french revolution cause and effect essay

The French Revolutions: Causes and Impacts Essay

Introduction, origin and experience of the 1789 revolution, origin and experience of the 1848 revolution, similarities.

Bibliography

France has had many major revolutions that changed the country’s face, politically, socially and economically. By the 1700s, it had a full strength monarch system of government in which the king held absolute power also known as an absolute monarchy, most typified by Louis XIV. The nobles that were allowed to make legislations were corrupt and often enriched themselves leaving the poor or the so-called third estates to lavish in poverty 1 . This paper will attempt to compare and contrast the two revolutions, which occurred in 1789 and 1848, focusing on their causes as well as the impacts associated with their occurrences.

The 1789 revolution took place at a time when the French monarchy had absolute power, governing the whole country and implementing high tax due to massive debt caused by wars that King Louis XVI had participated in including the American war of independence. Its causes were mainly the hard social, economic and political cataclysm that they had and were worsening each day 2 . The country was heading into bankruptcy, making life much more difficult; people died daily and were buried in pauper graves, privileges were given to the nobles and the church. This led to a surge in protests involving mainly of the public and their sympathizers in various French cities like Paris, Lyon, Marseille, among others. The monarch’s symbol of power was the Bastille jail in Paris that had been in place for the past 400 years and its attack signified the beginning of a republican government. This saw execution of King Louis amid protest from other European countries that supported the rule of monarchy, and duped France into wars with other states like Britain, which had a constitutional monarchy, Spain and the Netherlands as well as Belgium.

The impacts of this ‘terror’ were worsened by the soaring prices with the devaluation of French currency due to unprecedented war that was in existence. This prompted price control in almost all foodstuffs as the Jacobins seized power in a reign of terror. The national assembly that was constituted mainly by the third estate constituted a committee of public safety, whose days were numbered with the escalating famine and shortages that faced the country. Besides, workable laws were still in the process of making as they fought to install a feasible constitution. Tax levied by the Catholic Church, which owned the largest land in the country added more injury to already soaring economic problems. The effects were realized but at a price since even though rights of citizens were instilled, ravaging famine, wars and terror consumed the population 3 . This revolution took new shift as power changed hands from monarchy, through to the Robespierre, Jacobins, in 1794 then to Directory through to 1799 when Napoleon took over under Consulate. Secularism became rampant; innovations, wars, and the restoration of monarchy are some of the results that surfaced 4 . For instance, After the King’s execution, Revolutionary tribunal and public safety committee were instituted; this saw a reign of terror, with ruling faction brutally killing potential enemies irrespective of their age, sex or condition. Paris alone recorded about 1400 deaths in the last six weeks to 27 July 1794, when it was replaced by Directory in 1975. This brought together 500 representatives, in a bicameral legislature consisting of two chambers, which lasted about 4 years to 1799 when it was replaced by Consulate.

This revolution took place in Europe at a time when reforms were the main activity. This ended the reinstated monarchy that had replaced the earlier revolution 5 . A second republic was instituted and later saw the election of Louis Napoleon as its president although he went on to establish an empire that lasted another 23 years. The Orleans monarch had been put in place following a protest that saw the July monarch, Charles abdicate his throne and flee to England in 1830. This new monarch stood among three opposing factions, the socialists, legitimists, and the republicans. With Louis Philippe at the helm of Orleans’s rule, mainly supported by the elites, favors were given to the privileged set; this led to disenfranchisement of the working classes as well as most of the middle class. Another problem that caused this revolution was the fact that only landowners were allowed to vote, separating the poor from the rich. The leader never cared for the needs of his subjects as some people were not permitted in the political arena. He also opposed the formation of a parliamentary system of government. Furthermore, the country was facing another economic crisis, and depression of the economy due to poor harvest 6 Poor transport system affected aid efforts during the depression and the crushing of those who rebelled.

It started with banquets as protests were outlawed, resulting in protests and barricades once Philippe outlawed banquets forcing him to abdicate and flee to England as well. Provisional government was formed, in what was called a second republic. Unemployment relief was incorporated in government policies and universal suffrage enacted, which added 9 million more voters. Workshops were organized which ensured the ‘right to work’ for every French citizen. Other impacts included reduced trading and luxury as the wealthy fled and this meant servicing credits was a problem. Conservatism increased in the new government with struggles emerging between the classes. Eventually, politics tilted to the right and this revolution failed once again, ushering in the second empire.

The two revolutions had very many similarities in their origins; the first was started out of social and political problems like, unemployment, which was widely prevalent. Similarly, the second was also aimed at establishing the right to work. In both cases, forced protests were used to ensure that revolutions took place and they all failed; the first, giving way to emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and the second ushering emperor napoleon III. In both cases, corruption was rampant as could be seen in the nobles of the first monarchy and the elite who were favored in the second monarch. Financial crisis and expected economic depression was significant in causing the two revolutions. The impacts were also similar in some ways as there were no stable governments during the two revolutions.

The first revolution was more radical as it caused terror and war as compared to the second, which was less violent; this is evident in the assault on Bastille. The causes of the first revolution were more founded on the basic rights of the people as compared to the second. The first revolution occurred when there was limited freedom to the public with their rights restricted to one vote by the third estate, while in the second revolution, there were provisional governments that had liberated some of the restrictions like the universal suffrage and characterized by struggles between classes. The first revolution was the initiation of the revolutions that followed and was characterized with heavy loss of lives during the reign of terror, while the second was characterized by more political and social systems that enforced changes.

The two revolutions failed to fulfill all their goals although they made several crucial changes such as universal suffrages, which added 9 million new voters. Many thoughts have considered the revolutions to make a huge impact on British Philosophical, intellectual and political life, having a major impact on the Western history. Some of the sympathizers of the revolution like Thomas Paine among other English radicals shared their sentiment at first, as they believed it was a sign of liberty, fraternity and Equality. However, when it turned into exterminations and terror, it gave second thoughts to the earlier supporters. In the end, after the second revolution’s failure, a second state was put in office, led by Napoleon III; he purged the republicans, thereby dissolving the National Assembly, and then established a second empire, restoring the old order. It is imperative to note that the revolutions made great significance in the developments of Europe as a whole.

• Betts F. R., 2000. Europe In Retrospect: A Brief History of the Past two hundred years. Britannia,LLC .
• Cody D.2007. French Revolution. The Victorian Web .Doyle W.1990
• The Oxford history of the French revolution . (3rd Ed.). Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress . ISBN 0192852213 . Web.
• Emmet K.1989. A Cultural History of the French Revolution. New Haven: Yale University Press . Print.
• Rappot M. 2009. 1848: Year of Revolution . Basic Books . Web.
• Smitha E. F., 2002. The French Revolution. Macrohistory and World Report. Web.
• Walker L.H. 2001. Sweet and Consoling Virtue: The Memoirs of Madame Roland. Eighteenth-Century Studies, French Revolutionary Culture .
• E. F. Smitha, 2002, The French Revolution. Macrohistory and World Report . P. 1-8.
• D. Cody 2007. French Revolution. The Victorian Web .
• K. Emmet 1989. A Cultural History of the French Revolution. New Haven: Yale University Press . Print.
• L.H. Walker 2001. Sweet and Consoling Virtue: The Memoirs of Madame Roland. Eighteenth-Century Studies, French Revolutionary Culture . Pg. 403-419.
• M. Rappot 2009. 1848: Year of Revolution. Basic Books .
• F. R. Betts 2000. Europe In Retrospect: A Brief History of the Past two hundred years . Britannia,LLC .
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, December 26). The French Revolutions: Causes and Impacts. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolutions-causes-and-impacts/

"The French Revolutions: Causes and Impacts." IvyPanda , 26 Dec. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolutions-causes-and-impacts/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'The French Revolutions: Causes and Impacts'. 26 December.

IvyPanda . 2021. "The French Revolutions: Causes and Impacts." December 26, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolutions-causes-and-impacts/.

1. IvyPanda . "The French Revolutions: Causes and Impacts." December 26, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolutions-causes-and-impacts/.

IvyPanda . "The French Revolutions: Causes and Impacts." December 26, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolutions-causes-and-impacts/.

• The Revolution of 1848 in France
• The Revolutions 1789-1815 and 1848
• Parallels Between the Revolutions of 1848 and Arab Revolutions
• History: The French Declaration of 1789
• Revolution and Napoleon Between the 1789 and the 1815
• Napoleon Bonaparte, His Rise and Fall
• Napoleon Bonaparte’s Invasion of Russia
• The French and Russian Revolutions of 1789 and 1917
• Western Civilization: The French Revolution 1789-99
• Napoleon Bonaparte and Its Revolutions
• “Invisible Cities” by Calvino
• "Renaissance and Reformation: The Intellectual Genesis" by Anthony Levi
• Economic Situation of the Later Roman Empire
• Intellectual, Scientific and Cultural Changes in Europe Towards the End of 19th Century
• The History of European Expansion From the 14th Century - During the Age of Discovery

Sign Up Today

Start your 14 day free trial today

The History Hit Miscellany of Facts, Figures and Fascinating Finds

• French Revolution and Napoleon

The 6 Main Causes of the French Revolution

The main causes of the french revolution remain debated. the middle class resented political exclusion, the lower classes didn't want to support the current feudal system and the government was on the brink of bankruptcty. here we take a deeper look into the main causes of the french revolution..

Sarah Roller

27 sep 2021, @sarahroller8.

This educational video is a visual version of this article and presented by Artificial Intelligence (AI). Please see our AI ethics and diversity policy for more information on how we use AI and select presenters on our website.

In 1789, France was the powerhouse of Europe, with a large overseas empire, strong colonial trade links as well as a flourishing silk trade at home, and was the centre of the Enlightenment movement in Europe. The Revolution which engulfed France shocked her European counterparts and changed the course of French politics and government completely. Many of its values – l iberté, égalité, fraternité –  are still widely used as a motto today.

1. Louis XVI & Marie Antoinette

France had an absolute monarchy in the 18th century – life centred around the king, who had complete power. Whilst theoretically this could work well, it was a system heavily dependent on the personality of the king in question. Louis XVI was indecisive, shy and lacked the charisma and charm which his predecessors had so benefited from.

The court at Versailles , just outside Paris, had between 3,000 and 10,000 courtiers living there at any one time, all bound by strict etiquette. Such a large and complex social set required management by the king in order to manage power, bestow favours and keep a watchful eye over potential troublemakers. Louis simply didn’t have the capability or iron will necessary to do this.

Louis’ wife and queen, Marie Antoinette , was an Austrian-born princess whose (supposedly) profligate spending, Austrian sympathies and alleged sexual deviancy were targeted repeatedly. Incapable of acting in a way which might have transformed public opinion, the royal couple saw themselves become scapegoats for far more issues than those which they could control.

‘Marie Antoinette en chemise’, portrait of the queen in a muslin dress (by Louise Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun, 1783)

Image Credit: Élisabeth Louise Vigée Le Brun, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

As an absolute monarch, Louis was also held somewhat responsible – along with his advisors – for failures. Failures could only be blamed on advisors or external parties for so long, and by the late 1780s, the king himself was the target of popular discontent and anger rather than those around him: a dangerous position for an absolute monarch to be in. Whilst contemporaries may have perceived the king as being anointed by God, it was their subjects who permitted them to maintain this status.

2. Inherited problems

By no means did Louis XVI inherit an easy situation. The power of the French monarchy had peaked under Louis XIV, and by the time Louis XVI inherited, France found herself in an increasingly dire financial situation, weakened by the Seven Years War and American War of Independence .

With an old and inefficient taxation system which saw large portions of the wealthiest parts of French society exempt from major taxes, the burden was carried by the poorest and simply didn’t provide enough cash.

Variations by region also caused unhappiness: Brittany continued to pay the gabelle  (salt tax) and the  pays d’election  no longer had regional autonomy, for example. The system was clunky and unfair, with some areas over-represented and some under-represented in government and through financial contributions. It was desperately in need of sweeping reforms. The French economy was also growing increasingly stagnant. Hampered by internal tolls and tariffs, regional trade was slow and the agricultural and industrial revolution which was hitting Britain was much slower to arrive, and to be adopted in France.

3. The Estates System & the bourgeoise

The Estates System was far from unique to France: this ancient feudal social structure broke society into 3 groups, clergy, nobility and everyone else. In the Medieval period, prior to the boom of the merchant classes, this system did broadly reflect the structure of the world. As more and more prosperous self-made men rose through the ranks, the system’s rigidity became an increasing source of frustration. The new bourgeoise class could only make the leap to the Second Estate (the nobility) through the practice of venality, the buying and selling of offices.

Following  parlements  blocking of reforms, Louis XVI was persuaded to call an assembly known as the Estates General, which had last been called in 1614. Each estate drew up a list of grievances, the  cahier de doleances,  which were presented to the king. The event turned into a stalemate, with the First and Second Estates continually voting to block the Third Estate out of a petty desire to keep their status firm, refusing to acknowledge the need to work together to achieve reform.

Opening of the Estates-General in Versailles 5 May 1789

Image Credit: Isidore-Stanislaus Helman (1743-1806) and Charles Monnet (1732-1808), Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

These deep divisions between the estates were a major contributing factor to the eruption of revolution. With an ever-growing and increasingly loud Third Estate, the prospect of meaningful societal change began to increasingly appear to be something of a possibility.

4. Taxation & money

French finances were a mess by the late 18th century. The taxation system allowed the wealthiest to avoid paying virtually any tax at all, and given that wealth almost always equalled power, any attempt to push through radical financial reforms was blocked by the  parlements.  Unable to change the tax, and not daring to increase the burden on those who already shouldered it, Jacques Necker, the finance minister, raised money through taking out loans rather than raising taxes. Whilst this had some short term benefits, loans accrued interest and pushed the country further into debt.

In an attempt to add some form of transparency to royal expenditure and to create a more educated and informed populace, Necker published the Crown’s expenses and accounts in a document known as the Compte rendu au roi.  Instead of placating the situation, it in fact gave the people an insight into something they had previously considered to be none of their concern.

With France on the brink of bankruptcy, and people more acutely aware and less tolerant of the feudal financial system they were upholding, the situation was becoming more and more delicate. Attempts to push through radical financial reforms were made, but Louis’ influence was too weak to force his nobles to bend to his will.

5. The Enlightenment

Historians debate the influence of Enlightenment in the French Revolution. Individuals like Voltaire and Rousseau espoused values of liberty, equality, tolerance, constitutional government and the separation of church and state. In an age where literacy levels were increasing and printing was cheap, these ideas were discussed and disseminated far more than previous movements had been.

Many also view the philosophy and ideals of the First Republic as being underpinned by Enlightenment ideas, and the motto most closely associated with the revolution itself – ‘liberté, égalité, fraternité’ – can be seen as a reflection of key ideas in Enlightenment pamphlets.

Voltaire, Portrait by Nicolas de Largillière, c. 1724

Image Credit: Nicolas de Largillière, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

6. Bad luck

Many of these issues were long term factors causing discontent and stagnation in France, but they had not caused revolution to erupt in the first 15 years of Louis’ reign. The real cost of living had increased by 62% between 1741 and 1785, and two successive years of poor harvests in 1788 and 1789 caused the price of bread to be dramatically inflated along with a drop in wages.

This added hardship added an extra layer of resentment and weight to the grievances of the Third Estate, which was largely made up of peasants and a few bourgeoise. Accusations of the extravagant spending of the royal family – irrespective of their truth – further exacerbated tensions, and the king and queen were increasingly targets of  libelles and attacks in print.

You May Also Like

Mac and Cheese in 1736? The Stories of Kensington Palace’s Servants

The Peasants’ Revolt: Rise of the Rebels

10 Myths About Winston Churchill

Medusa: What Was a Gorgon?

10 Facts About the Battle of Shrewsbury

5 of Our Top Podcasts About the Norman Conquest of 1066

How Did 3 People Seemingly Escape From Alcatraz?

5 of Our Top Documentaries About the Norman Conquest of 1066

1848: The Year of Revolutions

What Prompted the Boston Tea Party?

15 Quotes by Nelson Mandela

The History of Advent

History Cooperative

French Revolution: History, Timeline, Causes, and Outcomes

The French Revolution, a seismic event that reshaped the contours of political power and societal norms, began in 1789, not merely as a chapter in history but as a dramatic upheaval that would influence the course of human events far beyond its own time and borders.

It was more than a clash of ideologies; it was a profound transformation that questioned the very foundations of monarchical rule and aristocratic privilege, leading to the rise of republicanism and the concept of citizenship.

The causes of this revolution were as complex as its outcomes were far-reaching, stemming from a confluence of economic strife, social inequalities, and a hunger for political reform.

The outcomes of the French Revolution, embedded in the realms of political thought, civil rights, and societal structures, continue to resonate, offering invaluable insights into the power and potential of collective action for change.

Table of Contents

Time and Location

The French Revolution, a cornerstone event in the annals of history, ignited in 1789, a time when Europe was dominated by monarchical rule and the vestiges of feudalism. This epochal period, which spanned a decade until the late 1790s, witnessed profound social, political, and economic transformations that not only reshaped France but also sent shockwaves across the continent and beyond.

Paris, the heart of France, served as the epicenter of revolutionary activity , where iconic events such as the storming of the Bastille became symbols of the struggle for freedom. Yet, the revolution was not confined to the city’s limits; its influence permeated through every corner of France, from bustling urban centers to serene rural areas, each witnessing the unfolding drama of revolution in unique ways.

The revolution consisted of many complex factions, each representing a distinct set of interests and ideologies. Initially, the conflict arose between the Third Estate, which included a diverse group from peasants and urban laborers to the bourgeoisie, and the First and Second Estates, made up of the clergy and the nobility, respectively.

The Third Estate sought to dismantle the archaic social structure that relegated them to the burden of taxation while denying them political representation and rights. Their demands for reform and equality found resonance across a society strained by economic distress and the autocratic rule of the monarchy.

As the revolution evolved, so too did the nature of the conflict. The initial unity within the Third Estate fractured, giving rise to factions such as the Jacobins and Girondins, who, despite sharing a common revolutionary zeal, diverged sharply in their visions for France’s future.

The Jacobins , with figures like Maximilien Robespierre at the helm, advocated for radical measures, including the abolition of the monarchy and the establishment of a republic, while the Girondins favored a more moderate approach.

The sans-culottes , representing the militant working-class Parisians, further complicated the revolutionary landscape with their demands for immediate economic relief and political reforms.

The revolution’s adversaries were not limited to internal factions; monarchies throughout Europe viewed the republic with suspicion and hostility. Fearing the spread of revolutionary fervor within their own borders, European powers such as Austria, Prussia, and Britain engaged in military confrontations with France, aiming to restore the French monarchy and stem the tide of revolution.

These external threats intensified the internal strife, fueling the revolution’s radical phase and propelling it towards its eventual conclusion with the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, who capitalized on the chaos to establish his own rule.

READ MORE: How Did Napoleon Die: Stomach Cancer, Poison, or Something Else?

Causes of the French Revolution

The French Revolution’s roots are deeply embedded in a confluence of political, social, economic, and intellectual factors that, over time, eroded the foundations of the Ancien Régime and set the stage for revolutionary change.

At the heart of the revolution were grievances that transcended class boundaries, uniting much of the nation in a quest for profound transformation.

Economic Hardship and Social Inequality

A critical catalyst for the revolution was France’s dire economic condition. Fiscal mismanagement, costly involvement in foreign wars (notably the American Revolutionary War), and an antiquated tax system placed an unbearable strain on the populace, particularly the Third Estate, which bore the brunt of taxation while being denied equitable representation.

Simultaneously, extravagant spending by Louis XVI and his predecessors further drained the national treasury, exacerbating the financial crisis.

The social structure of France, rigidly divided into three estates, underscored profound inequalities. The First (clergy) and Second (nobility) Estates enjoyed significant privileges, including exemption from many taxes, which contrasted starkly with the hardships faced by the Third Estate, comprising peasants , urban workers, and a rising bourgeoisie.

This disparity fueled resentment and a growing demand for social and economic justice.

Enlightenment Ideals

The Enlightenment , a powerful intellectual movement sweeping through Europe, profoundly influenced the revolutionary spirit. Philosophers such as Voltaire, Rousseau, and Montesquieu criticized traditional structures of power and authority, advocating for principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity.

Their writings inspired a new way of thinking about governance, society, and the rights of individuals, sowing the seeds of revolution among a populace eager for change.

Political Crisis and the Estates-General

The immediate catalyst for the French Revolution was deeply rooted in a political crisis, underscored by the French monarchy’s chronic financial woes. King Louis XVI, facing dire fiscal insolvency, sought to break the deadlock through the convocation of the Estates-General in 1789, marking the first assembly of its kind since 1614.

This critical move, intended to garner support for financial reforms, unwittingly set the stage for widespread political upheaval. It provided the Third Estate, representing the common people of France, with an unprecedented opportunity to voice their longstanding grievances and demand a more significant share of political authority.

The Third Estate, comprising a vast majority of the population but long marginalized in the political framework of the Ancien Régime, seized this moment to assert its power. Their transformation into the National Assembly was a monumental shift, symbolizing a rejection of the existing social and political order.

The catalyst for this transformation was their exclusion from the Estates-General meeting, leading them to gather in a nearby tennis court. There, they took the historic Tennis Court Oath, vowing not to disperse until France had a new constitution.

This act of defiance was not just a political statement but a clear indication of the revolutionaries’ resolve to overhaul French society.

Amidst this burgeoning crisis, the personal life of Marie Antoinette , Louis XVI’s queen, became a focal point of public scrutiny and scandal. 

Married to Louis at the tender age of fourteen, Marie Antoinette, the youngest daughter of Holy Roman Emperor Francis I, was known for her lavish lifestyle and the preferential treatment she accorded her friends and relatives.

READ MORE: Roman Emperors in Order: The Complete List from Caesar to the Fall of Rome

Her disregard for traditional court fashion and etiquette, along with her perceived extravagance, made her an easy target for public criticism and ridicule. Popular songs in Parisian cafés and a flourishing genre of pornographic literature vilified the queen, accusing her of infidelity, corruption, and disloyalty.

Such depictions, whether grounded in truth or fabricated, fueled the growing discontent among the populace, further complicating the already tense political atmosphere.

The intertwining of personal scandals with the broader political crisis highlighted the deep-seated issues within the French monarchy and aristocracy, contributing to the revolutionary fervor.

As the political crisis deepened, the actions of the Third Estate and the controversies surrounding Marie Antoinette exemplified the widespread desire for change and the rejection of the Ancient Régime’s corruption and excesses.

Key Concepts, Events, and People of the French Revolution

As the Estates General convened in 1789, little did the world know that this gathering would mark the beginning of a revolution that would forever alter the course of history.

Through the rise and fall of factions, the clash of ideologies, and the leadership of remarkable individuals, this era reshaped not only France but also set a precedent for future generations.

From the storming of the Bastille to the establishment of the Directory, each event and figure played a crucial role in crafting a new vision of governance and social equality.

Estates General

When the Estates General was summoned in May 1789, it marked the beginning of a series of events that would catalyze the French Revolution. Initially intended as a means for King Louis XVI to address the financial crisis by securing support for tax reforms, the assembly instead became a flashpoint for broader grievances.

Representing the three estates of French society—the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners—the Estates General highlighted the profound disparities and simmering tensions between these groups.

The Third Estate, comprising 98% of the population but traditionally having the least power, seized the moment to push for more significant reforms, challenging the very foundations of the Ancient Régime.

The deadlock over voting procedures—where the Third Estate demanded votes be counted by head rather than by estate—led to its members declaring themselves the National Assembly, an act of defiance that effectively inaugurated the revolution.

This bold step, coupled with the subsequent Tennis Court Oath where they vowed not to disperse until a new constitution was created, underscored a fundamental shift in authority from the monarchy to the people, setting a precedent for popular sovereignty that would resonate throughout the revolution.

Rise of the Third Estate

The Rise of the Third Estate underscores the growing power and assertiveness of the common people of France. Fueled by economic hardship, social inequality, and inspired by Enlightenment ideals, this diverse group—encompassing peasants, urban workers, and the bourgeoisie—began to challenge the existing social and political order.

Their transformation from a marginalized majority into the National Assembly marked a radical departure from traditional power structures, asserting their role as legitimate representatives of the French people. This period was characterized by significant political mobilization and the formation of popular societies and clubs, which played a crucial role in spreading revolutionary ideas and organizing action.

This newfound empowerment of the Third Estate culminated in key revolutionary acts, such as the storming of the Bastille in July 1789, a symbol of royal tyranny. This event not only demonstrated the power of popular action but also signaled the irreversible nature of the revolutionary movement.

The rise of the Third Estate paved the way for the abolition of feudal privileges and the drafting of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen , foundational texts that sought to establish a new social and political order based on equality, liberty, and fraternity.

A People’s Monarchy

The concept of a People’s Monarchy emerged as a compromise in the early stages of the French Revolution, reflecting the initial desire among many revolutionaries to retain the monarchy within a constitutional framework.

This period was marked by King Louis XVI’s grudging acceptance of the National Assembly’s authority and the enactment of significant reforms, including the Civil Constitution of the Clergy and the Constitution of 1791, which established a limited monarchy and sought to redistribute power more equitably.

However, this attempt to balance revolutionary demands with monarchical tradition was fraught with difficulties, as mutual distrust between the king and the revolutionaries continued to escalate.

The failure of the People’s Monarchy was precipitated by the Flight to Varennes in June 1791, when Louis XVI attempted to escape France and rally foreign support for the restoration of his absolute power.

This act of betrayal eroded any remaining support for the monarchy among the populace and the Assembly, leading to increased calls for the establishment of a republic.

The people’s experiment with a constitutional monarchy thus served to highlight the irreconcilable differences between the revolutionary ideals of liberty and equality and the traditional monarchical order, setting the stage for the republic’s proclamation.

Birth of a Republic

The proclamation of the First French Republic in September 1792 represented a radical departure from centuries of monarchical rule, embodying the revolutionary ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity.

This transition was catalyzed by escalating political tensions, military challenges, and the radicalization of the revolution, particularly after the king’s failed flight and perceived betrayal.

The Republic’s birth was a moment of immense optimism and aspiration, as it promised to reshape French society on the principles of democratic governance and civic equality. It also marked the beginning of a new calendar, symbolic of the revolutionaries’ desire to break completely with the past and start anew.

However, the early years of the Republic were marked by significant challenges, including internal divisions, economic struggles, and threats from monarchist powers in Europe.

These pressures necessitated the establishment of the Committee of Public Safety and the Reign of Terror, measures aimed at defending the revolution but which also led to extreme political repression.

Reign of Terror

The Reign of Terror, from September 1793 to July 1794, remains one of the most controversial and bloodiest periods of the French Revolution. Under the auspices of the Committee of Public Safety, led by figures such as Maximilien Robespierre, the French government adopted radical measures to purge the nation of perceived enemies of the revolution.

This period saw the widespread use of the guillotine , with thousands executed on charges of counter-revolutionary activities or mere suspicion of disloyalty. The Terror aimed to consolidate revolutionary gains and protect the nascent Republic from internal and external threats, but its legacy is marred by the extremity of its actions and the climate of fear it engendered.

The end of the Terror came with the Thermidorian Reaction on 27th July 1794 (9th Thermidor Year II, according to the revolutionary calendar), which resulted in the arrest and execution of Robespierre and his closest allies.

This marked a significant turning point, leading to the dismantling of the Committee of Public Safety and the gradual relaxation of emergency measures. The aftermath of the Terror reflected a society grappling with the consequences of its radical actions, seeking stability after years of upheaval but still committed to the revolutionary ideals of liberty and equality .

Thermidorians and the Directory

Following the Thermidorian Reaction , the political landscape of France underwent significant changes, leading to the establishment of the Directory in November 1795.

This new government, a five-member executive body, was intended to provide stability and moderate the excesses of the previous radical phase. The Directory period was characterized by a mix of conservative and revolutionary policies, aimed at consolidating the Republic and addressing the economic and social issues that had fueled the revolution.

Despite its efforts to navigate the challenges of governance, the Directory faced significant opposition from royalists on the right and Jacobins on the left, leading to a period of political instability and corruption.

The Directory’s inability to resolve these tensions and its growing unpopularity set the stage for its downfall. The coup of 18 Brumaire in November 1799, led by Napoleon Bonaparte, ended the Directory and established the Consulate, marking the end of the revolutionary government and the beginning of Napoleonic rule.

While the Directory failed to achieve lasting stability, it played a crucial role in the transition from radical revolution to the establishment of a more authoritarian regime, highlighting the complexities of revolutionary governance and the challenges of fulfilling the ideals of 1789.

French Revolution End and Outcome: Napoleon’s Rise

The revolution’s end is often marked by Napoleon’s coup d’état on 18 Brumaire , which not only concluded a decade of political instability and social unrest but also ushered in a new era of governance under his rule.

This period, while stabilizing France and bringing much-needed order, seemed to contradict the revolution’s initial aims of establishing a democratic republic grounded in the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity.

Napoleon’s rise to power, culminating in his coronation as Emperor, symbolizes a complex conclusion to the revolutionary narrative, intertwining the fulfillment and betrayal of its foundational ideals.

Evaluating the revolution’s success requires a nuanced perspective. On one hand, it dismantled the Ancien Régime, abolished feudalism, and set forth the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, laying the cornerstone for modern democracy and human rights. 

These achievements signify profound societal and legal transformations that resonated well beyond France’s borders, influencing subsequent movements for freedom and equality globally.

On the other hand, the revolution’s trajectory through the Reign of Terror and the subsequent rise of a military dictatorship under Napoleon raises questions about the cost of these advances and the ultimate realization of the revolution’s goals.

The French Revolution’s conclusion with Napoleon Bonaparte’s ascension to power is emblematic of its complex legacy. This period not only marked the cessation of years of turmoil but also initiated a new chapter in French governance, characterized by stability and reform yet marked by a departure from the revolution’s original democratic aspirations.

The Significance of the French Revolution

The French Revolution holds a place of prominence in the annals of history, celebrated for its profound impact on the course of modern civilization. Its fame stems not only from the dramatic events and transformative ideas it unleashed but also from its enduring influence on political thought, social reform, and the global struggle for justice and equality.

This period of intense upheaval and radical change challenged the very foundations of society, dismantling centuries-old institutions and laying the groundwork for a new era defined by the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity.

At its core, the French Revolution was a manifestation of human aspiration towards freedom and self-determination, a vivid illustration of the power of collective action to reshape the world. It introduced revolutionary concepts of citizenship and rights that have since become the bedrock of democratic societies.

Moreover, the revolution’s ripple effects were felt worldwide, inspiring a wave of independence movements and revolutions across Europe, Latin America, and beyond. Its legacy is a testament to the idea that people have the power to overthrow oppressive systems and construct a more equitable society.

The revolution’s significance also lies in its contributions to political and social thought. It was a living laboratory for ideas that were radical at the time, such as the separation of church and state, the abolition of feudal privileges, and the establishment of a constitution to govern the rights and duties of the French citizens.

These concepts, debated and implemented with varying degrees of success during the revolution, have become fundamental to modern governance.

Furthermore, the French Revolution is famous for its dramatic and symbolic events, from the storming of the Bastille to the Reign of Terror, which have etched themselves into the collective memory of humanity.

These events highlight the complexities and contradictions of the revolutionary process, underscoring the challenges inherent in profound societal transformation.

Key Figures of the French Revolution

The French Revolutions were painted by the actions and ideologies of several key figures whose contributions defined the era. These individuals, with their diverse roles and perspectives, were central in navigating the revolution’s trajectory, capturing the complexities and contradictions of this tumultuous period.

Maximilien Robespierre , often synonymous with the Reign of Terror, was a figure of paradoxes. A lawyer and politician, his early advocacy for the rights of the common people and opposition to absolute monarchy marked him as a champion of liberty.

However, as a leader of the Committee of Public Safety, his name became associated with the radical phase of the revolution, characterized by extreme measures in the name of safeguarding the republic. His eventual downfall and execution reflect the revolution’s capacity for self-consumption.

Georges Danton , another prominent revolutionary leader, played a crucial role in the early stages of the revolution. Known for his oratory skills and charismatic leadership, Danton was instrumental in the overthrow of the monarchy and the establishment of the First French Republic.

Unlike Robespierre, Danton is often remembered for his pragmatism and efforts to moderate the revolution’s excesses, which ultimately led to his execution during the Reign of Terror, highlighting the volatile nature of revolutionary politics.

Louis XVI, the king at the revolution’s outbreak, represents the Ancient Régime’s complexities and the challenges of monarchical rule in a time of profound societal change.

His inability to effectively manage France’s financial crisis and his hesitancy to embrace substantial reforms contributed to the revolutionary fervor. His execution in 1793 symbolized the revolution’s radical break from monarchical tradition and the birth of the republic.

Marie Antoinette, the queen consort of Louis XVI, became a symbol of the monarchy’s extravagance and disconnect from the common people. Her fate, like that of her husband, underscores the revolution’s rejection of the old order and the desire for a new societal structure based on equality and merit rather than birthright.

Jean-Paul Marat , a journalist and politician, used his publication, L’Ami du Peuple, to advocate for the rights of the lower classes and to call for radical measures against the revolution’s enemies.

His assassination by Charlotte Corday, a Girondin sympathizer, in 1793 became one of the revolution’s most famous episodes, illustrating the deep divisions within revolutionary France.

Finally, Napoleon Bonaparte, though not a leader during the revolution’s peak, emerged from its aftermath to shape France’s future. A military genius, Napoleon used the opportunities presented by the revolution’s chaos to rise to power, eventually declaring himself Emperor of the French.

His reign would consolidate many of the revolution’s reforms while curtailing its democratic aspirations, embodying the complexities of the revolution’s legacy.

These key figures, among others, played significant roles in the unfolding of the French Revolution. Their contributions, whether for the cause of liberty, the maintenance of order, or the pursuit of personal power, highlight the multifaceted nature of the revolution and its enduring impact on history.

References:

(1) Schama, Simon. Citizens: a Chronicle of the French Revolution. New York, Random House, 1990, pp. 119-221.

(2) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 11-12

(3) Hobsbawm, Eric. The Age of Revolution. Vintage Books, 1996, pp. 56-57.

(4) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 24-25

(5) Lewis, Gwynne. The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate. Routledge, 2016, pp. 12-14.

(6) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 14-25

(7) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 63-65.

(8) Schama, Simon. Citizens: a Chronicle of the French Revolution. New York, Random House, 1990, pp. 242-244.

(9) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 74.

(10) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 82 – 84.

(11) Lewis, Gwynne. The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate. Routledge, 2016, p. 20.

(12) Hampson, Norman. A Social History of the French Revolution. University of Toronto Press, 1968, pp. 60-61.

(13) https://pages.uoregon.edu/dluebke/301ModernEurope/Sieyes3dEstate.pdf (14) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 104-105.

(15) French Revolution. “A Citizen Recalls the Taking of the Bastille (1789),” January 11, 2013. https://alphahistory.com/frenchrevolution/humbert-taking-of-the-bastille-1789/.

(16) Hampson, Norman. A Social History of the French Revolution. University of Toronto Press, 1968, pp. 74-75.

(17) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 36-37.

(18) Lefebvre, Georges. The French Revolution: From its origins to 1793. Routledge, 1957, pp. 121-122.

(19) Schama, Simon. Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution. Random House, 1989, pp. 428-430.

(20) Hampson, Norman. A Social History of the French Revolution. University of Toronto Press, 1968, p. 80.

(21) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 116-117.

(22) Fitzsimmons, Michael “The Principles of 1789” in McPhee, Peter, editor. A Companion to the French Revolution. Blackwell, 2013, pp. 75-88.

(23) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 68-81.

(24) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 45-46.

(25) Schama, Simon. Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution. Random House, 1989,.pp. 460-466.

(26) Schama, Simon. Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution. Random House, 1989, pp. 524-525.

(27) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 47-48.

(28) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 51.

(29) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 128.

(30) Lewis, Gwynne. The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate. Routledge, 2016, pp. 30 -31.

(31) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp.. 53 -62.

(32) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 129-130.

(33) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 62-63.

(34) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 156-157, 171-173.

(35) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 65-66.

(36) Schama, Simon. Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution. Random House, 1989, pp. 543-544.

(37) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 179-180.

(38) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 184-185.

(39) Hampson, Norman. Social History of the French Revolution. Routledge, 1963, pp. 148-149.

(40) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 191-192.

(41) Lefebvre, Georges. The French Revolution: From Its Origins to 1793. Routledge, 1962, pp. 252-254.

(42) Hazan, Eric. A People’s History of the French Revolution, Verso, 2014, pp. 88-89.

(43) Schama, Simon. Citizens: a Chronicle of the French Revolution. Random House, 1990, pp. 576-79.

(44) Schama, Simon. Citizens: a Chronicle of the French Revolution. New York, Random House, 1990, pp. 649-51

(45) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 242-243.

(46) Connor, Clifford. Marat: The Tribune of the French Revolution. Pluto Press, 2012.

(47) Schama, Simon. Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution. Random House, 1989, pp. 722-724.

(48) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 246-47.

(49) Hampson, Norman. A Social History of the French Revolution. University of Toronto Press, 1968, pp. 209-210.

(50) Hobsbawm, Eric. The Age of Revolution. Vintage Books, 1996, pp 68-70.

(51) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 205-206

(52) Schama, Simon. Citizens: a Chronicle of the French Revolution. New York, Random House, 1990, 784-86.

(53) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 262.

(54) Schama, Simon. Citizens: a Chronicle of the French Revolution. New York, Random House, 1990, pp. 619-22.

(55) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 269-70.

(56) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989, p. 276.

(57) Robespierre on Virtue and Terror (1794). https://alphahistory.com/frenchrevolution/robespierre-virtue-terror-1794/. Accessed 19 May 2020.

(58) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 290-91.

(59) Doyle, William. Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 293-95.

(60) Lewis, Gwynne. The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate. Routledge, 2016, pp. 49-51.

How to Cite this Article

There are three different ways you can cite this article.

1. To cite this article in an academic-style article or paper , use:

<a href=" https://historycooperative.org/the-french-revolution/ ">French Revolution: History, Timeline, Causes, and Outcomes</a>

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

• Accessibility Tools
• Current Students
• The University
• Our Faculties
• Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
• School of Culture and Communication
• History Study Guides for Schools
• The long and short reasons for why Revolution broke out in France in 1789
• American Studies
• Classics, Ancient History, Egyptology
• English Language, TESOL, Applied Linguistics
• English Literature, Creative Writing
• Social Worlds of Steel
• History Staff
• 'The effectiveness of attempts at European co-operation in the period 1890-1939’
• The reasons for the Glorious Revolution of 1688
• What was the impact of fascist rule upon Italy from 1922 to 1945?
• Warfare in Western Europe in the Central Middle Ages
• The impact of the Second World War on the people of Wales and England
• Media, Communications, Journalism and PR
• Modern Languages, Translation and Interpreting
• School of Culture and Communication News
• School of Culture and Communication Rankings
• A Guide to Clearing - Classics, Ancient History and Egyptology
• Film and Visual Culture
• A Guide to Clearing - English Literature and History
• Combined Honours

A study guide by Swansea University Historians

Historians have identified multiple causes of the French Revolution, both long and short term. Early, royalist and clerical interpretations of the Revolution cast it as a conspiracy orchestrated by Enlightenment philosophes . From the late nineteenth century, explanations based on the theories of Karl Marx became dominant. In this reading the Revolution resulted from a struggle for power between the old feudal nobility, whose status was based on the ownership of land, and the bourgeoisie, who acquired wealth through trade, finance and the professions. In 1789 the bourgeoisie made common cause with the peasantry and the urban labouring classes to begin the Revolution.

The Marxist interpretation of the French Revolution was increasingly challenged after 1945. Critics pointed out that there were many nobles amongst those clamouring for reform in 1789. Moreover, the distinction between noble and commoner was not as clear as once supposed. Nobles were also involved in trade and finance, whilst many wealthy bourgeoisie purchased patents of nobility. Indeed, the French nobility was relatively open and rich commoners bought and married their way to social mobility. Economic and social status were, therefore, revealed to be a poor guide to political behaviour and the idea of monolithic ‘classes’ out for their own economic interests increasingly untenable.

This critique increasingly led historians to move away from social and economic causes as explanations for the Revolution. Instead, they focused on the role political and cultural causes played in fomenting the Revolution. The emergence of a revolutionary political culture has been identified. This culture was expressed in the increasing number of journals, newspapers, pamphlets and books and found a forum in the spread of coffee shops, salons, societies and clubs. It was this culture, these revisionist interpretations argued, that prompted the events of 1789.

The post-war period also saw interest in the Revolution shift to encompass previously overlooked groups. The spread of second and third wave feminism led to more interest in the role of women in the French Revolution. There was also more interest in events outside of Paris and in the French Empire.  

In the last decade ‘revisionist’ accounts of the Revolution that emphasise politics and culture have themselves been challenged. Questions have been raised about how political ideas were translated into concrete action on the streets of Paris? How could the revolutionary political culture mobilise the peasantry and urban poor? Several historians have argued that there must be a re-examination of the social causes of the Revolution. How did cultural and political developments identified by revisionist historians interact with the social and economic changes experienced by the wider French population?

Nevertheless, historians acknowledge that the Revolution was caused by a multiplicity of factors. The rest of this essay will provide an overview of these factors.

La Grande Nation: France as a Great Power

At first glance eighteenth-century France was the powerhouse of Europe. It was the foremost of the five Great European Powers (France, Britain, Austria, Russia and Prussia). It was the largest state in western Europe. Moreover, its population was almost 28 million, making it the most populous state in Europe after Russia.

France also had a colonial empire in the Caribbean and outposts elsewhere. It’s colonial possessions were not as extensive as those of the British, but by 1780s they comprised the richest colony in the world in Saint Domingue (later Haiti). In 1780 Saint Domingue supplied half the world’s exports of coffee and sugar and generated twice as much revenue as Spain’s richest colony, Mexico. In the late 1780s France sent more trading vessels to India than Britain and, between 1787 and 1791, even shipped more slaves from Africa than the British. 

The most vibrant economic sector in France was, therefore, the slave/sugar trade that operated out of the Atlantic ports of Nantes and Bordeaux. However, other areas of the economy also underwent expansion in the eighteenth century. In the Paris basin commercial farming had spread, whilst Lyon remained the centre of banking and the silk trade. 

By 1789 France’s GDP was three times that of Britain. Its large population and vibrant colonial trade provided a potentially large tax base through which France could finance its military. As a consequence, France boasted the largest European army and a powerful navy. The power of that military had been illustrated by the crucial aide France had provided the American revolutionaries in their struggle against the British during the American War of Independence.

Aside from its military might France also enjoyed a great deal of ‘soft power’. French was the second language of the educated across most of Europe. French forms in literature, theatre, fashion and cuisine were greatly influential. French philosophers and writers, such as Montesquieu, Voltaire, and Diderot, also played an important role in the eighteenth-century Enlightenment.  

The Weaknesses of the Eighteenth-Century French State  

Despite the advantages, however, the French state suffered from several structural weaknesses that belied its great power status. First, France suffered from financial problems throughout the eighteenth century. The nobility enjoyed many tax exemptions. They were exempt, for example, from the taille , the principal land tax. The Catholic Church, which owned a tenth of the land in France, was completely exempt. Instead, the Church negotiated a don gratuit (free gift) with the Crown in lieu of taxation. As a consequence the tax burden fell disproportionately on those least able to bear it, the peasantry. Between a third and a half of a peasant’s income were siphoned off by seigneurial dues, the Church tithe and taxes. Moreover, 56 per cent of the tax burden also fell on landed property, the least dynamic sector of the economy.

Second, numerous attempts were made to reform the tax system and the economy in the eighteenth century, but all failed because of the resistance of the nobility and the parlements. Resistance was fostered by the widespread system of venality, whereby wealthy individuals could purchase certain public offices, such as seats on the parlements . In the seventeenth century this practice had provided the Crown with a cash flow in the short term, but it also meant that it was difficult to remove public officials without recompense. The parlements , law courts responsible for registering royal decrees so they could become law, in particular became centres of resistance of royal authority and attempts to overhaul the tax system. 

Third, although parts of the French economy, such as its colonial trade, were flourishing, economic development elsewhere was hindered by guild restrictions, internal customs barriers and tolls. The development of manufacturing and early industrial enterprises therefore lagged behind other countries like Britain. Although new crops and agricultural techniques, such as potatoes and crop rotation, were introduced they were slow to spread across France. A series of harvest failures in the 1770s and in the late 1780s led to increased food prices, poverty and hardship for large sections of the population.

Fourth, French structures of administration and governance were not uniform. The French state had expanded from the early middle ages through a mixed process of conquest, marriage and inheritance. As a result law codes varied between different regions and provinces. In the pays d’election regional autonomy had been subordinated to the Crown, but in the pays d’états provincial estates continued to exist. Some regions enjoyed special privileges. Brittany, for example, was exempt from the unpopular salt tax, the gabelle .  The jurisdiction of the thirteen parlements also varied widely. The parlement of Paris, for example, encompassed around a third of France, but the others covered much smaller areas. The complexity of the this system hindered attempts at reform.

Fifth, demographic and social changes also created their own problems. The growth of the population and the widespread system of partible inheritance, whereby land was divided among sons, created pressure of agricultural land. Some peasants were able to purchase extensive tracts of land and enjoy considerable prosperity, but a much larger segment led a more precarious existence. Around half the peasantry were landless or farmed just a small plot. A poor harvest could have devastating consequences for these communities.

Stagnating agricultural production and rising inflation further eroded the purchasing power of the peasantry. As bread prices rose and real wages fell increasing proportion of the poor’s income was allocated to subsistence. This undermined demands for manufactured goods fell, which in turn had a negative impact on textiles and other industries. In Troyes, for example, some 10,000 textile workers were unemployed by 1788. 

A process of polarisation was also evident at the other end of the social scale. The nobility dominated the higher echelons of the Catholic Church, but the parish priests were relatively poor. They were also more intimately connected with the local peasant and urban communities. 

Meanwhile, the traditional nobility was often resentful of the entry of rich commoners into the ranks of the aristocracy. This was particularly the case amongst the old ‘sword’ nobility, many of whom had seen a deterioration in their fortunes over the last century. Meanwhile, rising land rents meant that those aristocrats with larger estates were becoming less dependent on royal appointments, sinecures and pensions, than they had been in the seventeenth and early eighteenth century.

The failure to reform taxation meant that although France was a wealthy country the Crown had to turn increasingly  to borrowing to meet its expenditures. To make matters worse the costs of waging war rose exponentially in the eighteenth century as France’s global commitments expanded.

Military and Diplomatic Defeats

France suffered a series of military and diplomatic reversals in second half of the eighteenth century. In 1756, in the so-called ‘Diplomatic Revolution’, France broke its alliance with Prussia and allied itself with its traditional rival, Austria. Between 1756 and 1763 it fought both Britain and Prussia in the Seven Years’ War in Europe. Simultaneously, it was at war with Britain and its colonies in North America in the French and Indian War, whilst a proxy war was conducted by the French and English East Indian Companies in India.

France suffered a serious of heavy defeats on all fronts in this first global conflict. The British conquered New France to create the colony of Canada. The French East India Company’s influence in India was greatly reduced and Britain would come to dominate the sub-continent. In Europe, meanwhile, the French army was humiliated by Frederick the Great and the Prussians at the battle of Rossbach in 1757. Napoleon Bonaparte would later claim the Revolution had began 1757, when Prussia had humbled Bourbon military might.

France enjoyed more military success in the 1780s when it allied itself with the American rebels against the British Crown. However, King Louis XVI’s hopes that this alliance would lead to preferentially trading rights after the war were dashed as the new American Republic renewed its trading links with Britain.

French involvement in the Seven Years’ War and the American War of Independence added substantially to the state’s debts. Jacques Necker, finance minister from 1777 and 1781, had largely funded France’s war effort through loans. As a result the state debt ballooned to between 8 and 12 billion livres by 1789. Serving that debt consumed an increasing share of state revenue. Moreover, worries over France’s creditworthiness meant loans could only be acquired at higher rates of interest.

Fiscal and diplomatic problems came together in 1787. The international prestige of the monarchy was undermined when it was unable to intervene in the conflict between republican and Orangist forces in the neighbouring United Provinces because of a lack of funds.

The Enlightenment and the Rise of the Public Sphere

The French involvement in the American War of Independence had an impact beyond the financial. The American rebels had fought under the slogan of ‘no taxation without representation’. Yet the French officers and soldiers did not enjoy the same political rights that their American allies were fighting for. The incongruity of an absolute monarchy fighting in defence of a republic founded on universal male suffrage (excluding slaves) was not lost on many commentators in France and Europe. The Marquis de Lafayette, who had served alongside George Washington, became a hero on both sides of the Atlantic. The Declaration of Independence provided inspiration to would-be reformers and revolutionaries in France. Indeed, the Declaration of Independence would provide a template for the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789.

Debate over domestic political reform was conducted in the pages of periodicals, books, pamphlets and journals that mushroomed in the eighteenth century. Rising literacy levels meant an increased audience for the written word. Some historians, such as Rolf Engelsing, have argued that eighteenth century Europe also witnessed as ‘reading revolution’. The literate began to read more widely rather then reading and rereading a small number of work, such as the Bible. This argument has been challenged. The Bible and other religious works remained very popular. However, the number of books published in Europe did rise exponentially during the eighteenth century. The Crown operated a system of censorship and controversial works, such as Voltaire’s Lettres philosophique and Dictonnaire philosophique , were burned. Banned works were, however, smuggled across the border from the Austrian Netherlands and the Dutch Republic, regimes with more liberal attitudes towards publishing.

This vibrant literary world was crucial to the spread of the public sphere. The term was coined by the German philosopher, Jürgen Habermas, and describes a social space where public opinion was formed. The development of the public sphere was also fostered by the spread of coffee shops. By 1789 Paris had 1,600 cafés. These often offered newspapers and periodicals to read as well as food and drink. They were, thus, spaces were ideas could circulate and be discussed. The salon, usually hosted by an aristocratic lady, provided a similar forum for discussion, albeit a more exclusive one than the coffee shop. Masonic lodges also spread in the eighteenth century and provided a network for the dissemination of ideas. 

It was through literature and in the public sphere that ideas for political and social reform were articulated. In 1748 Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws had identified three different forms of government - monarchical, republican and despotism - and advocated a separation of judicial, legislative and executive power. Voltaire praised England’s constitutional monarchic his Lettres philosophique , whilst Rousseau celebrated republican values. Foreign philosophers, particularly the work of John Locke, was also influential. All these intellectual currents fed into the intellectual ferment in the run up to the French Revolution and deeply influenced the attitudes of deputies of the National Assembly.

The public sphere, however, was not limited to high-minded discussion of political reforms and social matters. Several historians have pointed to the growth of politicised pornography in the later eighteenth century. Much of this literature featured those in positions of authority, such as clergymen and leading aristocratic statesmen. The royal family itself was also subject to this kind of writing. The Queen, Marie-Antoinette, was a particular target of slander and satire. As a Habsburg princess, she was associated with the disastrous Austrian alliance during the Seven Years’ War. She and Louis XVI also failed to produce a male heir until October 1781, eleven years after their marriage. Libels accused Marie-Antoinette of decadence, promiscuity, adultery and homosexuality.

Marie-Antoinette’s reputation was further tarnished by the ‘Affair of the Diamond Necklace’. In 1785 Cardinal de Rohan was duped in to buying a diamond necklace in order to curry favour with the Queen. The conmen, however, stole the necklace. The Queen had nothing to do with the ‘Affair’, but it was widely believed that she had instructed Rohan to buy the jewellery. The ‘Affair’ occurred against the background of a poor harvest and increased hardship for the poor. The extravagance of the jewellery solidified the image of the Queen as a spendthrift, more interested in her own luxury than the welfare of France.

Such slurs may not have led directly to the fall of the monarch, they nevertheless undermined the majesty and prestige of the Bourbons.

The Constitutional Crisis

In 1787 the French finance minister, Calonne, presented the king with a package of economic reforms aimed at addressing France’s financial problems. Calonne recognised that these reforms would take time to be effective. In order to meet the Crown’s immediate need for money Calonne suggested that the King summon a Council of Notables to approve the reforms. This would reassure lenders as to the solvency of the French state and allow it to borrow more money at better rates of interest.

The Council of Notables, however, refused to approve Calonne’s economic reforms. Led by the Duke of Orléans, Louis XVI’s cousin, the Notables demanded political reforms as the price of agreement. Louis XVI dissolved the Council and Calonne was dismissed. Brienne, Calonne’s replacement tried to force the reforms through the Parlement of Paris. The Parlement refused to register the reforms and also demanded political change. Louis responded by exiling the Parlement . A vigorous political debate emerged as the Parlement portrayed itself as the centre of resistance to royal despotism.

Brienne was dismissed and replaced by Necker. Necker persuaded the King to call the Estates General as a means of breaking the political deadlock. The Estates General, however, had not met since 1614 and represented a medieval view of how society functions. It was divided into three estates. The first represented the clergy, the second the nobility, whilst the third encompassed the mass of society in the commons. Each estate held its own elections, which were accompanied by the drawing up of lists of grievances, the so-called cahiers de doleances , that the deputies were to present to the King.

Initially, each estate was to have the same number of deputies, but a pamphlet campaign prior to the elections forced the King to agree reluctantly to double the number of deputies of the Third Estate. A key work in the debate was the manifesto What is the Third Estate? written by the Abbé Emmanuel Sieyès, in which he asked, ‘what is the Third Estate? Nothing. What does it wish to be? Everything’.

The 330 strong First Estate was dominated by deputies drawn from the parish clergy, whilst the old ‘sword’ nobility were the majority in the Second Estate. Some two-third of the deputies voted to the Third Estates were professional men, lawyer, notaries or judges who had experience of public debate and oratory.

Each estate voted en bloc. It was, therefore, still possible for the First and Second Estate to unite to block proposals from the Third. This proved a recipe for political stalemate. Whilst liberal-minded nobles wanted to work with the Third Estate, their conservative colleagues refused to abandon voting by bloc and insisted on defending their social status.  The deputies of the Third Estate called on the First and Second Estate to unite with them to deliberate and vote in common,  but they were ignored. Finally, on 10 June Sieyès suggested that the Third Estate proceed unilaterally. On 12 and 19 June several priests left the First Estate to join the Third. No longer representative of commoners alone the Third Estate voted on 17 June to range itself the National Assembly.

The King tried to reassert control over the Third Estate by locking it out it customary meeting place at the palace of Versailles on 20 June. The deputies gathered in the royal tennis court and swore an oath not to disband until they had provided France with a written Constitution. This Tennis Court Oath was a direct challenge to the authority of the King. More deputies from both the First and Second Estate now joined the National Assembly. On 23 June Louis XVI ordered the Estate to meet separately, but was ignored. The Comte de Mirabeau, a nobleman elected to the Third Estate, announced ‘we will not lave our seats except by the force of bayonets’. Finally, on 27 June Louis XVI, fearing popular unrest, ordered the remaining deputies of the First and Second Estates to join the National Assembly. The power and authority of the King had been badly undermined.

The Fall of the Bastille and the October Days

In July, however, Louis XVI appeared to change course. Orders had been issued on 26 June for regiments to march on Versailles and Paris, whilst the garrison of the Bastille was reinforced. Meanwhile, on 12 July Louis XVI dismissed Necker as finance minister.

News of Necker’s dismissal and troop concentration caused a mix of fear and anger In Paris. An angry crowd had assembled at the Palais Royale to protest at Necker’s dismissal. Here the lawyer turned radical journalist, Camille Desmoulins, addressed the crowd and advocated insurrection. Wearing green ribbons, a colour associated with liberty, the crowd ransacked guardhouses for weapons and warehouses for food. Crucially, the French Guards refused to intervene and many instead joined the crowd. On 14 July attention turned to the Bastille. The Bastille was a prison, but, more importantly, it was also an arsenal. The crowd that besieged the Bastille were more interested in seizing the guns and munitions stored there than freeing the prisoners. The governor, the Baron de Launay refused initially to surrender the fortress and fired on the crowd. After some fighting the Bastille was surrendered. De Launay was stabbed to death, decapitated and his head paraded on a pike. The capital was in the hands of the revolutionaries. 

Louis XVI, meanwhile, was warned by his generals that his soldiers were unreliable and might not disperse the crowds in Paris. Louis was forced to order his regiments to stand down and recalled Necker on 16 July. On 17 July he visited Paris with the National Assembly. At the city hall he was handed a tricolour cockade which blended the red and blue colours of the city of Paris with the white of the Bourbon monarch.

Although Paris was, briefly, calm, unrest had now spread to the provinces and countryside. The National Assembly passed a series of laws in an effort to provide stability. On 4 August noble deputies vied with each other to renounce their noble privileges. On 11 August the Assembly announced the destruction of the ‘feudal regime’. The Church tithe was also abolished, a decision that would sow the seeds for the later radicalisation of the Revolution and bloody conflict.

Most famously, on 26 August the Assembly approved the 17 articles of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. This document was to have a lasting impacting. Both the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the European Convention on Human Rights (1953) drew on the substance and even the wording of that earlier document.

Despite these reforms the National Assembly struggled to maintain order in Paris. After a brief period of stability, bread price began to rise again leading to mounting discontent. At the same time, the King voiced reservations about the Declaration of the Rights of Man. Rumours reached Paris of a banquet given by the King’s Bodyguard in the royal family’s honour at which the tricolour cockade had been trampled.

On 5 October market women gathered at the city hall to demand action on bread prices. Possibly orchestrated by the Duke of Orleans and the Comte de Mirabeau an armed crowd set out for Versailles to press their case on the National Assembly. A deputation met with the King to demand action on prices. On 6 October a small group of protestors broke into the palace and invaded the Queen’s apartments. Marie-Antoinette escaped just in time, but Lafayette, now commander of the National Guard, persuaded the royal family that the crowd would only disperse if addressed directly. The royal family addressed the crowd from a balcony, but the crowd demanded they return with them to Paris. His authority crumbling Louis XVI had no choice but to acquiesce. The King, his family and the National Assembly returned to Paris where they could be watched and influenced by the people of the city.

  Conclusion

The so-called October Days marked the end of what has often been described as the ‘liberal’ phase of the French Revolution. Thereafter, the Revolution would be characterised by growing levels of violence and factionalism. There were multiple causes to the French Revolution. France was not unique in facing difficult economic, social and political conditions in the last quarter of the eighteenth century. All Europe states faced similar challenges. Britain faced rebellion in America. The Dutch Republic had its own revolutionary movement. There were peasant uprisings in Central Europe too. It was, however, the particular constellation of these challenges in France that lead to the Revolution. Where to put the emphasis, be it on the emergence of a particular political culture or on the polarisation of society due to demographic and economic change remains at the core of debate today.

Study History for a Degree

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Why Publish with JSH?
• About Journal of Social History
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• < Previous

Intellectual History and the Causes of the French Revolution

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Jack R Censer, Intellectual History and the Causes of the French Revolution, Journal of Social History , Volume 52, Issue 3, Spring 2019, Pages 545–554, https://doi.org/10.1093/jsh/shy082

• Permissions Icon Permissions

From the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789, historians, politicians, and even the interested public believed radical ideas to be at the bottom of this upheaval. Upstaged by social explanations, particularly in the first two-thirds of the twentieth century, intellectual accounts have regained prominence, as recent scholarship has reiterated that ideas mattered. But what ideas? This essay focuses on those ideas that became evident at and around the outbreak of the revolution in 1788–89. For this period, a new wave of scholarship emphasizes not the idea of equality but rather historic rights and patriotism. In these accounts, Enlightenment notions of natural law provided the central justification for radicalizing the revolution as the decade proceeded. Beyond patriotism and rights, this essay also examines other competing discourses, especially those that challenged the church.

Many histories of the French Revolution, beginning with those written in the era itself, assumed, almost axiomatically, that the ideas of the philosophes had caused the “coming” of the event. 1 As social and other historians undermined that theory, intellectual historians moved in new directions, particularly toward the social history of ideas. Most visibly, in the 1960s, Robert Darnton and François Furet showed how subversive (even if not actually revolutionary) ideas had seeped into political culture through pornography and porous state borders. 2 Jürgen Habermas enlarged this vision by arguing that a “public sphere” had emerged in France that allowed subversive ideas and practices in various milieus, such as Freemasonry, the growing periodical press, and learned societies. 3 Still, few scholars claimed a direct link between these ideas and revolution.

Nonetheless, scholarly interest in ideas radically sharpened after the publication of François Furet’s Penser la revolution française in 1978, which opened up a new approach to intellectual history. 4 The first half of the book lambasted the Marxist explanation for the Revolution, which Furet labeled a “catechism” with class struggle at its absolute, immutable center. The twentieth-century Marxists who advocated this view saw themselves as the obvious heirs to the founding of the French republic, but Furet dismissed the Marxist interpretation as sheer fabrication.

Having pushed aside class conflict as the Revolution’s central dynamic, Furet succinctly posited his own theory that even before 1789 the monarchy was toothless. Into that power vacuum, sailed Rousseau’s Social Contract , a tract so powerful that its message eclipsed other ideologies and installed a potent logic—the absolute dominance of popular sovereignty. Yet, activating popular sovereignty required an advocate, an individual who could claim to embody the people’s will. Robespierre filled this role admirably, but he also created the potential for individual tyranny far more potent than that of a king whose authority was inherent in his body but surely did not represent the France of millions of people. From this fatal flaw eventually followed the Committee of Public Safety and the Terror. Furet’s theory was novel: by reducing the Revolution to the Terror, and blaming all of it on the logic of popular sovereignty derived from Rousseau, he tied the philosophe directly to the Revolution. Furet’s approach, drawn sharply to make a criticism of the Revolution as well as a scholarly point, was more specific than those that more generally connected the Enlightenment to the Revolution.

Although Furet’s interpretation did much to supplant Marxist and more traditional intellectual interpretations, it was criticized by scholars who contended that Rousseau’s fame had sprung far more from his sentimental writings than from the Social Contract . More recently, however, some scholars have resuscitated Rousseau’s influence. 5 Nonetheless, Furet provided no explanation for the revolutionaries’ acceptance of Rousseauian ideas other than the political vacuum and the rigorous logic springing from Rousseau’s belief that equality had no limits. How could these specific ideas hijack the mindset of a population?

Keith Baker articulated a parallel but different explanation for the acceptance of revolutionary ideology. 6 He put forth the abstract concept that every individual lives in an environment with discourses—ideational resources—that compete for attention. Facing these choices, people rather unconsciously pick and assemble notions that provide concrete solutions to material problems. In 1789, as governmental problems abounded, the elite—particularly dissatisfied elites—adopted three somewhat disparate discourses to frame their response. Baker labeled these three languages justice (opposition to despotism), reason (opposition to political views accepted because of their antiquity), and will (the right to implement enlightened concepts). The discourse of will approximated Furet’s notion of the role of equality and popular sovereignty. Yet Baker departed from Furet’s understanding of the way that ideology worked, adopting a more complex explanation for the creation of revolutionary ideology that included both chance and an alignment with material conditions. Nonetheless, Furet and Baker generally agreed on the important role of ideas or, more precisely, cultural change as a logic for revolution. 7

Continued work by Keith Baker, now collaborating with Dan Edelstein, remains highly visible, thanks in part to the impressive development of Stanford’s Digital Archive. 8 The architecture of the website springs from Edelstein’s and Baker’s priorities, which reflect their own understanding of the Revolution’s origins. Now, with a twenty-first century digital toolbox, Baker, Edelstein, and others at Stanford oversee technologists who are able to create algorithms that help scholars discover word associations, the building blocks for political discourse, on a far grander scale than what was possible even a few years ago. Still more important in extending their view of the power of ideas has been their new book Scripting Revolution , whose introduction confidently asserts that a revolution only assumes that form after being named a revolution. In practice, this theory implies that the French Revolution did not actually begin after the elections and the seizure of the Bastille in 1789 but instead only commenced later that year when Louis-Marie Prudhomme’s periodical Révolutions de Paris published a contemporary history of the events that labeled them revolutionary. Although Baker’s essay on the eighteenth-century use of the term “revolution” indicated the necessity of naming or “scripting,” he asserted this stronger point after Pierre Rétat pointed out Prudhomme’s essay. But what Rétat had begun in a fairly obscure article (that Baker carefully acknowledged and credited), Baker emphatically embraced and applied to all subsequent revolutions. In short, events called for the label; then, the label “revolution” defined subsequent actions. 9

Despite the significant achievements of Furet and Baker in reconceptualizing the intellectual origins of the Revolution, a new paradigm—classical republicanism—has exerted significant influence since 2000, at least in the English-speaking wing of the field. Baker would hardly contest this, it seems to me, since the convergence between the newer notion and his own arguments is considerable. In fact, he and his former student Johnson Kent Wright have done much to introduce this perspective to explain the French Revolution. 10 What neither they nor anyone else has provided is a standard definition of classical republicanism. For the purposes of this essay, one might assert that the essence of the term lies in the Greek and Roman defense of virtue and personal liberty against an empire. In the eighteenth century, according to this view, resistance fell to the nobility, which, motivated by honor, defended a populace that was itself only motivated by interest and largely incapable of taking up this necessary battle.

The ascendance of classical republicanism in accounts of the events of 1788–89 has tended to relegate the emphasis on natural rights (that Baker links to the language of “will”) to the subsequent radicalization of the Revolution. But this relationship was never quite settled, as Rousseau’s Social Contract advocated both republicanism and natural rights. Furthermore, advocates of classical republicanism also had their eye on equality, although they conceived of it more as the ennobling of all rather than leveling. In short, the equality born of natural law was minimized in 1788–89. Equality had proved difficult to accommodate consistently, much less realize, in the early part of revolutionary struggle driven by classical republicanism. 11

Worth noting as an aside is the prescience of two of the canonical works from a previous generation of scholars. Peter Gay clearly recognized the philosophes’ interest in the ancients but focused on their views that castigated religion, while Robert R. Palmer’s “intermediate bodies” are congruent with the resistance of elites, though clearly he imagined a social elite wider than the nobility of classical republicanism. 12

Evidence for how broad has been the reach of classical republicanism as an explanation for revolution are two distinguished studies in the related fields of fiscal policy and the economy. John Shovlin’s book, The Political Economy of Virtue details the debates beginning in the 1740 s between those who favored “virtuous” small producers over the wealthier, parasitic echelons of society. 13 His study depicts a battle between producers on one side and financiers and the comfortable on the other. Contemporaries believed that luxury and profit were derived from the exploitation of honest workers. Shovlin follows this division through the decades of the eighteenth century; though positions evolved, the rich and the oppressed remained opposed. To be sure, the author sometimes resorts to fancy footwork, as some entrepreneurial activities dropped by the rich and adopted by the poor apparently change from despicable to honored simply by virtue of who performed the work. He praises profit well earned by the hands of the poor and attacks that when the rich become the recipients.

During the revolutionary crisis, Shovlin argues, the advocates for the peasantry and the workers seized the upper hand. Dealing with the deficit, their representatives came to believe that piecemeal reforms would not do and the problem at bottom was an excess of luxury. At the center of this attack was Mirabeau, who argued that “speculation creates a false wealth which undermines real sources of riches in agriculture and in commerce.” 14 Further, Shovlin states that patriotism had influenced and shaped how ordinary citizens understood political economy. Although the author seldom acknowledges the link between patriotism and classical republicanism, the rhetoric he uncovers fits neatly with the broader theory of classical republicanism. 15

In his valuable work Privilege and the Politics of Taxation in Eighteenth Century France , Michael Kwass analyzes the resistance to royal taxation that boiled over in the Old Regime and into the Revolution and directly points out the immediate relevance of classical republicanism to the debate. Kwass notes that the contemporary meaning of classical republicanism included a king and “representative bodies” that coexisted in a milieu where a “vigilant” mistrust of authority and hostility to finance were augmented by the embrace of an authentic rustic existence in which virtue reigned. Watchfulness was necessary, even though somewhat powerless against the encroachment of the sovereign. But Kwass believes that Mireabeau, in the long term struggle of this scenario, articulated in 1750–51 the possibility of coexistence. Morally, the king was obliged toward restraint. Royal taxation had produced crises; only an end to arbitrary rule and its replacement could be successful. 16

Decades later, according to Kwass, Jacques Necker mobilized a similar rhetoric. Brought into government to address the deficit, Necker appealed to patriotism rather than duty to the king, whom he advised to encourage public involvement. As Kwass notes: “By publicizing the working of the state . . . both patriotism and public opinion would emerge to guide the nation to reform, stability, and fiscal strength.” 17 Such remarks were more than just a rhetorical similarity to classical republicanism, as shown by a popular engraving, which linked the minister and his fiscal plan to antiquity. Hallmarks of this classical allusion are the cupids who crowned Necker and his policies with garlands. Central to the piece is a monument labeled as a pyramid, whose lettering indicated that taxes linked to the king were to be eliminated, replaced by charity, equity, and abundance. 18

Although classical republican ideals were thus supposed to inhabit the economy and fiscal policy, they were, compared to the rhetoric of the political sphere, limited at best. Jay M. Smith’s provocative Nobility Reimagined asserts that the revolutionaries desired but failed to construct a republic based on the antique values of honor and virtue. The study describes the nobles’ hostility to Louis XIV’s absolutism and their desire to base society on patriotism and political virtue. As Smith notes, the French were familiar with ancient authors such as Livy, Tacitus, and Plutarch and “the ‘civic humanism’ idiom that served as an important vehicle for transmitting the values of the ancient republics to the early modern Atlantic world.” 19 The embrace of antiquity fueled the pride of nobles but also reminded them of family heritage and their disproportionate political and economic power. This cauldron yielded a compensatory embrace of virtue.

According to Smith, an increased interest in adding equality to the mix of values emerged at mid-century. In particular, commerce, premised on equality in moral and physical goods, was widely considered valuable. The publication in 1756 of Gabriel-François Coyer’s La Noblesse commerçante , which elevated the dignity of the merchant’s profession, furthered change. The contemporary Pierre Jaubert claimed even more as he asserted that “virtue, valor, zeal for the patrie , probity, ability, talent, experience, scorn for dangers, the honor of becoming a martyr for one’s patrie . . . in short, personal merit, are always hereditary in families.” 20 Smith claimed that such attributes were intended to incorporate commoners into the elite. Antique republicanism was socially expansive. In fact, by the 1760 s, the French had turned to ennobling the nation.

Despite all of these signs of inclusivity, Smith also indicates that many nobles were uneasy with this change. With the Revolution opening the door to unimaginable equality, the nobles asserted their difference, particularly by refusing to double the number of commoner representatives to the Third Estate. This action gave rise to a bitter struggle that animated the Revolution. Despite the ultimate demolition of the ideal of classical republicanism in revolutionary France, the passions ignited in 1788–89 reveal its importance to contemporaries and its relevance to history.

The monarch’s multiple foreign policy failures, the subsistence crises of 1788–89, the credit crunch of the 1780s, and the institutional paralysis that undermined all royal efforts at reform would also need to be integrated into any comprehensive analysis of the causes of the Old Regime’s collapse in 1789. 21

Agreeing with Kwass, Smith argues that in the end, these events and discourses cannot be “easily separated.” 22 Thus, politics and circumstances led to a radical division in which the nobility and the king ended up as the opponents of republican morality. To judge by the work of Shovlin, Kwass, and Smith, the central role of ideas in the complex crises of the late 1780 s seems well established. These scholars have begun to connect classical republicanism to the actions taken during this key historical conjuncture.

Ushered by classical republicanism into a smaller space in the intellectual ferment, the role of natural law requires reevaluation. Scholars who focus on classical republicanism in the origins of the Revolution sometimes imply through offhand remarks that natural law exerted a major impact as the Revolution continued. More work needs to be done to chart natural law and connect it to revolutionary events. Historians’ use of these two separate logics undermines the fundamental coherence of revolutionary thinking and perhaps that of the Enlightenment itself. Whereas classical republicanism is premised on the historic resistance to central control, natural law focuses on human equality, yielding a contradiction—perhaps even a useful one—that still resonates throughout modern politics.

Largely outside the political maelstrom, other ideas flourished. Particularly impressive is the study by Darrin McMahon on the “counter enlightenment,” a group that absorbed some progressive notions. 23 Even more astonishing—as it certainly would have been to Voltaire—has been the work on the Catholic enlightenment. Important new books by Jeffrey Burson and Ulrich Lehner have revivified an effort whose roots lie in R. R. Palmer’s Catholics and Unbelievers , which illuminated the balance of tradition and change. 24 Also relevant in this vein are Alan Kors’s studies of the Catholic Church. In his earliest work on Baron d’Holbach, Kors focused on the loneliness of atheists. More recently, he produced two important books that unequivocally revealed that notions of atheism circulated far more widely than even he earlier imagined. In seeking to reject atheism, the Church amplified the reach of what it sought to repress. 25 A new book by Anton Matysin on scepticism and doubt takes a similar tack. 26 Nonetheless, John Robertson’s persuasive The Case for the Enlightenment concludes that the Enlightenment, linked as it was to critiquing religion, was fundamentally reformist. 27 Nevertheless, none of these books on religious doubt attempt to relate their subjects directly to the upheaval in 1789.

None of these recent approaches seems to have raised the importance of intellectuals to quite the level achieved in France’s sister rebellion in North America. Sophia Rosenfeld has chronicled how Tom Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense , highlighting the acuity and value of the thinking of the common man, galvanized public opinion and incited the North American Revolution. Scholars, including Rosenfeld herself, have found no similar impact on the French Revolution. In fact, counterrevolutionaries actually marshaled the notion of common sense to sway the people against the uprising. The complexity and abstractness of many revolutionary plans created an opportunity for reactionaries to argue that common sense did not embrace, or in fact even respect, revolutionary goals. 28

Nonetheless, scholars, including Jay Smith, have noted the pamphlet war preceding 1788–89, in which Sieyès’s What Is the Third Estate? was most visible. 29 William Sewell’s work on Sieyès and Kenneth Margerison’s on pamphlets more generally provide additional evidence for the importance of these texts. 30 Doubtless, these publications could prove to be the most promising place to link the various prerevolutionary languages to the revolutionary plans enacted in Versailles, Paris, and throughout the country, though little evidence exists that the rural population knew much of this exchange among propagandists. Nonetheless, this explosion of print may provide fertile ground to examine the role of ideas.

Entering the crowded arena regarding the intellectual origins of the French Revolution has been Jonathan Israel, who approaches the role of ideas by postulating a direct connection between individual Enlightenment thinkers and specific views that would compete in the Revolution. In this way, Israel is rehabilitating the older approach that focuses not on languages or presuppositions but on on individuals and the power of ideas. Although his work (five books totaling four thousand pages published from 2001 to 2014) could be useful, its combativeness, the overemphases of its argument, and its length all undercut that potential contribution. In fact, his corpus has inspired the most acrimonious debate on the intellectual history of the Revolution in recent years. Largely because of the prominence of this debate, Israel’s work has somewhat obscured the previous decades of more sober, though still contentious scholarship. For this reason, both its arguments and the reactions it has provoked thus require a brief review. 31

To pursue the connection between ideas and the Revolution, Israel sorted the philosophes into two camps. Beginning in the seventeenth century with Spinoza, whose theory denied the spiritual and insisted on atheism, Israel focuses on Spinoza’s belief in “monism,” which held that only one substance (material not spiritual) made up the universe. The philosopher opposed “deists” and others—very prominently Rousseau—who posited a creator who fashioned the universe. From this sharp division, Israel finds two separate logics. The deists, believing in God, held that little could be done to improve on his perfection; monists, holding all matter to be equal, averred that everyone could participate in making life better. In this analysis, the atheists become the source of the moderate, incremental revolution, while the religious appear as political fanatics and authors of the Terror.

Israel presents his thesis forcibly, and the rebuttals have shown similar intensity. Although Furet attacked the Marxists and offended others by insisting that the Jacobin dictatorship was the logical end of the Revolution, even that of 1789, Israel undertakes a far larger, even compulsive effort to organize the Revolution around his Manichaean notion and refute other interpretations.

A storm of criticism greeted Israel’s work. 32 Kent Wright, Carolina Armenteros, Keith Baker, and Harvey Chisick found much to criticize and little to praise in the book. Israel seemingly found it impossible to acknowledge any of their critiques, which he completely rejected. For an example, consider the interchange between Baker and Israel. As author of the iconic biography of Condorcet, Baker had noted that that philosophe did not even include Spinoza in his narrative of human progress. Such a challenge to Israel’s linkages led the latter to remark condescendingly that this could “conceivably” be right, but nonetheless, the two philosophes still strongly shared goals. 33

Possibly, Israel’s resistance to criticism accounts for even more critical reviews that followed, by highly distinguished scholars Lynn Hunt, Jeremy Popkin, and David Bell. 34 In his review, Bell remarked that “Israel, in some remarkably cavalier pages, treats . . . popular actions almost with annoyance. . . . He takes no interest in the common people’s culture.” Israel’s unwillingness to engage with the work of other scholars piqued Lynn Hunt who derided his one-sided accounts: “Israel’s palette is too black and white for . . . subtleties. He is always right, and so are his heroes.” 35

Despite all its faults, Israel’s work does suggest the value in plumbing the ideas of individual intellectual predecessors of the French Revolution. Though few will follow his precise path, a focus on the use of ideas, from the Greeks to the physiocrats, could help illuminate the intellectual history of the revolutionary maelstrom. With this narrower focus, scholars just might be able to supplement the interplay of discourses and embedded presuppositions by seeing ideas at work among intellectuals.

The author wishes to thank Jane Turner Censer and Gary Kates for their advice and assistance.

See, for example, Edmund Burke’s early assertions in his Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790; rept. ed., Garden City, NY, 1961), first published in 1790.

Over the last several decades, Robert Darnton and François Furet have published numerous works in this area. See especially, Robert Darnton, The Forbidden Best-Sellers of Pre-revolutionary France (New York, 1995); and François Furet et al., Livre et société dans la France du XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1965–70), 2 vols.

Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society , trans. Thomas Burger (Boston, MA, 1993). See also Ran Halévi, Les Loges maçonniques dans la France d’Ancien Régime: Aux origins de la sociabilité démocratique (Paris, 1984).

François Furet, Interpreting the French Revolution , trans. Elborg Forster (New York, 1981).

See for example, Carol Blum, Rousseau and the Republic of Virtue: The Language of Politics in the French Revolution (Ithaca, NY, 1986); and more recently, Dan Edelstein, The Terror of Natural Right: Republicanism, the Cult of Nature, & the French Revolution (Chicago, 2010). See below for a discussion of Jonathan Israel’s work.

Keith Michael Baker, Inventing the French Revolution: Essays on French Political Culture in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, 1990).

For an even more poignant criticism of the role of ideas, consult Roger Chartier, The Cultural Origins of the French Revolution , trans Lydia G. Cochrane (Princeton, NJ, 1991), 67–91. Chartier argues that “books” do not make revolutions; rather it is the cultural act of reading that possesses power.

The website can be found at: https://frda.stanford.edu .

Keith Michael Baker and Dan Edelstein, eds., Scripting Revolution: A Historical Approach to the Comparative Study of Revolution (Stanford, CA, 2015). See Rétat’s article, “Forme et discours d’un journal Révolutionnaire: Les Révolutions de Paris en 1789,” in Claude Labrosse, Pierre Rétat, and Henri Duranton, L’Instrument périodique: La function de la presse au XVIIIe siècle (Lyon, France, 1985), 139–66. One can see Baker’s use of the article in Scripting Revolution , 96–97. Baker was even more emphatic on this point in a discussion at a conference at Haifa University in 1989.

Keith Michael Baker, “A Script for a French Revolution: The Political Consciousness of the Abbé Mably,” in Inventing the French Revolution (Cambridge, 1990); and Johnson Kent Wright, A Classical Republican in Eighteenth-Century France: The Political Thought of Mably (Stanford, CA, 1997). See also Rachel Hammersley, The English Republican Tradition and Eighteenth-Century France: Between the Ancients and the Moderns (Manchester, England, 2010). For more on the mixture of natural law and the right to resist overweening monarchs in the Atlantic world, consult Jack R. Censer, Debating Modern Revolution: The Evolution of Revolutionary Ideas (London, 2016), 7–52.

Edelstein, The Terror of Natural Right .

Peter Gay, The Enlightenment: An Interpretation , 2 vols. (New York, 1967, 1969); and R. R. Palmer, The Age of Democratic Revolution: A Political History of Europe and America, 1760–1800 , 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ, 1959, 1964).

John Shovlin, The Political Economy of Virtue: Luxury, Patriotism, and the Origins of the French Revolution (Ithaca, NY, 2006). Marisa Linton, The Politics of Virtue in Enlightenment France (New York, 2001); Andrew Jainchill, Reimagining Politics after the Terror: The Republican Origins of French Liberalism (Ithaca, NY, 2008).

Shovlin, The Political Economy , 171.

Henry C. Clark, Compass of Society: Commerce and Absolutism in Old Regime France (Lanham, MD, 2007) shows how resistance and accommodation limited at first the liberty of both producers and polity. However, it must be said that such values triumphed as the nineteenth century rolled along. In fact, James Livesey, Making Democracy in the French Revolution (Cambridge, MA, 2001) argues persuasively that already in the Directory (1795–99), both liberal economy and politics had revived, if only briefly before dominating in a later period.

Michael Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation in Eighteenth Century France: Liberté, Égalité, Fiscalité (Cambridge, 2000), 234–38.

Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation , 251.

Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation , 245.

Jay M. Smith, Nobility Reimagined: The Patriotic Nation in Eighteenth-Century France (Ithaca, NY, 2005), 32.

Smith, Nobility Reimagined , 133.

Smith, Nobility Reimagined , 265.

Smith, Nobility Reimagined , 266.

Darrin M. McMahon, Enemies of the Enlightenment: The French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity (New York, 2001).

Jeffrey D. Burson, The Rise and Fall of Theological Enlightenment: Jean-Martin de Prades and Ideological Polarization in Eighteenth-Century France (South Bend, IN, 2010); Ulrich L. Lehner, The Catholic Enlightenment: The Forgotten History of a Global Movement (New York, 2016); and R. R. Palmer, Catholics and Unbelievers in 18th Century France (Princeton, NJ, 1939).

Alan Charles Kors, D’Holbach’s Coterie: An Enlightenment in Paris (Princeton, 1976); Epicureans and Atheists in France, 1650–1729 (Cambridge, 2016); and Naturalism and Unbelief in France, 1650–1729 (Cambridge, 2016).

Anton M. Matysin, The Specter of Skepticism in the Age of Enlightenment (Baltimore, MD, 2016).

John Robertson, The Case for the Enlightenment: Scotland and Naples, 1680–1760 (Cambridge, 2005). In fact, in his The Enlightenment: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2015), 116, Robertson goes farther to note that “the Revolution was the antithesis of Enlightenment.”

Sophia Rosenfeld, Common Sense: A Political History (Cambridge, MA, 2011).

Smith, Nobility Reimagined , 255–57. Of course, Peter Gay found group solidarity in the eighteenth-century philosophes in his The Party of Humanity: Essays in the French Enlightenment (New York, 1964).

William H. Sewell, Jr., A Rhetoric of Bourgeois Revolution: The Abbé Sieyes and What Is the Third Estate? (Durham, NC, 1994); and Kenneth Margerison, Pamphlets & Public Opinion: The Campaign for a Union of Orders in the Early French Revolution (West Lafayette, IN, 1998).

Jonathan I. Israel, Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity 1650–1750 (Oxford, 2001); Enlightenment Contested: Philosophy, Modernity, and the Emancipation of Man, 1670–1752 (Oxford, 2006); A Revolution of the Mind: Radical Enlightenment and the Intellectual Origins of Modern Democracy (Princeton, 2010); Democratic Enlightenment: Philosophy, Revolution, and Human Rights 1750–1790 (Oxford, 2011); and Revolutionary Ideas: An Intellectual History of the French Revolution from The Rights of Man to Robespierre (Princeton, 2014).

H-France Forum 9, no. 1 (Winter 2014).

H-France Forum 9, no. 1, 80.

This paragraph is based on the following reviews and responses: David A. Bell, “A Very Different French Revolution,” New York Review of Books (July 10, 2014); Jonathan Israel, “The French Revolution: An Exchange,” New York Review of Books , October 10, 2014; Lynn Hunt, “Louis XVI Wasn’t Killed by Ideas,” New Republic , June 27, 2014; Jonathan Israel and Lynn Hunt, “Was Louis XVI Overthrown by Ideas?” New Republic , July 31, 2014; Jeremy D. Popkin, “Review of Jonathan Israel, Revolutionary Ideas,” H-France Review 15, no. 66 (May 2015); Jonathan Israel, “Response to Jeremy Popkin’s Review, H-France Review 15, no. 67 (May 2015).

Bell, “A Very Different French Revolution,” 2; Hunt, “Louis XVI,” 8.

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1527-1897
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Home — Essay Samples — History — French Revolution — The Main Causes Of The French Revolution

The Main Causes of The French Revolution

• Categories: French Revolution Middle Ages

About this sample

Words: 1050 |

Published: Feb 8, 2022

Words: 1050 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Works Cited

• Doyle, W. (1989). The origins of the French Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Godechot, J. (1971). France and the Atlantic revolution of the eighteenth century, 1770-1799. New York: Free Press.
• Hampson, N. (1988). The French Revolution: A concise history. London: Thames & Hudson.
• Hunt, L. (1984). Politics, culture, and class in the French Revolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Lefebvre, G. (1962). The coming of the French Revolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• McPhee, P. (2015). The French Revolution, 1789–1799. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Palmer, R. R. (1959). The age of democratic revolution: A political history of Europe and America, 1760–1800. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Schama, S. (1989). Citizens: A chronicle of the French Revolution. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
• Soboul, A. (1975). The French Revolution, 1787–1799: From the storming of the Bastille to Napoleon. New York: Random House.
• Tackett, T. (1996). Becoming a revolutionary: The deputies of the French National Assembly and the emergence of a revolutionary culture (1789-1790). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: History

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 963 words

2 pages / 696 words

2 pages / 701 words

1 pages / 1849 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on French Revolution

The historical relationship between Toussaint L'Ouverture and Napoleon Bonaparte is a complex and multi-faceted one that has been the subject of much scholarly debate and analysis. Both figures played pivotal roles in the [...]

The American and French Revolutions are two pivotal events in world history that have shaped the modern political landscape. Both revolutions were fueled by a desire for freedom, equality, and democracy, but they unfolded in [...]

The French Revolution, an epochal event that reshaped not only the course of French history but also the global political landscape, was ignited by a multifaceted interplay of political, social, and economic factors. To grasp [...]

Revolutions are pivotal events in history that have shaped the political, social, and economic landscape of the world. Two of the most influential revolutions are the French and American Revolutions, which occurred in the 18th [...]

h3>1. How do you think Louis XVI’s qualities as a leader led to the French Revolution?Louis did not know how to lead the general population effectively, and the general population discussed knew this. Louis had never needed to [...]

The Reign of Terror, a period of extreme violence and chaos during the French Revolution, has been a subject of much debate among historians and scholars. Some argue that the Reign of Terror was a necessary response to the [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

French Revolution Essay: Writing Topics and Examples

The French Revolution is one of the most significant historical events, undeniably impacting the world. It marked the end of the monarchy, sparked a quest for freedom, and transformed societies forever. Understanding this pivotal moment requires diving into its layers of politics, social change, and passionate beliefs. In this article, we’ll share proven tips on how to write a French Revolution paper and provide vivid examples. If you need urgent and practical help with this assignment, hire an essay writer online right now!

When Was the French Revolution?

The French Revolution occurred between 1789 and 1799, marking France's tumultuous decade of radical social and political change. Here's a brief French Revolution timeline of key events during this period:

• May 5: Estates-General convenes for the first time since 1614, marking the beginning of the revolutionary process.
• June 17: The National Assembly is formed by members of the Third Estate, signaling defiance against the absolute monarchy.
• July 14: The storming of the Bastille, a symbol of royal tyranny, ignites widespread revolt across France.
• July 14: The National Constituent Assembly adopts the Constitution of 1791, establishing a constitutional monarchy.
• April 20: France declares war on Austria, initiating the French Revolutionary Wars.
• August 10: The storming of the Tuileries Palace led to the monarchy's fall and the establishment of the First French Republic.
• September 20: The National Convention abolishes the monarchy and proclaims the First French Republic.
• September 22: French troops achieve victory at the Battle of Valmy, halting the advance of Austrian and Prussian forces.
• January 21: King Louis XVI is executed by guillotine.
• June 2: The Montagnards seize control of the National Convention, leading to the Reign of Terror.
• July 13: Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat, a prominent Jacobin leader.
• September 17: The Law of Suspects is passed, leading to mass arrests and executions.
• October 16: Queen Marie Antoinette is executed.
• July 28: Maximilien Robespierre, a key figure in the Reign of Terror, is executed, marking the end of the most intense phase of the revolution.
• August 22: The National Convention adopts the Constitution of the Year III, establishing the Directory as the new form of government.
• November 9–10: Napoleon Bonaparte stages a coup d'état, overthrowing the Directory and establishing the Consulate, effectively ending the revolution and leading to the rise of Napoleon as the ruler of France.

French Revolution Essay Topics

Here are 10 compelling topics you can use to produce an essay connected to the French Revolution:

• Causes of the French Revolution and its effects.
• The economic factors behind the French Revolution: Struggles of the Third Estate.
• How did the American Revolution influence the French Revolution?
• The role of Enlightenment ideas in sparking the French Revolution.
• When did the French Revolution start, and how?
• Women in the French Revolution: Voices of resistance and reform.
• Who is Napoleon, French Revolution key figure?
• The impact of the French Revolution on European monarchies: A catalyst for change or consolidation of power?
• Reign of Terror: French Revolution.
• How does the French Revolution continue to shape national identity today?

If you need more interesting topics or even a custom-tailored paper, simply say, ‘ write my essays ,’ and our experts will cater to all your wishes.

What Caused the French Revolution?

The French Revolution causes were propelled by a complex interplay of political, social, and economic factors that simmered for decades before erupting into open rebellion. At its core, the revolution was sparked by deep resentment towards the monarchy and the aristocracy, who held disproportionate power and privileges. At the same time, much of the population suffered from poverty and oppression.

The financial crisis exacerbated by the extravagant spending of King Louis XVI and the French participation in the American Revolutionary War further strained the economy, burdening the already impoverished masses with heavy taxation and economic hardship. Meanwhile, the Enlightenment ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity had permeated French society, inspiring a growing sense of political consciousness and a desire for reform among the educated bourgeoisie and the disenfranchised lower classes. As discontent simmered and economic grievances worsened, the stage was set for a revolution that would forever alter the course of French and world history.

Moreover, the rigid social structure of the Ancien Régime, with its entrenched privileges and hierarchical divisions, exacerbated tensions within French society. The feudal system, characterized by feudal dues and obligations imposed on peasants, fueled resentment and discontent among the rural population, who bore the brunt of the economic burden.

Meanwhile, the bourgeoisie, comprising the educated middle class, chafed against their exclusion from political power and sought to assert their influence. The Estates-General, which represented the three estates of French society – the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners – highlighted the stark disparities in representation and exacerbated social divisions. As grievances mounted and calls for reform intensified, the failure of the traditional institutions to address the burgeoning crisis laid the groundwork for a revolutionary uprising that would ultimately sweep away the old order and herald the dawn of a new era in French history. Are you struggling with analyzing historical events in the form of short compositions? We suggest you say, ‘ write my history essay for me ,’ so our authors can help you swiftly.

How to Write an Essay About What Caused the French Revolution?

Here are some useful tips for writing an essay about the causes of the French Revolution:

• Thematic Organization

Instead of simply listing causes chronologically, consider organizing your essay thematically. Group relevant causes under overarching themes such as social inequality, economic hardship, and political discontent. This approach allows for a more nuanced analysis and clearer presentation of your arguments.

• Primary Source Analysis

Incorporate primary sources, such as letters, diaries, and speeches from the period, into your essay. Analyzing primary sources provides firsthand accounts and perspectives that can enrich your understanding of the causes of the French Revolution and add depth to your analysis.

• Historiographical Debate

Engage with historiographical debates surrounding the causes of the French Revolution. Explore differing interpretations among historians and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of various arguments. This demonstrates a critical approach to the topic and adds complexity to your essay.

• Global Context

Situate the French Revolution within a broader global context. Consider how Enlightenment ideas, revolutionary movements in other countries, and global economic trends influenced events in France. This global perspective adds depth and relevance to your analysis.

• Comparative Analysis

Compare the causes of the French Revolution with other historical revolutions or periods of social upheaval. Drawing parallels and contrasts can shed light on common patterns and unique factors contributing to revolutionary change, enriching your analysis and providing a broader perspective.

• Historical Contingency

Emphasize the contingency of historical events by considering alternative outcomes and turning points. Explore how different decisions or circumstances could have altered the events leading up to the French Revolution. This fosters a deeper understanding of the complex interplay of factors involved.

• Interdisciplinary Insights

Draw on insights from other disciplines, such as sociology, economics, and political science, to enrich your analysis of the causes of the French Revolution. Consider how social structures, economic systems, and political institutions interacted to shape historical outcomes.

• Critical Reflection

Reflect critically on the relevance and implications of studying the causes of the French Revolution today. Consider how historical narratives are constructed and shape our understanding of contemporary issues such as inequality, democracy, and social change.

• Revision and Peer Review

Seek feedback from peers or instructors on your essay drafts. Revision and peer review can help you identify areas for improvement, clarify your arguments, and strengthen your overall essay.

• Ethical Considerations

Reflect on the ethical dimensions of studying historical events such as the French Revolution. Consider whose voices are represented in historical narratives and whose perspectives may be marginalized or overlooked. Aim for a balanced and inclusive approach that acknowledges diverse experiences and viewpoints.

What Impact Did the French Revolution Have on the Rest of Europe?

In an essay on the French Revolution, writing about its historical impact is one of the most popular pathways for students. The French Revolution reverberated across Europe, igniting revolutionary fervor and political upheaval in many countries. Its impact was profound and far-reaching, influencing the course of European history for decades. In the immediate aftermath of the revolution, neighboring monarchies grew increasingly alarmed by the spread of revolutionary ideals and the threat they posed to the established order. This led to military interventions to quell revolutionary movements and restore monarchic authority, such as the Napoleonic Wars and the Congress of Vienna. Additionally, the French Revolution inspired nationalist movements and calls for constitutional reform in European countries, fueling demands for greater political participation and individual rights.

Furthermore, the French Revolution challenged the legitimacy of traditional monarchical rule and paved the way for the rise of new political ideologies, such as liberalism and socialism. The revolutionary upheaval prompted rulers to enact reforms to appease restless populations and prevent further unrest. In some cases, these reforms led to the gradual transition towards constitutional monarchy or representative government, as rulers sought to balance the demands of their subjects with the need to maintain stability and control. However, the spread of revolutionary ideas also incited conservative backlash and repression as ruling elites sought to suppress dissent and preserve their grip on power.

Ultimately, the French Revolution reshaped the political landscape of Europe, accelerating the decline of absolute monarchy and feudalism while laying the groundwork for modern democratic principles and institutions. Its legacy is evident in the waves of political reform, social change, and nationalist sentiment that swept across the continent in the 19th and 20th centuries. Although the revolution initially faced resistance and backlash from entrenched conservative forces, its ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity inspired movements for social justice and political reform throughout Europe and beyond. We also have an insightful guide on how to write an essay on the American Revolution , so be sure to consult it, too!

The End of French Revolution

One of the themes for your essay is when did the French Revolution end and what came next. The French Revolution is generally considered to have ended with the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte to power in 1799. This marked the beginning of the Napoleonic era, which saw the consolidation of power under Napoleon's rule and the establishment of the French Consulate. While the revolutionary fervor of the early years subsided, many of the revolutionary ideals and reforms introduced during the Revolution continued to shape French society and politics throughout the Napoleonic period and beyond.

Napoleon's ascent to power marked a significant turning point in French history, ending the tumultuous revolutionary political turmoil and social upheaval. Under Napoleon's leadership, France experienced a period of relative stability and centralization of power as he implemented a series of reforms to modernize the country and consolidate his authority. However, Napoleon's ambitious military campaigns and imperial expansion eventually led to his downfall, culminating in the defeat of the French Empire in 1815 and the restoration of the Bourbon monarchy. While the French Revolution formally ended with Napoleon's rise to power, its legacy endured, shaping subsequent developments in France and influencing movements for social and political change worldwide. If you’re interested in other pivotal historical moments, read more about the Battle of Hastings 1066 .

The French Revolution Aftermath

The aftermath of the French Revolution was characterized by a complex interplay of political, social, and economic repercussions reverberating throughout France and beyond. While the revolution achieved significant political change, including abolishing the monarchy and establishing a republic, it also unleashed a period of internal conflict, violence, and instability known as the Reign of Terror.

The revolution's radicalism and upheaval led to the widespread destruction of traditional institutions and social norms, leaving a legacy of deep division and mistrust within French society. Additionally, the revolutionary wars sparked by France's expansionist ambitions resulted in widespread devastation and loss of life across Europe. Despite these challenges, the French Revolution also laid the groundwork for modern concepts of democracy, human rights, and citizenship, leaving an indelible mark on Western history. Before we get down to the most important facts about the French Revolution, use our political science essay writing service without hesitation if your deadlines are too short.

What Everyone Should Know About the French Revolution?

Here are 10 captivating French Revolution facts you should know:

• On July 14, 1789, angry Parisians stormed the Bastille, a symbol of royal tyranny and oppression, sparking the French Revolution.
• During the Reign of Terror (1793-1794), led by Maximilien Robespierre, thousands of perceived enemies of the revolution were executed, including King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette.
• The guillotine became synonymous with the French Revolution's brutality, providing a swift and "humane" method of execution for thousands, including high-profile figures like Robespierre himself.
• Robespierre attempted to create a new state religion, the Cult of the Supreme Being, to replace Catholicism but failed to gain widespread acceptance.
• In October 1789, thousands of women from Paris marched to Versailles to demand bread and protest against the high cost of living, forcing King Louis XVI to return to Paris.
• In June 1789, members of the National Assembly took a pivotal oath on a tennis court, vowing not to disband until a new constitution was established, signaling the end of absolute monarchy in France.
• Adopted in August 1789, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen proclaimed the rights of all citizens, including liberty, equality, and fraternity, influencing future declarations of human rights worldwide.
• Passed in 1790, the Civil Constitution of the Clergy law aimed to subordinate the Catholic Church to the state, sparking conflict with the Pope and dividing French society along religious lines.
• In July 1794, Robespierre was overthrown in a coup known as the Thermidorian Reaction, leading to the end of the Reign of Terror and a period of political moderation in France.
• Despite its turbulent end, the French Revolution had a profound and lasting impact, inspiring subsequent revolutions, shaping modern concepts of democracy and human rights, and influencing political ideologies worldwide.

Examples of a French Revolution Essay

Writing a French Revolution essay may be difficult from a technical perspective due to the abundance of themes related to this event. However, with the French Revolution essay example in front of you, writer’s block will easily vanish, giving way to creativity and genuine interest in the topic.

The Role of Women in the French Revolution: Challenges to Gender Norms and Struggles for Equality

This essay explores the integral yet often overlooked role of women in the French Revolution, focusing on their defiance of traditional gender norms and their relentless pursuit of equality. Despite being confined to the domestic sphere before the revolution, women emerged as active participants in political activism, forming societies, participating in protests, and contributing to revolutionary discourse. While facing resistance from male-dominated institutions, women such as Pauline Léon, Claire Lacombe, and Olympe de Gouges challenged societal expectations, advocated for political rights, and demanded recognition of their inherent equality.

Economic Turmoil and Social Unrest: Exploring the Impact of Financial Crisis on Revolutionary France

This essay examines the profound interconnection between economic turmoil and social unrest in Revolutionary France, elucidating how financial crises, exacerbated by fiscal mismanagement and regressive taxation, ignited widespread discontent among the populace and catalyzed the collapse of the ancien régime. The economic hardships endured by rural peasants and urban workers alike fueled a climate of social upheaval, manifesting in uprisings, pamphleteering, and demands for political and social reform. The French Revolution of 1789, characterized by the storming of the Bastille and the subsequent establishment of the National Assembly, emerged as a response to the injustices of the existing social order, albeit fraught with political strife and violence. Ultimately, the essay underscores the pivotal role of economic instability in precipitating revolutionary change and shaping the trajectory of modern history.

Legacy of Terror: Assessing the Reign of Terror's Influence on Revolutionary Ideals and Political Discourse

This essay analyzes the enduring legacy of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, examining its profound impact on revolutionary ideals and political discourse. It explores how the terror, initially conceived to safeguard the revolution, ultimately devolved into a brutal campaign of violence and repression, betraying the very principles it purported to defend. The essay assesses the ramifications of the terror on revolutionary ideals, highlighting the skepticism it engendered towards violent means of achieving social change and the challenges it posed to the balance between liberty and security. Furthermore, it examines the terror's influence on political discourse, shaping responses to subsequent revolutions and revolutions globally, and underscores the importance of confronting its complexities to navigate contemporary challenges and safeguard democratic principles.

In conclusion, contributing to an essay on the French Revolution necessitates a comprehensive understanding of this transformative period's historical context, key events, and ideological underpinnings.

By employing a structured approach that includes thorough research, critical analysis, and clear argumentation, scholars and students can effectively navigate the complexities of this multifaceted topic.

Emphasizing the significance of economic, social, and political factors while acknowledging the diverse perspectives and interpretations surrounding the revolution enables writers to craft nuanced and insightful essays that contribute to our understanding of this pivotal historical moment.

Frequently asked questions

She was flawless! first time using a website like this, I've ordered article review and i totally adored it! grammar punctuation, content - everything was on point

This writer is my go to, because whenever I need someone who I can trust my task to - I hire Joy. She wrote almost every paper for me for the last 2 years

Term paper done up to a highest standard, no revisions, perfect communication. 10s across the board!!!!!!!

I send him instructions and that's it. my paper was done 10 hours later, no stupid questions, he nailed it.

Sometimes I wonder if Michael is secretly a professor because he literally knows everything. HE DID SO WELL THAT MY PROF SHOWED MY PAPER AS AN EXAMPLE. unbelievable, many thanks

You Might Also Like

New Posts to Your Inbox!

Stay in touch

“Causes of French Revolution” Essay

Following are the causes of the french revolution  .

Social Inequality

France had an estate system. The First Estate consisted of the Roman Catholic Clergy, the Second Estate was the French nobility, and the Third Estate consisted of peasants, laborers, lawyers, and merchants. The Third Estate was excluded from positions of honor and political power and was looked down upon by the other Estates. This was resented and led to the Third Estate coming together to revolt against the other two Estates.

The Third Estate was forced to pay heavy taxes while the other Estates were exempted from paying taxes. This was questioned by the Third Estate that planned to fight against this tax system.

Rise of Bourgeoisie

Bourgeoisie referred to the rich men and women who became highly influential in the years leading to the revolution. These men and women did not like the power that the other two Estates had and wanted to get rid of the feudal system and this was a major reason for the French Revolution.

Financial Crisis

France was suffering from an economic and financial crisis because of the high costs involved in the war. The French also supported the American War and spent a lot of money. This led to the mounting of the debts and led France to bankruptcy.

Poor Harvest

Poor weather conditions led to droughts, famines, and poor harvests that took a toll on the peasants who were already struggling to survive daily. The peasants were angered and this led them to revolt.

Increasing Cost of Bread

The bread was the staple food of people in France and its increasing prices were also causes of the revolt. The rise in the cost of bread led to a food crisis that the monarch was not able to solve. This led to discontent of the poor peasants and they revolted.

Ineffective Leadership

The monarch was not answerable to the common people for any of the policies and reforms. Additionally, King Louis XVI was ineffective because he could not solve the financial or the food crisis of the country. The poor economic conditions of the nation angered the masses and became critical of their king. The additional extravagant expenditure of the monarch on personal things as well as in the war made the people consider the expenditures as wasteful and revolted against the monarch.

The French Revolution sparked by a series of events led the common people in France to revolt against the monarchy and overthrow it. The French Revolution also saw periods of a lot of violence where a lot of common people were killed mercilessly and wealth was looted. The revolution came to an end with a coup organized by Napoleon Bonaparte.

Related Posts

Crisis of Feudalism

Home Rule Movement: Essay & Important Notes

French Revolution: Essay & Important Notes

Satyagraha Movement: Essay & Important Notes

Political History of Greece

Industrial Revolution: Essay & Important Notes

One response.

u hve a good formated work so i want 2 follow u

Add Comment Cancel Reply

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

How Did the American Revolution Influence the French Revolution?

By: Julie Marks

Updated: June 13, 2023 | Original: May 1, 2018

When American colonists won independence from Great Britain in the Revolutionary War , the French, who participated in the war themselves, were both close allies and key participants. 

Several years after the revolt in America, French reformers faced political, social and economic hardships that mirrored the colonists’ struggles. While the French Revolution was a complex conflict with numerous triggers and causes, the American Revolution set the stage for an effective uprising that the French had observed firsthand.

The Revolutions Shared Similar Causes

Although the French and American people had several distinct and differing motives for revolting against their ruling governments, some similar causes led to both revolutions, including the following:

Economic struggles: Both the Americans and French dealt with a taxation system they found discriminating and unfair. Additionally, France’s involvement in the American Revolution, along with extravagant spending practices by King Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette , left the country on the verge of bankruptcy.

Monarchy:  Although the American colonists had lived in a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system, they revolted against the royal powers of King George III just like the French rose up against Louis XVI.

Unequal rights: Like the American colonists, the French felt that specific rights were only granted to certain segments of society, namely the elite and aristocrats.

Enlightenment Philosophy Was a Major Influence

Many experts believe that the same ideologies that sparked the American Revolution had long percolated through French culture.

During the war in North American colonies, some allied Frenchmen fought side by side with soldiers of the Continental Army, which allowed for the exchanging of values, ideas and philosophies.

One key ideological movement, known as the  Enlightenment , was central to the American uprising. Enlightenment stressed the idea of natural rights and equality for all citizens.

The ideas of the Enlightenment flowed from Europe to the North American continent and sparked a revolution that made enlightened thought all the more popular back across the Atlantic.

The Declaration of Independence Became a Template for the French

The French who had direct contact with the Americans were able to successfully implement Enlightenment ideas into a new political system.

The National Assembly in France even used the American Declaration of Independence as a model when drafting the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen in 1789. 

Much like the American document, the French declaration included Enlightenment principles, such as equal rights and popular sovereignty.

Americans' Victory Encouraged the French

The Americans’ victory over the British may have been one of the greatest catalysts for the French Revolution.

The French people saw that a revolt could be successful—even against a major military power–and that lasting change was possible. Many experts argue that this gave them the motivation to rebel. The newly-formed government of the United States also became a model for French reformers.

Ideas that were once just abstract thoughts—such as popular sovereignty, natural rights, constitutional checks and balances and separation of powers—were now part of an actual political system that worked.

What Was the Extent of America’s Influence?

Though most historians agree that the American Revolution influenced the French Revolution, which lasted from 1789-1799, some scholars debate the significance and extent of its impact.

France, a country on the verge of financial collapse with an outdated feudal system and a wildly unpopular monarchy, was a powder keg waiting to explode, with or without the American war to serve as an example.

Other political, social and religious factors also activated the French people’s appetite for change.

Though there were clear differences between the motives for each revolt and how the two wars were fought, most experts believe that the war in America at least partly paved the way for France’s own uprising. The Americans provided a working model of revolutionary success that cannot have been lost on the French.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Causes and Effects of The French Revolution

The French Revolution was one of the most significant, radical revolutions of all time. Before the revolution, France was broken up into three social classes. The First estate was the clergy, the Second Estate was the nobility, and the Third Estate was everyone else(Bourgeoise, peasants, small business owners, doctors, lawyers, and more). The First and Second Estates combined made up roughly three percent of France’s population, but paid little to no taxes. The Third Estate made up the remaining ninety-seven percent of the population and paid the majority of the taxes (The French Revolution 1). This tax inequality help to ignite the beginning of the French Revolution. The combination of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette’s spending issues, and the famine in France was not good for the country. France was in great debt, and her people were starving. A French citizens writing was uncovered and it explains the hardships of the times, “I have seen eighty, ninety, a hundred pieces of cotton or woollen stuff cut up, and completely destroyed. I have witnessed similar scenes every week for a number of years. I have seen manufactured goods confiscated; heavy fines laid on the manufacturers;”(Roland 1). Eventually, with some help, the French people were able to overthrow the monarchy, although there was not much of an immediate improvement. France had come to the point where citizens could not speak up for what they believed in without being guillotined. There did not seem to be much hope for France until Napoleon Bonaparte stepped in as emperor, and although France conquered many lands under his rule, he was eventually defeated, and France was once again a monarchy.

The September Massacres in France had a great impact on England. Prisoners that were held in the Bastille were being executed due to paranoia in the French citizens caused by Jean-Paul Marat’s writings. Based on only suspicion of royalist armies attacking Paris, hundreds of men died, some of which were English. On the first page of “The London Times,” the article discusses the importance of the public understanding the situation. “As the affairs of France very naturally engross the whole of the public attention, we have made it our business to collect the occurrences that have happened with as much precision as circumstances would admit. In the history of mankind, we have no precedent of of such wanton and disgraceful excesses.”(Liu 1). It was not only the September Massacres that impacted England, France had a lasting effect on the English lifestyle. Emigrants from France began to settle in England, changing the character of society where they settled. Art, literature, poems, and music were deeply influenced by the terror and violence of the French Revolution(Norman 1-9).

Spain was one of the many countries influenced by France, or more specifically in this scenario, Napoleon Bonaparte. Napoleon was determined to conquer all of Europe and even more if it was possible. He had already taken a good chunk of Europe when he took Spain as well. After Napoleon took Spain, he sent his brother, Joseph to rule in his place. Joseph ruled under the orders of his brother, and was considered a “puppet ruler.” In Napoleon’s private letters to Joseph, he told him where to position his military, what laws he should pass, who he could and could not trust, who he should promote, and how to run his country(Napoleon I 320). The Spanish people were less than thrilled that their king had been replaced by the French. Certain areas of Spain continued their loyalty to Ferdinand VII, and decided to align with Britain to defeat Napoleon. The Spanish people fought extremely hard to put their true king back on the throne, and in 1814 when Napoleon was finally defeated, King Ferdinand VII, the rightful king of spain was returned to his throne.

Napoleon attempted to seize power in many European countries. He replaced monarchs left and right and placed his family members as rulers. Napoleon tried to justify his actions by offering the old monarchs positions in court, but thy refused them. Napoleon was quoted saying, “they didn’t want them. I offered them posts from the administration; they turned them down. But I opened my antechambers to them, and they came running in.”(Herold 143). Throughout the revolution, France had significant impacts on other countries in Europe. “French armies invaded and reformed some parts of Europe but not others,”(Robinson, et. al. 2). Western Europe seemed the most impacted by French invasions. European countries such as Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, Austria, Spain, Prussia, and Italy were all affected by the French Revolution. France also had a large impact on North and Latin America. England was one of the few countries that Napoleon did not seize, though they were forced to spend millions to keep him out. England was able to convince Austria, Prussia, and Russia to join in their efforts to defeat Napoleon. Napoleon attempted to offer peace to England, but they would not accept unless there was a balance of powers throughout Europe(Herold 241).

The French Revolution relates to the global context globalization and sustainability. The entire revolution was based off of inequalities and peoples rights. Throughout the revolution, France dealt with famine, economic issues, unfit rulers, and because of all this, France became stronger as a country. France was eventually able to sustain itself while controlling other nations. France achieved globalization by influencing countries everywhere, and human life was changed forever by the French Revolution.

Works Cited

• British Newspaper Coverage of the French Revolution: the September Massacres. Translated by Alan Liu, 2 Feb. 2000. Web. 11 Dec. 2018.(P)
• “Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution.”Web. 4 Dec. 2018.(S)
• ‘How Did the French Revolution Affect England?’ National Trust. Web. 12 Dec. 2018.(S)
• “Internet History Sourcebooks-Sourcebooks.fordham.edu.” Web. 4 Dec. 2018.(P)
• “The French Revolution A Brief Outline – Florida Gulf Coast…” Web. 7 Dec. 2018(S)
• Horizon, Magazine. The Horizon Book of the Age of Napoleon. American Heritage; Book Trade Distribution by Harper and Row, 1963. Print.(P)
• I, Napoleon. ‘The Confidential Correspondence of Napoleon Bonaparte with His Brother Joseph … Selected and Translated, with Explanatory Notes, from the ‘Mémoires … V.1.’ HathiTrust. Boston :Ginn,c1938. Web. 06 Dec. 2018.(P)

Cite this page

Causes and Effects of The French Revolution. (2021, Mar 30). Retrieved from https://supremestudy.com/causes-and-effects-of-the-french-revolution/

"Causes and Effects of The French Revolution." supremestudy.com , 30 Mar 2021, https://supremestudy.com/causes-and-effects-of-the-french-revolution/

supremestudy.com. (2021). Causes and Effects of The French Revolution . [Online]. Available at: https://supremestudy.com/causes-and-effects-of-the-french-revolution/ [Accessed: 28 Apr. 2024]

"Causes and Effects of The French Revolution." supremestudy.com, Mar 30, 2021. Accessed April 28, 2024. https://supremestudy.com/causes-and-effects-of-the-french-revolution/

"Causes and Effects of The French Revolution," supremestudy.com , 30-Mar-2021. [Online]. Available: https://supremestudy.com/causes-and-effects-of-the-french-revolution/ . [Accessed: 28-Apr-2024]

supremestudy.com. (2021). Causes and Effects of The French Revolution . [Online]. Available at: https://supremestudy.com/causes-and-effects-of-the-french-revolution/ [Accessed: 28-Apr-2024]

Causes and Effects of The French Revolution. (2021, Mar 30). Retrieved April 28, 2024 , from https://supremestudy.com/causes-and-effects-of-the-french-revolution/

This paper was written and submitted by a fellow student

Our verified experts write your 100% original paper on any topic

Having doubts about how to write your paper correctly?

Our editors will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Leave your email and we will send a sample to you.

Please check your inbox

Sorry, copying content is not allowed on this website

Please indicate where to send you the sample.

Cause and Effects of the French Revolution Essay

The French Revolution 1789-1799 is known as one of the most significant events in the world’s history. Its impact hardly can be overvalued due to globally caused implications. Therefore, it is considered as generally valid birth of civilized principles. Being assigned to find out causes and effects of French Revolution, it is quite difficult to be maximally comprehensive with answer. Appropriate analyzing requires plenty of items considering. However, there is the try to outline the most significant causes and effects of great historical event. Let’s start with prerequisites (causes) of French Revolution. Talking about this part, there is the need to get complex look at that times. Absolutely clear that the large list of French Revolution causes can be mentioned. However, there is the attempt to organize all causes by categories. Social injustice and class inequalities. 18th century in French history was the time of feudal abutment. Naturally that is was accompanied by different rights and duties for its members. The division of French society members was provided by Estimates. In fact, prerevolutionary France experienced three of them: first, second and third estimate respectively (Drew 2010). The contrast between them were too significant and frustrated for the lowest class. The first most privileged Estate was for about 2 percent of the entire population. At the end of scholastic influence era, the power of Church was unrestricted. Therefore, it is naturally that it took the first one. As for corresponding benefits, the Estate was out of tax duty. Moreover, the Church was authorized for income tithe claiming. Curiously enough, this minority owned more than 15% percent of France lands. The second Estate was nobility. As well as Church, this class was free from taxes. At the era of feudal relations, the power of it was gathered around lands earning. The main sources of incomes was land rent and payments for land exploitation. As the land was the basis of producing relations, it is naturally that its owners were the richest people of that times. The rest of population was the third Estate, so called bourgeoisie. Logically that this class had to take entire tax burden and its status was incredibly contrast to two previous Estates. Therefore, it is not surprising that depressed majority took actions for equality establishment. Financial depression. Obviously, it left aside first two Estates. Actually, the unequal values distribution became one of the key factors which caused poetry of more than 95 percent of population. Except this, most of historians blame unreasonable financial policy of Louis XIV king’s policy (Delp 2008). In addition, we are capable to outline intensive wars which required embedding of financial resources. Low harvest is also worth to be considered. All these factors led to large financial crisis in the second half of 18th century. It is clear that it influenced the bourgeoisie Estate only with increased taxes and duties it had to pay. Furthermore, price rise was one more confusing economic reality. As the result, the hunger was spread among lowest class throughout the whole France. Therefore, we have two significant causes that raised French Revolution, but this list wouldn’t be full without one more. The Spirit of Changes. No doubt that poetry and inequality were essential features, but what led to common indignation awakening? The spirit of changes is the only reasonable explanation. In fact, it includes two main points – Enlightenment and American war for Independence. The effect of first is much more significant for French Revolution considerably. The Enlightenment era is known as the kind of intellectual movement based on rationalism and free thinking. Actually, it has generated the foundation of civil society and democracy which we allowed to appreciate today. In addition, this movement is the primary source of political freedom, idea of state as a self-governing republic, religious tolerance, market-based mechanisms, capitalism, the scientific method etc.. The most influential thinkers were Montesquieu, Voltaire, Rousseau, Didro. Their works were spread among bourgeoisie what led to new common mind forming. Interesting that Enlightenment’s impact to French Revolution was recognized by both sizes and it was claimed that greatest thinkers found the grains that gave the birth of fundamental changes to better life (Delp 2008). On the other hand, American Revolution wasn’t so impactful. However, the taken trend to justice establishment couldn’t leave aside depressed French bourgeoisie. In this order, humanity encouraged to assert that the spirit of changes became motive force to revolution. Enlightenment and American War for Independence assured that another society and state’s organization is not some kind of utopia. So, the most significant causes of French Revolution were outlined. Let’s go directly to effects. It is absolutely clear that France has passed several stages while revolution: National Assembly establishment, the Reign of Terror etc.. Obviously, each of them had own unique impact. However, there is the assignment to find out key effects which summed up 12 years of revolutionary movement. Still, there are several points incredibly valued with far-reaching significance. Republic and nationalism establishment. After Revolution, France became the largest European republic state of that times. From that moment, the power of individuals was significantly limited as well as church was prohibited with its influence. In this order, secular society was found, free from church’s intervention. Instead of monarch ruling, France experienced three branches of power establishment, which was promoted by Montesquieu before. Global influence of France republic is found out through democratic institutions establishment: elections, constitutions, representative authorities etc. for this reason, we are all encouraged to talk about France Republic as the fundamental birth of democracy and political freedoms. The Nationalism is another far-reaching effect. The Declaration of Rights proclaimed that the France belongs to its citizens. This gave the birth of common strong proud of French history, language, culture, heritage among its citizens (Padbury 2007, 2). From that times country is represented by the monarch no more, as this authority belonged to each state’s citizen. It is important that Nationalism was widely adopted all around the world as well as republic state establishments. Law effects. The greatest value of new society fundamentals was in theirs law protection. While and after the revolution, several world influential laws were enacted. The primary document to pay attention to is The Declaration of Rights of Man, dated by 1789. Adopted by National Assembly (Assemblee nationale constituante) it began the base of all revolutionary movement and became the foundation of modern law. This Declaration is grounded on Enlightenment concepts about civil equality and liberty that are inherent from birth. Natural rights of man and citizen declared with personal freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of belief, the right to resist oppression. It is absolutely clear that these fundamentals are well adopted in precedent and traditional law systems nowadays. The Declaration of Rights of Man generated next slogan – “libert, egalit, fraternit” (Padbury 2007, 2). The next is Constitution, adopted in 1791. The main impact of this document is in claimed before Republic establishment and monarchy prohibition. Actually, it became the grain for new, equal and feudal free society birth. Described before three power branches system takes its legal consolidation in the Constitution. The last law to talk about is The Napoleonic Code. Its impactful nature is also defined by several points. Adopted in 1804 Napoleonic Civil Code became the kind of combination of other revolutionary ideas. This code is still valued for inherent rights and freedoms proclamation. The Civil Code is often called the book of Revolution ideas. Among the most significant impacts, the secular society proclamation takes special place. From that time, church is legally separated from the state. In addition, Napoleonic Civil Code gave the fundamentals for property law and its protection. The gender equality was declared as well. In respect to credible facts, French law is known as procreator of civilized legal foundation. Call to your mind, freedoms and rights proclaimed in mentioned documents are the bases of USA Constitution. Moreover, Napoleonic Civil Code became the primary source for all non-English speaking countries laws development. Napoleonic wars. This French Revolutionary cannot be left aside with its impact to Revolutionary ideas spreading. Actually, the Napoleonic wars are often called Revolution wars due to appropriate intentions. The Great French War listed even longer than the Revolution itself (1792-1815). At first, it was the war between Revolution Army and Austria. Then, plenty of other countries were involved and military action reached the Egypt even. The importance of Napoleonic wars effect is determined by Revolution ideas global spreading. They became the tool to bring established freedoms and rights to oppressed nations. The genius of great military General allowed to get large achievements in this field. The year of 1810 became apogee of Revolution triumph, as French Empire reached from Poland to Spain (Padbury 2007, 2). Being clear with cause and effects of French Revolution, we have the ability to claim that this is history event is the turning point for civilized society establishment. Speaking Frankly, today virtues are the derivative products of that era. French Revolution gave the start point for modern freedoms, rights, values and principals. As it was clarified, the French Revolution is the multi-faceted phenomenon which was caused by numerous factors and produced large far-reaching effects. In this order, it is interesting how did all conditions and circumstances took place in the way that raised French Revolution? What if some was out? Seemingly, answers to these questions are the greatest mystery of history.

The Trinity Church New York and the Rock Church San Diego Essay

"in cold blood" by truman capote essay, writing help.

Our Benefits

• Professional Writers
• Plagiarism Free papers
• Friendly Customer Support
• Reasonable Prices

Free Extras

• Plagiarism FREE Papers
• FREE Title Page
• FREE Bibliography
• FREE Formatting
• FREE Delivery

Service Features

• Custom Written
• Fully Referenced
• 300 Words per Page
• Any Citation Style
• 12 point Courier New Font
• Double spacing

LEGAL NOTICE

Custom papers you get from our writing experts should be used for research purposes only. These papers are not supposed to be submitted for academic credit.

• Writing Services
• Essay Samples
• Essay Types
• Terms of Services
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Testimonials