Influence of the French Revolution

The French Revolution had a major impact on Europe and the New World. Historians widely regard the Revolution as one of the most important events in history.[1][2][3] In the short-term, France lost thousands of its countrymen in the form of émigrés, or emigrants who wished to escape political tensions and save their lives. A number of individuals settled in the neighboring countries (chiefly Great Britain, Germany, Austria, and Prussia), however quite a few also went to the United States. The displacement of these Frenchmen led to a spread of French culture, policies regulating immigration, and a safe haven for Royalists and other counterrevolutionaries to outlast the violence of the French Revolution. The long-term impact on France was profound, shaping politics, society, religion and ideas, and polarizing politics for more than a century. The closer other countries were, the greater and deeper was the French impact, bringing liberalism and the end of many feudal or traditional laws and practices.[4][5] However, there was also a conservative counter-reaction that defeated Napoleon, reinstalled the Bourbon kings, and in some ways reversed the new reforms.[6]

Most of the new nations created by the France were abolished and returned to prewar owners in 1814. However, Frederick Artz emphasizes the benefits the Italians gained from the French Revolution:

For nearly two decades the Italians had the excellent codes of law, a fair system of taxation, a better economic situation, and more religious and intellectual toleration than they had known for centuries.... Everywhere old physical, economic, and intellectual barriers had been thrown down and the Italians had begun to be aware of a common nationality.[6]

Likewise in Switzerland the long-term impact of the French Revolution has been assessed by Martin:

It proclaimed the equality of citizens before the law, equality of languages, freedom of thought and faith; it created a Swiss citizenship, basis of our modern nationality, and the separation of powers, of which the old regime had no conception; it suppressed internal tariffs and other economic restraints; it unified weights and measures, reformed civil and penal law, authorized mixed marriages (between Catholics and Protestants), suppressed torture and improved justice; it developed education and public works.[7]

The greatest impact came in France itself. In addition to effects similar to those in Italy and Switzerland, France saw the introduction of the principle of legal equality, and the downgrading of the once powerful and rich Catholic Church to just a bureau controlled by the government. Power became centralized in Paris, with its strong bureaucracy and an army supplied by conscripting all young men. French politics were permanently polarized—'left' and 'right' were the new terms for the supporters and opponents of the principles of the Revolution.

Impact on France

The changes in France were enormous; some were widely accepted and others were bitterly contested into the late 20th century.[8] Before the Revolution, the people had little power or voice. The kings had so thoroughly centralized the system that most nobles spent their time at Versailles, and played only a small direct role in their home districts. Thompson says that the kings had:

ruled by virtue of their personal wealth, their patronage of the nobility, their disposal of ecclesiastical offices, their provincial governors (intendants), their control over the judges and magistrates, and their command of the Army.[9]

After the first year of revolution, this power had been stripped away. The king was a figurehead, the nobility had lost all their titles and most of their land, the Church lost its monasteries and farmlands, bishops, judges and magistrates were elected by the people, the army was almost helpless, with military power in the hands of the new revolutionary National Guard. The central elements of 1789 were the slogan "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" and "The Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen", which Lefebvre calls "the incarnation of the Revolution as a whole."[10]

The long-term impact on France was profound, shaping politics, society, religion and ideas, and polarizing politics for more than a century. Historian François Aulard writes:

From the social point of view, the Revolution consisted in the suppression of what was called the feudal system, in the emancipation of the individual, in greater division of landed property, the abolition of the privileges of noble birth, the establishment of equality, the simplification of life.... The French Revolution differed from other revolutions in being not merely national, for it aimed at benefiting all humanity."[11]

Impact on Europe

Europe was wracked by two decades of war revolving around France's efforts to spread its revolutionary ideals, and the opposition of reactionary royalty, led by Britain. Napoleon was finally defeated and reactionaries took over France. Even so there were many deep results in terms of political ideas and institutions.[12]

French emigration

To escape political tensions and save their lives, a number of individuals, mostly men, emigrated from France. Many settled in neighboring countries (chiefly Great Britain, Germany, Austria, and Prussia), and quite a few went to the United States. The presence of these thousands of Frenchmen of varying socioeconomic backgrounds who had just fled a hotbed of revolutionary activity posed a problem for the nations that extended refuge to the migrants. The fear was that they brought with them a plot to disrupt the political order, which did lead to increased regulation and documentation of the influx of immigrants in neighboring countries. Still, most nations such as Britain remained magnanimous and welcomed the French.

French conquests

In foreign affairs, the French Army at first was quite successful. It conquered the Austrian Netherlands (approximately modern-day Belgium) and turned it into another province of France. It conquered the Dutch Republic (the present Netherlands), and made it a puppet state. It took control of the German areas on the left bank of the Rhine River and set up a puppet regime. It conquered Switzerland and most of Italy, setting up a series of puppet states. The result was glory for France, and an infusion of much needed money from the conquered lands, which also provided direct support to the French Army. However the enemies of France, led by Britain and funded by the inexhaustible British Treasury, formed a Second Coalition in 1799 (with Britain joined by Russia, the Ottoman Empire, and Austria). It scored a series of victories that rolled back French successes, and The French Army trapped in Egypt. Napoleon himself slipped through the British blockade in October 1799, returning to Paris.[13]

Napoleon conquered most of Italy in the name of the French Revolution in 1797–99. He consolidated old units and split up Austria's holdings. He set up a series of new republics, complete with new codes of law and abolition of old feudal privileges. Napoleon's Cisalpine Republic was centered on Milan. Genoa the city became a republic while its hinterland became the Ligurian Republic. The Roman Republic was formed out of the papal holdings while the pope himself was sent to France. The Neapolitan Republic was formed around Naples, but it lasted only five months before the enemy forces of the Coalition recaptured it.[14]

In 1805 he formed the Kingdom of Italy, with himself as king and his stepson as viceroy. In addition, France turned the Netherlands into the Batavian Republic, and Switzerland into the Helvetic Republic. All these new countries where satellites of France, and had to pay large subsidies to Paris, as well as provide military support for Napoleon's wars. Their political and administrative systems were modernized, the metric system introduced, and trade barriers reduced. Jewish ghettos were abolished. Belgium and Piedmont became integral parts of France.[15][16]
The new nations were abolished and returned to prewar owners in 1814. However, Artz emphasizes the benefits the Italians gained from the French Revolution:

For nearly two decades the Italians had the excellent codes of law, a fair system of taxation, a better economic situation, and more religious and intellectual toleration than they had known for centuries.... Everywhere old physical, economic, and intellectual barriers had been thrown down and the Italians had begun to be aware of a common nationality.[6]

Nationalism

Otto Dann and John Dinwiddy report, "It has long been almost a truism of European history that the French Revolution gave a great stimulus to the growth of modern nationalism."[17] Nationalism was emphasized by historian Carlton J.H. Hayes as a major result of the French Revolution across Europe. The impact on French nationalism was profound. Napoleon became such a heroic symbol of the nation that the glory was easily picked up by his nephew, who was overwhelmingly elected president (and later became Emperor Napoleon III).[18] The influence was great in the hundreds of small German states and elsewhere, where it was either inspired by the French example or in reaction against it.[19][20]

Britain

At the beginning of the Revolution, Britain supported the constitutional monarchy, up until the regicide of Louis XVI. The majority of the British establishment were strongly opposed to the revolution. Britain, guided by Pitt the Younger, led and funded the series of coalitions that fought France from 1793 to 1815, and with the deposition of Napoleon Bonaparte culminated with the (temporary) restoration of the Bourbons. Edmund Burke wrote Reflections on the Revolution in France, a pamphlet notable for its defence of the principle of constitutional monarchy; the events surrounding the London Corresponding Society were an example of the fevered times.[21][22]

Ireland

In Ireland, the effect was to transform what had been an attempt by Protestant settlers to gain some autonomy into a mass movement led by the Society of United Irishmen involving Catholics and Protestants. It stimulated the demand for further reform throughout Ireland, especially in Ulster. The upshot was a revolt in 1798, led by Wolfe Tone, that was crushed by Britain.[23][24] This revolt is seen as the foundation for modern Irish republicanism, which eventually led to the partition of Ireland and independence for 26 of its 32 counties.

Germany

German reaction to the Revolution swung from favorable at first to antagonistic. At first it brought liberal and democratic ideas, the end of guilds, of serfdom and of the Jewish ghetto. It brought economic freedoms and agrarian and legal reform. German intellectuals celebrated the outbreak, hoping to see the triumph of Reason and The Enlightenment. There were enemies as well, as the royal courts in Vienna and Berlin denounced the overthrow of the king and the threatened spread of notions of liberty, equality, and fraternity.

By 1793, the execution of the French king and the onset of the Terror disillusioned the "Bildungsbürgertum" (educated middle classes). Reformers said the solution was to have faith in the ability of Germans to reform their laws and institutions in peaceful fashion.[25][26][27]

The Confederation of the Rhine, composed of client states under Napoleon's control, 1806 to 1813; most German states belonged except Prussia (in the northeast) and Austria (in the southeast). The map text is in German

After Prussia was humiliated by Napoleon opinion swung against France and stimulated and shaped German nationalism.[28]

France took direct control of the Rhineland 1794–1814 and radically and permanently liberalized the government, society and economy.[29]

The French swept away centuries worth of outmoded restrictions and introduced unprecedented levels of efficiency. The chaos and barriers in a land divided and subdivided among many different petty principalities gave way to a rational, simplified, centralized system controlled by Paris and run by Napoleon's relatives. The most important impact came from the abolition of all feudal privileges and historic taxes, the introduction of legal reforms of the Napoleonic Code, and the reorganization of the judicial and local administrative systems. The economic integration of the Rhineland with France increased prosperity, especially in industrial production, while business accelerated with the new efficiency and lowered trade barriers. The Jews were liberated from the ghetto. One sour point was the hostility of the French officials toward the Roman Catholic Church, the choice of most of the residents. Much of South Germany felt a similar but more muted influence of the French Revolution, while in Prussia and areas to the east there was far less impact.[30] The reforms were permanent. Decades later workers and peasants in the Rhineland often appealed to Jacobinism to oppose unpopular government programs, while the intelligentsia demanded the maintenance of the Napoleonic Code (which was stayed in effect for a century).[31]

Poland

When the French invaded Russia, Prussia and Austria, Napoleon carved out a Polish state allied to the French known as The Duchy of Warsaw, the Polish had had their first glimpse of independence for 200 years since the partitions of Poland by Russia Austria and Prussia. This also led to an increase in Polish nationalism that would persist throughout the 19th and 20th century.

Switzerland

The French invaded Switzerland and turned it into an ally known as the "Helvetic Republic" (1798–1803). The interference with localism and traditional liberties was deeply resented, although some modernizing reforms took place.[32][33] Resistance was strongest in the more traditional Catholic bastions, with armed uprisings breaking out in spring 1798 in the central part of Switzerland. Alois Von Reding, a powerful Swiss general, led an army of 10,000 men from the Cantons of Uri, Schwyz and Nidwalden against the French. This resulted in the Swiss regaining control of Lucerne, however due to the sheer greatness in size of the French army, Von Reding's movement was eventually suppressed. The French Army suppressed the uprisings but support for revolutionary ideals steadily declined, as the Swiss resented their loss of local democracy, the new taxes, the centralization, and the hostility to religion.[34]

The instability of France resulted in the creation of two different revolutionary groups with different ideologies of revolt: The aristocrats, seeking the restoration of the Old Swiss Confederacy and a section of the population wanting a coup. Furthermore, Switzerland became a battleground between the armies of France, Austria and Russia. Ultimately, this instability, frequent coups within the government and the eventual Bourla-papey forced Napoleon to sign the Act of Medallion which led to the fall of the Helvetic Republic and the restoration of the Confederacy.

The long-term impact of the French Revolution has been assessed by Martin:

It proclaimed the equality of citizens before the law, equality of languages, freedom of thought and faith; it created a Swiss citizenship, basis of our modern nationality, and the separation of powers, of which the old regime had no conception; it suppressed internal tariffs and other economic restraints; it unified weights and measures, reformed civil and penal law, authorized mixed marriages (between Catholics and Protestants), suppressed torture and improved justice; it developed education and public works.[35]

Belgium

French invaded the territory of modern-day Belgium and controlled it between 1794–1814. The French imposed reforms and incorporated the territory into France. New rulers were sent in by Paris. Belgian men were drafted into the French wars and heavily taxed. Nearly everyone was Catholic, but the Church was repressed. Resistance was strong in every sector, as Belgian nationalism emerged to oppose French rule. The French legal system, however, was adopted, with its equal legal rights, and abolition of class distinctions. Belgium now had a government bureaucracy selected by merit.[36]

Antwerp regained access to the sea and grew quickly as a major port and business center. France promoted commerce and capitalism, paving the way for the ascent of the bourgeoisie and the rapid growth of manufacturing and mining. In economics, therefore, the nobility declined while the middle class Belgian entrepreneurs flourished because of their inclusion in a large market, paving the way for Belgium's leadership role after 1815 in the Industrial Revolution on the Continent.[37][38]

Netherlands

France turned the Netherlands into a puppet state that had to pay large indemnities.[39]

Denmark and Sweden

The Kingdom of Denmark adopted liberalizing reforms in line with those of the French Revolution, with no direct contact. Danes were aware of French ideas and agreed with them, as it moved from Danish absolutism to a liberal constitutional system between 1750–1850. The change of government in 1784 was caused by a power vacuum created when King Christian VII took ill, and power shifted to the crown prince (who later became King Frederik VI) and reform-oriented landowners. In contrast to Old Regime France, agricultural reform was intensified in Denmark, serfdom was abolished and civil rights were extended to the peasants, the finances of the Danish state were healthy, and there were no external or internal crises. That is, reform was gradual and the regime itself carried out agrarian reforms that had the effect of weakening absolutism by creating a class of independent peasant freeholders. Much of the initiative came from well-organized liberals who directed political change in the first half of the 19th century.[40][41]

In Sweden, King Gustav III (reigned 1771–92) was an enlightened despot, who weakened the nobility and promoted numerous major social reforms. He felt the Swedish monarchy could survive and flourish by achieving a coalition with the newly emerged middle classes against the nobility. He was close to King Louis XVI so he was disgusted with French radicalism. Nevertheless, he decided to promote additional antifeudal reforms to strengthen his hand among the middle classes.[42] When the king was assassinated in 1792 his brother Charles became regent, but real power was with Gustaf Adolf Reuterholm, who bitterly opposed the French Revolution and all its supporters. Under King Gustav IV Adolf, Sweden joined various coalitions against Napoleon, but was badly defeated and lost much of its territory, especially Finland and Pomerania. The king was overthrown by the army, which in 1810 decided to bring in one of Napoleon's marshals, Bernadotte, as the heir apparent and army commander. He had a Jacobin background and was well-grounded in revolutionary principles, but put Sweden in the coalition that opposed Napoleon. Bernadotte served as a quite conservative king Charles XIV John of Sweden (1818–44).[43]

Impact outside Europe

Middle East

The impact of the French Revolution on the Middle East came in terms of the political and military impact of Napoleon's invasion; and in the eventual influence of revolutionary and liberal ideas and revolutionary movements or rebellions. In terms of Napoleon's invasion in 1798, the response by Ottoman officials was highly negative. They warned that traditional religion would be overthrown. Long-standing Ottoman friendship with France ended. Sultan Selim III immediately realized how far behind his empire was, and started to modernize both his army and his governmental system. In Egypt itself, the ruling elite of Mamluks was permanently displaced, speeding the reforms. In intellectual terms, the immediate impact of the French Revolutionary ideas was nearly invisible, but there was a long-range influence on liberal ideas and the ideal of legal equality, as well as the notion of opposition to a tyrannical government. In this regard, the French Revolution brought such influential themes as constitutionalism, parliamentarianism, individual liberty, legal equality, and the sense of ethnic nationalism. These came to fruition about 1876.[44]

Northern America

British North America

The press in the colony of Quebec initially viewed the events of the Revolution positively.[45] Press coverage in Quebec on the Revolution was reliant, and reflective of public opinion in London, with the colony's press reliant on newspapers and reprints from journals from the British Isles.[46] The early positive reception of the French Revolution had made it politically difficult to justify withholding electoral institutions from the colony to both the British and Quebec public; with the British Home Secretary William Grenville remarking how it was hardly "possible to 'maintain with success' the denial 'to so large a body of British Subjects, the benefits of the British Constitution'.[47] Governmental reforms introduced in the Constitutional Act 1791 split Quebec into two separate colonies, Lower Canada, and Upper Canada; and introduced electoral institutions to the two colonies.[47]

Opposition to the French Revolution in Quebec first emerged from its clergy, after the French government confiscated the Séminaire de Québec's properties in France. However, most of the clergy in Quebec did not voice their opposition to the Revolution in its initial years, aware of the prevailing opinion of the colony at that time.[47] Public opinion in Quebec began to shift against the Revolution after the Flight to Varennes, and as popular accounts of disturbances in France in 1791 made its way to the colony.[45] After the September Massacres, and the subsequent execution of Louis XVI in January 1793, members of the Canadian clergy, and seigneurs began to openly voice opposition against the Revolution.[48] A shift in public opinion was also apparent in the first session of the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada, with the legislature voting against several bills inspired by the French Revolution.[49] By 1793, nearly all of the legislative assembly's members refused to be identified as "democrats," a term that was used by supporters of the Revolution.[50] By the end of 1793, the clergy, seigneurs, and the bourgeoisie of the Canadas were openly opposed to the Revolution.[51] Similar sentiments were also found with the "second class of Canadians," who lauded "the French revolution for its principles but detests the [events] it has spawned".[52]

French migration to the Canadas was decelerated significantly during, and after the French Revolution; with only a small number of artisans, professionals, and religious emigres from France permitted to settle in the Canadas during that period.[53] Most of these migrants moved to Montreal or Quebec City, although French nobleman Joseph-Geneviève de Puisaye also led a small group of French royalists to settle lands north of York (present day Toronto).[53] The influx of religious migrants from France reinvigorated the Roman Catholic Church in the Canadas, with the refectory priests who moved to the colonies being responsible for the establishment of a number of parishes throughout the Canadas.[53]

United States

The French Revolution found widespread American support in its early phase, but when the king was executed it polarized American opinion and played a major role in shaping American politics.[54] President George Washington declared neutrality in the European wars, but the polarization shaped the First Party System. In 1793, the first "Democratic societies" were formed. They supported the French Revolution in the wake of the execution of the king. The word "democrat" was proposed by French Ambassador Citizen Genet for the societies, which he was secretly subsidizing. The emerging Federalists led by Alexander Hamilton began to ridicule the supporters of Thomas Jefferson as "democrats". Genet now began mobilizing American voters using French money, for which he was expelled by President Washington.[55]

After President Washington denounced the societies as unrepublican, they faded away. In 1793, as war broke out in Europe, the Jeffersonian Republican Party favored France and pointed to the 1778 treaty that was still in effect. Washington and his unanimous cabinet (including Jefferson) decided the treaty did not bind the U.S. to enter the war, since they stopped being in favor of the Revolution after they executed the King; instead Washington proclaimed neutrality.[56] Under President Adams, a Federalist, an undeclared naval war took place with France in 1798–99, called the "Quasi War". Jefferson became president in 1801, but was hostile to Napoleon as a dictator and emperor. Nevertheless, he did seize the opportunity to purchase Louisiana in 1803.[57]

The broad similarities but different experiences between the French and American revolutions lead to a certain kinship between France and the United States, with both countries seeing themselves as pioneers of liberty and promoting republican ideals.[58] This bond manifested itself in such exchanges as the gift of the Statue of Liberty by France.[59]

Latin America

The call for modification of society was influenced by the revolution in France, and once the hope for change found a place in the hearts of the Haitian people, there was no stopping the radical reformation that was occurring.[60] The Enlightenment ideals and the initiation of the French Revolution were enough to inspire the Haitian Revolution, which evolved into the most successful and comprehensive slave rebellion.[60] Just as the French were successful in transforming their society, so were the Haitians. On April 4, 1792, The French National Assembly granted freedom to slaves in Haiti[61] and the revolution culminated in 1804; Haiti was an independent nation solely of freed peoples.[62] The activities of the revolutions sparked change across the world. France's transformation was most influential in Europe, and Haiti's influence spanned across every location that continued to practice slavery. John E. Baur honors Haiti as home of the most influential Revolution in history.[63]

As early as 1810, the term "liberal" was coined in Spanish politics to indicate supporters of the French Revolution. This usage passed to Latin America and animated the independence movement against Spain. In the nineteenth century "Liberalism" was the dominant element in Latin American political thought. French liberal ideas were especially influential in Mexico, particularly as seen through the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville, Benjamin Constant and Édouard René de Laboulaye. The Latin American political culture oscillated between two opposite poles: the traditional, as based on highly specific personal and family ties to kin groups, communities, and religious identity; and the modern, based on impersonal ideals of individualism, equality, legal rights, and secularism or anti-clericalism. The French Revolutionary model was the basis for the modern viewpoint, as explicated in Mexico in the writings of José María Luis Mora (1794–1850).

In Mexico, modern liberalism was best expressed in the Liberal Party, the Constitution of 1857, the policies of Benito Juárez, and finally by Francisco I. Madero's democratic movement leading to the Revolution of 1911.[64]

gollark: Individually, at least some people are competent and smart. Unfortunately, nobody has been able to organize anything so that the big groups work competently and smartly.

gollark: HAHAHAHAHAHA

gollark: They do actions. They're just bad actions.

gollark: Nobody is doing *anything* about the imminent [REDACTED] apioform █████ ██████ ███████████ ████ in 2026, either.

gollark: I mean, the MiniLM thing Minoteaur prototypes use for semantic search is only 80MB on disk so probably about the same in RAM.

References

Linda S. Frey and Marsha L. Frey, The French Revolution (2004), Foreword.
R.R. Palmer and Joel Colton, A History of the Modern World (5th ed. 1978), p. 341
Ferenc Fehér, The French Revolution and the Birth of Modernity, (1990) pp. 117-30
Mike Rapport and Peter McPhee. "The International Repercussions of the French Revolution", in A Companion to the French Revolution (2013), pp 379–96.
Klaits, Joseph; Haltzel, Michael H.; Haltzel, Michael (2002). Global Ramifications of the American Revolution. Cambridge UP. ISBN 9780521524476.
Frederick B. Artz, Reaction & Revolution: 1814–1832 (Rise of Modern Europe) (1934), pp. 142–43
William Martin, Histoire de la Suisse (Paris, 1926), pp 187–88, quoted in Crane Brinson, A Decade of Revolution: 1789–1799 (1934), p. 235.
John Hall Stewart, A Documentary Survey of the french revolution (1951) pp 783–94
J.M. Thompson, Robespierre and the French Revolution (1962), p. 22
Georges Lefebvre (2005) [1947]. The Coming of the French Revolution. Princeton UP. p. 212. ISBN 0691121885.
A. Aulard in Arthur Tilley, ed. (1922). Modern France. A Companion to French Studies. Cambridge UP. p. 115.CS1 maint: extra text: authors list (link)
Annie Jourdan, "Napoleon and Europe: the legacy of the French Revolution." in The Routledge Companion to the French Revolution in World History (Routledge, 2015) pp. 221-238.
William Doyle, The Oxford History of the French Revolution (1989), pp 341–68.
Steven T. Ross, European Diplomatic History, 1789–1815: France Against Europe (1969)
Alexander Grab, Napoleon and the Transformation of Europe (2003) pp 62–65, 78–79, 88–96, 115–17, 154–59
Palmer, The Age of the Democratic Revolution 2:293–326, 365–94
Dann, Otto; Dinwiddy, John (1988). Nationalism in the Age of the French Revolution. Continuum. p. 13. ISBN 9780907628972.
Beatrice Fry Hyslop, French Nationalism in 1789 (1968) especially chap. 7
Carlton J. H. Hayes, The Historical Evolution of Modern Nationalism (1931), ch 2–3
Keitner, Chimene I. (2007). The Paradoxes of Nationalism: The French Revolution and Its Meaning for Contemporary Nation Building. SUNY Press. p. 12. ISBN 9780791469583.
Emma Vincent Macleod, A War of Ideas: British Attitudes to the War against Revolutionary France, 1792–1802 (1999)
Palmer, The Age of the Democratic Revolution: The Struggle, Volume II (1970), pp 459–505.
Nick Pelling (2002). Anglo-Irish Relations: 1798 1922. Routledge. pp. 5–10. ISBN 9780203986554.
Palmer, The Age of the Democratic Revolution 2: 491–508.
James J. Sheehan, German History, 1770–1866 (1993), pp. 207–322.
Palmer, The Age of the Democratic Revolution 2:425-58
Blanning Blanning, "The French Revolution and the Modernization of Germany", in Central European History (1989) 22#2, pp 109–29.
Theodore S. Hamerow (1958). Restoration, Revolution, Reaction: Economics and Politics in Germany, 1815–1871. Princeton UP. pp. 22–24, 44–45. ISBN 0691007551.
T. C. W. Blanning, The French Revolution in Germany: Occupation and Resistance in the Rhineland 1792–1802 (1983)
Hajo Holborn, A History of Modern Germany, 1648–1840 (1964), pp 386–87.
Michael Rowe, From Reich to state: the Rhineland in the revolutionary age, 1780–1830 (2003)
Lerner, Marc H. Lerner, "The Helvetic Republic: An Ambivalent Reception of French Revolutionary Liberty", French History (2004) 18#1, pp 50–75.
R.R. Palmer, The Age of the Democratic Revolution 2: 394–421
Otto Dann and John Dinwiddy (1988). Nationalism in the Age of the French Revolution. Continuum. pp. 190–98. ISBN 9780907628972.
William Martin, Histoire de la Suisse (Paris, 1926), pp 187–88, quoted in Crane Brinson, A Decade of Revolution: 1789–1799 (1934), p. 235.
E.H. Kossmann, The Low Countries: 1780–1940 (1978) pp 65–81, 101–02.
Bernard A. Cook, Belgium (2005) pp 49–54
Samuel Clark, "Nobility, Bourgeoisie and the Industrial Revolution in Belgium," Past & Present (1984) # 105 pp. 140–175; in JSTOR
Palmer, The Age of the Democratic Revolution 2: 394–421
Henrik Horstboll, and Uffe Ostergård, "Reform and Revolution: The French Revolution and the Case of Denmark," Scandinavian Journal of History (1990) 15#3 pp 155–79
H. Arnold Barton, Scandinavia in the Revolutionary Era, 1760–1815 (1986)
Munro Price, "Louis XVI and Gustavus III: Secret Diplomacy and Counter-Revolution, 1791–1792," Historical Journal (1999) 42#2 pp. 435–466 in JSTOR
Alan Palmer, Bernadotte: Napoleon's Marshal, Sweden's King (1991)
Nikki R. Keddied, "The French Revolution in the Middle East", in Joseph Klaits and Michael Haltzel, eds. Global Ramifications of the French Revolution (2002), pp 140–57.
Greenwood 1993, p. 57.
Greenwood 1993, p. 58.
Greenwood 1993, p. 63.
Greenwood 1993, p. 65.
Greenwood 1993, p. 66.
Greenwood 1993, p. 70.
Greenwood 1993, p. 72.
Greenwood 1993, p. 73.
Dupuis, Serge (26 February 2018). "French Immigration in Canada". The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
Charles Downer Hazen (1897). Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution. Johns Hopkins UP.
Genet would have been executed if he returned to Paris; he stayed in New York, became an American citizen, and married the daughter of the governor of New York. Eugene R. Sheridan, "The Recall of Edmond Charles Genet: A Study in Transatlantic Politics and Diplomacy", Diplomatic History (1994) 18#4 pp: 463–88.
Susan Dunn, Sister Revolutions: French Lightning, American Light (2000)
Lawrence S. Kaplan, "Jefferson, the Napoleonic Wars, and the Balance of Power", William and Mary Quarterly (1957) 14#2 pp. 196–217 in JSTOR
"Similarities Between the American and French Revolutions : Western Civilization II Guides". Western Civilization II Guides. Retrieved 28 January 2017.
"The French Connection - Statue Of Liberty National Monument (U.S. National Park Service)". www.nps.gov. Retrieved 28 January 2017.
Rand, David. "The Haitian Revolution." The Haitian Revolution. Accessed March 25, 2015. http://scholar.library.miami.edu/slaves/san_domingo_revolution/%5B%5D individual_essay/david.html.
Ghachem, Malick W. The Old Regime and the Haitian Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Akamefula, Tiye, Camille Newsom, Burgey Marcos, and Jong Ho. "Causes of the Haitian Revolution." Haitian Revolution. September 1, 2012. Accessed March 25, 2015. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2015-04-02. Retrieved 2015-03-26.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link).
Baur, John. "International Repercussions of the Haitian Revolution." The Americas 26, no. 4 (1970).
Charles A. Hale, "The revival of political history and the French Revolution in Mexico", in Joseph Klaits and Michael Haltzel, eds. Global Ramifications of the French Revolution (2002), pp 158–76.