How are the french revolution and the glorious revolution the same?

Answer 1

In the Glorious Revolution, there was no bloodshed or violence. It was when parliament invited King William and Mary of Orange over from Holland to rule England if they signed the Bill of Rights and agreed to rule peacefully and fairly and they did.

The French Revolution was one of the bloodiest revolutions of all time. Thousands of people were guillotined and it was started because the lower class people of France (about 75%) hated the monarchs who were doing nothing for them.

To call it a bloodless revolution would of course be a gross falsification of real world history: Killicranie yielded 2,600 casualties, Dunkeld produced at least a thousand and in Ireland's Williamite War the Battle of the Boyne had 2,250 casualties and the Siege of Derry may have produced as many as 10,000 dead depending on who is to be believed. (Strangely, the battles with religious underpinnings seem to produce the most flagrant of liars. Crusader data bases are particularly suspect. Terms like "the Massacre at XYZ" must be cross checked, and then double checked.)

Answer 2

The Restoration involved the end of the Commonwealth introduced by the Parliamentary party and Oliver Cromwell after the Civil War, and the reversion to monarchy under Charles II. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 was instrumental in deposing his brother and successor, James II, for his incipient Catholicism and his covert dealings with France. William of Orange was invited to take the English throne on the grounds of his marriage to Jame's daughter Mary.

So both were examples of 'regime change'. But the first involved a change of the system of governance (from republic to monarchy) and the second was a change of ruler within a monarchical system. However, the Glorious Revolution marked the threshold of change towards a true constitutional monarchy.