Origins of the French Revolution

My resume search got me in the caves of my own work. Who knew I wrote about the origins of the French Revolution when I studied in Europe? This blog, lest I forget, is an archive.

Origins of the French Revolution

Until the 1960’s scholars widely recognised the French Revolution as a social upheaval, a displacing of the monarchical feudal system in favor of a bourgeois capitalist society. This Marxist interpretation of the French Revolution attributes deep-seeded social and economic inequalities to the events of 1789. However, the last thirty years have seen an academic re-evaluation of the causes of the French Revolution, preferring to view the Revolution as a political, rather than a social event. Financial difficulties during the 18th century revealed severe systematic problems with the French monarchy. Politically, the Old Regime could not accommodate the complexities of a large and modern nation. Accompanied with political infighting between figures and factions, the Old Regime collapsed under its own weight leaving a huge void of power. The events of 1789 to 1799 were the struggle to control the power previously held by the monarchy.

A re-examination of France before the revolution, in response to a backlash against Marxist versions of history, questioned the validity of the claim that the social and economic inequalities triggered the French Revolution. In fact the 18th century saw an increasingly unclear distinction between the privileged and unprivileged because of an influx of “new” nobles into French society. More importantly, there was no clear distinction between revenue acquired between commoners and nobles. Thus, economic policies did not significantly favor either nobles or commoners. As such, the nobles and commoners had no specific quarrels during the years preceding the Revolution that led to the collapse of the monarchy. The battle for power between the nobility and the third estate came as a result of the vacancy of power previously held by the monarchy. This battle occurred as a result of the monarchy’s failure and not as a result of deep seeded social inequalities. “ ‘Interest,’ as a principle of differentiation, is a symbolic and political construction, not simply a pre-existing social reality.” (Baker, 6)

The abandonment of the Marxist model necessitates an alternative explanation of the events of 1788-1789, the collapse of the monarchy and the ensuing struggle for power. The collapse of the Old Regime took a series of events that collectively built an inflexible monarchical system that could not accommodate the financial crisis of 1786.

The Financial Situation

The 18th century was financially rough for France. Debt incurred through a series of wars with Britain was problematic, not necessarily in the size but rather the relative rates of interest the French promised compared to the British and Dutch. This was a result of the lack of a publicly supported bank in France.

During the 1770’s all of Europe was stretched financially. To counteract shaken public confidence, Louie XVI appointed a well-known banker, Necker, to be in charge of royal finances. In the latter half of the decade, French support of the American Revolution proved too tempting to resist because of the potential financial benefits of a damaged Britain. To this end Necker was able to raise 520 million livres, much of it on high interest, short-term loans. By the time Calonne had taken over and closely examined the royal finances, it was too late. In 1786 he showed the king the dire financial situation of France and the problems with any simple solutions. Cutting military spending was not an option because of the instability of Eastern Europe after the death of Fredrick the Great. The recent number of indirect taxes targeting nobles already had the nobles upset and prevented the option of levying more new taxes. Merely chipping away at the debt was not possible because many of the loans were short-term and demanded full payment within a couple of years. (Doyle)

Calonne understood the extent of the crisis and the need for reforms. With the approval of Louie XVI, he introduced financial reforms with three major parts. The first reform was an overhaul of the tax system that would tax equally in proportion to land holdings. Secondly, he proposed a plan of economic stimulation, eliminating internal custom barriers with the hope that it would lead to more tax revenue. Lastly, he wanted to eliminate government controls over the grain trade. These reforms would each take time to have an effect, but with the confidence that long-term adjustments were being made, Colonne felt justified in borrowing more money to circumvent the immediate crisis. (Doyle)

Although these proposed reforms came from some of the best minds in France and the notables were aware something needed to be done about the financial situation, they met opposition in the Assembly of Notables in February 1787. The clergy, a small and determined faction, was persistent in their attempts to stop the land tax and any part of the plan that would effect them. But the clergy alone were not sufficient to dismantle the reforms, more opposition came from Colonne’s rivals in the ministry and other notables determined to restore Neckor to his former position. This political infighting damaged the already dire financial situation. Colonne’s power was weakened and the king began to lose faith in his ability and his proposed reforms. Colonne had mistakenly assumed that the notables would accept his reforms without conflict.

In a final effort to enact his reforms, Colonne appealed to the recent phenomenon of public opinion. He released the previously secret text of his proposals to the public. Priests were encouraged to read the reforms to the people. Again Colonne failed to present his reforms in a manner to garner support, as the public displayed no reaction. At this point the situation had become worse and Louie XVI replaced Colonne and added other new ministers. The notables had lost faith in Louie XVI’s ability to resolve the financial crisis and began a call for the Estates-General. “Having run out of money, the old monarchy and its servants had also run out of ideas.” (Doyle, 114)

Rising Importance of Public Opinion


Plagued by war, political division, and social unrest, centralisation of the king’s power in 17th century France was necessary to effectively use the resources of society. The idea was that by centralisation, the monarchy could co-ordinate the activities of communities and corporations for the common good. Thus, the traditional order of the monarchy changed, reducing the power of local government and of parlements. Louie XIV went so far as to, “systematically close off channels of communication between society and the state (such as the Estates General, the remonstrance’s of the parlements, the municipalities and the town councils).” (Furet, 36) After the reign of Louie XIV, parlements remained unrepresentative of the people because of their conservative policies and perhaps due to their diminished role under Louie XIV. Thus, 18th century French society sought a new form of representation or spokesman, in the form of the men of letters or philosophers.

Tocqueville understood that, “by abolishing the ancient liberties and destroying the political function of the nobility without also permitting the formation of a new ruling class on a different basis, the monarchy unwittingly set up the writers as imaginary substitutes for that ruling class.” (Furet, 36) The people sought a spokesman and writers filled the void. The problem with the growth of political power of writers was the lack of connection with the traditional structure. The structure failed to incorporate the political wills expressed by the people through writing; or looking at it another way, failed to incorporate the political will that influenced people through writing. Thus, two competing claims for political power were acting in complete isolation. First, the monarchy, already confounded with internal financial and political problems, had a self-perceived claim of legitimate political power. And secondly, political philosophers a la Rousseau (among others) expressed ideas that legitimate political power was rooted in the consent of the people. The claims of philosophers, journalists, etc. were expressed by the formation of sociétés, cafés, salons, and Masonic lodges. Since the traditional structure had no means to incorporate the new form of popular expression, it was unconscious of the extent to which public opinion mattered. Perhaps more importantly, it was also unconscious as to the shaping of public opinion, an art perfected by the writers, pamphleteers, and journalists of the time.

18th century France was a sophisticated country. By the time Louie XVI was king public opinion had become a political force that everyone, including the monarchy, recognised as important. However, the monarchy’s lack of influence over public opinion and lack of systematic incorporation of public opinion into policy severely impaired the power of the Old Regime.

Conclusion

Coupling the internal financial and political problems of the monarchy with the alternative sources of political power supplied by writers of public opinion the collapse of the Old Regime became imminent. Furet denominates the summoning of the Estates General, the (re) appointment of Necker, the recall of the parlements, all in the summer of 1788, as the surrender of Louie XVI’s power and the first major step of the French Revolution. The vacancy of power opened up numerous possibilities, the results determining the fate of the French nation and more broadly, the entire world.
“The reorientation (of the French Revolution) can best be characterised as a shift from Marx to Tocqueville, from a basically social approach to the subject to a basically political one.” (Baker, 1) The more modern understanding gives greater credence to the problems with the French monarchy as causes of the Revolution than the social inequalities focused upon by Marxist scholars. Thus, the worldwide shift from feudalism to capitalism was more a product of the French Revolution than the French Revolution was a product of the shift from feudalism to capitalism.