Living the French Revolution and the Age of Napoleon

by Suzanne M. Desan

The 25 years between the onset of the French Revolution in 1789 and the Bourbon Restoration after Napoleon in 1814 is an astonishing period in world history. This era shook the foundations of the old world and marked a permanent shift for politics, religion, and society - not just for France, but for all of Europe. An account of the events alone reads like something out of a thrilling novel:

France’s oppressed and hungry masses rise up against their government.
In Paris, crowds storm the Bastille looking for bread and weaponry.
Rumors, panic, and fear grip the nation as it faces an uncertain future.
The National Assembly adopts the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the first bold step toward the invention of democratic politics and a republican state.
A young Corsican named Napoleon Bonaparte stuns Europe with his military strategy and political boldness.

Living the French Revolution and the Age of Napoleon is your opportunity to learn the full story of this captivating period. Taught by Dr. Suzanne M. Desan, these 48 exciting lectures give you a broad and comprehensive survey of one of the most important eras in modern history.

Disclaimer: Please note that this recording may include references to supplemental texts or print references that are not essential to the program and not supplied with your purchase.

©2013 The Teaching Company, LLC (P)2013 The Great Courses

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Audiobook, France, War, Politics, European History

24 pages, Audible Audio

First published July 8, 2013

Reviews

[Brad · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really appreciated Dr. Suzanne M. Desan's perspective on everything French history ranging from the Terror to Napoleon's Hundred Days.

Much of the survey work I have consumed about the Revolutionary - Napoleonic period of France has tended to fall into one of two camps: 1. the Revolutionaries (specifically Robespierre) and Napoleon were BAD! (which often implies that the Monarchists and the Brits were GOOD! Pffft.); 2. that the Revolutionaries and the Terror were better than GOOD ... they were GREAT! and that Napoleon was not just bad he was so bad he was EVIL (maybe even as evil as Adolf and Uncle Joe). Dr. Desan, however, provides a much more balanced perspective on the era, and she makes sure that the primary figures of the period are given a fair shake, and that even includes Marie Antoinette.

This was especially thrilling for me when much of the reforms and progress made by the Revolutionaries -- and those created by the Little Corporal -- then spread by Napoleon's Empire building were credited properly. These achievements are often glossed over or eclipsed by the violence of the time and the biases of the historians passing along the information. But Dr. Desan gives us all the good and the bad mixed together.

When Ridley Scott's Napoleon film (starring Joaquin Phoenix) comes out, I may have to relisten to the second half of her lectures (the Napoleon-centric lectures) for a quick brush up, but for anyone who wants their own primer heading into the film, Dr. Desan's lecture series is the perfect listen.

[Lois · Rating 1 out of 5]

This was an interesting, if highly biased and thoroughly detailed condensed look at The French Revolution.
Some of the subject matter is handled respectfully and impartially.
Unfortunately, whole sections of this book are riddled with, sexism, racism, slavery apologism, classism and antisemitism.
First the US War of Independence can't be compared to the French Revolution because the War of Independence wasn't a revolution.
A revolution is when power dynamics and class structures change massively in a country. That did not really or significantly happen in the US during the War of Independence. That happens in the US during the Civil War.
The irony is The War of Independence is really a civil war and The Civil War is the revolutionary war.
At the end of the War of Independence power dynamics in the colonies weren't restructured for everybody only the elite.
Contrary to patriotic/nationalist propaganda only land owning white men could vote originally. The law at that time further limited the men considered 'white' to exclude certain European groups and white Jewish folks.
So basically the rich folks in the US no longer paid taxes to Great Britain and no longer needed to follow British rules about expansion.
Everyone in the US who wasn't a land owning recognized as white man had their station in life either stay the same as in the case of white women and children; or get drastically worse as in the case of Black Free & Enslaved folks and the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas.
The War of Independence changes chattel slavery in the US in significant ways that ultimately lead to 'slave' breeding. Which is a horror and really escalates the separation of infants & toddlers from their parents and families. The horror is unimaginable.
In addition the War of Independence leads greatly disrupts Indigenous peoples of the Americas controll? rule? power? over their own lands. The Peoples and Nations that survived genocide are in vastly different areas than those that have cultural significance to them in most cases. Their sacred lands and even the remains of their dead are disrespected.
In the western world we are just accustomed to the propaganda that prioritizes the experience of white supremacists over the view of history from the victims of white supremacist violence.
***There are some interesting ideas put forth by the founding oppressors but applying these concepts to only rich white men so chattel slavery and genocide could continue uninterrupted isn't a revolution worthy of the word.***
Now The Civil War lead to Reconstruction which is in essence a 'Second Founding' or a true attempt at founding a 'free' country. It starts as a legitimate attempt that horrifically fails for the most part.
The Founding Oppressors are human rights violators and hypocrites. They didn't come up with the best government ever.
Bear in mind that 1 in 4 of the Colonial soldiers were Black. Enslaved Blacks were promised freedom in exchange for joining both sides of this conflict.
Some were given their freedom but very few.
The British were better about attempting to keep this promise but barely.
George Washington re-enslaved the soldiers who helped him win the 'revolution'.
So no that's not a revolution.
In France the 'revolution' doesn't start out with full freedom as the goal yet in the end women had rights they wouldn't have again until after WWII.
In the 1790's.
They first capitulated after a rebellion by Vincent Oge to allow Free Black people limited rights and eventually, after Haiti rebelled, they outlawed chattel slavery. They never enforced the outlaw of chattel slavery and even though other French 'slave" islands have small rebellions none resulted in island wide freedom.
The French weren't perfect or even close but they attempted to live up to their ideals.
In the US we still don't have democracy in 2020 for all citizens. Specifically the colonized 'territories": Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa all do not allow US citizens living there the right to vote.
To recap in 2020 we STILL aren't living up to the promises of the Founding Oppressors.
The US has never practiced democracy and the founding oppressors never intended us to.
The author who I think is a professor of history really, really, really loves Napoleon.
She seems to have a royalist view of the Ancien Regime as well.
She continually praises Napoleon. She presents his military coup d'etat as 'rising to power'. She acts like his narcissistic wars across Europe & North Africa were logical, strategic and not a complete violation of the sovereignty of the countries he was invading.
I really was ticked off when she refused to process Haiti through a realistic lens. No grace for Toussaint unlike for Napoleon.
I mean Toussaint was a jerk in many ways but he WAS a military genius. With significantly less resources he beat Napoleon's virtually unbeatable army.
The French Army ultimately have to lie and cheat to create a cease fire which enables them to cheat.
At which time France illegally steals Toussaint and his entire family.
In violation of their own treaty.
Also Haiti isn't just the 'first colony in South America' to break with Europe:
It's the most successful chattel slave revolt to occur during the history of the Atlantic Slave Trade.
This put Haiti in a totally different position than France was in.
First of all they were Black ex-enslaved or descendants of ex-enslaved West Africans, surrounded by hostile, racist and rabidly enslaving nations.
I think Toussaint believed that Haiti's best chance to ensure that the island stayed free long term was to be useful to the hostile-white-supremacist-European Slave-nations which surrounded it. These Nations have a racist history of banding together with other white supremacist nations, even their traditional enemies, in order to more effectively steal from Black and Brown peoples and nations.
So Toussaint paid formerly enslaved people for their labor, most assuredly not fairly and forced them to continue working in the fields. It is the limited freedom that Blacks will largely face across the diaspora for primarily white supremacist reasons.
This isn't a perfect a compromise or plan but isn't worse than Napoleon's betrayals of the French Revolution which the historian/author presents as 'establishing order' or a 'return to order'.
Ignoring that the revolution had pretty much settled down and the honeymoon period of military dictatorships is always brief.
Napoleon wasn't any different in that department. He quickly set about creating endless war and conquest in an attempt to hold onto political power.
A move those of us in the modern world should be achingly familiar with.
We don't know what Haiti might have developed into had European slave-nations not stolen and killed their leaders and staged multiple undercover coups. Not to mention saddling them with debt and restricting their trade.
Haiti is a mess because even today the old chattel slave trading nations can't handle a Black country founded by West Africans that white supremacist can not in anyway take credit for.
Also because France charged ruinous fees to Haiti for having the audacity to no longer be enslaved.
Fees it took more than a hundred years to pay.
For land that was never theirs and they were never entitled to.
Yet Napoleon was a complete turd and horrible human rights violator. He caused massive destruction across Europe and was on a narcissistic quest to 'rule the world' but she has nothing but praise.
She seems unable to grasp that while it's a tragedy that 40,000 people died during 'the terror' but Napoleon is estimated to have lost almost a million soldiers from the Empire alone. Not including the losses in the countries he invaded,either civilian or military. His losses were staggering and he ALWAYS needed more soldiers. Way more folks than 40,000 died under Napoleon so I fail to see how his coup d'etat was stabilizing. Not to mention The Terror was basically over when the Jacobins were guillotined. France was relatively stable when Napoleon made his coup d'etat. He didn't save folks from the terror, he WAS the terror.
It's just no one cares about the people he killed while the folks killed in 'the terror' were aristocratic and royal.
Royal and aristocratic deaths aren't more tragic than those whose lives the royals and aristocracy were putting at risk through, at best narcissistic theft and neglect.
Governments don't exist in a vacuum and when they screw folks over it's natural and normal for citizens to harm them back.
Also the authors attempt to pass off Napoleon's antisemitism as 'assimilation' worries is cringeworthy. He set up Gentile councils to 'monitor' Jewish communities rate of 'assimilation' into the French Empire. The author treats this like a valid concern failing to acknowledge that Jewish Communities weren't 'failing to assimilate', French society was rabidly antisemitic and refused to allow them to participate fully.
The folks who needed to be 'policed' to make sure that 'Jewish' folks 'assimilation' into the French Empire is smooth are the ones doing the policing.
Yet this is just glossed over and ignored.
I understand that some of Napoleon's methods of bureaucracy used are still used today.
Some of the scientific advances gained via Nazi war crimes are still used today.
Whatever advance in medicine or science doesn't in any way cleanse the Nazi inventor/finder/etc of their guilt or crimes against humanity.
The same is true for Napoleon.
We can only learn from history when we tell the truth about what was fucked up.
Also the author pretends like the 'insurgents' in various countries occupied by Napoleon's military dictatorship are partially responsible for the violence resulting from them fighting to be free.
Um, no there's not 'atrocities on both sides' when Napoleon illegally occupies another sovereign nations.
Is this historian serous?
Napoleon isn't entitled to force other nations to join the French Empire because he has a dream of ruling the world.
Napoleon and The French Empire are responsible for whatever violence occurs.
So the conclusions drawn by the author/historian/professor are shit takes and uphold sexism, racism, antisemitism, etc.
It's really too bad because this is engagingly handled and streamlined in an easy to process way.

[Ayn Doe · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best introduction to both the French Revolution and the Napoléonic Era I could've asked for.

In describing the Ancién Regime, I found her listing more people moving in to the cities, a rising Bourgeoisie class (who would go on to back the Girondin and later Napoléon), authors writing more and more plays about equality, etc. to be the causes of the revolution to create a republic (and later oust the king when the republic became too powerful to see the need for one) over the pop culture idea of peasants being impoverished to the point of them deciding to overthrow their king. She also admitted that the people were mainly stirred up by lies and misinformation ("let them eat cake" and the like) while still positing that the revolution itself was a great benefit to France as a whole.

She also didn't fall into the trap of painting The Terror with a similar brush Cold War raised conservatives paint the USSR's rise and fall. That is to say, she didn't paint it as the bloodthirsty radical left initiating purges and executing all dissendents for no reason than it's in the nature of left wing groups. She did indeed talk in detail about the purges and executions and I doubt she tried to water it down at all, but she also put it in to perspective by referring to in detail the Girondin executions of the Jacobins when Robespierre was ousted and the Directory was formed, Napoleon's mass purge of both when he took on the role of consul and later emperor, and Louis XVIII's complete shutdown of all forms of free speech when he got into power as well as throwing into prison/killing anyone with the slightest suspicion of wanting the Republic/Napoléon back.

For Napoléon's section, there's much less to say since his reign was much less controversial than the Jabobin's/Directory's, but I did appreciate her going into Napoléon's romantic life as well as having whole lectures dedicated to small things like the US's experiences with French diplomats. It was also nice taking a break to learn about Haiti and Toussant L'Overture along with the war he waged upon France.

The last two lecture briefly touch on the restoration of a monarchy to France all the way up to the 1968 uprisings, which I didn't expect but was pleasantly surprised by. She even mentioned Marx's writings on the uprising and how they inspired the mannifesto (though her describing Marx's ideas as Jacobin ideas not gone far enough I feel was greatly butchering him) and the 1871 Paris Paris Commune, though very very briefly. Coincidentally I started reading Georges Lefebvre's "Napoléon" nearing the end of the series and she referenced him calling for the youth to defend the principles of liberté, égalité, & fraternité before eventually getting in trouble with the Nazis.

I really wish this wasn't the only lecture series by her I could find. I would've loved to hear her talk about those 160 years with much more room than two lectures.

[Clif Hostetler · Rating 3 out of 5]

The French Revolution brings to mind the guillotine, the demise of Louie XVI and Marie Antoinette, and the Reign of Terror. But is all a blur in my mind. I know there’s more to that history than that. And why was the French experience with revolution so much different from the American experience? I’ve also read a lot about Napoleon and his exploits, but how could an outsider (Corsican) take over the French government and create his Empire?

These are all questions that spurred me on to listen to these forty-eight lectures. That totals twenty-four hours of listening time which approximately equals a 700 to 800 page book. So this has been a pretty heavy dose of French history that I’m recovering from while writing this review.

One of my first thoughts is to compare the current Arab Spring happenings with the French Revolution. A lesson from both is that it’s easier to begin a revolution than to bring it to a final conclusion.

And it’s almost not fair to compare the French Revolution to the American Revolution. The French Revolution was more of a civil war while the American Revolution was a separation from a country on the other side of the ocean. Granted, there were American Loyalist, but the colonies didn’t have established aristocracy and clergy (rich and tax exempt) within their country the way that France did.

And then there’s the phenomenon of The Terror, how did that come to be? It began as a tool to execute “enemies of the revolution” but devolved into a way to get rid of political opponents who were in reality fellow revolutionaries. Toward the end it became necessary for politicians to execute their rivals before their rivals executed them. The death toll was in the tens of thousands over an eleven month period.

And why could an outsider like Napoleon take over? As best I can figure there was so much internal squabbling that only an outsider could bring it to an end.

One of the reasons I was interested in this subject was that on a recent tour through the European lands of my ancestors, I learned that religious dissidents didn’t have any civil rights until the French Revolution and the subsequent spread the French Revolutionary ideas. The French Revolution and then Napoleon introduced the concept of the secular state throughout Europe, and helped spread the concept of toleration of minority religious groups. The Reformation had divided Europe into Protestant and Catholic nations, but had not done much for religions not sanctioned by the state.

[Irena Pasvinter · Rating 5 out of 5]

A set of 24 lectures, 30 minutes each. The history of French Revolution and Napoleon's Empire presented in a concise and logical manner, with lots of fascinating details and with the analysis of its international influence and legacy. The best resource on this period of history I've met so far. A hundred times better than French Revolution lectures from The Modern Scholar.

[Denise · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an excellent, highly informative lecture series covering the time period of the French Revolution and the rule of Napoleon in thorough detail, including repercussions of this tumultous quarter century around the world and through to the present day. While I'm well versed in the history of the revolution up to the end of the Terror, there was a lot I learned from this course in particular when it comes to the time after 1794. Too many books on the subject of the French Revolution tend to end there, with the second half of the decade touched on briefly if at all, so I greatly appreciated this comprehensive account.

[Kirsti · Rating 5 out of 5]

My favorite bit of trivia from this series: On the day Joséphine was crowned empress, she was wearing underwear that had emeralds sewn into it.

I wish I had kept track of how many miles I logged on the rowing machine while watching this series of 48 lectures about Marie Antoinette, Madame de Staël, and of course Napoléon. This is a detailed and enthusiastic combination of social history (the words and deeds of regular people), economics, political philosophy, military history, and much more. Dr. Desan makes an effort to include information about women and their rights. I've watched a lot of Teaching Company courses, and this one has more lectures, more images, more animated maps, more political cartoons, more everything.

[Igor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Most comprehensive audio Great Course so far

LECTURE GUIDES
LECTURE 1: Introduction and the Old Regime Monarchy
LECTURE 2: Privilege—Old Regime Society
LECTURE 3: The Enlightenment
LECTURE 4: France, Global Commerce, and Colonization
LECTURE 5: American Revolution and the Economic Crisis
LECTURE 6: The Political Awakening of 1789
LECTURE 7: July 14th—Storming the Bastille
LECTURE 8: Peasant Revolt and the Abolition of Feudalism
LECTURE 9: The Declaration of the Rights of Man
LECTURE 10: Paris Commands Its King
LECTURE 11: Political Apprenticeship in Democracy
LECTURE 12: Religion and the Early Revolution
LECTURE 13: The Revolution and the Colonies
LECTURE 14: Women’s Rights in the Early Revolution
LECTURE 15: The King’s Flight
LECTURE 16: Foreign Reactions—A Divided Europe
LECTURE 17: The Path to War with Europe
LECTURE 18: Overthrowing the Monarchy
LECTURE 19: The King’s Trial
LECTURE 20: The Republic at War
LECTURE 21: Revolutionary Culture and Festivals
LECTURE 22: Family and Marriage
LECTURE 23: Slave Revolt and the Abolition of Slavery
LECTURE 24: Counterrevolution and the Vendée
LECTURE 25: The Pressure Cooker of Politics
LECTURE 26: Revolution in Crisis—Summer 1793
LECTURE 27: Terror Is the Order of the Day
LECTURE 28: The Revolution Devours Her Children
LECTURE 29: The Overthrow of Robespierre
LECTURE 30: The Thermidorian Reaction
LECTURE 31: The Directory—An Experimental Republic
LECTURE 32: Young Napoleon
LECTURE 33: The Italian Campaign and the Sister Republics
LECTURE 34: Sister Republics? France and America
LECTURE 35: Bonaparte in Egypt
LECTURE 36: Bonaparte Seizes Power
LECTURE 37 Building Power—General and First Consul
LECTURE 38: Napoleon Becomes Emperor
LECTURE 39: Napoleon’s Ambitions in the New World
LECTURE 40: Taking on the Great Powers
LECTURE 41: Expanding the Empire
LECTURE 42: France during the Empire
LECTURE 43: Living under the Empire
LECTURE 44: The Russian Campaign:
LECTURE 45: Napoleon’s Fall and the Hundred Days
LECTURE 46: Waterloo and Beyond
LECTURE 47: Emerging Political Models
LECTURE 48: Revolutionary Legacies

[Noah Goats · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting, clearly organized, well presented, comprehensive and all around very good. This course is a good place to learn a fascinating stretch of French history.

[Nathan Leopard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid introductory lectures on the topic.

[Chelsea · Rating 5 out of 5]

A little lengthy at 25 hours of listening, but an excellent overview of the French Revolution, Napoleonic era, and a brief summary of France’s government from post-Napoleon to modern times. It was interesting to hear about how the political arena affected ordinary French citizens and how they made their voices heard. Also how the French Revolution was affected by and affected other revolutions of the time.

[Jonathan Grant · Rating 5 out of 5]

I feel like I should have listened to this first, before the Napoleon biography. Made me realise how little we actually covered when we did the French Revolution in school.

[Sarthak Bhatt · Rating 3 out of 5]

Robespierre was not that bad

[Luis Brudna · Rating 5 out of 5]

Um pouco longo demais para o que eu queria.
Cansei de saber sobre Revolução Francesa. Mas a produção ('livro') não é ruim.

[Nilesh Jasani · Rating 5 out of 5]

Few historic periods are as eventful, turbulent and consequential for human society as the 25-year period starting from 1889. Even avid history buffs are often at loss to explain how the revolution of all time for democracy ended up with the popular rise and then fall of Napolean in the double quick time.Everyone should listen to this easy to understand lectures simply to learn about this fascinating period if not for any other reason.

Ms Desan's lecture series covers the tumultuous period's events in the most understandable manner without turning overbearing. She has a new style that blends chronological progress with continuous analysis of themes. Or perhaps the other way around. Let me elaborate.

The professor does not simply state history with the implications and analysis of events. Rather, each session is built on a new theme or a subject which could range from the poverty, daily life, art or certain personalities and their key traits. To expand on the theme, the narrator would go back in time, elaborate on the relevant details and reach up to a new moment in the French history of the period, cover the moment and expand on its impact for the future. Still, in every lecture with those critical themes and events, the series would keep rolling forward chronologically. The style is beautiful and immensely creative because it allows the flow of the narrative to remain fresh and meaningful.

From Bastille to Napoleon's Corsican exile, the struggle between the Jacobins and Girondins that led to the internal civil war, the reign of terror and the guillotined end of the democracy itself, the Thermidorian provided first intermission and the spectacular rise of Napolean followed by the innumerable fables of the legend - the lectures have enough topics to support even a ten year soap opera!

[Jim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Birth of the political Left and Right...The French Revolution!

This is a college-level deep dive into the French Revolution and its Napoleonic aftermath...covering in very nice detail the period between (roughly) 1787 to 1815. The subject matter is rich, with detailed discussions of the politics and players of the times...from Louis XVI (and Marie) to Rousseau to Robespierre to finally Napoleon. How France survived these trying times, especially The Terror, all in the name of freedom contrasts sharply with the American Revolution. Any potential listener/watcher of this course should be prepared to do her/his homework by researching further every single lecture...you won't regret it.

Professor Desan's audio style can be just a bit off-putting, but her organization and depth of knowledge certainly makes up for any weakness in presentation. I especially enjoyed the concluding lectures in which she noted some of the consequences of that raging French Revolution (as well as the following Napoleonic Age) that live with us today. BTW, wouldn't 'Talleyrand' be a great name for a dog?

Highly recommended, it's one of the best...but you'd deserve to lose your head if you didn't wait for that sale and that coupon.

[Chris Chapman · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a series of lectures, and it's told in a chatty, sometimes joking (and yes, American) style which some might find grating, but I didn't. Although I can't say I loved the canned applause that opened and closed each lecture. I did love the granular detail she throws in, such as excerpts from diaries and letters of common people, observers of (and willing or unwilling participants in) the events. How interesting to learn that the British press described Napoleon at the height of his rampages across Europe alternately as "the 4 foot 2 monkey" and "the Corsican ogre"! How much does that say about our need to demonise our enemies, and the drive, on the one hand, to build them up as people to be feared, and on the other, to mock them? I can't really comment on any factual inaccuracies, glaring ommissions or undue emphases, as I am only now making an effort to fill in the huge gaps in my knowledge of history.

[Tee · Rating 2 out of 5]

I still need a thorough review to write about this... probably by December.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nice compliment while reading Napoleon the Great. Only listened to lectures 32-48. Perhaps I'll find out how the French Revolution started another time. :P

[Madeline Honig · Rating 4 out of 5]

Both the courses I have listened to from The Great Courses have been very thorough and easy to listen to. Although it difficult to retain all the information given, because there is so much detail, the general story is easy to remember. This was the second of many of these courses I will be listening to in the future.

[Robert Jerome · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably the most important piece of history for anyone who wants to understand modern politics. Without a lot of detail about any one character (except napoleon), this tells the story of the different political groups that arose during the French Revolution.

[Deon French · Rating 5 out of 5]

insightful and very interesting. details the grassroots of the revolution up to the fall of Napoleon. I do now understand a bit more of the country I am currently living in.

[Patrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Awesome course, always wanted to learn more about Napoleon and this is an incredible way to do so

[WadeofEarth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow! This was crazy. I guess I knew plenty of facts about the French Revolution and Napoleon, but in this lecture series, professor Desan takes us through the roller-coaster of changing events and political climates that epitomized this period of French history on three main levels: the level of the average citizen loving through these times and how all the upheavals effected then by repeatedly building up hope and then dissapointing them, the level of the main movers and shakers of the political atmosphere of France and how they interacted with one another and the events as they took place, and on the world stage, where the events happening in France, one of the most powerful and influential nation in the world at that time, shook and reformed the entire world and into a place that was more likely to have freedom for all people. Then, after taking us through the revolution, which was riveting, she introduces us to the "Son of the Revolution" Napoleon Bonaparte.

His rise to power was strange, but his actions once he was there, absolutely changed the course of human history, while it may have been tumultuous at the time and his authoritarian leadership was problematic in so many ways, his overall impact on humanity, I would say, was very positive. He was an enigma; in a time when political tides turned so quickly and party lines were drawn in stone and written in blood, he toed no party lines, and had no hidden agenda. His goal was to civilize the world, under a French flag, for its own good, with himself at the very center; he was undoubtedly egotistical. But through his efforts, he put many of the final nails in the coffin of old Feudalism, and made great strides towards the equal footing of all men (though definitely not women). He had a desire for equality of all unerring himself, but due to his egotism and authoritarianism, he was both unable to see he own prejudices (as we all are) and because he was alone at the top, there was no one in his life able to draw his attention to them.

This entire series was fascinating and Napoleon's part in it was the icing on the cake. Don't get me wrong, I don't think he was a good man, or a worthy emperor, but as men who have single handedly shaken the world go, I think he made it, though not in the ways he may have intended, a better place.

[Erik · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am glad to have listened to this series of lectures. My previous understanding of the French Revolution was woefully inadequate.

The lecturer relates the current situation in 1793 that led to the terror, so I feel that I can understand how it happened better, though the terribleness is not lessened. To me it is a very cautionary tale of what happens when too much power is put into the hands of people with a strong agenda. The executions were legal. The Committee of Public Safety was given the power to condemn people to death legally without any real trial, so they did, and it spiraled out of control.

I think if given the same power that was held by the Committee was given today to politically vocal groups on either the far left or the far right, the same thing would likely happen. Which is one reason that I am a big proponent of assiduously protecting the rights of the people guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. (As an interesting note, the lecturer tells how our modern terminology of the left and right of politics originated during the French revolution and was based on where officials of different political leanings sat at meetings)

The book goes over the time of Napoleon, and paints him in a more negative light than the book Napoleon: A Life, that I recently read.

[Dido · Rating 5 out of 5]

Prof Desan is a marvelous storyteller... she had me hooked right from the start through the end. This course provides a very comprehensive coverage of the French Revolution, life and times during then and in the Napoleonic age. Prof Desan does a phenomenal job of explaining the roots of liberty, egalitarian concepts such as all men/women are equal by the law, abolition of slavery, genesis of political left and right terms, and much more...She covers in-depth about how the French revolutionaries introduced all sorts of social and cultural experiments as the Americans and the rest of the world looked on in shock and at times in fear:
- abolished aristocracy and privilege
- took away the wealth and lands of the catholic church
- and they even tried to shut down religious practice
- the revolutionaries declared all laws applied equally to all man
- they gave Jews rights
- they allowed wives to divorce their husbands
- they abolished slavery
She also covers about how the French and Napoleon tried to bring some of these changes - getting rid of bed-rock European traditions like God, church, king and social hierarchy etc. abroad, to other countries and really ushered in the birth of Modernism... A really fascinating rendition of a very important part of human history - I highly recommend this audible book, you cannot go wrong with it!

[Don Heiman · Rating 5 out of 5]

In 2013 The Teaching Company released Prof Suzanne Desan’s 48 lecture course “The French Revolution in the Age of Napoleon.” Her video dvd lectures are easy to follow; and each lecture is 30-35 minutes long. These lectures explain the French Revolution in the context of old regime “privilege” monarchies that were replaced by new beliefs and political governance structures drawn from the Age of Enlightenment, global commerce, colonization, and social-economic justice reforms. The Revolution began in 1789 and endured long after Napoleon’s fall in 1815. During this period, France frequently changed her governing constitutions. The changing constitutions were made in response to citizen revolts, Napoleonic wars, empire building, and frequent changes in European economic-social-political mores. Prof Desan concludes her course with insightful discussions of the emerging economic political models that were formed from the French Revolution’s legacy and its impact on our present age. Suzanne’s lectures are exceptionally well done; her use of graphics and period art is stunning; and her “on-screen” reference notes are very informative. The course guidebook has 373 printed pages. The guide was very helpful for me to understand the many dimensions of the Revolution. (L)

[Jeff Beardsley · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was one of the longer Great Courses lecture series that I’ve taken, but also one of the more interesting and educational. While it took me a few episodes to get used to Suzanne Desan’s teaching style, once I did I really enjoyed the subject matter, and I certainly learned a lot. The lectures broken down approximately as two-thirds regarding the French Revolution, and one-third regarding the rise and fall of Napoleon Bonaparte. Of course, the two are entirely linked, which is also described in detail. At forty-eight lectures, this series is not for those who are only looking for a simple understanding of the events. This series goes deep, yet still leaves the fan of history wanting more. While the time-frame focuses on the period between 1789 and 1815, it also does a fantastic job of describing ideologies and events leading up to the Revolution (such as the period of the Enlightenment), and the two-hundred-year aftermath upon the world. On the whole, it is a well-crafted and highly-detailed lecture series which any fan of history will truly enjoy. Highly recommended!

[Roo Phillips · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fantastic overview of the French revolution and the rise and fall of Napoleon. It seemed just the right amount of detail. Not so much that it gets boring, but also not so little that you don't get something out of it. My prior understanding of the french revolution was solely from Les Miserable. That wasn't even the "French Revolution," so I really learned a lot.
I was surprised at how messy and wild the revolution was in France, at least until Napoleon took over. There never seemed to be a strong group of minds to give real direction and stability, an interesting contrast from the almost coincident American revolution.
The Napoleon part was also very interesting as I had never really studied his history before. I've seen his larger than life tomb in Paris, which makes a lot of sense for someone that could sack Moscow...in the winter...on foot (spoiler alert)...at great cost.
Desan seemed to pick just the right amount of quality information throughout to keep me interested. I recommend it to anyone interested in french or european history.

[MG · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have avoided reading about the French Revolution and the rise and fall of Napoleon since I always suspected it was a dark and rough history that would only serve to depress me. But I am glad I gave this course a chance to correct me. First, I learned that the Revolution was indeed noble and idealistic and that the "terrors" did not occur until a few years later. In fact, I had not realized that Louis XVI at first tried to go along with the changed and that one possibility could have been a shared rule like occurred in England. Yes, it did get ugly, but that was because of major debt, war, and the herculean task of creating a new political culture of equality after centuries of living under the rule of power and privilege. I still do not like Napoleon, though, even though he is indeed interesting.