DOCSLIB.ORG

Revolutions in Paris

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revolutions in Paris Revolutions in Paris The two later French Revolutions, the French Revolution of 1830 and the French Revolution of 1848, were two major events that not only impacted France, but the rest of Europe as well. The French Revolution of 1830, better known as the July Revolution, was triggered after Louis XVIII died, and his brother, Charles X, rose to power. He established the French Constitution that many citizens of France opposed. On Tuesday, July 27, 1830, fighting broke out in the streets of Paris between military officials and angered citizens. By that Thursday, the rebels gained control and forced Charles X to abdicate to Great Britain. The French Revolution of 1848 was started for reasons very similar to the July Revolution. The citizens of France were once again angered by the way the country was being run, and were unhappy that only about 1% of the population was allowed to vote. Thus, fighting once again broke out between French officials and displeased citizens, and the citizens came out on top. King Louis Philippe fled to England and a republic was then set up in France. 1. July Revolution, 1830 • After King Louis XVIII’s death in 1824, his brother, Charles X, inherited the French throne • Charles X was an absolute monarch – he had absolute power and took away people’s rights • In 1830, Charles suspended the legislature, limited the right to vote, and restricted the press • Angry citizens, led by liberals and radicals, rebelled, fired on soldiers, threw stones, and soon controlled Paris • Charles X abdicated – fled to England A new government • Radicals hoped to set up a republic – a government with elected representatives, but liberals insisted on a constitutional monarchy, a monarchy whose power is limited by a constitution • Louis Philippe (cousin of Charles X) was chosen king • Louis Philippe favored the bourgeoisie, or middle class, over the workers • He was known as the “citizen king” because he owed his throne to the people • He did extend suffrage, but only to wealthy citizens – most people still did not vote ‘Whenever France sneezes, Europe catches a cold.’ - Metternich Effects of Paris Revolts • Paris revolts inspired uprisings elsewhere in Europe • Most revolts failed, but the revolutions frightened rulers and encouraged reforms • One notable success was in Belgium, which achieved its independence from Holland in 1831 • Belgium had been forcefully united with the Netherlands at the Congress of Vienna to prevent future French aggression • Belgium had different language (Belgian vs. Dutch), different religion (Catholic vs. Protestant), and different economy (manufacturing vs. trade) • The Paris uprising sparked a successful rebellion in Brussels, Belgium • Nationalists also revolted in Poland in 1830, but failed to win widespread support • Russian forces crushed the independence movement in Poland 2. February Revolution, 1848 • Discontent grew again in France in 1840s • Radicals, socialists, and liberals denounced Louis Philippe’s government • An economic recession heightened the discontent • People lost their jobs and poor harvests caused bread prices to rise • Newspapers blamed the government for the economic crises • When the government tried to silence the critics, angry crowds took to the streets in February, 1848 (“February Days”) February Days, 1848 • Government tried to silence the critics and block public meetings • Protestors rioted in the streets • Mobs blocked streets, overturned carts, and toppled trees • Royal troops killed some protestors • Louis Philippe decided to abdicate • A group of liberals, radicals, and socialists proclaimed the Second Republic • Differences in the Second Republic • Middle class liberals wanted moderate political reforms • Socialists demanded serious social and economic changes • Socialists forced the government to establish national workshops to provide jobs for the unemployed June Days (1848) • The national workshops were shut down as a waste of money • Workers rioted again in the streets • About 1500 people were killed before the government crushed the June rebellion • A bitter legacy was left – middle class feared and distrusted socialists while working class hated the middle class bourgeoisie • By the end of 1848, the National Assembly issued a constitution for the Second Republic, giving the right to vote to all adult men • When the election for President was held, Louis Napoleon, the nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, won • However, by 1852 he had proclaimed himself Emperor Napoleon III • This ended the Second Republic Effects of Paris Revolution of 1848 • Revolutionary fever spread across Europe!!! • Middle class liberals wanted greater share of political power for themselves • Middle class liberals wanted basic rights for all male citizens • Workers demanded relief from miserable working conditions • Nationalists wanted to eliminate foreign rule Describe events in Paris in February 1848 leading to the Second French Republic. A Reform Banquet planned for 22 February 1848 was banned by Guizot. On 22 February there was a protest march through Paris and barricades went up in the streets. On 23 February Louis Philippe dismissed Guizot. Mole and Thiers were offered the leadership, but both refused. Odilon Barrot assumed control. Louis Philippe abdicated in favor of his grandson. Describe the revolutionary events in Paris in June 1848. Guizot banned a Reform Banquet. He was accused by the Deputies of forgetting who it was who put Louis Philippe on the throne in1830. The crowds took to the barriers shouting “Vive la Reforme!” and “Mourir pour la Patrie”. Louis Philippe took fright and fled leaving the rebels in charge. The Socialists and Republicans combined to form a provisional government of the new Second Republic (Feb.1848). The Republicans immediately gave the vote to all men over 21. They created the National Workshops in Paris to give jobs to the unemployed The National Workshops were closed down in June 1848. This brought fresh uprisings called the ‘June Days’. The risings were ruthlessly suppressed. Over 1500 were killed in four days of fighting. Large numbers were executed, imprisoned or sent overseas. Why were the actions of Guizot important in causing the February 1848 Revolution in France? Guizot refused to respond to demands to extend the franchise. Supporters of reform organized a Reform Banquet to drum up support for their cause, but this was banned by Guizot. Opposition groups felt their only option now was revolution Guizot refused to allow certain reforms Guizot banned a Reform Banquet planned for 22 February Guizot did not respond to demands to extend the franchise Guizot wanted to ensure that middle class domination of the Chamber of Deputies continued Guizot’s actions meant that opposition groups felt that their only option was revolution Why was Louis Philippe overthrown in 1848? [6] Louis, the government and businessmen seemed to be becoming richer, while most were in poverty. The government did not seem to be doing anything to spread the wealth. There had been a series of poor harvests and food prices were high. With poor employment because of the economic depression, many struggled to afford the high prices. People feared a return to 1789. There had been high food prices. There was much unemployment. The rich seemed to get richer and the poor poorer. Guizot banned a Reform Banquet. The Chamber of Deputies did not feel appreciated. Louis was uninspiring. He had a lack-luster foreign policy. How far was the issue of electoral reform the reason for revolution in France in 1848? Explain your answer. [10] The bourgeoisie was refused the vote by Louis and his conservative ministers. This was despite the pressure from Reform Banquets demanding that the vote should be extended to the wealth creators of the country. From 1846 to 1848, there had been a series of poor harvests causing high prices for food. There had been an economic crisis causing much unemployment and a widening pay gap. This caused civil unrest. There was an economic crisis. There were poor harvests. Working conditions deteriorated. The income gap widened. There was a refusal to extend the franchise. The Reform Banquets had a significant impact. Louis Philippe had a ‘laissez-faire’ attitude. Socialists and Bonapartists made up the opposition. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Political Story, 1814-1900
    The Political Story: 1815-1900. From Monarchy to Republic, the struggle for stability and compromise • Republicanism a minority allegiance up to 1880 • Critics associate it with Jacobinism, violent democracy, “Bolshevism” in its day. • By 1880, a permanent majority of the French converted to the republican ideal (Wright, 205) • Transition was exceptional, not normal, it its day A series of experiments in search of stability and compromise (Wright) • The Bourbon Experiment (1814-1830) • The Orléanist Experiment (1830-1848) • The Republican Experiment (1848-1852) • The Imperial Experiment (1852-1870) • The Rooting of the Republican System (1870-1919) Louis XVIII, King of France (1814-1824) Louis-Philippe, King of the French, 1830-1848 Official portrait of Louis XVIII by Jean-Baptiste-Louis Gros Official portrait by Franz Xavier Winterhalter, 1839 Louis XVIII and the Royal Family Charles X, King of France 1824-1830 Official portrait François GERARD, 1825 1814-1848 Struggles for Compromise that Failed How to blend the Revolution and the Old Regime? How to bridge deep divisions created by the Revolution? • Louis XVIII (1814-1824) & the Charter—divine right and a nobility with a legislature • 1817—90,000 men of the wealthy elite had the right to vote • The Chamber: ultras, moderates, liberals (constitutional monarchists, a few republicans) • Charles X (1824-1830) “Stubbornly Unwise” • Coronation at Reims (symbol of the Old Regime) • Compensation of noble émigrés • Partial restoration of the Church—seminaries and missions • Trio of unpopular
    [Show full text]
  • I Was Not Dull
    What, Me Dull? Listen, one of the reasons those crazy French overthrew me, supposedly, was because I was dull and boring. I want you to know the truth. Just listen to a bit of my life and let me know if you think it was dull. I was born in Paris (never a boring city) on October 6, 1773. My father was Louis Philippe Joseph. He was a member of the younger branch of the royal family known as the Orleans branch. He was probably the richest man in France. Did you ever hear of him? Probably not, because he is better known as Philippe Egalite, which means Philip Equality. You see, he supported the French Revolution to such a great extent that he was elected to the most revolutionary body of that period, the Convention. In fact, he also voted for the execution of King Louis XVI. My father’s vote was crucial because the vote to have King Louis executed was close and passed by only one vote. So you see, he was a loyal son of the French Revolution even to the point that my father was guillotined (the revolution had a reputation of devouring its own children). Anyway, I also supported the French Revolution and fought in important battles. I liked our general, Dumouriez, so much that I followed him right down to the time he went over to the Austrians—the Revolution. I spent a lot of time in exile during the First French Republic and later while Napoleon reigned. Since you are Americans, it might interest you to know that among the places I lived was Philadelphia, where I stayed for four years.
    [Show full text]
  • Commerce, Glory, and Empire Montesquieu’S Legacy Céline Spector1
    1 Commerce, Glory, and Empire Montesquieu’s Legacy Céline Spector1 “This book is not precisely in anyone’s camp.”1 Should we take at face value this statement at the end of the introduction to volume one of Democracy in America? Or should we see it, more subtly, as an echo of the quotation from Ovid with which Montesquieu prefaced The Spirit of Laws: prolem sine matre creatum, a work created without a mother? For Tocqueville, as for Montesquieu, the point is by no means to forgo the inspiration of past sources, but rather to announce a new method – the “new political science for a world altogether new,” which he evokes in keeping with the science of society for which The Spirit of Laws laid the groundwork.2 From the first volume of Democracy in America – weaving together geographical causes, laws, and customs – to The Ancien Regime and the Revolution, which redeploys the method of Considerations on the Causes of the Greatness of the Romans and Their Decline, Tocqueville pursues Montesquieu’s project: to determine the causes of institutions (laws, customs) and assess their effects in a comparative light, to theorize the adaptation of legislation to the “genius” of the people it is meant to govern, and to explain the deep causes of radical historical breaks, without denying any leeway to the human will.3 Nevertheless, it is not sufficient to quote Tocqueville’s famous phrase about his three “fetish authors”: Montesquieu, Rousseau, and Pascal.4 Beyond the parallels, we need to revisit an affinity that his contemporaries recognized but that has since been lost from view.5 Like the American Framers such as Madison and Hamilton, Tocqueville knew his debt to the “rarest political writer” of all time.
    [Show full text]
  • HSTR 352.01: French Revolution 1789-1848
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Syllabi Course Syllabi Summer 6-2016 HSTR 352.01: French Revolution 1789-1848 Linda S. Frey University of Montana - Missoula, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Frey, Linda S., "HSTR 352.01: French Revolution 1789-1848" (2016). Syllabi. 4242. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi/4242 This Syllabus is brought to you for free and open access by the Course Syllabi at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Syllabi by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Summer 2016 Prof. Frey FRENCH REVOLUTION Required Reading Wright, France in Modern Times Tocqueville, The Old Regime and the French Revolution Palmer, Twelve Who Ruled Rowe, “Civilians and Warfare during the French Revolutionary Wars.” (reserve) Holtman, The Napoleonic Revolution Walter, Diary of a Napoleonic Soldier Supplementary readings are available at the reserve desk at the Mansfield Library. Exams This class is only offered for a traditional grade. Midterm (tentative date June 8) will cover Wright pp. 3-56, Tocqueville, Rowe, Palmer, and readings on reserve. Final will cover Wright, pp. 57-122, Holtman, and Walter, and readings on reserve. Papers are due June 13 at the beginning of the class hour. No electronic submissions will be accepted. LATE PAPERS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Length: 5-7 pages double spaced. Style: Chicago Manual of Style, Footnotes. All papers should be submitted with the usual scholarly apparatus, that is, title page, footnotes, and bibliography.
    [Show full text]
  • Commerce, Glory and Empire: Montesquieu's Legacy
    Commerce, Glory and Empire: Montesquieu’s Legacy Céline Spector To cite this version: Céline Spector. Commerce, Glory and Empire: Montesquieu’s Legacy. E. Atanassow et R. Boyd. Tocqueville and the Frontiers of Democracy, p. 202-220, 2013. hal-02475953 HAL Id: hal-02475953 https://hal.sorbonne-universite.fr/hal-02475953 Submitted on 12 Feb 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Céline Spector Commerce, Glory and Empire: Montesquieu’s Legacy in Tocqueville and the Frontiers of Democracy, E. Atanassow and R. Boyd eds., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013, pp. 202-220. Translated by Patrick Camiller 1 ‘This book does not exactly follow any particular person.’ Should we take seriously this statement at the end of the introduction to Democracy in America, Volume One? Or should we see it, more subtly, as just an echo of the quotation from Ovid that Montesquieu places at the end of his preface to The Spirit of Laws: prolem sine matre creatam, ‘a work created without a mother’? For Tocqueville, as for Montesquieu, the point is by no
    [Show full text]
  • Under the July Monarchy (1830-1848)
    REPRESENTATIONS OF “LE TRAVAIL” UNDER THE JULY MONARCHY (1830-1848) by Rebecca Terese Powers A dissertation submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland July, 2015 Representations of le travail under the July Monarchy ABSTRACT This project traces the definition of a social reality of labor under the July Monarchy. More specifically, it investigates how the ubiquitous but elusive term travail – understood as manual, non-agricultural work – operates at different levels of discourse in the 1830s and 1840s. To underline this specific cultural context, I employ the French travail rather than the English “work” or “labor.” French workers expected improved social conditions after their contribution to the 1830 Revolution, but were promptly denied this by the new Constitutional Monarchy. Their frustration came to a head in 1848, when they again revolted, demanding the right to work – le droit au travail. This moment is often considered the dawn of the French labor movement, but I contend that it is in the years leading up to 1848 that travail undergoes its most dramatic definition and consecration as a modern value. In order to better understand how the term took on such significance, I examine a variety of cultural documents, both literary and what we would today consider paraliterary. The corpus includes novels by Honoré de Balzac and George Sand; moralist inquiries by René Villermé and Honoré-Antoine Frégier; Jules Michelet’s historiography of the French people; and writings by the workers themselves, whose first-hand accounts of physical labor were becoming increasingly influential.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hunchback of the July Monarchy
    Introducing Monsieur Mayeux: The Hunchback of the July Monarchy Amanda L. Peters This Thesis was Presented to the Department of the History of Art in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for a B.A. with Honors in the Subject of the History of Art University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI 2016 Advisor: Howard Lay Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 List of Illustrations 4 Epigraph 8 I. Introduction and Statement of Purpose 9 II. Mayeux and the July Revolution 15 III. Repression & Censorship 20 IV. Mayeux, Rabelais, and the Ladies 27 V. Mayeux, the Pear King, and Poiricide 33 VI. Mayeux Bonaparte 38 VII. Mayeux’s Demise and Afterlife 41 VIII. Conclusion 46 Bibliography 48 Figures 51 2 Acknowledgements Howard— thank you for your ceaseless dedication, patience, and guidance. Your commitment to the thesis project as a whole is inspiring. Thank you for both believing in and challenging me as a writer. Finally, thank you for sharing your love of French art and history. I will be forever grateful for sitting in 271 on my first day of college. Merci mille fois. Mom & Dad—thank you for your endless support in whatever endeavors I take on. Thanks for always believing in me. Dad, sorry this isn’t medicine, but I hope you’re impressed! Anna—thanks for always listening. Ross—thanks for sharing your passion for art and life with me. I will (almost) miss the late nights of coffee, commiseration, and talking more than we worked. Thank you to all of my friends who pretended to listen to me (quite convincingly) ramble on about a fictional hunchback.
    [Show full text]
  • Liberty Leading the Women: Delacroix’S Liberty As Transitional Image
    Kimberly Carroll (Eugene Delacroix. Liberty Leading the People, 1830. Musée du Louvre, Paris.) Liberty Leading the Women: Delacroix’s Liberty as Transitional Image One of the most iconic transformed into a true wom- overthrow of the monarchy works of revolutionary art is an of the people. Delacroix that had been reinstituted Eugene Delacroix’s Liberty introduces through her figure shortly after the first French Leading the People, a paint- a level of specificity that Revolution of 1789 – 99. It ing from 1830 that depicts transcends her traditional debuted in the Paris Salon the July Revolution of the representations as a passive, in 1831 and was met with same year (Fig 1.). The main mythological, or allegorical mixed reactions. figure of the painting is the symbol. In looking to the or- Many were horrified at the symbol of Liberty, an igins of the figure of liberty, depiction of an event in allegorical representation the role of women during the what would have been of the ideal of perfect free- revolutions, the artist’s own contemporary history in dom. Liberty is represented history, and the reappear- which a bare-breasted through the female form, a ance of this figure into our woman was painted leading traditional manner of rep- own contemporary world, the people of France. In the resentation of victory that the evolution of Delacroix’s same year of its debut, the dates back to antiquity (Fig. Liberty as an image can be painting “was censored by 2). Many components of her seen to serve as a bridge Louis-Philippe” and was appearance clearly indicate from a purely allegorical fig- “hidden from the public for that she is an allegorical rep- ure to a real woman.
    [Show full text]
  • D: the Bourbons Restored; Louis XVIII and the Charter; Charles X and the Revolution of 1830
    F962B2: Monarchy, Republic and Empire; France 1814-70 How successful was the Reign of Louis XVIII 1814 . Louis XVIII was old, weak and unpopular. He was an uninspiring figure to the French, who were used to Napoleonic glory. Louis had been imposed by the allies and was accordingly resented. Louis did little to inspire France with new policies. There were rumours that he would confiscate property seized from nobles during the last twenty years. The armies occupying Paris demanded that Louis XVIII implement a constitution. The Charter . The Charter of 1814 guranteed Freedom of Religion, a legislature composed of the Chamber of Deputies and the Chamber of Peers and limited press freedom,. The property would remain in the hands of their current owners. Taxation was to be voted on by the chambers. Catholicism was the official religion of France. Candidates for the Chamber of Deputies had to pay over 1,000 francs per year in tax, and be over the age of forty. The King appointed peers to the Chamber of Peers on a hereditary basis, or for life at his discretion. Deputies were to elected every five years, with one fifth of them up for election each year. There were 90,000 citizens eligible to vote. This meant that the Chamber was dominated by the aristocracy for most of the time from 1814- 30. The Settlement . Louis XVIII signed the Treaty of Paris on 30 May 1814. The treaty gave France her 1792 borders, which extended east of the Rhine. She had to pay no war indemnity, and the occupying armies of the Sixth Coalition withdrew instantly from French soil.
    [Show full text]
  • Vichy France and the Legacy of the French Revolution
    5 CONTESTED SYMBOLS Lear Prize Winner Contested Symbols: Vichy France and the Legacy of the French Revolution This paper examines how Vichy, the authoritarian government in France throughout most of the Second World War, reckoned with the legacy of the French Revolution. I investigate this relationship through the regime’s treatment of four revolutionary symbols: the figure Marianne, the anthem “La Marseillaise,” the national holiday of Bastille Day, and the slogan of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. Because these symbols were deeply embedded in French social and political life, I argue that Vichy could neither fully reject nor embrace them; instead, it pursued a middle ground by twisting the symbols’ meanings and introducing alternatives in line with the traditionalism and ethnocentrism of its National Revolution. In doing so, Vichy attempted to replace the French Republic and the revolutionary values that it stood for with its own vision of the French past, present, and future. Emma Satterfield Written for History 457: Modern Revolutions 1776, 1789, 1917, 1989, 2011 Dr. Peter C. Caldwell SPRING 2019 EMMA SATTERFIELD 6 Since 1789, the themes and struggles at the heart of the French Revolution have been invoked and re-invoked at times of political crisis and change, from the empire of Napoleon to the brief Paris Commune of 1870. At the onset of the twentieth century, even as the Revolution grew more distant with the passing of time, its legacy remained central to the identity of both the French Republic and its citizens. This crystallization of French identity was made possible by the government’s use of a repertoire of revolutionary symbols embodying the ideals of liberty, equality, and brotherhood.
    [Show full text]
  • The Restored Bourbon Monarchy in France 1814-1830
    THE RESTORED BOURBON MONARCHY IN FRANCE 1814-1830. After the defeat of Napoleon and his 1st exile to the land of Elba (1814), the Vienna Congress powers restored the Bourbon monarchy in France under Louis Stanislus Xavier de France who took the title Louis XVIII. This was in accordance to the principle of legitimacy by which rightful rulers were to be restored to their legitimate thrones. Louis XVIII was 60 years and was the eldest brother of King Louis XVI who was executed in Jan 1793. Louis XVIII was both intellectually and by character suitable to be a king. He had a lot of common sense and had learnt a lot from the French revolution and Napoleonic era .He was aware of the faults of his brother that caused his death .He had suffered enough in exile and would never wish to go back. He therefore stood for a policy of compromise and reconciliation between the new and old order in France. However on 1st march 1815, Napoleon escaped from Elba and landed in Paris with 1100 men. He received overwhelming ovation and support from the peasants. The soldiers sent to engage him fraternized when he dimply moved forward, opened his coat and asked, "Which of you will fire against his emperor"? This event forced Louis XVIII to flee to exile once again and Napoleon ruled for 100 more days the allies, who had suffered in the hands of Napoleon, reorganized themselves and defeated Napoleon at the battle of Waterloo on 18th June 1815. Louis XVIII returned from exile with a charter to rule as a constitutional king.
    [Show full text]
  • Montesquieu and Guizot Steven Patrick Connolley A
    MONTESQUIEU AND GUIZOT From the Regime to Society by STEVEN PATRICK CONNOLLEY A thesis submitted to the Department of Sociology in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Queen's University Kingston, Ontario, Canada August, 1998 copyright Q Steven Patrick Comolley, 1998 National Library Bibliothèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Sewices services bibliographiques 395 Weliingtori Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaON K1AW ûüôw ON K1A ON4 canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Liirary of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distriiîute or seli reproduire, prêter, distri'buer ou copies of this thesis in microfonn, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic fonnats. la forme de microfiche/fiim. de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the &oit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor mbstantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT This thesis has compared the idea of political determinism - i.e., the notion that the regime has causal primacy over its society - with the idea of sociai determinism - Le., the notion that political institutions are effects of social conditions. Consequently, this argument juxtaposed Montesquieu's political determinism with Guizot's social determinism.
    [Show full text]