Afterwards Alejandro has checked the exercise 22, it was about the reforms of Charles III's reing. The reforms he did weren't enough for all the people of the time.One of the reforms he did is very curious, he declared the honesty of all the professions, this means that handworks have the same value as the rest of professions.Then Laura Meco has checked the exercise 23 that asked about the limitations of these reforms, one of the problems of these reforms was that most of the people continued being poor so there wasn't enough demand, so the industries didn't develop. This created a vicious circle.
After the correction of the exercises Paqui has talked to us about Charles IV, who looks like our actual king, Juan Carlos I. When Paqui has finished explaining Charles IV we have started checking the crossword from unit 2 starting from Dani.
As some people were talking while we checked the crossword Paqui has said that maybe she will change our seats so we have kept silence.
After the correction of the crossword we have started the new unit called "The French Revolution and the Restoration". We have copied the index from the blackboard. Later Enrique has started reading the Introduction in the book and the Causes of the Revolution. After Paqui has explained us all that.
Today for homework we have to do the exercise 1 in page 22.
Some new words we have learned today is:
-to issue a decree: hacer público un decreto
-vicious circle: círculo vicioso
-to be gifted to: estar dotado para
Bye!!
11 comments:
Hi Javi! Good work :)
I have found only two mistakes:
-some people in the class were STOOD up.
-Then Paqui has REMINDED US the things we saw yesterday...
I think you could add a little bit more about the causes of the French Revolution, when it started, and why.
And we have also learned another expression:
-"To be gifted to": "estar dotado para".
That's all I can add. See you soon!
Ah, I'm not sure if "to be stood up" is right. Maybe it's better to say:
-some people were STANDING up.
Paqui, what's the right one?
Hello Javi,
Here you have my corrections:
- We say "go/come into the class", not "pass to".
- People were "standing up"
- Be careful with punctuation marks: after every dot, you have to click "enter". And you have to write dots instead of commas to separate different ideas.
- Charles IV looks like or ressembles...
You could add why we have talked about a vicious circle and something more about what I´ve said in the introduction of the new unit. You could also add some of the comments or questions your classmates have made or asked.
And it´s sure in I´m changing your seats, because many of you speak a lot. Maybe you´ll be more quiet with different classmates.
Anyway, well done.
Laura, It´s better to say "were standing up", because it has been something specific at a specific moment and this is the common use of the Present Continuous tense.
I´ve included some questions about Marie Antoinette on this week´s challenge. Maybe you will be interested in solving it and the research will help you for your French project ;)
Hello!
I've checked all!
Good evening!
Hi!
I think I'll enjoy this unit, because since I read about the French revolution I wanted to Know the causes of this important event and I was very young to understand them.
I have a question. Why the majority of the leaders of the revolution died beheaded by their own followers, by the people who supported them in the revolution.
I expect to find the answers in this unit.
Bye! See you on Monday!
Javi, the vicious circle was about Spain and the limits of the reforms made during Charles III´s reign. The most needed reform wasn´t done and peasants were so poor that they couldn´t buy anything and this damaged industry and so on.
Review the punctuation marks;)
Hello Javi!
Very good work as always! =)
I haven't seen any mistakes. Paqui I think that if you change the seats we won't speak. If you change it I would like to be in the first line of the class.
Bye bye see you on monday and have a good weekend.
Alejandro, the execution of many of the leaders of the Revolution was partly related to the circumstances: during the period of Terror, the bloodiest stage of the Revolution, the situation in France was so dangerous for the revolutionary achievements (France was being attacked by the armies of the absolute powers in Europe and there were also counter-revolutionary movements in France) that the people in charge of the government, the Jacobins, took extraordinary measures to stop these threats. In that period "extraordinary measures" meant exemplary executions. The right to life wasn´t still considered as one of the human rights and violence was very common as the best way to solve public order problems. The guillotine was used as a way of punishing many crimes, not only the political ones. During Terror, the Jacobins judged and executed all the suspected of counter-revolutionary activities and this included people who criticized their policy, if they considered that criticism could be a danger to the Revolution. When the situation became calmer and the invasion danger disappeared, the most moderate members of the Convention got more support and they took advantage of this to get rid off the most radical ones. And they did the same: they used the guillotine.
The most important Girondist leaders were executed during Terror (and also some moderate Jacobins, like Danton) and the most important Jacobins were executed during the Thermidorian reaction, for example, Robespierre, Saint Just or Couthon. It may seem difficult to understand, but if you imagine the context and you think about those times, is not much different from other war periods. Remember the English Revolutions or the Thirty Years´ War. These were very bloody conflicts. The French Revolution Terror may seem worst, because many of these executions were made in the name of freedom, Reason, equality… This is an interesting dilemma: can these ideas be defended using violence? What do you think? What would you have done, if you were a French revolutionary?
This is one of the reasons why I love this unit so much. I hope you like it too. Have a good night.
hi Paqui!
I think I would adapted to the situation and to the time but I don't know exactly what I would did.
With my ideals the violence wouldn't be justified even if it was necessary, you can incarcerate them, I thing asking the people what they thought about the situation and appeal to their reason.
I think they are not the best solutions but I'm confused because now I know the real ideology of the era and the pressure the situation exert to them.
Bye see you on Wednesday!
Hello Alejandro. I think you´re right. It´s difficult to know how one would have acted in such circumstances, because we are now influenced by human rights, non violence and other positive values. Maybe we would have followed the revolutionary tide, especially if we were convinced that the lives of the majority of the population would improve.
Human rights were one of the consequences of so many bloody wars and violence against other human beings. And this was because some people started asking questions about the value of human life and if there is justification for torture of execution. If we consider life as one of the human rights,we don´t have the right to take a life, even if we are fighting for freedom or equality. Many governments use these supposedly superior rights to justify their violent actions: they consider that freedom is superior to life or that there are some more worthwhile lives than others. We can find this type of ideology in the actions of the U.S.A against Irak or Bin Laden or Israel´s actions against the Palestinians.
The Jacobins are the perfect example of good ideas that became a tyranny when they tried to get them using the same means absolute monarchs had used against them. But they probably didn´t have any other option. We can´t justify this, but we can understand it if we analyze the context and try to see the period through their eyes.
Have a good night.
Post a Comment