Although the revolutions that occurred in France and Spain were in different time periods and sought to change their country in different ways, there are many parallels in the ideologies and histories of these revolutionary leaders. Looking at this, one might ask how the backgrounds and styles of the leaders affected the outcome of each revolution? Napoleon Bonaparte of the French Revolution (hereafter Napoleon) and Francisco Franco of the Spanish Civil War (hereafter Franco) came from similar backgrounds with a heavy influence on education and military training. Both men fought with a primary motivation of forming a military dictatorship under their rule. One notable area that where they differed is in their leadership: Franco led through …show more content…
fear and intimidation whereas Napoleon led by gaining the respect of his people. Francisco Franco and Napoleon Bonaparte both came from middle-class backgrounds and went on to establish themselves in military school. Franco was born in “El Ferrol, a small naval base in northwestern Spain,” in Galicia. It is said that the “stereotypical Galician man… is melancholic, soft-spoken, and prudent.” Because of this, many Spaniards argue that Franco’s background in Galicia played a huge role in the type of leader he later became. His father, Nicolás Franco, held a “high-level administrative position” in the Galician region that Franco grew up in. Franco came from a “family with a tradition of staff service in the Spanish Navy,” so his family, along with many other “Spanish families with strong naval ties,” strongly felt the decline of the Spanish Empire in the 1890s. Similarly, Napoleon came from a family that was not wealthy but was part of his homeland’s nobility; he “started his life in a big house, but with very little money.” Both of these men grew up in a family that was not necessary poor, but also was not rich. These instances of middle-class backgrounds immensely shaped their military careers because---- ***find more information on Napoleon’s background*** Franco wanted to follow his father and grandfather’s naval legacy by joining his country’s navy.
Unfortunately, due to the academy’s temporary closure from 1906 to 1914, Franco instead enrolled into the Infantry Academy in Toledo. It is said that while he was there, Franco was “more serious and disciplined” than the other boys his age, “[keeping] mostly to himself.” There, he and his fellow cadets had strong nationalist values drilled into them. He graduated three years later and was commissioned as a lieutenant. Likewise, Napoleon first attended the Military Academy of Brienne and later transferred to the Royal Military Academy in Paris. He excelled in these schools, “[finishing] what normally took three [years]” in a single year. Although the “standard of teaching was poor” at Brienne, Napoleon exceeded in French, mathematics, geography, and history. These famous leaders both went to military academies to follow the path of their male relatives. As noted above, both men were very serious and self-controlled in their path towards a military profession. Both did fairly well in their training and went on to have high positions in the military of their country. These instances of ordinary backgrounds and strict military training caused Napoleon and Franco to go on to be important historical figures in military history.-------redo for just military …show more content…
training Both Napoleon and Franco had primary motivations of creating a military dictatorship that they ruled.
They sought to return their country to its original glory by appealing to the lower classes. Franco was a right-wing monarchist that feared the thought of a republic in Spain. As a right-wing fascist, he valued “tradition,…equity, survival of the fittest, and… economic freedom” Franco, along with most other Spanish conservatives, viewed the Popular Front political party as Communist party that wanted to turn Spain into a Marxist state. He wanted to preserve the “core values of Spanish society,” ‘save’ Spain from the horrors brought upon by democracy, and keep what he deemed the ‘anti-Spain’ forces out. Franco’s nationalist and conservative ideas gave the Spanish citizens an overwhelming sense of cultural unity. As mentioned in a speech, Franco sought to unite his people by rallying a call for action to defend country. Correspondingly, Napoleon tended to the wants of the people by establishing “popular sovereignty, trial by jury, equality before the law, a citizen army, freedom of religion” and many other needs. He was driven to establish France as a formidable empire in the world by expanding his country. Napoleon wanted to install cultural unity in the people of France; he thought that education “must impart the same knowledge and the same principles to all individuals in the same society.” He wanted the whole country to be on an equal footing when it came to the law. Both
Franco and Napoleon wanted to become dictators by creating cultural unity and by appealing to the needs of the lower-class. These men both had ambitions of “saving” their country from what they considered to be a horrible and poisonous style of government that had taken over. One critical area that the two famous military leaders differed in is in the way that they chose to lead their country. Franco led oppressively and Napoleon led with a passion for his country. Franco sought to control people through tyrannical measures that negatively impacted their liberties. Franco was an incredibly brutal leader; he “began a reign of terror aimed at the physical liquidation of all his potential enemies, [including] concentration camps” and mass executions. Franco wanted to get rid of all Republicans and Communists that were left in Spain after the war. His government caused “harsh repression by military tribunals, political purges, and economic hardship,” as well as exhaustion from overworking, starvation, and many executions. Once he was in charge, Franco began to ‘restore’ Spanish policies and laws to what they were before the republic came into control: “he outlawed divorce; he prevented women from voting, getting a job, or opening a bank account without approval of their husbands; and declared that he could make or unmake any law without the legislature’s approval;… Children of Republicans were forced into monasteries or convents; those whose parents had died fighting the Nationalists were re-baptized with different names.” Franco wanted to re-establish Spain as a monarchy, with all of the “real power… exclusively in the hands of [himself].” He was a very secretive, cold-hearted, and cautious leader, known for his “icy-ruthlessness;” he is even sometimes compared to Stalin and Hitler, two very aggressive military and political rulers. Franco sought to gain the respect and loyalty of his people through fear and intimidation. He forced the obedience of his people in his quest to rid Spain from the ‘anti-Spain’ forces. On the other hand, Napoleon focused on improving his country for the good of the people. He gained their support by “[fixing] many of the nation’s problems” and bringing stability to a country that was left in shambles. These reforms included “[abolishing] aristocratic privileges, [establishing] state education, and [reorganizing] the administrative and legal systems.” He believed in promotion based on merit and thought that a man
They were both inspired by previous revolutions. France was inspired by England and America, and Latin America was inspired by them as well as France. Another similarity is that both revolutions were lead by the middle class. In France the bourgeoisie led the third estate, and the creoles led Latin America. Although the bourgeoisie and creoles did not have natural born political power, they were still wealthy and educated enough to successfully lead a revolution. However, France and Latin America do share their differences. France is known for their revolution being very violent and terrifying. Not to say that the Latin American revolution wasn’t violent, but it wasn’t to a savage extent. King of Brazil, Pedro I even declared Brazil independent from Portugal. This was done with very little bloodshed. Also, the revolutions ended completely different. In France the push for democracy wasn’t quite met. They ended up with an absolute monarchy again, however this time around the people's needs were actually met. In Latin America they did fulfill their goal to become independent. Again, these two revolutions are different, but also share some
For starters, both revolutions were inspired by others. The French revolution was empowered by the American. News spread throughout the rest of the world that England’s American colony had overthrown their British government with a war. A period called "The Enlightenment" sparked the American Revolution. During this time, philosophers and lawmakers focused on basic human rights and creating a balanced government. Ideas from the Declaration of Independence which came from these philosophers, inspired the people of France to develop a sense of natural rights in French government. Since their current government gave the people very little natural rights, they rebelled.
Being a part of a small noble family, Napoleon found he was able to attend a school in mainland France. He eventually found himself at Brienne, a school where his Corsican background and lack of French nobility caused him great hardship and stress from other students. This would plant the seeds of hatred for nobility inside Napoleon that would eventually lead him to destroying noble privilege based on birth in his empire....
Napoleon was able to grant French citizens natural rights, which was the main purpose of the Revolution, and use this to better society as a whole. For example, he used a plebiscite, vote of the people, to approve a new constitution that gave him power to rule. By getting the consent of the people to rule and to create and pursue certain actions in government, Napoleon used the governed as a ruling mechanism; he didn't ignore them. He created a system of meritocracy (what the people wanted): granting positions to those that deserved them based on qualifications, not just handing out jobs to people of higher social status giving “careers open to talent (Coffin and Stacey, 494).” Finally through his supremacy as French ruler,...
Unlike the leaders of America, the leaders of the French did not turn out to be as positive for the country. In fact, some of these leaders caused much more harm than good. These leaders taught the French people more about what type of government would be the best option for them. One of the most radical, and extreme leaders was Maximilien Robespierre. The duration of his dictatorship was known as "Reign of Terror." He demanded a republic and soon after his demands; the monarchy was overthrown. He also felt that a constitutional government would have to wait until all the enemies of the revolution have been eliminated. To accomplish this task, he murdered close to 40,000 people, most by guillotine, and some sentenced to life in jail. The Reign of Terror was one of the most controversial, and terrifying phases of the Revolution. Some French colonists thought it to be a path to democracy; others thought it was just a attempt for Robespierre to assume dictator. The other great leader was Napoleon Bonaparte. He believed that the only way to have control in France was to put a limit on democracy. Over a period of time Napoleon 's party overthrew Robespierre 's party. Soon enough, Napoleon was dictator of France. The French soldiers who fought in the American Revolution came back from the war with new ideas and reason for revolution. These ideas included the right to take up arms against tyranny, all men should
French citizens did not dare question his authority, as they respected him more than their former absolute monarch, King Louis XVI. During Napoleon’s reign, France participated in many gruesome battles, building a reputation as one of the most powerful countries in Europe. Napoleon’s armed forces carried the nationalistic ideologies of the French revolution. Soon, nationalism would be regarded a political epidemic poisoning neighbouring kingdoms and empires, many of which were multi-nation states. Collective groups who were forced to co-exist with one another were outraged, as they believed that they all deserved their own territory and sovereignty. If the revolution was able to transform France into the most powerful nation on the continent, why wouldn’t it work out for everyone else? Soon enough, nationalism would be dividing nation-states rather than unifying
In many ways, the French Revolution and Arab Spring are comparable. The French Revolution was divided into 3 large social classes called estates. Between 1500-1800, European rulers began ruling their countries with very few limits on their power. THis rise in power created a division in social and political classes across Europe and was a fundamental cause of the French Revolution, which led to the death of Queen Marie Antoinette. Queen Marie Antoinette was not the only “Absolute Monarch” in Europe.
...oppressor of the French people, the restoration of France’s credibility after the turmoil of the Revolution cannot simply be ignored. An ambitious and determined leader from the beginning, this “Second-Class Frenchmen” proved to be an indispensable Hero of European History. Always desiring the best for himself and his country, Napoleon’s drive and thirst to prove himself gave him the motivation to set big goals and to accomplish them. Although consistently faced with threats and attacks from his enemies, Napoleon persevered with courage, always summoning the strength to fight back. Many of the reforms made during Napoleon’s rule continued the enforcing of equality in France that were so desired during the French Revolution. A staple of historical discussion and debate, the Not-So-Little Corporal will forever continue to be recognized as an icon of France’s history.
French and Russian Revolutions Both the French and Russian revolutions occurred for two main reasons. Both of these revolutions were the direct result of bad leadership and a bad economy. These two reasons, along with other factors, caused both of these revolutions. Although they were both similar, they also had differences. A difference between the two is that the Russians had an unsuccessful "pre-revolution" in 1905.
Bourbons’ monarchy and their reforms agenda greatly transformed the Spanish empire that had been formerly ruined by the Habsburgs’ regime. The country’s structural changes effected imposed increased tensions to the colonies since most of these reforms were targeted at eliminating colonial organizations that had dominated significant positions of the country. These reforms were later reinforced by the ideas borrowed from the French revolution that strengthened the Spain’s independence efforts.
Napoleon maintained the Revolutionary system of conscription and encouraged promotion based on ability.... ... middle of paper ... ... Broers, Michael.
French Revolution brought a great number of great ideas, but ideas are not beneficial unless they are realized and stabilized. The man to stabilize the concepts of French Revolution was Napoleon Bonaparte. He started out as an Italian general and ended up being one of the greatest historical figures. First, Directors requested Napoleon's support while organizing a coup d'etat. Then, Bonaparte fought Britain in order to benefit France. Lastly, he was called to help creating a new constitution and ended up as the First Consul of France. At home, he ruled using flattery, but also he strongly resisted the opposition. Napoleon is a pro-revolutionist because he denied all the privileges of the aristocracy, created a new constitution, and also established the Napoleonic Code.
Napoleon’s military career is what eventually led to his prominence. Napoleon began his military career above most of the other men his age. He rapidly made his way through the ranks eventually gaining a great support system. As the directory leaned more and more heavily upon the military, a coup d’état developed. Because of his military expertise, he immediately became first consul of France. The empire of France was soon to grow once Napoleon was in reign. In the 1790s the French army was near one million men, an advantage in the Austrian wars as well as future ventures. Wars raged with other European countries in the early 1800s. Napoleon was able to beat the continental coalition, thus gaining territory for France. France annexed some of Italy but also controlled states such as Spain, Holland ...
Before you can get into how he became a military genius you have breakdown how is life really was before his military career began. Napoleon was born in Ajaccio, Corsica, on August 15th 1769 to Carlo Buonaparte, a lawyer and political opportunist, and his wife, Marie-Letizia Buonaparte. The Buonaparte's were a wealthy family from the Corsican nobility, although when compared to the great aristocracies of France Napoleon's kin were poor and pretentious. Due to his parents connections he was able to enter the Military academy in Brienne in 1779. He moved to the Parisian Ecole Royale Militaire in 1784 and graduated a year later as a second lieutenant in the Artillery. When the civil war broke out the Buonaparte’s fled to France and adopted the French version of their name Bonaparte. When the political situation in France flipped around, Napoleon was tried for treason, but if not for his roots in politics, he would have been executed but his families connections saved him from death. In 1795 Napoleon became a hero again and helped fight the revolutionary forces off. As a result of that, he grew to be one of the most respected military leaders in France.
...s on who should have power. Rebellions broke out across France and turned the nation against itself. The major revolutionary revolt was The Storming of Bastille. The third estate demanded for a republic. King Louis was killed, along with his wife Marie Antoinette to pursue the ideas of changing society. Maximilien Robespierre ordered their deaths by the violent and horrific machine, the guillotine. He was also killed shortly after, but provided the Jacobins a leader in his efforts to overthrow the monarchy. Napoleon was the last to save the revolution as it came to a close. The French Revolution has changed history and the lives of everyone in France up to today. Many people sacrificed themselves to change the country for others today. This revolution was life changing and inspired many others around the world to stand up for their beliefs and fight for a democracy.