The French empire has often been perceived as being one of the most difficult empires to define as a total whole (SOURCE). There is no such thing as one coherent history of the French empire, but rather the Empire could be divided up into roughly three different individual empires. One can distinguish between three different French empires as starting with the period of the rule of the ancién regime, known as the Kingdom of France, lasting from 1594 to 1789. Subsequently, one can distinct the empire as created by Napoleon I as a second empire which lasted from 1804 to 1814 (and a brief restoration in 1805), which was the first to be actually named an empire, and finally the second French empire, founded by Napoleon's nephew Napoleon III which lasted from if 1851 to 1948. This paper draws a comparison between the French empire during the time of the ancién and regime and the French empire led by Napoleon I to show that both empires should be seen as being so different they cannot be considered to be one empire. It will do so by examining several characteristics of empires, showing both similarities and differences in the portrayal of these characteristics. SOCIAL One of the most intricate social and political upheavals during the second half of the 19th century that fundamentally changed France as well as the world (SOURCE) and that marks the transition from one empire to another was the French Revolution between 1789 and 1799. Over this ten year period the people of France – more specifically those not belonging to the classes of the nobility, aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, but rather the working classes – grew increasingly frustrated with the rule of the monarchy of the house of Bourbon and the inequality facilitated by th... ... middle of paper ... ...a direct representative of God with the divine right to sole rule through the power of the monarchy and not in need of any help. Considering himself to be a patron of the arts he devoted significant resources to the creation of several impressive buildings of which the Palace of Versailles is arguably the most striking. More importantly however these projects arguably served to prove that he was a world apart from all his mortal subjects. (SOURCE) Above all, Louis attempted to create a common national identity for his people. His policies strived for both a better France that its inhabitants would be able to identify with and be proud of, as well as creating his own legacy. Of the latter he hoped that his subjects would take pride in the glory of their sovereign. He wanted prestige and wished to be perceived as he who led the French into an age of prosperity.
nation. In order to become a true absolute ruler Louis xiv needed to make sure
Napoleon Bonaparte’s attitude towards the French Revolution is one that has often raised questions. That the revolution had an influence on Bonaparte’s regime cannot be denied – but to what extent? When one looks at France after Napoleon’s reign it is clear that he had brought much longed for order and stability. He had also established institutions that embodied the main principles of the revolution. However, it is also evident that many of his policies directly contradict those same principles. Was Napoleon betraying the same revolution that gave him power, or was he merely a pragmatist, who recognised that to consolidate the achievements of the revolution he needed to sacrifice some of those principles?
Beginning in mid-1789, and lasting until late-1799, the French Revolution vastly changed the nation of France throughout its ten years. From the storming of the Bastille, the ousting of the royal family, the Reign of Terror, and all the way to the Napoleonic period, France changed vastly during this time. But, for the better part of the last 200 years, the effects that the French Revolution had on the nation, have been vigorously debated by historian and other experts. Aspects of debate have focused around how much change the revolution really caused, and the type of change, as well as whether the changes that it brought about should be looked at as positive or negative. Furthermore, many debate whether the Revolutions excesses and shortcomings can be justified by the gains that the revolution brought throughout the country. Over time, historians’ views on these questions have changed continually, leading many to question the different interpretations and theories behind the Revolutions effectiveness at shaping France and the rest of the world.
King Louis XIV was a showy and self-absorbed king. His palace was representative of his personality and ideals. The Versailles palace architecture displayed Louis XIV ideals of secular issues. He cared more about spending money to show off his power. Unlike the Escorial, Versailles was centered on “The Sun King” instead of religion. At one point Louis XIV stated that “he was the state”. This statement was saying that Louis XIV represented the center and best of France. An example of this was that King Louis XIV lived in the middle of Versailles. Versailles was also very ornate and had the atmosphere of freeness. However, the Escorial was very basic like Philip II.
Kreis, S. (2006, October 30). Lecture 11: The Origins of the French Revolution. Lecture 11: The Origins of the French Revolution. Retrieved May 15, 2014, from http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/lecture11a.html
The French Revolution was a period of political upheaval that occurred in France during the latter half of the 18th century. This revolution marked an end to the system of feudalism and the monarchy in France and a rise to democracy and new Enlightenment ideas. By 1789, when the revolution began, France was in a deep financial crisis due to the debt they had obtained over many years of reckless spending and France was nearly bankrupt. These financial issues fell almost completely on the bottom social class or the Third Estate which made up a majority of the country. Because of this financial trouble the common people were heavily taxed leaving many of them in poverty. In addition to the economic issues, France also held an Estate System that led to heavy
New York: Barnes & Noble, 1969. Print. The. Kreis, Steven. A. A. "Lecture 12: The French Revolution - Moderate Stage, 1789-1792.
Kirchberger, Joe H. The French Revolution and Napoleon. New York: Facts on File inc, 1989.
...ig concepts, such as equality before the law, but he also did what would benefit his country. It is important to understand that since France had just exited a revolution, it was pretty fragile; one big mistake and France might have ended up in another one. Napoleon was not only a child of both the French Revolution and the Enlightenment, he was also a very intelligent person. His cunning and his wits led him to be one of the greatest, if not the greatest enlightened despot of all time.
During the eighteenth century, France was one of the most richest and prosperous countries in Europe, but many of the peasants were not happy with the way France was being ruled. On July 14, 1789, peasants and soldiers stormed the Bastille and initiated the French Revolution. This essay will analyze the main causes of the French Revolution, specifically, the ineffectiveness of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, the dissatisfaction of the Third Estate, and the Enlightenment. It will also be argued that the most significant factor that caused the French Revolution is the ineffective leadership of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.
... move, defunding any revolts they might plan, and preoccupying their time with petty social matters instead of matters of the state. If Louis’ reign was not supported by the enabling qualities of the Palace of Versailles, his reign would certainly not be as absolute as it was.
With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country, France, from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.
Louis' cultural goals were a large success. He changed French trends and etiquette, and was a major patron of the arts, meaning, he supported the art movements and artists, encouraging them and financing them. Because of Louis, France led Europe in the arts. He loved music and theatre. Louis was a great patron of the arts; he exceeded Augustus of Rome in his art aiding. He created the city of Versailles by turning his father's hunting cabin into a magnificent palace in the village of Versailles. Construction began in 1668, and wasn't done until 1710, but Louis moved in on May 6, 1682--showing his impatience.
Nardo, Don. A. The French Revolution. San Diego, California: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1999. Print.
The bad living conditions of France and its depressed economy was one of the primary drivers for the French Revolution. The people of France were so poor that they had no shoes to wear and no food to eat. The poverty of France breaks its economy at its root. The economy got so bad that “By December 1788, there was a nationwide revolt against food shortages and rising prices, which continued to spread till the summer of 1789, when there was another bad harvest”(Todd 528). One ...