Hello again. At the start of the course I explained that there were three questions that we were going to be investigating. The origins of the French Revolution, why it took the particular course or trajectory that it did, and finally, what were it's outcomes or consequences. What I'm going to do in this final, group of lectures this week is, to discuss a range of perspectives on the third of those questions, the significance or the outcomes of the French revolution. I'm going to offer you six perspectives, beginning with one on what happened next, which is a good place to start, in terms of understanding the importance of the French revolution, or the limitations to what it actually changed. I explained that the regime of the Directory, which is set up after the National Convention in 1795, is a narrow regime in terms of where it draws it's political power and legitimacy from. It seemed to be a rather narrowly class based regime and it suffers constantly from challenges from left and right. For example, in October 1795, there's an attempt by royalists in the streets of Paris to overthrow the regime. One of the reasons why it's unsuccessful is that Napoleon Bonaparte brings in his cannon to the streets of Paris. But then at the same time, and into 1796 and 1797, there's a challenge from the left, where Gracchus Babeuf, a militant revolutionary, and someone who in some ways is articulating a communist ideology, of the nationalization of the means of the production and distribution, also attempts to win public support. He, too fails, and is executed in 1797. But the regime does seem to be chronically unstable, and it's one reason why the great revolutionary painter, Jacques-Louis David, in 1799, does this, allegorical painting, from classical antiquity of the Sabine women, intervening in the streets of Rome, to prevent warring factions from creating civil disorder. And he seems to be calling for someone, some force which could bring French people together again, which could heal the discord, the division that a decade of revolution had created. David gets his wish as do many other people who have a similar longing, and that wish takes the form of a military coup d'etat in November, 1799 by Napoleon Bonaparte. Among the other people who were calling for a strong government, a strong ruler, is none other than Emmanuel Sieyès - remember him as the cleric who had written, What is The Third Estate, in late 1788? One of the key revolutionary figures, who by the end of the revolutionary decade is despairing of the instability, the chronic disorder and division in French society, and, looks to someone like Napoleon Bonaparte, a successful general, but a man with Republican credentials, to heal the disorder, to heal the divisions, to give France a sense of purpose once again. David in fact effectively becomes Napoleon's court painter, once Napoleon seizes power in 1799. Here, for example, he paints him crossing the Alps, on a white charger, in 1800, a work of propaganda. In fact, Napoleon had crossed the Alps at a very difficult time of year on the back of a donkey but this type of painting has enormous resonance in France itself. Down here in the corner you can make out where David has inscribed Bonaparte's name on a boulder, but also the name of Hannibal, the great general from Carthage, who similarly had crossed the Alps, but in his case with elephants, back earlier in the 3rd century. One of the other great portraitists of the period is a man named Gérard, who paints this portrait of Napoleon as emperor of France in 1810. Napoleon becomes emperor for life in 1804. And when we look at a painting like this, which is resonant with references to authority and power to an almost regal stature that Napoleon had assumed, we're reminded of that famous painting of Louis XVI at the time of his coronation in 1774. And it does raise a very fundamental question, about the significance of the French Revolution, what it had changed, in that, Napoleon Bonaparte seems in so many ways, to be adopting the same, almost autocratic pose, as the ruler of the nation, and suggests that after all of the political upheavals, the division, the bloodshed, little had changed. But there's another portrait of Napoleon Bonaparte, another one done by David, this time in 1813, of Napoleon in his study. It's my favorite portrait of Napoleon. One of the reasons why it's particularly telling, is that behind Napoleon on his desk, is a rolled up copy of a crucially important document, the Napoleonic code, or the civil code, as it was called. Napoleon's attempt to take from all of the constitutions, the legislation of the French revolutionary period, all of those things, which he thought were fundamentally important, which should endure, and he put them together in a code, with which he intended to rule France and in fact, rule other parts of Europe that he conquered. The Napoleonic Code is in a sense a statement of what Napoleon thought the Revolutionary decade had achieved, which was of durable significance. And crucially important in that code is the, again the enduring concepts of constitutional government, popular sovereignty, a society based on merit and talent, the end of corporate privilege belonging to the nobility and the church. Napoleon is expert in both compromising with the old regime, seeking to mend the fences with old regime society and yet at the same time insisting that French society has changed forever. So for example in 1802, he welcomes back all of those people who fled the revolution, some of whom fled at least a decade beforehand, welcomes back the Emigrés from various parts of Europe, many of them as suggested in this in this image, returning back bitter and impoverished. But Napoleon makes it absolutely clear, that they are welcome home, but they will not be recompensed, they'll not be returning to their former positions in society. Similarly in 1801, he reaches an agreement with the church, which, of course, has been through a decade of extraordinary division and suffering for many of its members. And this particular image shows Napoleon attending a ceremony at Easter time in 1802 where Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris is reopened for worship. In 1806, similarly, he pleases the Catholic church by restoring the Gregorian, or Christian calendar. It's the end of 13 years of the Revolutionary calendar. But again, Napoleon makes it quite plain to the Catholic church, that it is not returning to its former position as the only state religion. He is not going strip away the rights to worship, that have been accorded to Protestants and Jews. And, nor is the church returning to it's former position of wealth. Church lands are not going to be restored. Napoleon's emphasis on social order, a recognition of the past and of the Revolution is exemplified, I think, in this image of the western city of La Roche-sur-Yon - one of the towns of the Vendée where that huge peasant based counter-revolutionary insurrection that occurred in 1793. La Roche-sur-Yon is effectively destroyed during the fighting in 1793, 1794 and Napoleon Bonaparte decides to rebuild it, as the capital of the Department of the Vendée. Tellingly he calls it Napoleon-Vendée. He gives it a new name. But the design of the main square, in the heart of that town, is so telling about Napoleon's values. On one side of the square is the church, one of the four pillars of society, and on the other three sides are the other three, the prefecture, the administrative headquarters, the garrison for the army, and the law courts. The four pillars of Napoleonic society. And in the middle of that square itself, is a statue of the great man himself, if you like an architectural statement of Napoleonic power and its values. This comes to a pinnacle in the coronation of Napoleon and Josephine in 1804, again captured by David - the coronation of the emperor, where Napoleon is shown himself crowning Josephine as empress. One of the people there, is the Pope Pious VII, delighted with the concordat, delighted that peace is now possible with the regime in France, delighted that the religion of most French people has been recognized by Napoleon Bonaparte. But Napoleon makes it absolutely plain, that he is running France, that he will conduct the Coronation, even to the point later on where he crowns himself as a rather disgruntled Pious VII looks on. This is to be a regime where the support of the church is crucial, in terms of social order, but, earthly power remains firmly in the hands of Napoleon Bonaparte. At its peak, the Napoleonic Empire is vast, stretching from an expanded France, through other areas of Europe, including parts of Italy, Poland, and Spain, which have friendly regimes or members of Napoleon's family, actually in charge of them. An extraordinary, empire where, as I said, Napoleon also seeks to, implement his Napoleonic code, a new conception of European society. It's always overstretched in some ways. There is endemic unrest, for example in the Iberian peninsula, and when in 1812 Napoleon decides to invade Russia he over-stretches wildly. And that is to be the crucial moment ultimately in the downfall of the regime, the failure of the Russian Expedition. At the Congress of Vienna in 1815 when Napoleon has finally been defeated France has essentially returned to its pre-revolutionary boundaries. One of the consequences of the Napoleonic period, which it must be stressed the allies saw as part of the French Revolution, they see Napoleon as a revolutionary figure, one of the consequences is the creation of this confederation of German states, designed to be some sort of buffer to the east of France against any further revolutionary expansion. It's a precursor to the age of German unification. But France has returned to its pre revolutionary boarders. It's interesting that when Napoleon is overthrown in 1815, he's replaced by Louis XVI's younger brother, Louis XVIII here depicted in his finery, which reminds us of that of his brother Louis XVI. When he dies Charles X, the youngest of the brothers, someone who fled the revolution as early as July 1789, comes to the throne. The last two Bourbon kings. But what's critically important, is that their capacity to rule France is contingent on their willingness to accept some of the fundamentals of the French Revolution, to govern France as a constitutional monarch, in terms of a written charter, recognizing popular sovereignty, recognizing the end of the corporate privileges of the nobility and clergy from the old regime. And when in 1830, Charles X is perceived to be behaving in far too autocratic a fashion, dreaming of the glory days of the 18th century, there is another revolution in Paris, in 1830, and he's replaced by Louis-Phillippe, a member of the Orléans branch of the royal family, a more liberal minded constitutional monarch, who will in turn become the last king of France. But the critical point to make about this first perspective on the French Revolution is in terms of subsequent history it is plain that there is no way that the essential changes brought by the Revolution, can be rolled back and any ruler that tries to, in fact incurs the wrath of the French people.
