Moderate reforms were expected in 1789, and with louis failing to meet these reforms from the

In this letter, he disapproved of the reduction of his royal powers and personal wealth, which affected his lifestyle and authority. He denounced the Revolution, National Assembly, and its constitution. Copies of the letter circulated in public and revealed to people that “Louis had lied to the French” when he swore an oath “before God and the nation to uphold the constitution” (102). Not only did he leave behind his people but his flight would have led to a civil war between revolutionaries and loyalists aided by foreigners. On top of that, deputies of the National Assembly dealt with the aftermath of a missing king: paranoid Parisians suspecting a conspiracy, people storming the palace, and palace servants being accused of treason. This added to the “profound sense of desertion and betrayal” by a king that people saw as a “good father” (222). Out of disgust, they denounced Louis: calling him all sorts of names, took down portraits of him, and covered “in black the word royal” on signs, buildings, and other public places (110). The “myth of the kingship had been shattered” because nobody knew what to do with Louis at this time (104, 108). Some wanted exile or imprisonment whereas others suggested reinstating him as only a figurehead, and some thought about a “republic without a king” (108). Either way, they no longer

Just about any country that one can name has some history of civil unrest, class issues, rioting in the streets, and outright warfare. These patterns of behavior are common denominators for most civilization in the world. The names, faces, and places may change, but the motivations are generally the same, because of the need for change and the willingness to do whatever is necessary to achieve it. In contrast to the United States, which was in the process of freeing itself from British colonial rule, France was working to free itself from royal absolutism. This period is historically known as the French Revolution. Many scholars do not agree on the chronology of the French Revolution; some scholars suggest that the Revolution took place between 1789 to 1799 while others feel that it did not end until Napoleon lost power in 1815. To better understand the history of the French Revolution it is necessary to discuss the causes, major events, significant figures, and the outcomes associated with these political developments. Without this uprising, that changed the face of the entire country and influenced local political life in many countries in Europe, in all likelihood the France we know today would never have existed.

King Louis XVI and Marie Antionette were two people that should not have been ruling a country. King Louis was always gone on hunting trips and Marie Antionette spent every dime of French money. Once the Monarchy ran out money, they started to tax the Third, and poorest, estate. The third estate took up 97% of the population. 97% of the population was starving and the royal family kept spending large amounts of money until the people revolted. The people of France tried to reason with King Louis, but he refused to change his ways and kept taxing the third estate. When the people revolted, they stormed the Bastille and took all of the weapons they could. The people then went to the King’s palace and demanded he fix the way he was ruling before they killed him. The King didn’t listen and was executed along with his wife. Of the three kids that Marie Antionette had, the two boys died of Tuberculosis in jail and the daughter was sent to live the remainder of her life in exile in Austria. It may seem as though the people of France had successfully overgrown their monarchy and could begin a life of freedom, however this is not the case. The French had rushed into combat too fast and did not have a plan for what to do after they had killed their rulers. The right of Terror begins where Maximilian Robespierre beheads 40,000 people in the span of ten months for speaking against the revolution. In the end, Robespierre ends up getting

During the French revolution, French citizens went against absolute monarchy and the feudal system that was antiquated. They were influenced by Enlightenment ideas such as inalienable rights and popular sovereignty. Louis XVI was the ruler at the time; he believed that his power was given to him by God, thus making him think his ruling was right despite people’s opinion. The citizens of France especially the 3rd estate disliked the king for treating them poorly. Eventually the Jacobins convicted Louis XVI to death by a guillotine for treason after finding a large iron box holding Louis XVI’s secret correspondence with foreign monarchs. The beheading of King Louis XVI was justified because he took people’s rights away and made people follow his inadequate rules and biased judgments based on status. Furthermore, if he were to be left alive it would have posed a threat to the security and stability of France.

The author explained how the French Revolution starts and also how choice made by the royal government affect the old regime which moved the country into different conflicts. For example, in chapter 1 “The

France was experience a great amount of change in the summer of 1793, when the Jacobins succeeded the moderates in the National Convention. With the radical Jacobins in power, the country was in tumult, and a Reign of Terror ensued due to a law of suspects that legalized local revolutionary committees. Because of this, thousands of people were killed by guillotine or other methods. Throughout the summer of 1793, the radical Jacobins’ control of the Committee of Public Safety instituted the Terror which was advantageous in it’s intended purpose, yet it was disadvantageous because of the enemies it created.

After reading this book I understand a lot more about the French Revolution. Most of the problems that occurred dealt with the idea of change. Some people like things the way they are, some are afraid of change, and others would like to see something new. Louis XVI wanted things the way they were and be treated as a king is supposed to be treated, and

When analyzing the French Revolution, the idea of political transformation and citizen involvement play a huge role in actually understanding how the revolution altered from enlightened conversations in salons to its completion, resulting from the French “voice” uniting to halt The Terror that Paris had become. Reflecting back on this event, historians still debate on the specific moment this aristocratic revolution of 1789 turned into the blood-bath radical revolution due to the momentum and contingency that each event has on the overall Revolution. The two authors, Jeremy Popkin, and Timothy Tackett, explain their historical opinion on this period of French history, in which both share a similar

Timothy Tackett’s book When the King Took Flight focuses on arguably the most consequential event in the French Revolution. King Louis XVI and his family’s attempt to escape France would influence an atmosphere of violence that would only continue to worsen. King Louis XVI regretted signing and accepting the Civil Constitution of the Clergy earlier in July 1790. Deciding to flee the country he assumed that through foreign intervention or negotiating he could change parts of the constitution he disagreed with. However he would be recognized and captured in Varennes. The king underestimated the true meaning and appeal of the revolution (87). His misunderstanding of the revolution led the way for the destruction of kingship and the monarchy itself. This decision had given power to the sans-culottes and the idea of a republic. While the kings flight to Varennes had many unintended consequences it serves as a crucial turning point for the revolution.

With King Louis XVI making the bad decisions, acknowledgement was to be done to fix corruption in government. As said in document A, "The representatives of the French people believed that the ignorance, neglect, or contempt of the rights of man are the sole causes of public calamities and the corruption of the government." King Louis was a poor absolute monarch during the 1780's (document B) juggling France's unfair tax system and poverty (background essay). This relates back to representatives of the French people's beliefs of a corrupted government. Seen throughout the Reign of Terror, the reign of Robespierre, and King Louis XVI reign, corruption of government is through ignorance, neglect, or contempt of the rights of man (document B). Although power has been taken advantaged of through absolute monarchs, they have changed history for better. Without their abuse of power, the Reign of Terror wouldn't have ended and solved the problems France was facing.

In this essay I shall try to find whether the Terror was inherent from the French revolutions outset or was it the product of exceptional circumstances. The French revolution is the dividing line between the Ancien Regime and the modern world. After France the hierarchy that societies of the time had been founded on began to change and they began to sweep away the intricate political structures of absolute monarchy, but however to achieve this was the Terror absolutely necessary? And was it planned/ or was it just the extraordinary circumstances, which the French had lead themselves into once they had deposed of Louis the

During the eighteenth century there was one central political cause for the French Revolution. King Louis XVI was a weak ruler who endured a lavish lifestyle. He disregarded the people’s needs, leaving much of the French population in discontent. Prior to the revolution the form of government was Absolute monarchy led by Louis XVI. The problem with absolute monarchy was that people were denied basic rights, and a say in government because the divine right theory was abused. The King ruled by the divine right of theory which

The King of France, Louis XV died on the 10 May 1774, he was succeeded by his grandson, twenty year old Louis XVI. When Louis XVI took the throne riots had already begun. The reason for this, the cost of grain and bread, which was the staple diet (mainly among the peasants) had risen to beyond what the commoners could afford. He had in inherited a Kingdom already in great difficulty. In order to enact reforms he changed the political team of his grandfather and had a succession of ministers, such as Turgot and Necker. Louis XVI lack of strength of character and his inability to make decision did not lend to these ministers the support needed to sort out the fiscal problems of France.

The French Revolution Louis XVI: Fit for a Man not for a King Bryce K. Richards Louis XVI was deemed potentially one of the worst leaders in history as a result of his downfalls being so severe that he invoked a national revolution that resulted in his execution. He was born August 23, 1754 in the Palace of Versailles [1]. Growing up, he was tutored by French noble men and he studied religion, morality, and humanities. A simple life full of humble beginnings that was trumped by his parents’ lack of attention towards him and then his family’s premature deaths. These things resulted in him being a man fit for the life of a man but not for one of a king.

An important aspect when discussing the commune is the way in which violence was used: the event of the Paris Commune had two equally violent poles – the National Guard representing the Proletarians and the German army whose country now controlled France. But the driving force behind the Commune should not be misunderstood as a repressed class fighting for their ideas; instead, one has to emphasize that the political agitation is a result of the materialistic class struggle that pushes for the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Because of this, examining how or whether the Commune was sophisticated in its structure is irrelevant as a result. What this paper instead tries to examine how the reversion of the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoise, i.e. capitalism, affects the both informal and formal structures within a society, in this case Paris. One can not analyse the structures of the Commune, and it’s pre-stages, without emphasizing the violence: the happening that was the Commune was entirely dependent on an armed proletariat, i.e. the National Guard. The demands of the Commune were unclear and to some extent confused, but in the last resort they came forward on the abolition of the class antagonism between workers and the bourgeoise. This demand, however unknown it was for it to be brought about, was an threat to the existing society. As of