Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Louis the Great, absolute monarchy
Quiz over king louis xiv
Louis the Great, absolute monarchy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Louis the Great, absolute monarchy
Louis’s destructive character sent the country ablaze with fury and closer to the removal of the monarchy. The intervention of Prussia caused King Louis’s situation to change “from that of de facto prisoner to that of de facto hostage.” Popular pressure ruled the National Assembly to the point the council suspended the King from his duties, dissolved the National Assembly for the creation of the National Convention, and imprisoned Louis in the Temple under guard by the Commune. Here, King Louis XVI finally became an official prisoner of the state. He could not leave the Temple to hunt, one of his pastimes, or eat extravagant food. He heard of the Prussian invasion and the beginning of the Reign of Terror with the invention of the guillotine …show more content…
Louis’s plan of defense presented the faults of his own character prominently. The Convention accused Louis of “retracting his oath to uphold the constitution, leading an army against the forces of the nation and leaving the kingdom; he had … already incurred the only penalty possible, dethronement.” As the nation accused Louis and read of certain charges, Louis responded to all the questions with short and vague answers such as, “At that time I could order troops to march where I pleased,” and rarely shared his motives to justify all his poor and externally influenced decisions. Before, Louis could not talk when his power was in jeopardy. Now, he finally found enough words to break and explain his silence, but it was too late. His words carried no weight to the betrayed National Convention. At this point, Louis realized his biggest mistake—his silence. He attempted to fix all his errors in a short period of time, except his efforts could not change the opinions of his subjects. His lack of honesty, words, initiative, intuition, and authority undermined his attempted goodness for his dear country and ultimately pushed the National Convention to announce his death by guillotine. As Louis waited for the decision of the Convention, he prepared his Testament. His Testament explained his position on the trial, his innocence before the law, and conveyed the tone of a martyr, rather than …show more content…
The main motion was: “Is Louis Capet, former king of the French, guilty of conspiring against liberty and an attempt against the state? Yes or no.” The motion passed with a strong majority, while the motion to execute Louis passed with a simple majority. The minister of justice announced execution to Louis, and he showed a lack of sentiment when the decision of the Convention was read to him, but persisted to have the three motions delayed. This action displayed the consistency of the ex-king to show unconcern at decisions. However, the king for one of the first times exhibited initiative and desire to save France. Since his imprisonment, Louis faced his identity and realized where he went wrong. Once again, this was not enough to save his head from the guillotine. The National Convention and people of France executed Louis on January 21, 1793 as a
The prosecution on the other hand,believed the case was a way to reaffirm independence from the influence of the Queen of Spain and, according to the movie, gave a supoort system for a civil war. This case could be utilized to unite the states and complete the American revolution. 3. The debate in court does not focus on the morality of the institution of slavery but of property. Describe the various positions in the courthouse.
King Louis nation had a massive reaction focused on the King’s plight and return. The Reaction was not only seen in Paris alone but also on the other provinces, where a widespread phobia caused by foreign invasion led to the utter news of the King’s escape. Nevertheless, Tackett identifies the royal family plight to flee France as one of the most critical moments in the history of the French revolution. The king’s flight opens a window to the whole of the French society during the revolution. The purpose of the Kings flight was to offer freedom of action in terms of power and this was in regards to the King’s power and rule. The royal couple together with their advisers had unclear political agenda for their nation. Similarly, it is in the vent of these unclear goals factored by the Kind’s technical knowhow of not making decisive decisions that led to the stoppage of the royal family at Varennes and thereafter their return to Paris. The consequence of their return to Paris was the onset of the constant possibility of the end of the Monarch reign. On the same case, it is as a result of the royal family escape attempt and failure necessitated the integrity of the King as a constitutional monarch. On a much more political notion, The King’s hope of survival is mitigated
Although the Edwards excerpt sentence involved fear, emotional deception and mental deception to obtain the audiences full attention, the opening sentence of Jefferson's Declaration gives the audience a much different approach to procure the audiences focus. Jefferson's opening sentence has a mild tone of diction, for the beginning of an informative speech. The eloquent words highly imposed among the s...
Unfortunately, he died before experiencing Haiti’s separation from France in 1804. However, along the way of success of both revolutions, a toll occurred on the numerous lives lost. The Reign of Terror in France was created as a way to protect the republic from its internal enemies, but instead 16,000 people were guillotined. Many documents were shown to be describing the execution of the Reign of Terror to be gruesome and wrongful such that J.G. Milligen stated, “The process of execution was also a sad and heartrending spectacle”, in The Revolutionary Tribunal. Milligen continued to describe the vivid scene of the execution, but this was only one event and many others have died in the fall of the Bastille and the attack on the royal palace.
A guillotine is a decapitation device that quickly chops off it’s victims head in the blink of an eye. According to document F, About 16,000 people were believed to have died at the hands of it. No matter how small or petty a crime was, people would have been executed for it. Even Marie Antoinette and King Louis XVI, the leaders of France before the Revolution, were decapitated by one, as was the leader of the Reign of Terror, Maximilien Robespierre. Another method to weed out the counter revolutionaries was a network of spies that watched out for anyone who spoke out against the government, “A careless word of criticism spoken against the government could put one in prison or worse” (Document E). The punishment for a crime as small as ththis was more often than not
Aside from giving the guillotine a purpose, the Reign of Terror stands as a necessity in the story of French independence. It might not have been the proudest of times, but the Reign began on a strong premise: holding together a new government by purging the bad apples for the betterment of the whole cart. While the Reign of Terror developed into an overly excessive bloodshed, it was justified by the war stricken circumstances and necessity for the support of the ongoing revolution. Despite the extreme heights the Reign of Terror reached, it was necessary to maintain the fragile presence of the government and preserve the new liberty a majority of the population had been denied before. In a 1793 letter from Vendée —a major counterrevolutionary hub— local government was fending off on-going riots and rebellion while being invaded from the north by Prussia.
“Give me liberty or give me death!” This statement from Patrick Henry’s “Speech to the Virginia Convention,” delivered to the House of Burgesses, has been quoted by many, becoming almost cliché. However, the declaration is truly understood by a select few. The unjust Stamp Act passed by the British crown in 1765, brought fame and notoriety to Henry as he spoke out against the unjust taxation without representation. Ten years later on the eve of revolution, Henry calls upon the Colonial government of which he is part, to act for the betterment of the people.
He suffered from stage fright and often “blushed and faltered”, (18) even at his inauguration as President, “he trembled and several times could scarce make out to read his speech” (18) This weakness of his is often glossed over as it doesn’t seem to fit in with his image as the towering, imposing “founding father”. Yet today, it is essential for a President to be able to deliver impressive and clear speeches to the whole country. Finally there are some criticisms that he was not as effective General as is often believed. Thomas Paine claimed that he was a bad general whose strategy consisted of “doing nothing” (19). Although Paine had a personal agenda in condemning George Washington as he resented not being appointed Postmaster-General, and then later by not being rescued from French persecution by the government, it is true that George Washington did lose more battles than he won (20) and often did seem to do nothing for long periods of time. There is also the issue of his harsh treatment towards his own soldiers, any who were caught deserting or plundering were “flogged” (21) and he even a “Gallows near forty feet high erected” to terrify the rest into obedience.
... move, defunding any revolts they might plan, and preoccupying their time with petty social matters instead of matters of the state. If Louis’ reign was not supported by the enabling qualities of the Palace of Versailles, his reign would certainly not be as absolute as it was.
...ving twice been a resident on Free soil. The lower court and the Missouri Supreme Court ruled against him; and the case went to the US Supreme Court. The Chief Justice Rodger Taney declared that the Missouri Compromise, was unconstitutional and the congress didn’t have the power. The issue of slavery, once again, made war sound as if it couldn’t be avoided.
...st powerful symbols of the French Revolution and killed an estimated 20,000 to 40,000 people during the Reign of Terror. (Doc F) The guillotine was a sharp, angled blade that killed quickly the most deadly and feared method of invoking fear during the revolution. (Doc F) These methods; however, became too extreme and the deaths of the incident was not justified.
The church was also brought under control, and Louis sought to do away with all other religions by revoking the Edict of Nantes. Political power was given to noblemen, who were seen as possible opponents, and they were made to reside part of the year at Louis XIVs’ court in Versailles in order to display dominance over them (458–459).... ... middle of paper ... ...
“Europe cannot conceive of life without Kings and nobles; and we cannot conceive of it with them. Europe is lavishing her blood to preserve her chains, whereas we are lavishing ours to destroy them”(Maximilien Robespierre). For centuries upon centuries, the monarchal system had dominated European life. The very nature of this method of rule incited rebellious feelings, as a definite imbalance of power was present. Understandably, people under this system had risen against authority. The glorious nation of France was no exception. The eighteenth century brought about a great deal of economic and social turmoil. By the end of this one hundred year period, rebellion had been talked about by many citizens for quite some time. However, no definitive action was taken until one man stepped to the forefront; Maximilien Robespierre. Born in Arras, France about thirty years prior to the French Revolution, Robespierre was an immensely intelligent man as is seen from his ability to read and write fluently from the age of eight (the Force of 10). Robespierre rose from fairly humble origins to become a provincial lawyer, advancing further to become a representative in the Estates General, and eventually ascending to the leader of the French Revolution itself. For its sake he sent thousands to the guillotine, overthrew a monarchy, declared a new national religion, and invigorated the will of a nation. “No individual of the French Revolutionary era, with the exception of Napolean Bonaparte, has excited more passion in his time than the…dedicated provincial lawyer, Maximilien Robespierre”(Maximilien 1). During this era, Robespierre led France’s world inspiring cry for the liberation of mankind and petrified the world with its relentle...
Over the course of Louis’ rein, he showed that he was a bad monarch because he abused his power. Ultimately, he made the citizens unhappy. Louis believed that Kings “are born to possess all and command all” and their power should not be questioned. This caused him to make impulsive decisions without thinking of the citizens opinions because they were not supposed to question him. If his power was questioned Louis was quickly able to say that God gave him the power to make decisions therefore they were right.
The Reign of Terror History is said to be written by the winners, but is it possible to rewrite the history of the rewrite? In a way, the French, like many who have preceded them, and many who will proceed have done the impossible, rewriting history. From trivial folklore, such as George Washington chopping down a cherry tree, to the incredibly wrong, the African slave trade; people's views of history can be. shaped and molded by the. The French have done a superb job of instilling all of us.