French Revolution

The French Revolution was in 1789, when France’s political, economical, and social stance was unstable. People’s living conditions before the revolution were nowhere close to their conditions after the revolution. At the time, only the king had power in France. He was basically a grant, since there were no limits to what he could do. Even though the people of France were not satisfied with the decisions of the king of France, they could not show their hate and unacceptance because they were allowed and able to vote.’ There were three main estates in France at the time. These estates were the first estate, the second estate, and the third estate?

All estates had only one vote each. This meant that whenever the kings had a new ecision, the first and the second estate would coordinate and outvote the third estate, which were he peasants.” At the end, the french revolution accomplished its goals and solved its problems, and, or the most part, the french revolution succeeded. First of all, people of France were voiceless. The third estate had no significance to new ules and laws; therefore, they were voiceless. Peasants were not educated, so it was unlikely for hem to go into the second or the first estates.” At the time, peasants would farm in their personal ands and the nobles would hunt and spend time around these areas. If ever the nobles damaged or ed to pay for the damage or fix the damage. vent over these spaces, they were not d and powerful enough to complain about this. Moreover, Furthermore, the peasants were not a he peasants would not earn enough to manage their spendings and pay their high taxes which would cause financial instability. The people of France were aware that their taxes were spent by heir kings and his wife Marie Antoinette who were known to spend the people’s money on gambling, jewellery, and unnecessary wants. This caused more anger between the citizens and their evolution in their favour: king. This was one of the main causes of the citizens of France to star o have power and voice. If we are to look at the results of the revolution in terms of social estates and the power and voice they had, the third estate had much more power after the revolution than they did before the revolution. In this case, the french revolution was successful and satisfying, and the french revolution solved its pre-revolutionary problems.

Secondly, people of France wanted an economically better France. As it can be seen from he change from Louis XIV to Napoleon Bonaparte, the citizens of France were aware of how Louis XIV did not know how to manage the country financially and politically. France were financially damaged after the Seven Years’ War.” At the same time, the population of France grew from 20 million inhabitants to 28 million inhabitants. All of these innocent civilians had to be fed and bread was the most popular food source for all of these people. At some point, bread became very s of a month for an average peasant. At the same time, expensive to buy and it was equal to feed his own people. This Louis XIV spent the money to defeat the British instead of spending it to stupid act of Louis XIV also had a major eff nts who were hungry and angry. Politically France was unstable since Louis XIV was a tyrant with unlimited power within France and its colonies. It was militaristically also very weak considering France’s losses in wars such as he Seven Years’ War. In addition, people also knew about Marie Antoinette who simply wasted all e money of France. Therefore, people were angry about all the spendings of France which also ean countries.’ Once again, the french aused France to be weak politically amongst other with better politics and economy.

Revolution fulfilled what the people want which is a Last but not least, people of France wanted a politically better France. People of France Iways knew that France did not have a good political stance in front of other European countries. That’s why, France had to be supported by other ally nations in order survive several bankruptcies nd revolts. Otherwise, the country would be much worse since there would be no more money to pport anything at all. As mentioned before, France had already lost several wars which includes the Seven Years’ War. This war did not only destroy France economically but also militaristically. France lost troops as well as great general leaders. In return of this, Louis XIV ordered that the. Estates General comes to meet after 175 years.” However, as mentioned before, the first and the second estate could manage to outvote the third estate. In this case, the same thing happened and the country became worse again. People were not satisfied and this also triggered the revolution. In addition to all, Louis XIV would imprison people randomly, mostly with unreasonable reasons. This is explained also by when the revolution actually happen, the people actually attacked the prison of Louis XIV, this explained how people should inno ecially under Louis XIV’s government The result was the attack of the third estate.

“The third estate made a radical move to the assembly. They broke free from it and The third estate now called itself the National Assembly.” All in all, the french revolution was done by the 97% of France who needed to be more ndependent and free in all aspects. The revolution after started when the people attacked the prison f the king. This was a representa risoned without a reason. nce at the time because of hi Afterwards, Napoleon, who victories as a leader. People believed in Napoleon to be the saviour of France. As a result, the French Revolution fulfilled what the people wanted from their government. This is because people were voiceless, taxed a lot, and could manage their living. People were not living in good conditions and this was the general cause of the french revolution. Napoleon took control of France 1799 and people believed that he would lead France to become the Great French Empire. France d to be bankrupt and destroyed had to make allies in Europe because the people cou gain. Overall, the result of the french revolution were good enough for people who were in conditions which are not good. Not everybody was in better conditions after the revolution but i was definitely better than before the revolution since even bread costed equal to earnings of an average itizen in the third estate. Before the revolution France wasn’t a country to live in due to living conditions.

At the end of the revolution, people were satisfied but hoping for Napoleon to be a different. Louis XIV was charged with treason.” Louis XIV after was killed with the guillotine in front of everyone. Seeing people dead would be discouraging but for the french it was encouraging because they understood what they could do.” This was called a coup d’etat which meant the overthrowing of a certain government. In this case Napoleon performed a coup d’etat.2 Afterwards, Napoleon who was known to be successful was defeated in the battle of Waterloo. The Bastille Prison was the logo of the revolution and people of France destroyed it brick by brick. 3 The revolution was successful since the majority of people were happy at the end of the revolution. nd as much as previous leaders Afterwards, the majority of the people wanted Napoleon no who mainly caused all of this in the first place. It was a try act to get rid of the biased government of France as well as the selfish and wasteful leader. Napoleon was mainly known to be proud of epairing and restoring France into its better times without a monarch or a tyrant and without a wife s educational, financial, and political who is Austrian and wasteful. Napoleon improved the ne to challenge conditions. It is true that N is decisions, but at least he let others’ suggest things. Napoleon w to get the entire world for France. In 1814, Napoleon was taken over from the throne after several defeats as a leader. Louis XVIII, who is Louis XIV’s brother, came to power. After years of revolution, France’s monarchy was restored in 1815.

Federalists and Jeffersonian Republicans on French Revolution The Federalists wanted to remain neutral regarding the issue of French Revolution in order to avoid to a trade conflict with Britain. However, the Jeffersonian Republicans wanted to help France achieve independence from a cruel monarchy and help the Frenchmen support the idea of freedom just like the United States. The Federalist Party was led by Alexander Hamilton.

Federalists favored a strong federal government, believed that the government should be ruled by educated, wealthy men, wanted to pay off national debt, establishing a national credit, promoted entrepreneurship & manufacturing, and interpreted the United States Constitution with an open mind. These views supported the Federalists’ view on the French Revolution and so did Jefferson’s party. Thomas Jefferson led his party known as the Jeffersonian Republicans.

The Jeffersonian Republicans supported the idea of government ruled by informed men, believed in a strong state government, wanted to cultivate an economy by cultivating crops, and followed the U. S. Constitution verbatim. Jefferson’s party too had an opinion on the French Revolution. Hamilton and Jefferson supported their party’s views. The Federalists wanted to remain neutral to avoid a sanction from Britain on American goods because they were highly concerned about paying off the national debt and ensure a strong economy by exporting manufactured goods.

Conversely, Jeffersonian Republicans and his leader, an author of the Declaration of Independence, supported the motif of the French Revolution and believed that the Americans should support one similar to theirs. In conclusion, the Federalist Party wanted to remain neutral regarding the issue of French Revolution to avoid a sanction from Britain. Though, the Jeffersonian Republicans supported the French citizens to remove a feudal system, revolt against a tyranny and achieve independence similar to America.

The French Revolution of 1789-1799, had a great impact not only to the people in France, but to rest of Europe, and the entire world. The major cause of the French Revolution was the disputes between the different types of social classes in French society. The revolution led to many changes in France, which at the time of the Revolution was the most powerful state in Europe. The revolution led to the development of new political forces such as democracy, and nationalism. It questioned the authority of kings, priests, and nobles.

The revolution also gave new meanings and new ideas to the political ideas of the people. The primary cause of the revolution was the disputes over the people s differing ideas of reform. Before the beginning of the revolution, only moderate reforms were wanted by the people. An example of why they wanted this was because of King Lousis XIV s actions. At the end of the seventeenth century, King Lousis XIV s wars began decreasing the royal finances dramatically. This worsen during the eighteenth century. The use of the money by Lousi XIV angered the people and they wanted a new system of government.

The writings of the philosophisers such as Voltaire and Diderot, were critical of the government. They said that not one official in power was corrupt, but that the whole system of government needed some change eventually, when the royal finances were expended in the 1780 s there began a time of greater criticism. This sparked the peasants notion of wanting change. Under the Old Regime in France, the king was the absolute monarch. Louis XIV had centralised power in the royal bureaucracy, the government departments which administered his policies.

Together, Louis XIV and the bureaucracy worked to preserve royal authority and to maintain the social structure of the Old Regime. At this time in French history, the social classes played an important role in the lives of the people. The social structure of France was divided among three groups; the first, second, and third estates. Each social group had a varied type of people within their structure, which presented the different views of the people. The First Estate was the Church. During the ancient regime, the church was equal in terms of its social, economic, and spiritual power.

The first estate owned nearly 10 percent of the land in France. It paid no taxes but, to support church activities such as school running,, and caring for the poor, they collected a tithe, or a tax on income. About one-third of the entire clergy in France served as parish priests. Also included in this estate were the nobles. Some of the nobles lived in luxury in major cities in France such as Versailles or Paris. Parish priests usually lived a hardworking life. This Estate was the minority of the people in France, having approximately 1 to 2 percent of the population.

The Second Estate in French life was the nobility. They enjoyed extensive rights and privileges. They made up less than 2 percent of the population. They, like the First Estate, paid hardly any taxes. Economically, the nobility was characterised by great land wealth. Nobles were generally the richest member of the society. Typical sources of income were rents and dues for the use of their farm or estates. The First and Second estates were grouped together because they had similar political beliefs. The Third estate consisted of the commoners.

It included the bourgeoisie, or the middle class, were by far the wealthiest. In the bourgeoisie, there were the merchants and manufacturers, lawyers, doctors and others similar to those types of professions. Peasants made up the largest group within the Third estate. They were forced to pay hefty taxes, tithes to the church, and rents to their landlords for the land they lived on. The last group within the Third estates were the city workers. They were servants, apprentices, and household maids. The major causes of the revolution were the differences these three groups had.

However, there was another important factor during these times. France suffered from harsh economic problems. Poor farm harvests by farmers hurt the economy, and trade rules from the Middle Ages still survived, making trade difficult. However, the most serious problem was the problem facing the government during this time. The French government borrowed much money to pay for the wars of Louis XIV. Louis still borrowed money to fight wars and to keep French power alive in Europe. These costs greatly increased the national debt, which was at the time already too high.

“The French Revolution was a decisive period in the shaping of the modern west. It implemented the thought of the philosophies, destroyed the hierarchical and corporate society of the Old Regime, which was a legacy of the Middle Ages, promoted the interests of the bourgeoisie, and quickened the growth of the modern state” ( Perry. Chase. Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 462). The aristocracy of France was also weakened by the Revolution. The nobles no longer had their ancient rights and privileges making them ordinary people. In the nineteenth century, the ruling class was no longer decided upon by noble birth but by property.

This trait was shown before the Revolution. Also the French government was now ran by the aristocrats and the bourgeois. With the bourgeois being given high positions because of their wealth, talent, ambition, and opportunities, they would have an important role in the political life of France. The French Revolution changed the Old Regime, based on a dynastic state, into the modern state it is today. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen concluded that the state was no longer a separation of provinces or estates; it was also no longer a possession of the monarch’s that he believed belonged only to him.

The idea of the Declaration showed that the state now belonged to the people as a whole and its power must come from the people to succeed. The people now had the characteristic of individuality of no longer being separated into nobles and commoners. Many surrounding lands took the ideas and reforms of the French Revolution as inspiration to create their own revolution over their land. “During the nineteenth century, the French Revolution served as a frame of reference for the various political constellations: liberalism, socialism, and conservatism” ( Perry. Chase.

Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 462). Before the Revolution, the state was still closely linked to its religion. Each state had a state church that was the ruling power. “By disavowing any divine justification for the monarch’s power, by depriving the church of its special position, and by no longer limiting citizenship to members of a state church, the Revolution accelerated the secularization of European political life” (Perry. Chase. Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 463). The Revolution did away with administrative ways of the Old Regime, and imposed rational ways to the state.

Highest ranks of land and position were given to men by their talent and no longer by their birth line. The Revolution also did away with peasantry working obligations, and based taxes on the people’s income. By showing that an ancient order could be overpowered by a new one, The French Revolution inspired other generations to revolt against their abusive model societies. This created three forces with the modern state: total war, nationalism, and a fanatic utopian mentality. These ideas went against the ideas of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and could be destructive to what the French Revolution was creating. The French Revolution also gave birth to the modern nationalism” ( Perry. Chase. Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 463). During the Revolution, the entire nation was directed loyalty. This view was seen as dangerous by many philosophers because it was feared that it would setback the progress of the Revolution. The Revolution looked to reconstruct society on the basis of Enlightenment ideals. These ideas were soon crushed by the terrors and fears of the dangerous forces that had begun to rise in the later years of the Revolution. These forces almost succeeded in ruining what the French reformers had created.

Ben Jorgensen Professor Wakefield English 5 3 April 2013 The Influence of Rationalism on the French Revolution What was the driving force behind the French Revolution? Many people may say it was financial, or political, and while I would agree that these things were part of the force that propelled the French Revolution, I would assert that the philosophies of the Enlightenment were the dominant force that blasted late eighteenth century France into revolution .

In his article, “The French Revolution: Ideas and Ideologies “Maurice Cranston of History Today articulates that the Enlightenment philosophies were pivotal in the revolutions inception. He writes that: “The philosophes undoubtedly provided the ideas. ” Cranston goes on to write that: “…the unfolding of the Revolution, what was thought, what was said, and what was advocated, was expressed in terms and categories that came from political theorists of the Enlightenment. While many of the Enlightenment concepts contributed to the revolution, I would propose that the philosophy of rationalism was foundational to the French Revolution because of its reliance on reason, and its opposition to superstition. Rationalism in its epistemology is defined by the Online Oxford Dictionary as: “A belief or theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and knowledge rather than on religious belief or emotional response. The Online Encyclopedia Britannica adds: “Holding that reality itself has an inherently logical structure, the rationalist asserts that a class of truths exists that the intellect can grasp directly. ” There are many types and expressions of rationalism, but the most influential expressions of rationalism pertaining to the French Revolution were in ethics and metaphysics. The first modern rationalist philosopher was Rene Descartes (1596-1650).

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states that: “Descartes is known as the father of modern philosophy precisely because he initiated the so-called epistemological turn that is with us still. ” Descartes interest in philosophy stemmed from a fascination with the question of whether humans could know anything for certain. Descartes desired to create a philosophy that was as solid as say the concepts of algebra, or geometry, a philosophy based purely on quantifiable reason and logic.

In this way, Rene Descartes laid the foundation for philosophies built on reason as opposed to superstition, chief among them: rationalism. While Rene Descartes defined the terms and laid down the agenda for the philosophy of rationalism, Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677) and Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716) completed the triad for the chief philosophers of rationalism. Spinoza and Leibniz took the terms and agenda of Descartes philosophy of rationalism, and developed their own views on rationalism, both publishing a number of books, and journals on their rationalist philosophies.

Although these early modern philosophers of rationalism did not directly influence the French Revolution, it cannot be doubted that their general epistemological philosophy of rationalism helped create a new way of thinking in which man was not ordained by God to rule over other men, but that it was through reason of the mind that man chose to be ruler or subject. The French Revolution began between the years 1787 and 1789.

It is no wonder that the revolution occurred at this time when the Enlightenment was in its prime, shining light onto the social and political issues of the day with new philosophies like rationalism that challenged the old feudalistic and monarchist regimes of Europe that were built on irrationality and superstition. William Doyle, in his book, “The French Revolution: A Very Short Introduction,” conveys that the French Revolution was: “…triggered by King Louis XVI’s attempt to avoid bankruptcy. (19) However, while the trigger was financial, the social and political rumblings of the Third estate is what shook, and toppled the old regime under Louis XVI, afterword which came to be called the ancien regime by the French people. Author William Doyle says that: “In political terms pre-revolutionary France was an absolute monarchy. The King shared his powers with nobody, and was answerable for its exercise to nobody but God. (21) The ancien regime government lacked reason, but was bursting with more than its fair share of divine laws and rights that the “creator” had set in place in order to insure social stability. In fact, as Doyle points out in his book, this concept that God had set forth a divine law to be followed was directly stated in a document that parliament wrote: “This social order is not only essential to the practice of every sound government: it has its origin in divine law. (24) The document goes on to say that: “The infinite and immutable wisdom in the plan of the universe established an unequal distribution of strength and character, necessarily resulting in inequality in the conditions of men within the civil order…” (24) This document summed up the ancien regimes ideology: God has placed the king the clergy, and aristocracy above the common people and that is how it is, because that is how it has been.

The words irrational, divine, and superstitious come up many times when describing the ancien regimes government and society; in fact, these things were actually integral to the maintenance of government and society in France during the ancien regime. Indeed, you could not have this form of government without divine law, irrational organization, and superstitious beliefs. The rumblings of the French Revolution began as rates of literacy increased.

With the rise in literacy, the French people demanded more newspapers, and books, and as much as the aristocracy and Church tried to filter what the public read, the French people began to read the writings of philosophers like, Leibniz, Spinoza, Descartes, Voltaire, and Montesquieu. With this increase in literacy, and thus knowledge, the French people became more involved in politics than they originally had been. Now Louis the XVI was scrutinized for his actions, for his mishandling of his citizens finances.

Now the people of France came to expect their King to act for his people in observance of laws, as a representative of the people, instead of a man who had divine superiority over them. William Doyle writes that: “ in the eighteenth century these expectations were reinforced by the widespread conviction that since nature had herself (as Isaac Newton had shown) worked by invariable laws and not divine caprice, human affairs should also be conducted so far as was possible according to fixed and regular principles, rooted in rationality, in which the scope of arbitrariness was reduced to a minimum. To have a government and society “Rooted in rationality” was what the French revolutionaries so passionately fought to attain. In his book Europe in Retrospect, Raymond F. Betts writes that “It must be remembered that the French Revolution was the first major social revolution, of far greater dimensions and of deeper purpose than the American Revolution that had preceded it. Betts continues to explain in his book that the ideology of the French Revolution was unique for its time in what it sought to accomplish, and what it stood for: “To sweep away the old and begin the new was the liberal solution; it was predicated upon the assumption that human nature was essentially good, mankind essentially rational, and the purpose of life the ‘pursuit of earthly happiness. ” The assumption that humankind was rational was a belief that the revolutionaries espoused, but I would also say that the French Revolution was built on a belief that government, society, and the individual were all capable of thriving on reason, in part on the philosophy of rationalism. Although many events that took place during the French Revolution were controversial, and at times the actions taken by the revolutionaries were irrational, the French Revolution originated from a place of enlightenment.

Indeed, more specifically, from the philosophies of the Enlightenment, and while many of the philosophies of the Enlightenment contributed to the inception of the French Revolution, the philosophy of rationalism contradicted so much of pre-r revolutionary French society that to subscribe to rationalism at that time was a revolution in itself. Steven Kreis of The History Guide. com summarizes the eventual results of the Revolution eloquently stating that: “Man had entered a stage in human history characterized by his emancipation from superstition, prejudice, cruelty and enthusiasm.

Liberty had triumphed over tyranny. New institutions were created on the foundations of reason and justice and not authority or blind faith. The barriers to freedom, liberty, equality and brotherhood were torn down. Man had been released from otherworldly torment and was now making history! ” Works Cited Cranston, Maurice. “The French Revolution: Ideas and Ideologies. ” History Today. History Today, 1989. Web. 2 Apr. 2013. Doyle, William. The French Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: New York, 2001. Print.

Kreis, Steven. “Lecture 11: The Origins of the French Revolution. ” Lecture 11: The Origins of the French Revolution. The History Guide. com, 30 Oct. 2006. Web. 02 Apr. 2013. Lennon, Thomas M. , and Shannon Dea. “Continental Rationalism. ” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Fall 2012 ed. N. d. Web. “Rationalism Definition. ” Oxford Dictionaries Online (US). N. p. , n. d. Web. 02 Apr. 2013. “Rationalism”. Encyclop? dia Britannica. Encyclop? dia Britannica Online. Encyclop? dia Britannica Inc. , 2013. Web. 02 Apr. 2013

“ It is with sorrow that I pronounce the fatal truth: Louis ought to die instead than a 100 thousand virtuous citizens ; Louis must decease that the state may populate ” A Maximilien Francois Robespierre

“ Justice has its choler, my Godhead Bishop, and the wrath of justness is an component of advancement. Whatever else may be said of it, the Gallic Revolution was the greatest measure frontward by world since the coming of Christ. It was unfinished, I agree, but still it was sublime. It released the untapped springs of society ; it softened Black Marias, appeased, tranquilized, enlightened, and set fluxing through the universe the tides of civilisation. It was good. The Gallic Revolution was the anointment of humanity. ” Victor Hugo

“ Liberty, equality, fraternity, or decease ; – the last, much the easiest to confer, O Guillotine! ”

Charles Dickens ( A Tale of Two Cities )

Helen Maria Williams was a adult female in front of her clip. While composing letters place to England during the Gallic Revolution, the convulsion and political turbulence around her closely mimicked the convulsion she was sing personally. An friendless amongst her friends, Williams ‘ observations and devastation are evident in her Letterss Written in France, in the Summer of 1790, a aggregation of her Hagiographas to friends and household still in England. As a adult female efficaciously on the front lines of war, Williams was able to capture the world of the revolution and record her observations in Letters, the recognized composing medium of adult females. Romanticism was an rational motion which began around the latter half of the eighteenth century and is was defined largely by alteration. Most humanistic disciplines, like music, poesy, literature, and even political relations began to accommodate in response to the disruptive societal clime seen in France during the Revolution. Romanticism emphasized emotion, imaginativeness, and originality, which was in blunt contrast to the scientific discipline, ground and order defined by the “ Age of Enlightenment ” which came after the Revolution. Romanticism, as opposed to Enlightenment, concentrated more on the single author or creative person themselves, as opposed to the province or ground. Both ocular humanistic disciplines and literature, from the Romanticism motion, elevated and famed Nature as a wild Being, instead than as something that can easy be explained ground or survey. The Romanticism motion in literature evolved in response to the Gallic Revolution and instead than concentrate on ground and reason to explicate nature and adult male, Romanticism focused more on emotions and feelings to explicate and portray them. The poesy and Letters of Helen Maria Williams espouse the Romanticism ideals as they portend the hereafter of feminism and adult females who live their lives for themselves.

Helen Maria Williams straight confronted the ideals of the Revolution. Williams had relocated to Paris in 1792, and she was imprisoned for a short clip in the Bastille during the Reign of Terror. Both her clip in prison, and the atrociousnesss she witnessed during the Revolution, personally influenced her and straight influenced the tone of much of her work. While captive, Williams wrote many of her verse forms, like “ Sonnet to the Curlew ” , which trade with freedom and yearning. In the “ Curlew ” verse form, Williams identifies with a curlew and wants she could be every bit free as he is upon the air current. As Williams faced the Revolution of France, she began to confront a revolution of her ain that was reminiscent of the ideals of both Romanticism and Feminism.

During her early old ages in France, Williams began a relationship with John Hurford Stone, a married Englishman and extremist militant. Though Stone divorced in 1794, it is ill-defined whether Williams and Stone of all time married and their relationship caused a dirt in England which resulted in Williams being personally attacked by the British imperativeness. Before Williams foremost visited France in 1790, she had been celebrated as a all right, feminine poet. After publically placing with the Revolution, Williams was denounced as a unblushing adult female who had developed debased political and sexual propensities. She had become a adult female who had “ betrayed both her state and her sex ” ( Blakemore 676 ) . In a Gentleman ‘s Magazine, a referee of her Letterss from France said of Williams

“ [ s ] he has debased her sex, her bosom, her feelings, her endowments in entering such a tissue of horror and villainousness and make bolding to diss a regular authorities and a happy people [ i.e. , the English ] with such inside informations, whose consequence, we defy her to demo has yet been productive of one individual good ” ( Adams 114 ) .

Horace Walpole, Earl of Orford, referred to Williams as “ a scribbling slattern ” in his Correspondence and in Anti-Jacobin Review and Magazine, Williams was portrayed as Lechery in a emanation of the Seven Deadly Sins. The magazine went so far as to province,

“ [ Williams has ] an inveterate hatred of all bing constitutions, by an earnest desire to advance their devastation, and by a disdain of truth, decency, and decorousness, which constitute the general features of a female head infected with the toxicant of democracy ” ( Blakemore 676 ) .

Williams was vilified by the imperativenesss, both at place and abroad, and it is apprehensible that she would seek a more hospitable venue to name place. For Williams, that welcoming topographic point was a state in the throes of civil war.

In June 1794, Williams and Stone fled to Switzerland after a jurisprudence was passed by Maximilien de Robespierre necessitating all aristocracy and aliens leave Paris under punishment of jurisprudence. Williams and Stone remained in Switzerland for 6 months, and she wrote Tour in Switzerland which dealt with subjects including political relations, history, and nature. In response to the effects of the revolution, Williams said that she appreciated what the Revolution had done for adult females ‘s rights, but she openly condemned the force needed to accomplish it. In her letters, Williams ‘ response to the Revolution varies, frequently comparing the feminine civilization of the Revolution with the “ Antient authorities of France ” and she condemns the force much as she had during the American Revolution.

aˆ¦The executioner held up the hemorrhage caput, and the guards cried ‘Vive La republique! ‘ [ ‘Long live the democracy! ‘ ] Some dipped their hankies in the blood-but the greater figure, chilled with horror at what had passed, desired the commanding officer would take them immediately from the topographic point. The hair was sold in separate braids at the pes of the scaffold ( 100 ) .

After depicting the scene of King Louis XVI ‘s decease by closure by compartment, Williams describes the wake in an about composure and calm voice, as though she had become asleep to the force of the Revolution

aˆ¦The devastation of the monarchy in France on the 10th of August-the horrors of the slaughter of the 2d of September, and so the decease of the male monarch, eventually alienated the heads of Englishmans from the Gallic revolution ; rendered popular a war, which otherwise no curate would hold dared to set about ; disgusted all wise, and shocked all human work forces ; and left to us, and all who had espoused the cause, no hope but that Heaven, which knows how to convey good out of immorality, would watch over an even so interesting to the public assistance to mankind as the Gallic revolution ; nor suffer the folly and frailty of the agents concerned in it, to botch the greatest and noblest endeavor of all time undertaken by a state ( 100 ) .

Laetitia Matilda Hawkins, a coeval of Williams, wrote a response to each of Williams ‘ letters warning Williams for her positions on the Revolution

Hawkins ‘s Letters conveys a sense of pressing crisis ; for her, the Revolution is a foreign invasion endangering English life and English womanhood-a Revolution turning the natural order upside down. She bases her response to Williams ‘s Letterss on a reading of the first two series ( in the Scholars ‘ Facsimiles & A ; Reprints edition, 1:1.1-223 ; 1:2.1-206 ) , in which Williams celebrates the function of adult females in the Revolution every bit good as their “ topographic point in the universe ” ( 1:1.27-8 ) ( Blakemore 677 ) .

Although Williams seemed to appreciate what the Revolutionary civilization did for adult females, she did non O.K. of the force used to accomplish the alteration. Williams was going a newer, more self-asserting and unchained adult female than she was earlier.

“ In the old ages predating the Gallic Revolution, a patriarchal political orientation stressing proper female behaviour, the “ natural domestic function of adult female, and her biddable subordination to her hubby ( underscored in assorted scriptural texts ) had been in topographic point for centuries ” ( Blakemore 673 ) .

After sing societal turbulence, imprisonment, expatriate from her adopted fatherland, and the loss of some of her closest friends, Williams emerged as a adult female who was non afraid to populate her life her ain manner.

In Paris, as in London, Williams was introduced to and hosted many outstanding intellectuals and literary figures in her salon, such as Thomas Paine and Mary Wollstonecraft. Williams ‘ salon rapidly became a meeting topographic point for outstanding Girondins, but as the Jacobins gained power, many of her friends were arrested and executed. Williams wrote in a manner acceptable for adult females ‘s Hagiographas, the epistolary. Despite the controversial content of her Letters, Williams ‘ Hagiographas received by and large positive reappraisals from many English magazines. What negative reaction her authorship received, was in response to the manner and vocabulary she chose because she would frequently utilize Gallic colloquialisms and spellings which alienated many of her English readers.

Williams lost about everything she held beloved during the Gallic Revolution. She had lost her fatherland, her freedom-for a clip, her friends, but she refused to lose herself. Because of Williams ‘ Letterss, readers have a adult female ‘s first-hand history of the political and societal turbulence seen during the Revolution. The singularity of the history contained within her Letters has assured Williams a topographic point in women’s rightist survey, irrespective if that was her original purpose. Williams personifies all the ideals of Romanticism within herself and her writings-emotional entreaty to trepidation, horror and awe-and the sublimity of wild nature.