For a brief period of time, Napoleon seemed to be all things to all people. Perhaps the greatest
military commander ever. He was also a preeminent head of state. With his brilliant mind and
amazing leadership abilities he made France soar, taking it to unprecedented heights and
glory. But, he also brought it to its knees when his genius and his ego spiraled out of control.
Nearly two centuries later the impact of his actions still reverberates around the globe.
Napoleon's road to glory started on Corsica, a small Mediterranean island located off the coast of
France. The Bonapartes lived in the Port city of Ajaccio. His father Carlo, was a
prominent attorney and a descended to the Italian nobility. His mother Letizia also of noble birth
was considered by some to be one of the most attractive women on the island. On August
fifteenth, 1969 she was attending church services in this cathedral when she went into labor. The
family estate was only minutes away. So, she decided to make her way home. When she reached
the house, she could not climb the stairs to her bedroom, but instead gave birth to Napoleon on
this sofa in a downstairs sitting room. From birth, she instilled in him a feeling of being special.
She was a very determined woman. She was a great realist. Napoleon had a very good sense of
his own importance. I think his mother gave him that. His mother, although being a realist was
always one that thought her children could do anything. Although of noble birth, the Bonapartes
weren't wealthy. They lived in a fine house and had a high profile in the community, but
money was tight. They brought their children up with a set of beliefs that were close to the earth,
and very Corsican in nature. He certainly had pride and a belief in family. He had a sense of
honor. And these are things that are often attributed to Corsicans. If ever an island to give birth to
a warrior, Corsica was it. For centuries, Corsican men had made battle a way of life. The year
Napoleon was born, the island was engulfed in war as the Corsican's fought with France for
independence. As a boy, Napoleon was charismatic and generous, yet he was often in
fights. There was nothing unusual about this though, for the Corsican view of manhood
encouraged it. Pride, revenge, and honor brought hand in hand here. At the age of nine,
Napoleon received a scholarship to go to France and study at the Brienne Military Academy. The
thought of being a soldier seemed to fascinate him. Whenever his mother had given him white
bread for school back on Corsica he'd exchanged it with soldiers at the nearby fort for army
rations. Claiming he had to get used to them sooner than later. Almost from the beginning at
Brienne his leadership abilities were noticed.Napoleon is immediately going to show great
promise as a soldier. He is going to organize the fellow boys in snowball fights. He is
immediately the man in charge. Smaller than the others he is still the pluckiest and takes charge
of them and organizing their games whenever he can. Yet, he was always the outsider. Brien was
a school that attracted boys from the finest families in France. As a Corsican, Napoleon was
looked down on as a second class Frenchman. This seems to fuel his need to achieve. He had to
win everything he did. That was part of his makeup as a boy, and it was one of the reasons for
success as a commander. Probably wasn't popular or easy to get along with. Although his grades
weren't perfect, even at this young age, he was beginning to show signs of
extraordinary intelligence. Napoleon probably was a genius. He had an amazing brain capacity.
Along with his study of things militarily, he picked up along the way politics and
philosophy. And his brain just sucked all this up like a sponge. And it was as if he had a
computer in there that he could just draw on for anything that he needed. It was like going to a
great library and just picking a book out. Now, 15 years old, Napoleon next moved to Paris in
1784. He continued his education here in one of France's foremost military academies. The
prestigious ?cole Militaire. Almost from the beginning people commented on his
enormous ambition. If you looked at him you could tell that there was someone who was
determined, who had a fire in his eye. And when he talked to you, he looked you right in the
face. And he wasn’t afraid to talk to you even though he came from a poor background. He
seemed already to be formulating a vision of greatness for himself. A vision where he would play
a major role on the world stage. Ferociously he studied the lives of great men like Alexander the
Great and Hannibal trying to unlock the secret of what had made them great. The other thing he
studied obsessively was firepower. He became a brilliant artillery man. Instinctively he knew the
proper use of artillery that would allow him to dominate any situation. He was so focused and
proficient at his studies that he passed through the two year program in one. Becoming an officer
at the age of 16 years, 15 days. Napoleon soared to glory amidst the turmoil of the French
revolution. This was a time when a man could be rapidly promoted and Napoleon's rise
was meteoric. He believed in a French republic and fought against Royalists who wanted to
restore the recently fallen monarchy. France was not only at war with itself, it also was battling
other European powers on the force who wanted to see the old monarchy reinstated. Napoleon
received his first real taste of glory in 1793, the French seaport of Toulon. He masterminded a
brilliant attack against the pro Royalist British fleet anchored there. Against all odds, his troops
drove the British from a fort and their fleet from the harbor. In combat, he led many of the
charges himself. He seemed almost fearless. He was a firm believer in leading by example. By
taking the greatest risks himself, how could any of his men refuse him? His accomplishment here
was so astounding he was made Brigadier General at the age of 24. Yet, France remained in total
chaos. It's political climate was changing so rapidly that a hero one day could become a criminal
the next day when another side gained favor. Napoleon was caught front and center in this male
stream. Less than a year after Toulon he was jailed briefly by political enemies, and spent a
desolate period in Paris without command. At one point his fortunes fell so low that he even
contemplated suicide. In 1795, he was pulled out of this tailspin when he was called in to protect
the National Convention from mobs of angry Royalists forces. Firing his cannons through the
streets of Paris, he drove the Royalists out. And in some people's eyes, it saved the revolution.
This was exactly the epic accomplishment that was needed to start him on his way to the most
fabled career in military history. For in return for his success, he was now given command of the
French army in Italy. At the same time, he met an astonishing woman who would change his life
forever, Josephine. The love affair between Napoleon and Josephine Beauharnais is one of the
most famous romances in history. Yet, no one would describe it as a fairy tale. Josephine was a
beautiful young woman who was a member of Parisian high society. She had lost her husband in
the Revolution. Ambitious, intelligent, and calculating, she knew what she wanted and how to
get it. Napoleon almost instantly fell in love with Josephine and pursued her with the same
determination with which he went into battle. For her part, although she found him attractive, it
seemed she looked on the relationship in a very businesslike way. She was getting older, she'd
been having a lot of affairs with very prominent people in Parisian society. But affairs don’t
always equal marriage. And she wasn't sure what her prospects would be. She wasn't sure that
this army officer would amount for much. But, she decided in the end that it would probably be a
good match for her and her children. After a courtship of less than a year, they were married on
March ninth, 1796. Napoleon would one day become the most powerful man on earth. Yet, he
would never be able to completely control Josephine. Just days after their wedding, Bonaparte
left to take command of his troops in Italy. France was dabbling there with other European
powers who still wanted it to restore its monarchy. Foremost amongst these foes were
Austria and Piedmont. It would take a miracle for him to succeed there. His army was a ragtag
group of ill fed, underpaid, poorly equipped and understaffed men. Yet, his confidence was so
high that none of this seemed to bother him. He simply went to work. The thought of losing
seemed never to occur to him. Napoleon had great belief in himself and his own ability. In Italy
he used this and he used every shock in his arsenal of, um, man management cajoling,
persuading, being extremely friendly with people. Being very harsh with people. Screaming at
them. Whatever it took to get the men to follow him. And this magic worked. It was what we
would call today, perhaps star quality. As a lifelong student of warfare, Napoleon used the Italian
campaign to put his own theories of battle to work. In the process he revolutionized the art of
war. It is like nobody has seen before. Before war had been a gentlemen's game. Two armies line
up on a field and they pound away at each other until one side gives. Not Napoleon, he's not
going to take it while the other side's giving it. He's going to force it all upon the enemy. He
divided their forces, crushes one wing and then goes after the other. Slowly but surely the
miracle began to happen. The French started to turn defeat into victory. And then victory into
conquest. Leading many of the charges himself, a myth of invincibility began to grow around
Bonaparte. He had led the attack from the front, bullets whizzing by left and right. All kinds of
men falling killed and wounded off to all sides of him. He is untouched, unscathed. He feels at
the end of this, that he has been touched by a superior being. That something great awaits him.
And maybe it's the conquering of Europe, if not, the world. In less than a year, he accomplished
the impossible. Starting almost from scratch, he defeated four armies, each larger than his own.
Yet, he was not the conquering hero in his private life. Obsessively in love with his wife, he was
troubled by her lack of response to the letters he sent home. He didn't know that back in Paris
Josephine was having numerous affairs. Next, he returned to France now one of the country's
greatest heroes. Many felt if he could work miracles in Italy, he could also work them against
them against France's mortal enemy, England. The place he chose to confront the British was
unexpected and exotic, Egypt. Napoleon felt if he could conquer Egypt it would help
disrupt England's trade routes with the Middle East and India. A soldier of fortune at heart, he
knew there could be no greater or more exotic battle arena then this ancient land. The scholar in
him was already aware of the fate of the country's past. For thousands of years it had been the
greatest civilization on earth. In July of 1798 he landed in Egypt, and quickly took
Alexandria. Then in the spectacular Battle of the Pyramids near Cairo, destroyed
additional Egyptian forces. Although, this was clearly a military expedition, for Napoleon it was
also an intellectual challenge. His curiosity and reverence for the land was all consuming. He
also understood that there were things in Egypt that the French could learn. He took a whole
cadre of Scientists along with him. The idea was to try to understand Egyptian science, try to
understand Egyptian history. They went and looked at the pyramids. They discovered the Rosetta
Stone. The excitement of these fabulous discoveries was soon dampened though by work from
Europe. Napoleon learned that a new coalition of Austria, Britain, and Russia had formed against
France. He decided to return to Paris. At the same time he received word of Josephine's
infidelity. The news devastated him. In a letter full of self-pity and heartache, he poured out
his emotions to his brother, Joseph. His rocky marriage next went from heartbreak to
humiliation. When Britain's Admiral Nelson intercepted the letter at sea, it was published in
London newspapers and Napoleon became the laughing stock of Europe. Heartsick, he returned
to France, determined to divorce Josephine. Threatened with the breakup of her marriage,
Josephine now realized how important it was to her. She pleaded with him for another chance. At
first, he refused to forgive her. But the thought of losing contact with her children who he now
loved as his own, caused him to give the relationship another try. At the same time, an enormous
opportunity came his way. The French people were losing faith in their government. After over
10 years of revolution and civil upheaval, they longed for a strong leader. Someone to calm the
waters. Napoleon had performed miracles on the battlefield, perhaps he could deliver them
also in government. The people were looking for a savior that would cut them free of the turmoil.
He was the obvious one to wield it. Forming key political alliances and with the threat of force,
he seized control of the government in a bloodless coup on November ninth, 1799. Becoming the
first console of France, a post that carried with it almost dictatorial powers. Now, Napoleon set
about making France into something new. Something that would cause the whole world to take
notice. The government was an arena where he could let his ideas become reality. He was
obsessed with living up to this challenge. And he succeeded spectacularly. He instigated a new
code of laws, abolished serfdom, encouraged religious toleration, and made education a top
priority. It adds a dimension to Napoleon that makes him greater than just a general. It makes
him greater than just a conqueror. This is a man who understands the civilian side. The peaceful
side of life. And is attempting to mold it in what he believes is right. He seemed to have more
energy than other men. At the Fontainebleau Palace he had his desk moved into his bedroom so
he could get up in the middle of the night and work. Even while taking a bath, he would be
reading and thinking. To those around him, he was both inspiring and exasperating. People
adored Napoleon and despised him. And even people that adored him, sometimes despised
him. Because of his incredible work habits, his ability to be both cold and friendly at the same
time. He was not a simple personality. It was very complex. For many, Napoleon became a hero.
Even men like Beethoven looked up to him. France was soon the envy of the world. Everything
seemed to be working for him. Even his marriage. Josephine seemed born for her role as the
most visible woman in France. Her taste was impeccable, and she had an enormous influence on
French society. The couple lived a whirlwind lifestyle. Yet, did manage to find some quiet hours
at their country estate of Malmaison. Malmaison was Josephine's prize project. She redecorated
it and spared no amount of cost. Whatever it took, she was willing to spend to redecorate it. It
was a country home. It was a manner. It was a place where people could go and relax. And that
was precisely what it was designed to be. The only room that truly seemed to be Napoleon's was
his study. He spent a lot of time here rethinking France and Europe. Then it was off to Paris to
put his plans into action. But although he was head of state, he never really ceased to be a soldier.
His actions were extremely paradoxical. He would play the Prince of Peace but at the same time,
be the God of War. Always in the name of peace, always in the name of the Revolution, his
troops marched out and dominated Europe. With the support of bayonets and cannons, he was
determined to enlighten his neighbors to his progressive policies. Soon, most of Europe was
under his control. Napoleon knew better than most the lure of glory. And he offered it as a prize
for all of France. Napoleon was leading them to glory. He, actually used this term a lot. The
problem with glory, particularly military glory is that it's like riding a tiger. You can't get off.
Presentation: Enlightenment: Ideas That Have Consequences
The enlightenment ideas that have consequences this lecture will give an overview of
the Enlightenment 1st we will identify what links stand Lightman with the Scientific
Revolution next we will look at the character of the Enlightenment identify some of its
core ideas and describe some of the programs suggested by Enlightenment
thinkers finally we will discuss the impact of the Enlightenment. Recall that the scientific
revolution suggested that the universe was a mechanism that could be understood
through natural laws was it possible that the same could be true of people could
individuals and society also be understood in this way one of the earliest to suggest
that it might be possible was John Locke he was not an enlightenment thinker himself
rather he was a forerunner of the Enlightenment he believed the scientific method could
be applied to the study of individuals and society his ideas about the individual rested
on the concept of the top view the Rozel or blank slate this was the idea that human
beings are born blank that they are like a blank slate when they are born and that
environment shapes individuals and society thus it is possible to make changes that will
produce a better society forelock education was the key to the environment went that
would create better individuals and ultimately a better world he wrote about this
concept in his essay concerning human understanding published in 6090. Locke also
believed that scientific methods could be applied to society particularly to government
and his 2 treatise on government he argued that political communities are based on
consent he believed that human beings have natural or in alienable rights to life liberty
and property his contract theory of government directly contradicted the more
traditional divine right theory which was the basis for absolutism So we see some
early signs of Enlightenment thinking in Locke's ideas about the individual and
society. Indeed the goals of the Enlightenment might be understood in these terms 1st
to free mankind from ignorance and superstition through a critical review of all human
knowledge this is the use of reason to liberate the individual secondly to free people
from unnecessary restraints on their freedom through social and political reform this is
the use of reason to improve society the scientific revolution focused on the material
universe in Lightman thinkers applied their methods to people to society and
government if natural laws govern the universe that is they can be discovered predicted
and possibly controlled then natural laws must also govern human behavior
and institutions how does this accord with a biblical worldview think about it and we'll
come back to that idea in a moment. Let's start by describing the character of the
Enlightenment What was it like 1st of all the Enlightenment was practical there was no
grand philosophical system that guided the writers and thinkers of this movement
instead they wrote on a range of subjects such as education hell economics justice
religion and science and they tended to write in very practical terms perhaps this
aspect of the Enlightenment is best illustrated by its most important publication the
end sequel Paty or encyclopedia under the hand of didn't go in light. Thinkers
assembled a comprehensive and systematic compilation of knowledge with data bear
and others Ditto sought to compile all of human knowledge into a single rationally
organized publication The 1st edition published between 17511756 consisted of 17
volumes over 16000 pages the image here is the cover page from the 1st volume
published in 751 by 780 it had grown to 35 volumes containing over 70000 articles
and over 30000 excuse me 3000 illustrations this remarkable publication was not only
controversy all but it also became an important vehicle for spreading in Lightman ideas
it might be understood as a kind of democratization of information or ideas can you
think of a 21st century equivalent to the Enlightenment was not only practical but it was
also informal there were some systematic treatises written but most of the
Enlightenment writing consists consisted of less formal essays satires critiques
dialogues and public letters these were more like polemical pieces for specific occasions
sort of like columnists or bloggers today or perhaps commentators they were aimed at
the general public at the literate public at all social levels indeed the enlightenment
happened when and where it did in part because of the expanding audience of readers
as literacy expanded ideas were no longer limited to highly educated elites but writing
was only one facet of the informal character of the Enlightenment these new and
controversy all ideas were also spread through new forms of secular culture such as
clubs coffee houses and silence. While the Enlightenment was both informal and
practical it was also international in Lightman thinkers carried on correspondence and
built friendships across national boundaries they consider themselves members of a
republic of letters a community of scholars that included many nationalities and faiths
both Monta skew and Voltaire spent time in England where they were both deeply
influenced by the relative freedom there and by the idea of representative government
yes the Enlightenment was based in France but there were also important contributions
and manifestations of the Enlightenment from Britain and America. Although there were
significant differences among Enlightenment thinkers most were concerned with a core
set of ideas the 1st as one we've mentioned already reason but rather than build
abstract philosophic systems and Lightman thinkers sought to use reason to show that
many traditional ideas about God nature and society rested on false foundations in
other words they promoted a subversive use of reason tearing down rather than
building up for enlightenment thinkers reason went beyond logic it was a combination of
commonsense and observation with a strong dose of skepticism and a bias toward
freedom. Within the bounds of reason and Lightman thinkers also promoted ideas
about progress inspired by the scientific revolution they began to see human history as
a March forward of something called civilization in fact the very term civilization was 1st
coined for use in this context they saw in history movement toward a more peaceful
humane comfortable world for human beings they believed that life had been could be
improved for the cultivation of the human spirit how does this compare with a biblical
world view does the Bible teach that human progress is inevitable or even achievable
one of the fundamental tenets of the Christian faith is the idea of a better world to come
the very mission of the church itself is to make disciples to preach the good news the
1st advent of Jesus Christ was heralded with peace and goodwill to all the difference
here is that a better world is not achieved by man's efforts but rather through the power
of God and a better world is not defined by technology medicine and knowledge about
how well that world conforms to God's plan how well individuals are conformed to the
image of Jesus Christ. And the other set of core ideas of the Enlightenment grew out of
their view of nature since Isaac Newton nature was understood as orderly rational even
elegant in its arrangement. In Lightman thinkers contrasted their current social
conditions with something that supposedly existed in an earlier state of nature before
the invention of government and social institutions in other words they held to an
idealized mythical past where things were simpler and better a sort of doctrine of the
good old days if you will how do these ideas about nature compare with a
biblical worldview the Bible teaches that God's order and his truth are evident in
nature the Genesis account tells us that all of His creation was good but the same
account continues by explaining how that good was marred by sin so that the world we
live in today is a corrupted version of what was originally intended and God in His
sovereignty has provided institutions like government to maintain an orderly society in a
fallen world. In addition to reason progress and nature most Enlightenment thinkers had
something to say about liberty John Jacques Rousseau open his most famous work the
social contract this way man is born free but everywhere he is in chains he went on to
argue that the institutions of society church government etc restrict man's natural
freedom again he advocated a tearing down of traditional institutions like was. Wrote
about liberty no man has received from nature the right to command others liberty is a
gift of the heavens and every individual of the species has the right to enjoy it as soon
as he has a reason you might recognize a similarity here till Ra locks in England noble
rights in general in Lightman thinkers believe that no one has an inborn right to rule
others they believe that liberty was a natural right not granted by a sovereign a natural
condition of all humans all humans guided by reason the question was who has a reason
children of course are not guided by reason and at this time most believe that women
could not be guided by reason so the idea of liberty was still quite limited in some
ways. What does the biblical worldview say about human liberty is man born free the
Genesis account is clear in showing that mankind was created in the image of God
and with moral freedom freedom to choose to obey or not to obey but the rest of the
Bible tells the story of man's choice to sin consequently mankind isn't slain by the sin
nature but is promised freedom in Jesus Christ and while biblical teaching does not
advocate the overthrow of the social hierarchy he clearly teaches that all human beings
are equal in God's sight in Lightman thinkers ideas about reason progress nature and
liberty were not understood as abstract they were to be applied here are some of the
suggested applications 1st is there. I am for government although there is no unified
programme for government among the lightman thinkers they all agree that the present
system is flawed let's look at 2 sets of remedies 1st is the program suggested by man
to skew in his spirit of the laws he laid out a program that would maintain the traditional
rights and privileges of social ranks but that would also maintain good government in
order to limit or prevent oppression England was his model he sought a government
where the king and legislature which share power but he also advocated religious
tolerance RW so pretty represented the more radical wing of the Enlightenment in fact
he sometimes seemed to oppose the Enlightenment in his social contract he argued
for a kind of democracy Rousseau believe that sovereignty derived from the people he
did not however advocate democracy by majority rule but rather the concept of a
general will the general will was understood as what was in the best interest for all the
best interest for the greatest number of people this was not decided by the majority but
instead was determined by a group of enlightened elites who were able to determine
what the general will was. In addition to their ideas about government and Lightman
thinkers also had some definite concerns about religion they were not necessarily anti
religious or even completely anti Christian but they were unanimous in their opposition
to the traditional Christian Church especially the Roman Catholic church at least that
was the case in France opposition to religion was virtually non-existent as a component
of the British unlike Mitt Voltaire serves as a good example of French and Lightman
ideas about religion it was he who famously demanded it cause a length or crushed the
infamous here he was expressing his vehement opposition to what he saw as the
oppression of the Roman Catholic Church but even in his intense opposition he still
advocated for religious tolerance he held that many religions made it less likely that any
single religion could become oppressive. Adam Smith of the Scottish and Lightman also
had some things to say about religion he didn't write so much about the danger of
religion or recommend its abolition rather he argued for a kind of free market
for religion similar to Voltaire he believed that the multiplication of religious sects would
ensure that no single sect could rise up and impose its views and practices on the rest
of society. Perhaps the most common religious view among Enlightenment thinkers
was. Does on recognizes the existence of God but denies that he continues to act in the
world therefore deist reject the miraculous in supernatural for them religion is the most
valuable ethical is most valuable as an ethical system. In addition to their programs for
government and religion in Lightman thinkers also suggested programs for society as
we have seen a common theme for enlightenment thinkers was that society could be
improved through the application of scientific principles perhaps the best illustration of
this is in economics in 776 Adam Smith published his treatise on the Wealth of Nations it
is from Smith that we get the term less safe air the idea that governments should not
interfere with commerce and trade but that the market should determine what is
produced and at what price people eat the market would regulate itself by means of the
invisible hand of supply and demand that it will reward those who provide what people
want at a price they're willing to pay of course this idea is at the core of free market
capitalism which we will discuss later in the course. So far we have seen the character
of the Enlightenment summarized its core ideas and taken a look at some of its
programs what was the overall impact of the Enlightenment 1st the enlightenments new
emphasis on reason and independent thinking undermine traditional habits of
unquestioning obedience to the authority of church and state this aspect of the
Enlightenment will have far reaching repercussions from the time of the French
Revolution into the 20th century Secondly in Lightman ideas about the nature of
government and the relationship between government and government created a whole
new way of thinking about the political world again we'll see significant repercussions
of this idea for the next 200 years thirdly the enlightment also produced
something called public opinion for the 1st time in Western history people were
talking. About new ideas outside the confines of the church or the university they were
meeting and sharing ideas in coffee houses and salons they were creating public
opinion. In these ways and many others the Enlightenment became a force for
shaping future political developments such as the American Revolution the French
Revolution the reforms of enlightened monarchs and pressure Russia Austria
and ultimately the rise of later political ideologies such as socialism and
communism lastly and perhaps most importantly the Enlightenment joined the classical
and Christian traditions to create the foundation for modern Western civilization the
enlightenments contribution to these values includes the notions of human rights
popular sovereignty tolerance and respect for the law.
Presentation: The French Revolution: From Monarchy to Empire
Hello I'm Dr Christopher
J.
Smith and I'm going to be discussing of the French revolution
and especially I'll be looking at it in a comparative contacts to the American Revolution
now the French Revolution is one of the key major crossroad events and history it is a
moment where people thought that they could not only just change human institutions
like government charges cetera through political action but also human nature itself and
many respects the French Revolution was the most upsetting of the major revolutions
because it wound up throwing out traditional society got rid of the monarchy the
traditional aristocracy traditional institutions like the Catholic Church it waged a war on
Christianity itself unlike the American Revolution which was undertaken to defend
individual liberties and rights established by a long tradition the French
revolutionaries attempted to establish a new order based on ideals of human equality
and rights which sounded good but they were divorced from a precedent for addition
and so forth tragically the French Revolution degenerated into a bloodbath where the
First Republic which was established wielded more authority than the monarchies that it
preceded and the proceeded it and the Napoleonic empire which came out of the
revolution can be can be characterized as an ancestor of the towel Tarion regimes of the
twentieth century now first I'd like to talk a bit about the causes of the French
Revolution very complex subject much history has been written about it but it can be
boiled down to a some basic factors first of all and in the late eighteenth century had a
situation in the in the in the seventeen eighties where the Borgen monarchy was in a
deep state of crisis and there are several aspects of that situation first of all France in
the late eighteenth century was a nation where inequality and privilege were wolves
and into politics. Sidey cytulture unlike the thirteen American colonies which had a
social order based on English Common Law which were suspected individual rights now
some aspects of that society were as follows First of all you had an isolated extravagant
king of the Borman monarch Louis the sixteenth and his Queen Marie Antoinette and of
the court who were isolated from the people they lived in the palace at Versailles very
isolated from the concerns of the people living in an almost fantasyland like lifestyle as
far as material their material conditions were concerned it wasn't as extensive as we
might think in the popular imagination of the military and the courtiers concerned in the
end and pensions to the aristocracy consumed much more of the budget but it was the
extravagant lifestyle at the Palace of Versailles which the French people saw and very
much resent it you also had a traditional aristocracy whose approved privileges
especially tax exemption could not be born anymore you also had a thriving middle
class the bush was easy who were blocked as a group from political power and then
there was also a peasantry and an emerging urban working class who were also blocked
a from political power as well and of these last groups the middle class and of the
peasants in the urban working class they were expected to bear the nation's tax burden
on their shoulders so this a situation created quite a bit of explosive resentment another
a big factor at work in the cause of the French Revolution is the intellectual
movement called delight in it which was a revolution in thinking in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries among the the literary public it was based on ideals of liberty
equality control of one's own destiny which have their good aspects but it also
questioned traditional Thorpey in a dispassionately tended to attack a traditional
Christianity scripture. Church faith and so forth and it also attack established a social
order the enlightment consisted of a feeble souls like Voltaire and Jones Dr so and then
it's due to Rowan and a mom to skew who critique the politics and society and to some
of their ideas were quite worthy of discussion but the enlightment also consisted of
what we call Grub Street this was an underground press in France which launched a
scurrilous sometimes pornography attacks on the king or queen and of the estate
and established society and this did much to stir up a resentment and disrespect for the
monarchy among of the middle classes and contrast of the American Revolution the
American founders that they cherry picked ideas from the Enlightenment like Mana
skews a notion of a government divided among three branches but the but the found
but the ideas underlying the American Revolution were based more on the English
experience common wall the English Civil War the Glorious Revolution in the English Bill
of Rights and so forth another at another factor feeding into the causes of the French
Revolution was the failure of Borgen foreign policy following the precedent set by Louis
the Fourteenth in the late seventeenth early eighteenth centuries the French Crown had
attempted to wage war both on land to see it pursued an expansionist policy both in the
continent of Europe and overseas competing with England for colonies trade and
prestigious so forth and over the course of the eighteenth century the French suffer
devastating defeats in two major wars the war of the Austrian succession in the
seventeenth forties and the Seven Years War of seven hundred fifty six to seven
hundred sixty three this last conflict was especially devastating because France was
utterly defeated and humiliated both on land and sea France lost its a colonies in North
America and India and other points around the world and by adding to this problem
was. The fact that France came out of these conflicts of basically broke the a crown was
on the verge of bankruptcy at the end of the Seven Years War intervention in the
American Revolution didn't help the situation to the French government spent two billion
leave supporting of the American rebels and while that helped the Americans again
their independence further increased the instability of of the French monarchy as far as
its financial situation and its prestige was concerned so as a result of these conflicts the
French Crown lost much prestigious credibility among among the French people and
then the final cause of the French Revolution this was the immediate trigger was an
enormous financial and economic crisis by the seven hundred eighty S. the crown
spending on the military on pensions in a newly tease for the aristocracy of the court
and many other things had led to out completely out of control deficits by seven
hundred eighty seven the Crown's deficit stood at one hundred million leave which is
roughly two point four billion dollars in American money and the tooth that exchange
rates in the year two thousand the French crown was borrowing six hundred fifty million
leaving a year and the sixteen eighties and by seventeen eighty eight the year before
the revolution broke out sixty percent of the Crown's budget was it was dedicated to
paying off interest on the debt and so the French crown was headed toward an
enormous financial collapse by seven hundred eighty six eighty seven eighty eight This
of course exacerbated the economic situation massive economic status stagnation
yet crop failure several years in a row excess exacerbating the situation the winner of
seven hundred eighty eight seven hundred eighty nine just before the storming of the
Bastille was the hardest winter France experienced and nine get Cade's with crop
failures and many many other problems. So everything was coming to a boil for France
in the late part of the eighteenth century and the explosion which occurred in the
summer of seven hundred eighty nine with the storming of the bass steel was almost
what was not completely inevitable but a very much a something that was coming now
as far as talking about the course of the A French Revolution again a very complicated
process and there are just a few in there are several points to be made in contrast
with the American experience first of all the French revolutionaries very much
following of the example of the Americans in many ways then the end the French nation
had high hopes for an outcome like that of the American Revolution the French
nation wanted a Constitution based you know which would establish a government
based on the sovereignty of the people and so forth but what they want up with after a
decade was an authoritarian state governed by a military dictator who wielded
more power than any monarch ever had now how did they get to that point basically
there are four critical turning points first of all there was the storming of the Basti all the
events which is on the on the fourteenth of July seventeenth eighty nine which is given
as the event which triggered the French Revolution that the the French Revolution in
that the ordinary people of Paris intervened into a dispute between the monarchy and
the aristocracy over what to do about the financial crisis that what happened when the
ONLY a mob stormed the Bastille is that the governor of the fortress De Launay and
many of the garrison were butchered in cold blood their heads were cut off and paraded
through the streets of Paris on pikes and that the national symbol which was the state's
general which had convened to deal with the situation the National Assembly did
nothing to condemn that action by the Paris mob This is a critical turning point because
it sanctioned violence and it set a precedent for violence which would
continue throughout the rest of the revolutionary experience the second critical
turning. Point was the failure of the constitutional monarchy a constitutional monarchy
was established and seventeen eighty nine seventeen and nineteen but Louis the
sixteenth had no intention of abiding by this constitution he wanted to continue to hold
on as much of his absolute power as possible and his attempt to flee the country in the
June of seventeen ninety one turned of the bulk of the population against him and that
spelled the doom of the monarchy and of course Louis of the four it's Louis the sixteenth
and Marie Antoinette wound up going to the guillotine one of the events which triggered
the next critical turning point of the reign of terror a significant difference from the
American Revolution the French first republic found itself at war with just about every
country in Europe they were dealing with counter-revolutionaries sentiments within the
French nation itself and to deal with this the first republic had to. Embark on an
unprecedented mobilization of resources to fight the war they invoke the Levey on
mosques a mass conscription of them in of military age ages eighteen to forty five
for the armed services they began to that they undertook the control of the economy
for them to control the war effort controlling prices and wages and so forth and to
enforce this the government led by the Committee of Public Safety under Maximillian
robes Pierre they instituted a reign of terror where they rooted out in a mes real and
imagined all throughout the country and over the year so that the terror lasted seventy
ninety three seventy ninety four some fifty thousand Frenchmen know were executed
most of them innocent of any wrong doing. And and then they had the final turning
point was of course the war itself of a war consumed much of the country's resources
provided a further. A further basis for this authoritarian state and this war continued
until the. Ascension of Napoleon Bonaparte Now this leads to the final point I want to
make comparing the French and American revolutions really boils down in many ways to
two men on the one hand you had George Washington who was a of self-
sacrifice patriots who sought to serve his country's cause and struggle for independence
he did things like not accept a compensation as commander in chief of the Continental
Army he deferred to the authority of the Continental Congress he also stood down a
potential mutiny by Continental Army officers in seven hundred eighty three and then
when victory was won Washington voluntarily resigned his commission this made him
the most trusted man in the country led to him being elected to two terms as president
as president and after which he set another precedent by again voluntarily handing
down his power after a two terms now contrast him to Napoleon Bonaparte the
admittedly brilliant Corsicans soldier adventurer artillery officer who became ruler of
France at the age of thirty and contrast to George Washington a pulley in Bonaparte you
know saw himself this is all the Revolution as a vehicle for his own ambitions and eight
hundred he seized the power in a coup d'etat he then he then oversaw the writing of a
constitution which gave him absolute authority he used a plebiscite where the people
could go to the polls after the fact to vote their approval of his assuming power as sort
of the near for his this authoritarian regime that he established that he ultimately
crowned himself and burned December of eighteen zero four and then for the next a
decade he waged wars of conquest which seemingly were endless and he and he
rejected opportunities for peace on numerous occasions so obviously there were
*
significant differences between the American and French revolutions now looking at
France obviously the situation was much more catastrophic as far as the economy. In
society we're concerned with the deep social inequalities and and the economic
catastrophe and so forth but there's a but really there is a that the differences between
the two boiled down to the character of two men George Washington who sought to
serve the cause of his country and Napoleon Bonaparte who sought to make his country
the servant of his ambitions.
