HIST362: Modern Revolutions

Read this article to learn about mass uprisings and how governments react to them. As you read, think about the nature of mass uprisings and how they can lead to revolution. How do governments and militaries respond to mass uprisings and protests? Does their reaction stifle protest, or does it inspire an uprising to evolve into a rebellion or revolution?

While the peasant or lower classes usually spearhead popular mass uprisings from below, small groups of the social elite typically initiate coups d'etat. These are highly organized and may or may not have popular support. For example, chosen military staff may suddenly replace political leaders with a violent revolt during a military coup, such as the coup d'état in Egypt in 1952, where Mohammed Naguib (1901–1984) and Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918–1970) overthrew Egypt's King Farouk (1920–1965). Similarly, the military deposed and incarcerated the democratically-elected Aung San Suu Kyi during a military coup d'etat in Myanmar in 2021 despite mass protests. Rebellions combine aspects of mass uprisings and coups. They are often the first step toward a revolution. They involve large numbers of participants and a high degree of planning and organization. The leaders typically have a clear vision for the future and enlist action from a large percentage of the population. The American Revolution began as a rebellion. So did the Russian Revolution in 1917 and the Chinese Communist Revolution in 1956. Watch this video to learn how revolutions shape the world, compared to a mass uprising, coup d'etat, or rebellion. The presenter explores the definition of revolution and examines how conditions in the 17th century fostered an era of modern revolution. How do political revolutions differ from agricultural and industrial revolutions?

Revolutionary change may be intellectual or political. Political change involves government overthrow, such as when colonists in the United States (1765–1783) and citizens of France (1789–1799) rebelled against monarchical power to support democracy. Intellectual change occurs when individuals challenge beliefs about how the world functions, such as when scientists and philosophers questioned the natural order and religious traditions during the Scientific Revolution after Nicolaus Copernicus published De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres) in 1543. Do revolutions need to be violent to effect change? Many dubbed Czechoslovakia's revolution in 1989 the "velvet revolution" because the mass protests were essentially non-violent. Leaders made compromises to avoid mass violence, which led some to argue it was not a true revolution. If violence is essential to a revolution, how do we define a peaceful transfer of power?

Read this article on the nature and consequences of revolution. What are some root causes of revolution? How do these factors instigate social and political change? What is a revolution, and how does it compare to other kinds of uprisings? Why is it important to differentiate a mass uprising, revolt, or coup d'etat from a revolution?

Read this lesson on the ideas of Marx. It explores his ideology, which helps lay a foundation for what revolutions are and how they form. Think about the definition of revolution and how Marx's ideals contrast with those of Tocqueville, Johnson, and other philosophers.

Read this article that explores Alex de Tocqueville's ideas and his basic theory on why revolution occurs. How did Tocqueville's ideas compare with those of Marx, Brinton, Johnson, and Anderson?

Read this article on how the concept of modernity was centered in Western Europe. How did industrialization and the socioeconomic stratification it created lead to revolution? What linkages can you make between the concept of modernity and the ideologies we studied in the previous section: Tocqueville, Marx, Brinton, Johnson, and Anderson?

Max Weber (1864–1920) argued that before the rise of the modern state, the king had to share his legitimate use of violence or force with the church. A defining feature of the modern state is that it alone has the ability to exert legitimate, coercive force. European governments no longer had to cooperate with the church to exert authority because the Catholic Church had lost much of its hegemonic power during the Enlightenment and Scientific Revolution. This shift, however, would also empower the people to question the legitimacy of governments – they determined that citizens had an innate right to rise in revolt and revolution. Watch this video on modernity and the modern era. Think about our definition of revolution and how political revolution resulted from modernization. What linkages can you make to the ideologies we studied in the previous section: Tocqueville, Marx, Brinton, Johnson, and Anderson?

John Merriman argues that the turmoil of the Thirty Years War (1618–1648) led many members of the nobility and upper classes to agree to the terms of monarchy and absolute rule in exchange for a restoration of public order, protection against popular insurrection, and peasant uprisings, and the recognition of noble privilege. For example, the ancien régime in France describes this era where religious and other conventions supported a social and political order that glorified the king as protector and subjugated the peasants and lower classes. These monarchies routinely ignored any parliaments or government assemblies. However, in England and the Netherlands, the parliament refused to be ignored. These countries each had a growing influential commercial middle-class population, a large number of property owners, a strong urban population, a small nobility, and a decentralized police force and army. Both resisted the power of the Catholic church based in Rome in favor of more local control. Historical and intellectual elements of the Enlightenment contributed to revolutionary processes across the world. These changes and revolutions all contributed to the rise of modernity (which we explore below). Watch this lecture, which discusses how and why both England and Holland rejected absolutist rule.

As you watch this lecture, try to understand how the Thirty Years War (1618–1648) influenced state-building in France and England. Focus on the following aspects of pre-revolutionary societies: the institution of kingship, the role of religion, and the mechanisms of taxation.

The Enlightenment or Age of Reason (1715–1789) describes the period when philosophers and intellectuals emerged outside traditional religious spheres to question the established social and political order. Primary philosophical concepts included skepticism of the political establishment, the pursuit of reason, religious tolerance, liberty, and empiricism. John Merriman says the Enlightenment thinkers affected their readers in six ways: 

1. They weakened the hold of traditional religion as a public institution; 
2. They promoted a secular code of ethics;
3. They developed a critical spirit of analysis that did not accept routine tradition and hierarchies; 
4. They were curious about history and believed in progress;
5. They differentiated absolutism from despotism; and
6. They disrespected the monarchy and heaped abuse on unjustified privilege. 

During the Enlightenment, several key philosophers shaped the way people viewed the Enlightenment itself and the growing socioeconomic and political changes it engendered. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), a German philosopher, encouraged individuals to think for themselves rather than exhibit blind obedience to political authority. Kant wrote that Enlightenment is built on man's ability to use his own reason, which takes courage. He argued that most people reject Enlightenment out of cowardice and laziness: they are unwilling to break away from the domination of others, particularly church leaders, government officials, and educators. Domination by these powerful people restricts one's individual freedom. Kant believed he did not live in an enlightened age but in an age that was moving toward Enlightenment and that people would gradually learn to think for themselves over time. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), a Swiss philosopher, wrote "The Social Contract", in which he argued that humans are born free but coerced into economic and social dependence. Political and social covenants should restore this lost freedom. Rousseau believed that legitimate civil authority is only derived from civil contracts that both sides enter freely. In other words, to be legitimate, citizens must enter a civil contract with a government willingly. In this civil society, each individual works for their own best interest. Collectively, these individual wills support and benefit the general will, which Rousseau called "the sovereign ".In this system, the will of the majority rules. Each person who enters this social contract agrees to abide by laws the government passes, even when they disagree with them. Nicolas de Condorcet (1743–1794), a French philosopher and mathematician, believed continual progress led toward the perfection of mankind. He argued that the progress the Enlightenment promoted, especially in the areas of science and social thought, would lead to an increasingly perfect human state. Understanding health, wealth creation, and industry would eventually lead to the elimination of disease, poverty, and suffering. Through knowledge, humans are capable of unlimited progress. Watch this lecture. Focus on the different meanings of the Enlightenment among the intellectual elites and in popular culture. What did the Enlightenment thinkers focus on? What did they critique? How was the influence of the intellectuals different from that on the "street"?

This 1784 essay is one of the most important texts of the European Enlightenment. What does Kant mean by "emergence from self-incurred immaturity"? What is the relationship between thinking for oneself and obedience to political authority? What do you think is revolutionary about this text?

In The Social Contract, Rousseau articulated the concept of the general will, an idea the revolutionaries in France and other countries we will study frequently evoked. Read this selection of excerpts from Rousseau's influential text to understand what he meant by the concept of the general will.

Read this 1794 essay and analyze its tone. Why is Condorcet so unshakably convinced about the necessity of progress? What does he mean by progress? What is his understanding of history?

Read this article to learn about Cromwell, his actions, and his importance. Think about Cromwell's actions and whether you believe he was a true revolutionary.

Although the monarchy was restored in 1660 with Charles II, this "revolution" saw many accomplishments: 

1. The rise of parliamentary supremacy over the Crown; 
2. The idea that careers are open to talent; 
3. Protection of private property (which supported the rise of mercantilism and capitalism);
4. Religious tolerance; and
5. Aggressive internationalism. 

Some call the period between 1688 and 1689 the Glorious Revolution, before the Parliament passed the Bill of Rights in 1689 and signaled the official beginning of a constitutional monarchy. Read this text and list the long-term causes of the English Revolution of 1688. Pay particular attention to the conflicts between religion and politics in 17th-century England.

Both revolution and civil war refer to dramatic and violent uprisings that express popular discontent. Both terms refer to upheaval within a particular country instead of international war. However, revolutions are generally uprisings against the current government. Civil war pits two or more opposing organized groups against each other, typically aligned within a country along ethnic, political, or religious lines. They typically engage in violent conflict to obtain political power or control.

The historical determination of whether a conflict constitutes a civil war or revolution is not always clear-cut. For example, historians continue to disagree about the case of the English Civil War. Many call the conflict the English Civil War because two distinct groups battled against each other. However, others categorize the conflict as a revolution because the opponents ultimately fought against the government itself (the monarchy) and transformed the system of government into a constitutional monarchy. Watch this lecture to understand the lasting impact of the English Revolution of 1688. Think about how it changed how people viewed government, their role in it, and their right to interfere and overthrow it.

Watch this video to understand the impact and importance of the Magna Carta. How did this transformative document justify the actions of Cromwell and other leaders during and after the English Revolution of 1688?

With the passage of the English Bill of Rights (1689), Parliament supported the rule of law and the civil rights outlined in the two founding documents. It declared that it alone (not the Crown) had the authority to levy taxes, raise an army, and wage wars. The King and others in positions of authority were responsible and answerable to the people. The Bill also required regular parliamentary meetings, free elections, freedom of speech in Parliament, prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment, and declared that judges would be independent of the monarchy.

As you read this document, focus on the kinds of rights it guarantees citizens. Test your understanding by writing a paragraph about how this document helps explain the difference between a traditional and constitutional monarchy.

When King James II fled England in 1648, his Protestant daughter Mary II (1662–1694) assumed the English throne with her Dutch husband, William III (1650–1702), also known as William of Orange. Both supported Parliament's efforts to expand its power. To protest the restrictive and prohibitive nature of King James' Catholicism and outside control from the Pope, Parliament declared no Roman Catholic could ascend the English throne, nor could any English monarch marry a Roman Catholic. The Toleration Act of 1689 supported freedom of worship for Protestants but excluded Catholics, antitrinitarians, and atheists from its provisions. Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), an English philosopher, laid the foundation for modern concepts of government and revolution. Hobbes was a royalist, meaning he believed that government power was best vested in a monarch. However, he proposed the idea of a social contract in which citizens and government form a cooperative relationship. People give up some of their rights; in return, the government provides them protection. However, what happens when the government fails to provide basic protections for the people? Do the people have the right to rebel? Read this article, which links the revolutionary experience in England to John Locke's Two Treatises on Government. Focus on the second half of the article (after Leviathan: Structure and Major Themes) and make sure you can discuss the logic of Locke's thinking about the powers and role of government in modern societies. Try to summarize Locke's ideology in a few sentences.

John Locke (1632–1704), the English philosopher, also feared that Catholicism would take over England and argued for religious freedom in his Letter Concerning Toleration (1689). He argued that the government existed to promote external welfare, not spiritual welfare, and should not attempt to dictate religious choice. Locke believed that civil unrest and conflict would ensue when civil magistrates tried to limit the religious choices of citizens. In other words, Locke paved the way for the American idea of the separation of church and state. However, it is important to note that Locke was not opposed to suppressing religions that refused to accept his doctrine of tolerance. Read "A Letter Concerning Toleration" by John Locke and "Liberty and Prosperity: The Levellers and Locke" by Murray Rothbard to understand what Hobbes and Locke thought about the relationship between politics, religion, the people, and the monarch. These discussions provide a foundation for the intellectual discussions revolutionaries will have during conflicts yet to come: the rights of the people, their relationship with the government, and their right to revolt or revolution. Where does Locke draw the boundaries of tolerance? How does he justify this choice? How does Hobbes see the relationship between the Crown and the People? How do Hobbes and Locke compare?"

Read this article about how the concepts of liberty and property were central to Locke's treatise and how religious liberty was central to Locke's ideas and the ideas of the Enlightenment. How does religious liberty contribute to a population's feelings of empowerment toward revolution?

With the English Bill of Rights (1689), the English Parliament established its supremacy over the Crown and proclaimed the government a constitutional monarchy. Contrast this to an absolute monarchy, where the king or queen governs with absolute power and authority. In a constitutional monarchy, the country's written and unwritten constitution limits the powers of the monarch (the king or queen). In today's United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland), the monarch has limited formal authority and represents the country as its head of state, performing a primarily public ceremonial role. The elected prime minister is the head of government: the parliament is responsible for debating, creating, and executing laws and overseeing and approving government taxation and spending. Britain does not have a single written constitution like most modern states. Instead, its unwritten or uncodified constitution is based on Acts of Parliament, court judgments, and conventions. Many of these traditional protocols originated with the Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1628), and the English Bill of Rights (1689). Note that English "common law" describes law derived from custom and judicial precedent rather than legislative statutes (statutory law). However, the evolution of English Common Law is important in its assertion of human rights. The idea that the government exists for the betterment of the people and not the other way around – as was the common belief in feudalism – became the foundation of modern revolutions. Watch this video, which explores how human rights are integral to modern revolutions. Think about the importance of The Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Rights (1628), and the English Bill of Rights (1689). How does the assertion of rights lead to empowerment and revolution?

The English Revolution of 1688, the English Bill of Rights (1689), and the Enlightenment profoundly influenced the revolutions that followed. The leaders of the American Revolution, in particular, cited the influence of philosophers such as Hobbes and Locke as they asserted their right to overthrow a government they felt had become corrupt. While the English Revolution of 1688 did not result in a total change in government, its lasting effect cannot be debated. With the passage of the English Bill of Rights (1689), the rights of the citizenry became the foundation for many modern revolutions that reshaped geopolitics in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. Read this essay that analyzes the various traditions that influenced the writing of the U.S. Constitution. The English Bill of Rights was among its most important influences. Then, examine the chart that reviews the Magna Carta. How does this analysis compare with your reading of the English Bill of Rights? How did this document pave the way for the U.S. Constitution?

Read this article as part of your comparative exercise. How did each document pave the way for the American Revolution and the U.S. Constitution?

Watch this lecture, which describes what it was like to live in the colonies in the 18th century.

The American Revolution began as a series of revolts between 1765 and 1783, when the 13 American colonies declared independence from Great Britain and formed the United States. With this declaration, the rebellion became a revolution, and the 13 colonies formally declared themselves an independent nation, granting themselves the powers of nations, including the right to declare war and enter into alliances.
Why did the American colonists change from being solid British citizens to revolutionaries in just ten years? Many Americans had fought proudly in the Seven Years' War from 1756 to 1763, but the policies of taxation and mercantilism, coupled with the fact that the American colonists could not take the land gained during the war, transformed pride into hostility and resentment.

Read this article, which discusses this Revolutionary Era. Before delving into the dynamics and ideals of the American Revolution, you should understand its chronology and historical context.

During the colonial period, the 13 colonies had established a unique identity due to their isolation from Britain. However, each colony was unique and had developed separate cultures, economies, and governments. For example, many colonies, such as Massachusetts and Virginia, had set up governments based on representative elected legislatures. The people – mainly white land-owning men – were accustomed to having an active role in the day-to-day governance of their towns and colonies. The educated elite was well-versed in Enlightenment philosophies and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights. Many colonial leaders, such as Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790), John Adams (1735–1826), and Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), believed firmly in their role and the importance of citizen participation in government. During the Seven Years' War, the colonists banded together under Benjamin Franklin's Albany Plan of Union. The idea was that the colonies needed to work together and cooperate to help in the war effort. This temporary union bridged some of the gaps that existed among the colonies and implanted the idea that the 13 separate governments could come together under a shared purpose. In 1651, England passed the Navigation Acts, which were aimed mainly at the Dutch – England's largest trading partner. In 1664, England gained the colony of the New Netherlands, which became New York. The British East India Company and Dutch East India Company were great economic rivals, jostling for economic supremacy. The Navigation Acts, similar to all English colonies, prescribed that the colonies were to trade exclusively with England and serve as resource depots or markets for British-produced goods – as part of a mercantile system. The American colonists resisted these restrictions and resorted to smuggling to circumvent the Acts. The British government had essentially ignored this resistance until 1763, when they began to impose harsh punishments on American smugglers. The American colonists chafed under the new penalties – they viewed the Navigation Acts (in addition to the new taxes from the Stamp, Tea, and Sugar Acts) as violations of the independence they had previously enjoyed. The colonies appealed to the British government but lacked a clear way to redress their grievances. The British failed to consult the colonists on major policy issues and treated them like dependent children. Internal factors, such as population pressures, consumerism, commercialism, relationships (based on contracts rather than familial ties), and new ideas from the Enlightenment about political representation (Republicanism), prompted the American colonies to unite in a series of congresses and rebel. Watch this lecture to review the causes of the American Revolution. Think about what you already know about these events and how Freeman's understanding of revolution fits into our previous discussions. How does Freeman analyze the revolutionary events in terms of facts and interpretations? What does she suggest should be your primary focus?

Revolutionaries and those who opposed the revolution wrote pamphlets and other forms of propaganda to gain domestic and international support for their movement. "Common Sense" was one of the most important pamphlets of the American Revolution. Read the introduction and parts I–IV. Pay attention to Paine's arguments for independence from Britain. What are his claims? What does he say about religious diversity in the new nation? How does he envision equal representation?

In 1765, Daniel Dulaney (1722–1797), a Maryland Loyalist politician and mayor of Annapolis, explored the right of the British government to tax the colonies. How do his ideas complement and contrast with Paine's? How was the idea of taxes inherent to the revolution?

The first elected assembly in October 1765, the so-called "Stamp Act Congress", opposed the Acts of taxation. A group called the Sons of Liberty, based in Boston, Massachusetts, began to openly rebel against the British tax collectors by sabotaging the enforcement of the new laws. This led to the Boston Massacre in 1770 and the Boston Tea Party in 1773. Tensions escalated when the British government passed the Quartering Act of 1774, which essentially placed Boston under martial law. The colonies united by forming the first Continental Congress, but the British ignored the petitions and letters of redress drafted against British policies. In April 1775, several major confrontations, including Lexington and Concord, sparked a revolution. The colonies formed into the Second Continental Congress and, by July 1776, declared themselves independent. That spring, battles followed in North Carolina, New York, and Canada. The Continental Congress drafted its first constitution, the Articles of Confederation, based on Enlightenment ideas of citizen participation, republicanism, and limited government. Watch this lecture on why the colonists felt they needed to rebel and how they went about it. Think about what you know about the Enlightenment. Why did differences among the colonists fail to interfere with their shared purpose of independence?

War with the United States was expensive to the British, who were still paying for the Seven Years' War (1756–1763). By 1783, their losses outweighed the value of the colonies. In 1783, representatives of King George III (1738–1820) signed the Treaty of Paris with the United States to end the American Revolution. At this time, this was truly revolutionary: a colonial master had declared it would allow one of its colonies to become independent. The United States, a former colony, created a brand new government, writing its own constitution, and organizing itself as an independent state.

Read this text, which outlines the timeline for the American Revolution. Why was the American Revolution so unconventional at the time? In what ways did it define the modern revolutionary movement?

Read this article on the long-term consequences of the American Revolution. How are today's Americans the recipients of this legacy?

As you watch this lecture, pay attention to how Freeman defines revolution. What does it take for a revolution to end? What are some important legacies of the American Revolution?

Let's analyze some primary sources on the American Revolution. Choose at least one primary source document written between 1751–1775 and one written between 1776–1785 and answer these questions: Who authored the document? Were they in favor or opposed to the revolution? Was it written before or after the Declaration of Independence? Why is this important? What does the author argue? Do they support or oppose the revolution? Where do you see Enlightenment ideology? How do the ideas in the document compare to the ideas of Paine and Dulaney?

Watch this lecture to review the Articles of Confederation. What aspects of this document caused the first government to be so ineffective? Can you explain the rationale for the framer's faulty decision-making? We will see how the framers learned from their mistakes in the following sections.

Although the framers had initially convened to revamp the Articles of Confederation, the attending politicians – steeped in Enlightenment ideology with competing visions of the best form of government – debated and eventually created an entirely new Constitution by the end of the meeting. They divided the government into three equal branches and gave the federal governing body more power and authority. Study the text of the Constitution to see the compromises the framers made for this founding document for the United States. Can you point to any similarities with the documents we studied previously?

Read this article on the U.S. Constitution. How did the principles of Enlightenment help frame this document? How did the framers balance power between the federal and state governments?

The framers looked at many sources when writing the Constitution, including Enlightenment philosophy, the English Bill of Rights, and the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy. Delegates from the tribes attended the convention and educated the framers about their government system and why it was effective.

Watch this video on the Haudenosaunee Confederacy. What elements may have influenced the U.S. Constitution and how the framers organized the U.S. government?

Compare this constitution with the U.S. Constitution. What elements did the United States adopt from the Haudenosaunee Confederacy? How did their system of government influence our current model?

Watch this lecture, which describes how the Enlightenment influenced the framers of the U.S. Constitution. How did the revolutionary nature of the U.S. Constitution enable it to last so long?

The adoption process for the Constitution was not easy. Deep-seated fears of tyranny resounded throughout the United States, and two factions developed – the Federalists led by Alexander Hamilton (1755 or 1757–1804) supported a strong federal government, while the anti-Federalists (later the Democratic-Republican and then the Democrat Party) led by Thomas Jefferson believed individual states should have more power. The Federalists were committed to a strong central government, unwavering support for the U.S. Constitution, and a traditional social structure. Hamilton, James Madison (1751–1836), and John Jay (1745–1829) strengthened their talking points during the U.S. Constitutional Convention in 1787. They outlined their support for the U.S. Constitution in 85 articles and essays they wrote and published in New York papers in 1788. These became known as the Federalist Papers. The Anti-Federalists preferred state sovereignty, a limited federal government, and increased local control. Patrick Henry (1736–1799), Thomas Jefferson, and other anti-Federalists were afraid the Federalists were paving the way for future government tyranny. However, they were not as organized in promoting their arguments since they had not participated in the Constitutional Convention. Their strongest argument was the lack of a bill of rights in the Constitution: they convinced the Federalists to add the Bill of Rights (the first ten Amendments to the Constitution) as a condition for their support for ratification. The principles of the U.S. Bill of Rights and why the U.S. founders felt it was necessary to ratify the Constitution are key to understanding the revolutionary nature of the U.S. government. Consider how the Bill of Rights balances power between the government and its citizens as you read this article.

Now, read the American Bill of Rights and compare it with the English Bill of Rights you studied in Unit 1. What are the most important differences between the two documents? What do you think accounts for these differences?

Watch this video, which explains why the U.S. Bill of Rights is such an important part of the U.S. Constitution. How do you think the Enlightenment philosophers influenced the ideals of the U.S. Bill of Rights?

The U.S. Bill of Rights laid a foundation for civil rights and civil liberties for citizens in the United States. Read this article, which explains the difference between these two concepts. How have they evolved since the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788? Now, let's take a moment to do some primary source analysis. Choose two primary source documents written between 1786 and 1800. Answer these questions for each document: Who authored the document? Were they in favor or opposed to the Bill of Rights/Constitution? Was it written before or after the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788? What is the argument in the document? Does it support or oppose the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Where do you see Enlightenment ideology? Is the document a Federalist or Anti-Federalist document, and how did it help establish the U.S. government?

Watch this lecture to understand the class system in France that led to the revolution. You should be able to describe what life was like for people in the Third Estate and why they supported the armed protests.

Read this text about the tax system in France and its effect on the Third Estate. Compare the French tax system to that in America before the colonists rebelled against the British.

Read this text for more analysis of the causes of the French Revolution. You should be able to explain the structural, long-term causes of the French Revolution. What events precipitated the outbreak of revolution in 1789? How do historians determine long- and short-term causes of revolution? What difficulties arise when we try to link long and short-term factors?

Watch this slideshow, which shows pictures of the Palace of Versailles, to get a glimpse of the life of Marie Antoinette and Louis XIV. Consider the funds needed to maintain the palace and this luxurious lifestyle. How do you think these excesses connect with the taxes the monarchy imposed on the Third Estate and the revolution?

Read this account of the daily life of Marie Antoinette. Consider the hierarchies involved and procedures needed to tend to the queen's basic "needs". These disparities flamed the ire of those in the Third Estate. How did her life compare with those who were part of the Third Estate?

Read this letter Marie Antoinette wrote to her mother in 1773. Think about the previous document that illustrated her daily life and how she lived in the Palace of Versailles. Do you think she understood the situation members of the Third Estate were in? How did this disconnect illustrate a core cause of the French Revolution?

Once the monarchy had been deposed, the revolutionary government suffered from instability. Infighting and mistrust prevented the revolutionaries from creating a new functional government and led to the so-called Reign of Terror. More than 300,000 people were arrested, and 17,000 were executed as enemies of the revolution from 1793 to 1794. Watch this video for an overview of the events of the French Revolution. Hostilities began in May 1789 with the meeting of the Estates-General – a general assembly representing the three French estates of the realm: the nobility, the church, and the common people. Summoned by King Louis XVI to propose solutions to his government's financial problems, the Estates-General sat for several weeks in May and June 1789. They arrived at an impasse when the three estates clashed over their respective powers. Members of the Third Estate created a National Assembly, which signaled the outbreak of revolution. On July 14, a mob famously stormed the Bastille, a medieval fortress and prison that represented royal authority in the center of Paris, and demanded the arms and ammunition stored there.

We can see several similarities between the American and French Revolutions. Both rebellions arose from the financial chaos of the Seven Years' War (1763–1766) when the British and French governments demanded their respective working and middle classes pay for their wartime and personal excesses. The British imposed burdensome taxes on the American colonists, while the First and Second Estates in France did the same to the Third Estate. In fact, the French military and financial support for the American Revolution helped bankrupt France. The ideas and philosophies of the Enlightenment fueled the American and French revolutions. As we explored in Unit 2, the 1700s saw the rise of capitalism, industrialization, secularization, and fundamental changes in class structure. Rousseau argued that legitimate civil authority is only derived from civil contracts, which the governor and governed enter freely. The American colonists and French people demanded this equality and modern change. However, the French experience differed from the American colonists because it was primarily a class struggle brought about by economic disparities. The French revolutionaries wanted to reorder their society, while the Americans wanted to end colonial rule and create a new country based on self-government. The Americans did not want to undermine the basic class structure of their society. They wanted to throw the British out and end their colonial oppression. The revolutionaries in both countries used violence to achieve their ends. After he had witnessed the chaos of the French Revolution, the conservative thinker Edmund Burke (1729–1797) wrote that revolutions cause more problems than they solve. He argued that change should be introduced gradually. He said that revolutions abandon generations of knowledge and experience, and societies should protect themselves from the temptation of revolutionary ideas. For Burke, slow and steady change will win. In contrast, Thomas Paine (1737–1809) argued that people have the right to revolt when their government fails to protect their natural rights. People have an obligation to protect their rights when their government does not. Watch this video, which describes the second stage of the French Revolution. The French revolutionary war began soon after Louis XV and his wife tried to escape Paris in 1791. However, the fighting went badly quickly, and prices rose sky-high. In August 1792, a mob assaulted the Royal Palace in Paris and arrested the King. In September, the Assembly abolished the monarchy and declared a republic.

Listen to this lecture from 8:30 to the end. Focus on how Merriman characterizes revolutionary terror. How does he describe Maximilien Robespierre's (1758–1794) role?

Watch this lecture on the Reign of Terror, the period of violence that occurred after the onset of the revolution. It was incited by conflict between rival political factions and marked by mass executions of "enemies of the revolution". The death toll ranged in the tens of thousands, with 16,594 executed by guillotine and another 25,000 in summary executions across France.

The revolutionary government faced significant opposition due to the Reign of Terror, which prompted a counter-revolution called the Thermidorian Reaction. This describes the liberal-conservative counter-revolution that followed the end of the Reign of Terror after Robespierre was executed on 9 Thermidor (July 27, 1794, according to the French revolutionary calendar). The state had become all-powerful and violent. The alliance purged the government of revolutionary political forces (led by the Jacobin Club) and attempted to restore the political, social, and economic order of 1789. After several military successes, Napoleon Bonaparte, the statesman and military leader, rose to prominence and became the authoritarian leader of France in 1799. He declared himself Emperor of France in 1804. Read this primary source document, which describes how fears of counter-revolution fueled revolutionary extremism and how the violence led to the Thermidorian reaction and the end of the Republic.

As you watch this lecture, think about how the Reign of Terror destabilized the revolutionary movement, led to the fall of the Republic, and opened the door to Napoleon's authoritarian takeover.

Watch this video on the causes of the French Revolution. Think about how philosophical ideals had inspired these protests in France and the United States.

As in the United States, the revolutionaries in France convened a new government, the National Assembly, in June 1789. They approved a new Constitution of 1791, and Maximilien Robespierre took leadership of the government to serve as president of the National Convention. Inspired by the English Bill of Rights (1689) and the U.S. Bill of Rights (which was also drafted in 1789), the French penned the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789), one of the most important documents for the establishment of the rights of all peoples. Read the Declaration of the Rights of Man. How does it compare with the English and American Bill of Rights? Can you identify any common ideas and differences?

Read the Declaration of the Rights of Women (1791). Think about how the framers of this document differed from the American revolutionaries in promoting women's rights.

The French revolutionary government also extended rights to Jewish people. This was a significant move for several reasons. First, the French asserted that human rights were universal. Secondly, they rejected the established view that Jewish people were subhuman, a belief many Europeans had held since the medieval period. Read this document to understand its revolutionary nature. Pay attention to the distinction between individual and communal rights. What rights did it extend to Jews in 1791? How does it compare to the English and American ideas of human rights?

Read the constitution of the first French Republic. Compare it to the American Declaration of Independence (1786). Can you identify any similarities and differences? Think about how these aspects reflect the different social experiences and historical context of the American and the French revolutionaries.

Let's analyze some primary resources of the French Revolution and counter-revolution. Choose two of these primary documents we have not yet analyzed. Analyze and compare the two documents by focusing on these questions: Who authored the document? Were they in favor or opposed to the French Revolution? When was it written before, after, or during the French Revolution? What is the argument in the document? Does it support or oppose the French Revolution? Where do you see Enlightenment ideology? What is the document's significance in helping to develop a detailed understanding of the French Revolution and its aftermath?

Watch this lesson on the background of Napoleon, including his early life, education, and rise to power. Think about his background and how this may have contributed to his way of thinking.

Watch this video, which discusses the last stages of the French Revolution and how Napoleon Bonaparte was able to overthrow and replace the French Directory with the French Consulate. Napoleon rose to power during the French First Republic, which formed at the end of the French Revolution. He proclaimed himself dictator and then emperor under the First French Empire in 1804.

Napoleon instituted several lasting reforms. He centralized the administration of the départements and created a higher education system, a tax collection system, a central bank, codes of law, and road and sewer systems. He created a set of civil laws, the Napoleonic Code or French Civil Code, that combined several legal principles (supported during the revolution) into one document. For example, his legal code formalized equality under the law and the right to property and abolished the feudal system. Several countries, including Italy, Germany, and Switzerland, have adopted these legal standards into their legal traditions. Read this text on the nature of Napoleon's government reforms.

Read this text, which examines the impact of the Napoleonic Code and how it promoted the rule of law. Make a list of ways the Napoleonic Code promoted the rule of law. Think about the impact of each code.

To solidify his power, Napoleon formed a partnership with the Catholic Church. This move was part of the counter-revolution against the secular nature of the revolution of 1789.

As you read, think about why Napoleon sought the backing of the papacy and how this alliance was a rebuke of the radicalism of the French Revolution.

During the Napoleonic Wars (1803–1815), Napoleon fought against Europe's powers to create a single, consolidated French empire. His military successes not only upended the traditional feudal systems in northern Italy, Germany, and Belgium, but they had worldwide implications in 1808 when Napoleon deposed the Spanish King Ferdinand VII (1784–1833). The political instability that resulted in Spain created a power vacuum that would embolden revolutionary movements in Spain's colonies in the Americas and Asia.

Read this article on the impact of the Napoleonic wars on Europe and on revolution. How did Napoleon's ambitions change Europe and the world economically, socially, and geopolitically?

In 1812, Napoleon made the fatal mistake of invading Russia. The size and climate of Russia strained and decimated Napoleon's forces, which were spread across the continent. Napoleon's ambitions also prompted the European powers to ally together against him. At the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, Napoleon suffered a crushing defeat by the Prussian-English allied forces. Abdicating the throne, Napoleon was exiled first to the Island of Elba and later to Saint Helena, where he ultimately died of stomach cancer in 1821. Watch this video on the fall of Napoleon. Why was Napoleon ultimately defeated? What was the impact of his ambitions in France and Europe?

Although his rise to power was brief, Napoleon fundamentally changed Europe. Nevertheless, France restored its monarchy at the end of the Napoleonic Wars after the Congress of Vienna in 1814. King Louis XVIII (1755–1824) created a constitutional monarchy and preserved many of the liberties of the French Revolution during his rule from 1814 to 1824. Watch these two lectures on the aftermath of Napoleon and the restoration of the French government. How was France organized politically and administratively after the Congress of Vienna in 1815? What were the causes of the Revolution of 1830?

Let's analyze some primary resources on the rise and impact of Napoleon. Choose two of these primary documents we have not yet analyzed.

Analyze and compare the two documents by focusing on these questions: Who authored the document? Did they support or oppose Napoleon? When was it written before, after, or during Napoleon's reign and the Napoleonic Wars? What is the argument in the document? Does it support or oppose Napoleon? Where do you see Enlightenment ideology? What is the document's significance in helping to develop a detailed understanding of Napoleon and his legacy?

Examine this map, which shows the land the United States gained in North America with the Louisiana Purchase. Think about how the United States benefited from Napoleon's reign and the long-term impact this land acquisition would have on global geopolitics.

The French Revolution and Napoleonic ascension also significantly affected Poland and Lithuania. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, established in 1569, was one of the most populated areas in Europe. It was established as a semi-federal/confederal, aristocratic government. The Commonwealth operates by sharing authority between the central and local governments. It combined ideas of democracy and constitutional monarchy and limited the monarch's power via the asserted power of the aristocracy – similar to the Magna Carta in England. The Commonwealth, established between the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, covered much of eastern Europe, including Latvia, parts of Ukraine and Estonia, and Belarus. Although officially a partnership, Poland maintained the majority of power in the Commonwealth. While it eventually degraded into partial anarchy, the Commonwealth, at its apex, stood against the Russian, Ottoman, and Swedish empires. The first century of the Commonwealth was its most successful—many historians call it a Golden Age. The Parliament was powerful and could keep it out of the Thirty Years War that ravaged Europe in the 17th century. The Enlightenment also significantly affected the Commonwealth. The ideas of constitutionalism, human rights, and universal education predominated intellectualism in the Commonwealth. These ideas spread throughout Europe and greatly impacted the ideology of government that characterized early modern revolutions. Listen to this article about the Polish Enlightenment until 4:01. Consider how the ideas of the Polish Enlightenment influenced beliefs about revolution in the late 18th century.

Things began to fall apart for the Commonwealth during the end of the 17th century. The Khmelnytskyi Uprising of 1648 – the largest Cossack uprising in history weakened stability. The Russian Tsar readily supported the Cossacks by moving into Ukraine and exerting its influence to supplant Polish authority. In 1655, the Swedes allied with Transylvania to launch an invasion, further weakening the Commonwealth. An alliance with the Holy Roman Emperor and involvement in the Great Turkish War led to even more chaos. These external pressures caused internal instabilities, which devolved into near anarchy. Read this lecture until the Partition of Poland. Make a timeline as you read to note the important dates and events. Then, make a T chart that lists the successes of the Commonwealth on one side and the challenges it faced on the other.

The Four-Year Sejm of 1788–1792 tried to pass several reforms to preserve the Commonwealth. The Constitution of 1791 was its last failed attempt to maintain the political entity, but the partitions by neighboring Russia, Prussia, and the Habsburg Monarchy had already taken place. By 1795, the three foreign powers had carved up its territories, and the Poland-Lithuanian Commonwealth ceased to exist. Poland and Lithuania would remain absorbed until the end of World War I, when in 1918, the nations of Poland and Lithuania would once again establish themselves as independent nations.

Read this continuation of the lecture notes you just read. Make a chart with four columns. In the first column, note the key points of the first partitioning. In the second column, note the key points of the second partitioning. In the third column, note the key points of the third partition. In the fourth column, note the key points of the Constitution of 1791.

Watch this video to begin our investigation. Consider the lasting impact of Napoleon's ambitions on the boundaries of Europe and how they set the stage for the development of modern Europe.

The prominent dignitaries and leaders of the day attended the Congress of Vienna. Britain's foreign secretary Robert Stewart (1769–1822), whose formal title was Viscount Castlereagh, and Arthur Wellesley (1769–1852), the first Duke of Wellington, represented Great Britain. Prince Metternich represented Austria, and Prince Karl August von Hardenberg (1750–1822) represented Prussia. Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord (1754–1838), the French foreign minister, represented the newly-instated King Louis XVIII (1755–1824). Russia was dually represented by Count Karl von Nesselrode (1780–1862) and Tsar Alexander I (1777–1825). While inferior powers such as Spain and Portugal were invited to send representatives to the Congress, Britain, Russia, Austria, Prussia, and France made the major decisions. Interestingly, the negotiators initially excluded France from the discussions, but Talleyrand-Périgord was soon able to assert his presence to take part. The Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy, an ally of Britain during the War of 1812, also sent representatives. The main objective of the Congress of Vienna was to reorganize Europe, as the major powers negotiated to divide the territories Napoleon had defeated among themselves. For example, Italy was divided into eight parts, while 300 German states were consolidated into 39. Great Britain gained control of more colonial territory, while Russia exerted its control over Poland. Read this article to explore how the Congress participants reorganized the borders of their respective countries. Pay attention to what happened to the German states, which previously existed as independent kingdoms. How do you think merging these jurisdictions might influence the future consolidation of Germany into one state? Note Russia's gains in Poland in light of what you have learned about the Partitioning of Poland. What did Great Britain gain? How did these decisions impact less powerful countries like Spain, Norway, and Portugal?

Many 19th-century observers criticized the Congress as a conservative backlash to revolutionary liberalism, since it opposed the human rights and liberties the French and American revolutionaries had asserted. They complained that the so-called Conservative Order ignored the civil rights of the people who lived in the reorganized states in support of the interests of the major powers. However, opinions about the Congress shifted in the 20th century – many historians came to appreciate the "feats of diplomacy" the participants had achieved and credited the Congress with preserving the peace for 100 years, until World War I. The Paris Peace Conference of 1918, at the end of World War I, was modeled after the Vienna Congress.

Read this lesson on the Congress of Vienna to understand these different perceptions. As you read, make a two-column chart. In the first column, note the definition and characteristics of the Conservative Order. In the second column, note key features of the Concert of Europe. Do you agree with the 19th-century critics or the 20th-century historians on the impact of the Congress of Vienna?

The Congress of Vienna significantly impacted the development of nationalism, which led to the outbreak of World War I. While the participants may have meant to prevent unrest and instability, some believe the Congress helped create a larger nationalist movement across Europe. Watch this lecture to understand these trends. What role did the Congress of Vienna play in developing nationalism and the European geopolitical structure?

The reorganization changed the power structure of Europe, as Russia, Great Britain, and France became increasingly assertive. Their power struggles led to the Crimean War (1853-1856), pitting Russia against Great Britain, France, and the Ottoman Empire.

Read this text on the diplomatic fallout and consequences of the Congress of Vienna. As you read, make a chart. In the first column, note the key points of 1848 – the year of revolution. In the second column, note the key points of the Crimean War. In the third column, note key points for the Holy Alliance. In the fourth column, note the key points of the Quadruple Alliance. Then, write a summary to explain how the Congress of Vienna led to failed revolutions, diplomatic upheaval, and the development of alliances in Europe, which eventually contributed to the outbreak of World War I.

As the 19th century progressed, France and England came to control most of Europe. However, the ideas of nationalism, Marxism, and socialism led those who lived in countries with less power to chafe at the hegemony of France and England. The stability of the Congress of Vienna devolved. This instability and burgeoning nationalism led to the "year of revolution" in 1848, when republican revolts swept the continent from Sicily to France, Germany, and Austria. While these revolutions ultimately failed, they reminded the European powers that they had not extinguished the zeal for civil rights and representation.

Watch this video. Think about how the Congress of Vienna contributed to the growth of nationalism and the outbreak of revolution. How did the famine of 1845 further destabilize Europe and contribute to the reassertion of republicanism?

Watch this video. What were the most important causes of the 1848 revolutions in Europe? How did these revolutions compare with the French Revolution? Why was there no revolution in Britain?

Focus on these questions as you read this essay. What are the most important features of a Marxist interpretation of revolutionary change? How does Christopher Hill characterize the causes and outcomes of the English Revolution?

As the 19th century ended, nationalism, Marxism, and socialism gained momentum, and Europe became embroiled in unrest. By 1861, Italy's states and kingdoms had joined to form a nation, while Germany also united as a country under the leadership of Otto Von Bismark (1815–1898) in 1871. These two new nations were bursting with nationalistic fervor and eager to assert themselves as European powers, but they lacked the imperial clout of England and France.

In addition to a tangle of alliances that had begun forming in Vienna in 1815, this jostling would come to a head when Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip assassinated Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914. The web of alliances and colonies caused Europe and the world to plunge into the conflagration of World War I. This war would impact geopolitics worldwide. The Russian Revolution presaged Soviet and Japanese ambitions against Asia, and the world tumbled into an even larger global firestorm known as World War II.

To understand the Haitian Revolution, you must understand slavery in Saint Domingue and elsewhere in the Americas. As you watch this video, think about Haiti's different racial and socioeconomic groups and how society was structured in Saint Domingue.

Watch this lecture about slavery in the Americas. How did the American institution of slavery differ from earlier forms of slavery? How did this form of slavery create an environment or culture that would foment Haiti's revolution?

France followed the same policy of mercantilism that Britain had imposed on its 13 colonies in the future United States. The colony of Saint Domingue was only allowed to trade with France. Its aristocracy was not represented in the government. The country served as a natural resource depot for France, which reaped the profits from its cash crops. However, when France published the Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789, the residents of Saint Domingue expected the new government would also convey these rights to them. The French revolutionary government granted varying degrees of autonomy, rights, and participation to certain groups in Saint Domingue. The White planters and some wealthy free Blacks were allowed to participate, but they excluded the petit blancs, enslaved people, and maroons. These disparities led to a multi-faceted civil war in Saint Domingue. The conflict eventually developed into the Haitian Revolution, where enslaved people rose to oppose the French government and their enslavers. Toussaint L'Ouverture (1743–1803), a formerly enslaved person, was the son of an African prince who had been captured into slavery. Although L'Ouverture was born into slavery, his enslavers treated him less harshly, and he was highly educated. L'Overture joined the slave rebellion in 1792 following the Night of Fire, when enslaved people rose against their enslavers, set their plantations on fire, and mounted armed resistance against their oppressors. This revolution was more successful than previous slave rebellions – the 500,000 enslaved people vastly outnumbered the 40,000 White people on the island – but it was costly: 100,000 enslaved people and 24,000 White people died. Spain, which controlled the eastern part of the island (today's Dominican Republic), took advantage of the instability by offering to support the revolution. L'Ouverture and other revolutionary leaders allied with Spain against France. In 1793, Britain followed Spain's cue and began pushing into the island. In response, the National Assembly of France (the revolutionary government in Paris) decided to emancipate all the enslaved people in the French empire and make them citizens. This had the intended effect: in 1794, L'Ouverture realigned with France, and they pushed the British out and took the eastern side of the island from Spain. Saint Domingue remained a semi-autonomous French colony from 1794 to 1803. L'Ouverture became general-in-chief of the army, drafted a constitution based on the liberation of enslaved people, and later appointed himself governor-general for life. Watch this video describing the Constitution L'Ouverture drafted. How does it compare to the American and French constitutions we have studied and to the ideals of the Enlightenment philosophers embedded in its framework?

In 1803, Napoleon, France's new leader, sent 43,000 troops to regain full control of Saint Domingue. L'Ouverture was captured and sent to prison in France, where he died in 1803. However, Jean-Jacques Dessalines (1758–1806), L'Ouverture's second in command, successfully fought off the French forces. He declared Haiti an independent nation in 1804. France recognized its independence, but the nation still faced many challenges.

Watch this video to understand the significance of the Haitian Revolution. As you watch, consider how Haiti's culture contributed to the uprising. Why do many consider the revolution a watershed moment in history?

Since it was the first republic established by formerly enslaved people, Haiti faced challenges in securing trading partners and establishing diplomatic relations. Many Americans were reluctant to form alliances or create ties with a country where formerly enslaved people had just wrested power from their enslavers. Edmund Burke, the conservative pundit who criticized the French Revolution, claimed the Haitian Revolution threatened the institution of slavery.

Watch this video on the challenges Haiti faced after it had achieved independence. How did the American and French Revolutions inspire the protesters? Describe the opposition its leaders faced concerning trade and diplomatic relations and how these barriers affected its development as a nation.

Read this letter that Dessalines sent to Thomas Jefferson. Think about the words he used to appeal to the president of the United States. How do you think Jefferson, who helped draft the U.S. Constitution but enslaved 600 people during his lifetime, received this letter? How do you think Jefferson's conflicting views may have complicated Haiti's situation?

The next two articles discuss the ideological conflicts the new Haitian republic faced. How did the history of slavery in the Americas influence whether leaders would accept the results of the revolution and independence? Make a Venn Diagram that compares Koekkoek and Sepinwall's ideas. Then, develop your own argument. Why was the revolution of Haiti and its independence so controversial, then and now?

This first article examines various perspectives on the Haitian Revolution while it was taking place.

This article explores how French and American historians have viewed the Haitian Revolution. Make a note of any similarities and differences from the previous article on the perspectives on the Haitian Revolution.

As you read this lesson, create a timeline of the different revolts against Spanish rule. How did pressures in Europe help lead to independence in Mexico and Latin America?

As you watch this video, consider how the Enlightenment principles played into the revolutions in Mexico and Latin America. How were they similar to the American Revolution?

The newly independent Mexico faced many challenges. The war was costly and left the country in an economic crisis with rampant political instability. Agricultural yields had suffered while conservative and liberal factions fought over how the government should operate. Some wanted to create a system similar to Spain, while others sought to model Mexico after the United States. After gaining independence, Mexico experienced 50 governments in 30 years as military generals led several coups to overtake the government. None of the military leaders were as impactful or controversial as Antonio López de Santa Anna (1794–1876), who controlled 11 of the 50 governments as president and military dictator. During the fray of instability, the northern colony of Tejas (Texas) rose in rebellion. In 1820, Spain allowed Moses Austin and his son Stephen to bring 300 Anglo-Americans to settle in Tejas. Mexico honored this agreement in 1821, when the settlement occurred. Spain and Mexico had difficulty finding settlers willing to live in Tejas. In 1718, Spain recruited settlers from the Canary Islands to found the city of San Antonio, but few moved outside. In 1820, Tejas had about 7,000 residents. The Spanish and Mexican governments lured Americans to Tejas with the promise of large tracts of land, provided they became Mexican citizens and converted to Catholicism. Many White Americans immigrated to Tejas from the southern states, with their plantation systems and the people they had enslaved, drawn to the fertile soil in east Tejas that was suitable for cotton farming. These Texan enslavers were not pleased when the Mexican government abolished slavery in 1821. They grew weary of the political instability and resented the overturn of the 1824 Constitution, which had supported limited government and gave the Mexican states significant autonomy. The Texans rose in rebellion when Santa Anna and his military government replaced this constitution with a more restrictive central government that criminalized gun ownership. The Texans fought a short but successful revolution against Mexico and declared independence in 1836. Read the Texas Declaration of Independence. Can you see any similarities with the U.S. Declaration of Independence? Did the settlers share the same types of grievances? Compare the Texas Revolution with the American, French, Haitian, and Mexican revolutions.

Since Santa Anna had personally led Mexican forces to quell the rebellion, he was forced to surrender and cede the control of Tejas when the Texan forces captured him in 1836. His government was declared illegitimate when he returned to Mexico, and the Mexican government never recognized Texan independence. This led to the Mexican-American War in 1845, when the United States annexed Tejas, and Mexico lost most of its territory north of the Rio Grande River. This led to further reform in Mexico when the government convened another constitutional convention to reestablish most of the 1824 Constitution (with modifications).

Read this lesson about the Texas Revolution. How did Mexico's instability following its independence from Spain in 1821 contribute to the revolt in Texas? How did these events catalyze change in Mexico and lead to the formation of a new Constitution?

The Mexican Constitution of 1857 would last until the Revolution of 1910, with the onset of the Mexican Civil War (1910–1920). This revolution ended the Porfiriato, the rule of Porfirio Diaz (1830–1915). Diaz seized political power in 1876 and created a dictatorship from 1876 to 1911. During his 34-year dictatorship, Porfirio Diaz created a centralized government. He pursued an aggressive policy to build a modern capitalist and industrialized state with substantial investment from the United States and other foreign countries. The Mexican Revolution of 1910 represented the culmination of a century of political and social conflict in Latin and South America following independence from Spain and Portugal. We have learned that Mexico became a democracy when it separated from Spain. However, wealthy elites dominated its political, economic, and social institutions. Lower and middle-class Mexicans had little political power and faced constant subjugation from corrupt landlords and political officials. The 1910 revolution changed Mexico's culture and government on a national and regional level. Important revolutionary figures include Francisco Madero (1873–1913), Emiliano Zapata (1879–1919), and Pancho Villa (1878–1923). The Mexican Revolution began as an upper-middle-class political conflict between Porfirio Diaz and Francisco Madero, his political rival, but eventually encompassed all classes of Mexican society. The conflict led to Diaz's fall from power and a series of coups and counter-coups that prevented a return to stable government. Poor farmers and the indigenous population took advantage of the revolutionary chaos to challenge the political and economic power of wealthy landlords and local officials. In the early 1930s, President Lazaro Cardenas restored political and social order by implementing several social reforms to address extreme social and economic inequalities. Power and wealth were concentrated within the central government, among the foreign (usually American) investors, and among the members of the wealthier upper classes, who were often of Spanish heritage. They included wealthy merchants and the owners of the large landed estates (haciendas). The peasants, villagers, and members of the Mexican working class were often of mixed race (Mestizos) or members of the indigenous population (Zapotecs, Yaquis, and Maya). Both the peasants and workers had a history of rebellion in Mexico. Not only were Mexican landowners and American conglomerates abusing the peasants, miners, oil workers, ranch hands, and other members of the working class, but massive amounts of land were being transferred to foreign corporations, such as American agribusiness and Mexican landowners. These groups had few rights and saw little of the economic prosperity that benefited those who supported Diaz. Read this paper describing Mexico's political situation before the 1910 Revolution. How did capitalism and the desire for wealth and power create an economic and political structure that fomented revolution in Mexico? Consider the larger situation in Latin America – these Mexican revolutionaries in 1910 were the first members of the lower classes to rise in rebellion against the established society.

Increasingly, Mexican intellectuals aligned themselves with European-style liberalism. Industrial workers (although not unified) began to unionize, and the rural and urban poor began to object to their positions. The small but growing middle class also objected to the concentration of wealth in the upper class and foreign investors. As in the French Revolution, the consolidation of power and wealth at the top left the vast majority of citizens out of the political and economic life of the country.

In October 1910, Francisco Madero (1873–1913), an advocate for social justice and democracy, called on Mexicans to rise up to oppose the Diaz dictatorship. He was supported by Emiliano Zapata (1879–1919), who had inspired an agrarian movement (Zapatismo) in the state of Morelos by calling on the peasants to demand water rights and land reform. In May 1911, Díaz was forced to resign and flee to France after the Federal Army suffered several military defeats by the forces supporting Madero. In October 1911, Madero was elected president with resounding support from the Mexican people. However, Madero soon disavowed the support he had received from Zapata's forces and denounced the Zapatistas as simple bandits.

As you watch this video, think about the nature of revolution in the 1900s in Mexico and why many call it a civil war.

Despite his popularity, Madero soon encountered opposition from more radical revolutionaries and former Diaz supporters. In February 1913, General Victoriano Huerta, the military commander of Mexico City, led a military coup that included intense fighting (called the Ten Tragic Days or la Decena Trágica) and resulted in the arrest and assassination of Madero along with his vice president, José María Pino Suárez. The country quickly plunged into civil war in protest, and Huerta fled the country in 1914, ousted by a coalition of Constitutionalist forces from northern Mexico led by Venustiano Carranza, Álvaro Obregón, and Francisco Pancho Villa (1877–1923), with the support of Zapata's troops. Complicating this infighting among economic and political groups was a growing sense of Mexican nationalism, which would create a sense of national identity and provide an element of cohesion to resist foreign domination, especially from the United States. These nationalist sentiments allowed groups to join together, often temporarily, because they felt it was their right to assert their national independence and sovereignty. Pancho Villa and his actions symbolized the uprising of the common class against the ruling elites. He became a folk hero and symbol of revolution. Read this text about Pancho Villa. Why do some see him as a Robin Hood-like hero and others as a terrorist?

After the revolution, Mexico created a new Constitution. Venustiano Carranza, elected president from 1917 to 1920, oversaw the creation of the Mexican Constitution of 1917. This constitution was revolutionary. It recognized the rights of organized labor, established the basis for a free, mandatory, and secular education, and limited the power of the Catholic Church. Carranza was assassinated in 1920, and his opponent, Obregon, was elected president, marking the end of the Mexican Revolution. Since the Constitution of 1917 was the first constitution to discuss social rights, many historians view it as the first socialist constitution. It would directly influence later socialist revolutions and constitutions, including the Weimar Constitution of 1919 in Germany and the Soviet Federative Socialist Republic Constitution of 1918 in Russia. This socialist and Marxist revolutionary tradition was evident in 1910 Mexico and would resurface in Chile, Ecuador, and Cuba. The Mexican Constitution of 1917 provides the basis for today's government. Read this text. Why do you think many consider it to be revolutionary? How do you think it changed the structure of the Mexican government and society?

As you watch this lecture, consider how events in Europe inspired revolutions in South America. Compare the revolutions in Mexico and Central America and how they fit into the overall story of the revolution.

Just as had occurred during the American Revolution, the revolutions in South America split loyalists who continued to support the Spanish monarchy and those who wanted independence. To stem the intense infighting and conflict that frequently resulted, Bolívar became a temporary dictator in Venezuela, Peru, and president of the newly-formed Gran Colombia. Read this article, which describes the power dynamic between revolutionaries and royalists. How did this type of conflict impact the revolutionary movements?

Just as had occurred during the American Revolution, the revolutions in South America split loyalists who continued to support the Spanish monarchy and those who wanted independence. To stem the intense infighting and conflict that frequently resulted, Bolívar became a temporary dictator in Venezuela and Peru and president of the newly-formed Gran Colombia. Read this article, which describes the power dynamic between revolutionaries and royalists. How did this type of conflict impact the revolutionary movements?

As you read this article, consider how the juntas provided temporary stability but long-term strife. How did the revolutions in Mexico and Latin America differ from those in the United States? What do they have in common?

Read the Monroe Doctrine. Who was President James Monroe (1758–1831) addressing when he wrote the Monroe Doctrine? How does this document support revolution? How did it transform the U.S. into a world power?

In the 1890s and 1900s, America used imperialism to protect its interests. The use of the military helped America establish a strong influence throughout the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. As you read the article on the Philippine-American War, think of how this event added to the influence of America. What was the main cause of the war, and how did this add to American imperialism?

Review this article and consider the specifics of the war, such as how it started, what other countries influenced the war, the advantage America had, and the results.

Theodore Roosevelt said, "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far". What did he mean by this, and what are the details surrounding this phrase? How did this perspective contribute to American imperialism?

Read this article on the American empire. Why do you think the United States became involved in Latin America and other parts of the world? How did the United States exert its power and destabilize the governments it disagreed with?

Read this article on U.S. involvement in the Panamanian revolution. How did U.S. intentions and actions compare with what had occurred in the Philippines? Do you think the events in Panama fit the definition of a revolution? Why or why not?

The Cuban Revolution was the most significant socialist/communist revolution in the Americas in the 1900s. Led by Fidel Castro (1926–2016) and Che Guevara (1928–1967), the participants overthrew Cuba's capitalist system, which had become beholden to U.S. commercial interests. They replaced it with a communist system that is still in place today. These events in Cuba became a proxy war for the Cold War (1947–1989). The United States and the Soviet Union (today's Russia) engaged in a constant struggle between the ideologies of capitalism and communism. The two superpowers were to fight several future conflicts to establish their world dominance. As you read this chapter, think about how the 1910 Mexican Revolution influenced the events in Cuba. How were the changes to Cuba's government and economic system revolutionary?

Watch these videos. How does each lecturer characterize Fidel Castro and the Cuban Revolution? Why do you think each person carries the beliefs they espouse? Do they exhibit certain biases or objectives? What evidence do they use to substantiate their claims? Then, formulate your own opinion of the history of the Cuban Revolution and its importance to the discussion of the revolution. This first video is from a professor and advocate of Marxism. In the video, he focuses on the successes of the Cuban Revolution.

This second video was created in 1960. It explores the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro based on U.S. foreign policy. It focuses on the possibility of similar revolutions throughout the globe and their possible impact. Think about how these revolutions and their impacts. What similarities and differences do you discover? What were the causes, attitudes, belief systems, perspectives, reasons, and results of the Cuban Revolution?