NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
The French revolution overthrew the countrys ancient monarchy, proclaimed Liberty, Equality and Fraternity and fought off a hostile Europe. It ushered in a new age, but at a terrible price in blood and human suffering. There were many causes of the Revolution. The French Revolution appears to have been the outcome of both long term and short term factors, which arose from the social and political conditions and conflicts of the ancien regime. The long standing grievances of peasants, townsmen and bourgeoisie; the frustrations of rising hopes among wealthy and middling bourgeoisie and peasants; the distress and breakdown of government; a real (or at least perceived) feudal reaction; the stubbornness of a privileged aristocracy; the creation of radical ideas among wide sections of the people; a sharp economic and financial crisis; and the successive triggers of state bankruptcy, aristocratic revolt and popular revolution: all these factors played a part. The middle and lower class were becoming more conscious of their increased social importance and because the peasants were becoming more independent, more literate and prosperous that the old feudal freedoms and aristocratic privileges appeared all the more burdensome and intolerable for the struggling discontents of France.
For more than one hundred years before the accession of Louis XVI, France was the most powerful country on the European continent. She had held this position for over 150 years, thanks to her fertile land, large population and many resources. However, the government had under gone periodic economic crisis, resulting from long wars, royal mismanagement, losses incurred in the French and Indian War (1756 - 1763) and Seven Years War (1775 - 1783) and increased debt arising from loans to the American colonies during the American Revolution (1775 - 1783). The governmental system had worked reasonably well under Louis XIV but had become impossible under his weak successors.
The government was corrupt and centralized and the Kings authority had been slowly extended over the country. Under the system, there was a lot of overlapping authority and a great inefficiency in the provincial governments. The only people who could obstruct the royal government in an attempt to save the country was the Parliament of Paris. Unfortunately, its members were only concerned about their own welfare rather than the members of the country. The greatest government weakness was the lack of consistency and order. By 1788, the government was almost bankrupt.
The supporters of economic, social and governmental reforms had become increasingly vocal during the reign of Louis XVI. The greatest governmental weakness lay in the lack of order and consistency. The Administration of Justice and Finance were particularly confused and the government fell steadily behind, owed on public debt accounted for 51 % off all expenditures (Going broke). 1 1 - The most hated responsibilities were dues owed to the landlords. Peasants were required to pay to use the mill, bake oven, and hunting rights.
The peasants soon became very discontent with these situations and were willing to listen to revolutionary theories. In 1789 a crisis over finances, resulting in a temporary weakness on the part of the royal government of France, led to the sudden and violent breakthrough of the forces of change and to the overthrow of the old regime of privilege and inequality in the most powerful state in Europe. France having stretched its resources in the war, was left financial crippled and this was the first flames of revolution in France. It was after two years after the war that Calonne, French Financial Minister, was faced with a deficit of nearly a quarter of the nations incomes, declared the state bankrupt and called for drastic measures to overcome it. He believed it wasnt extravagance that was the problem and he believed the debts could be paid quite quickly if the privileged class paid their share in tax. His theory was that people should pay tax according to how much land they owned.
Obviously, this didnt go down well with people in the first and second estates. They were not used to paying taxes and were not about to start. Calonne's plans of reform three main elements. Firstly came the economic and administrative reforms designed to fix once and for all the structural problems troubling the royal finances.
Calonne proposed to recast the tax system by abolishing the ving times (common tax) and substituting it for a permanent territorial subvention or a land tax. There were to be no exemptions, such as was enjoyed by the clergy. From this reform Calonne expected an increase in revenue or income to help pay off bad debt. Secondly, Calonne believed that the program of economic growth would increase and further the already improved tax yield that would be expected from the administrative reforms.
Thus, Calonne proposed the abolishment of internal custom barriers, which never happened. Calonne had hoped to abolish the forced labor taxes for road building, substituting it for an extra tax. Thirdly, he proposed once more to relax governmental controls on the grain trade, going further than either Turgot or any of his forefathers of the 1760 s in allowing free export both internally and externally. All these reforms, whether administrative or economic, could not be expected to show instant results whatever their long term benefits were expected to be. Calonne had to also find some means to overcome the financial crisis, which had brought him to the point of proposing broader reforms in the first place.
The immediate problem was to find money to pay off short-term debt falling due to redemption in between 1787 and 1797. Calonne proposed to do it by raising yet more loans, confident that these would be easy to repay in their turn from increased tax revenues later as his reform began to have an effect. The difficulty was convincing French leaders to share his confidence. He decided to call upon an Assembly of Notables (made up of first and second estates) to consider his remedies for the crisis. However, they refused largely because their own privileges were threatened.
Calonne's plan had misfired, having expected the Notables to accept that there was a crisis and to approve his proposals for dealing with it. It seems clear that if it could be proved that there was a genuine crisis, the Notables would have been prepared to take radical action to overcome it. Instead, they said that people from all estates meeting together could only agree such a tax. Louis was extremely unhappy and dismissed Calonne in 1787 and was replaced by Brienne.
Brienne knew that if a tax was ever going to work he had to get an agreement of the Parliament of Paris. This was the Paris Law Court controlled by nobles. Like Calonne, Brienne found himself in trouble. The Parliament of Paris refused to agree to the new tax and they too said that only the Estates-General could pass such a tax. Things were desperate depression and famine had set in after the bad harvest of 1788 the price of bread had risen 50 % between April 1788 and March 1789. There were riots and the country was becoming impossible to run.
Louis had no choice but to call upon the Estates-General, which had not met since 1614. This was convocation representing all three estates. However, many middle class members had plans of their own. Members of the third Estate such as lawyers and teachers wanted a say in how France was governed. They demanded a constitution for equal rights and share of wealth (even the King could have to obey these rules).
Many of these rules were opposed by the King and by the richest people in the First and Second Estates. Since the Estates-Generals first meeting there has been nothing but useless argument. the three estates differ on every point. The king favored the clergy or nobility.
violence may be the only way to save the monarchy. 2 When the king tried, on June 20 th, 1789, to break up the meeting, the Third Estate met in a local tennis court and pledged not to go home until they had written and constitution for France. They called themselves the National Assembly. The French social pyramid was riddled with contradictions both within and between its constituent parts. Today we believe everybody is treated equally in a system of law.
This was not the case in France before the revolution. The French people belonged to one of three classes or estates. The First Estate was made up of members of the Church (the clergy) 3. It owned about one tenth of the land and some of its members, including Cardinal Fleury, played an important part in government.
With the 130, 000 clergy in France, the Church was very important in an age where most people believed in heaven and hell. In return for praying for the King and the people, the first estate were allowed privileges. Its members didnt have to pay taille or main tax; they were not called for military service and if they broke the law they were tried in their own courts. The Second Estate was made up of nobles. In 1789, there were about 400, 000 nobles in France in which they owned one third of land. The older noble families had served the King for centuries either in government, battle or at court.
Rich or poor, the nobility was expected to serve the King in war and in return, they were given privileges, including exemption from most governmental taxes. The Third Estate comprised of most of the population, ranging from rich businessmen to poor peasants. These members had no privileges and played no part in government and running the country. Providence, ever watchful, well knows that this evil brood, the aristocrats, would always, in France, be like a bad seed growing on good land. 4 Most were peasants and made 80 % of the population. They had a hard life and most didnt own the land they farmed on. As well as paying rent, they had to work free of charge for the local landowner on certain days of the year.
They had to pay taxes to the government, like the taille and the gabelle (salt tax), and tithes to the church. Sometimes they paid three quarters of their yearly income in taxes. They were also expected to fight whenever France went to war. Arthur Young states poor miserable, much arising from the minute division of their little farms among all other children 5 Tocqueville believes the middle class were becoming increasingly richer and more conscious of their social importance.
Further more, because the peasants were becoming free, literate and prosperous the old feudal survivals and aristocratic privileges appeared more vexatious and intolerable. The 'Abbe Sieyes' pha...
Free research essays on topics related to: louis xvi, third estate, financial crisis, first and second estates, french revolution
Research essay sample on First And Second Estates Louis Xvi
