The Estates General and The French Revolution

In late 1788, Jacques Necker announced that the meeting of the Estates General would be brought forward to January 1, 1789 (in reality, it didnt meet until May 5th of that year). However, this edict neither defined the form the Estates General would take nor set out how it would be chosen. Afraid that the crown would take advantage of this to fix the Estates General and transform it into a servile body, the Parlement of Paris, in approving the edict, explicitly stated that the Estates General should take its form from the last time it was called: 1614. This meant the estates would meet in equal numbers, but separate chambers. Voting would be done separately, with each having a third of the vote. Bizarrely, no one who had called for the Estates General over the past years appears to have previously realized what soon became obvious: the 95% of the nation who comprised the third estate could be easily outvoted by a combination of the clergy and nobles, or 5% of the population. Recent events had set a very different voting precedent, as a provincial assembly which had been called in 1778 and 1787 had doubled the numbers of the third estate and another called in Dauphin had not only doubled the third estate but allowed for voting by head (one vote per member, not estate). However, the problem was now understood, and a clamor soon arose demanding the doubling of third estate numbers and voting by head, and the crown received over eight hundred different petitions, mainly from the bourgeois who had woken up to their potentially vital role in future government. Necker responded by recalling the Assembly of Notables to advise himself and the king on the various problems. It sat from November 6th until December 17th and protected the nobles interests by voting against doubling the third estate or voting by head. This was followed by the Estates General being postponed by a few months. The uproar only grew. On December 27th, in a document entitled Result of the Kings Council of State—the result of discussion between Necker and the king and contrary to the advice of the nobles—the crown announced that the third estate was indeed to be doubled. However, there was no decision on voting practices, which was left to the Estates General itself to decide. This was only ever going to cause a huge problem, and the result changed the course of Europe in a way the crown really, really wished they had been able to foresee and prevent. The fact that the crown allowed such a situation to arise is one of the reasons why they have been accused of being in a malaise as the world turned around them. The Third Estate Politicizes The debate over the size and voting rights of the third estate brought the Estates General to the forefront of conversation and thought, with writers and thinkers publishing a wide range of views. The most famous was Sieyà ¨s What is the Third Estate, which argued that there shouldn’t be any privileged groups in society and that the third estate should set themselves up as a national assembly immediately after meeting, with no input from the other estates. It was hugely influential, and in many ways set the agenda in a manner the crown did not. Terms like national and patriotism began to be used ever more frequently and became associated with the third estate. More importantly, this outburst of political thought caused a group of leaders to emerge from the third estate, organizing meetings, writing pamphlets, and generally politicizing the third estate across the nation. Chief among these were the bourgeois lawyers, educated men with an interest in the many laws involved. They realized, almost en masse, that they could start to reshape France if they took their chance, and they were determined to do so. Choosing the Estates To choose the estates, France was divided up into 234 constituencies. Each had an electoral assembly for the nobles and clergy while the third estate was voted on by every male taxpayer over twenty-five years of age. Each sent two delegates for the first and second estates and four for the third. In addition, every estate in every constituency was required to draw up a list of grievances, the cahiers de doleances. Every level of French society was thus involved in voting and vocalizing their many grievances against the state, drawing in people across the nation. Expectations were high. The election results provided the elites of France with many surprises. Over three-quarters of the first estate (the clergy) were parish priests rather than the previously dominant orders like bishops, less than half of which made it. Their cahiers called for higher stipends and access to the highest positions in the church. The second estate was no different, and the many courtiers and high-ranking nobles, who assumed they’d be automatically returned, lost out to lower level, much poorer men. Their cahiers reflected a very divided group, with only 40% calling for voting by order and some even calling for voting by head. The third estate, in contrast, proved to be a relatively united group, two-thirds of which were bourgeois lawyers. Estates General   The Estates General opened on May 5th. There was no guidance from the king or Necker on the key question of how the Estates General would vote; solving this was supposed to be the first decision they took. However, that had to wait until the very first task was finished: each estate had to verify the electoral returns of their respective order. The nobles did this immediately, but the third estate refused, believing that separate verification would inevitably lead to separate voting. The lawyers and their fellows were going to put their case forward from the very start. The clergy passed a vote which would have allowed them to verify but they delayed to seek a compromise with the third estate. Discussions between all three took place over the following weeks, but time passed and patience began to run out. People in the third estate began to talk about declaring themselves a national assembly and taking the law into their own hands. Critically for the history of the revolution, and while the first and second estates met behind closed doors, the third estate meeting had always been open to the public. The third estate deputies thus knew they could count on tremendous public support for the idea of acting unilaterally, as even those who didnt attend the meetings could read all about what happened in the many journals which rep orted it. On June 10th, with patience running out, Sieyà ¨s proposed that a final appeal should be sent to the nobles and clergy asking for a common verification. If there wasn’t one, then the third estate, now increasingly calling itself the Commons, would carry on without them. The motion passed, the other orders remained silent, and the third estate resolved to carry on regardless. The revolution had begun. National Assembly On June 13th, three parish priests from the first estate joined the third, and sixteen more followed in the next few days, the first breakdown between the old divisions. On June 17th, Sieyà ¨s proposed and had passed a motion for the third estate to now call itself a National Assembly. In the heat of the moment, another motion was proposed and passed, declaring all taxes illegal, but allowing them to continue until a new system was invented to replace them. In one quick motion, the National Assembly had gone from simply challenging the first and second estates to challenging the king and his sovereignty by making themselves responsible for the laws on tax. Having been sidelined with grief over the death of his son, the king now began to stir and the regions around Paris were reinforced with troops. On June 19th, six days after the first defections, the entire first estate voted to join the National Assembly. June 20th brought another milestone, as the National Assembly arrived to find the doors of their meeting place locked and soldiers guarding it, with notes of a Royal Session to occur on the 22nd. This action even outraged opponents of the National Assembly, members of which feared their dissolution was imminent. In the face of this, the National Assembly moved to a nearby tennis court where, surrounded by crowds, they took the famous Tennis Court Oath, swearing not to disperse until their business was done. On the 22nd, the Royal Session was delayed, but three noblemen joined the clergy in abandoning their own estate. The Royal Session, when it was held, wasnt the blatant attempt to crush the National Assembly which many had feared but instead saw the king present an imaginative series of reforms which would have been considered far-reaching a month before. However, the king still used veiled threats and referred to the three different estates, stressing they should obey him. The members of the National Assembly refused to leave the session hall unless it was at bayonet point and proceeded to retake the oath. In this decisive moment, a battle of wills between king and assembly, Louis XVI meekly agreed they could stay in the room. He broke first. In addition, Necker resigned. He was persuaded to resume his position shortly afterward, but the news spread and pandemonium broke out. More nobles left their estate and joined the assembly. With the first and second estates now clearly wavering and the support of the army in doubt, the king ordered the first and second estates to join the National Assembly. This triggered public displays of joy and the members of the National Assembly now felt they could settle down and write a new constitution for the nation; more had already happened than many dared to imagine. It was already a sweeping change, but the crown and public opinion would soon change these expectations beyond all imagining. The Storming of the Bastille and the End of Royal Power The excited crowds, fueled by weeks of debate and angered by rapidly rising grain prices did more than just celebrate: on June 30th, a mob of 4000 people rescued mutinous soldiers from their prison. Similar displays of popular opinion were matched by the crown bringing ever more troops into the area. National Assembly appeals to stop reinforcing were refused. Indeed, on July 11th, Necker was sacked and more martial men brought in to run the government. A public uproar followed. On the streets of Paris, there was a sense that another battle of wills between the crown and people had begun, and that it might turn into a physical conflict. When a crowd demonstrating in the Tuileries gardens was attacked by cavalry ordered to clear the area, the longstanding predictions of military action seemed to be coming true. The population of Paris began to arm itself in response and retaliated by attacking toll gates. The next morning, the crowds went after arms but found stacks of stored grain too; looting began in earnest. On July 14th, they attacked the military hospital of the Invalides and found ​cannon. This ever-growing success led the crowd to the Bastille, the great-prison fortress and dominant symbol of the old regime, in search of the gunpowder stored there. At first, the Bastille refused to surrender and people were killed in the fighting, but rebel soldiers arrived with the cannon from the Invalides and forced the Bastille to submit. The great fortress was stormed and looted, the man in charge lynched.​ The storming of the Bastille demonstrated to the king that he couldn’t rely on his soldiers, some of whom had already defected. He had no way of enforcing royal power and conceded, ordering the units around Paris to withdraw rather than try and start a fight. Royal power was at an end and sovereignty had passed to the National Assembly. Crucially for the future of the Revolution, the people of Paris now saw themselves as the saviors and defenders of the National Assembly. They were the guardians of the revolution.

Comparing Act 2 Scene 3 and Act 3 Scene 1 of Much Ado...

Comparing Act 2 Scene 3 and Act 3 Scene 1 of Much Ado About Nothing by William Shakespeare In Act 2 Scene 3 and Act 3 Scene 1 Beatrice and Benedick are both separately being tricked into falling in love with each other by their friends. To compare the two scenes we must first consider the symmetry between them; the initial thing we notice as an audience is that all of the characters in Act 2 Scene 3 are male, and that all of the characters in Act 3 Scene 1 are female; this gives the effect of the two sexes battling. Both scenes are riddled with deceit and trickery, and the lengths too are also similar. As we know both parties have the same purpose and after reading the play we know that there is a†¦show more content†¦The scenes are both of similar length, and seem almost symmetrical. There are a similar number of characters, and the outcome is the same in each case. Both Benedick and Beatrice launch into monologues giving reason why they both should love the other one. All characters leave the stage in each case before the monologues occur. In Benedicks monolo gue he begins by saying this can be no trick he does not believe that Leonato would lie, as he has such huge respect for him since the war and therefore he is totally open to manipulation when Leonato is present. By the fourth line Benedick has already decided he must requite Beatrices love and says I will bear myself proudly. Beatrices monologue is slightly shorter but has almost exactly the same content, she even says the same words as Benedick does I will requite thee the lines are emphatic, which makes the audience understand better what she is trying to say. The two characters change dramatically in personality after these two scenes, Benedick is mocked by Don Pedro and Claudio and Beatrice also by Hero and Ursula for being so quiet. Both scenes are full of humor and are great to watch in the theatre as Shakespeare wrote them to be acted out. Beatrice and Benedick are the mockers in the play, but the irony is that the mockers andShow MoreRelated Classical Imagery in Shakespeares Much Ado About Nothing Essay3559 Words   |  15 PagesClassical Imagery in Shakespeares Much Ado About Nothing The romance of history has lured many of the worlds greatest authors to search for their subject matter in the pages of time. William Shakespeare serves as a unfailing embodiment of the emotion of days past; yet he also turned to those before him. The comedy Much Ado About Nothing is a poignant love story, riddled with stunning imagery and allusion. An examination of the development of certain characters, the imagery and allusion, dictionRead MoreJulius Caesar2287 Words   |  10 PagesCaesar† by William Shakespeare The following questions will help you to prepare for your eventual test over â€Å"Julius Caesar†. While I will not be collecting this, it is on you to make sure that you are answering the questions as we go. Your test will be taken directly from this study guide. Act I 1) Judging from the events in Act I, the political mood and behavior of the Romans are best described how? 2) When we first see Brutus, he appears to be ________________________. 3) Which line from Act I foreshadowsRead MoreBenedick’s Change of Heart by the End of Act 2 Scene 3 of William Shakespeares Much Ado About Nothing2295 Words   |  10 Pagesby the End of Act 2 Scene 3 of William Shakespeares Much Ado About Nothing ‘Much ado about nothing’ is one of William Shakespeare’s popular comedy plays. With regards to the title of the play, the word ‘nothing’ in the title suggests it links with how characters in the play create so much bother about nothing. Speculation has occurred among people over the word ‘nothing’ in the play’s title. The word ‘nothing’ has a double meaning. Noting and nothing sounded identical Read MoreJames Earl Jones: a Voice in the Crowd2904 Words   |  12 Pageswords@(54). The Aturning point@ in Jones= ability to cope with stuttering came in Professor Donald Crouch=s English classroom in high school. After falling in love with Longfellow=s AThe Song of Hiawatha,@James Earl was inspired to write a poem about his love for grapefruit. He patterned his work after Longfellow=s cadence and rhyme scheme. When Professor Crouch accused Jones of plagiarism Jones was forced to recite his work from memory in front of the class (63). Considering his honour of

Chris Mccandless s Into The Wild - 3734 Words

November 23, 2014 Into The Wild Themes Jon Krakauer’s Into The Wild chronicles the journeys and events leading up to the death of a young man named Chris McCandless. Chris was a vagabond who traded friends and family in exchange for adventure, but ultimately wound up dead in the Alaskan wilderness. Within this recollection readers can discover various themes. Primarily, the subjects of materialism, ultimate freedom, and even man vs. nature all recur in this text. Materialism refers to the desire for money or possessions rather than spiritual or ethical values. Chris McCandless denounces this desire. After he left home, he rejects all forms of luxury similar to that of his family’s wealthy situation. While traveling, he insists on only carrying the bare essentials to survive and he regularly refuses any aid that would compromise this doctrine. He even goes as far as burning one hundred twenty-three dollars, which shows just how little he cares for it. On the other hand, McCandless disp lays a yearning for â€Å"ultimate freedom† throughout his travels. Eventually, he would like to find a place where he does not have to obey anyone’s rules. In chapter one, when Jim Gallien asks Chris if he has a hunting license, McCandless describes his distaste for the government’s rules, stating, â€Å"How I feed myself is none of the government’s business.† Also, Chris’ constant traveling shows his reluctance to settle down or become tied down to one place. He avoids developing relationships withShow MoreRelatedChris Mccandless s Into The Wild2337 Words   |  10 Pagessituations. Chris McCandless, subject of Jon Krakauer’s successful novel, Into the Wild, met his fate in the Alaskan wilderness. McCandless donated all his money to OXFAM America after double majoring in anthropology and history at Emory University, then walked away from his old life. He took on the name Alexander Supertramp, and the next time his family would see him would be as a corpse, brought to his knees by nature’s unforgiving presence. At the beginning of his travels, McCandless â€Å"tramped aroundRead MoreChris Mccandless s Into The Wild1080 Words   |  5 Pagesor apathetic to invest against their comfort zones. People in today’s society struggle with trying to find their inner selves--their interpersonal expeditions. In the novel, Into the Wild, Chris McCandless was oblivious to the external world. He was raised from a wealthy family from the Washington D.C region. Chris has been a man who wanted to create a divergent life for himself by making the decision to travel around the Alaskan Wilderness. Why would he be so selfish to throw away his fortunateRead MoreChris Mccandless s Into The Wild1570 Words   |  7 Pages Chris McCandless and Holden Caulfield are two boys who both disagree with their current societies and decide to escape to discover their identities. In Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer, Chris McCandless never seems to regret his decision to leave, while Holden Caulfield in The Catcher in the Rye begins appreciating his life more and shortly returns home to his family. After leaving the comfort and security of their homes, Chris McCandless feels finally liberated from society, whereas Holden CaulfieldRead MoreAnalysis Of Chris Mccandless s Odyssey Into The Wild1103 Words   |  5 PagesInto the Wild follows Christopher McCandless through his last year of his life traversing the North American frontier. As a biography based on McCandless’ journals and interviews, much of the details of Chris’ journeys are speculated. Yet, Krakauer succeeds in developing the enigma of Christopher McCandless, or as he would be immortalized in the bus on the Stampede Trail, Alexander Supertram p, in a way that tugs at the buried wanderer inside of everyone. Throughout the novel, Chris McCandless facesRead MoreAnalysis Of Chris Mccandless s The Wild And Understanding His Life 1196 Words   |  5 Pagestimes they are simply unimportant part of your life. When having a unique personality, like Chris McCandless, becoming friends is hard but many acquaintances can be made. After reading Into the Wild and understanding his life, many people can be thought of who would have benefited Chris if he got to know them. These people could help Chris see the other side of the story as well as change the tragic ending. Chris would benefit the company of Ted Kaczynski, Garret Mason, and Bill Gates. All three of theseRead MoreAnalysis Of Chris Mccandless s The Wild And Never Came Back Out 1128 Words   |  5 PagesMaryna Nguyen Ms. Mensen US Lit. A 24 November 2014 Chris McCandless: Who Went Into The Wild and Never Came Back Out To the average person, going off and living off the land is far fetched from the ideal â€Å"perfect life† or â€Å"American Dream†. To Christopher McCandless, it’s another story, he isn’t the type of person to â€Å"stick to the status quo†, he follows the things that he believes could benefit himself. To some people, it may be narcissistic because it’s selfish to only think about what is goodRead MoreJon Krakauer And Chris Mccandless1015 Words   |  5 PagesJon Krakauer and Chris McCandless Into the Wild, a novel talks a young boy called Chris McCandless who was born in a rich East Coast family and traveled to Alaska by hitchhiking until he walked into the wilderness and then he dead. He loved to adventure, seek a place without civilization and escape where he lived. The author of the novel, Jon Krakauer, has similar experience to McCandless. Jon Krakauer climbed Devils Thumb, the one of dangerous mountains in Alaska alone when he was twenty-three,Read MoreInto The Wild By Jon Krakauer Essay1237 Words   |  5 Pages Jon Krakauer s novel â€Å"Into the wild†, Is a story about a young man named Christopher McCandless or â€Å"Alex Supertramp† who went on a self discovering odyssey in which he had traveled around the U.S. The story surrounds Chris and his travels and what he had done at the time, leading to his death in August 1992. Thus the story takes a direction in the viewpoints of the people Alex has come across through in his travels. It speaks a bout what he had done at the time of his journey before he hadRead MoreChris McCandless is NOT a Hero1239 Words   |  5 PagesInto the Wild, written by John Krakauer tells of a young man named Chris McCandless who 1deserted his college degree and all his worldly possessions in favor of a primitive transient life in the wilderness. Krakauer first told the story of Chris in an article in Outside Magazine, but went on to write a thorough book, which encompasses his life in the hopes to explain what caused him to venture off alone into the wild. McCandless’ story soon became a national phenomenon, and had many people questioningRead MoreThe Journey Of Chris Mccandless1654 Words   |  7 PagesWhether McCandless was a vagabond, genius, whack job, free spirit, rebel, or poet, Christopher McCandless (also known by the pseudonym Alexander Supertramp) was unique among men. At an age when most upper-class kids begin their arduous climb toward becoming the next big thing, Christopher McCandless went in the opposite direction—he became a nobody. Through perusing Into The Wild, I have detested a ton of feelings for the most part outrage. I have never believed that such individual would remain

Compose Song Alone Compared To Composing †Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Compose A Song Alone As Compared To Composing? Answer: Introducation: It is very simple to compose a song alone as compared to composing it with other co-writers when it comes to the legal consequences of its ownership. There is no mandatory registration of copyrights in Australia. Through the concept of copyright the state provides protection to the person who uses their idea to create a valuable composition. Copyright can be in relation to things such as graphic, images, text and sound. Thus the composition of a song comes under the protection of copyrights in Australia. Whenever a musical track is created there are more than one owners of the copyright. These include the composer by whom the song is written owning the copyright of the music, the person who wrote the lyrics owning the copyright of the literature and music performer owns copyrights in relation to sound recordings (Homan 2015). The copyrights laws in relation to joint ownership of property provide that there is no separate ownership of a property with respect to copyright as per the Copyright Act 1968. This means that if there are four owners of a work the ownership would not be 25% each but all four members would hold 100% ownership of the rights as provided by the case of cecinsky v George Routledge Sons Ltd(1916) 2 KB 325. All co-owners are joint owners of the copyright in a property. The joint owners cannot exercise their rights without the consent of the other owners. However when there is no agreement related to the ownership of copyright a co owner may exercise his right but has to share the profits with the other co owners. For instance if a co-owner decides to conduct a music show alone he has to share the proceeding with the other owners of the song. If the right of any co-owner had been infringed by the other owner compensation can be claimed from them as provided by the case of Prior v Lansdown e Press Pty Ltd(1977) VR 65. In this case the music rights are owned by Mel, the literary rights are owned by Paul the live performance rights are owned by Tom and Kim and the whole bands owns the copyright with respect to the sound recording. As discussed above all of them are joint owners of the copyright which exists in the song and each person is liable to the other in case of any infringement. Thus if a distribution is to be done 20% has to be provided to each person along with the band. The simplest way to sell a piece of music to digital distribution services is through the use of Aggregators. The work of the aggregator is to submit the music to various services across the world along with the collection of royalties from streaming or downloads. More than 40 digital aggregators are operating all over the world. Aggregator can be paid simple fees or they charge a percentage of income. Services like Band camp and Louder charge percentage fees and services which charge per song basis include DistroKid and TuneCore. Aggregators are gatekeepers between the big platforms and individual artists. For instance the constnet which is accepted by iTunes are only from encoding houses which are approved. In theory, an individual artists can send content directly to iTunes from an encoding house approved by Apple. However in most cases the application requirements would not be met by the artists. As provided by Apple, Aggregators are individuals who are expert in providing content to iTunes. They can appropriately format and deliver the consents of an individual to apple for a fee. The maximum numbers of independent songs which are available on iTunes have been given by the aggregator partners. Only those contents which have been encoded and delivered by an encoding house which is approved by Apple. The specific encoding which is necessary for distribution on iTunes is done by the encoding houses. One of the fastest, easiest and least expensive aggregator is DistroKid which is also approved by Apple. The aggregator uploads music into Spotify, Apple Music, iTunes and Google play. The aggregator allows the individuals to keep 100% of the royalties and pays every month. The aggregator claims to be 10-20x faster as compared to any other distributor at a very less comparative price. The aggregator charges only $19.99 to upload songs and albums for a year without limit. Any earning from a track can be routed to any other person easily through the aggregator. The aggregator helps the legal distribution of cover songs and a collect payment when such songs are used by others. DistroKid is the only aggregator which allows unlimited uploads for a year. The aggregator can be used through the process of online sign up at its website (DistroKid 2017). When the music work of an artist is approved and uploaded the artist is eligible to get a percentage of royalty on the musical work. The royalty is provided to the artist in accordance to the terms of the contract they get into. Thus, it is very important for an artist to understand the system of royalty along with other cost which are deducted before the final payment is made. The royalties of the songwriter come from public performance such as when the song is played on radio or any restaurant along with the sales of the single or recorded album. When it comes to the qualities of a recording artist they are only eligible to gain royalty from a single or a recorded album sale. The payment of royalties when it comes to record sales is derived from how the calculation is made. Mostly record contracts are not a very straightforward deal. Recoupment of expenses, taxes fixed deduction the price of the product are taken into account for the customary royalty calculation. Every royalty per centage in the music industry is known as a point. Royalties are provided to the artist based upon total record sales percentage. The percentage is determined according to the size of the market. The company which a person is dealing with and the structure of the deal is also taken into account mobile calculating royalty percentage (Graham 2013). ITunes provider royalty rate of 15% (Apple Australia 2017). However this does not mean that a $50 CD sale hand the artist 7.5 dollars. The price which is paid by the retailer to the record company for the product is known as published price top dealer and the royalty rate is a percentage of this price. In the given circumstances this price is $ 2.19. Under standard royalty rate provided by iTunes as discussed above is 15% of this price. No one is provided royalty on GST and when it comes to music albums the percentage of GST applicable is 9%. Thus, 9% of $ 2.19 account to $ 0.33 which means that the price on which 15% would be provided is $ 1.86. Thus, the actual reality which would be received by the artist would be 15% of $ 1.86 which accounts to $ 0.28. The fees of the aggregator selected has already been paid initially so no percentage would be deducted from this price. Additional fees charged by APRA and AMCOS if their services are availed would also be deducted. The leftover am ount would be shared according to the above discuss criteria where the maximum amount would go to the song writers where is the drummer and the bass guitarist would not be eligible for any royalty on the sale. . References Copyright Act 1968 cecinsky v George Routledge Sons Ltd(1916) 2 KB 325 Prior v Lansdowne Press Pty Ltd(1977) VR 65. DistroKid. (2017).DistroKid is the easiest way for musicians to get their music into iTunes, Spotify, Amazon, Google Play, and more. [online] Available at: https://distrokid.com [Accessed 16 Aug. 2017]. Apple (Australia). (2017). iTunes. [online] Available at: https://www.apple.com/au/itunes/ [Accessed 16 Aug. 2017]. Homan, S., 2015. The Popular Music Industries.The Routledge Companion to the Cultural Industries. Graham, P., 2013. Australian copyright regimes and political economy of music. InMusic Business and the Experience Economy(pp. 11-26). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.