[saofan_315]

Originally Posted by lockedheart

Aww, you teach? And I've never taken a formal class on just French history, but a lot of euro history classes. I also took a class on France's politics which really delved into the fr.

Well, I sort of teach. I work as a tutor right now. Eventually, once I get my credentials and everything, I'll be a teacher. For now, I just help high school kids with their history classes and prepare them for the SAT.

[lockedheart]

Originally Posted by saofan_315

Well, I sort of teach. I work as a tutor right now. Eventually, once I get my credentials and everything, I'll be a teacher. For now, I just help high school kids with their history classes and prepare them for the SAT.

Oh, very cool! I used a lot of history on the SAT.

[Keri]

So I admit I don't have the most knowledge of the French Revolution and I've enjoyed reading the responses. One thing that I've been wondering about is France's role financially in the American Revolution. France already had financial troubles leftover from the Seven Years' War and made it worse by helping out the Americans. Even though the poor in France revolted against the monarchy, what kind of animosity formed against the Americans? Did they partially blame America for their awful conditions? I've always heard that the French tend to have a general disdain towards Americans, so I guess I'm just wondering at what point it started and if it began around this time when they saw how the US began to thrive at France's expense, but France itself went downhill.

[saofan_315]

I'd love to hear an answer to that question. I tried doing some research about how the French-American relationship deteriorated, but I didn't find much. So one said it was due to the US backing out of some promised military support during a war with Spain during the 1800s, but that's about all I know. I'd also take a guess that France didn't quite like getting whipped by Germany during both wars while the US sat on the sidelines of isolationism during each war's beginning.

[Keri]

I'm glad the question made sense, it was hard to word well-enough to post. Though in addition to France helping out financially, after the US was established, it became more of an economic partner with Britain rather than France. That probably didn't feel too good either. But the part about the US being more isolated during the world wars definitely makes sense too.

[lockedheart]

Not to change the topic completely, because I love/want to hear an expert answer on the above question, but has anyone heard of/studied the Roanoke Colony? I'm very interested. I went there and it was intriguing. Google Virginia Dare and Walter Raleigh if you've never heard of it. It's a great link between Tudor and early American history.

[theagentcoma]

The Roanoke Colony? As in one of the biggest 'unsolved mysteries' in American history? Super creepy. What was the word that was carved into the tree? "Croatoan" or something like that?

[aloneatlastnj]

Originally Posted by theagentcoma

Sweet! yeah I enjoyed it but I could never be an archivist or do historical research. I took a class that was all about that my second to last semester in school and it convinced me I wasn't cut out for historical research. What are your areas of interest?

Also, we're so cool and so is this thread.

this is what i do now. i actually got a job working with my mentor in college doing archives and historical research. freakin' love it.

[aloneatlastnj]

Originally Posted by KingsCrossing

Currently reading War and Remembrance by Herman Wouk.

Love it so far. Anybody who's into WW2 historical fiction should definitely check it out.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0316954993/absolutepunk-20/

thanks for this - sounds right up my alley.

[lockedheart]

Everyone in this thread is my hero.

Also, Happy Potsdam Conference!

[lockedheart]

Originally Posted by theagentcoma

The Roanoke Colony? As in one of the biggest 'unsolved mysteries' in American history? Super creepy. What was the word that was carved into the tree? "Croatoan" or something like that?

Yeah!! I've been there, it's crazy awesome! THey have a play called "The Lost Colony" and it's very well done. Virginia Dare was the first englishman(woman) born in the United States, at Roanoke. They don't know what happened to her or her colony-mates. Croaton was carved in a tree, and there are several possible scenarios that might have taken place- however, since there were no bones when the British returned, it's unlikely that they were flat-out massacred by the natives. If they were killed, they were definitely taken away and hidden well. A more plausible explanation is that they might have conjoined with them- there are several DNA tests still being conducted on a lot of modern Native Americans (Called the Lumby tribe) to see whether or not their DNA is similar to known family members of the Lost Colony. If so, these individuals would not only have a lot of insight into their family history, but also a lot of $$$$$$$$.

[saofan_315]

Why is it so hard for people to believe that those at Roanoak either died off or joined one of the nearby native tribes? Yeah, it's strange there isn't a whole lot of evidence, but it's not really the great mystery that most make it out to be.

[richter915]

Originally Posted by saofan_315

Why is it so hard for people to believe that those at Roanoak either died off or joined one of the nearby native tribes? Yeah, it's strange there isn't a whole lot of evidence, but it's not really the great mystery that most make it out to be.

I don't think it's the outcome that's so intriguing but rather the rapidity and lack of traceable evidence.

going back to the French Revolution. What're your thoughts on the role of robespierre and the reign of terror? Was his radical nature necessary for the revolution or would a leader like Napoleon have risen up but after a longer period of nebulous rule?

[lockedheart]

Originally Posted by richter915

I don't think it's the outcome that's so intriguing but rather the rapidity and lack of traceable evidence.

going back to the French Revolution. What're your thoughts on the role of robespierre and the reign of terror? Was his radical nature necessary for the revolution or would a leader like Napoleon have risen up but after a longer period of nebulous rule?

I think Robespierre's period symbolizes the inefficiency of the revolution- it was completely factional and therefore returned full circle (ish) to an autocracy. I think Napoleon came to power because the Directory not only saw potential in him, but also a lack of potential in the situation and a need for change.

[saofan_315]

Originally Posted by lockedheart

I think Robespierre's period symbolizes the inefficiency of the revolution- it was completely factional and therefore returned full circle (ish) to an autocracy. I think Napoleon came to power because the Directory not only saw potential in him, but also a lack of potential in the situation and a need for change.

This is pretty much how I would respond to the question. The French and American revolutions, although similar in time and philosophies, were dramatically different in support. I feel like the French revolution was just as you said- fractional. Each "leader" of the revolution became either too power hungry or too corrupt when he became in charge or just gained too much power.

Napoleon became leader because, well, he gave the people what they wanted. Napoleon pretty much gave the French people all of what they hoped to desire out of the revolution (more freedoms and liberties and getting rid of the established aristocracy), which is why he was able to stay in power. If you keep the people happy, you're pretty set as a leader.