DOCSLIB.ORG

French Revolution and English Revolution Comparison Chart Print Out

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
French Revolution and English Revolution Comparison Chart Print Out Socials 9 Name: Camilla Mancia Comparison of the English Revolution and French Revolution TOPIC ENGLISH REVOLUTION FRENCH REVOLUTION SIMILARITIES DIFFERENCES 1625-1689 Kings - Absolute monarchs - Absolute monarchs - Kings ruled as Absolute - English Kings believed in Divine - James I: intelligent; slovenly - Louis XIV: known as the “Sun King”; Monarchs Right of Kings and French did habits; “wisest fool in saw himself as center of France and - Raised foreign armies not Christendom”; didn’t make a forced nobles to live with him; - Charles I and Louis XVI both - Charles I did not care to be good impression on his new extravagant lifestyle; built Palace of did not like working with loved whereas Louis XVI initially subjects; introduced the Divine Versailles ($$) Parliament/Estates General wanted to be loved by his people Right Kings - Louis XV: great grandson of Louis XIV; - Citizens did not like the wives of - Charles I did not kill people who - Charles I: Believed in Divine only five years old when he became Charles I (Catholic) and Louis were against him (he Right of Kings; unwilling to King; continued extravagances of the XVI (from Austria) imprisoned or fined them) compromise with Parliament; court and failure of government to - Both Charles I and Louis XVI whereas Louis XVI did narrow minded and aloof; lived reform led France towards disaster punished critics of government - Charles I called Lord Strafford, an extravagant life; Wife - Louis XVI; originally wanted to be Archbishop Laud and Henrietta Maria and people loved; not interested in governing; did occasionally Parliament; Louis despised her (Catholic) not help middle and lower classes; XVI only called Estates General - Charles II: supposed to rule as married Marie Antoinette who people as he had no advisors a constitutional monarch; tried despised (Austrian) to protect Catholic freedom - Louis allowed critics of government to - James II: openly Catholic, be imprisoned or killed believed in Divine Right of Kings; instituted reign of terror due to rebellions against him Parliament vs general - it was the government for them - France had a kind of parliament called - The estates general had 3 estate that they called parliament the estate general - they both had rules estates, commoners, clergy, - parliament made all the - the estate general included the three - you had to go by there rules and nobility. Parliament had decision making in the english estate (first estates: clergy aristocrats - they were basically the same 2, commoners and nobility. revolution formed the second estate the middle - thing but just different - More important, the estates - parliament did not agree to class made up the third estate names general had given the king Charles plans - this meant that the privileged classes - they do the same stuff but in the ability to levy taxes. - parliament told the king iy had twice much voting power as the other orders would grant no money until the middle class - they didn't like one another Parliament never gave the king ceased his illegal activities - turbot had tried to reform the economy king that authority. and until he signed a new but had been forced out of the office by -The estates general stopped charter called the “petition or Marie Antoinette now the country was meeting after it gave the king the right” bankrupt power to levy taxes. - there was the short parliament - there was the new parliament - and there was the long parliament where the long parliament was even more unfriendly to Charles - one day parliament left in the hand of presbyterians and puritans who also disagreed on many important matters religion - puritans were a large and - mostly catholics - most of the country - believed in different powerful group among the - the church had many privileges believed in one religion religions dissenting protestants - the enlightenment was against the - the kings were in charge - religion was a nog part of - very important to everyone religion and they tried to remove the of the church the english civil war - church of England decided catholic church from France - both of them had main - many philosophers were how church service were to - the church gave its support to the church against religion be conducted every where in country rulers - churches were privileged the country - the church owned about six percent of - mostly protestants the land - official church was church of England government - parliament rebelled against - had a parliament called estate - both had a kind of - France had philosophers the king general parliament - many poplin England - most people did not have the - the estate general rarely met - parliament and the estate disagreed with parliaments right to vote - government was divided into general both refused to right to make decisions - parliament was now on the sections Charles 1 wishes - in France woman and men hand of presbyterians and - many philosophers rejected the - government was divided into would meet to discuss puritans idea of absolute monarchy and sections society and politics to social - many people disagreed with favoured democracy problems parliaments right to make - - in England a lot of people decisions fought for the king not for - Charles the 1 never agreed to themselves parliament taxes - ship money - the third estate had to pay the - the church collected a tax - had to pay taxes for food and - churches were supported by most taxes from peasants in France transportation taxes - upper class and the church were - Charles 1 used unpopular - upper class member did not - the king used money on privileged and payed few taxes taxes as a way to earn some have to pay as many taxes things for themselves - people were unhappy with the high money for himself - people were really unhappy - people were unhapy about taxes or taxes at all - lower class people had to the taxes - churches collected taxes too pay the most taxes and they - lower clashed to pay the - shipping of goods involved thirty didn't even have that much most taxes separate taxes money it was so unfair -.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nationalism in the French Revolution of 1789
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Honors College 5-2014 Nationalism in the French Revolution of 1789 Kiley Bickford University of Maine - Main Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/honors Part of the Cultural History Commons Recommended Citation Bickford, Kiley, "Nationalism in the French Revolution of 1789" (2014). Honors College. 147. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/honors/147 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors College by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NATIONALISM IN THE FRENCH REVOLUTION OF 1789 by Kiley Bickford A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for a Degree with Honors (History) The Honors College University of Maine May 2014 Advisory Committee: Richard Blanke, Professor of History Alexander Grab, Adelaide & Alan Bird Professor of History Angela Haas, Visiting Assistant Professor of History Raymond Pelletier, Associate Professor of French, Emeritus Chris Mares, Director of the Intensive English Institute, Honors College Copyright 2014 by Kiley Bickford All rights reserved. Abstract The French Revolution of 1789 was instrumental in the emergence and growth of modern nationalism, the idea that a state should represent, and serve the interests of, a people, or "nation," that shares a common culture and history and feels as one. But national ideas, often with their source in the otherwise cosmopolitan world of the Enlightenment, were also an important cause of the Revolution itself. The rhetoric and documents of the Revolution demonstrate the importance of national ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • I. History and Ideology in the English Revolution1
    THE HISTORICAL JOURNAL VOL. VIII 1965 No. 2 I. HISTORY AND IDEOLOGY IN THE ENGLISH REVOLUTION1 By QUENTIN SKINNER Christ's College, Cambridge IDEOLOGICAL arguments are commonly sustained by an appeal to the past, an appeal either to see precedents in history for new claims being advanced, or to see history itself as a development towards the point of view being advocated or denounced.2 Perhaps the most influential example from English history of this prescriptive use of historical information is provided by the ideological arguments associated with the constitutional revolution of the seventeenth century. It was from a propagandist version of early English history that the 'whig' ideology associated with the Parliamentarians—the ideology of customary law, regulated monarchy and immemorial Parliamen- tary right—drew its main evidence and strength. The process by which this 'whig' interpretation of history became bequeathed to the eighteenth century as accepted ideology has of course already been definitively labelled by Professor Butterfield, and described in his book on The Englishman and his History.3 It still remains, however, to analyse fully the various other ways in which awareness of the past became a politically relevant factor in English society during its constitutional upheavals. The acceptance of the ' whig' view of early English history in fact represented only the triumph of one among several conflictinb ideologies which had relied on identical historical backing to their claims. And despite the resolution of this conflict by universal acceptance of the ' whig' view, the ' whigs' themselves were nevertheless to be covertly influenced by the rival ideologies which their triumph might seem to have suppressed.
    [Show full text]
  • HENRY VII M.Elizabeth of York (R.1485–1509)
    Historic Royal Places – Descriptors Small Use Width 74mm Wide and less Minimum width to be used 50mm Depth 16.5mm (TOL ) Others Various Icon 7mm Wide Dotted line for scaling Rules 0.25pt and minimum size establishment only. Does not print. HENRY VII m.Elizabeth of York (r.1485–1509) Arthur, m. Katherine HENRY VIII m.(1) Katherine m.(2) Anne m.(3) Jane m.(4) Anne of Cleves Edmund (1) James IV, m Margaret m (2) Archibald Douglas, Elizabeth Mary Catherine Prince of Wales of Aragon* (r.1509–47) Boleyn Seymour (5) Catherine Howard King of Earl of Angus (d. 1502) (6) Kateryn Parr Scotland Frances Philip II, m. MARY I ELIZABETH I EDWARD VI Mary of m. James V, Margaret m. Matthew Stewart, Lady Jane Grey King of Spain (r.1553–58) (r.1558–1603) (r.1547–53) Lorraine King of Earl of Lennox (r.1553 for 9 days) Scotland (1) Francis II, m . Mary Queen of Scots m. (2) Henry, Charles, Earl of Lennox King of France Lord Darnley Arbella James I m. Anne of Denmark (VI Scotland r.1567–1625) (I England r.1603–1625) Henry (d.1612) CHARLES I (r.1625–49) Elizabeth m. Frederick, Elector Palatine m. Henrietta Maria CHARLES II (r.1660–85) Mary m. William II, (1) Anne Hyde m. JAMES II m. (2) Mary Beatrice of Modena Sophia m. Ernest Augustus, Elector of Hanover m.Catherine of Braganza Prince of Orange (r.1685–88) WILLIAM III m. MARY II (r.1689–94) ANNE (r.1702–14) James Edward, GEORGE I (r.1714–27) Other issue Prince of Orange m.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction: the Queen Versus the People 1
    N OTES Introduction: The Queen versus the People 1 . J e a n n e L o u i s e C a m p a n , Memoirs of the Court of Marie Antoinette, Queen of France , ed. M de Lamartine (Philadelphia, PA: Parry and McMillan, 1854), pp. 158–159. 2 . Nancy Nichols Barker, “Revolution and the Royal Consort,” in Proceedings of the Consortium on Revolutionary Europe (1989): 136–143. 3 . Barker, “Revolution and the Royal Consort,” p. 136. 4 . Clarissa Campbell Orr notes in the introduction to a 2004 collection of essays concerning the role of the European queen consort in the Baroque era that “there is little comparative work in English on any facet of European Court life in the period from 1660 to 1800.” See Clarissa Campbell Orr, “Introduction” in Clarissa Campbell Orr (ed.), Queenship in Europe: 1660–1815: The Role of the Consort (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 2. There are strong exceptions to Orr’s conclusion, including the works of Jeroen Duidam and T.C.W. Blanning, which compare the culture, structure, and politics of Early Modern courts revealing both change and continuity but these stud- ies devote little space to the specific role of the queen consort within her family and court. See Jeroen Duindam, Vienna and Versailles: The Courts of Europe’s Dynastic Rivals 1550–1780 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), and T.C.W. Blanning, The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture: Old Regime Europe 1660–1789 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). 5 . See Kevin Sharpe, The Personal Rule of Charles I (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996); Bernard Bourdin, The Theological-Political Origins of the Modern State: Controversy between James I of England and Cardinal Bellamine (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2010), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Social-Property Relations, Class-Conflict and The
    Historical Materialism 19.4 (2011) 129–168 brill.nl/hima Social-Property Relations, Class-Conflict and the Origins of the US Civil War: Towards a New Social Interpretation* Charles Post City University of New York [email protected] Abstract The origins of the US Civil War have long been a central topic of debate among historians, both Marxist and non-Marxist. John Ashworth’s Slavery, Capitalism, and Politics in the Antebellum Republic is a major Marxian contribution to a social interpretation of the US Civil War. However, Ashworth’s claim that the War was the result of sharpening political and ideological – but not social and economic – contradictions and conflicts between slavery and capitalism rests on problematic claims about the rôle of slave-resistance in the dynamics of plantation-slavery, the attitude of Northern manufacturers, artisans, professionals and farmers toward wage-labour, and economic restructuring in the 1840s and 1850s. An alternative social explanation of the US Civil War, rooted in an analysis of the specific path to capitalist social-property relations in the US, locates the War in the growing contradiction between the social requirements of the expanded reproduction of slavery and capitalism in the two decades before the War. Keywords origins of capitalism, US Civil War, bourgeois revolutions, plantation-slavery, agrarian petty- commodity production, independent-household production, merchant-capital, industrial capital The Civil War in the United States has been a major topic of historical debate for almost over 150 years. Three factors have fuelled scholarly fascination with the causes and consequences of the War. First, the Civil War ‘cuts a bloody gash across the whole record’ of ‘the American .
    [Show full text]
  • Henrietta Maria: the Betrayed Queen
    2018 V Henrietta Maria: The Betrayed Queen Dominic Pearce Stroud: Amberley, 2015 Review by: Andrea Zuvich Review: Henrietta Maria: The Betrayed Queen Henrietta Maria: The Betrayed Queen. By Dominic Pearce. Stroud: Amberley, 2015. ISBN 978-1-4456-4547-6. 352 pp. £20. enrietta Maria, the controversial uncrowned queen consort of the equally provocative Charles I of England, Scotland, and Ireland, H continues to have a reputation for shrewish obstinacy and religious bigotry, with little—if any—attention given to the more positive qualities of her character. The premise behind Dominic Pearce’s biography is that historians have betrayed the queen, because she has been largely ignored and/or disrespected. Pearce shows Henrietta Maria as a fully-fleshed person: her weaknesses and strengths are equally stated. The text is followed by a list of Henrietta Maria’s descendants, notes, a bibliography, acknowledgements, and an index. The 2010s have seen a positive trend in biographies seeking to re- examine the Stuart monarchs of the seventeenth century, notably Mark Kishlansky’s Charles I: An Abbreviated Life (2014), and White King: Charles I – Traitor, Murderer, Martyr by Leanda de Lisle (2018). Such critical re-evaluations have led to studies that are more balanced and more aware of the complexities of the figures of the seventeenth-century Stuart dynasty than the prejudices of Whig historians have previously allowed. Pearce’s book is no exception and, while it competently adds to the scholarship of the Caroline period, it perhaps can be argued that it does not add a great deal more than what has already been written in other relatively recent works on or featuring Henrietta Maria, such as Alison Plowden’s Henrietta Maria: Charles I’s Indomitable Queen (2001), or Katie Whitaker’s A Royal Passion: The Turbulent Marriage of King Charles I of England and Henrietta Maria of France (2010).
    [Show full text]
  • Enlightenment Walking Tour 4
    France and Paris were changed dramatically by the Enlightenment and ensuing French Revolution. Likewise, many of the monuments and buildings you’ll see on this walk were “reinvented” during the 18th century. The Panthéon, where this walk starts, began as a church sponsored by an absolute monarch and ended the century as a monument to the country’s most famous Enlightenment figures. The place de la Concorde, where the walk ends, saw one monarch celebrated with a statue and another executed on the same site. Saint-Sulpice and Saint- Thomas-d’Aquin were transformed from churches to secular “temples” and back to churches again. And the Palais du Luxembourg, Hôtel de Salm, and Palais Bourbon, homes at the beginning of the century to royalty and aristocrats, ended the century as homes to the country’s newly created democratic institutions. In addition to showcasing neoclassical buildings and monuments, the walk also provides an opportunity to wander through part of the Saint-Germain des Prés quarter, one of the city’s most lively and interesting neighborhoods. Start: Panthéon (Métro: Maubert Mutualité) Finish: Place de la Concorde (Métro: Concorde) Distance: 3 miles Time: 3 - 4 hours Best Days: Any day Copyright © Ann Branston 2011 HISTORY Religion and Philosophy Politics and Economics The political and economic situation in 18th-century France provided fertile As the 18th century began, France’s monarchy and the Catholic church ground for Enlightenment philosophers (know as “philosophes”) who (known later collectively as the “ancien régime”) were at the apex of their believed that natural “scientific” laws could be applied to social, economic power and glory.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Review the Outline of My Research Topic Will Encompass
    Literature Review The outline of my research topic will encompass Anne of Denmark’s role as queen consort in Scotland and England, from 1589 to 1619, in order to investigate her political influence. To fully understand Anna’s political role, recent historiography surrounding influential women in early modern England and, in particular, the role of the queen consort will be evaluated in depth. My research will contribute to these two growing fields and fill a gap by re-examining Anna, who historians once considered frivolous and vain. Accompanied by re-definitions of high politics at one end of the spectrum and court masques at the other, a re-assessment of her character throughout her reign as queen consort of Scotland and England is accordingly needed. The value of analysing Anna in a political light will be demonstrated in this essay through an examination of the historiography surrounding influential women in early modern England, queen consorts in general and then Anna herself. Previous study has excluded women from high politics because it was considered part of the public sphere, rather than the private sphere that they belonged to. In her article ‘Women and Politics in Early Tudor England’, Harris challenges the traditional view of high politics by emphasising its redefinition to include the influence of women.1 Sara Mendelson and Patricia Crawford’s book, Women in Early Modern England, echoes this view. Although women exercised some influence in high politics, this is not 1 B. Harris., ‘Women and Politics in Early Tudor England’, The Historical Journal, 33:2 (1990), pp.259-281, p.259.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 JAMES M. VAUGHN Department of History University Of
    JAMES M. VAUGHN Department of History University of Texas at Austin 128 Inner Campus Dr. B7000 Austin, TX 78712-1739 EDUCATION Ph.D., Department of History, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 2009 M.A., Division of the Social Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 2004 B.A., Department of History, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 2000 PROFESSIONAL APPOINTMENTS Assistant Professor, Department of History, University of Texas at Austin 2008 - present Assistant Director, Program in British Studies 2009 - present Jack Miller Research Fellow in Representative Institutions, the MacMillan 2011 - 2012 Center for International and Area Studies, Yale University, New Haven, CT PUBLICATIONS (including Accepted and In Press) Book Vaughn, J. M. (In production [copyediting], expected September 2018). The Politics of Empire at the Accession of George III: The East India Company and the Crisis and Transformation of Britain’s Imperial State. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 130,000 words. Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles and Book Chapters Vaughn, J. M. (August 2017, published online as “ahead-of-print” featured article [DOI: 10.3366/brw.2017.0283]; in press, September 2018). John Company Armed: The English East India Company, the Anglo-Mughal War and Absolutist Imperialism, c. 1675-1690. Britain and the World, 11 (2). Austen, R. A., & Vaughn, J. M. (2011). The Territorialization of Empire: Social Imperialism and Britain’s Moves into India and Tropical Africa. In T. Falola and E. Brownell (Eds.), Africa, Empire and Globalization: Essays in Honor of A. G. Hopkins (193-212). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press. 1 Non-Peer Reviewed Articles Vaughn, J. M. (2013). 1776 in World History: The American Revolution as Bourgeois Revolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline (PDF)
    Timeline of the French Revolution 1789 1793 May 5 Estates General convened in Versailles Jan. 21 Execution of Louis XVI (and later, Marie Jun. 17 National Assembly Antoinette on Oct. 16) Jun. 20 Tennis Court Oath Feb. 1 France declares war on British and Dutch (and Jul. 11 Necker dismissed on Spain on Mar. 7) Jul. 13 Bourgeois militias in Paris Mar. 11 Counterrevolution starts in Vendée Jul. 14 Storming of the Bastille in Paris (official start of Apr. 6 Committee of Public Safety formed the French Revolution) Jun. 1-2 Mountain purges Girondins Jul. 16 Necker recalled Jul. 13 Marat assassinated Jul. 20 Great Fear begins in the countryside Jul. 27 Maximilien Robespierre joins CPS Aug. 4 Abolition of feudalism Aug. 10 Festival of Unity and Indivisibility Aug. 26 Declaration of Rights of Man and the Citizen Sept. 5 Terror the order of the day Oct. 5 Adoption of Revolutionary calendar 1791 1794 Jun. 20-21 Flight to Varennes Aug. 27 Declaration of Pillnitz Jun. 8 Festival of the Supreme Being Jul. 27 9 Thermidor: fall of Robespierre 1792 1795 Apr. 20 France declares war on Austria (and provokes Prussian declaration on Jun. 13) Apr. 5/Jul. 22 Treaties of Basel (Prussia and Spain resp.) Sept. 2-6 September massacres in Paris Oct. 5 Vendémiare uprising: “whiff of grapeshot” Sept. 20 Battle of Valmy Oct. 26 Directory established Sept. 21 Convention formally abolishes monarchy Sept. 22 Beginning of Year I (First Republic) 1797 Oct. 17 Treaty of Campoformio Nov. 21 Berlin Decree 1798 1807 Jul. 21 Battle of the Pyramids Aug.
    [Show full text]
  • The Glorious Revolution Reconsidered: Whig Historiography
    Author: Omar El Sharkawy Title: “The Glorious Revolution Reconsidered: Whig Historiography and Revisionism in Historical and Intellectual Context” Source: Prandium: The Journal of Historical Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall, 2020). Published by: The Department of Historical Studies, University of Toronto Mississauga Stable URL: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/prandium/index The Glorious Revolution is the subject of extensive discussion in relation to the meaning and conduct of revolutionary behavior.1 There are several schools of thought on the Glorious Revolution, but this paper focuses on the most firmly entrenched “traditional” perspective. In its most pure form, the traditional or “Whig” interpretation was first articulated by Thomas B. Macaulay in the nineteenth century. He viewed the Glorious Revolution as a mostly staid and boring affair: a moderate political revolution guided by the propertied political classes that established constitutionalism, parliamentary sovereignty, and religious toleration as the bedrock of English government. This revolution displaced a tyrannical Catholic monarch, James II, who was bent on absolute power and religious persecution. The “Whig interpretation of history” has been a source of both praise and criticism in the revolution’s long and well-established historiographical tradition.2 Modern scholarly debates concerning the revolution have almost completely revised the Whig perspective as a moderate and quintessentially English revolution. However, the interpretation of the degree of social
    [Show full text]
  • The Monarchs of England 1066-1715
    The Monarchs of England 1066-1715 King William I the Conqueror (1066-1087)— m. Matilda of Flanders (Illegitimate) (Crown won in Battle) King William II (Rufus) (1087-1100) King Henry I (1100-35) – m. Adela—m. Stephen of Blois Matilda of Scotland and Chartres (Murdered) The Empress Matilda –m. King Stephen (1135-54) –m. William d. 1120 Geoffrey (Plantagenet) Matilda of Boulogne Count of Anjou (Usurper) The Monarchs of England 1066-1715 The Empress Matilda – King Stephen (1135- m. Geoffrey 54) –m. Matilda of (Plantagenet) Count of Boulogne Anjou (Usurper) King Henry II (1154- 1189) –m. Eleanor of Eustace d. 1153 Aquitaine King Richard I the Lion King John (Lackland) heart (1189-1199) –m. Henry the young King Geoffrey d. 1186 (1199-1216) –m. Berengaria of Navarre d. 1183 Isabelle of Angouleme (Died in Battle) The Monarchs of England 1066-1715 King John (Lackland) (1199- 1216) –m. Isabelle of Angouleme King Henry III (1216-1272) –m. Eleanor of Provence King Edward I Edmund, Earl of (1272-1307) –m. Leicester –m. Eleanor of Castile Blanche of Artois The Monarchs of England 1066-1715 King Edward I Edmund, Earl of (1272-1307) –m. Leicester –m. Eleanor of Castile Blanche of Artois King Edward II Joan of Acre –m. (1307-27) –m. Thomas, Earl of Gilbert de Clare Isabella of France Lancaster (Murdered) Margaret de Clare – King Edward III m. Piers Gaveston (1327-77) –m. (Murdered) Philippa of Hainalt The Monarchs of England 1066-1715 King Edward III (1327-77) –m. Philippa of Hainalt John of Gaunt, Duke Lionel, Duke of Edward the Black of Lancaster d.
    [Show full text]