@@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
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.
@@darkfool2000 But how did it improve French situation ? Sure it may have helped stop slave trade in the long run but from realist standpoint it didn't help stabilise the nation or preserve continuity of power, and that was kind of Poignac's job, not stoping slave trade or piracy.
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
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 he 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.
Here’s the weird part about it when Marmont surrender Paris to coalition we don’t know why he did it as he didn’t give any reason why he decided to surrender the city
@@Randomgen77 It's interesting how every country has such figures who become synonymous with betrayal. In India, we have Jaichand and in Bangladesh/Bengal, you'll have Mir Jafar.
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" .
You probably won't read this comment because it's one among a thousand. But I just wanted to take a moment to say how much I genuinely appreciate your channel. I first found this channel while looking up information on how the different positions in the Roman cursus honorum worked and found your videos on it. Back then you didn't have very many videos, I think your latest was one of the "In His Year" videos. So I've been following this channel for so many years now and none of your videos has ever disappointed me. Always very well made, full of fascinating stuff and some laughs on top of that. You also cover a lot of the specifics and nuances that I feel like are often left out of videos like this and I very much appreciate that. I don't have the money to support your Patreon currently still, but I just wanted to say thank you for the great content. I always look forward to your videos. Some of the best on UA-cam, imo.
One thing to remember about Charles X is that he was convinced what led to the Revolution of 1789 was his older brother's Louis XVI's weakness. He wouldn't give up anything to a Parliament, which existence even annoyed him (he was born and raised under absolutist rule of his brother at a time a legislative Parliament seemed both unnecessary and even sacrilegious). The Revolution of 1789 and the two decades or war and instability that ensued were on everyone's mind at that time.
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.
It is said that the Restored Bourbons learned nothing (about the causes, events, and effects) but remembered everything (all the privileges and power of the monarchy) about the French Revolution. It is very possible that King Charles X saw that Louis the 16th compromised and gave up royal power until the radical revolutionaries cut his head off, and was determined to not give an inch.
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).
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
Also, the reason Britain "weathered the storm" is because they had it first. The English Civil War, the Glorious Revolution, and the Jacobite Rebellions had already settled the political order in Britain, and the prevailing faction was the Whigs.
I feel obligated to add a sidenote that Louis Philippe's wife, and even more so his sister played massive roles in pushing him to take the throne, as well as helping to organize his politics and factions.
4:32 Villéle did not want to invade Spain. From Shannon Selin: " French ultra-royalists were pressuring King Louis XVIII to rescue his distant cousin (King Ferdinand). Louis, however, disapproved of Ferdinand’s brand of absolutism, and neither he nor Prime Minister Joseph Villèle favoured sending troops into Spain."
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
Fun Fact: This year (2024) in July, Bangladesh experienced a massive civil uprising which resulted in the ousting of a 15-year-long autocratic government. People have now dubbed that "July Revolution" too. (It started in mid July after police and government backed goons started violently suppressing university students who were protesting against the unfair quota system. The suppression were brutal, *Hundreds* died in July. July left such a bloodstain that even in 1st August, people wrote 32nd July. It went on till 36th July (or 5th August) when the PM (Dictator) finally resigned and fled the country. Sic Sempre Tyranis!)
@@mushfiqurrahman1107 Yeah, except the French didn't start to harass their minority like you folks did. They were not breaking temples and churches. Revolution, or just Islamists seizing power to make life hell for Hindu and Christian minorities?
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!
That's maybe because there were no major wars between 1814 and 1914, so it's kind of "easy" to skip forward. However there were many revolutions and counter-revolutions, it was a politically hot time in Europe... but relatively stable in terms of major wars.
@@LuisAldamiz Erm...but not for civil wars/wars of independence/unification, wars fought in Russia/Eurasia, and, erm--the Franco-Prussian War. That's kind of a big one.
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.
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 :)
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.
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.
@@omarbradley6807even the US sent its marines to defend US shipping from Algerian slaver pirates. This topic has been ignored a lot because it goes against some people's beliefs.
Obviously they made the repression forces work easier. I'm surprised we don't do that anymore (also three meter tall barricades, that's extremely impressive and hard to counter).
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'.
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.
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.
One of the biggest contributing factors to the July Revolution's success was Charles X and Polignac's utter lack of preparation. Outside of the men physically close to the King, nobody knew of the Four Ordinances until the newspaper announcing them arrived. This means potential allies were not primed to act on them, local police forces were at best sluggish about attempting to shut down the presses since this was the first they heard of all this, and the loyal soldiers not in Algeria were not moved into position to respond to a violent backlash, something even Louis XVI did in the days leading up to the storming of the Bastille. This allowed the backlash to spiral out of control and it very quickly was beyond military control. There's a great anecdote of Polignac and the Naval Minister, after escaping the angry crowds on the night of 26th of July, probing a local police chief about reinforcements, and Polignac declaring he should probably put the Royal Guard on alert. Naval Minister: "The Royal Guard aren't on alert already?!" Polignac: "You worry too much." No wonder every move was twelve hours too late to diffuse the situation.
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.
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.
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. 37:10 That wasn’t really much of a concern as the government had regardless intended to exile both the King and Henri’s uncle the Dauphin. The reason this didn’t happen is because Louis-Philippe’s sister Adelaide acted quickly to secure the throne for brother with the help of some independently acting liberal politicians, and because Henri’s mother Marie Caroline refused to turn her son over to the custody of the government
@ Not really. The Bonapartists and republicans often worked together by necessity, but they were not one and the same political faction, especially since ultimately, the Bonapartists were still a monarchist faction, just favoring a different family.
@@Edmonton-of2ec That is the problem, the followers of Napoleon didn't want a Bonaparte in power, the want the Napoleon in power, the republicans also want that Napoleon in power, and were followers of Napoleon, they didn't wanted different things, but differences after they success in 1848 happen when Louis Napoleon run for president representing the Napoleon's family, the same bloc divided into those that supported Louis Napoleon and those that wanted other candidates.
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
Very interesting as always but there is a serious error at the beginning when describing the Spanish Constitution as Napoleonic. It was not: it was in fact the countering of Bonapartism at the Cortes of Cádiz: the 1812 Constitution popularly known as "la Pepa". Napoleon and his brother Joseph did produce a Charter in 1808 at Bayonne (where the quarreling Spanish Bourbons were tricked into abdication by their strongman Godoy, all for the good of the continental blockade and the destruction of Portugal, a key British ally), that was the first constitution Spain ever had and the first legal Spain to ever exist (previously it was just "Castile") but Napoleon and Joseph comitted serious errors such as abolishing the Inquisition (what irked the ultra-conservatives) or massacring some rebels at Madrid, what got a growing number of Spaniards and Spanish Americans in rebellion against the new illustrated regime. Eventually these gathered at Cádiz, under British naval protection, and wrote down an alternative liberal constitution that clearly outshined the Bonapartist charter (and also used the term "Spain" for the second time in legal history). After Napoleon's defeat in 1814, Ferdinand VII (a Bourbon and relative of the French monarch) was restored and right away he obliterated the Constitution of 1812 and ruled in terms absolutistic until 1820 (this is known as the "absolutist six years"). As result the American juntas became secessionist and by 1821 Spain had lost most of its colonies (which made Britain very happy, as they could now meddle in more easily), meanwhile the Spaniards of Europe forced (via military coup) that the King had to accept the Constitution of 1812, producing the "liberal three years". Ferdinand was not happy and called for help from the French Bourbons, which he got ("the 100,000 sons of St. Louis", the largest invasion Spain ever suffered since the Muslims, although quite comparable to the 70,000 that Mussolini would send 117 years later to impose fascism).
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
If y'all want an even more detailed discussion on revolutions and specifically this revolution. Look up the Revolutions podcast by Mike Duncan, I think the season 7 is on the July revolution.
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.
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 UA-cam exactly when you need a refresher
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
I’m not sure I agree they “almost took down the international system” France had an international mandate(including the other great powers) from the Congress of Verona to go into Spain and restore Ferdinand
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.
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.
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.
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’ve watched your videos for years. They’ve always been amazing, and my time watching them is always special. So well made, well narrated with great visuals :) thanks for making such great videos sharing history with us
Historia, I love your content, but your opener was wrong. The French invasion of Spain was sanctioned broadly by the international community as a way to put down what was perceived as radicals threatening the European order. Quoting from Wikipedia as the easiest source available, "On 22 January 1823, a secret treaty, from which Britain was excluded, was signed at the Congress of Verona, allowing France to intervene in Spain to help restore Ferdinand VII as an absolute monarch." This treaty had Austria, Prussia, and Russia backing it, so France's invasion was not totally stupid. Also the first king of France you discussed, although willing to have only a venire of democratic governance, knew that he had to have that venire as well as promote certain policies of the left if he wanted to keep power. He was conservative by nature, yes, but he also understood that Napoleon and the Revolution had changed a lot, and he was cautious not to walk back everything that had happened in the monarchy's absence. You kind of portrayed him as this idiot with little agency, and I don't really agree.
I loved your previous vids and want you to make as many as possible, but i found this one to contain many unconnected dots. What was the international reaction to France's invasion of Spain, and if it didn't cause a world war, why not? If the elections were rigged, and resulted in huge majorities for the ultra-conservatives, what caused the electoral win of the liberals and republicans in 1827? If the parliament was unable to function or make any decisions, how did France succeed in deciding to invade Algeria?
Yeah there are a lot of blindspots in this video. He completely ignores how leaders in Algeria had been conducting piracy and slave raids for quite some time.
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!
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
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.
He regained access to the old device with the login credentials still saved on disk. Truly marvelous.
He had to ask tribune Aquila for the password
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
"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
@@darkfool2000 But how did it improve French situation ? Sure it may have helped stop slave trade in the long run but from realist standpoint it didn't help stabilise the nation or preserve continuity of power, and that was kind of Poignac's job, not stoping slave trade or piracy.
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?
It's okay they asked Tribune Aquila first
A real-life "I AM the senate" moment
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
same here!
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
Finally, Tribune Aquila had let this video be uploaded
VETO 😈
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.
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 he 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.
Here’s the weird part about it when Marmont surrender Paris to coalition we don’t know why he did it as he didn’t give any reason why he decided to surrender the city
@@Randomgen77 It's interesting how every country has such figures who become synonymous with betrayal. In India, we have Jaichand and in Bangladesh/Bengal, you'll have Mir Jafar.
How many coloured squares in this video?
Yes
HC: I’ll take your entire stock (with Tribune Aquila’s approval)
"The French Navy had somehow lost a battle on land. Truly they were not safe anywhere."
I'm dead. 😂
Notice how the carriage they get into is pulled by two pigs too lmao
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
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
@@zoetje9817Nonsense. They'll have to ask Tribune Aquila first wether they're allowed to fight.
You probably won't read this comment because it's one among a thousand. But I just wanted to take a moment to say how much I genuinely appreciate your channel. I first found this channel while looking up information on how the different positions in the Roman cursus honorum worked and found your videos on it. Back then you didn't have very many videos, I think your latest was one of the "In His Year" videos. So I've been following this channel for so many years now and none of your videos has ever disappointed me. Always very well made, full of fascinating stuff and some laughs on top of that. You also cover a lot of the specifics and nuances that I feel like are often left out of videos like this and I very much appreciate that. I don't have the money to support your Patreon currently still, but I just wanted to say thank you for the great content. I always look forward to your videos. Some of the best on UA-cam, imo.
One thing to remember about Charles X is that he was convinced what led to the Revolution of 1789 was his older brother's Louis XVI's weakness. He wouldn't give up anything to a Parliament, which existence even annoyed him (he was born and raised under absolutist rule of his brother at a time a legislative Parliament seemed both unnecessary and even sacrilegious).
The Revolution of 1789 and the two decades or war and instability that ensued were on everyone's mind at that time.
It's such a frightfully myopic view of the situation by the guy whose neck was literally on the line
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.
But the Revolution did not forget about them, worry not.
It is said that the Restored Bourbons learned nothing (about the causes, events, and effects) but remembered everything (all the privileges and power of the monarchy) about the French Revolution. It is very possible that King Charles X saw that Louis the 16th compromised and gave up royal power until the radical revolutionaries cut his head off, and was determined to not give an inch.
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).
America is the goat
France is the goat
Nah america is little bro
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
This guy has some bias towards napoleon
He's confused on that one.
Also, the reason Britain "weathered the storm" is because they had it first. The English Civil War, the Glorious Revolution, and the Jacobite Rebellions had already settled the political order in Britain, and the prevailing faction was the Whigs.
I feel obligated to add a sidenote that Louis Philippe's wife, and even more so his sister played massive roles in pushing him to take the throne, as well as helping to organize his politics and factions.
4:32 Villéle did not want to invade Spain.
From Shannon Selin:
" French ultra-royalists were pressuring King Louis XVIII to rescue his distant cousin (King Ferdinand). Louis, however, disapproved of Ferdinand’s brand of absolutism, and neither he nor Prime Minister Joseph Villèle favoured sending troops into Spain."
Sounds quite plausible, Louis XVIII may have been a Bourbon but he was of the rare sensible kind of his breed. As for Villèle, I'm not so sure.
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
babe wake up. New HistoriaCivilis is dropping in 2 hours
Your babe woke up yet?
You're single don't lie
Babe...? ... BAAABE...!?!?!?
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
Fun Fact: This year (2024) in July, Bangladesh experienced a massive civil uprising which resulted in the ousting of a 15-year-long autocratic government.
People have now dubbed that "July Revolution" too.
(It started in mid July after police and government backed goons started violently suppressing university students who were protesting against the unfair quota system. The suppression were brutal, *Hundreds* died in July. July left such a bloodstain that even in 1st August, people wrote 32nd July. It went on till 36th July (or 5th August) when the PM (Dictator) finally resigned and fled the country. Sic Sempre Tyranis!)
@@mushfiqurrahman1107 Yeah, except the French didn't start to harass their minority like you folks did. They were not breaking temples and churches. Revolution, or just Islamists seizing power to make life hell for Hindu and Christian minorities?
Man are you using 46 BC calendary?
I was literally looking at the channel yesterday wondering when a new video would drop. This is good
same
6:22 You got this wrong again, the spanish constitution was elaborated by the cadiz courts during the civil war.
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!
just wait until 1848 and 1870-1871
Oh, well yes. We've had 5 Republics after all. We're professionals in this field 😂
That's maybe because there were no major wars between 1814 and 1914, so it's kind of "easy" to skip forward. However there were many revolutions and counter-revolutions, it was a politically hot time in Europe... but relatively stable in terms of major wars.
@@LuisAldamiz Erm...but not for civil wars/wars of independence/unification, wars fought in Russia/Eurasia, and, erm--the Franco-Prussian War.
That's kind of a big one.
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
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
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 :)
Your videos are maybe my favorite rare treat on UA-cam, thanks for all the effort you put into them.
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.
Nothing makes me happier then when i see one of your videos. Nothing been then spacing out and hearing history!
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
@@omarbradley6807 No, it didn't. Algeria was the holdout, even after Piracy from Morocco, Tunisia, Libya had ceased. That didn't end until 1830.
@@omarbradley6807even the US sent its marines to defend US shipping from Algerian slaver pirates. This topic has been ignored a lot because it goes against some people's beliefs.
Poor street lamps! What did they do wrong?!
What I want to know also.
Obviously they made the repression forces work easier. I'm surprised we don't do that anymore (also three meter tall barricades, that's extremely impressive and hard to counter).
Only channel I became a member for early access, I didn’t even need to second-guess myself about it
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'.
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.
16:12
As an avid map painter (eu4, hoi4, vic3...) I feel called out.
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.
Absolute banger of a video yet again, man never stops dropping the best content
Your uploads are a blessing for humanity.
Another incredible video and perspective. I eagerly await to see you talk about the Springtime of Nations and the 1840s.
One of the biggest contributing factors to the July Revolution's success was Charles X and Polignac's utter lack of preparation. Outside of the men physically close to the King, nobody knew of the Four Ordinances until the newspaper announcing them arrived. This means potential allies were not primed to act on them, local police forces were at best sluggish about attempting to shut down the presses since this was the first they heard of all this, and the loyal soldiers not in Algeria were not moved into position to respond to a violent backlash, something even Louis XVI did in the days leading up to the storming of the Bastille. This allowed the backlash to spiral out of control and it very quickly was beyond military control.
There's a great anecdote of Polignac and the Naval Minister, after escaping the angry crowds on the night of 26th of July, probing a local police chief about reinforcements, and Polignac declaring he should probably put the Royal Guard on alert.
Naval Minister: "The Royal Guard aren't on alert already?!"
Polignac: "You worry too much."
No wonder every move was twelve hours too late to diffuse the situation.
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.
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.
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
speak for yourself
@@dftp Nah, i will speak for the majority. Thx. :)
your videos are so good I had massive shivers and cried
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.
37:10 That wasn’t really much of a concern as the government had regardless intended to exile both the King and Henri’s uncle the Dauphin. The reason this didn’t happen is because Louis-Philippe’s sister Adelaide acted quickly to secure the throne for brother with the help of some independently acting liberal politicians, and because Henri’s mother Marie Caroline refused to turn her son over to the custody of the government
Well, all the Bonapartist (although that term wasn't used) were radical left wing, it is not 1848,
@ Not really. The Bonapartists and republicans often worked together by necessity, but they were not one and the same political faction, especially since ultimately, the Bonapartists were still a monarchist faction, just favoring a different family.
@@Edmonton-of2ec That is the problem, the followers of Napoleon didn't want a Bonaparte in power, the want the Napoleon in power, the republicans also want that Napoleon in power, and were followers of Napoleon, they didn't wanted different things, but differences after they success in 1848 happen when Louis Napoleon run for president representing the Napoleon's family, the same bloc divided into those that supported Louis Napoleon and those that wanted other candidates.
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! 😉
23:32 Holy shit he's editing in more of those black dots on purpose now
Where have you been! The happiest I’ve been to see a UA-cam Icon in quite some time!
Man I thought you weren’t making videos anymore. This makes me so happy.
Very interesting as always but there is a serious error at the beginning when describing the Spanish Constitution as Napoleonic. It was not: it was in fact the countering of Bonapartism at the Cortes of Cádiz: the 1812 Constitution popularly known as "la Pepa".
Napoleon and his brother Joseph did produce a Charter in 1808 at Bayonne (where the quarreling Spanish Bourbons were tricked into abdication by their strongman Godoy, all for the good of the continental blockade and the destruction of Portugal, a key British ally), that was the first constitution Spain ever had and the first legal Spain to ever exist (previously it was just "Castile") but Napoleon and Joseph comitted serious errors such as abolishing the Inquisition (what irked the ultra-conservatives) or massacring some rebels at Madrid, what got a growing number of Spaniards and Spanish Americans in rebellion against the new illustrated regime. Eventually these gathered at Cádiz, under British naval protection, and wrote down an alternative liberal constitution that clearly outshined the Bonapartist charter (and also used the term "Spain" for the second time in legal history).
After Napoleon's defeat in 1814, Ferdinand VII (a Bourbon and relative of the French monarch) was restored and right away he obliterated the Constitution of 1812 and ruled in terms absolutistic until 1820 (this is known as the "absolutist six years"). As result the American juntas became secessionist and by 1821 Spain had lost most of its colonies (which made Britain very happy, as they could now meddle in more easily), meanwhile the Spaniards of Europe forced (via military coup) that the King had to accept the Constitution of 1812, producing the "liberal three years". Ferdinand was not happy and called for help from the French Bourbons, which he got ("the 100,000 sons of St. Louis", the largest invasion Spain ever suffered since the Muslims, although quite comparable to the 70,000 that Mussolini would send 117 years later to impose fascism).
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
The English Civil Wars had really nothing to do with absolutism and everything to do with religion.
If y'all want an even more detailed discussion on revolutions and specifically this revolution. Look up the Revolutions podcast by Mike Duncan, I think the season 7 is on the July revolution.
If you ever feel that you’re stupid just remember your name isn’t Vilele.
Villèle
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.
Gonna get some beer and pizza, and enjoy this afternoon
Ey it's you! I like your videos
Almost finished going through all your videos in chronological order for the second time!
Another great video for the playlist!
Thanks for making it.
For those Americans unwilling to do the conversion three meters is about nine feet or one and a half Toyota Corolla's tall.
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 UA-cam exactly when you need a refresher
Babe wake up, time to spend 45 minutes looking at colorful squares being dramatic!
I full heartedly believe he wasn’t posting because he got arrested for his last video
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
I was just watching some older videos today and you decide to upload, fantastic!
A peaceful transition of power..
But spoiler alert, there are still 4 republics, an empire and several transitional regimes ahead!
I literally bought beer to celebrate your new vid here, and I am currently loving life watching this. Thanks so much, Historysyllabus dude!
i missseeddd yooouu! i didn't know i was so invested on boxed characters. lol
I’m not sure I agree they “almost took down the international system” France had an international mandate(including the other great powers) from the Congress of Verona to go into Spain and restore Ferdinand
23:26 there’s an accidental optical illusion here with the black dots moving among the crowd
I really appreciate the cleanness of that visual breakdown of Article 14 at 21:08. You're a good educator.
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.
I have cried during your narration! Thank you for that video
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.
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
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.
You know the days gonna be good when Historia Civilis uploads a new video. Thanks so much for all the amazing content over the years!!!
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.
Great video please keep on doing the great work❤🎉
"Invading Spain was not wise". You'd think that the French would have learnt that by now.
I’ve watched your videos for years. They’ve always been amazing, and my time watching them is always special. So well made, well narrated with great visuals :) thanks for making such great videos sharing history with us
Historia, I love your content, but your opener was wrong.
The French invasion of Spain was sanctioned broadly by the international community as a way to put down what was perceived as radicals threatening the European order. Quoting from Wikipedia as the easiest source available, "On 22 January 1823, a secret treaty, from which Britain was excluded, was signed at the Congress of Verona, allowing France to intervene in Spain to help restore Ferdinand VII as an absolute monarch." This treaty had Austria, Prussia, and Russia backing it, so France's invasion was not totally stupid.
Also the first king of France you discussed, although willing to have only a venire of democratic governance, knew that he had to have that venire as well as promote certain policies of the left if he wanted to keep power. He was conservative by nature, yes, but he also understood that Napoleon and the Revolution had changed a lot, and he was cautious not to walk back everything that had happened in the monarchy's absence. You kind of portrayed him as this idiot with little agency, and I don't really agree.
Louis XVIII was the last French monarch to die still king. He's underrated successfully balancing the different factions
Great video as always, just wanna point out a typo at 25:03 if you want to fix: Ordinances, not Ordinences
30:25 - This made me literally laugh out loud, haha.
I love when we Americans get called out for not knowing anything outside of what goes on here, because it's true of the majority of Americans.
This video series on 19th century politics in Europe is great! I'm already excited for the next one
I loved your previous vids and want you to make as many as possible, but i found this one to contain many unconnected dots. What was the international reaction to France's invasion of Spain, and if it didn't cause a world war, why not? If the elections were rigged, and resulted in huge majorities for the ultra-conservatives, what caused the electoral win of the liberals and republicans in 1827? If the parliament was unable to function or make any decisions, how did France succeed in deciding to invade Algeria?
Yeah there are a lot of blindspots in this video. He completely ignores how leaders in Algeria had been conducting piracy and slave raids for quite some time.
When the world needed him most, he returned
Babe wake up, new Historia Civilis video just dropped
Its a great day when historia civilis uploads!
Fuck yea! Best possible notification! Thanks for your work!
“For the Americans that’s Learn how tall a meter is high” 😂
oh how I've missed you!
Been waiting!! Worth it every time, thank you for all your effort.
16:00 But the colonies were not lost at the end of the Napoleonic wars, in fact it was before, and after Napoleon some colonies were recovered
NEW HC VIDEO, DROP EVERYTHING
So happy to see you back