French Revolution Causes Quizlet

The October Days

By October 1789, there was suspicion that Louis XVI was not willing to support the revolution, as he had appeared to do in July when he wore the revolutionary cockade. His lack of return to Paris since the visit of 17th July, failure to ratify the August Decrees or Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, summoning of the loyal Flanders Regiment to Versailles for extra protection, reports that the regiment had trampled upon revolutionary cockades and inflated foodstuff prices prompted the journée of October 5th and 6th 1789, when a crowd of several thousand Parisians, many of them women, successfully marched on Versailles to pressure the royal government to return to Paris. This served to guarantee that the constitutional achievements of June and July 1789 would not be lost, and that the King could not indefinitely refuse to accept them. 1) In October 1789, Louis XVI had not ratified the August Decrees or the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen and had summoned the loyal Flanders Regiment (1100 soldiers) to Versailles for added protection (14 September 1789). Surrounded by loyal troops, Louis stated he could not accept all parts of the August Decrees (18 September), later adding that he had concerns about the Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen (4 October). Further suspicion was roused by the dinner for the Flanders Regiment at Versailles on 1 October 1789, where servants reported that the King and Queen visited the dinner, and the drunken soldiers had declared their loyalty to the monarchy, trampling on the revolutionary cockade. 2) News had also emerged that a group of nobles had formed a 'Guard of the French Regeneration' to 'protect' the King, and this led to a rumour that while he was in Versailles he would be under the influence of conservative nobles. Even Lafayette began to think that he would be better off in Paris. Other revolutionaries, such as Desmoulins and Danton, were stirring up Paris with the idea that the King should be brought back to be held accountable to the people. 3) The Parisian crowd was also angered by rising bread prices that had started to inflate again in mid-September. Although not caused by the King, but by hot weather and a lack of wind to turn the mills, shortages soon caused riots in marketplaces. Petitions from women to city authorities to control the rising cost of bread were made. The events of 5 October 1789 initially began as a protest by market women at the Town Hall about bread prices, then escalated into a broader campaign against the King and National Assembly. As a result, Lafayette used the National Guards to protect bakers' shops. The crowd was further angered by news in early October that the King was feasting while Parisians were hungry and enraged by the reported anti-revolutionary behaviour of the Flanders troops. Rumours spread that the King was deliberately trying to starve Paris by increasing bread prices. A Bastille hero, Maillard, suggested that the Parisian revolutionary crowd needed to go to Versailles to force the King to come back to Paris, so he would not be influenced by the anti-revolutionary mood at Versailles. 4) Initially unarmed, a crowd of 6000-7000 militant market people (mostly women) moved through Paris, encouraged by secret agents of the Duc d'Orleans and marched to Versailles, demanding a meeting with the King. The President of the National Assembly agreed to ask the King to meet a deputation of a select group from the crowd. Although the National Assembly were frightened by the size and militancy of the armed crowd, they recognised it would only be the threat of violence by direct action that would force the King to ratify their decrees. The King agreed to secure bread for Paris and to ratify the August Decrees and Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, although he refused to go to Paris. In the small hours of the morning, a second and more militant crowed invaded the palace, threatening to kill Marie-Antoinette and killing two palace guards. On 6 October, Lafayette and the National Guard escorted the King, the royal family, the King's personal guards and the Flanders Regiment back to Paris with the assassinated guards heads being paraded on pikes. A few days later, the deputies of the Assembly made the same journey. 5) As a result, the royal family were forced to live in the Tuileries Palace, the National Assembly were forced to meet in Paris and a number of aristocrats started a wave of noble emigration after being frightened by the violence and power of the revolutionary crowd. Mirabeau's Decree of Martial Law (21 October 1789) was also passed, which gave the National Assembly the right to use the National Guard to stop violent crowd action. This episode guaranteed the constitutional achievements of June-July 1789 and placed political pressure on the King to accept them, leaving the National Assembly indebted to the direct (yet violent) action of the revolutionary crowd. The Parisian revolutionary crowd now was confident of its own agency and those in the crowd now saw their role as using direct crowd action, including targeted revolutionary violence, to protect, defend and consolidate the revolution. Significantly, the event changed the power structures of 1789 as the King's power was weakened and his prestige had been damaged by being forced to come to Paris as a virtual prisoner.

Camille Desmoulins

Camille Desmoulins was a middle-class lawyer and journalist who joined the 'patriot' movement for political reform in France in the 1780s. He played a pivotal role in spreading ideas of republicanism and democracy and became the link between middle-class intellectuals and the Parisian revolutionary crowd by urging the crowd to arm themselves and revolt in response to the influx of 30 000 royal troops into the city following 12 July 1789. 1) Camille Desmoulins adopted strong and espoused liberal political opinions, condemning absolute monarchy and admiring the idea of a republic. He practiced as a journalist, publishing a pamphlet recommending a republic as the best form of democracy and defending revolutionary violence. He also produced the journal The Revolutions of France and Brabant (1789-1791). 2) Camille Desmoulins played an active role in haranguing crowds at the Palais Royal in July 1789, to encourage them to support the actions of the National Assembly at Versailles and to arm themselves against the influx of 30 000 royal troops King Louis XVI had sent to the capital on the 12 July. 3) In this way, Desmoulins forged a link between middle-class intellectuals and the Parisian revolutionary crowd.

Duc d'Orleans

Duc Philippe d'Orleans contributed to the development of the French Revolution by proposing new political ideas and by playing host to radical speakers. Because of his social, economic, and political power, Philippe was able to create a centre for revolutionary ideology that played a large part in undermining royal absolutism in France. 1)When refused appointment as France's admiral, the Duc D'Orleans joined the Society of Thirty, a group of liberal nobles who espoused enlightenment and American ideas of individual liberty, republicanism and popular sovereignty. This club sponsored the publication and distribution of political pamphlets, undermining the benevolent image of the Bourbons and the pillars of absolute royal power. 2)The duc d'Orleans opened up his buildings of the Palais Royal to radical speakers which ensured they were free from police interference, because the police were prohibited from entering royal property. The Palais-Royale rapidly became a centre for revolutionary agitation and culminated in Camille Desmoulins call to arms on 12 July 1789. 3)At the opening of the Estates General, the Duc d'Orleans broke ranks with the nobles and marched with the Third Estate. This symbolic act gave the impression that the powerful and members of the privileged estates no longer agreed with the monarchy.

Friction between monarchy and Parlements

During the reign of Louis XV, the judges of the parlements (a network of 13 of the highest law courts in France and the Paris parlement) began to think that they could and should act as a check on royal power, and began using their remonstrances (a power to delay or block laws they saw as unclear or correct) to question and block the King's wishes. This new attitude exemplified the political idea of representation, with the parlement aspiring to go beyond its legal role of a high court to a body that could approve or disapprove of laws. Once Louis XVI reopened the parlements, they resumed the campaign to confront the King, demonstrating an ambition to play a political role as a representative body between the King and the people. After the closure of the Assembly of Notables in May 1787, the Paris parlement and its provincial satellites started a constitutional rebellion against royal power. They asserted new political ideas of representation (eg: the people must have a say in the way taxes were paid) and accountability (eg: the King must be willing to show a nation's accounts to representatives of the whole nation), and criticised what they called ministerial despotism. In July 1787, when Minister Brienne took a modified form of Calonne's tax reforms to the Paris parlement, it refused to approve it, using its legal authority to assert that "taxes should be consented to by those who had to bear them" and arguing that new taxes could only be approved by the nation's representatives assembled in the Estates-General. The King ordered them to register the new laws (August 1787) then closed the parlement and exiled it to the provinces (August 1787). In May 1788, the reconvened parlement stated its constitutional thinking in The Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom, arguing that there were laws of the realm that equalled a constitution, and that the King could not change them. They therefore rejected the idea of arbitrary royal power, exemplified by lettres de cachet. The Paris parlement and its satellites became the first revolutionary leaders in this sense, as they saw themselves as the champions of the ordinary French people against royal despotism. They enjoyed the support of the popular movement in Paris and the provincial cities. After the suspension of the Paris parlement and the provincial parlements (May 1788), crowds in Paris and cities like Grenoble rioted in defence of the judges, in some cases attacking royal troops and even expelling the royal administration from the town (the Day of Tiles in Grenoble, June 1788). Their protests were politically based, heightened by economic problems caused by bad harvests. These popular protests challenged royal authority, especially when royal troops expressed an unwillingness to fire on crowds. Royal authority could not stop the flood of hostile political pamphlets proclaiming the principle of representation, as well as more radical ideas drawn from Rousseau's The Social Contract, such as the sovereignty of the people. Thus, by 1788, the parlements had asserted radical new constitutional ideals, and had shown how popular support could be used to challenge royal authority.

Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes

Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes was a clergymen who had been a member of the bourgeoisie who helped shape the revolution as a political theorist and a strategist, most notably through his influential writings which conceptualised the 'the nation' and facilitated the transfer of sovereignty from the King to the nation. In this way, his writings offered a blueprint for dramatic political and constitutional change, guiding the formation of a National Assembly and transition from royal absolutism to a constitutional monarchy. 1) During the 'pamphlet wars' in January 1789, Abbe Sieyes produced his influential pamphlet titled 'What is the Third Estate?' which challenged royal absolutism and questioned the feudal, corporate nature of French society, shifting the focus of debate in France from royal despotism to the subject of privilege—specifically, noble privileges, by asking "What is the Third Estate? Everything, but an everything shackled and oppressed". This document became the most powerful and influential attack on the social and political order of France, crystallising the grievances of the bourgeoisie. 2) Sieyes became a deputy for the Third Estate in the Estates General, where he suggested that the Third Estate should 'summon' the other deputies to join them, and conduct a roll-call of all deputies on one list, where those absent would be considered in default, whereas those who were present could consider themselves the representatives of the nation. This allowed the possibility of the deputies of the privileged orders to join them. The Third Estate deputies instead changed Sieyes' suggestion to 'invite' members from other estates to join them, and between 13-15th June, a number of parish priests responded positively to the invitation. This divided the clergy and strengthened the cause of the deputies of the Third Estate, in opposition to the King and more privileged orders. 3) Sieyes wrote the declaration of the creation of the National Assembly on 17th June 1789, conceptualising the idea of the nation and facilitating the transfer of sovereignty from King to nation.

The critique of privilege

Enlightenment political thought posed the ideas of universal rights and equality, which challenged corporate society in France which was founded on privileged orders or 'estates'. This, in turn, influenced the political grievances of the Third Estate which were articulated in the Books of Grievances and at the Estates-General of May 1789, which culminated in calls for political and social reform founded on notions of equality. The Books of Grievances of the Third Estate firmly demanded an end of all forms of privilege -especially following the national debt crisis. In regards to fiscal privilege, there was general consensus that the nobles and clergy must surrender their tax exemption as well as their legal privilege of special courts. Another common demand in the books of the Third Estate was to remove the privilege of appointment, and make all careers open to talent, thus asserting the principle of personal merit over noble birth. Nonetheless, the 270 deputies of the Second Estate who went to Versailles arrived with firm instructions to defend noble privileges and to advocate for a corporate, hierarchical society. By August 1789, the Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen had consigned privilege to the past, and establish the diametric principle of equality (men being born free and equal in rights).

France's involvement in the American War of Independence

France's involvement in the American War of Independence inspired notions of 'the nation' and a constitution in France, as well as bringing France to the brink of bankruptcy; prompting political and ideological alternatives to royal absolutism and precipitating a fiscal and political crisis which escalated into the revolutionary events of 1789. 1) France's involvement in the American War of Independence brought a sense of patriotism and support for liberty to France through the role of the 8000 French soldiers in the war effort. For instance, officers such as the Marquis de Lafayette and the Duc de la Rouchefoucauld, returned impassioned by the struggle between liberty and royal despotism over the issue of taxation without representation. This prompted a sense of admiration amongst liberal circles in Paris for the colonial struggle for personal freedoms and constitutional liberty. This helped spread the principles of 'the nation' and 'citizen' throughout France, which were essentially were utilised through the Society of Thirty and in the Tennis Court Oath (June 20 1789) in which the National Assembly refused to take a solemn oath until the constitution of the kingdom was established. Thus, the idea of the constitution derived from the American war inspired the notion of a constitutional monarchy in France, thus challenging royal absolutism. 2) France's involvement in the American War of Independence was initially disastrous because it resulted in a massive national debt. After having lent the colonists 18 million livres and after committing 8000 troops, French involvement in the American War of Independence increased the existing French national debt by 1000 million French pounds. This exacerbated existing war debts France had incurred in the eighteenth century from the War of Austrian Succession and Seven Years War, and created a situation where the chief financial officer, Jacques Necker, relied entirely upon foreign loans with generous terms and high interest rates to finance France's support of the colonists in the American War of Independence, which resulted in a deficit of 34.7 million livres in 1786. Thus, by 1786, France was facing bankruptcy, leaving France's new chief financial officer, Charles Alexander de-Calonne, with no alternative but to pursue tax reform, which precipitated a political crisis between the parlements and the monarchy and heightened tensions between the First, Second and Third estates and the monarchy; eventually escalating into revolution by June-July 1789. 3) The national debt incurred from France's involvement in the American War of Independence in turn tarnished public perceptions of the Bourbon monarchy and prompted the nature of public debt to become a political concern. Public opinion, fuelled by rumours started by Marie-Antoinette's critics, blamed the Queen for her excessive spending on luxuries, earning her the moniker 'Madame Deficit', despite royal spending only accounting for 6 per cent of the national budget in 1788. The misunderstanding about the American origin of the debt, and the belief in the Queen's alleged overspending, compounded her earlier popularity as 'the Austrian bitch', instigating a flow of critical political pamphlets which desacralised the image of the royal family and attracted more public criticism to the Bourbon monarchy.

The harvest crisis and food shortages

Harvest failures in 1778, 1781, 1785 and 1787 contributed to revolutionary sentiment by leaving France's growing population (22.4 million in 1705 to 27.9 million in 1790) short of food crops, particularly in the cities, thus radicalising and inspiring urban crowds to take decisive action and instigating the actions of the revolutionary crowd in Paris up to 1789. 1). Farmers in 18th century France used antiquated labour intensive methods that did not produce large yields, plus they were susceptible to adverse weather conditions. The 1780s was a particularly poor decade for harvests, caused by heavy rains, severe droughts, a volcanic eruption in 1783 and a July 1788 hailstorm that decimated a large volume of crops. This created bad harvests, which were compounded by the crop disaster of 1788. Consequently, the price of wheat doubled in two years and a working person's spending on bread rose from 50 percent of their income to 75-80 percent, with the price of bread rising from 4 to 14 sous between 1788 and 1789. By July 1789 grain prices reached the highest level ever in 27 out of 32 administrative regions, causing critical subsistence duress. 2). In 1788-89 the national government took action to prevent a famine, however by the start of 1789 the nation's cities found themselves critically short of food. These shortages were particularly acute in Paris, where bread prices increased from eight sous to 14.5 sous, or between 70 and 90 per cent of the daily wage of an unskilled worker. This inspired the revolutionary crowd, mostly made up of urban workers, to protest about bread prices, popularly enforce price-fixing on bread and attack places where grain was allegedly being hoarded. 3) This, in turn, inspired violent, radical actions of the crowd such as the Revellion Riots, which were a precursor to the violent political action of the Parisian riots and storming of the Bastille in July 1789.

The attack on 'ministerial despotism' in the revolt of the Notables 1787-88

In France, the term 'despotism', defined by political theorist Montesquieu in The Spirit of the Laws as the rule of one individual respecting no law apart from his own personal desires and aims (as distinct from a monarch, who rules within the boundaries of existing laws and with respect to his people), was used to accuse Louis XVI of removing the powers and rights of traditional bodies such as the parlements, instead relying heavily on the executive power of his ministers to exert his authority. From 1786 onwards, Louis XVI's attempts to address the debt crisis in France caused accusations that Finance Minister Calonne, in dealing with the Assembly of Notables (a council containing 144-147 influential nobles and clergymen) and Brienne, in dealing with the Paris parlement, were agents of royal arbitrary behaviour. When it became clear the Assembly of Notables would not endorse Calonne's proposals, Calonne sought public support by publishing information about the fiscal crisis and his attempts to resolve it. This information exposed the urgent need for debt relief and taxation reform: an empty treasury and an annual deficit of 110 million livres in 1786. This infuriated both the Notables and the king, who dismissed Calonne on April 7th. The disastrous Royal Session of November 1787 when Louis XVI ordered the Paris parlement to register its decrees, caused the Duc d'Orleans to make an accusation of illegality and despotism. The King proceeded to demonstrate classic despotic behaviour by issuing a letter de cachet to send the Duc d'Orleans into exile and to arrest two leaders of the parlement. Further attempts at fiscal reform failed, and consequently, the Estates-General was called, an occurrence not seen since 1614. The drafting of the Books of Grievances in early 1789 prior to the Estates-General reveal widespread condemnation of the absolute monarchy and ministerial despotism (according to Peter McPhee). Additionally, when the National Assembly found themselves locked out of the chamber in which they had hoped to prepare for the upcoming Royal Session, they reassembled on a nearby tennis court and took the oath to 'establish the constitution of the realm' (20 June 1789). Consequently, during the Royal Session (23 June 1789), Louis XVI declared the decision of the Assembly null and void and proceeded to move troops around Paris and Versailles in order to prevent disturbances -viewed by many as an act of ministerial despotism. Witnessing the 30 000 troops stationed around Paris and the palace, the Parisian population decided to arm themselves to protect the National Assembly and to protest against the dismissal of Necker. In order to do so they stormed the Bastille prison searching for gunpowder (14 July 1789), starting the Revolution. Further, by 1789, the Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen had translated into law the opposite of despotism: representative government, with the rule of universal laws and the codification of natural human rights.

Marie Antoinette

In the 1780s, Marie Antoinette's Austrian heritage and image of lavish spending attracted the French people's suspicion, the latter becoming linked to the public concern of national debt, thus tarnishing the image of the Bourbon Dynasty. She was also involved in the counter-revolutionary 'Court Party' -including the Count of Fersen and the Duchess of Polignac- which pressured Louis to stand up to the revolutionary cause and instigating actions with revolutionary repercussions, such as the dismissal of Necker. This, in turn, was a catalyst for the radical actions of the revolutionary crowd, including the storming of Les Invalides and the Bastille in July 1789.

Decisions made by Louis XVI

King Louis XVI's weak character and incompetency when it came to political decision-making, his failure to satisfy the political and material grievances of his people and the public perception of royal distance and largesse against a backdrop of unprecedented financial and political crisis generated demands for political reform from 1774-1789. Additionally, the King's initial authoritarian response to calls for a constitution and a National Assembly and his subsequent dismissal of popular finance minister Jacques Necker provided part of the basis for mass popular protests in Paris, eventually culminating in the storming of the Bastille in July 1789. Having succeeded two strong, influential Kings, Louis XVI inherited a nation in 1774 used to firm governance. He also inherited a country sorely lacking in equality, in terms of finance and opportunity, and with an enormous national debt. While these obstacles would have been a blight for any king, Louis XVI was so fundamentally unsuited to leadership that his character exacerbated the already dangerous situation that he inherited. As one member of the Paris Parlement stated, 'timidity and mistrust of himself are at the centre of his character', indeed Louis's indecision and timorousness made him a significant cause of the Revolution. France yearned for massive internal restructuring of its society, government, and economic system following the ravages of extravagant spending and the expense of war inflicted by its Kings. Notwithstanding the 1200 million livres debt incurred by King Louis XVI's own decision to involve France in the American War of Independence. These preconditions that sowed the seeds for the French Revolution may never have germinated had King Louis been prepared to exercise his dynastic power. Yet Louis was described as a 'laughing stock' at Versailles, and Georges Lefebvre claimed 'he did not have enough intelligence to run the country properly'. It was widely recognised that Louis was not emotionally suited to command, Christopher Hibbert exemplifies this when he attests that Louis made the following pathetic query of a retiring minister, 'Why can't I resign too?' Alongside his personal inadequacies, Louis XVI was surrounded by the trappings of royal largesse that distanced him from his subjects. With his wife, Marie-Antoinette, he indulged in the excess that privileged Bourbon kings had enjoyed for centuries. Louis's injudicious decision to allow Jacques Necker in February 1781 to complete a 'Compte de Rendu a Roi' (a Complete Account to the King) publically outlined the extent of national and royal expenses. While this document revealed that the royal expenses accounted for only 6.1% of national expenses, it was more than public works (2.9%) and charities (1.7%) combined. The public awareness of royal expense was never more apparent. His wife's alleged (and actual) profligacy also added to the belief that France's royal family had little regard for the poverty endured by their subjects. With the nation spiralling towards bankruptcy, Louis XVI made the decision in 1783 to appoint Calonne as Controller-General in an effort to arrest the economic disaster and approved Calonne's 'Plan to improve the finances of the nation' in 1786. Calonne's plan required an 'Assembly of Notables' to ratify his revenue raising strategies. This proved disastrous for the monarchy as the Assembly when it met in February 1787 turned out to be anything but pliable and catalysed a revolutionary attitude. The Notables did not endorse Calonne's ideas and publically counteracted the wishes of the King, it led to Calonne's dismissal but also ignited a 'pamphlet war' that continuously questioned the position of the monarchy. Louis XVI's next strategy further denigrated his standing: Calonne's replacement, Brienne tried to use the power of the Parlement to approve economic reform. Brienne was almost successful in his quest but in overseeing the 'Lit de Justice' on the 19th November 1787, Louis XVI revealed an authoritarian side to himself that had hitherto been absent from his reign. His inflexible response to the Paris Parlement's stature snowballed into significant revolutionary angst. This Royal Session of the Paris Parlement was a public-relations disaster for the King - revealing either his incompetence or authoritarian nature - when he decreed that 'it is so because I wish it' he disenfranchised both the Parlement and the people. This led to public outcry across France in more pamphlets and also in violent outburst like the 'Day of Tiles' in Grenoble in June of 1788. Louis XVI's incompetence at the Assembly of Notables and the Paris Parlement forced his hand into calling one final forum, the Estates-General which had not been used since 1614. Once again, this was played out in front of a fascinated and energised public who were given (by Louis) the opportunity to vote for delegates and list their grievances in the cahiers de doleances. This was the final fuel for a revolutionary situation as the Estates-General (May 1789) developed into a platform for revolutionary ideology and actions. Firstly, the structure and ritual of the formation of the Estates-General - dress, position of the Third Estate, voting rights - all served to alienate the 600 deputies of the Third Estate. The lack of interest shown by the King in the initial proceedings, his censure of his cousin for marching with the Third Estate in the opening procession, his later withdrawal due to the illness and sadly, death of the dauphin on the 4th of June were all perceived to be evidence of a King who lacked the inclination or wherewithal for reform. Most damning, however, was King Louis XVI's response to the formation of a National Assembly by the Third Estate (17th June, 1789) through his calling of a Royal Session (23rd June, 1789) as a show of absolute power. This would not only ratify the assembly but inspire further acts towards revolution. The Royal Session of the 23rd June proved disastrous for Louis XVI; led by Mirabeau who claimed that the Assembly was above the law of the monarchy, subject to the nation and not the king and that they would driven out of the chambers only by 'bayonets' or by force. The King's retreat to authoritarianism after such a period of incompetence emboldened the people rendering him and perhaps the ancien regime as a pathetic relic. This found its physical incarnation in the events that followed, Desmoulins' call to arms the moment after Louis' dismissal of Necker on the 11th July, the subsequent Storming of the Bastille on the 14th July following Louis' decision to send troops to Paris and the Great Fear (20th July-4 th August). It found its spiritual or ideological incarnation in the Night of Patriotic Delirium on the 4th of August and in the Declaration on the Rights of Man and the Citizen on 26th August.

Louis XVI

King Louis XVI's weak character and incompetency when it came to political decision-making, his failure to satisfy the political and material grievances of his people and the public perception of royal distance and largesse against a backdrop of unprecedented financial and political crisis generated demands for political reform from 1774-1789. Additionally, the King's initial authoritarian response to calls for a constitution and a National Assembly and his subsequent dismissal of popular finance minister Jacques Necker provided part of the basis for mass popular protests in Paris, eventually culminating in the storming of the Bastille in July 1789. Having succeeded two strong, influential Kings, Louis XVI inherited a nation in 1774 used to firm governance. He also inherited a country sorely lacking in equality, in terms of finance and opportunity, and with an enormous national debt. While these obstacles would have been a blight for any king, Louis XVI was so fundamentally unsuited to leadership that his character exacerbated the already dangerous situation that he inherited. As one member of the Paris Parlement stated, 'timidity and mistrust of himself are at the centre of his character', indeed Louis's indecision and timorousness made him a significant cause of the Revolution. France yearned for massive internal restructuring of its society, government, and economic system following the ravages of extravagant spending and the expense of war inflicted by its Kings. Notwithstanding the 1200 million livres debt incurred by King Louis XVI's own decision to involve France in the American War of Independence. These preconditions that sowed the seeds for the French Revolution may never have germinated had King Louis been prepared to exercise his dynastic power. Yet Louis was described as a 'laughing stock' at Versailles, and Georges Lefebvre claimed 'he did not have enough intelligence to run the country properly'. It was widely recognised that Louis was not emotionally suited to command, Christopher Hibbert exemplifies this when he attests that Louis made the following pathetic query of a retiring minister, 'Why can't I resign too?' Alongside his personal inadequacies, Louis XVI was surrounded by the trappings of royal largesse that distanced him from his subjects. With his wife, Marie-Antoinette, he indulged in the excess that privileged Bourbon kings had enjoyed for centuries. Louis's injudicious decision to allow Jacques Necker in February 1781 to complete a 'Compte de Rendu a Roi' (a Complete Account to the King) publically outlined the extent of national and royal expenses. While this document revealed that the royal expenses accounted for only 6.1% of national expenses, it was more than public works (2.9%) and charities (1.7%) combined. The public awareness of royal expense was never more apparent. His wife's alleged (and actual) profligacy also added to the belief that France's royal family had little regard for the poverty endured by their subjects. With the nation spiralling towards bankruptcy, Louis XVI made the decision in 1783 to appoint Calonne as Controller-General in an effort to arrest the economic disaster and approved Calonne's 'Plan to improve the finances of the nation' in 1786. Calonne's plan required an 'Assembly of Notables' to ratify his revenue raising strategies. This proved disastrous for the monarchy as the Assembly when it met in February 1787 turned out to be anything but pliable and catalysed a revolutionary attitude. The Notables did not endorse Calonne's ideas and publically counteracted the wishes of the King, it led to Calonne's dismissal but also ignited a 'pamphlet war' that continuously questioned the position of the monarchy. Louis XVI's next strategy further denigrated his standing: Calonne's replacement, Brienne tried to use the power of the Parlement to approve economic reform. Brienne was almost successful in his quest but in overseeing the 'Lit de Justice' on the 19th November 1787, Louis XVI revealed an authoritarian side to himself that had hitherto been absent from his reign. His inflexible response to the Paris Parlement's stature snowballed into significant revolutionary angst. This Royal Session of the Paris Parlement was a public-relations disaster for the King - revealing either his incompetence or authoritarian nature - when he decreed that 'it is so because I wish it' he disenfranchised both the Parlement and the people. This led to public outcry across France in more pamphlets and also in violent outburst like the 'Day of Tiles' in Grenoble in June of 1788. Louis XVI's incompetence at the Assembly of Notables and the Paris Parlement forced his hand into calling one final forum, the Estates-General which had not been used since 1614. Once again, this was played out in front of a fascinated and energised public who were given (by Louis) the opportunity to vote for delegates and list their grievances in the cahiers de doleances. This was the final fuel for a revolutionary situation as the Estates-General (May 1789) developed into a platform for revolutionary ideology and actions. Firstly, the structure and ritual of the formation of the Estates-General - dress, position of the Third Estate, voting rights - all served to alienate the 600 deputies of the Third Estate. The lack of interest shown by the King in the initial proceedings, his censure of his cousin for marching with the Third Estate in the opening procession, his later withdrawal due to the illness and sadly, death of the dauphin on the 4th of June were all perceived to be evidence of a King who lacked the inclination or wherewithal for reform. Most damning, however, was King Louis XVI's response to the formation of a National Assembly by the Third Estate (17th June, 1789) through his calling of a Royal Session (23rd June, 1789) as a show of absolute power. This would not only ratify the assembly but inspire further acts towards revolution. The Royal Session of the 23rd June proved disastrous for Louis XVI; led by Mirabeau who claimed that the Assembly was above the law of the monarchy, subject to the nation and not the king and that they would driven out of the chambers only by 'bayonets' or by force. The King's retreat to authoritarianism after such a period of incompetence emboldened the people rendering him and perhaps the ancien regime as a pathetic relic. This found its physical incarnation in the events that followed, Desmoulins' call to arms the moment after Louis' dismissal of Necker on the 11th July, the subsequent Storming of the Bastille on the 14th July following Louis' decision to send troops to Paris and the Great Fear (20th July-4 th August). It found its spiritual or ideological incarnation in the Night of Patriotic Delirium on the 4th of August and in the Declaration on the Rights of Man and the Citizen on 26th August.

Comte de Mirabeau

Le Comte de Mirabeau was a liberal noble who adopted the reformist ideas of the Enlightenment and wrote against royal despotism and 'letters de cachet'. He eventually became a deputy of the Third Estate and played a pivotal role in defying royal authority during the Royal Session of 23 June 1789 while calling for the removal of royal troops in Paris following the capture of the Bastille on 14 July 1789. 1) Comte de Mirabeau adopted the reformist ideals of the Enlightenment and was a member of the Society of Thirty, a club comprised of liberal nobles calling for a national French constitution, espousing 'patriot' ideas and attacking corporate privilege. 2) In late 1788, Mirabeau became a deputy of the Third Estate for the two southern cities of Aix and Mairseille. Between May 1789 and March 1790, Mirabeau eloquently espoused revolutionary rhetoric throughout the National Assembly and became known as the "voice of the revolution". At the Royal Session of 23 June 1789, he challenged the royal Master of Ceremonies to remove the deputies, further strengthening the resolve of the Third Estate deputies in refusing to disband until they had a constitution, exacerbating formal challenges to royal authority. 3) Following the capture of the Bastille, Mirabeau demanded the removal of royal troops from Paris, thus supporting and helping to strengthen the resolve of the revolutionary crowd's storming of the Bastille and rebellion in Paris.

Political pamphlets

Necker's decision to allow political clubs and the publication of political pamphlets prior to the meeting of the Estates General in May 1789 both expressed and further stimulated the intense public debate in France about national issues like the national debt, taxation and representation, and this in turn directly informed and guided the people's actions in the key revolutionary events of 1789. The 'Pamphlet War' of 1788 followed extensive violent protests across France in support of the parlements in June of 1788, and publicised widespread debate about the upcoming meeting of the Estates-General. In the 7000 pamphlets published, writers debated the controversial question of the order of voting at the Estates General, criticising what they saw as the outdated system last used in 1614, where voting was by order and gave the First and Second estates more influence, where they could out-vote the Third Estate. The Society of Thirty, a group of 60 patriots (nearly all of which were liberal nobles) also commissioned and published pamphlets attacking this system of voting, but extended their critique to apply to the whole system of privilege, advocating for a constitutional monarchy similar to that of England. The pamphleteers also proposed and publicised alternative political systems, such as the Vizille Provincial Assembly, which had already adopted the system of voting by head and the "doubling of the Third" Estate's vote to recognise their numerical majority. The pamphlet writers also adapted Enlightenment ideas to their own time. The 'patriots' adopted the constitutional ideas of Montesquieu (the separation of powers outlined in The Spirit of the Laws) and Rousseau (The Social Contract, 1762). From these, they developed their own ideas of personal liberty: the belief that human beings possess inalienable rights and cannot be arbitrarily deprived of them, unless subject to rules outlined and defined by the law. They redefined Rousseau's idea of the General Will (which argues that all citizens must take part in framing the laws that apply to them) and developed their own idea of representation, essentially redefining the very origin of political authority, or sovereignty, as coming from below form the people, not from the King. The most influential of these pamphlets, Abbe Sieyes' What is the Third Estate (January 1789), fervently advocated the radical idea that the Third Estate was the vast majority of the nation and hence its deputies could be considered as the representatives of the nation. This transformed the Pamphlet Wars by advocating for broader constitutional reform rather than being limited to a critique of the voting system at the Estates-General. Therefore, when the Estates-General opened in May 1789, most Third Estate deputies were already convinced that they legitimately constituted an assembly for the nation -the National Assembly. This pamphlet was therefore a catalyst for subsequent revolutionary events instigated by the deputies of the Third Estate at the Estates-General, such as the Tennis Court Oath (20 June 1789) where the Third Estate deputies at Versailles refused to disband until they were granted a constitution. Also, the Parisian pamphlet industry continued to feed political debate during the meeting of the Estates-General from May-June 1789. The Duc d'Orleans residence, the Palais-Royale, was at the epicentre of public debate and new pamphlets, with British visitor Arthur Young noting that 92 new pamphlets were published in one week, all demanding 'liberty' regarding issues relating to the Estates-General. This was the site of revolutionary action, when Camille Desmoulins called to Parisians to arm themselves on 12 July 1789, which initiated the events leading up to the storming of the Bastille.

Peasant grievances

One of the most significant long-term conditions contributing to the revolutionary situation in France was the array of material difficulties and economic grievances of the majority of the peasantry, who formed 80 per cent of France's population. Economic problems such as the cost of food and living were a significant causal factor of the revolution as they added to the political and constitutional issues that were causing tension and conflict by 1789, precipitating wide-sweeping changes to France's social structure, encoded in the August Decrees. 1) The 22 million peasants of the Third Estate were the most heavily burdened by taxation, paying on average a total of 25-33 per cent of their wealth to the monarchy, the church and their feudal lord. They paid 10-15 per cent of their income to the King in direct taxes such as the taille or the land tax, as well as owing him 14 days' of unpaid labour. They paid 8-10 per cent of their income to the Catholic Church in the form of the tithe and paid 10-25 per cent of the value of their produce to their feudal landowner. 2) In addition to this were other forms of payment or exploitation, whereby the peasants paid to cross their lord's bridge, were obliged to grind grain in the lord's (more expensive) windmill and had to follow the lord's hunting party to ride through the crops. 3) Added to this were indirect taxes, such as the Gabelle (salt tax), which was an essential resource for farming. Evidence for this is that the Books of Grievances for the Third Estate condemned the heavy, unfair tax system and demanded an abolition of feudal dues. 4) The failure of the National Assembly to respond to these peasant grievances prompted the Great Fear (July-August 1789) in which the peasants attacked noble chateaux and destroyed feudal documents. At the time of the Great Fear uprisings, Breton Club liberals in the National Assembly proposed a series of reforms or concessions to pacify the peasants. The reforms went much further than intended, with the August 4th session transforming into a night of 'patriotic delirium' where noble deputies voluntarily surrendered their privileges and feudal rights. The Assembly then passed the August Decrees, formalising the abolition of seigneurial feudalism and noble privilege in France.

Economic change

The 1780s saw economic hardship in towns in both artisanal trades and industries. Urban workers suffered from unprecedented high prices for grain, and hence for bread. There was also a downturn in production, and hence employment, which placed socio-economic pressure on working people, galvanising and radicalising the actions of the revolutionary crowd in July 1789. 1) France's Eden Treaty with Britain in 1786 allowed competition from foreign manufacturers, causing a decline in the demand for goods produced in Paris and textile centres such as Lyon, where production dropped by 50 percent in 1789. 2) In turn, peasants had to pay higher taxes for bread and reduced their purchasing of manufactured goods. This also reduced work in textile preparation done by women in cottage industries, who relied on this work to supplement income from farming. 3) The wine industry suffered a recession because working people in towns and the countryside reduced their wine consumption in order to buy bread. Thus, the majority of working people were suffering unprecedented socio-economic pressure due to rising unemployment, under-employment and catastrophically rising food prices in the 1780s, which galvanised and radicalised the actions of the revolutionary crowd in July 1789, leading up to the storming of the Bastille in July.

Cahiers de doleances

The Cahiers de Doleances, or Books of Grievances, were instructions from an estate or order to its elected deputies who would represent them at the Estates General. While the writing up of the Books of Grievances was not a revolutionary act against royal power, this official, traditional part of dialogue between the King and his subjects between February and April 1789 expressed the new liberal political and constitutional demands of the Third Estate and its supporters in the liberal clergy and nobility. It was due to the unfulfilled hopes and expectations of the various groups expressed in the Cahiers that created widespread disappointment in the monarchy and an image of despotic government, which in turn radicalised groups that felt alienated and overlooked by their King. 1) The Cahiers marked a culmination of widespread tensions as the parlement's resistance prompted new ideas of democratic representation. The ideas in the Cahiers were largely derived and inspired by the 18th century philosophes including Montesqieu's 'Spirit of the Laws' and Rousseau's 'will of the people', which called for Separation of Powers and guarantees of civil rights. 2) Furthermore, the Cahiers demonstrated a strong presence of dissatisfaction among all three Estates as the noble cahiers showed large support for a constitution and taxation by representation. Above all the ideas had the greatest effect on the bourgeoisie as they dominated the Third Estate cahiers. George Lefebvre attributes the revolutionary period prior to the Estates General (5th May) as the 'bourgeois revolt' as the ideas of the Cahiers manifested itself into calls for 'doubling of the third' and 'voting by head'. The demand for representation outlined in the Cahiers was effected independently as the deputies of the Third Estate and some who were clergy members drew upon the 'will of the people' to declare a National Assembly (17th June 1789). The subsequent declaration of the Tennis Court Oath (20th Jun ) marked a revolutionary defiance and shaped the direction for a constitution. As Historian Crane Brinton remarked 'no ideas, no revolution'. The cahiers demonstrated the grievances of a 'nation of people that drove the revolution onwards. 3) The Cahiers de Doleances also helped spur revolutionary activity through what they omitted. The drafting of the Books of the Third Estate meant that peasants at village level stated their grievances, such as their demands to end the feudal system and other problems such as heavy labour dues, 'banalities' (lord's monopolies on mills and oil presses) and the right to hunt. Having stated them, and watching them being recorded in the first draft of the document, they expected redress from the King. However, the second and third stages of drafting led to the elimination of these local grievances in favour of more political, constitutional and civic matters. This process of drafting gave the people the expectation that their problems would be solved by the government. When they were not, the resultant disappointment created the sense that the government was despotic and that change would have to occur by force. The subsequent inactivity of the National Assembly on rural concerns led to a pressure group of deputies from the Breton Club to demand the abolition of the feudal system, resulting in the Night of Patriotic Delirium (4-5 August 1789) in which the feudal system as (initially abolished completely, later in part.

Marquis de Lafayette

The Marquis de Lafayette was a liberal noble who criticised the absolute monarchy and corporate privilege and was instrumental in spreading patriotic ideas and notions of constitutional monarchy throughout France. 1) Lafayette served in the Assembly of Notables in 1787, hoping to push his reformist ideas of toleration of Protestants and the removal of barriers to free trade. He demanded economies at court, in the mistaken belief that the debt had been caused by Marie Antoinette's spending. He demanded the calling of a popular assembly, which he called the 'National Assembly' and reminded the notables of the American phrase 'No taxation without representation'. He also supported the rebellion of the Paris parlement in 1788, condemning the arrest of two judges and the transfer of power of registration to a court of royal officials. He supported the nobles of Brittany by signing their protest at the closing of their own local parlement. 2) Lafayette, an American revolutionary war hero, by being aware of the enlightenment-inspired, liberal actions within America at a time of Revolution was able to bring a sense of patriotism to France through his role within the Revolution. The principle of 'the nation' and 'citizen' essentially were utilised through the Society of Thirty and in the Tennis Court Oath (June 20 1789) in which the National Assembly refused to take a solemn oath until the constitution of the kingdom was established. Thus, the idea of the constitution derived from the American war that allowed Lafayette, as Commander of the National Guard (15 July 1789) to instil the notion of a constitutional monarchy in France. 3) Lafayette was also instrumental in the development of the National Guard, a body formed to protect private property against the revolutionary crowd and to defend against royal and noble attack. In this way, the idea of balancing political reform (through advocating a constitutional monarchy) and the maintenance of stability and orderly change was established, which shaped the early days of the revolution.

Réveillon Riots

The Reveillon Riots (26-29th April 1789) occurred before the outbreak of the French Revolution and represent how material grievances (unemployment, wages, the price of bread and other staple foodstuffs) triggered popular collective action. It was also one of the first examples of popular revolutionary action by the Parisian crowd—preceding other acts of revolutionary violence such as the Parisian riots and storming of the Bastille on the 14th July. 1) The Reveillon Riots were triggered by an alleged comment that Jean-Baptiste Reveillon, a wallpaper factory owner from the Saint-Antoine district of Paris, made. In April 1789, concerned about the effect of inflated bread prices on his workers, he made a speech in the local preparatory meeting for the Estates-General expressing concern about economic conditions in Paris, arguing that the price of bread should be reduced. Reveillon's comments were misreported as being a plan to reduce wages. Paid agents of the Duc d'Orleans helped stir up resentment amongst urban workers. 2) Subsequently, the crowd of local workers Reveillon employed at his factory staged protest marches and later, on the 28 April, attacked and destroyed Reveillon's home and factory, as well as the factory of a gunpowder manufacturer called Henriot. In response, the royal government sent in the French Guards to crush the riots, and at least 25 people were killed. This was the first act of revolutionary violence of the Parisian revolutionary crowd. 3) For the French bourgeois at the time, this was a frightening spectacle of popular action and crowd violence, as these acts demonstrated how easily the crowd could descend into systematic destruction of property and looting (as the crowd consumed his supply of 2000 bottles of wine). Although this action was pre-revolutionary, it was one of the first examples of the violence and power of the revolutionary crowd and in the longer term, precipitated the formation of the National Guard, designed to protect private property.

The attack on feudalism

The attack on feudalism in France began as a series of small, individual acts of rebellion and renunciation beginning in December 1788, which undermined feudal privileges and paved the way for a new, more equal social structure in revolutionary France. The widespread collective attack on feudalism at the village level was comprised of several small rebellious acts ranging from hunting on the lord's land to refusing to pay tithes or rents. Following the capture of the Bastille in July 1789, news and rumours concerning this spread slowly to rural regions from July-August. As a result, peasants blamed the authorities for the existing shortage of grain and became fearful that the new crops would be destroyed by fire as part of a 'Famine Pact' by the King and nobles to starve the peasants into submission. Consequently, some rural communities expressed themselves in the language of political discourse, where they attacked the properties of seigniors, destroying feudal documents and vandalising the dovecotes (eg: 2 August 1789, a group of 300 peasants attacked the Duc de Montmorency). Initially, the deputies of the National Assembly were unsympathetic, as feudal dues were initially seen as a form of property, which the Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen declared inviolable in August of 1789. Therefore, small, individual acts of renunciation worked to undermine feudalism in revolutionary France. For instance, the noble Baron de Montchenu voluntarily gave up his feudal rights in August 1789, with others following his example. The political impulse to attack feudalism came from the Breton Club, which was committed to achieving liberty, equality and the abolition of privilege. Appealing to principles of humanity, reason and 'patriotism', these deputies were asked to mount a campaign to abolish the feudal system on the night of 4 August 1789, which became known as the 'Night of Patriotic Delirium'. This attack was led by the Duc d'Aiguillon, a member of the Society of Thirty and others such as Vicomte de Noailles and du Moustier, who condemned all forms of privilege and demanded the abolition of seigneurial rights (with compensation). Others demanded the abolition of venal offices, dovecotes, seigneurial hunting rights, noble courts, tax exemptions and the tithe, to realise the 'patriot' ideal of equality. This resulted in the August Decrees (4-11 August 1789) which abolished feudal dues and venal offices with compensation and completely abolished the tithe outright.

The calling of the Estates-General and their regulation

The calling for the Estates General was a significant catalyst for the development of a revolutionary crisis inside of France from 1788 to 1789 as it ignited public debate amongst the liberal nobility and the bourgeoisie in regards to social and political distinctions and decision-making, eventually inspiring them to act against royal authority by June 1789, thus weakening the bases of royal absolutism. The attempted regulation of the Estates-General in regards to voting arrangements created controversy from 1788 to 1789, prompting calls for representative government which became increasingly radicalised into calls for a National Assembly; openly defying absolute royal power and providing a rival political alternative in the form of representative government. 1) Inspired by the 'voting by head' (rather than order) arrangements of the radical provincial assembly of Vizille, controversy ensued between the privileged orders and the Third Estate in the lead up to the Estates General about whether the estates should vote by head or by order. This escalated into outright debate from September-December 1788, until finance minister Jacques Necker attempted to regulate the Estates-General by 'doubling' the vote of the Third Estate to appease each order. Consequently, when the Estates General convened on 5 May 1789, the First and Second Estates voted to meet as an estate, whereas the Third Estate demanded common verification of credentials. This voting controversy complicated the attempt to solve the nation's financial crisis, paving the way for political crisis. 2) Leading up to the Estates General of 1 May 1789, Louis XV1 exercised a relaxation of censorship of the press in late 1788. This resulted in a large scale 'pamphlet war' across France, where some 4000 pamphlets were published between May 1788 and April 1789 discussing liberal ideas and the importance of the Third Estate. This in turn prompted Abbé Sièyes to write his 20,000 word pamphlet 'What is the Third Estate?' in January 1789, crystallising the political grievances of the large, successful and self-confident bourgeoisie. This document discussed the notion that the Third Estate is 'everything, but an everything shackled and oppressed' and that as the Third Estate constituted 25,000,000 people while the two privileged Estates number only 200,000 'it will form a National Assembly'. This discussion of such radical and revolutionary ideas was largely due to the consequences of the demands for an Estates General to be called, and led to a situation where the Third Estate voted by a vast majority (491 to 89) to call itself the National Assembly on 17th June, stating that if it were dismissed, all existing taxes would be illegal and that once a constitution were to be formed, the nation would take on the national debt and remove finance from the King. This openly challenged royal absolutism by offering a rival authoritative body to the King in the form of representative government. 3) The meeting of the Estates-General on 5 May 1789 reinforced and reflected the political and social distinctions between the three orders that were grounded in a culture of deference, which reinforced tension between the Third Estate and privileged orders and the King, inspiring the deputies of the Third Estate to formerly challenge royal authority. Against Necker's advice, Louis XVI upheld the ceremonial nature of the Estates General, where the deputies of the Third Estate were humiliated by having to wear plain black costumes, like poor priests, while the privileged orders wore colourful ceremonial costumes. Deputies of the Third Estate were also angered when the King respectfully greeted the clergy and nobility in the Hall of Mirrors, but greeted the Third Estate deputies in a more humble room. On 20 June, the Third Estate deputies were locked out of their chamber, which precipitated the Tennis Court Oath of 20 June 1789. This exacerbated the rebellion against the royal authority when the deputies of the National Assembly pledged 'never to dissolve until the constitution of the kingdom has been established', therefore formally disobeying the Monarchy with the defiance eventually spreading to the more radical Third Estate, marking the beginnings of a radical transition from absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. 4) In response to the Declaration of the National Assembly following the convocation of the Estates-General, Louis XVI attempted to regulate the meeting by sending troops to surround the meeting hall where the Third Estate Deputies were meeting. He declared the National Assembly's decrees void and commanded that the Estates-General continue to meet, debating partly in common and partly by estate. Consequently, crowds of people walked to Versailles and surrounded the meeting hall and the 830-strong Third Estate deputies refused to leave; exacerbating the open challenge to royal authority and increasing political pressure on Louis XVI to accede to the demands of the National Assembly.

The dismissal of Necker

The dismissal of Necker (11 July 1789) triggered the urban revolt of 12-14 July 1789 that culminated in the capture of the Bastille and the radical, violent actions of the revolutionary Parisian crowd. This changed the nature of the French Revolution from being constitutional to more violent and crowd-driven. 1) In the public perception, Necker represented the capable and responsible handling of France's financial and fiscal crisis and the reforming ideas of the Enlightenment, as he was a protestant and not a noble, and sympathetic to the 'patriot' causes of the revolution. He gained favour with members of the Third Estate as he defended freedom of speech by releasing imprisoned radical writers and by allowing free debate in the pamphlets, removing Brienne's ban on political clubs. 2) After Marie Antoinette and the Comte d'Artois campaigned to have him dismissed in June 1789, Louis relived him of his post on 11 July 1789 on the pretext that he had caused the failure of the Estates General. 3) The King's decision to dismiss Necker and replace him with the authoritarian Breteuil was perceived as the King refusing to support a capable minister who had the trust of the French public, and hence seemed he to reassert his despotic intentions. This galvanised existing popular agitation into a fully-fledged uprising in July 1789, by instigating large gatherings at the public gardens of the Palais-Royal, where Camille Desmoulins called upon the people to arm themselves, instigating the storming of the Bastille. This also provided a link between the radical bourgeoisie and the urban workers of Paris, where the articulate, young bourgeois directly called upon working people to rebel.

The 'Great Fear'

The peasant rebellion the 'Great Fear' (20 July-6 August 1789) arose from the pressure of severe economic hardship caused by the crop failure of July 1788 and the subsequent soaring price of bread and other foodstuffs. This was compounded by rising unemployment in the city and country and the belief amongst the peasants that nobles and government officials were deliberately hoarding grain to force prices even higher. When alarmed and confused reports of revolution in Paris reached the countryside, the fear of royal or aristocratic punishment drove the peasants to engage in a brief but intense wave of peasant riots and uprisings in July and August 1789, which exposed the depth of peasant feeling about feudal dues and caused some consternation among the Second Estate and the deputies of the National Constituent Assembly. 1) In mid July peasants heard rumours that the King and aristocrats loyal to him had hired gangs of mercenaries or 'brigands' to destroy their crops or property as a means of imposing political control. The existing fear became inflated into an imagined Famine Pact, under which the nobles would pay brigands to destroy crops just as they were ready for a bumper harvest, and starve the peasants into obedience. 2) The popular movement was further motivated by disappointed hopes: the peasantry had stated their grievances (feudal dues, noble dovecotes, noble hunting rights, payments to cross bridges, milling rights) in the first drafts of the Books of Grievances 1788-1789, but most of theses 'minor' grievances had been filtered out in the second and third stages of drafting, and never had reached Versailles. The peasants did not know this and, having stated their concerns, expected to see the King redress them. Peasants were dismayed that the new National Assembly had not lightened the feudal dues that weighted so heavily on them. 3) News of the fall of the Bastille emboldened the peasants to attack noble lands and to occupy the common land; many had stopped paying both the tithe and feudal dues. Wild rumours spread that the cities had ejected all their criminals, who were now rampaging across the country in search of food. The news of such scares and rumours travelled quickly through the rural warning system of tocsin bells -which alerted warnings to neighbouring villages when unknown people were seen in an area. Combined, these factors resulted in 'The Great Fear' sweeping through eight regions of France from 20 July to 16 August, where peasants attacked castles and burned feudal contracts recording payments due. Three landlords were killed, but the level of violence was generally quite low. 4) Bourgeois deputies in Paris were horrified because this represented an attack on property—including their own. The peasants were labelled 'brigands' and National Guards were ordered to punish the rebels. Some peasants were executed. 5) However, this also precipitated the Night of Patriotic Delirium and August Decrees, historic events that produced radical changes, most notably the abolition of French feudalism or seigneurialism. At the time of the Great Fear uprisings, Breton Club liberals in the National Assembly proposed a series of reforms or concessions to pacify the peasants. The reforms went much further than intended, with the August 4th session transforming into a night of 'patriotic delirium' where noble deputies voluntarily surrendered their privileges and feudal rights. The Assembly then passed the August Decrees, formalising the abolition of seigneurial feudalism and noble privilege in France. It was welcomed and celebrated by liberal revolutionaries. The peasants, however, were only temporarily pacified by the August Decrees. Many feudal rights could only be abolished if the owner was compensated, something the peasants could not deliver. he August Decrees caused a lull in the Great Fear but peasant unrest and violence continued into late 1789 and early 1790. It would not end until the Assembly abolished all dues without compensation in April 1790.

Claims to popular sovereignty and equality

The redefinition of popular sovereignty as the origins of political authority and legitimacy was one of the most basic principles established in 1789, and challenged rule by divine right and royal absolutism -both of which were political pillars of the Ancien Regime. The ideal of equality undermined the notion of corporate and privilege which underpinned the feudal social structure of the Ancien Regime. These ideals, in turn, inspired calls for political and social reform in pre-revolutionary France; involving demands for a National Assembly, constitution, universal taxation and the abolition of feudal privileges. These ideals were crystallised in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (August 1789) which relocated sovereign power to the people of France and declared that "men are born free and equal in rights". [FOR MORE, SEE ENLIGHTENMENT IDEALS CARD]

The storming of the Bastille

The storming of the Bastille marked a turning point in popular revolutionary action. Although the fiscal and political crises in France from 1787-1789 had already drawn the revolutionary crowd into action (groups were formed to protect the parlements and the Parisian mob engaged in the Reveillon Riots), during the storming of the Bastille, the Parisian crowd switched its loyalty from the parlements to support for the National Assembly, further linking their material concerns to the broader political concerns of the nation. 1) In July 1789, Paris seemed on the brink of rebellion, as the King appeared to be preparing for military intervention following the failed Royal Session of the 23rd June which was designed to annul the declaration of the newly-formed National Assembly and disband the deputies of the Third Estate at Versailles, who were calling for a constitution. Louis XVI sent eight regiments of troops to Paris in late June and early July, bringing the number of troops in Paris up to 20 000. In response, Comte de Mirabeau, a liberal noble and deputy of the Third Estate, called for the troops to be withdrawn, but the King refused, insisting they were to "keep order", heightening tensions between the deputies of the Third Estate and the monarchy. 2) These tensions escalated further and directly involved the Parisian crowd following the King's dismissal of popular finance minister Jacques Necker on 11 July 1789, where Louis XVI replaced him with the authoritarian Breteuil. The news hit Paris on 12 July 1789, a Sunday -when no one was at work. Consequently, there were large gatherings at the public gardens of the Palais-Royale, as many working people of Paris had supported Necker's favouring of control of grain production and government subsidies for bread during the Bread Crisis, which impacted the food security of urban workers. The radical bourgeoisie, realising that popular agitation could serve their cause for a society grounded on notions of merit and utility, also played a role by provoking the action of the revolutionary crowd. Camille Desmoulins, a radical journalist, called upon the people of Paris to arm themselves. This was a direct link between the radical bourgeoisie and the working people of Paris -the articulate and educated bourgeois had directly called upon the crowd to rebel. Subsequently, armed crowds were roamed the streets, tearing down the tax wall and setting fire to customs houses. By 13th July, the crowd began to prepare for battle by searching for food and weapons and subsequently looted the Abbey of Saint Lazare on 13th July. On 14th July, a crowd of 30 000 people attacked Les Invalides, a military hospital for veterans, where they armed themselves with 40 000 muskets and 12 cannons and were not stopped by the royal troops encamped nearby, representing the concerns of their commander Besenval that they could not be trusted to obey the order to fire on the crowd. 3) On 14th July 1789, a crowd stormed the royal prison of the Bastille, an emotive symbol of royal authority and a visible instrument of repression. While negotiations were attempted, royal troops in the Bastille panicked and fired, killing 100 people, while the crowd was reinforced by 60 French Guards commanded by Sergeant Hulin, who had defected from royal regiments. The royal reinforcements taught the crowd how to use the cannons they had armed themselves with from Les Invalides so they could blow apart prison portals. Consequently, the governor of the Bastille, de Launey, surrendered. However, the crowd executed him on the spot, bludgeoning him to death and sawing his head off with a pen-knife. Three staff officers and three veteran soldiers were also killed by the crowd, whereas 98 members of the crowd were killed. Though the fall of the Bastille had few political ramifications, its loss represented a powerful narrative, a symbol of the 'ordinary people' destroying an instrument of royal absolutism.

Noble privileges

The vast range of privileges enjoyed by the French nobility became increasingly intolerable to members of the Third Estate and fuelled demands for the revolutionary concept of equality, the opposite of the special ideals represented by feudal French society. 1) In a culture of deference, the nobles enjoyed honorific privilege, which included the right to wear a sword, to possess a coat of arms and to have respectful terms of address (such as 'Your Excellency') 2) Nobles also enjoyed legal privileges and privilege of opportunity, where they had the right to be tried by special courts staffed by fellow nobles, the right to be beheaded by the sword rather than suffering common death by hanging and having important professional and military positions being reserved for people of noble birth. 3) Nobles also enjoyed fiscal and economic privileges, such as being exempt from paying the heavy 'Gabelle' (salt tax) and the common income tax the 'taille'. They were also exempt from the corvee (days of unpaid labour on the King's roads) and compulsory military service, although they paid the 'capitation' (personal tax) and 'Vingtieme' (special wartime tax).

Enlightenment ideals

Through the impact of Enlightenment ideals espoused by the Philosophes and the American war of Independence (1783), they were able to contribute to the development of the Revolution by exploring new ideas and further, through spreading enlightenment thought. 1) Lafayette, by being aware of the enlightenment-inspired, liberal actions within America at a time of Revolution was able to bring a sense of patriotism to France through his role within the Revolution. The principle of 'the nation' and 'citizen' essentially were utilised in the Tennis Court Oath (June 20 1789) in which the National Assembly refused to take a solemn oath until the constitution of the kingdom was established. Thus, the idea of the constitution derived from the American war that allowed Lafayette, as Commander of the National Guard (15 July 1789) to instil the notion of a constitution monarchy in France. 2) Secondly, Rousseau's notion of a 'social contract' contributed to the development of the Revolution by highlighting the weakness of the King. The Social Contract essentially demonstrated the link that binds the monarch to the people and thus illustrated the need to fulfil the desires of the people. 3) Further, Rousseau's idea of a 'law not made by the people is not a law at all' transferred to the Parlement of Paris (2 July 1787) who refused the approval of Brienne's tax bills as they believed it should be approved by those who had to bear it, contributing to the discontent of the monarch in Paris. 4) Thirdly, Montesquieu's idea of the separation of powers contributed to Revolution through limiting the King's powers and thus creating dissatisfaction for the monarchy. The notion of having an executive, a parliament and a judiciary not influenced by each other saw the destruction of the principle of divine right and thus catalysed the desire for the nobles on the 4th August 1789, to abolish feudal privileges as the first step towards the destruction of the old regime.