THE FRENCH REVOLUTIONA. Mathews – Revolution and Reaction: Europe 1789-1849R. Lerner, S. Meacham and E. McNall Burns -Western Civilizations V2D. Murphy, T. Morris, R. Stanton and S. Waller - Europe 1760-1871S. Miller – Mastering Modern European HistoryM. Chambers, B. Hanawalt, T.R. Raab, I. Woloch and R. Grew –The Western Experience

ORIGINS OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION

IntroductionBy the 1780s France was the most populous and powerful state in Europe, the most centralized and culturally the most advanced.The French Revolution of 1789 proved to be a turning point in European history. Its sheer radicalism, creativity and claims of universalism made it unique. Its ultimate slogan – Liberty, Equality and Fraternity – expressed social and civic ideals that became the foundations of modern western civilization. In the name of individual liberty French revolutionaries swept away the institutionalized constraints of the old regime seigneural charges upon the land, vestiges of feudalism, tax privileges, guild monopolies on commerce, and even (1794) black slavery overseas. The revolutionaries held that legitimate governments required written constitutions, elections, and powerful legislatures

They demanded equality before the law for all regions of the country, denying the claims to special treatment of privileged groups, provinces, towns or religions.

The term fraternity expressed a different kind of revolutionary goal. It meant that all citizens regardless of social class or region shared a common fate in society and that the nation’s well-being could override the interests of individual citizens.

STRUCTURE OF FRANCE BEFORE THE REVOLUTION

Monarchy, Government and Administration

The Ancien RegimeThe term is used to describe the system of government and structure of society in France prior to 1789, ie what existed before the

1 | P a g e

revolution. It was one where the government was based on absolute monarchy and where society and social structure were based on privilege.

Absolutism

Absolute monarchy was a system in which the state was ruled by a monarch who claimed absolute or total authority. Absolute monarchs were thereby answerable to no-one for their actions and their word was law. Theoretically their powers were unlimited although in practice they governed within the established laws of the kingdom. The basis of this authority was a mixture of divine right (kings were placed in authority by God) and hereditary right. Divine right was the foundation of the monarchy. Monarchs had a duty to have paternal concern for their subjects.

Absolute monarchy was the norm in Europe in 1789. Monarchs were buttressed in their rule by a landed aristocracy whose authority and privileges were protected by the crown and on whom the crown relied to keep local order. This state of affairs was given religious sanction by the church, whose privileges and positions the crown protected. These institutions owned much of the land directly and could demand a range of dues and services from their peasantry.

The monarchy of Louis XVI was absolute. He was answerable only to God – divine right was symbolized by the anointing of the king in the coronation service. Political power was concentrated in the hands of 1 man; it was personal and therefore the personality, qualities and weaknesses of the monarch had a decisive impact on political decisions.

Social Structure18th century France was divided, not along classes but by order or estate. There were 3 orders of citizens or estates. Each order had its particular rights, privileges and obligations:The 1st Estate – the clergyThe 2nd Estate – the nobilityThe 3rd Estate – everybody else; the peasants

What distinguished these orders was not necessarily wealth, but privilege. The 1st two orders enjoyed a range of privileges and the 3 rd

Estate none.

2 | P a g e

The 1 st Estate – the clergy There were about 130,000 clergy in France from parish priests, bishops and archbishops. In many ways the clergy mirrored French society- parish priests were generally poor and had much in common with the peasantry; bishops and abbots were all noble in background and recruited from the aristocracy, wealthy and servants of the crown. They enjoyed large incomes and a number of privileges. The clergy: Had their own courts Had their own assembly to control their affairs. Enjoyed exemptions from all direct taxes (taille) and many indirect

taxes (covee royale)

Collected their own taxes -tithe – on all land under cultivation, an average of 1/10 and 1/15 of the annual harvest, from the rest of the population.

The Catholic Church had a monopoly over education and care of the sick.

In exchange the church supported the monarchy and donated a don gratuity (gift of money raised largely through a levy on the lower clergy) to the crown.

The church owned 10% of the land in France and enjoyed considerable income from this source in rents and other dues. Although they were a wealthy institution and had many ostensibly wealthy bishops, most parish priests were poor and received only a fraction of the tithes levied supposedly for their maintenance.

The 2 nd Estate – the nobility There were between 100,000 to 400,000 in the 18th century. Many were small farmers but had social status and privileges including:

Not liable to some of the more cruel punishments Exemption from the taille (main direct tax) Exemption from forced labour on the roads (covee royale) The right to bear sword and access to officer status in the army. They owned over 10% of the land and enjoyed rights as local lords

of the manor (hunting rights, right to a portion of the peasant’s crop).

There were many types of nobles:Nobility of the sword- descendants of the old feudal nobilityNobility of the robe- gained their status through official posts they held or had purchased in the law courts and royal administrationAnnoblis – purchase of a royal office

3 | P a g e

The 3 rd Estate – everybody else; the peasants Over 95% of the 26 million population; ranging from wealthy bankers, government officials and financiers to lowly landless peasants, this large group was by no means homogenous. There were 3 broad groups:

1. The bourgeosie –4%-10% of the population with education and relative wealth. They were also not a homogenous class, yet many could not easily be distinguished from the nobility. The higher bourgeosie were financiers, bankers, prosperous lawyers and office holders who sought to transfer into nobility through purchase or marriage. They owned 12% of the land.

2. The urban workers – 4 million small shopkeepers, skilled workers/artisans and unskilled manual workers.

3. The peasantry – 20 million, ranging from relatively wealthy peasant farmers to landless labourers and sharecroppers. Many owned land but were burdened with dues which limited their ability to survive from year to year.

Dues and taxes included:

o Money payments or labour on the lord’s land (covee)o Payment in kind on the crops grown – 12% of the harvesto Transfer tax on the sale or inheritance of lando To use the mill, oven and winepress of the lordo Special permission to build walls or harvest hay before

midsummero Payment of tithes –one twelfth of cropo Direct royal taxes – taille (on income or land),

vingtieme( 5% on income to meet emergency like war) and capitation(poll tax).

o Indirect royale taxes eg the gabelle (salt)o Labour on the roads (covee royale)

Dues varied from peasant to peasant, village to village and region to region but were heavy and disproportionate on the peasants.

The 1st two groups formed the bulk of what became known as the sans-culottes.

4 | P a g e

Social Change-Between 1800-1850 the population of Europe rose by some 50% which posed problems, including on food supply. The population explosion was also accompanied by a shift in population distribution into towns which caused its own problems of overcrowding and increasing rents. Much of the urban population was poor, unskilled and unemployed. Such pressures resulted in increased public health difficulties – rapid spread of diseases, high infant mortality and low life expectancy.

Change in the social structure saw the growth of the middle class with ideas of liberalism and nationalism that challenged the existing social and political values.

Economic Structure-The French economy saw considerable growth in the 18th century, and especially in the overseas trade sector which quadrupled in value. However, the mass of the interior of France was relatively unaffected by this as its development was handicapped by a number of factors including primitive financial institutions, structural backwardness of manufacturing and low levels of capital investments (S. Miller, p1).

France had a predominantly agricultural economy, which was more than at subsistence level. All villages and regions tried to produce their own grain to provide bread which was the staple of the rural and urban diet. Peasants also tried to cultivate cash crops like vines to produce wine for sale as an extra income. They also supplemented their income by spinning and weaving cloth. France’s main exports were wine and spirits and luxury goods such as silk.

Bad harvest created severe shortages and rapid inflation. People could therefore not afford manufactured goods which caused wider economic crisis.

When agriculture flourished, trade and industry flourished; when harvests were bad, bread prices rocketed and the impact on trade and industry was immediate. A good harvest meant lower bread prices, leaving more income available to spend on other goods; a poor harvest meant high bread prices or shortages, with little for the purchase of other goods. Contracting demand for goods led to unemployment amongst urban workers. The importance of the price of bread was recognized because if bread prices rocketed, the whole economy was affected. That is why in times of dearth local authorities sometimes introduced price controls to prevent unrest.

Industrialization was beginning to transform economics and society. Technological advances in machinery and the application of steam

5 | P a g e

power began to have an impact everywhere. The application of steam power to manufacturing processes, like spinning, promoted the development of large-scale factory production with this vast numbers of unskilled, poorly paid workers, many of them women and children.

CAUSES OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTIONThe French Revolution had 2 elements:1. There was a political revolution in which the system of absolute monarchy was overturned and replaced by constitutional government answerable to the elected representatives of the people. It was symbolised by the Tennis Court Oath, made secure by the Storming of the Bastille and enshrined in the Declaration of the Rights of Man.2. There was a revolution in the social organization of France symbolized by the abolition of privilege on the night of August 4th.These 2 elements are not mutually exclusive.

Historians have long debated the causes of the French Revolution. Here we examine some of them.

A) The Enlightenment (Spread of ideas subversive to absolutism)

The 18th century had witnessed the enlightenment, an intellectual movement building on the scientific revolution of the previous century, which sought to apply logic and reason to try to understand politics, economics and society. The result was a critique of the existing situation that spawned a range of ideas that developed into liberalism, nationalism, democracy and later socialism. Thinkers/philosophes concerned themselves with almost every branch of knowledge from the physical sciences, history, religion, education, government, politics and economics. The ideas of philosophes like Voltaire, Montesquieu and Rousseau led to a questioning of the existing arrangement in society, politics, economics systems and religion (see page 25,A. Mathews) and provided alternative approaches.

Voltaire campaigned against intolerance, miscarriage of justice and political and religious intolerance. Montesquieu advocated a mixed constitution with the separation of powers and the branches of government acting as checks and balances on each other.

Rousseau argued that the only moral and legitimate government was one based on popular sovereignty and which conformed to the General will.

6 | P a g e

However philosophes were not revolutionaries, nor were they political leaders. Yet they had no clear programme of political change.They were not against monarchy, even absolute monarchy.

Their audience amongst the educated classes was quite wide. The 18 th

century saw the development of literary societies in many towns and cities across France where intellectual debate could take place amongst the bourgeosie and liberal-minded nobility and churchmen. Writers and journalists spread ideas and many were exposed to enlightened thinking.

Against a society based on privilege, liberalists proposed one based on equal rights (freedom of speech and of the press, freedom of conscience and equality before the law). It attacked social privilege based on birth and advocated the idea of ‘careers open to talents’, or equality of opportunity, meritocracy.

Against absolute monarchy, nationalists posed the idea of constitutional government which was to serve the nation and were answerable to them by giving all men the right to vote.

Against protectionist economic policy a doctrine of economic liberalism (free trade) was suggested, and freedom of conscience instead of religious intolerance. The questioning of authority and existing institutions reached down to artisans and workers in the form of scandal-mongering pamphlets and cartoons. The targets of these satires and gossip were the monarchy and the privileged; the king was impotent. The queen promiscuous, the aristocracy perverted. This did much to undermine respect for the privileged orders and monarchy.

Enlightened ideas however did not cause the French Revolution, but they did provide a framework for criticism and a moral justification for change or opposition.

B) Antagonisms among the Social Orders(Continuing existence of privilege)1. There was tension within the 1st Estate - the Roman Catholic Church. Its rulers – bishops, archbishops and cardinals – were in the main recruited from the aristocracy. They enjoyed large incomes derived from property that had been willed to the church over the centuries and that was exempt from taxation.

7 | P a g e

Income from both property and tithe was distributed among the ranks of the clergy. The princes of the church, along with the leading monastic orders, took the lion’s shares. Parish priests who collected the tithes received very little. This imbalance in the distribution of revenues was resented not only by the priests, but by peasant tithe payers who hated to see their taxes spent to support a distant and haughty ecclesiastical hierarchy rather that their own, often very deserving, local clergy.

2. Within the 2 nd Estate the nobles of the sword regarded the nobles of the robe as upstarts. In 1781 they pressed successfully for a law that restricted the sale of military commissions to men whose aristocratic lineage extended back at least 4 generations. The tensions between these 2 nobles kept the aristocracy fragmented and vulnerable and hence unable to form together into anything more than a negative and potentially destructive force.

The disdain for the nobles of the sword by the nobles of the robe was mild compared with the contempt in which haughty aristocrats held the 3rd estates. The upper echelons of the 3rd Estate also aspired to be nobles. By 1780 the nobility of the sword was intent upon closing off the avenue of social advancement. No matter how much money a merchant, manufacturer banker or lawyer might acquire he was still excluded from political privileges. He had almost no influence at court; he could not hold high political office, and the majority could not vote and they had less access to the army and the church.

3. As the middle orders achieved greater affluence their members were bound to resent discrimination. While the lower bourgeoisie were frustrated by the lack of opportunities for advancement, they nevertheless still felt themselves above the peasants and workers. The peasants in turn resented their obligations as they paid taxes to Church and state. The various orders continued to press for what they called their liberties. They put their interests before that of the state. They felt that they should be allowed to carry on their affairs without state interference.As a result the political theories of the philosophes appealed to both the discontented nobility and the bourgeoisie.

C) The Role of the Monarchy (Ineptitude of Louis XVI)The personal qualities of the monarch played a crucial role in shaping developments prior to revolution. Louis XVI was awkward in society. He was good natured but weak, and indecisive, a man of limited intelligence who lacked self-confidence which made him an ineffectual

8 | P a g e

leader. He was more interested in his hobbies (like deer hunting) than attending to government business.

His wife Marie-Antoinette, an Austrian princess did not help the cause. Her activities were the source of slanderous scandal. She was frivolous, meddlesome and tactless. Vain and strong-willed, she was fond of court entertainment and palace intrigue. She inspired the dedicated hatred of reformers, intellectuals, and the common people. Her reputation was completely dashed when it was thought that she was promiscuous even with cardinals of the church.

As a result of Louis’ hesitancy and ineptitude he pressed for reform and then retreated from it; he changed ministers whenever the pressure was on. It was paralysis of effective government at the very top that helped bring about and ensure the success of the revolution of 1789.

D) Deepening Financial CrisisBritain defeated France in the 7 years’ War (1756-63). This was France’s 2nd defeat in a major war in less than 25 years. It had 3 principal effects:1. It undermined respect for the monarchy by damaging French prestige.2. Its costs left the Crown heavily in debt.3. It left the Crown anxious to reverse its humiliation.

Between 1740 and 1783 France took part in 3 major wars- the War of Austrian Succession 1740-48, the 7 Years War 1756-63 and the American War of Independence. In the first 2 there were only losses, in the last the gain was minimal. All of this meant that there was pressure to increase expenditure on the army and navy.To finance the debt the Crown borrowed money but then had to pay the interest which in turn added to expenditure and hence the overall debt. In addition to the high costs of war came expenditure of running the administration and the royal household (pg 27, Mathews).

The continuing and deepening financial crisis of the 1770s and 1780s was brought on by years of administrative improvidence and ineptitude. This chaotic nature of financial administration included:

o Lack of uniformity in the tax system (tax privileges, varying taxes)

9 | P a g e

o Inefficiency and corruption involved in their collection (Farmers-General, venal offices, lack of efficient accounting systems).

The Crown found itself trapped in a spiraling cycle of debt and dependence on credit that made eventual bankruptcy likely unless radical reform was undertaken. Thus the Crown had to maximize its revenues and so consider reform of the chaotic financial system. However parlement resisted reform decrees posing as defenders of the nation.

The last 4 years of Louis XV’s reign saw a determined effort to trim the powers of the parlement (the main obstacle to reform) and to initiate substantial financial reforms. The opposition of the Paris parlement led to its exile and then abolition, along with several other parlements. Louis XVI succeeded to the throne seeking popularity and under great pressure reversed his predecessor’s reforms and restored the Paris parlement.

By 1776 controleur general Turgot proposed a new package of financial and economic reforms, including stricter accounting procedures. The Paris parlement refused to register the edicts, the king failed to stand by his minister and the reform package collapsed.

In the American War of Independence 1776, France decided to support the colonists, imposing extra strains on royal finances, leading to bankruptcy a few years later.

Jacques Necker a Swiss Protestant banker came to the rescue with financial reforms and the ability to raise cash through loans. However, Necker’s attempt to control the level of war expenditure aroused the opposition of powerful ministers. Additionally, Necker’s ambition to join the inner circle of the king’s advisors caused friction because as a Protestant he was debarred. Louis XVI was persuaded to abandon him and his reforms in 1781. Alexandre de Colonne was appointed controleur general. The debts continued to mount steadily and interest payments were taking up an increasing proportion of royal expenditure. The Paris parlement meanwhile refused to register new loans and the interest rates demanded by financiers began to escalate.

Colonne proposed a reformed tax structure that would remove the tax privileges of the nobility as well as reforms that would ensure efficient collection and accounting. The proposals required some kind of endorsement if there would be any chance of making them stick. The Assembly of Notables was that body but they criticized the proposals as being impractical. The attacks on Calonne were such that the king dismissed him, replacing him with Brienne. The assembly was still not

10 | P a g e

amenable so it was dissolved, declaring that only the Estates-General which had not met for over 170 years could approve new taxation.

Thus, various ministers attempted to raise revenue by implementing a stamp duty and a direct tax on the produce of land. The King called an assembly to discuss the issue. They proposed that in order to pass such a general tax the Estates General would have to be called to approve the new taxation.

Meanwhile the bad harvest in 1786 resulted in reduced tax yield causing bankruptcies amongst tax officials. Facing imminent bankruptcy Brienne presented a watered-down version of Calonne’s proposals but once again the Paris parlement (posing as defender of the nation’s interest) refused to register them, declaring that only the Estates-General could approve new taxation.

When the king met the parlement in November 1787 to register a new loan protests by the duc d’Orleans led to his exile and the arrest of critics of royal policy. The actions of the king stimulated protest – Revolt of the Nobles. This brought about the final collapse of royal finances by August 1788. The king was forced to call the Estates-General and recall Necker.

Thus the Crown and the various controleurs generaux were not blind to the financial situation but, every attempt at reform failed. There were a number of reasons:Financial reforms were sometimes coupled with unpopular economic reforms.Reform was sometimes attempted at times of general economic hardship. Reform was opposed by ministerial and court rivals and those vested interests that would lose out.The crown failed to support reforming ministers when opposition arose.The parlements, especially that of Paris, opposed reform measures.

e) The Impact of the American War of IndependenceIn 1776 American colonists rose in revolt against George 111 of England. Louis XVI supported them as a chance for revenge against Britain. While the Americans and French were successful, its effects helped precipitate the events leading to revolution.

Financial Impact – Finance could be raised either through extra taxation (vingtiemes) or borrowing. Extra taxation was already being levied in order to pay off the debts left by previous wars. That left borrowing. The crown already had to pay the interest on previous

11 | P a g e

loans. The Crown found itself in a circle of debt having to take out new loans to pay off old ones, with the total debt spiraling ever upwards. By 1786 over 50% of royal debt was going directly on interest payments. To avoid bankruptcy urgent financial reform was necessary. It was the attempt to achieve this reform that provoked the political crisis which led to revolution.

Economic Impact – During the war trade with the WI was severely disrupted. There was dearth of raw cotton which affected the textile industry. As many cotton-workers were peasants, their income was adversely affected. The problems were compounded because the end of the war was followed by economic depression.

Political Impact- Soldiers who fought in America brought ideas which supported notions of popular sovereignty and constitutional government; they believed that all citizens had basic natural rights.

The Meeting of the Estates GeneralThe Estates General was an institution representing the 3 estates.The last time the Estates-General had met was in 1614. Back then the nobility and clergy which usually voted together, had been able to relegate the 3rd Estate to the fringes, but times had changed. Yet the Nobles wanted the Estates General to meet under the same old conditions. The Paris parlement declared that the 1789 Estates-General should follow the forms of 1614 which could result in the 1st 2 privileged orders outvoting the 3rd Estate. This offended many, including the new Nobles. The claim of the parlement to be acting in defense of the nation sounded hollow. It was now obvious that they were acting solely in defense of their privileges and positions within the state.

The 3rd Estate demanded that all Estates meet together. They also demanded the doubling in their numbers in the Estates General. The Estates General was set to meet in May, 1789. In the months prior to their meeting, the King had vacillated on the issues of increasing the numbers of the 3rd Estate and voting procedure. This upset the 3rd Estate. When the Estates General met in May, the leaders of the 3rd Estate walked out. On 17th June the 3rd Estate issued a final invitation to the other 2 orders to join them then declared itself to be the National Assembly. This was testament to the popularity and power the Estate now enjoyed. On June 20 royal troops excluded the 3rd Estate from its usual meeting place, but rather than disperse they assembled in an empty tennis court where they took an oath not to disband until a new constitution for France had been agreed – this was the famous Tennis Court Oath.

12 | P a g e

This action did not only protest against the King but the Assembly was asserting its right to act as the highest sovereign power in the nation.

The king ordered the other Estates to meet with the National Assembly. They were asked to prepare a Cahiers or list of grievances. The delegates of the 3rd Estate took this seriously and presented a list. The Assembly set out to implement reform. Meanwhile the economic crisis continued as the price of bread rose steeply.

Need for Estates General - Social and Economic Crisis The harvest of the summer of 1788 had been a disaster all across France; many crops were destroyed by heavy hailstorms and food prices were rising rapidly. Hunger and inflation made the other burdens on the unprivileged seem all the more unjust and in need of reform (Reveillon riots, April 1789). Everywhere the Estates-General was looked to as the body that would solve all problems. However, there was lack of co-operation amongst the 3 estates, along with a lack of response from the crown.

The Bourgeosie – With limited opportunities for advancement and falling resources, their social frustration found expression in support for enlightened ideas as about careers open to talents and equal rights. Not surprisingly they supported the parlements’ defence of the nation’s interests and the demand for an Estates-General. They wanted not only constitutional limitation on the power of the crown but also abolition of noble privileges. In the enlightened talk about natural rights, equality, popular sovereignty and irrationality of privilege by birth, the bourgeosie found justification for their demand for a dominant share of political power.

The Peasantry – In the last ¼ of the 18th century the growth of the rural population was 1 of the factors increasing pressure on the land, and increasing competition for land led to rises in rents. Meanwhile the general drift of prices was upwards whilst oversupply of labour helped depress wages. In 1770s and 1780s the standard supplements to farm work – wine producing and weaving – were troubled by fluctuations in demand and prices. On top of all this came a large rise in taxation between 1749 and 1780s. All this was in addition to the effects of land harvests and the other burdens on peasants such as seigneurial dues.

The Estates-General became the focus of the hopes of redress of some of the burdens from which they suffered – indirect taxes on essentials

13 | P a g e

like salt, the hated corvee royal and the seigneurial obligations that hampered their ability to make ends meet.

High prices and shortages reached their peak during the soudure (May-August). Hunger began to cause sporadic unrest in the countryside as early as January 1789- on grain convoys, spontaneous tax strike (peasants assumed royal taxes, tithes and seigneurial dues would be abolished.

The Towns – Bad harvest did not only affect the peasantry. Increases in food prices directly affected the urban poor and the economy generally. Bread prices went up from about 50% in the summer of 1788 to 80% the following year. There was much less to spend on manufactured goods like textiles; leading to a slump in demand, cuts in production and hence unemployment or wage cuts.

While it would be incorrect to say that the revolution was a Parisan affair, it was in Paris that the central drama of the revolution was played out and it was the people of Paris who were to have a crucial part to play, not only in the events of 1789 but in the general course of the revolution after 1789.

14 | P a g e