@@ErikHareI was just thinking “how old is this reference now?” And even the thing being referenced in the reference is obscure. This is such a great deep cut of an ongoing joke for a small community
@@art-games6230there’s a story about Caesar spending an amount of time being petty after getting slighted tribune Aquila by randomly in meetings going “oh but we better ask tribune Aquila first?!?!?” It was a story referenced in one of the older videos but I’m sure by the time I finish this comment someone else will have found it and explained it better.
It's actually incredible how incompetent Charles X was. Most autocrats at least understand that they can't allow themselves to become *so* hated that the people's anger can overcome their fear of the autocrat. And he didn't even understand that he had to keep his soldiers happy
He was indeed incompetent but his only mistake was not make his soldiers happy. With military strength you can hold into power regardless, like north Korea for exemple.
Yeah, his idiocy was basically singlehandedly responsible for destroying the monarchy of France. If the monarchy of France had survived its reign, it’s very likely France would be a kingdom today
Oh, so like a third of a down. Glad you cleared that up for me. What's with the rest of the world and their crazy units - why can't we all just measure things in *rational* units, like football fields?
@@rootbeerconnoisseur6104 It is, indeed, all the French 's fault, who came up with stupid ideas like the metric system. 😁 - The revolution took things even further than they are now, though. Applying it , among others, even to clocks and calendars; all in the name of good ol' French "rationality" .
06:22 the Spanish constitution was not made by Napoleon, it was made by the Cortes of Cadiz who were oposed to Napeoleon but wanted to turn Spain into a constituional monarchy. Napoleon's "constitution" was never fully applied to the country since it was in open rebellion and granted much less rights than the Cadiz constitution.
I can’t understand how he hasn’t corrected this error; in the previous video he said the same thing among other inaccuracies about the Spanish situation those years
Very interesting; the whole video is full of smaller mistakes and logical fallacies, the man seems to be only good at quoting written down records. It's strange he made such a big mistake anyone with prior knowledge or information would not have
I actually have to disagree with his argument. He's very much ignoring the fact that piracy and slave raiding in north Africa had been rampant for quite some time, and it only fully stopped after France occupied Algerian ports. Invading Algeria was probably the only sensible idea that Jules de Polignac had.
The 1812 constitution being the creation of Napoleon is some beyond-my-mind bogus. It was the creation of spanish patriots, written against some Joseph who Napoleon tried to crown and proclaimed under fire from french guns
You know, we were taught about the French Revolution, and everything that followed up to Napoleon becoming Emperor, but nothing after that. I learned about Napoleon's two periods of exile through completely different subjects, so didn't know the actual history and the politics behind it. I had no idea that the French Monarchy came back briefly, let alone being turfed out of power again!
Love your videos! Just a small remark. The spanish liberal constitution (Cádiz one) can't be called a Napoleon invention, but it was indeed strongly influenced by the french and american revolutions. Also, another motivation for the french king to invade Spain was to put back the old spanish king which had strong ties with the french monarchy (same family).
This reminds me of the English civil wars. An absolutist king doesn’t realize the time of absolutism has passed and ends up losing his throne as a consequence. Though this was also a confirmation of a previous revolution like the 1688 glorious one and obviously was much less drastic
The parallels are in some ways intentional, the liberal press had actually become obsessed with the Glorious Revolution and wanted a similar course of action for France.
The sovereign is the executive body of the nation. All that happens in these cases are middle class minor nobility wanting that power for themselves and whipping people into a frenzy only to oppress them later. I’m sick of people pretending the french revolution was about elevating anyone, it wasn’t. It was an internal power struggle justified by a time of scarcity
29:05 a quick notice; Marmont wasnt a major-general, he was a marshal of france given the title by napoleon himself in 1809. He was essentially despised at this point by many for his perceived backstabbing by surrendering his force to the allies, causing Napoleon to his first abdication in 1814.
Well we can't all be as politically savvy as Talleyrand, honestly as soon as the prime minister and the king failed to respond his requests to deal with the uprising, Marmont should've switched sides. Talleyrand was far more duplicitous and was still politically useful to the new King Louis-Phillipe to serve as ambassador to the UK from 1830 to 1834.
- "The taller ones could be as tall as 3 meters high, which for the Americans in the audience, is approximately "meant how long a meter is" high." - The absolute madlad 😂😂I love it
One thing i like about Historia Civilis is that every time he makes a video i whatch it then completly forget that he even exist's and don't relise how much time pases bewen videos so i don't get mad when it takes him a lot amount of time to make a video.
You've got to be kidding me. I literally just rewatched the previous parts because my brother was here yesterday and this period came up. And now this drops. Awesome work.
Funnily enough, Marmont was a Marshal of France under Napoleon. In 1814, Napoleon had entrusted him with the defence of the capital, but when coalition forces arrived, he elected to surrender rather than wait for Napoleon's army to come help him. This was in many ways the last straw that forced Naploen to abdicate and go into his first exile. When Marmont appealed to the King and Polignac, they insulted him to his face and asked if they intended to sell them out just like he did with Napoleon years earlier. To his death, Marmont was called the betrayer for his actions in 1814 and 1830.
He shoot at the people in 1830, never betrayed the King, that was his undoing, however his problem was siding with the monarchy, in 1814, Marmont surrender Paris but was recived with open arms by Napoleon, then he betrayed him again by surrendering VI corp in secret at Essone. The Liberals and everyone at the left of the king hated him for this reason
Amazing how Talleyrand was able to stick around. He served as ambassador the UK from 1830 to 1834, after the July Revolution. If Marmont had more sense, he could've betrayed the king at the right moment and maybe stayed in France.
Should be noted that while The Assembly was absolutly dominated by Ultra Conservatives , it didnt just vote for every thing Charles and Villèlle proposed , for example Charles give in 1926 Villèlle ordered to pass a law to re-establish male-only primogeniture for families paying over 300 francs in ta (so that old aristocratic inheritence was back ) and not only was this highly unpopular publicly but the Assamble actually voted it down so it never became a law , also when Charles forced Villèlle to propose the Anti-Sacrilege Act in 1825 ( wich punnished blasphemy and sacrilege , thus eroding secularism ) while it did pass , the vote was 210 votes against 95 in the assambly and 127 votes against 96 in the peeers
It really goes to show how good this channel is, that you can toss out a random topic few have heard about, and we'll still watch it and be entraced by the politicking of it all
CONGRATULATIONS FOR 1 MILLION SUBSCRIBERS! You’ve got some of the best videos here on this site, and it keeps me coming back yearning for more! I’m sure I’ll throughly enjoy this video, and be eager to watch the next :)
Okay here before the vid comes out for us common folk. This is my favorite revolution and I have been waiting for this vid for a very long time. Hell ya.
The ending is brilliant. A masterclass at making something good, normal and morally right sound so ominous. I remember wishing you'd talk about Belgium while watching the previous video and I had that feeling again this time. It would be so comical to see little squares taking an opera performance way too far. The run up to that performance (and the revolution/insurrection) is also peak comedy at that, with the authorities being absolutely clueless as to why the liberals wanted to perform a very inciting opera in honour of the king's birthday. Just don't gloss over us until Leopold II, because I really have that feeling you're gonna go there with that ending and that bit about 'lesser men'.
Nope nope, not the French monarchy as a whole. Only Charles X, he was always an ultra-royalist fool even as the Count of Artois. Louis XVIII, while still having very conservative views, recognised the fact that the Ancien régime was a thing of the past, the guy dreaded dying because he knew that Charles would succeed him and get the Bourbons exiled again.
yes finally! love your videos, and allways wanted to learn more of frances internal politics post napolean which i dont hugely often hear much about, or in general get an explaintion for how internal govs work as most videos focus on only the wars.
I find it odd that the King's square was a dark blue instead of using Poliganc's shade of purple, since you, known, purple = royalty but great video obviously
Pretty sure the Algeria move was also an attempt to get the army on his side by giving them some of the glory that they had been missing out on since Napoleon.
Invade one of Napoleon's few allies wasn't a good idea that fired up Napoleon's veterans, also the army of 1830 was pretty different in comosition that the armies of Napoleon.
I like Historia Civilis, but he's completely ignoring the issues of piracy and slave raiding that leaders in Algeria were undertaking. All of that only fully stopped after France invaded Algeria. Invading Algeria was the only sensible idea the Ultra-conservatives had.
you have a mil subs and i see your videos are well researched i just wonder still if theres nothing that can be done to upload more often than 1-2times a year.
You oversimplify. The "ultra-conservatives" weren't all aristocrats, they had support from people who liked doing things the old fashioned way and there was infighting within this group too
Dude how do you get the first forty seconds of your video wrong. Inserting your own take on a situation is fine but insinuating it as fact is a massive problem. France was acting in accordance to the concert of Europe system established after the Napoleonic wars ended. Thats the primary reason the king agreed to send troops into Spain. When it sent troops into Spain the war went insanely well for the French and they restored the Spanish monarch to his throne. The other monarchies of Europe besides Britain's liberal Parliament supported the French invasion because they also wanted to keep the forces of revolution in check.
It’s nice being in the Patreon because you get the video so early that you forget about it and then it shows up in TH-cam exactly when you need a refresher
This revolution is the reason my ancestors came to America. Charles X was my seven greats grandfather, and we had to change our last name from Bourbon to Skinner (a maternal ancestor's name) to avoid potentially being deported for being illegal at the time
@AdamtheRed- and the funniest part about it is that I'm moving to France in a couple years, although I doubt my head would be on the chopping block. My ancestors were princes, but I'm relatively unheard of outside of a couple states and small countries where I have a following
@@AdamtheRed- Absolutely nothing will happen in the USA, its ridiculous to think it is anywhere close to the kind of crisis it'd need for a revolt of any form.
The Spanish Constitution of 1812 had been drafted against Napoleon, Napoleon had drafted the Bayonne Chárter which in content was similar to the French Chárter of 1814.
Yes, however the liberal opposition to Napoleon was almost inexistent in Spain, they were either liberals like Urquijo that where with Napoleon, or absolutist with Fernando VII, the liberals of Cadiz were too right wing to support Napoleon but hoped for a more "liberated" Spain. Since they were a terrible minority, they tried to gain support from Napoleon's supporters, but considering Spain to be Arch-conservative at that time, it was almost imposible except to get some sympathies.
@@omarbradley6807 On the opposite, there was almost no spanish liberal support for Napoleon. The ones that supported him favored an enlightened absolutist monarchy like that of Charles III or Charles IV, and the "afrancesados" were the bulk of Fernando VII's government during the Ominous Decade (the regime that followed the French invasion of 1823). Almost all the more progressive people in Spain at the time (Riego, Espoz y Mina, Juan Martín Díez, etc) had fought against Napoleon, Joseph I and Murat during the Spanish War of Independence. Also Spain was not more "arch-conservative" at the time than the other absolutist monarchies of Europe, one can see that in that Spain was the epicenter of the revolutionary cycle that came after the French Revolution, that of 1820.
@@gregorio360p The pro Urquijo faction was in favor of Napoleon, the Afrancesados really didn't work with Fernando VII as the majority were exiled, and those liberals you mentioned fought more on a country based war rather that ideology, but the entire royalist faction was certainly against Napoleon
High quality, simple and to the point, entertaining, great narrator. Yep, it's Historia Civilis. Dang, now I want to binge the whole channel again. One of the bests on TH-cam. ^^
I need more explanations of military engagements from you. You make the whole thing so fascinating to listen to-I think watching your videos has legit made me a better strategist.
1:02 I feel this moment deserve more details. The murdered man was Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry and the younger son of Charles X (then known as Charles, Count of Artois). His assassin was not a left-wing radical, but a Bonapartist named Louis Pierre Louvel who strongly identified with the empire and had served in Napoleon’s army. The reason the assassination was so consequential was because the senior line of the House of Bourbon was in the midst of a dynastic crisis not seen since the late reign of Louis XIV. Louis XVII and Louis XVIII both had no children, while Charles’s eldest son Louis Antoine, Duke of Angoulême (and future Dauphin of France) was married to Marie-Thérèse, the only surviving child of Louis XVI, but the marriage was a disaster and they never had any children. Charles by contrast had a more fruitful marriage and his young wife, Marie Caroline of Naples and Sicily, had already given birth to a healthy daughter, so in any imagination it seems that Charles Ferdinand was the only member of the family capable of perpetuating the dynasty. Behind him was Louis Philippe III, Duke of Orléans, an outspoken critic of his conservative relatives… and the son of the previous Duke of Orléans who had helped send Louis XVI to the guillotine. It should be no surprise that Louis XVIII and his immediate family were horrified at the prospect of his ascension and match it with a hatred for the Orléans family. The House of Bourbon breathed a huge sigh of relief when Marie Caroline delivered a posthumous son, Henri, Count of Chambord, but his father’s death is a blow that the dynasty would ultimately never recover from.
My Fellow Americans a meter is 1.1 yards so the rule is for every ten meters add a yard. This gets less accurate the higher the distance being measured bc of rounding.
Louis XVIII was not an Ultra-conservative. In fact, he was challenged many times by them and their political leader: the future Charles X, who was a political Ultra-conservative and masterminded the White Terror following Napoleon's downfall. Louis XVIII actually knew he couldn't rule like an absolute monarch like his predecessor or even Napoleon, so he abided to the idea of a Constitutional Monarchy and was favoured by the Liberals, of which many were former Napoleonic officers or supporters of a British-style system like Richelieu and Talleyrand.
Interestingly enough Charles X's grandson Henri would be offered the throne of France in 1870, but refused it after rejecting the tricolor as a national flag. Some think this decision silly, but the real reason was that he believed France just wasn't a country anymore where one could reign peacefully as a monarch.
32:56 "local military officer" lol. HC just obfuscate things endlessly just so the story in his mind works somewhat. genuinely made one of the most interesting periods in history bland and one sided. there's so many little things and misconceptions that were put on purpose just to satisfy a modern audience to the point that i wonder when the history channel becomes you. history youtubers are amazing but every time i see a video by HC i fear that it could start downward trend in the quality that made them so damn good in the first place
Pretty much, yes. After the the failure of the July Monarchy and the second republic, it came down to either a bourbon restoration (with prince Henri) or a Bonaparte restoration with Louis-Napoléon. And just writing that makes me realize once more what a cluster fuck french politics was in the 19th century.
I'm not an expert in the subject, but I think that the Constitution the liberals in Spain were promoting was the Cádiz constitution, which was not Napoleon's work, but his enemies'.
His way of telling the story of the Spanish Expedition (or "Los Cien Hijos de San Luis") is just really wrong anyway. But puting the Cadiz Constitution as a legacy of Napoleon just drops the ball.
@@OswaldMiyake35 Well, yes it is not the first time i saw mistakes in this channel, but well, the Cadiz constitution was a modification on Napoleon's own constitution.
The conservatives would today be unrecognizable to us, they were the so called ultras, more monarchist than the King, and they had effectively seeded power by creating their own version of the freemasons. They were radically Catholic and deeply anti-liberal, some of the greatest anti-enlightenment thinkers were associated with them, however they were chipped to pieces by the moderate politics of the King himself who allied with their least radical members to maintain his own halfway house of a political vision. In would eventually shatter their alliance and led to their slow irrelevant in French politics, though their would still be some kicking about for another century or so. Modern conservatives are fundamentally liberal (I would argue that the influence of English Whig thinkers on their fundamental conception of conservatism mean that it itself is liberal), and not even very moderate ones as they were effected by the Trotskyist student movements and thus are typically gungho for bombing people into world liberalism, as for their social policies they might as well be on ice with how far a small push will send them, the history of conservatism is one of betraying allies to the right (most notably their own voter base) while entrenching liberal reforms they were opposed to up until five minutes ago when it got passed into law. Actual rightists are as ideologically motivated as leftists, they are like a dog that forgots it's voice once you pass the threshold, nor to they run around for treats, it's just that not many exist and those who do are probably arguing about jacobitism on small but growing corners of the internet.
*They are not like a dog that does so, conservatives are. Though they are sometimes much worse given their willingness to use nationalism and militarism to secure the utopia where actual liberals typically think you can talk to or trade people into it (both are wrong, but one kills a lot of people before failing).
Please, maan, I love your videos but the Spanish Constitution was created by Spanish Liberals opposed to Napoleon! It was not his work, he was besieging the convention that wrote it. Please stop :(
Yes but it was a copy of Napoleon's own constitution, that was drafted in 1812, after Salamanca, so, the point was the same, to prevent an absolutist monarch, only that the Spanish constitution of Cadiz tuned down some rights,
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Best financial decision I ever made
I couldn’t agree more
The only content on this platform worth actual money
Can confirm
Agreed 💯
Just the emojis alone!
Obviously the king forgot to ask Tribune Aquilla if he could stay in power
I think you win most obscure comment. But on this channel people will get it.
@@ErikHareI don’t, could you please explain it?
@@ErikHareI was just thinking “how old is this reference now?” And even the thing being referenced in the reference is obscure. This is such a great deep cut of an ongoing joke for a small community
@@art-games6230there’s a story about Caesar spending an amount of time being petty after getting slighted tribune Aquila by randomly in meetings going “oh but we better ask tribune Aquila first?!?!?” It was a story referenced in one of the older videos but I’m sure by the time I finish this comment someone else will have found it and explained it better.
@@sapaulgoogdmen9542I love that story. It shows how humans have always been people lol it’s so petty but funny.
My dude remembers his password again.
It's actually incredible how incompetent Charles X was. Most autocrats at least understand that they can't allow themselves to become *so* hated that the people's anger can overcome their fear of the autocrat. And he didn't even understand that he had to keep his soldiers happy
What surrounding yourself with nothing but yes-men does to your ol' thinking gland
He was indeed incompetent but his only mistake was not make his soldiers happy. With military strength you can hold into power regardless, like north Korea for exemple.
Charles X had a different vision for France which required radical actions, his only error was indeed not keeping the army on side.
Making All Gravely Antagonized?
Yeah, his idiocy was basically singlehandedly responsible for destroying the monarchy of France. If the monarchy of France had survived its reign, it’s very likely France would be a kingdom today
Ultra conservatives: but my lord is that legal?
Charles X: I will make it legal
Charles X: this is my apprentice, Darth Villéille. He will find your lost absolute monarchy
You ever hear of the tragedy of Darth Robespierre the wise?
I was literally thinking yesterday, Historia Civilis hasn’t uploaded in a while
Same! But the quality makes up for the wait times. It’s like seasons of a tv show
He uploads on average I’ve noticed every 3 months if that helps!
I'm thinking that every day
babe wake up. New HistoriaCivilis is dropping in 2 hours
Finally, Tribune Aquila had let this video be uploaded
VETO 😈
To all my fellow Americans, three meters is approximately 3% of a football field.
Oh, so like a third of a down. Glad you cleared that up for me. What's with the rest of the world and their crazy units - why can't we all just measure things in *rational* units, like football fields?
@@rootbeerconnoisseur6104 It is, indeed, all the French 's fault, who came up with stupid ideas like the metric system. 😁 - The revolution took things even further than they are now, though. Applying it , among others, even to clocks and calendars; all in the name of good ol' French "rationality" .
Or in human scales, around twice as tall as the average women
A meter is about a yard or a little over 3 feet
3 meters is roughly around 10feet
Or about 30 burgers
06:22 the Spanish constitution was not made by Napoleon, it was made by the Cortes of Cadiz who were oposed to Napeoleon but wanted to turn Spain into a constituional monarchy. Napoleon's "constitution" was never fully applied to the country since it was in open rebellion and granted much less rights than the Cadiz constitution.
I can’t understand how he hasn’t corrected this error; in the previous video he said the same thing among other inaccuracies about the Spanish situation those years
Very interesting; the whole video is full of smaller mistakes and logical fallacies, the man seems to be only good at quoting written down records. It's strange he made such a big mistake anyone with prior knowledge or information would not have
@@derrickstorm6976 He really should stick to ancient history. He's clearly much more familiar with it
The Spanish constitution was a needle in between the absolutist king and the liberal Urquijo-Bonaparte government constitution
Actually it granted even more rights that the Cadiz constitution, that was practically Napoleon's one tuned down
The reason it takes so long to make a Historia Civilia video is because it's 5% editing, and 95% picking the right colour square for each character
It took so long for this video to reach us common folk was because HC needed permission from Tribune Aquila
I love our free and fair elections today.
"The point of colonies cannot be how they look on a map."
Every grand strategy player ever: But the bordergore! The map must be unicolour!
Few things in life are better than renaming Earth to "Wallachia"
@jeremiaas15 gfm monaco wc was the greatest moment of my life
I actually have to disagree with his argument. He's very much ignoring the fact that piracy and slave raiding in north Africa had been rampant for quite some time, and it only fully stopped after France occupied Algerian ports. Invading Algeria was probably the only sensible idea that Jules de Polignac had.
The map must follow natural borders, anything else is heresy
Grand strategy games that make provinces cross rivers are engaging in a cardinal sin
Worth the subscription. Thanks for doing these videos
Bro you can’t put Brutus between Marc Anthony and Octavian like that. It’ll get violent.
He uploaded this 13 days ago for sponsors? Kekw
How many coloured squares in this video?
Yes
HC: I’ll take your entire stock (with Tribune Aquila’s approval)
The 1812 constitution being the creation of Napoleon is some beyond-my-mind bogus. It was the creation of spanish patriots, written against some Joseph who Napoleon tried to crown and proclaimed under fire from french guns
You know, we were taught about the French Revolution, and everything that followed up to Napoleon becoming Emperor, but nothing after that. I learned about Napoleon's two periods of exile through completely different subjects, so didn't know the actual history and the politics behind it. I had no idea that the French Monarchy came back briefly, let alone being turfed out of power again!
Love your videos! Just a small remark. The spanish liberal constitution (Cádiz one) can't be called a Napoleon invention, but it was indeed strongly influenced by the french and american revolutions. Also, another motivation for the french king to invade Spain was to put back the old spanish king which had strong ties with the french monarchy (same family).
This reminds me of the English civil wars. An absolutist king doesn’t realize the time of absolutism has passed and ends up losing his throne as a consequence. Though this was also a confirmation of a previous revolution like the 1688 glorious one and obviously was much less drastic
The parallels are in some ways intentional, the liberal press had actually become obsessed with the Glorious Revolution and wanted a similar course of action for France.
The sovereign is the executive body of the nation. All that happens in these cases are middle class minor nobility wanting that power for themselves and whipping people into a frenzy only to oppress them later. I’m sick of people pretending the french revolution was about elevating anyone, it wasn’t. It was an internal power struggle justified by a time of scarcity
29:05 a quick notice; Marmont wasnt a major-general, he was a marshal of france given the title by napoleon himself in 1809. He was essentially despised at this point by many for his perceived backstabbing by surrendering his force to the allies, causing Napoleon to his first abdication in 1814.
Well we can't all be as politically savvy as Talleyrand, honestly as soon as the prime minister and the king failed to respond his requests to deal with the uprising, Marmont should've switched sides. Talleyrand was far more duplicitous and was still politically useful to the new King Louis-Phillipe to serve as ambassador to the UK from 1830 to 1834.
Historia, when will we get a continuation of the Roman series? We all LOVE that series!
octavian won and they all lived happily ever after
@@breaddboy .... Lies detected.
i assume he got burnt out with roman history
- "The taller ones could be as tall as 3 meters high, which for the Americans in the audience, is approximately "meant how long a meter is" high." -
The absolute madlad 😂😂I love it
I was literally looking at the channel yesterday wondering when a new video would drop. This is good
same
One thing i like about Historia Civilis is that every time he makes a video i whatch it then completly forget that he even exist's and don't relise how much time pases bewen videos so i don't get mad when it takes him a lot amount of time to make a video.
"Oh yeah! Historia Civilis!!"
@@CODDE117Pretty much like that
You've got to be kidding me. I literally just rewatched the previous parts because my brother was here yesterday and this period came up. And now this drops. Awesome work.
Well, HC just posted another video. Time to binge his old content as well.
Funnily enough, Marmont was a Marshal of France under Napoleon. In 1814, Napoleon had entrusted him with the defence of the capital, but when coalition forces arrived, he elected to surrender rather than wait for Napoleon's army to come help him. This was in many ways the last straw that forced Naploen to abdicate and go into his first exile. When Marmont appealed to the King and Polignac, they insulted him to his face and asked if they intended to sell them out just like he did with Napoleon years earlier. To his death, Marmont was called the betrayer for his actions in 1814 and 1830.
He shoot at the people in 1830, never betrayed the King, that was his undoing, however his problem was siding with the monarchy, in 1814, Marmont surrender Paris but was recived with open arms by Napoleon, then he betrayed him again by surrendering VI corp in secret at Essone. The Liberals and everyone at the left of the king hated him for this reason
Amazing how Talleyrand was able to stick around. He served as ambassador the UK from 1830 to 1834, after the July Revolution. If Marmont had more sense, he could've betrayed the king at the right moment and maybe stayed in France.
IIRC, “Marmont” is still referential to “traitor” in France, like “Benedict Arnold” is in the US or “Malinche” is in Mexico.
You rely way too much of Eric Hobsbawn
Should be noted that while The Assembly was absolutly dominated by Ultra Conservatives , it didnt just vote for every thing Charles and Villèlle proposed , for example Charles give in 1926 Villèlle ordered to pass a law to re-establish male-only primogeniture for families paying over 300 francs in ta (so that old aristocratic inheritence was back ) and not only was this highly unpopular publicly but the Assamble actually voted it down so it never became a law , also when Charles forced Villèlle to propose the Anti-Sacrilege Act in 1825 ( wich punnished blasphemy and sacrilege , thus eroding secularism ) while it did pass , the vote was 210 votes against 95 in the assambly and 127 votes against 96 in the peeers
It really goes to show how good this channel is, that you can toss out a random topic few have heard about, and we'll still watch it and be entraced by the politicking of it all
It seems French newspapers printed dune years before Herbert did
As someone who's ready the first 4 dune books, I'm not sure what you are referring to
16:12
As an avid map painter (eu4, hoi4, vic3...) I feel called out.
Nothing makes me happier then when i see one of your videos. Nothing been then spacing out and hearing history!
Poor street lamps! What did they do wrong?!
CONGRATULATIONS FOR 1 MILLION SUBSCRIBERS!
You’ve got some of the best videos here on this site, and it keeps me coming back yearning for more! I’m sure I’ll throughly enjoy this video, and be eager to watch the next :)
Best 46 Minutes I have spent this month
Thank you so much! We're learning about this in my AP Euro class as we speak so thank you!
Okay here before the vid comes out for us common folk. This is my favorite revolution and I have been waiting for this vid for a very long time. Hell ya.
The ending is brilliant. A masterclass at making something good, normal and morally right sound so ominous.
I remember wishing you'd talk about Belgium while watching the previous video and I had that feeling again this time. It would be so comical to see little squares taking an opera performance way too far. The run up to that performance (and the revolution/insurrection) is also peak comedy at that, with the authorities being absolutely clueless as to why the liberals wanted to perform a very inciting opera in honour of the king's birthday.
Just don't gloss over us until Leopold II, because I really have that feeling you're gonna go there with that ending and that bit about 'lesser men'.
Only channel I became a member for early access, I didn’t even need to second-guess myself about it
Absolute banger of a video yet again, man never stops dropping the best content
Man I thought you weren’t making videos anymore. This makes me so happy.
your videos are so good I had massive shivers and cried
Your uploads are a blessing for humanity.
Its honestly impressive how quickly the french monarchy forgot about the first french revolution
Nope nope, not the French monarchy as a whole. Only Charles X, he was always an ultra-royalist fool even as the Count of Artois. Louis XVIII, while still having very conservative views, recognised the fact that the Ancien régime was a thing of the past, the guy dreaded dying because he knew that Charles would succeed him and get the Bourbons exiled again.
Your videos are maybe my favorite rare treat on TH-cam, thanks for all the effort you put into them.
yes finally! love your videos, and allways wanted to learn more of frances internal politics post napolean which i dont hugely often hear much about, or in general get an explaintion for how internal govs work as most videos focus on only the wars.
I find it odd that the King's square was a dark blue instead of using Poliganc's shade of purple, since you, known, purple = royalty but great video obviously
Might have to do with the French lilies and the Bourbon monarchy: Allez les Bleus! 😉
Pretty sure the Algeria move was also an attempt to get the army on his side by giving them some of the glory that they had been missing out on since Napoleon.
Invade one of Napoleon's few allies wasn't a good idea that fired up Napoleon's veterans, also the army of 1830 was pretty different in comosition that the armies of Napoleon.
I like Historia Civilis, but he's completely ignoring the issues of piracy and slave raiding that leaders in Algeria were undertaking. All of that only fully stopped after France invaded Algeria. Invading Algeria was the only sensible idea the Ultra-conservatives had.
@@darkfool2000 the piratery had already ended by 1819
Another incredible video and perspective. I eagerly await to see you talk about the Springtime of Nations and the 1840s.
you have a mil subs and i see your videos are well researched i just wonder still if theres nothing that can be done to upload more often than 1-2times a year.
You oversimplify. The "ultra-conservatives" weren't all aristocrats, they had support from people who liked doing things the old fashioned way and there was infighting within this group too
"Invading Spain was not wise". You'd think that the French would have learnt that by now.
*Endless Laugh at Marmont's own Troops going over to the enemy
15 years after he did so himself near Paris to betray Napoleon
23:32 Holy shit he's editing in more of those black dots on purpose now
Congrats on 1M man. Best history channel on TH-cam.
Dude how do you get the first forty seconds of your video wrong. Inserting your own take on a situation is fine but insinuating it as fact is a massive problem. France was acting in accordance to the concert of Europe system established after the Napoleonic wars ended. Thats the primary reason the king agreed to send troops into Spain. When it sent troops into Spain the war went insanely well for the French and they restored the Spanish monarch to his throne. The other monarchies of Europe besides Britain's liberal Parliament supported the French invasion because they also wanted to keep the forces of revolution in check.
He’s getting most of this from a literal communist “historian”
@@AragornRespecter 'Communist' isn't the only notable thing about Hobsbawm, but the other thing tends to go along with that, iykyk.
right, that shit of Viena was a problem
It’s nice being in the Patreon because you get the video so early that you forget about it and then it shows up in TH-cam exactly when you need a refresher
This revolution is the reason my ancestors came to America. Charles X was my seven greats grandfather, and we had to change our last name from Bourbon to Skinner (a maternal ancestor's name) to avoid potentially being deported for being illegal at the time
History is about to repeat itself in America. So there's that.
@@AdamtheRed- lol no
@AdamtheRed- and the funniest part about it is that I'm moving to France in a couple years, although I doubt my head would be on the chopping block. My ancestors were princes, but I'm relatively unheard of outside of a couple states and small countries where I have a following
@@necromater6656 Yes. Put down the kool-aid and get an education.
@@AdamtheRed- Absolutely nothing will happen in the USA, its ridiculous to think it is anywhere close to the kind of crisis it'd need for a revolt of any form.
I was just watching some older videos today and you decide to upload, fantastic!
If you ever feel that you’re stupid just remember your name isn’t Vilele.
Villèle
Gonna get some beer and pizza, and enjoy this afternoon
The Spanish Constitution of 1812 had been drafted against Napoleon, Napoleon had drafted the Bayonne Chárter which in content was similar to the French Chárter of 1814.
Yes, however the liberal opposition to Napoleon was almost inexistent in Spain, they were either liberals like Urquijo that where with Napoleon, or absolutist with Fernando VII, the liberals of Cadiz were too right wing to support Napoleon but hoped for a more "liberated" Spain. Since they were a terrible minority, they tried to gain support from Napoleon's supporters, but considering Spain to be Arch-conservative at that time, it was almost imposible except to get some sympathies.
@@omarbradley6807 On the opposite, there was almost no spanish liberal support for Napoleon. The ones that supported him favored an enlightened absolutist monarchy like that of Charles III or Charles IV, and the "afrancesados" were the bulk of Fernando VII's government during the Ominous Decade (the regime that followed the French invasion of 1823). Almost all the more progressive people in Spain at the time (Riego, Espoz y Mina, Juan Martín Díez, etc) had fought against Napoleon, Joseph I and Murat during the Spanish War of Independence. Also Spain was not more "arch-conservative" at the time than the other absolutist monarchies of Europe, one can see that in that Spain was the epicenter of the revolutionary cycle that came after the French Revolution, that of 1820.
@@gregorio360p The pro Urquijo faction was in favor of Napoleon, the Afrancesados really didn't work with Fernando VII as the majority were exiled, and those liberals you mentioned fought more on a country based war rather that ideology, but the entire royalist faction was certainly against Napoleon
Where have you been! The happiest I’ve been to see a TH-cam Icon in quite some time!
High quality, simple and to the point, entertaining, great narrator. Yep, it's Historia Civilis.
Dang, now I want to binge the whole channel again.
One of the bests on TH-cam. ^^
I need more explanations of military engagements from you. You make the whole thing so fascinating to listen to-I think watching your videos has legit made me a better strategist.
23:26 there’s an accidental optical illusion here with the black dots moving among the crowd
Holy shit!!!!! you're back! welcome back brother, we have needed you now more than ever!!!!
i missseeddd yooouu! i didn't know i was so invested on boxed characters. lol
I have cried during your narration! Thank you for that video
oh how I've missed you!
1:02 I feel this moment deserve more details. The murdered man was Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry and the younger son of Charles X (then known as Charles, Count of Artois). His assassin was not a left-wing radical, but a Bonapartist named Louis Pierre Louvel who strongly identified with the empire and had served in Napoleon’s army.
The reason the assassination was so consequential was because the senior line of the House of Bourbon was in the midst of a dynastic crisis not seen since the late reign of Louis XIV. Louis XVII and Louis XVIII both had no children, while Charles’s eldest son Louis Antoine, Duke of Angoulême (and future Dauphin of France) was married to Marie-Thérèse, the only surviving child of Louis XVI, but the marriage was a disaster and they never had any children. Charles by contrast had a more fruitful marriage and his young wife, Marie Caroline of Naples and Sicily, had already given birth to a healthy daughter, so in any imagination it seems that Charles Ferdinand was the only member of the family capable of perpetuating the dynasty.
Behind him was Louis Philippe III, Duke of Orléans, an outspoken critic of his conservative relatives… and the son of the previous Duke of Orléans who had helped send Louis XVI to the guillotine. It should be no surprise that Louis XVIII and his immediate family were horrified at the prospect of his ascension and match it with a hatred for the Orléans family. The House of Bourbon breathed a huge sigh of relief when Marie Caroline delivered a posthumous son, Henri, Count of Chambord, but his father’s death is a blow that the dynasty would ultimately never recover from.
Babe wake up, new Historia Civilis video just dropped
My Fellow Americans a meter is 1.1 yards so the rule is for every ten meters add a yard. This gets less accurate the higher the distance being measured bc of rounding.
Louis XVIII was not an Ultra-conservative. In fact, he was challenged many times by them and their political leader: the future Charles X, who was a political Ultra-conservative and masterminded the White Terror following Napoleon's downfall.
Louis XVIII actually knew he couldn't rule like an absolute monarch like his predecessor or even Napoleon, so he abided to the idea of a Constitutional Monarchy and was favoured by the Liberals, of which many were former Napoleonic officers or supporters of a British-style system like Richelieu and Talleyrand.
Interestingly enough Charles X's grandson Henri would be offered the throne of France in 1870, but refused it after rejecting the tricolor as a national flag. Some think this decision silly, but the real reason was that he believed France just wasn't a country anymore where one could reign peacefully as a monarch.
Fuck yea! Best possible notification! Thanks for your work!
I literally bought beer to celebrate your new vid here, and I am currently loving life watching this. Thanks so much, Historysyllabus dude!
Was at a wedding but fuck em historia civilis posted
Another awesome video
Babe wake up, time to spend 45 minutes looking at colorful squares being dramatic!
It's always a treat when a Historia Civilis video drops! Ave Historia!
32:56 "local military officer" lol. HC just obfuscate things endlessly just so the story in his mind works somewhat. genuinely made one of the most interesting periods in history bland and one sided. there's so many little things and misconceptions that were put on purpose just to satisfy a modern audience to the point that i wonder when the history channel becomes you. history youtubers are amazing but every time i see a video by HC i fear that it could start downward trend in the quality that made them so damn good in the first place
What did he obfuscate?
Really happy to see a new upload! Have a good holiday season, HC.
While I love the later periods I'd love you see the squares return to antiquity again.
You know, sometimes I think you make this videos for us to reflect on how the world today works but I don't know.
Thanks!
Been waiting!! Worth it every time, thank you for all your effort.
This must be what France felt like during the return of Napoleon
Pretty much, yes. After the the failure of the July Monarchy and the second republic, it came down to either a bourbon restoration (with prince Henri) or a Bonaparte restoration with Louis-Napoléon. And just writing that makes me realize once more what a cluster fuck french politics was in the 19th century.
I always enjoy your videos and this one is a banger as usual. Love all the content on 19th century European political history.
5:10 Any parallels to current events are purely coincidental
NEW HC VIDEO, DROP EVERYTHING
So happy to see you back
If the measuring system isnt in freedom units, then it can stay unknown to americans.
Congrats on 1 million subs!!!
I'm not an expert in the subject, but I think that the Constitution the liberals in Spain were promoting was the Cádiz constitution, which was not Napoleon's work, but his enemies'.
His way of telling the story of the Spanish Expedition (or "Los Cien Hijos de San Luis") is just really wrong anyway.
But puting the Cadiz Constitution as a legacy of Napoleon just drops the ball.
Yes, but again, to oversimplify it, it was a copy of Joseph and Urquijo constitution. (with some things tuned down)
@@OswaldMiyake35 Well, yes it is not the first time i saw mistakes in this channel, but well, the Cadiz constitution was a modification on Napoleon's own constitution.
Hallelujah! A new configuration of colored squares to bless us with.
That three-way split between the left, the moderates and the reactionaries in the French Parliament looks awfully familiar
we're just going in circles forever
History droppin' rhymes like a rap battle.
It's sad to watch inevitability.
The conservatives would today be unrecognizable to us, they were the so called ultras, more monarchist than the King, and they had effectively seeded power by creating their own version of the freemasons. They were radically Catholic and deeply anti-liberal, some of the greatest anti-enlightenment thinkers were associated with them, however they were chipped to pieces by the moderate politics of the King himself who allied with their least radical members to maintain his own halfway house of a political vision. In would eventually shatter their alliance and led to their slow irrelevant in French politics, though their would still be some kicking about for another century or so.
Modern conservatives are fundamentally liberal (I would argue that the influence of English Whig thinkers on their fundamental conception of conservatism mean that it itself is liberal), and not even very moderate ones as they were effected by the Trotskyist student movements and thus are typically gungho for bombing people into world liberalism, as for their social policies they might as well be on ice with how far a small push will send them, the history of conservatism is one of betraying allies to the right (most notably their own voter base) while entrenching liberal reforms they were opposed to up until five minutes ago when it got passed into law. Actual rightists are as ideologically motivated as leftists, they are like a dog that forgots it's voice once you pass the threshold, nor to they run around for treats, it's just that not many exist and those who do are probably arguing about jacobitism on small but growing corners of the internet.
*They are not like a dog that does so, conservatives are. Though they are sometimes much worse given their willingness to use nationalism and militarism to secure the utopia where actual liberals typically think you can talk to or trade people into it (both are wrong, but one kills a lot of people before failing).
I have been checking for a new video almost every week, I don't think I've been this excited for series in my life
Please, maan, I love your videos but the Spanish Constitution was created by Spanish Liberals opposed to Napoleon! It was not his work, he was besieging the convention that wrote it.
Please stop :(
Yes but it was a copy of Napoleon's own constitution, that was drafted in 1812, after Salamanca, so, the point was the same, to prevent an absolutist monarch, only that the Spanish constitution of Cadiz tuned down some rights,
I’m so glad you’re back. Oh how I’ve missed you.