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!
About this sample
About this sample
Words: 1827 |
Pages: 4|
10 min read
Published: Jan 30, 2025
Words: 1827|Pages: 4|10 min read
Published: Jan 30, 2025
In 1789, France entered into a state of revolution. The French Revolution was a time of great social and political change in France. It began in 1789 and ended in 1799 with the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte as the Emperor of the French. A number of factors led to the revolution, and these factors will be discussed in the subsequent sections. Before evaluating the factors that contributed to the success of the revolution, it is important to understand the groundwork of the revolution. Therefore, an introduction to the French Revolution is provided.
France was a great country in the 18th century, but it was not great for everyone. It was a great country for the monarch, nobility, and clergy. But the common people suffered a lot. France was an absolute monarchy where the king had all the power, and the common people had none. Even though the king was considered to be the representative of God on earth, there was widespread dissatisfaction with the monarchy (Pagan, 2012). The Enlightenment thinkers criticized the existing socio-political system and proposed new ideas that inspired revolutionary thought. The common people were highly inspired by the Enlightenment ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity.
France was a monarchy, and King Louis XVI was on the throne. The monarchy failed miserably in addressing the grievances of the common people. Instead, the monarchy resorted to repressive measures to silence the dissent. On top of all this came the economic crises in France. France supported the American Revolution and went bankrupt as a result. There was widespread unemployment and poverty. The cost of essential commodities skyrocketed, and the common people were out on the streets protesting against the regime. The existing socio-political system was highly unjust and inequitable. The common people were overburdened with taxes, whereas the clergy and nobility were exempted from paying taxes. All these factors led to a desire for change among the citizens of France.
This examination aims to take a closer look at the complex social, economic, and political factors that led to the success of the French Revolution while also providing insight into these realities that allowed entire societies to act rebelliously. French society was heavily stratified into three estates. The First Estate was composed of clergy, the Second Estate was composed of nobility, and the Third Estate consisted of everyone else, including the bourgeoisie, peasants, and urban workers. An immense frustration for the Third Estate was the feudal privileges enjoyed by the Second Estate. Tithes, or taxes exclusively for the Church, were imposed on all men, women, and children of the parish, regardless of social standing. Without representation, the Third Estate grew resentful of these privileges and began demanding reform (Pagan, 2012). While each estate brought grievances, a list of reforms for the absolutist monarchy was at the forefront for the Third Estate. Economic woes plagued France, especially among the Third Estate. Rising taxes coupled with a crippling drought kept public discontent at a high simmer. Public grain stocks were hoarded by wealthy merchants as bread prices skyrocketed. Bread was a staple in the French diet; therefore, hunger was rampant. When the Commons began organizing as the National Assembly, King Louis XVI attempted to quell the angry public with reform and sympathy, but his actions were too little and came too late. The monarchy was weak because it was incapable of dealing with the problems that plagued its subjects. Louis failed to act in defiance of his court’s wishes so long as it was content and he was assured the country could be controlled. Only when those in the Parisian court began to grow anxious over events in Paris did Louis attempt to assert control. Political premises also played a vital role in the Revolution’s success. The King hoped to avert disaster through reform, but attempts were too late and too ambiguous. Aetherous letters to the public promising reforms were poorly received due to the King's reluctance to grant any meaningful change. Amid political chaos, radical pamphleteers filled the void left by silence from the court, and Enlightenment thinkers questioned the respectability of the King's actions, bringing the credibility of the monarchy into question. These social, economic, and political realities intertwined to create the conditions that fostered a successful Revolution. Understanding the foundational components that acted as the seeds of the Rebellion is crucial in understanding the success of the Revolution.
A great many men of various positions and opinions participated actively in the Revolution. Some, by their character and position, imposed their motives and their desires upon the crowd. Others, like the crowd, found themselves seized by uncontrollable circumstances, which they could not master. The Revolution was both, but chiefly the latter — a series of events, some of which, considered at a distance, appear to have determining influence but which, in the very unfolding of them, were entirely blind. It is an experience of chaos in which everything that happened was at once necessary and arbitrary. And yet, it was precisely through single men that all this was brought about. Without their action, it is clear nothing would have happened. Accordingly, it is necessary to examine the part played by these men, to what extent the mass of the events came from them, and to what extent they themselves were determined by the surrounding circumstances.
In France, as elsewhere, the course of history was throughout greatly determined by single individuals whose actions, in great part, brought about what happened. With the immediate objects in view, they acted in accordance with their understanding and convictions, and yet what they intended and desired was frequently brought about contrary to their intention. It is in this sense that one can speak of the “great men” of the Revolution — of those who were in the vanguard, or at any rate took a part in it, as leaders from a higher standpoint. From this point of view, it is desirable to examine the course of the Revolution as it emerged from the forces that brought it about and determined it thereafter.
However, it was especially since Voltaire that, from the point of view of the crowd, the writers or philosophers had begun to take the leading part in affairs. The writings of these philosophers fanned the flame of discontent almost as strongly as the parlements had done it before. Almost all had been subjected to some sort of oppression — even this was an asset on their side. In poverty, and with great effort, they had produced literary works which by their mere existence provoked new vexations — works which gave voice to rationality and moderation, to hopes for improvement and progress, to freedom in all its senses — political freedom, freedom of conscience, and freedom of instruction — and which thus uncovered the inadequacy of the existing order.
The French Revolution attracted extensive attention as it rapidly escalated and its outcome remained uncertain. In particular, the rise of the Jacobins, the radical left political faction, drew interest and concern in Paris and throughout France. Although the success of the French Revolution and the subsequent rise of the Jacobins were primarily due to domestic factors, external influences were also important. Other European monarchies were deeply concerned about revolutionary movements in France and swiftly reacted. Coalitions formed against France. The fear of paralleled uprisings outside of France only strengthened the resolve of revolutionaries inside France. The ideas of the American Revolution also inspired French revolutionaries. France had supported the American colonies against the British and, as a result, a stream of revolutionary pamphlets laden with Enlightenment ideas arrived in France, insisting on democracy and rights. However, the most immediate external influence was foreign intervention in the domestic affairs of France. While many European monarchies were willing to wait and see how the new radical turn in France played out, Austria and Prussia escalated the situation by issuing an “ultimatum” that the French de-escalate or face military action. The situation greatly worried moderate revolutionary factions, like the Girondins, as they had projected a globally united revolution and did not see the good that could come from war. However, it was precisely such external pressures that created a sense of urgency and unity within the revolutionary faction (Chrzanowski, 2019). In short, the revolutionary surge that swept through France was largely rooted in the country, but it should also be noted that the revolution was not a unique or isolated phenomenon. Rather, it was part of a broader global wave of change that collectively moved toward democracy.
The French Revolution is a complex historical event with a legacy that has been interpreted in various ways. It had profound and lasting effects on France and the world, establishing the foundation for modern democratic principles and human rights. The revolutionary ideas that emerged from the Enlightenment and the experience of the revolution impacted subsequent political movements and revolutions across Europe and the world. Some were inspired by the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity, while others directly sought to emulate the French example and its hopes and challenges on a larger scale (T. J. Barron et al., 2018). The French Revolution created a model for future democracies and far-reaching public deliberation, and the meaning of the lessons learned from it still resonates today.
The revolution’s outcomes were complex, and the status of the ideals and principles that inspired it has always been debated. On the one hand, the French Revolution was a stunning success, and no one could deny that it far exceeded the hopes of its actors. By 1789, there were no democracies in Europe, whereas by 1815, there were several nation-states ruled directly in the name of the people (T. J. Barron et al., 2017). Constitutional monarchies, which had been unthinkable prior to the revolution, now existed in France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy, while limited parliamentary government emerged in the larger states of Europe, such as Britain and the Russian Empire. The principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity brought into being by the French Revolution became the moral yardstick against which all regimes were measured. On the other hand, the question of what the French Revolution ultimately accomplished has troubled historians. The rise of Napoleon and the restoration of monarchy in France after 1815 have often been seen as a negation of the revolution and a return to the status quo ante. Moreover, the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity that were at the center of the revolution were co-opted by the French, and often paradoxical, legitimacy of colonial ventures added another layer of complexity.
References:
Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled