Congress declared war on Britain in 1812. Even though the War of 1812 lasted two years, it was only a minor inconvenience to Britain in its struggle with Napoleon. The Peninsular War In 1808, Napoleon made a second costly mistake. In an effort to get Portugal to accept the Continental System, he sent an invasion force through Spain. The Spanish people protested this action. In response, Napoleon removed the Spanish king and put his own brother, Joseph, on the throne. This out- raged the Spanish people and inflamed their nationalistic feelings. The Spanish, who were devoutly Catholic, also worried that Napoleon would attack the Church. They had seen how the FrenchRevolution had weakened the Catholic Church in France, and they feared that the same thing would happen to the Church in Spain. For six years, bands of Spanish peasant fighters, known as guerrillas , struck at French armies in Spain. The guerrillas were not an army that Napoleon could defeat in open battle. Rather, they worked in small groups that ambushed French troops and then fled into hiding. The British added to the French troubles by send- ing troops to aid the Spanish. Napoleon lost about 300,000 men during this Peninsular War —so called because Spain lies on the Iberian Peninsula. These losses weakened the French Empire.
The conquering emperor Napoleon brought many of the reforms of the FrenchRevolution to other parts of Europe. His administrators in conquered lands reduced the privileges of the nobles and the clergy. They set up the Napoleonic Code and fairer systems of taxation. They put an end to serfdom, put qualified people in important jobs, supported religious toleration, and promoted public education. Higher education was opened to all who qualified, regardless of class or religion. Every state had an academy or institute for the promotion of the arts and sciences. Incomes were provided for important scholars, especially scientists. Each state was promised a constitution, providing for universal male suffrage (the right to vote) and a parliament, and containing a bill of rights. French-style administrative and judicial systems were required.
Before entering Notre Dame, Napoleon was vested in a long white satin tunic embroidered in gold thread and Josephine similarly wore a white satin empire style dress embroidered in gold thread. During the coronation he was formally clothed in a heavy coronation mantle, made from crimson velvet, lined with ermine; the velvet was covered with embroidered golden bees, drawn from the golden bees among the regalia that had been discovered in the Merovingian tomb of Childeric I, a symbol that looked past the Bourbons and linked the new dynasty with the ancient Merovingians; the bee replaced the fleur-de-lis on imperial tapestries and garments. The mantle weighed at least eighty pounds and was supported by four dignitaries. Josephine was at the same time formally clothed in a similar crimson velvet mantle embroidered with bees in gold thread and lined with ermine, which was borne by Napoleon's three sisters. There were two orchestras with four choruses, numerous military bands playing heroic marches, and over three hundred musicians. A 400-voice choir performed Paisiello's "Mass" and "Te Deum". Because the traditional royal crown had been destroyed during the FrenchRevolution, the so-called Crown of Napoleon, made to look medieval and called the "crown of Charlemagne" for the occasion, was waiting on the altar. While the crown was new, the sceptre was reputed to have belonged to Charles V and the sword to Philip III. At the moment of the crowning when the Pope said, "Receive the imperial crown..." Napoleon unexpectedly turned and, forestalling the Pope, removed his laurel wreath and crowned himself and then crowned the kneeling Joséphine with a small crown surmounted by a cross, which he had first placed on his own head. At Napoleon's enthronement the Pope said, "May God confirm you on this throne and may Christ give you to rule with him in his eternal kingdom". Limited in his actions, Pius VII proclaimed further the Latin formula "Vivat imperator in
After Napoleon’s takeover, the French impact spread much wider throughout Europe. In Ger- many, where the direct control of the Revolutionary armies had been limited to the Rhineland, Napoleon constructed a string of satellite buffer states on France’s northeastern border. There were several iterations, but the big break point followed the Peace of Lun´ eville (February 1801), with a massive reorganization of the territories that comprised the Holy Roman Empire (roughly Austria and Germany in their 1914 borders). Much of the astonishing variety of the Empire disappeared—literally hundreds of independent states, ecclesiastical territories and free imperial cities vanished and were consolidated into a cluster of larger kingdoms, principalities, and duchies; ultimately, their number shrank to fewer than 40 states (Grab, 2003, pp. 89-90). The main beneficiaries were the Grand Duchy of Baden and the kingdoms of W¨ urttenberg and Bavaria (all in the South of Germany). These and most other German states except Prussia were brought together in 1806 in the Rheinbund, known in English as the Confederation of the Rhine (see Schmitt, 1983).
In October of 1795, a young military officer with a great thirst for power named Napoleon Bonaparte put down an uprising by royalists. After the uprising had been quelled, a fourth revolutionary government called the Directory was formed, and they set up their operations here at the Luxembourg Palace in Paris. After the Directory took over, Napoleon grew to be a very popular hero in France, due to his brilliant military victories in Italy. In 1797, the Directory even asked him to take charge of an invasion of Great Britain. But Napoleon did not like the government's plan. Instead he convinced the Directory to approve an invasion of Egypt. His goal was to disrupt vital British trade in the Middle East and then establish a French colony. It is interesting to note that Napoleon brought scholars along with him when he invaded Egypt. And back in France, their discoveries caused a tremendous fascination for the ancient Egyptian civilization to develop. In the end, Napoleon's plan for Egypt failed; nevertheless, he remained a strong and respected leader in the eyes of the French people. And as the dawn of the 19th century approached, the French people wanted a strong leader more than a poorly functioning democracy. And in November of 1799, with the help of certain influential politicians, Napoleon brought about an end to the FrenchRevolution by seizing control of the government of France.
Furthermore, from mid-1810 both the British and French economies slid into severe recession. In such hard economic times it was diﬃcult to ignore the traditional trade ties between the two belligerents. Britain could provide an important market for French wines, brandy, and silks ; in turn, France needed colonial products and raw materials, and British merchants needed further export markets. The licensing system met all these needs. The licences simply legalized for some merchants what smugglers had been doing over the course of the war. Having opened up French ports to a controlled level of licensed trade with Britain, it was only one logical step further for Napoleon to allow English smugglers entry in the following year, providing a further export outlet for French products.
legal heritage. In particular, LaPorta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer, and Vishny (1996,1997) show that differences in the legal treatment of shareholders and the quality of corporate annual reports are systematically linked to the country’s legal origin. Based on the work of legal scholars, they categorize countries as having predominantly English, French, German, or Scandinavian legal origins. Since most countries obtained their legal systems through occupation and colonization and since these systems vary little over time, the legal variables are treated as exogenous for the 1976-1993 period. Thus, I test whether the exogenous component of stock market development – the component of stock market development defined by the legal and accounting regime – is positively associated with long-run economic growth.
This is rescuing the Spenceans from the massive condescension of posterity with a vengeance. Worrall’s nostalgic endorsement of a Spencean or Cobbettite vision is not entirely absurd – after all, so central a political economist as John Stuart Mill is on record as saying that the large-scale creation of peasant proprietors after the FrenchRevolution of had been good for French agriculture and had created the happiest people in Europe. ) But surely the growth of British population had by produced a situation in which the only possible route to rising living standards was via some kind of industrialization. And I wonder whether an instrumental account of these ultras, one which treats them as revolutionaries oriented primarily towards a vision of an alternative society which they hoped rapidly to create in an act of surgical violence, is the whole story. Their fiery speeches, their ‘ secret ’ gatherings so easily penetrated by informers, their brandishing of home-made pikes can also be read as theatre, bravado, coat-trailing. These were men who gave meaning to their lives by casting them into dramatic narratives, and when they vowed themselves to liberty or death, they meant it, acting out the tragic closure in the expected manner in the condemned cell, and on the scaffold before a deeply moved audience.
taking up arms, revealing both society and the male spectators’ perception of women as inherently inept at fulfilling traditionally- masculine roles. Unfortunately, French women continuously and often-unsuccessfully fought against traditionalist categorizations during the Revolution, with one unnamed woman informing the citizen legislators, “you have given men a Constitution; now they enjoy all the rights of free beings, but women are very far from sharing these glories...we now demand the full exercise of these rights for ourselves.” 5 Encouraged by the public appeals to
This lesson can form part of studies for Scheme of Work Unit 10: France 1789-94 - 'why was there a revolution?' It is useful specifically for part four of the unit that requires pupils to decide: 'Why was the Bastille attacked and destroyed?', although it can of course be used for any investigation into the FrenchRevolution. Use of this snapshot covers National Curriculum requirements for History in relation to general requirements (2a), together with breadth of study requirements to examine a European study before 1914 (11).
In fact, in the earliest journalistic accounts of the outbreak of the Revolution, hot off the press later that July, as well as the earliest historical narratives of these events in the early 1790s, the episode of the wax busts looms large. 43 So we can talk of a certain rite of passage for the people here. The parading of the two wax figures realizes a general rite of mourning, albeit of angry mourning, carried out in tandem with the search for arms. It is the ritual aspect of this action, as with later revolutionary festivals, that allows popular instinct to be raised to a symbolic level, that allows for the sacrifice of their heroes to be sanctified. 44 Yet, as such, it also invoked something else, another sanctifying act: a rite of revenge to be crowned by the incontestable triumph of the people. This was, of course, provided two days later in the search for arms, with the fall of the Bastille. As Simon Schama has perceptively noted, there is an eerie symmetry set up between the two events, of the 12 and 14 July respectively:
It is important to appreciate the relationship between the petitioning strategy and the Chartist Convention. James Epstein has shown how the Convention was careful to legitimate itself with reference not to the events of the Frenchrevolution but to the historic English ‘Conventions’, the quasi-parliaments which had brought about both the Restoration of 1660 and the Glorious Revolution of 1688-9, and then retrospectively legitimated themselves through the authority of the new monarch. Conventions had again been mooted by reformers in 1819 and 1832. But there was also the problem of the sedition legislation of 1792-1820 which remained in force, ironically given greater legitimacy by the slightly more democratic constitution under which it now operated. As one delegate bitterly explained, ‘they sat under the cloak of being a petitioning body . . . because petitioning was almost the only constitutional right they had left’. 67 In order to navigate around the seditious meetings’ legislation
nation of the interest payment (i.e. in most cases, the location of the branch where the bank account into which the payment is made, is held), but also to the tax domicile of the creditor (i.e. interest paid into a coopera- tive jurisdiction to a creditor tax resident in a non-coop- erative state or territory would not suffer interest with- holding tax, but would not be tax deductible by the French taxpayer). This restriction will apply with regard to fiscal years beginning on or after 1 January 2011. Under certain conditions, such non-deductible interest may be recharacterized as constructive dividends under Art. 109 of the CGI, in which case they could be subject to the dividend withholding tax set out under Art. 119 bis of the CGI, at a rate of 25% or, where the interest is paid into a non-cooperative state or territory, 50% (unless an applicable treaty provides for a reduced rate). Accordingly, in certain circumstances, French-source interest paid into a non-cooperative state or territory to a creditor tax resident in a cooperative jurisdiction having concluded an income tax treaty with France could be (1) exempt from the 50% interest withholding tax (based on treaty relief ) but (2) subject to French dividend with-
humanity’s interdependent relationship to nature and offered solutions that operated ‘at the middle scale, between the local and the cosmic’ (p. 309). In response to their age’s problems they offered medium-sized solutions rather than total global revolution: Fourier’s phalansteries, Leroux’s communes and Comte’s intendancies. We might say that, in Tresch’s view, the early socialists offered a kind of precursor to the ‘think globally, act locally’ ethos of later environmentalists.
Following the outbreak of the American and French Revolutions, and the significant numbers of college and university students involved in revolutionary action, a new value was placed on education as a means of instilling particular moral and political attitudes in both Europe and America. This view was also gaining ground in late eighteenth-century Oxford which was no stranger to undergraduate violence. In the first half of the century, the university had witnessed repeated violent disturbances by undergraduates in favour of the Jacobite cause, whose supporters desired the return of the deposed royal House of Stuart. An increase in student violence may well have been linked to a rising student age and a tendency to spend ever longer periods of time at college. As university historian, Laurence Stone, has shown, the average age of students entering Oxford rose from 17.5 to 18.5 years of age over the course of the eighteenth century, meaning that by the time of the American and French Revolutions, nearly all would have reached the legal age of majority (21) while still at university. 1 In addition, by the second half of the century, many more students were spending