European History since 1648

Before the start of Peter the Great era in 1682, Russia embraced the policy of closed borders and little communication with Western world. However, Peter changed the country’s identity due to his progressive ideology. The following essay describes Peter’s era and its impacts on the country. After analysis, it becomes clear that Peter’s reign eroded Russia’s traditional policy and reputation due to the emphasis on westernization as known from Custom Book Report.

Peter the Great's main aim after rising into power was to transform Russia by adopting the Western structure. He wanted Russia to be mighty like the then superpowers, namely France, Great Britain, and Sweden. Peter believed that the Western model was the best tool of revolution. He deployed a lot of resources to persuade the Western technicians and scholars to come to Russia. Peter then initiated reforms in the major institutions, namely the military and the courts. In addition, the ruler sent Russians to Western institutions to gain experience. He connected Russia to the West by investing in transport vessels such as ships, shipyards, and sea fortresses.

Peter understood that the Western culture had a big role in the modernization and, as a result, wanted the Russians to behave and look like Europeans. He motivated the country to engage in commercial activities in order to step up the country’s industries as a way of fostering economic development. As a result, Russia ended up adopting the European model, thus leaving behind their traditions.

In conclusion, it is evident that Peter’s reign changed Russia’s traditional regime due to his dream of westernization. His development program entailed the adoption of the Western policies and ideas without considering their influence. In the process, the country abandoned their traditional norms.

The traditional theories of universe nature shaped consequent studies on the geographic outlook of the universe. The following essay analyzes heliocentric and geocentric views of the universe. The analysis of the two shows that the geocentric theory prompted more studies that came up with the heliocentric view.

There are notable differences between heliocentric and geocentric views of the world. Geocentric view is based on the belief that the Earth is located at the center of the universe, and everything revolves around it. This theory was invented and used in the Ancient Greece. Scholars such as Ptolemy and Aristotle adopted the idea that the Sun, the Moon, and the other parts of the galaxy surround the earth. This theory was supported by two observations. Firstly, the Sun, the Moon, and planets were seen to revolve around the Earth on a daily basis, with the stars rotating around the pole. Secondly, the scholars perceived the land to be stable and in a constant state of rest.

According to heliocentric view, the stationary object is the Sun with the other objects of the Solar System rotating around it. This theory appeared in the 3rd century, with Aristarchus of Samos disapproving geocentric view. This model encountered more developments in the 16th century after the incorporation of mathematics in its concepts. A century later, Johannes Kepler elaborated the model extensively through introducing of elliptical objects.

In summary, the question of the universe structure caused a lot of attention of the scientists throughout the history of the Earth. Geocentric model of the universe was thoroughly examined and dismisses, as the Earth was proved to move. Further investigations identified that the Sun is the central object of the Solar System.

The French revolution that took place in 1789-1799 was one of the historical events that shaped the current France. The following essay analyzes the revolution and its reasons. Analysis demonstrates that the French government had dictatorial policies that contrasted with more democratic authorities of England.

French Revolution was caused by economic, social, political, and cultural factors. The economic crisis leading to royal debts preceded the revolution. Due to the accumulating arrears, the government could barely sustain its people, despite the country’s deposits in resources The government levied high taxes, leading to high food prices and low wages. For this reason, people from lower class could not afford their living. This crisis led to the revolt. The French politics also contributed to the revolution because the citizens were unhappy about the country’s monarchical leadership that resulted in tyranny. Executions approved by the king led to the sense of insecurity in the country. As a consequence of the dictatorial leadership, the citizens started revolting.

Social causes of the revolution entailed marginalization of the social classes. For instance, judging by the taxes, the higher classes paid less while the majority of the poor paid higher taxes. Lower class citizens had no privileges such as voting or freedom of speech. The inequality that existed forced the lower class citizens to revolt.

The French and Glorious Revolution had notable differences. The French Revolution was a bloody affair due to the violence involved. The major trait of the French revolution was the guillotining of people, coupled by endless violence. In contrast, the Glorious Revolution was peaceful, and no violence or death occurred. The parliament invited King William and Mary of Orange from Holland to rule England by signing a bill of rights. The two leaders made an agreement to rule England without violence, thus leading to revolutionized England.

In summary, it is clear that the French Government had a dictatorial policy that contrasted with a more democratic leadership in England. The government had oppressive policies such as unfair taxation and marginalization. On the contrary, England leadership managed to develop dialogue and collaborative administration which fostered the English Revolution.