More handpicked essays just for you.
Political causes of the french revolution
Political causes of the french revolution
Chapter 6 the french revolution and napoleon
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Was the French Revolution a success? Yes, I do think that the French Revolution was a success. The Revolution was a movement that took over France during the years of 1787 and to the final year of 1799. This Revolution reached its highest point in the year 1789. The French Revolution was one of the most violent revolutions of its time. There were many causes to why it was one of the most violent revolutions of this time but one of its first causes included fuedal regime. Fuedal regime was weakened severely and it had disappeared in lots of parts in Europe. There were many wealthy commoners and they were still increasing as time went on and some of the commoners were, manufacturers, professionals, merchants. The peasants that lived in this area also
These are some of the reasons why I thought that the French Revolution was a good thing.
Was Napoleon the embodiment of the Revolution? Or was he the reason the revolution went wrong? Personally, I think Napoleon Bonaparte was the embodiment of the Revolution. Napoleon did many great works in the revolution that I think that nobody could have done what he had done. He was a great leader and he did very good in battles and in war. Napoleon was fearless and ruthless and those are great qualities in war and in being an excellent leader for his country. Napoleon had become the ruler of France and then made a huge empire. Napoleon was educated at a French Military School and then later gained power and started an uprising in 1795. He had crazy military tactics and led his men to many victories and many of them were huge for France. Napoleon Bonaparte had been leading his army for more than 15 years and he was becoming a very popular figure. Some people were calling him a “child of the French Revolution” and then later he was called the same of the
During his rule, Napoleon called himself an emperor, but he acted like the kings before him. The French Revolution stood against the idea of one leader with all authority over one country and promoted liberty, equality, and fraternity. The French citizens did not glorify Napoleon as a king because he gave his people sovereignty over political situations. He used plebiscites or voting to spread equality, however, the majority was always in favor of Napoleon. This happened due to fear because he was the strongest man in Europe at the time. He idolized himself as a hero, saving the French people from the
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?
In other ways Napoleon was also the savior of the French Revolution: he fought wars and won most as an attempt to try and unite Europe under one French Empire. Even though this eventually failed, French nationalism and pride emerged in its aftermath. Napoleons also regulated the economy to control prices, encouraged new industry and build roads and canals, built schools, and abolished privilege, leading towards benefaction towards centralizing the state. In his entirety as a ruler, Napoleon did more to help the French people than to hurt them. For these reasons Napoleon was the savior of the French Revolution: he transformed his power and strength into benefits towards his people, creating and bringing the change France needed during and after the Revolution to help its people.
The enlightenment was a time of great learning throughout Europe during the eighteenth century. Although the period is significant for scientific and other scholastic advancements, it is most important because it allowed for the opening of great minds—such as that of Napoleon Bonaparte. Shortly after this enlightenment made its way through Europe, revolution and civil war ripped through France between 1879 and 1899. The unrest of the time called for a strong ruler. A man/woman with an open mind and an enlightened soul. France needed a child of the enlightenment to sew its tattered flag. Napoleon Bonaparte was a child of the enlightenment. This was displayed in both his attitudes and policies as a result of enlightened religious ideas, political genius, and social reforms.
The only way of determining whether Napoleon consolidated or betrayed the revolution is to explore his actions such as his military success, dictatorship and social reforms. The difficulty of this analysis is that Napoleon's motives for his actions determine whether he consolidated or betrayed the Revolution. If Napoleon betrayed the revolution, then he betrayed the ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity. For it is ideals rather than realities that Napoleon allegedly betrayed. The reality of the French revolution is 8 periods of constant change and succession of policies and leaders, with each new leader and party bringing amendments to the revolution.
The French Revolution evokes many different emotions and controversial issues in that some believe it was worth the cost and some don't. There is no doubt that the French Revolution did have major significance in history. Not only did the French gain their independence, but an industrial revolution also took place. One of the main issues of the Revolution was it's human costs. Two writers, the first, Peter Kropotkin who was a Russian prince, and the other Simon Schama, a history professor, both had very opposing views on whether the wars fought by France during the Revolution were worth it's human costs. Krapotkin believed that the French Revolution was the main turning point for not only France but for most other countries as well. On the other hand, Schama viewed the French Revolution as unproductive and excessively violent.
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
Before the revolution, life in France was still observing feudal rights. The monarch, nobles, and the clergy lived a life on the back of the people. It was a very dark time for the peasants with no light in sight. The large mass of peasants grew poorer and living in famine. Crime was the way of life for the peasants because food resources began to become scarce. Leading up to the revolution, the beginning of a middle class began develop. This new class would be the leading force for the revolution in France. After the revolution the French Revolution failed to establish a representative government or a constitutional monarchy. Before the revolution, France began with an absolute monarchy. They completely abolished the monarchy by cutting off the king’s and queen’s head and ended up with Napoleon Bonaparte. The French revolution did give the people a taste of liberty, equality, and power, but that was short lived. The co...
French Revolution brought a great number of great ideas, but ideas are not beneficial unless they are realized and stabilized. The man to stabilize the concepts of French Revolution was Napoleon Bonaparte. He started out as an Italian general and ended up being one of the greatest historical figures. First, Directors requested Napoleon's support while organizing a coup d'etat. Then, Bonaparte fought Britain in order to benefit France. Lastly, he was called to help creating a new constitution and ended up as the First Consul of France. At home, he ruled using flattery, but also he strongly resisted the opposition. Napoleon is a pro-revolutionist because he denied all the privileges of the aristocracy, created a new constitution, and also established the Napoleonic Code.
... 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 wits led him to be one of the greatest, if not the greatest, enlightened despots of all time. Works Consulted (none of the above).
The first and main reason for the French Revolution was the terrible leadership of King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette. The peasants wanted to overthrow them as they made France bankrupt by overspending. He spent a little less that 228 million livres in the span of 15 years. King Louis had sent huge amounts of money, military equipment and soldiers to America during the American Revolution because he wanted to help them beat Britain. He also spent a lot of money to build his palace, the Versailles. Marie Antoinette also used huge sums of money for her lavish parties and to fulfill her extravagant tastes. Both of these combined created a further debt for France. King Louis wanted to increase the taxes of the Third Estate to pay off the debts, which made the peasants even angrier, which will be talked about in the next paragraph. King Louis came into power at the age of 20, and he put most of the financial duties to Turgot, one of the best statesmen. When he finally realized the French Revolution was a big problem, all his attempts to stop it were all in vain because he didn’t know what to do sin...
Certain individuals approved of Napoleon's reign as the saviour of France. He finished and completed the Revolution by fulfilling the ideals the people of France demanded. A person such as one belonging to the bourgeoisie, or even a peasant would be very satisfied with the way Napoleon ruled over the country. He gave them equality, freedom, justice, and many rights. Such things never existed during the reign of the monarchs before Napoleon stepped in. A banker too would be very affirmative on how Napoleon had truly helped France in its economic problems. He made the franc the most stable currency in Europe, and the banker had witnessed that, as probably one of the bankers of the Bank of France. Another type of individual that agrees that Napoleon isn't the destroyer of the ideals of the Revolution would be his soldiers and generals. He had fought alongside with his men in many battles. Through inspiration, he gained their loyalty, to "follow him to the stars" if he asked them to. Such inspiration would never be gained if he never respected them, if he never treated them fairly. And then, the "Legion of Honour", which awarded to some certain citizens for their civil and military achievements.
Napoleon Bonaparte was an interesting ruler in that he was compromised of attributes of both a tyrant and a hero. Napoleon had a strong following throughout his reign and even during his two exiles. He was the emperor of France between 1799 and 1815, following the fall of the Directory. Despite the efforts of the French Revolution to rid the country of an autocratic ruler, Bonaparte came to power as Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte I in 1804. He claimed that he preserved the goals of the Revolution, which can be easily argued as his rule became more dictatorial as it progressed. Despite his departure from some of the gains of the Revolution, he overall was a hero for the French people. Through his military ventures, political changes and social reform, Napoleon proved himself as a hero. This is not to say that there were aspects of his reign that were tyrannical, but he was overall beneficial for France.
There are many things in history that could have been avoided under the right circumstances, but was the French Revolution one of them? The French Revolution lasted from 1789 all the way through 1799. It captured the decline of the monarchy and the rise of the republic by the people. It abolished strict class systems and gave the society of France hope. There was a lot of chaos occurring in France during the time of the revolution, yet it could have been avoided if the government spread the taxes equally between all three estates, if the estates generals voted by head rather than order, and if the French government granted equal rights such as granting jobs based on merit rather than status, to all three estates.
Before analysing the nature of the revolution, one must understand the social structure of pre-revolutionary France which is referred to as the Ancien Regime. Society was divided into estates and the king ruled over all of them. The king was an absolute monarch. “The adjective means that he…was not subject to the laws, since he was their originator.” The first estate consisted of the clergy, the second estate housed the aristocracy or the nobles who owned land, and the third estate was everyone else. The third estate was a very broad and diverse category as it consisted of ninety six percent of the population. Within this diverse third estate were the bourgeoisie. Georges Lefebvre divides the bourgeoisie into five groups “the bourgeois proper ‘living nobly and on his property, members of the royal administration, officiers, proprietors of venal offices, some of them ennobled, lawyers- notaries, procureurs, avocats, members of the liberal professions-doctors, scientists, writers, artists, the word of finance and commerce, shipbuilders, wholesale traders, entrepreneurs and the upper gr...