The ‘Three Glorious Days’: The Revolution of 1830 in Provincial France

1983 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 831-844 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela Pilbeam
Keyword(s):  
Complete Analysis ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
Napoleon Bonaparte ◽  
Revolutionary Violence ◽  
Regular Army ◽  
History Of ◽  
Local Impact ◽  
The Government ◽  
Council Of State ◽  
The Revolution

France has always envied Paris. A popular interpretation of the history of France has been of conflict between the capital and the provinces in which Paris was the victor, at least from the establishment of the system of intendants by Louis XIV in the late seventeenth century. Radical Paris took the lead in the revolutionary upheavals of the 1790s, in 1830, 1848 and 1870–1. The conflict of the 1790s produced civil and foreign war and led to an even greater domination by Paris through the centralizing policies of Napoleon Bonaparte as military dictator. Under his rule and subsequently, all officials - civil, judicial, military, religious and educational - were appointed by the government in Paris. The Council of State was a corner-stone of this policy in the capital, the departmental prefect in the provinces. In 1830 the results of the July Days were acceptable on the whole to the French; but in 1848 provincial France roundly rejected the radical social revolution favoured by intellectuals and artisans in Paris; in 1871 the Commune of Paris was virtually isolated in its decentralizing and social-reforming ambitions and suffered bloody defeat at the hands of the regular army. Apparently, then, 1830 was the last, and perhaps only, time in the nineteenth century that ‘Paris led, France followed.’ Was 1830 so unique, and if so, why? The Revolution of 1830 was unquestionably Parisian, in that events in the capital determined the timing and location of acts of significant revolutionary violence and in that the major political and administrative changes which followed the revolution were enacted in Paris. Should one therefore assume that the provinces were passive, that they had little impact on events? This revolution may neatly illustrate the success with which Louis XIV, Napoleon and others had centralized France, but that conclusion needs to be based on evidence, not assumption. The most recent complete analysis of the revolution concentrated on Paris, but also delineated some aspects of provincial unrest in 1830, making use of the local studies written for the centenary of the revolution. Some provincial and departmental histories describe the events of 1830 and their local impact.

1. The History of the Practice of Strategy from Antiquity to Napoleon

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrice Heuser
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Technological Innovation ◽  
Ancient Greece ◽  
European History ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
Philip Ii ◽  
Napoleon Bonaparte ◽  
History Of ◽  
Medieval Warfare ◽  
Philip Ii Of Spain

This chapter traces the history of the practice of strategy from Antiquity to Napoleon Bonaparte. It first considers various definitions of strategy before discussing episodes of European history since Antiquity for which historians claim to have found evidence of the practice of strategy. While focusing only on Europe, the chapter covers case studies over nearly 2,500 years, ranging from the wars of Ancient Greece, of the Romans to medieval warfare, the warfare of Philip II of Spain, Louis XIV of France, Frederick II of Prussia, the French Revolutionaries, and Napoleon. It also considers two sets of incremental changes that ultimately led to the transformation of warfare and of strategy: the growth, centralization, and diversifiation of the structure of European states; and technological innovation.

James VII's Forfeiture of the Scottish Throne

1973 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-313
Author(s):  
Robert P. Barnes
Keyword(s):  
Past Century ◽  
The Past ◽  
History Of ◽  
Independent Process ◽  
The Government ◽  
Constitutional Monarchy ◽  
The Way ◽  
The Revolution

The perspective of time has allowed most British historians to declare the English phase of the British Revolution of 1688-1689 “glorious” whereas the Scottish developments largely have been ignored as inconsequential. Although Scotland was included in Macaulay's History of England, for the past century it has been mentioned only briefly in historical treatments of the Revolution. Yet the Scottish Convention Parliament of 1689 not only followed and fulfilled the English Parliament's revolutionary initiative, but in an independent process paved the way for a more fundamental, uncompromising, and far-reaching constitutional settlement.Lacking foresight to know that their best efforts would be amalgamated in the Union of 1707, Scottish politicians in 1689 forged ahead with a radical revolution that terminated Stuart absolutism and provided a fleeting chance for national independence under a constitutional monarchy. The event which opened the way for a revolutionary constitutional settlement was the forfeiture of the throne by James II & VII and the subsequent conditional offering of the same to William and Mary by the Scottish Estates in the spring of 1689.In January 1689 following the final flight of James VII from Britain and the simultaneous collapse of his Scottish administration, the leaders of the Scottish aristocracy assembled at Whitehall and temporarily placed the government of their realm in the hands of Prince William of Orange pending a Convention Parliament.

The Council of State and the Clergy During the Reign of Louis XIV: An Aspect of the Growth of French Absolutism

1973 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-266
Author(s):  
Cynthia A. Dent
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Intensive Study ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
Late Eighteenth Century ◽  
Detailed Explanation ◽  
Late Eighteenth ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Many ◽  
Council Of State ◽  
Personal Rule

Historians of ancien régime France frequently pay tribute to the statebuilding capacities of that most talented and successful architect of absolute monarchy, Louis XIV. And it has long been recognised that, of the many institutions either created or inherited by the French Crown which were wont to claim a share in the handling of the daily affairs of the realm, the Council of State became, during the personal rule of Louis XIV, the chief vehicle for dispensing the royal will. Unfortunately, the sheer volume of matters dealt with by the Council has tended to discourage historians from making it the object of intensive study. More important is the fact that the machinery of Council after 1661 reflected two apparently contradictory tendencies: the peculiar personal and informal nature of Louis XIV's government, and the incipient formalism and bureaucratisation which were to become dominant factors in the government of late eighteenth-century France. The consequent flexibility and complexity of the system have certainly been important characteristics which have so far precluded a full and detailed explanation of the forms and functions of the Council and, more generally, its overall significance in the administration of absolute government.

scholarly journals The Bolshevik myth of October 1917

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 25-43
Author(s):  
Stanisław Ciesielski
Keyword(s):  
Point Of View ◽  
Party Leader ◽  
Socialist Revolution ◽  
New Era ◽  
Leading Role ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Government ◽  
Main Protagonist ◽  
The Masses ◽  
The Revolution

Bolshevik mythology presented the events of October 1917 as an effect of the operating laws of history, i.e. a necessary phenomenon through which the sense of history manifested, and, at the same time, as an effect of the activity of the masses led by the Bolshevik Party, an act in the power struggle. The Bolshevik myth of October 1917 was a founding myth; it created an impression that there had come a “new era in the history of humankind”, ending “all forms of exploitation”. It legitimised the government established at the time as one rooted in the revolution opening this new era and representing the most profound interests of a class that was to abolish the most tragic division in the history of humankind — class division. The myth of October had to have its collective and individual heroes. From this point of view its content was described in the most succinct manner by the following formula: the Great October Socialist Revolution was carried out by the working class allied with the poor peasantry led by the Bolshevik Party headed by Lenin. The cult of Lenin was primarily a cult of a victorious revolution and party leader that had led the masses to a triumph. Almost identical formulas were used by Stalin, Khrushchev and Gorbachev. However, the real heroes of the revolution were the Bolshevik themselves, their party and their leaders. In Stalinist times the main protagonist of the October myth was the “Bolshevik Party of Lenin-Stalin”. The leading role in the party became a crucial element of Bolshevik mythology, independent of political transformations and turns in the USSR.

The Maison militaire du roi and the Disintegration of the Old Regime

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy Rowlands
Keyword(s):  
Old Regime ◽  
French Politics ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
French Army ◽  
Royal Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Revolution

For all the research that has been done into French politics and society in the fifty years before the Revolution, only a handful of serious studies have looked at the great noble families and the royal court. Moreover, the history of the army, where leading noble families dominated the upper ranks, has been integrated neither with that of the court, nor with that of intra-noble relations. This chapter therefore examines the most prestigious units of the French army — the privileged forces associated directly with the royal households — to bring together the history of the military and the court and suggest why, by the time the old regime collapsed in 1787–89, the great nobility was at loggerheads with the monarchy, and why relations between higher and lesser nobles had deteriorated a great deal since the reign of Louis XIV. The collapse of elite cohesion was ultimately disastrous for all concerned.

The Birth of Modern Political Satire

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meredith McNeill Hale
Keyword(s):  
Historical Narratives ◽  
Political Satire ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Text And Image ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
History Of ◽  
Political Milieu ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

This book documents one of the most important moments in the history of printed political imagery, when the political print became what we would recognize as modern political satire. Contrary to conventional historical and art-historical narratives, which place the emergence of political satire in the news-driven coffee-house culture of eighteenth-century London, this study locates the birth of the genre in the late seventeenth-century Netherlands in the contentious political milieu surrounding William III’s invasion of England known as the ‘Glorious Revolution’. The satires produced between 1688 and 1690 by the Dutch printmaker Romeyn de Hooghe (1645–1708) on the events surrounding William III’s campaigns against James II and Louis XIV establish many of the qualities that define the genre to this day: the transgression of bodily boundaries; the interdependence of text and image; the centrality of dialogic text to the generation of meaning; serialized production; and the emergence of the satirist as a primary participant in political discourse. This study, the first in-depth analysis of De Hooghe’s satires since the nineteenth century, considers these prints as sites of cultural influence and negotiation, works that both reflected and helped to construct a new relationship between the government and the governed.

scholarly journals Assessment of the causes of the February Revolution in the modern party narrative

2021 ◽  
pp. 94-108
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Leonidovna Timshina
Keyword(s):  
Social Stratification ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Modern Time ◽  
State Structure ◽  
Uniform Approach ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Government ◽  
Key Events ◽  
The Revolution

The February Revolution is one of the key events in the Russian history. Namely this event put the end to the century-long history of the Russian autocracy, and prompted an attempt of a new state structure. A century later, the attitude towards these events determines the ideological basis of multiple Russian parties existing in modern time. Within the framework of establishment of their historical policy, they proposed the original approaches towards the causes of the February Revolution. The author analyzes the perspective of modern parties on the causes of the fall of the monarchy and the advent of revolutionary disturbances. The main sources employ the official documents of the most popular parties (participants of the 2016 federal elections), speeches and publications of their leaders. The conclusion is made on the absence of uniform approach of the parties towards the causes of the revolutionary events of 1917. The author distinguishes the two groups: those who see the causes of the revolution in aggravation of socioeconomic problems; and those who perceive the revolution as coincidence that disrupted the course of history due to certain mistakes made by the government. Unlike the majority of professional historians, multiple political authors assume that the revolution was a result of conspiracy, comparing it to the “orange revolutions” of recent years. The parties also drew parallels between modernity and pre-revolutionary times. The author indicates the need for overcoming (or preventing) the gap between the government and society. as well as reducing the social stratification.

Master and Servant

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Swann
Keyword(s):  
Political System ◽  
Turning Point ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
Subsequent Trial ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Governmental System ◽  
The Revolution

In the summer of 1661, Nicolas Fouquet the charismatic surintendant des finances appointed by the recently deceased cardinal Mazarin was arrested on the orders of the young Louis XIV. His subsequent trial and imprisonment was a crucial turning point in the history of the monarchy. It marked the end of the era of minister-favourites and the establishment of a new governmental system in which the king acted as the point of focus for a personal monarchy, aided and abetted by the secretaries of state. This chapter examines that transition, and the relationship between the royal master and his ministerial servants, and explores the role of disgrace in the functioning of a political system that would endure in many of its defining features until the eve of the Revolution.

scholarly journals FRANÇOIS-PAUL DE LISOLA AND ENGLISH OPPOSITION TO LOUIS XIV

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 559-580
Author(s):  
MARK GOLDIE ◽  
CHARLES-ÉDOUARD LEVILLAIN
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
State System ◽  
Diplomatic History ◽  
Critical Juncture ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
European State ◽  
System A ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Alliance ◽  
The Revolution

AbstractBetween the Restoration in 1660 and the Revolution in 1688 the English public abandoned its century-long animus against Spain and began to identify France as its chief enemy. Historians often hold that the most significant intervention in shifting the balance of public opinion was the Dutch-inspired pamphlet,England's appeal from the private cabal at Whitehall(1673), written by the Huguenot Pierre du Moulin. It is argued here that an immensely influential earlier intervention was made by François-Paul de Lisola, in hisBuckler of state and justice(1667), which, at a critical juncture, presented a rhetorically powerful body of arguments about the nature of the European state system. A Catholic in the service of the Habsburg emperor, who spent nearly two years in England in 1666–8, Lisola was an accomplished and versatile diplomat and publicist. This article interweaves diplomatic history with the history of geopolitical argument, tracing paths which led to Europe's Grand Alliance against Louis XIV.

Debata parlamentarna poświęcona projektowi prawa małżeńskiego z 1818 r. jako płaszczyzna wymiany idei politycznych i prawnych

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-141
Author(s):  
Rafał Kania
Keyword(s):  
Catholic Church ◽  
Roman Catholic ◽  
Roman Catholic Church ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Members Of Parliament ◽  
Parliamentary Debate ◽  
Research Concept ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Government ◽  
Council Of State

Contemporary research concept of the history of political and legal thought includes various sources of information about opinions on politics, state and law that appeared in the past. One of them is a parliamentary debate. The article concentrates on the discussion about the marriage law that took place in the Polish Parliament (Sejm) in 1818. At that time one of the most controversial law institutions was the divorce. The legislative bill divided Members of Parliament into three different groups. The first party supported the project of the new matrimonial law that was prepared by the government (The Council of State). The second group considered acceptance of the religious norms that were given by the Roman Catholic Church to be the most appropriate solution. The last one was formed by liberals who opposed voting in favour of the project, which – in their opinion – extremely invaded human privacy and freedom. The content of the debate also presents three major conceptions of the system of government that prevailed in the Kingdom of Poland.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document