Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Submitted by
Elizabeth Ping
4142216
Although the French Revolution did not begin until July of 1789, there were
numerous precipitating factors already escalating turmoil and causing a spiraling chaos.
Ultimately, the French Revolution represented a point of change in modern European history,
and its influence had far-reaching consequences. The years preceding the French Revolution
were in many ways like a festering boil with the purulence of disease rising to the surface
and then exploding in a mess of stench and destruction once the pressure became too great. It
is difficult to sum up and categorize the events that led France to mayhem; however, for the
purposes of this paper, the causative factors will be looked at from three perspectives –
I. French Society
French society in the period leading up to the French Revolution was highly
sophisticated and had remained practically unchanged because those who had power and
wealth passed it on to their offspring. The peasants and common people were required to
support those in the upper classes and be the work horses of the nation, earning little for
themselves and their families. The historian, George Rude, likened French eighteenth-
people: the peasants at the base, the bourgeoisie in the middle or central layer, and the Court
and aristocracy at the apex.1 Similarly, France was divided into three orders or estates: the
First Estate (clergy), the Second Estate (nobility), and the Third Estate (commoners).2 At the
1
George Rude, The French Revolution: It’s Causes and its Legacy after 200 Years (New York,
NY: Grove Press, 1988), 1-2.
2
William Duiker and Jackson Speilvogel, World History (Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2010),
532.
2
core, the French Revolution was a result of a class struggle as the poor fought for greater
Nobility
The government of France relied on older traditions at the time of Louis XVI’s
coronation.4 There was no official constitution, and there were 39 constituent provinces with
their own local customs. In one town alone, there were 53 courts. In short, there were no
universal laws that applied to every citizen of the country. The king proclaimed his absolute
power through divine right, and proudly stated, “I am the state.”5 Even though the king was
simultaneously head of state and representative of God, the monarchy was still responsible
for his finances. This meant that the king could not waste royal capital to the point of
exhaustion or give it to unworthy subjects who were attempting to rob the king of his
wealth.6 Indeed, the monarchy relied on the revenue gained from taxing the poor and loans
taken from aristocratic lenders.7 The watchful eyes of the public during the French
Revolution would eventually expose the material trappings of Louis XVI and his inadequate
contention that the French monarchy was surrounded by an egotistical and indulgent
atmosphere. Although she was apparently well liked in the beginning of her reign, the French
3
Donald Kagan, Steven Osmet, and Frank Turner, The Western Heritage (New Jersey: Prentice
Hall, 2001), 629.
4
Nancy Plain, Loiuis XVI: Marie Antoinette and the French Revolution (New York, NY: Marshal
Cavendish Books, 2001), 17.
5
Richard Heath Dabney, The Causes of the French Revolution (New York, NY: Henry Holt and
Co., 1888), 58.
6
Pierre Goubert, The Course of French History (New York, NY: Franklin Watts, 1988), 241.
7
Ibid., 251.
8
Ibid., 266.
3
people ultimately came to dislike her.9 Marie-Antoinette was obsessed with maintaining her
beauty and commanding her friends. She was also particularly whimsical and would
intervene inappropriately in government business. Furthermore, she held lavish balls and
feasts without thinking about the financial cost of her extravagance. At one point during her
reign, she had gambled millions away in card games and went through 200 formal gowns and
country dresses.10 Marie-Antoinette’s mother, Maria Theresa, saw the danger in her
daughter’s frivolous spending and wrote that she was “heading straight for disaster” and had
Specifically, the nobility represented the Second Estate and consisted of figures of
power in the arenas of government, military, law, and high church offices.12 This sector was
land. The aristocracy was largely disliked because its members possessed certain inherent
rights by being born with power and were not required to pay the “taille” or “cut,” which was
a particular kind of tax. This was very unpopular since the wealthiest individuals did not owe
money to the government while the poorest individuals were required to give substantial
amounts of their income without question. Furthermore, the nobility required the peasants to
pay certain fees for using the community facilities that they owned, such as the mill, oven,
and winepress, thus earning additional revenue from the already-sapped lower classes.
9
Ibid., 266.
10
Plain, 22-23.
11
Ibid., 22-23.
12
Duiker and Speilvogel, 532.
4
The clergy or First Estate was made up of approximately 130,000 members of the
Catholic Church, and, like the nobility, they were exempt from paying certain taxes.13 They
also owned ten percent of the land, and some had familial ties with nobility, which probably
aided them in not having to be responsible for government taxation. Additionally, the
relationship with the higher members of French society increased the likelihood of their
sympathizing with the nobility rather than the peasants and commoners more often than not.14
Clergy members selected from their own ranks those who should hold the most power in the
church. Little could thwart the clergy since they reflected the entire establishment of the
Catholic Church and ecclesiastical duties.15 Furthermore, the king supported the collecting of
tithes from the Third Estate, making the clergy a formidable party.
total population or approximately 2.3 million individuals.16 In society, they accounted for the
merchants, industrialists, bankers, physicians, public officers, writers, and lawyers. The
middle class owned a sizable amount of land, which totaled between 20 to 25 percent of
France. Although the bourgeoisie reflected some professional disciplines, they were still not
allowed many of the privileges that the nobility enjoyed, so the middle class became
increasingly disgruntled with the prevalent social order of French tradition. The bourgeoisie
argued in favor of Enlightenment ideals, which defiantly opposed the customs of the old
order that focused on birthright instead of a person’s ability to improve his financial
Peasants
France’s peasants lived in a dismal and pitiful state of existence. The peasants made
up the Third Estate, which accounted for almost two-thirds of the population, and they were
despised by almost everyone.17 With poverty being the nation’s most visible social concern, it
was obvious to many that the plight of the peasantry was almost inescapable. Desperate
because of the limited opportunities for employment and assistance, many poor people chose
to shamelessly beg in the streets by faking illnesses.18 Others chose prostitution and crime to
make an income. These hard-pressed individuals mainly consisted of the very young and
very old who could not work. Even those who could hold a job were at a loss when crop
failures increased since the cost of living had risen so dramatically while average wages
remained fairly constant. Charitable funds were also dwindling rapidly since the influx of
city dwellers created an unwieldy number of indigent men, women, and children.
By and large, the peasants of France argued for greater control of their finances after
years of being suppressed by those with wealth. They were the poorest citizens, but they
were expected to give most of their income to those with more financial stability. They were
required to pay the “taile,” which was a basic tax, in addition to taxes on such common goods
as salt and soap.19 Taxation for the running of monasteries cost the peasants more than eight
percent of their income.20 The feudal system was an artifact from medieval times, and the
feudal taxes were required even when the harvest was less than satisfactory because most
peasants rented the land that they farmed from the more affluent landowners. Taxes for
17
William Doyle, The Oxford History of the French Revolution (New York, NY: Oxford
University Press, 2002), 16.
18
Ibid., 15.
19
Plain, 19.
20
Doyle, 11.
6
peasants were variable throughout France and ranged from a few cents to a quarter of one’s
income. The dues the peasants owed were infinite since the feudal lords controlled the land
they rented. The peasants were further hampered by the responsibility of the “corvee”
Frances’s peasants desired more than that the old feudal structures be abandoned;
they desperately wanted the idea of privilege to be renounced.21 The privilege of the upper
classes over the peasants was a despised principle since it allowed those who were wealthy
enough to replace standing officials by buying them off. Those who cried for social change
promoted the idea that opportunities for elevation of employment should not be based on
such privilege but on an individual’s talents.22 In turn, the people would benefit from greater
equality of work status and civil duties. The renunciation of privileged hunting rights, private
courts, and tolls were also suggested. No more could the wealthy individuals who gained
their advantages through birth assume power irrefutably; supremacy must be earned through
hard work and natural ability. Consequently, a record of grievances and aspirations that the
people conveyed (i.e., cahier de doléances) was set forth. This ultimately represented the
seeds of the subsequent revolution because the public opinion reflected the need for social
Social and political thought during the Age of Enlightenment focused on exploring
the ideas of natural rights and social contract theories. In fact, the very foundation of
21
Ibid., 117.
22
Ibid., 116.
23
John Markhoff, The Abolition of Feudalism: Peasants, Lords, and Legislators in The French
Revolution (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania University Press, 1996), 22.
7
philosophical thought concerning ethical and social values was formulated by introducing the
relationship of how an individual’s rights influence practical politics and form a new, better
type of humanity. These concepts eventually became the basis of the subsequent French
Revolution since the prevailing monarchy was viewed as failing to follow the social contract
Philosophes
Montesquieu, Locke, Diderot, Alembert, Rousseau, Hume, Gibbon, Smith, Lessing, and
Kant) living in eighteenth-century Europe who were concerned with the application of the
science of reason to all social practices. Although each of the philosophes had a different
opinion about how government and society should be reformed, their primary desire was to
promote human liberty.24 Peter Gay asserts that the philosophes’ common goals involved
“freedom from arbitrary power, freedom of speech, freedom of trade, freedom to realize
one’s talents, freedom of aesthetic response, freedom, in a word, of moral man to make his
way in the world.”25 The peasants relayed the enthusiasm to induce a state of freedom so that
they could have the opportunity to actually “be something” in life.26 The nullity in politics
that the peasants possessed was specifically described by Abbé Sieyès in his pamphlet “What
is the Third Estate?” In this document, he suggested that the moving force of the common
people would be the potential for greater political, social, and economic significance.
Voltaire's, Letter's on the English, resounded irrevocably in the minds of the French
people. In fact, some historians argue that his works marked the gradual shift against the
24
Kagan, Osmet, and Turner, 590-591.
25
Peter Gay, The Enlightenment: An Interpretation (New York, NY: Knoph, 1967), 4.
26
Jordan, 15.
8
prevailing order of the Christianity, the government, and some of society in French culture
which at last brought forth the need for social renovation.27 He attacked the church with rigid
and direct scorn and the State at a lesser degree but still apparent in his reflections. Voltaire
distinguished the Catholic Church and all religions likewise as the "source of all intolerance
and misery" that was a force directly impeding scientific reasoning. Furthermore, Voltaire
championed his own reason and refuted the previously-taught philosophy to distrust one's
own rationalizations.28 Thus, Voltaire ushered in a new school of thought that was seemingly
devoid of prior dogma. He expressed the need to think rationally, though, at the same time he
was somewhat frightened of the storm that change could potentially bring. Nevertheless, he
held reluctance to support any human act that he deemed illogical, and therefore he could not
While Voltaire exclaimed his contempt for religion, Montesquieu exclaimed his
forbearance for the monarchy of France.30 His book, The Spirit of the Laws, revealed his
philosophy on political matters. Though he felt that no perfect model of government could
exist, Montesquieu fervently believed that civil and political laws should reflect the nature of
man which should thusly demonstrate the atmosphere of the country in general. Montesquieu
predicted that the customary form of government, despotism, would eventually lead to
anarchy when the common people would lose all sense of freedom and become servile.31 For
this reason, Montesquieu promoted a government similar to that of England's system, with a
27
Alfred, B. Ernst, The Cambridge Modern History: The French Revolution (London:
Cambridge University Press, 1904), 10.
28
Ibid., 11.
29
Ibid., 12.
30
Ibid., 18.
31
Ibid., 19.
9
and judicial roles would be most ideal. Additionally, Montesquieu called for a reformation in
taxation based on a scale of whether an item was a necessity for living or merely a luxury,
with luxury items being more taxed more heavily. Moreover, Montesquieu felt that everyone
should be afforded the opportunity to be educated on the principles of working.32 In this way,
Locke proposed that all men in the state of nature were born free and equal and only
because of increased wealth, especially by government, are these natural liberties stripped
away.34 However, Locke also argued that government could be utilized to protect certain
rights of individuals such as the right to life and the right to property. By forming a kind of
social contract between a people and a governmental system, the natural rights of man could
be safe guarded. The stipulation to Lockean theory is that people have a right to be loyal to
their government only as long as the government is loyal to them; the only reason
government should exist is for the mutual benefit of all.35 Consequently, Locke’s ideas of his
treatises of government provided initiative for the American and French Revolutions.36 By
the close of the seventeenth century, the grievances of the larger people were coming to a
head, and the present monarchy was no longer satisfying the concerns and needs of the
citizens.
challenged the necessity for a country to be governed by an absolute monarchy.37 In fact, the
32
Ibid., 20.
33
Ibid., 21.
34
Ibid., 7.
35
Lora P. Oberle, The Declaration of Independence (Mankato: MN, Bridgestone Books,
2002), 35-36.
36
Ibid., 41.
37
Peirre Goubert, The Course of French History (New York, NY: Franklin Watts, 1988), 273.
10
Declaration of Independence, developed during the American Revolution, has been viewed
by modern historians as directly affecting France’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and
Citizen and the French Constitution of 1791. The enthusiasm that the American anti-colonial
insurrection unleashed spread through France and elicited understanding from those who
were familiar with Enlightenment philosophical views. The Declaration of Independence was
translated into French and distributed throughout the country.38 The result of the American
Revolution was what the philosophes envisioned to be their idealistic form of government.39
Most envied by the French was the freedom that American citizens enjoyed, such as the
freedom of press, election of judges, majority voting for taxation practices, and opportunity
for education.
Physiocrats
economics and politics who looked toward natural laws for social reform, and their ideas
were largely based on those of Francois Quesnay’s Tableau Economique.40 Specifically, the
as being separated into three categories: the productive class (capitalists and laborers in
agriculture), the sterile class (nonagricultural laborers), and the idle class (clerical, noble, and
common people).41 Furthermore, they promoted the abolition of guilds and recommended
that all government revenue be raised from one tax on agriculture.42 With less government
interference, the physiocrats believed that the economy could flourish when each individual
38
Plain, 24.
39
Goubert, 272.
40
E. Hunt, History of Economic Thought: A Critical Perspective (Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 2002), 36.
41
Ibid., 38.
42
Ibid., 36.
11
acted under the doctrine of laissez faire capitalism.43 In this way, progress could be made as
individual wealth increased and not necessarily consisting of the nobility. The primary legacy
of the physiocrats was the new economy they set forth and its sharp contrast with the ideals
of mercantilism.44 Laissez faire capitalism would permit a more equal opportunity to gain
fortune and even out the disparity between the people who had money and those who did not
have money.
In the late 1770s, the French economy started to waiver in the domestic and foreign
domains.45 In essence, France was starting to lose control over the ability to maintain a
powerful, influential, and competitive system internally and externally. Financial difficulties
were seen even at the level of the monarchy, and this increasingly became the norm after
expensive wars generated high levels of debt and consumed much of the annual revenue.
resulted in mounting trade deficits when natural disaster struck, and other European nations
Increasing Debt
France acquired substantial debt during the Seven Years’ War or French and Indian
War and lost almost all of the American colonies to England.46 By the end of the Seven
Years' War, the federal deficit reached 50 million livres.47 Additional debt was accrued
during the American Revolution when France backed the American colonies against Great
43
Ibid., 59.
44
Dennis Canterbury, European Bloc Imperialism (Leiden, Brill, 2010), 126.
45
Lewis Gwynne, The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate (New York, NY: Routledge,
1999), 11.
46
Plain, Louis XVI, 19.
47
William Doyle, The French Revolution: Opposing Viewpoints (New York, NY: Greenhaven
Press, 2004), 63.
12
Britain.48 To supplement its war efforts, France was forced to take a loan for over 500 million
livres, which excluded the amount spent on naval operations.49 All in all, the total sum of the
American Revolution for the French has been evaluated at 1.3 billion, which was added on to
the amount still owed for previous war debts. Debt service was approximated to be at fifty
percent of the nation’s annual revenue.50 No one wanted to contribute to reducing the national
debt with his own money. For this reason, some recommended that France should declare
bankruptcy as it had done during previous periods of enormous debt.51 However, bankruptcy
was viewed as a highly dishonorable practice, which ruined credibility and frightened away
investors. Therefore, the only other option was to increase taxes even more in a nation where
issues. For instance, France anticipated that an alliance with America would create more
trade prospects.52 However, aiding the American Revolution depleted finances to such an
extent that France could not participate in its other international associations.53 The French
felt that their deteriorating funds were more important than defending the Dutch, who called
for French support when the Prussian army invaded the Dutch Republic in 1787. The country
could not uphold its obligation to assist in military efforts, and the French monarchy was left
48
Kagan, Osmet, and Turner, 626.
49
Goubert, 274.
50
Doyle, The Oxford History, 69.
51
Doyle, The French Revolution: Opposing Viewpoints, 64.
52
Sylvia Neely, A Concise History of the French Revolution (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers, 2008), 41.
53
Ibid., 49.
13
The Swiss banker Jacques Necker was appointed as the new director-general of
Revolution, his plan was to raise money for the war without raising the people’s taxes.55 In
the end, he was forced to leave office after it was revealed that the aristocracy was draining
the royal reserves through pensions, which upset the upper classes since they did not want to
give up the monetary privileges they believed that they deserved.56 Necker, in fact, shed light
on the wider scope of the monarchy’s outlandish expenditures, which totaled approximately
six to eight percent of spending and placed income at a surplus instead of a deficit.57 One
800,000 to her friend Polignac, which was a staggering amount equal to the wages of two
nation’s citizens, turning them against the monarchy and its frivolous spending.
Suffering Industries
The textile industry suffered due to increasing competition from Prussia, Switzerland,
Italy, Spain, and England.58 Furthermore, wealthier French citizens were choosing to limit
their overall spending on textiles, and by 1789, the textile industry’s productivity was at half
its previous rate.59 When the demand for textiles decreased, unemployment rates increased,
54
Ibid., 626.
55
Goubert, 270.
56
Kagan, Osmet, and Turner, 626.
57
Goubert, 271.
58
Ibid., 11.
59
Goubert, 290.
14
and those without work flocked to the cities where they met others who were in similar
situations. By this time, the city of Paris held 700,000 citizens and included many young and
contributed to an anxious and fearful atmosphere in which the inhabitants exchanged songs,
pamphlets, posters, and conversations about social and political change. Not initially
apparent, social unrest began to foment as a consequence of diminished incomes and limited
welfare opportunities for those who were presented with financial difficulties.
Likewise, the wine business endured hardship when the return on sales reached only
half the expected amount before the revolution.60 This was the end result of an
overproduction of wine and subsequent lowered wine prices that occurred between the years
1775 and 1778.61 In effect, wine production was an extensive French affair at the time. It is
estimated that the wine consumption constituted approximately a liter per day for urban
residents during the period preceding the revolution. Furthermore, there were thousands of
wine producers who were considered specialists in their trade and even more peasant wine
producers who were simply trying to earn some extra money. The overproduction greatly
affected the peasant class since the side business of cultivating grapes for wine afforded them
additional profit that allowed them to subsist on their meager incomes and meet their living
expenses. Without the supplementary income from the production of wine, the peasants were
at risk of increasing financial struggles since rentes (taxes) were always collected.62
Unlike Great Britain, France did not undergo a vast technological revolution during
the late eighteenth-century.63 During this time, the French still relied on older means to
60
Ibid., 11.
61
Ibid., 289.
62
Ibid., 290.
63
Ibid., 12.
15
produce goods, what modern historians call “proto-industrial.” The production methods
involved in the proto-industrial system were more sophisticated than the cottage industries of
the medieval era and relied on domestic workers who supplied raw materials to the
merchants who, in turn, relied on money from bankers. Finished goods were then transported
to America or other countries in Europe. Although this method sounds like a productive way
goods surpassed the traditional industries. The technological revolution allowed those
countries who embraced new systems to produce goods quicker and cheaper. The
modernization of work came in the form of mule and spinning jennies, with Great Britain
utilizing the most machines and thereby creating a clear lead in economic power.
Physiocrats
economy.64 This was because the physiocrats believed that agriculture was the foundation for
returning the country to wealth. True to their beliefs, the peasants typically lived in smaller
villages with populations of 2,000 or less, and the people of Frances tended to invest most of
their wealth in the land that they cultivated. The caveat to France’s reliance on their
agricultural system was that the peasants were taxed both by the government and by the
feudalistic system. Together with France’s comparatively lowered production rates for goods,
the country lagged behind the other European nations. Modern historians call feudal
64
Ibid., 12-13.
65
Ibid., 12-13.
16
One of the breaking points for the peasants came in the late 1780s when crop failures
led to famine and dramatically increased bread prices, making this staple unaffordable for
them.66 This crisis was compounded by a meddling in the corn trade by some who opposed a
change in trade regulations, which led to the belief that there was a deficient supply of corn
when in fact there was not.67 The fear over having a scarcity of corn and grain made the
peasants increasingly concerned, and many chose to endure long lines in order to wait for the
opportunity to receive free bread. The importance of bread for the French was immense. In
fact, bread was the mainstay of the French diet, and the people could not afford to spend as
much as 88 percent of their daily wage on food without sacrificing on other essentials.68 With
the majority of income spent on bread alone, spending on goods such as fuel and clothing
The multitudinous challenges that led to the eventual French Revolution were vastly
complex. To some extent, the spheres of society, politics, philosophy, and economic thought
contributed to the disruption and overturn of the government. The question of inequality
raised during the pre-revolutionary period amounted to the belief that the majority of
France’s citizens - the peasants - were being suppressed by taxation and poverty to such a
degree that they could not continue to live in squalor without rising up to protect the few
shreds of dignity that they did possess. Decades of indulgence by the monarchy and privilege
among the upper classes led to their being held in contempt and a call for equal opportunity
for public employment and terms of office for those handling government affairs. Already-
66
Sylvia Neely, A Concise History of the French Revolution (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers, 2008), 72.
67
Bertha M. Gardiner, Epochs of Modern History (New York, NY: Longmans, Green, and Co.,
1910), 59.
68
Neely, 72.
17
inadequacies to provide a better country for every citizen, not just those were born wealthy.
Although time would reveal the “reign of terror” that the French Revolution would entail,
few would question the necessity for reform so that France could become a nation of “liberty,
Bibliography
Dabney, Heath Richard. The Causes of the French Revolution. New York: Henry
Holt and Co., 1888.
Doyle, William. The French Revolution: Opposing Viewpoints. New York: Greenhaven
Press, 2004.
69
Kagan, Osmet, and Turner, 624-625.
18
Doyle, William. The Oxford History of the French Revolution. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2002.
Duiker, William and Jackson Spielvogel. World History. Boston: Cengage Learning,
2010.
Ernst, B. Alfred. The Cambridge Modern History: The French Revolution. London:
Cambridge University Press, 1904.
Gardiner, M. Bertha. Epochs of Modern History. New York: Longmans, Green, and Co.,
1910.
Goubert, Pierre. The Course of French History. New York: Franklin Watts, 1988.
Gwynne, Lewis. The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate. New York: Routledge,
1999.
Jordan, P. David. The King’s Trial: Louis XVI vs. French Revolution. Los Angeles:
California Press, 1979.
Kagan, Donald, Steven Osmet, and Frank Turner, The Western Heritage. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall, 2001.
Markhoff, John. The Abolition of Feudalism: Peasants, Lords, and Legislators in the French
Revolution. University Park: Pennsylvania University Press, 1996.
Neely, Sylvia. A Concise History of the French Revolution. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers, 2008.
Plain, Nancy. Louis XVI: Marie Antoinette and the French Revolution. New York: Marshall
Cavendish Books, 2001.
Rudé, George. The French Revolution: It’s Causes, and Its Legacy after 200 Years. New
York: Grove Press, 1988.