the french revolution essay causes

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

French Revolution

By: History.com Editors

Updated: October 12, 2023 | Original: November 9, 2009

The French Revolution was a watershed event in world history that began in 1789 and ended in the late 1790s with the ascent of Napoleon Bonaparte. During this period, French citizens radically altered their political landscape, uprooting centuries-old institutions such as the monarchy and the feudal system. The upheaval was caused by disgust with the French aristocracy and the economic policies of King Louis XVI, who met his death by guillotine, as did his wife Marie Antoinette. Though it degenerated into a bloodbath during the Reign of Terror, the French Revolution helped to shape modern democracies by showing the power inherent in the will of the people.

Causes of the French Revolution

As the 18th century drew to a close, France’s costly involvement in the American Revolution , combined with extravagant spending by King Louis XVI , had left France on the brink of bankruptcy.

Not only were the royal coffers depleted, but several years of poor harvests, drought, cattle disease and skyrocketing bread prices had kindled unrest among peasants and the urban poor. Many expressed their desperation and resentment toward a regime that imposed heavy taxes—yet failed to provide any relief—by rioting, looting and striking.

In the fall of 1786, Louis XVI’s controller general, Charles Alexandre de Calonne, proposed a financial reform package that included a universal land tax from which the aristocratic classes would no longer be exempt.

Estates General

To garner support for these measures and forestall a growing aristocratic revolt, the king summoned the Estates General ( les états généraux ) – an assembly representing France’s clergy, nobility and middle class – for the first time since 1614.

The meeting was scheduled for May 5, 1789; in the meantime, delegates of the three estates from each locality would compile lists of grievances ( cahiers de doléances ) to present to the king.

Rise of the Third Estate

France’s population, of course, had changed considerably since 1614. The non-aristocratic, middle-class members of the Third Estate now represented 98 percent of the people but could still be outvoted by the other two bodies.

In the lead-up to the May 5 meeting, the Third Estate began to mobilize support for equal representation and the abolishment of the noble veto—in other words, they wanted voting by head and not by status.

While all of the orders shared a common desire for fiscal and judicial reform as well as a more representative form of government, the nobles in particular were loath to give up the privileges they had long enjoyed under the traditional system.

7 Key Figures of the French Revolution

These people played integral roles in the uprising that swept through France from 1789‑1799.

The French Revolution Was Plotted on a Tennis Court

Explore some well‑known “facts” about the French Revolution—some of which may not be so factual after all.

The Notre Dame Cathedral Was Nearly Destroyed By French Revolutionary Mobs

In the 1790s, anti‑Christian forces all but tore down one of France’s most powerful symbols—but it survived and returned to glory.

Tennis Court Oath

By the time the Estates General convened at Versailles , the highly public debate over its voting process had erupted into open hostility between the three orders, eclipsing the original purpose of the meeting and the authority of the man who had convened it — the king himself.

On June 17, with talks over procedure stalled, the Third Estate met alone and formally adopted the title of National Assembly; three days later, they met in a nearby indoor tennis court and took the so-called Tennis Court Oath (serment du jeu de paume), vowing not to disperse until constitutional reform had been achieved.

Within a week, most of the clerical deputies and 47 liberal nobles had joined them, and on June 27 Louis XVI grudgingly absorbed all three orders into the new National Assembly.

The Bastille 

On June 12, as the National Assembly (known as the National Constituent Assembly during its work on a constitution) continued to meet at Versailles, fear and violence consumed the capital.

Though enthusiastic about the recent breakdown of royal power, Parisians grew panicked as rumors of an impending military coup began to circulate. A popular insurgency culminated on July 14 when rioters stormed the Bastille fortress in an attempt to secure gunpowder and weapons; many consider this event, now commemorated in France as a national holiday, as the start of the French Revolution.

The wave of revolutionary fervor and widespread hysteria quickly swept the entire country. Revolting against years of exploitation, peasants looted and burned the homes of tax collectors, landlords and the aristocratic elite.

Known as the Great Fear ( la Grande peur ), the agrarian insurrection hastened the growing exodus of nobles from France and inspired the National Constituent Assembly to abolish feudalism on August 4, 1789, signing what historian Georges Lefebvre later called the “death certificate of the old order.”

How Bread Shortages Helped Ignite the French Revolution

When Parisians stormed the Bastille in 1789 they weren't only looking for arms, they were on the hunt for more grain—to make bread.

How a Scandal Over a Diamond Necklace Cost Marie Antoinette Her Head

The Diamond Necklace Affair reads like a fictional farce, but it was all true—and would become the final straw that led to demands for the queen's head.

How Versailles’ Over‑the‑Top Opulence Drove the French to Revolt

The palace with more than 2,000 rooms featured elaborate gardens, fountains, a private zoo, roman‑style baths and even 18th‑century elevators.

Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen

IIn late August, the Assembly adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen ( Déclaration des droits de l ’homme et du citoyen ), a statement of democratic principles grounded in the philosophical and political ideas of Enlightenment thinkers like Jean-Jacques Rousseau .

The document proclaimed the Assembly’s commitment to replace the ancien régime with a system based on equal opportunity, freedom of speech, popular sovereignty and representative government.

Drafting a formal constitution proved much more of a challenge for the National Constituent Assembly, which had the added burden of functioning as a legislature during harsh economic times.

For months, its members wrestled with fundamental questions about the shape and expanse of France’s new political landscape. For instance, who would be responsible for electing delegates? Would the clergy owe allegiance to the Roman Catholic Church or the French government? Perhaps most importantly, how much authority would the king, his public image further weakened after a failed attempt to flee the country in June 1791, retain?

Adopted on September 3, 1791, France’s first written constitution echoed the more moderate voices in the Assembly, establishing a constitutional monarchy in which the king enjoyed royal veto power and the ability to appoint ministers. This compromise did not sit well with influential radicals like Maximilien de Robespierre , Camille Desmoulins and Georges Danton, who began drumming up popular support for a more republican form of government and for the trial of Louis XVI.

French Revolution Turns Radical

In April 1792, the newly elected Legislative Assembly declared war on Austria and Prussia, where it believed that French émigrés were building counterrevolutionary alliances; it also hoped to spread its revolutionary ideals across Europe through warfare.

On the domestic front, meanwhile, the political crisis took a radical turn when a group of insurgents led by the extremist Jacobins attacked the royal residence in Paris and arrested the king on August 10, 1792.

The following month, amid a wave of violence in which Parisian insurrectionists massacred hundreds of accused counterrevolutionaries, the Legislative Assembly was replaced by the National Convention, which proclaimed the abolition of the monarchy and the establishment of the French republic.

On January 21, 1793, it sent King Louis XVI, condemned to death for high treason and crimes against the state, to the guillotine ; his wife Marie-Antoinette suffered the same fate nine months later.

Reign of Terror

Following the king’s execution, war with various European powers and intense divisions within the National Convention brought the French Revolution to its most violent and turbulent phase.

In June 1793, the Jacobins seized control of the National Convention from the more moderate Girondins and instituted a series of radical measures, including the establishment of a new calendar and the eradication of Christianity .

They also unleashed the bloody Reign of Terror (la Terreur), a 10-month period in which suspected enemies of the revolution were guillotined by the thousands. Many of the killings were carried out under orders from Robespierre, who dominated the draconian Committee of Public Safety until his own execution on July 28, 1794.

Did you know? Over 17,000 people were officially tried and executed during the Reign of Terror, and an unknown number of others died in prison or without trial.

Thermidorian Reaction

The death of Robespierre marked the beginning of the Thermidorian Reaction, a moderate phase in which the French people revolted against the Reign of Terror’s excesses.

On August 22, 1795, the National Convention, composed largely of Girondins who had survived the Reign of Terror, approved a new constitution that created France’s first bicameral legislature.

Executive power would lie in the hands of a five-member Directory ( Directoire ) appointed by parliament. Royalists and Jacobins protested the new regime but were swiftly silenced by the army, now led by a young and successful general named Napoleon Bonaparte .

French Revolution Ends: Napoleon’s Rise

The Directory’s four years in power were riddled with financial crises, popular discontent, inefficiency and, above all, political corruption. By the late 1790s, the directors relied almost entirely on the military to maintain their authority and had ceded much of their power to the generals in the field.

On November 9, 1799, as frustration with their leadership reached a fever pitch, Napoleon Bonaparte staged a coup d’état, abolishing the Directory and appointing himself France’s “ first consul .” The event marked the end of the French Revolution and the beginning of the Napoleonic era, during which France would come to dominate much of continental Europe.

Photo Gallery 

French Revolution. The National Archives (U.K.) The United States and the French Revolution, 1789–1799. Office of the Historian. U.S. Department of State . Versailles, from the French Revolution to the Interwar Period. Chateau de Versailles . French Revolution. Monticello.org . Individuals, institutions, and innovation in the debates of the French Revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences . 

HISTORY Vault

Stream thousands of hours of acclaimed series, probing documentaries and captivating specials commercial-free in HISTORY Vault

Sign up for Inside History

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

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

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

History Cooperative

French Revolution: History, Timeline, Causes, and Outcomes

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

Time and Location

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Causes of the French Revolution

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

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

Economic Hardship and Social Inequality

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

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

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

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

Enlightenment Ideals

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

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

Political Crisis and the Estates-General

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key Concepts, Events, and People of the French Revolution

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

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

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

Estates General

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

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

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

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

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

Rise of the Third Estate

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

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

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

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

A People’s Monarchy

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

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

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

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

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

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

Birth of a Republic

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

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

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

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

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

Reign of Terror

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

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

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

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

Thermidorians and the Directory

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

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

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

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

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

French Revolution End and Outcome: Napoleon’s Rise

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Significance of the French Revolution

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key Figures of the French Revolution

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to Cite this Article

There are three different ways you can cite this article.

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

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

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Sign Up Today

Start your 14 day free trial today

History Hit Story of England: Making of a Nation

• French Revolution and Napoleon

The 6 Main Causes of the French Revolution

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

Sarah Roller

27 sep 2021, @sarahroller8.

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

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

1. Louis XVI & Marie Antoinette

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. Inherited problems

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

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

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

3. The Estates System & the bourgeoise

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

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

Opening of the Estates-General in Versailles 5 May 1789

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

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

4. Taxation & money

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

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

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

5. The Enlightenment

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

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

Voltaire, Portrait by Nicolas de Largillière, c. 1724

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

6. Bad luck

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

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

You May Also Like

Young Stalin Made His Name as a Bank Robber

3 Things We Learned from Meet the Normans with Eleanor Janega

Reintroducing ‘Dan Snow’s History Hit’ Podcast with a Rebrand and Refresh

Don’t Try This Tudor Health Hack: Bathing in Distilled Puppy Juice

Coming to History Hit in August

Coming to History Hit in September

Coming to History Hit in October

The Plimsoll Line: How Samuel Plimsoll Made Sailing Safer

How Polluting Shipwrecks Imperil the Oceans

How Cutty Sark Became the Fastest Sail-Powered Cargo Ship Ever Built

Why Did Elizabethan Merchants Start Weighing Their Coins?

‘Old Coppernose’: Henry VIII and the Great Debasement

French Revolution

Server costs fundraiser 2024.

The French Revolution (1789-1799) was a period of major societal and political upheaval in France. It witnessed the collapse of the monarchy, the establishment of the First French Republic, and culminated in the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte and the start of the Napoleonic era. The French Revolution is considered one of the defining events of Western history.

The Revolution of 1789, as it is sometimes called to distinguish it from later French revolutions, originated from deep-rooted problems that the government of King Louis XVI of France (r. 1774-1792) proved incapable of fixing; such problems were primarily related to France's financial troubles as well as the systemic social inequality embedded within the Ancien Régime . The Estates-General of 1789 , summoned to address these issues, resulted in the formation of a National Constituent Assembly, a body of elected representatives from the three societal orders who swore never to disband until they had written a new constitution. Over the next decade, the revolutionaries attempted to dismantle the oppressive old society and build a new one based on the principles of the Age of Enlightenment exemplified in the motto: " Liberté, égalité, fraternité ."

Although initially successful in establishing a French Republic, the revolutionaries soon became embroiled in the French Revolutionary Wars (1792-1802) in which France fought against a coalition of major European powers. The Revolution quickly devolved into violent paranoia, and 20-40,000 people were killed in the Reign of Terror (1793-94), including many of the Revolution's former leaders. After the Terror, the Revolution stagnated until 1799, when Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821) took control of the government in the Coup of 18 Brumaire , ultimately transitioning the Republic into the First French Empire (1804-1814, 1815). Although the Revolution failed to prevent France from falling back into autocracy, it managed to succeed in other ways. It inspired numerous revolutions throughout the world and helped shape the modern concepts of nation-states, Western democracies, and human rights.

Most of the causes of the French Revolution can be traced to economic and social inequalities that were exacerbated by the brokenness of the Ancien Régime (“old regime”), the name retroactively given to the political and social system of the Kingdom of France in the last few centuries of its initial existence. The Ancien Régime was divided into three estates, or social orders: the clergy, nobility, and commoners. The first two estates enjoyed many social privileges, including tax exemptions, that were not granted to the commoners, a class that made up well over 90% of the population. The Third Estate was burdened with manual labor as well as paying most of the taxes.

Rapid population growth contributed to the general suffering; by 1789, France was the most populous European state with over 28 million people. Job growth had not kept up with the swelling population, leaving 8- 12 million impoverished. Backwards agricultural techniques and a steady string of terrible harvests led to starvation. Meanwhile, a rising class of wealthy commoners, the bourgeoisie, threatened the privileged position of the aristocracy, increasing tensions between social classes. Ideas of the Age of Enlightenment also contributed to national unrest; people began to view the Ancien Régime as corrupt, mismanaged, and tyrannical. Hatred was especially directed toward Queen Marie Antoinette , who was seen to personify everything wrong with the government.

A final significant cause was France's monumental state debt, accumulated by its attempts to maintain its status as a global power. Expensive wars and other projects had put the French treasury billions of livres into debt, as it had been forced to take out loans at enormously high interest rates. The country's irregular systems of taxation were ineffective, and as creditors began to call for repayment in the 1780s, the government finally realized something had to be done.

The Gathering Storm: 1774-1788

On 10 May 1774, King Louis XV of France died after a reign of nearly 60 years, leaving his grandson to inherit a troubled and broken kingdom. Only 19 years old, Louis XVI was an impressionable ruler who adhered to the advice of his ministers and involved France in the American War of Independence. Although French involvement in the American Revolution succeeded in weakening Great Britain , it also added substantially to France's debt while the success of the Americans encouraged anti-despotic sentiments at home.

In 1786, Louis XVI was convinced by his finance minister, Charles-Alexandre Calonne, that the issue of state debt could no longer be ignored. Calonne presented a list of financial reforms and convened the Assembly of Notables of 1787 to rubberstamp them. The Notables, a mostly aristocratic assembly, refused and told Calonne that only an Estates-General could approve such radical reforms. This referred to an assembly of the three estates of pre-revolutionary France , a body that had not been summoned in 175 years. Louis XVI refused, realizing that an Estates-General could undermine his authority. Instead, he fired Calonne and took the reforms to the parlements .

The parlements were the 13 judicial courts that were responsible for registering royal decrees before they went into effect. Consisting of aristocrats, the parlements had long struggled against royal authority, still bitter that their class had been subjugated by the "sun king" Louis XIV of France a century before. Spotting a chance to recover some power, they refused to register the royal reforms and joined the Notables in advocating for an Estates-General. When the crown responded by exiling the courts, riots erupted across the country; the parlements had presented themselves as champions of the people, thereby winning the commoners' support. One of these riots erupted in Grenoble on 7 June 1788 and led the three estates of Dauphiné to gather without the king's consent. Known as the Day of Tiles, this is credited by some historians as the start of the Revolution. Realizing he had been bested, Louis XVI appointed the popular Jacques Necker as his new finance minister and scheduled an Estates-General to convene in May 1789.

Rise of the Third Estate: February-September 1789

Across France, 6 million people participated in the electoral process for the Estates-General, and a total 25,000 cahiers de doléances , or lists of grievances, were drawn up for discussion. When the Estates-General of 1789 finally convened on 5 May in Versailles, there were 578 deputies representing the Third Estate, 282 for the nobility, and 303 for the clergy. Yet the double representation of the Third Estate was meaningless, as votes would still be counted by estate rather than by head. As the upper classes were sure to vote together, the Third Estate was at a disadvantage.

Subsequently, the Third Estate refused to verify its own elections, a process needed to begin proceedings. It demanded votes to be counted by head, a condition the nobility staunchly refused. Meanwhile, Louis XVI's attention was drawn away by the death of his son, paralyzing royal authority. On 13 June, having reached an impasse, the Third Estate commenced roll call, breaking protocol by beginning proceedings without the consent of the king or the other orders. On 17 June, following a motion proposed by Abbé Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyès , the Third Estate officially proclaimed itself a National Constituent Assembly. Two days later, the clergy formally voted to join it, and the nobility begrudgingly followed suit. On 20 June, after finding themselves locked out of the assembly hall, the deputies of the National Assembly met in the royal tennis court. There, they swore the Tennis Court Oath, promising never to disband until they had given France a new constitution. The French Revolution had begun.

Louis XVI realized he needed to regain control. In early July, he called over 30,000 soldiers into the Paris Basin, and on 11 July, he dismissed Necker and other ministers considered too friendly to the insolent revolutionaries. Fearing the king meant to crush the Revolution, the people of Paris rioted on 12 July. Their uprising climaxed on 14 July with the Storming of the Bastille , when hundreds of citizens successfully attacked the Bastille fortress to loot it for ammunition. The king backed down, sending away his soldiers and reinstating Necker. Unnerved by these events, the king's youngest brother, Comte d'Artois, fled France with an entourage of royalists on the night of 16 July; they were the first of thousands of émigrés to flee.

In the coming weeks, the French countryside broke out into scattered riots, as rumors spread of aristocratic plots to deprive citizens of their liberties. These riots resulted in mini-Bastilles as peasants raided the feudal estates of local seigneurs, forcing nobles to renounce their feudal rights. Later known as the Great Fear , this wave of panic forced the National Assembly to confront the issue of feudalism . On the night of 4 August, in a wave of patriotic fervor, the Assembly announced that the feudal regime was "entirely destroyed" and ended the privileges of the upper classes. Later that month, it accepted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen , a landmark human rights document that championed the general will of the people, separation of powers, and the idea that human rights were universal. These two achievements are considered the most important and longest-lasting accomplishments of the Revolution.

A People's Monarchy: 1789-1791

As the National Assembly slowly drafted its constitution, Louis XVI was sulking in Versailles. He refused to consent to the August Decrees and the Declaration of the Rights of Man, demanding instead that the deputies include his right to an absolute veto in the new constitution. This enraged the people of Paris, and on 5 October 1789, a crowd of 7,000 people, mostly market women , marched from Paris to Versailles in the pouring rain, demanding bread and that the king accept the Assembly's reforms. Louis XVI had no choice but to accept and was forced to leave his isolation at Versailles and accompany the women back to Paris, where he was installed in the Tuileries Palace . Known as the Women's March on Versailles , or the October Days, this insurrection led to the end of the Ancien Régime and the beginning of France's short-lived constitutional monarchy.

The next year and a half marked a relatively calm phase of the Revolution; indeed, many people believed the Revolution was over. Louis XVI agreed to adopt the Assembly's reforms and even appeared reconciled to the Revolution by accepting a tricolor cockade. The Assembly, meanwhile, began to rule France, adopting its own ill-fated currency, the assignat , to help tackle the outstanding debt. Having declawed the nobility, it now turned its attentions toward the Catholic Church. The Civil Constitution of the Clergy , issued on 12 July 1790, forced all clerics to swear oaths to the new constitution and put their loyalty to the state before their loyalty to the Pope in Rome . At the same time, church lands were confiscated by the Assembly, and the papal city of Avignon was reintegrated into France. These attacks on the church alienated many from the Revolution, including the pious Louis XVI himself.

Sign up for our free weekly email newsletter!

14 July 1790, the first anniversary of the Bastille, saw a massive celebration on the Champ de Mars . Led by the Marquis de Lafayette , the Festival of the Federation was meant to mark the unity of the newly liberated French people under the magnanimous rule of their citizen-king. But the king had other plans. A year later, on the night of 20-21 June 1791, he and his family left the Tuileries in disguise and attempted to escape France in what has become known as the Flight to Varennes . They were quickly caught and returned to Paris, but their attempt had irrevocably destroyed any trust the people had in the monarchy. Calls began to mount for Louis XVI to be deposed, while some even began to seriously demand a French Republic. The issue divided the Jacobin Club, a political society where revolutionaries gathered to discuss their goals and agendas. Moderate members loyal to the idea of constitutional monarchy split to form the new Feuillant Club, while the remaining Jacobins were further radicalized.

On 17 July 1791, a crowd of demonstrators gathered on the Champ de Mars to demand the king's deposition. They were fired on by the Paris National Guard, commanded by Lafayette , resulting in 50 deaths. The Champ de Mars Massacre sent republicans on the run, giving the Feuillants enough time to push through their constitution, which centered around a weakened, liberal monarchy. On 30 September 1791, the new Legislative Assembly met, but despite the long-awaited constitution, the Revolution was more divided than ever.

Birth of a Republic: 1792-1793

Many deputies of the Legislative Assembly formed themselves into two factions: the more conservative Feuillants sat on the right of the Assembly president, while the radical Jacobins sat to his left, giving rise to the left/right political spectrum still used today. After the monarchs of Austria and Prussia threatened to destroy the Revolution in the Declaration of Pillnitz , a third faction split off from the Jacobins, demanding war as the only way to preserve the Revolution. This war party, later known as the Girondins, quickly dominated the Legislative Assembly, which voted to declare war on Austria on 20 April 1792. This began the French Revolutionary Wars (1792-1802), as the old regimes of Europe , feeling threatened by the radical revolutionaries, joined together in a coalition against France.

Initially, the war went disastrously for the French. The summer of 1792 saw a Prussian army accompanied by French royalist émigrés slowly march toward Paris. In August, the invaders issued the Brunswick Manifesto, threatening to destroy Paris should any harm come to the French royal family. This threat sent the people of Paris into a hysterical panic that led to the Storming of the Tuileries Palace on 10 August 1792, the insurrection that finally toppled the monarchy. Still fearful of counter-revolutionary enemies who might aid the Prussians, Paris mobs then invaded the city's prisons and murdered over 1,100 people in the September Massacres .

On 20 September 1792, a French army finally halted the Prussian invasion at the miraculous Battle of Valmy . The next day, the jubilated Legislative Assembly officially proclaimed the French Republic. The later French Republican calendar dated itself from this moment, which was seen as the ultimate accomplishment of humankind. The Assembly was disbanded, and a National Convention was convened to draft a new constitution. One of the Convention's first tasks was to decide the fate of the deposed Louis XVI; ultimately, he was tried and guillotined on 21 January 1793, his family kept imprisoned in the Tower of the Temple until the trial and execution of Marie Antoinette that October. The trial and execution of Louis XVI shocked Europe, causing Great Britain, Spain, and the Dutch Republic to enter the coalition against France.

Reign of Terror: 1793-1794

After the decline of the Feuillants, the Girondins became the Revolution's moderate faction. In early 1793, they were opposed by a group of radical Jacobins called the Mountain, primarily led by Maximilien Robespierre , Georges Danton , and Jean- Paul Marat. The Girondins and the Mountain maintained a bitter rivalry until the fall of the Girondins on 2 June 1793, when roughly 80,000 sans-culottes , or lower-class revolutionaries, and National Guards surrounded the Tuileries Palace, demanding the arrests of leading Girondins. This was accomplished, and the Girondin leaders were later executed.

The Mountain's victory deeply divided the nation. The assassination of Marat by Charlotte Corday occurred amidst pockets of civil war that threatened to unravel the infant republic, such as the War in the Vendée and the federalist revolts . To quell this dissent and halt the advance of coalition armies, the Convention approved the creation of the Committee of Public Safety , which quickly assumed near total executive power. Through measures such as mass conscription, the Committee brutally crushed the civil wars and checked the foreign armies before turning its attention to unmasking domestic traitors and counter-revolutionary agents. The ensuing Reign of Terror, lasting from September 1793-July 1794 resulted in hundreds of thousands of arrests, 16,594 executions by guillotine, and tens of thousands of additional deaths. Aristocrats and clergymen were executed alongside former revolutionary leaders and thousands of ordinary people.

Robespierre accumulated almost dictatorial powers during this period. Attempting to curtail the Revolution's rampant dechristianization, he implemented the deistic Cult of the Supreme Being to ease France into his vision of a morally pure society. His enemies saw this as an attempt to claim total power and, fearing for their lives, decided to overthrow him; the fall of Maximilien Robespierre and his allies on 28 July 1794 brought the Terror to an end, and is considered by some historians to mark the decline of the Revolution itself.

Thermidorians & the Directory: 1794-1799

Robespierre's execution was followed by the Thermidorian Reaction , a period of conservative counter-revolution in which the vestiges of Jacobin rule were erased. The Jacobin Club itself was permanently closed in November 1794, and a Jacobin attempt to retake power in the Prairial Uprising of 1795 was crushed. The Thermidorians defeated a royalist uprising on 13 Vendémiaire (5 October 1795) before adopting the Constitution of Year III (1795) and transitioning into the French Directory , the government that led the Republic in the final years of the Revolution.

Meanwhile, French armies had succeeded in pushing back the coalition's forces, defeating most coalition nations by 1797. The star of the war was undoubtedly General Napoleon Bonaparte, whose brilliant Italian campaign of 1796-97 catapulted him to fame. On 9 November 1799, Bonaparte took control of the government in the Coup of 18 Brumaire, bringing an end to the unpopular Directory. His ascendency marked the end of the French Revolution and the beginning of the Napoleonic era.

Subscribe to topic Related Content Books Cite This Work License

Bibliography

• Andress, David. The Terror . Time Warner Books Uk, 2005.
• Blanning, T. C. W. The French Revolutionary Wars, 1787-1802 . Hodder Education Publishers, 1996.
• Carlyle, Thomas & Sorensen, David R. & Kinser, Brent E. & Engel, Mark. The French Revolution . Oxford University Press, 2019.
• Davidson, Ian. The French Revolution. Pegasus Books, 2018.
• Doyle, William. The Oxford History of the French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 2018.
• Francois Furet & Mona Ozouf & Arthur Goldhammer. A Critical Dictionary of the French Revolution. Belknap Press: An Imprint of Harvard University Press, 1989.
• Fraser, Antonia. Marie Antoinette. Anchor, 2002.
• Lefebvre, Georges & Palmer, R. R. & Palmer, R. R. & Tackett, Timothy. The Coming of the French Revolution . Princeton University Press, 2015.
• Lefebvre, Georges & White, John Albert. The Great Fear of 1789. Princeton University Press, 1983.
• Mikaberidze, Alexander. The Napoleonic Wars. Oxford University Press, 2020.
• Palmer, R. R. & Woloch, Isser. Twelve Who Ruled. Princeton University Press, 2017.
• Roberts, Andrew. Napoleon. Penguin Books, 2015.
• Schama, Simon. Citizens. Vintage, 1990.
• Scurr, Ruth. Fatal Purity. Holt Paperbacks, 2007.
• Tocqueville, Alexis de & Bevan, Gerald & Bevan, Gerald. The Ancien Régime and the Revolution . Penguin Classics, 2008.

About the Author

Translations

We want people all over the world to learn about history. Help us and translate this definition into another language!

Questions & Answers

What was the french revolution, what were 3 main causes of the french revolution, what began the french revolution, what ended the french revolution, what are some important events of the french revolution, related content.

Thermidorian Reaction

Georges Danton

Maximilien Robespierre

Fall of Maximilien Robespierre

Power Struggles in the Reign of Terror

Cult of the Supreme Being

Free for the world, supported by you.

World History Encyclopedia is a non-profit organization. For only $5 per month you can become a member and support our mission to engage people with cultural heritage and to improve history education worldwide.

Recommended Books

Cite This Work

Mark, H. W. (2023, January 12). French Revolution . World History Encyclopedia . Retrieved from https://www.worldhistory.org/French_Revolution/

Chicago Style

Mark, Harrison W.. " French Revolution ." World History Encyclopedia . Last modified January 12, 2023. https://www.worldhistory.org/French_Revolution/.

Mark, Harrison W.. " French Revolution ." World History Encyclopedia . World History Encyclopedia, 12 Jan 2023. Web. 18 Aug 2024.

License & Copyright

Submitted by Harrison W. Mark , published on 12 January 2023. The copyright holder has published this content under the following license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike . This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon this content non-commercially, as long as they credit the author and license their new creations under the identical terms. When republishing on the web a hyperlink back to the original content source URL must be included. Please note that content linked from this page may have different licensing terms.

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Quick Facts
• The Ardennes
• The Massif Central
• The Massif Armoricain
• The Paris Basin
• The Flanders Plain
• The Alsace Plain
• The Loire plains
• The Aquitaine Basin
• Pyrenees, Jura, and Alps
• The southern plains
• The Seine system
• The Loire system
• The Garonne system
• The Rhône system
• The Rhine system
• The smaller rivers and the lakes
• The oceanic region
• The continental region
• The Mediterranean region
• Animal life
• Ethnic groups
• Mediterranean
• Postwar transformation
• Urban settlement
• Population history
• Immigration
• Population structure
• Population distribution
• Fruits and wine making
• Dairying and livestock
• Agribusiness
• Industrial trends
• Branches of manufacturing
• Banking and insurance
• The stock exchange
• Foreign investment
• Civil service
• Labour and taxation
• Air transport
• Telecommunications
• The genesis of the 1958 constitution
• The dual executive system
• The role of the president
• Parliamentary composition and functions
• The role of referenda
• The role of the Constitutional Council
• The régions
• The départements
• The communes
• The overseas territories
• The judiciary
• Administrative courts
• Political process
• Armed forces
• Police services
• Social security and health
• Wages and the cost of living
• Primary and secondary education
• Higher education
• Other features
• Cultural milieu
• Daily life and social customs
• Painting and sculpture
• Architecture
• Photography
• Administrative bodies
• Museums and monuments
• Sports and recreation
• Television and radio
• Geographic-historical scope
• Gaul under the high empire ( c. 50 bce – c. 250 ce )
• Gaul under the late Roman Empire ( c. 250– c. 400)
• The end of Roman Gaul ( c. 400– c. 500)
• Early Frankish period
• Gaul and Germany at the end of the 5th century
• Frankish expansion
• The conversion of Clovis
• The conquest of Burgundy
• The conquest of southern Germany
• The shrinking of the frontiers and peripheral areas
• The parceling of the kingdom
• Chlotar II and Dagobert I
• The hegemony of Neustria
• Austrasian hegemony and the rise of the Pippinids
• Charles Martel
• The conquests
• The restoration of the empire
• The Treaty of Verdun
• The kingdoms created at Verdun
• Germans and Gallo-Romans
• Social classes
• Diffusion of political power
• The central government
• Local institutions
• The development of institutions in the Carolingian age
• Frankish fiscal law
• Institutions
• Monasticism
• Religious discipline and piety
• The influence of the church on society and legislation
• Merovingian literature and arts
• Carolingian literature and arts
• French society in the early Middle Ages
• Principalities north of the Loire
• The principalities of the south
• The monarchy
• Economic expansion
• Urban prosperity
• Rural society
• The age of cathedrals and Scholasticism
• Culture and learning
• Philip Augustus
• Later Capetians
• Foreign relations
• John the Good
• Charles VII
• Governmental reforms
• Military reforms
• Regrowth of the French monarchy
• Economic distress
• Culture and art
• Military and financial organization
• The growth of a professional bureaucracy
• The age of the Reformation
• The Wars of Religion
• Political ideology
• The development of central government
• Louis’s religious policy
• Absolutism of Louis
• Foreign affairs
• French culture in the 17th century
• The social order of the ancien régime
• Monarchy and church
• Commitment to modernization
• Agricultural patterns
• Industrial production
• The Enlightenment
• The influence of Montesquieu and Rousseau
• The historical debate
• Foreign policy and financial crisis
• Domestic policy and reform efforts
• King and parlements

The causes of the French Revolution

• The juridical revolution
• Parisian revolt
• Peasant insurgencies
• The abolition of feudalism
• Restructuring France
• Sale of national lands
• Religious tensions
• Political tensions
• The second revolution
• A republic in crisis
• Girondins and Montagnards
• The Reign of Terror
• The Jacobin dictatorship
• The Army of the Republic
• The Thermidorian Reaction
• Sister republics
• Alienation and coups
• The Consulate
• Loss of political freedom
• Religious policy
• Napoleonic nobility
• The civil code
• Campaigns and conquests, 1797–1807
• The Grand Empire
• The Continental System
• Conscription
• Napoleon and the Revolution
• Louis XVIII, 1815–24
• Charles X, 1824–30
• The revolution of 1830
• The July Monarchy
• The revolution of 1848
• The Second Republic, 1848–52
• The authoritarian years
• The liberal years
• The Franco-German War
• The Commune of Paris
• Attempts at a restoration
• The constitution of the Third Republic
• Republican factions
• Opportunist control
• The Dreyfus Affair
• Foreign policy
• The prewar years
• World War I
• German reparations
• Financial crisis
• Collective security
• Internal conflict on the left
• The Great Depression and political crises
• German aggressions
• Cultural and scientific attainments
• The Vichy government
• The Resistance
• Constitution of the Fourth Republic
• Political and social changes
• Colonial independence movements
• The Fifth Republic
• France after de Gaulle
• Mitterrand’s first term
• Mitterrand’s second term
• The Chirac administration
• The Sarkozy administration
• The 2012 presidential campaign
• The Hollande administration
• Society since 1940
• The cultural scene
• Major rulers of France

• Who was René Descartes?
• What is René Descartes known for?
• What was René Descartes’s family like?
• How did René Descartes die?
• Who was Voltaire?

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Social Science LibreTexts - France and Cardinal Richelieu
• Central Intelligence Agency - The World Factbook - France
• Jewish Virtual Library - France Virtual Jewish History Tour
• France - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• France - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

In an immediate sense, what brought down the ancien régime was its own inability to change or, more simply, to pay its way. The deeper causes for its collapse are more difficult to establish. One school of interpretation maintains that French society under the ancien régime was rent by class war. This position implies that the French Revolution revolved around issues of class; it has led to the class analysis of prerevolutionary society as well as to the class analysis of the opposing Revolutionary factions of Girondins and Montagnards and, more generally, to what the historian Alfred Cobban called “the social interpretation of the French Revolution.”

In keeping with this interpretation, Marxist historians from the 1930s to the ’70s emphasized that the French 18th-century bourgeoisie had assumed a distinct position in French society in that it was in control of commerce, banking, and industry. Revisionist historians in the 1980s, however, responded that the bourgeoisie had no monopoly in these sectors; nobles were also heavily involved in foreign trade , in banking, and in some of the most modern industries, such as coal mining and chemicals.

Recent News

Most historians today argue that, on balance, it was becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish clearly between the nobility and the bourgeoisie. Like most nobles, wealthy French non-nobles were landlords and even owners of seigneuries, which were bought and sold before 1789 like any other commodity. Although one can speak of a secularized “bourgeois” ethic of thrift and prudence that had come into its own, supporters of this ethic, as of the Enlightenment ethic, were both noble and non-noble.

There were two areas, however, in which the nobility enjoyed important institutional privileges: the upper ranks of the army and the clergy were, in the main, aristocratic preserves and had become more so in the 1780s. Henri de Boulainvilliers , in his posthumous essays of 1732 on the nobility of France, had even developed a wholly fraudulent but widely praised theory of noble racial superiority. Thus, there were some issues on which all the bourgeoisie might unite against most of the nobility. But such issues, it is now claimed, were relatively unimportant.

Proponents of a social explanation of the Revolution have also emphasized the role of the lower classes. As population increased during the 18th century, peasant landholdings tended to become smaller, and the gap between rich and poor grew. Although the general trend after 1715 had been one of greater overall prosperity, the 20 years before 1789 were a time of economic difficulties. The months leading up to the convening of the Estates-General coincided with the worst subsistence crisis France had suffered in many years; a spring drought was followed by a devastating hailstorm that ruined crops in much of the northern half of the country in July 1788. Distressed peasants were thus eager to take advantage of a situation in which the privileges of their landlords seemed vulnerable to attack. Urban workers, who suffered acutely when bread prices rose, as they had after Turgot’s reforms in 1775 and again after the 1788 hailstorm, also had social grievances. Some felt menaced by the development of large-scale manufacturing enterprises; others resented the regulations that, for example, prevented journeymen from setting up their own shops in competition with privileged guild masters. The process of elections to the Estates-General gave both rural and urban populations an unprecedented opportunity to articulate grievances against elite privileges that had been endemic under the ancien régime but that had not been openly voiced.

Contemporary historiography has refocused the discussion regarding the causes for the Revolution. Studying the representation of politics, the shape of revolutionary festivals, and the revolutionary cults of sacrifice and heroism, scholars have come to place the transformation of culture at the core of their discussion. What really mattered was the desanctifying of the monarchy, the new understanding of the self and the public good, and the belief that thinking individuals might seize the state and fundamentally reshape it. Other historians, by contrast, have emphasized the persistent liabilities that French political culture carried through the Enlightenment, such as the suspicion of dissent and the readiness to rely on force to subvert it.

From either of these two perspectives, it follows that the prospects of the monarchy’s survival were dim in 1788. Many government officials, it is true, were finely attuned to public opinion . The vast neorepublican canvases of Jacques-Louis David (1748–1845), such as his Oath of the Horatii (1784), glorifying traditional republicanism, were commissioned by the king’s dispenser of patronage, the marquis d’Angivillers, a friend of Turgot. Visionary architects, developing a style of Revolutionary Neoclassicism , similarly received royal commissions for new public works . Chrétien Guillaume de Lamoignon de Malesherbes (1721–94), another friend of Turgot and, like him, a minister of the crown, protected the Encyclopédistes. On balance, however, it is hard to see how the monarchy, even if it had resolved its financial problems, which it was very far from doing, could have extended this ecumenism from art to politics and social life. To do so, it would have had to transform its institutions in keeping with new conceptions regarding men’s public and private affairs and to commit itself to the rejection of the corporatist ethic in economic life. Thus, the monarchy seemed fated to failure and the stage set for revolution.

• Modern History

What were the causes of the French Revolution?

The French Revolution, which spanned from 1789 to 1799, was both an uprising against the monarchy, as well as a profound social and political upheaval that reshaped the very fabric of French society.

The streets of Paris and the halls of Versailles echoed with calls for liberty, equality, and fraternity, as the old order crumbled, and a new one emerged from its ashes.

But what led to this monumental shift? 

Here are the five most important causes:

1. Monumental social inequalities

The social fabric of pre-revolutionary France was characterized by deep-seated inequalities that played a significant role in fermenting discontent.

Central to this was the Estates System, a socio-political structure that divided the French population into three distinct groups.

The First Estate consisted of the clergy, both high-ranking bishops who lived lavishly and parish priests who often shared the struggles of the common people.

The Second Estate was the nobility, a group that enjoyed vast privileges, from tax exemptions to exclusive rights to high offices.

Then there was the Third Estate, a diverse group that encompassed everyone from affluent bourgeoisie merchants to struggling peasants.

Despite representing over 95% of the population, the Third Estate had minimal political power and bore the brunt of the nation's tax burdens.

Prominent figures like Abbé Sieyès raised the question of this glaring disparity.

In his influential pamphlet "What is the Third Estate?", Sieyès argued that the Third Estate was the true representative of the French nation and should no longer be subservient to the outdated privileges of the clergy and nobility.

His writings resonated with a growing sentiment that the old social order was unjust and needed reform.

Adding to the social tensions were the conditions in rapidly growing urban centers like Paris.

The city saw an influx of peasants seeking better fortunes, only to be met with overcrowded living conditions, inadequate sanitation, and rampant unemployment.

This urban proletariat became a hotbed for revolutionary fervor, especially as they encountered the stark contrast between their hardships and the opulence of the aristocracy.

2. Severe economic strains

The economic landscape of late 18th-century France was fraught with challenges that played a pivotal role in setting the stage for the Revolution.

At the heart of these challenges was the nation's crippling financial crisis. France had accumulated a staggering national debt, a significant portion of which was due to its involvement in foreign wars, most notably the Seven Years' War and the American Revolutionary War .

These military endeavors, while driven by geopolitical ambitions, drained the royal treasury.

Compounding the financial woes was the country's outdated and inefficient system of taxation.

The burden of taxation fell disproportionately on the Third Estate, which comprised the vast majority of the population, including peasants, artisans, and the burgeoning bourgeoisie.

This was in stark contrast to the First and Second Estates—the clergy and the nobility—who enjoyed extensive tax exemptions and privileges.

The "taille," a direct land tax primarily on the peasantry and non-nobles, and the "gabelle," a tax on salt, were particularly onerous.

Such regressive taxation exacerbated social inequalities and fueled resentment against the privileged classes.

Yet, the economic strain was not limited to high taxes and war debts. France also grappled with a series of crop failures in the years leading up to the Revolution.

Poor harvests, particularly in 1788, led to food shortages and skyrocketing bread prices.

Bread, a staple of the French diet, became unaffordable for many, leading to widespread famine and discontent.

The subsistence crisis, as it's often termed, heightened the economic despair.

The urban proletariat, or the working-class city dwellers, faced rising unemployment and diminishing wages, further deepening the economic divide.

3. Catastrophic political mismanagement

The Bourbon monarchy, under King Louis XVI, epitomized the challenges of an absolutist regime grappling with modernizing pressures.

Louis, while well-intentioned, lacked the decisiveness and political acumen necessary to navigate the complex socio-economic and political challenges of his era.

His frequent vacillations on key issues, coupled with an inability to push through necessary reforms, left the monarchy appearing both weak and out of touch.

One of the most glaring examples of political mismanagement was the monarchy's handling of the financial crisis.

While the need for fiscal reform was evident, Louis XVI's attempts were often half-hearted and lacked follow-through.

His appointment of finance ministers like Jacques Necker and Charles Alexandre de Calonne showcased the inconsistency in the approach.

While Necker was popular among the public and advocated for greater transparency in royal finances, Calonne sought to implement controversial tax reforms that further alienated the nobility and the broader population.

The convocation of the Estates-General in 1789, after a hiatus of nearly 150 years, was a desperate attempt to address the financial crisis and seek broader consensus on reforms.

However, it quickly became mired in debates over representation and voting procedures.

The Third Estate, representing the vast majority of the French population, felt marginalized as they were granted the same representation as the much smaller First and Second Estates.

Their demands for "double representation" and voting by head, rather than by estate, were met with resistance, leading to further political deadlock.

4. Inspirational new thinkers

The Enlightenment, a movement that championed reason, individual rights, and secularism, profoundly influenced the minds of the French populace and set the ideological groundwork for the Revolution.

Philosophers and writers began to question the established order, challenging the divine right of kings, the privileges of the nobility, and the unchecked power of the Church.

Voltaire, with his biting wit and criticism of the Church and the monarchy, became a beacon for those advocating for a more rational and just society.

His works, such as "Candide," ridiculed the prevailing societal norms and highlighted the injustices of the Ancien Régime.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his seminal work "The Social Contract," introduced the revolutionary idea that authority should be derived from the consent of the governed, rather than from divine mandate.

He posited that individuals had natural rights and that society's structures should reflect a social contract that respects these rights.

Another influential figure was Denis Diderot, who, along with Jean le Rond d'Alembert, embarked on the ambitious project of compiling "Encyclopédie."

This monumental work sought to catalog all human knowledge and, in the process, disseminated Enlightenment ideas to a broader audience.

The "Encyclopédie" not only challenged traditional sources of authority but also promoted scientific inquiry, secularism, and social progress.

5. External pressures on France

While the roots of the French Revolution were deeply embedded in the nation's own socio-political fabric, external influences played a non-trivial role in shaping the course of events.

One of the most significant of these influences was the American Revolution.

The struggle of the American colonies for independence from British rule resonated deeply with many in France, who saw parallels between the American fight for liberty and their own aspirations for freedom and equality.

France's involvement in the American Revolutionary War was not merely ideological; it was also military and financial.

The French government provided crucial support to the American rebels, with troops, naval forces, and funds.

Figures like the Marquis de Lafayette became symbols of this Franco-American alliance.

Lafayette, who fought alongside George Washington, returned to France imbued with revolutionary fervor and ideas about republicanism and human rights.

His experiences and those of other French soldiers who fought in America served as a conduit for the transmission of revolutionary ideals back to France.

However, the support for the American Revolution came at a significant cost.

The financial strain of the war exacerbated France's already precarious economic situation, pushing it further into debt.

While the war ended in a victory for the American colonies, the financial repercussions for France were profound and contributed to the economic crises that precipitated the French Revolution.

Beyond the American Revolution, the broader geopolitical landscape of Europe also influenced events in France.

The constant rivalries and wars with other European powers, especially Britain, drained French resources and often dictated domestic policy decisions.

The diplomatic isolation France faced in the years leading up to the Revolution, coupled with the fear of counter-revolutionary interventions from neighboring monarchies, further heightened the sense of urgency and paranoia during the revolutionary period.

The final match which lit the fire of revolution

While the French Revolution was the culmination of years of mounting tensions and systemic issues, certain immediate events acted as catalysts, propelling France into a decade of upheaval.

One of the most symbolic of these triggers was the storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789.

The Bastille, a fortress-prison in Paris, had come to represent the tyranny and oppression of the Bourbon monarchy.

Its storming by a group of Parisian citizens was not just a quest to secure arms but also a powerful statement against the old regime.

The fall of the Bastille marked the point of no return, signaling the beginning of widespread revolt.

In the weeks leading up to this event, the Estates-General, convened in May 1789, had become mired in disputes over representation and voting.

The Third Estate, frustrated by the deadlock and feeling marginalized, took the audacious step of declaring themselves the National Assembly on June 17, 1789.

This self-proclamation was a direct challenge to the authority of the king and the established order.

The subsequent locking of the Salle des États, whether by design or accident, was perceived as a royal attempt to suppress the newly formed National Assembly.

This led to the famous Tennis Court Oath on June 20, where members of the Third Estate vowed not to disband until a new constitution for France was established.

King Louis XVI's response to these events was ambivalent at best. His dismissal of the popular finance minister, Jacques Necker, on July 11, 1789, was seen as a move against the reformist faction and further inflamed public sentiment.

The subsequent mass demonstrations and the formation of the National Guard under the Marquis de Lafayette underscored the shifting power dynamics.

In essence, the summer of 1789 was a whirlwind of events, each building on the other, that transformed the simmering discontent into an open revolution.

These immediate triggers, set against the backdrop of broader economic, social, and political issues, were the final push that plunged France into a revolutionary era.

What do you need help with?

Download ready-to-use digital learning resources.

Copyright © History Skills 2014-2024.

Contact  via email

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

A study guide by Swansea University Historians

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

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

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

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

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

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

La Grande Nation: France as a Great Power

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

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

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

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

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

The Weaknesses of the Eighteenth-Century French State  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Military and Diplomatic Defeats

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

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

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

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

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

The Enlightenment and the Rise of the Public Sphere

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Constitutional Crisis

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Fall of the Bastille and the October Days

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Conclusion

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

Study History for a Degree

What Caused the French Revolution? Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Causes of the french revolution, works cited.

The French revolution that took place in 1789-1799 was a period of political and social upheaval in France. However, the revolution did not only affect France alone but also the whole of Europe (Lefebvre 6). The revolution brought about the modern revolution- an idea of a plan that can transform the world. The revolution ushered in modernity after the collapse of the old regime that was characterized by legal inequality, feudal economy and absolutist politics.

The revolution began after a meeting of the Estates-Generals on 5 May 1989, which was attended by the Third Estates (merchants, peasants, professional men and artisans) representatives who felt uncomfortable with the old regime governance that exempted clergies and the rich from paying taxes. The meeting then changed its name to National Assembly after the nobles and clergies joined.

The main aim of this meeting was to give France a constitution that called for liberty, equality, and fraternity. After the King realized of the meeting he kicked them out of their usual meeting place (Lefebvre 8). On 20 June 1789, they changed their meeting venue to the Oath of Tennis Court.

The King further tried to remove them from the hall, which sparked out the revolution. On July 14, the revolution became radical after a mob stormed and captured the Bastille, the old royal prison in Paris. The radicals further spread from Paris to other districts in the country. In this paper, the focus is in support of John Locke’s statement that “if man’s rights are deprived the people affected have the right to overthrow the government and establish a new one.”

Royal Absolutism: In 18 th century, France had an absolute monarch that was applicable in both theory and practice. In reality, France rather than having a parliament had Estate General that was composed of members from each of the three estates (Cobban 3). This Estate General was semi-representative and ineffective as it last convened in 1641. France experienced a bloated bureaucratic administration from the government officials.

The bureaucracy overgrew and by 1750, it was very large, inefficient and corrupt. The officials had acquired properties illegally, bought and sold government offices for their own benefits. In addition, there was no unified system of law in France as every region had its parliament that determined the law. The French revolution implemented a single and unified system of law.

Finances: Lack of legislature made the French monarchy to have an overall control of the finances. The king managed the countries fiscal year and by 1789, the government of France was so bankrupt that it could not settle its debts.

In addition, the level of debts had increased in the past years due to the involvement of France in many wars in the late 17 th century and early 18 th century (Cobban 1946). Further, the exemption of a number of social groups from payment of taxes led to the government’s failure to raise enough finances. The rich, the clergy and the church, universities and the cities were exempted from paying taxes.

Enlightenment: During the 18 th century, the French society started awareness of the happenings in their nations. The third class that was paying taxes while the first and second did not, became aware of the inequality and the effects it had on them (Cobban 6).

In addition, the need for women to take part in elections and decision-making in the country also brought about the rise of revolution. Further, the realization of the third class that all men were born to be equal in paying taxes, enjoying equal rights, owning properties, and being elected to representatives contributed to the rise of the revolution.

The American Revolution : In 1775-1783, America experienced a revolution and the government of France sent its troops and navy to help the rebelling colonists. Its troops had contacts with the Americans, which is believed to be a source of exchange of revolutionary ideas.

These troops further spread the ideas to the French citizens after returning to France (Cobban 5). In addition, the formation of democratic republic in 1780s attracted attention of various writers who wrote about the America and predicted the trend to follow in European countries. Those who read the books became enlightened and preached the information of steady and inevitable progress of man’s intellectual nature and morals, which caused more tensions in France.

Food Scarcity: Years before the revolution, France experienced a harsh climate conditions that led to poor harvests (Cobban 5). This consequently led to the rise of hunger and high prices of bread in France. In addition, the government was unable to deal with the situation due to poor means of transport that hindered the transportation of food from rural areas with plenty foods to the hunger stricken and populated areas. This led to destabilization of the French Citizens, which eventually led to the revolution.

The causes of the French revolution were due to inefficiency of the old regime of governance of the French Monarchy. This made the monarchy to violate human rights and needs. To look for an alternative means for a government that would cater and have the concerns of the French society as the priority, the society had to kick out the old regime and form a new modern regime.

This gives support and concurs with John Locke statement “if man’s rights are deprived they have the right to overthrow the government and establish a new one.”

Cobban, Alfred. Historians and the Causes of French Revolution . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1946. Print

Lefebvre, Georges. The French Revolution: From its Origin to 1793 . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962. Print.

• Absolutism in French Revolution
• Major social groups in France prior to the French revolution
• French Revolution in World History
• "Travels During the Years 1787, 1788, & 1789" by Arthur Young
• History of French Revolution
• History of the English Population During the 19th Century
• The Renaissance and Its Cultural, Political and Economic Influence
• The Rise of Democracy
• Article Summary and Critique
• English Imperialism in the Caribbean and Africa
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, June 10). What Caused the French Revolution? https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolution/

"What Caused the French Revolution?" IvyPanda , 10 June 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolution/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'What Caused the French Revolution'. 10 June.

IvyPanda . 2018. "What Caused the French Revolution?" June 10, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolution/.

1. IvyPanda . "What Caused the French Revolution?" June 10, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolution/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "What Caused the French Revolution?" June 10, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-french-revolution/.

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

• You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
• You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
• You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
• A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

Causes of French Revolution: Political, Social and Economic Causes

Causes of French Revolution: Political, Social and Economic Causes!

The three main causes of French revolution are as follows: 1. Political Cause 2. Social Cause 3. Economic Cause.

1. Political Cause:

During the eighteen the Century France was the centre of autocratic monarchy. The French Monarchs had unlimited power and they declared themselves as the “Representative of God”.

Image Source: 2.bp.blogspot.com/_8uW1gTbUKfs/TRarqf5sauI/AAAAAAAAAWE/atK90o6ZfTk/s1600/French-Revolution-Logo-FINAL.jpg

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Louis XIV was the exponent of this view. The French Monarchs engaged themselves in luxurious and extravagance at the royal court of Versailles. They enjoyed unlimited power. By the Letter de Catchet, they arrested any person at any time and imprisoned them. They paid no attention towards their subjects.

Louis XIV (1643-1715) of the Bourbon Dynasty was a powerful monarch. He was an efficient, hard-working and confident ruler. He participated in many wars. Louis XIV’s concept of unlimited royal power is revealed by his famous remarks, “I am the State”.

Louis XV (1715-1774) succeeded Louix XIV He was a ‘butterfly monarch’. His defective foreign policy weakened the economic condition of France. Louis XV fought the Seven Years War against England which brought nothing for France. France became bankrupt due to over expenditure in wars and luxury. He realised it later on. Before his death he cried-‘After me the Deluge’.

After Louis XV, Louis XVI (1774-1793) ascended the throne of France. During that period, the economic condition of France became weak. Louis XVI was an innocent and simple man. But he was influenced by his queen Marie Antoinette who always interfered in the state affairs.

Out of frustration he uttered-“Oh! What a burden of mine and they have taught me nothing.” Marie Antoinette was the daughter of Marie Theresa, the Austrian Empress. She always felt proud as she was the daughter of Austrain Empress. She always enjoyed luxurious and extravagant life. She sowed seed of the French Revolution. Thus, the autrocratic monarchy, defective administration, extravagant expenditure formed the political cause of the French Revolution.

2. Social Cause:

The Social condition of France during the eighteenth century was very miserable. The then French Society was divided into three classes— the Clergy, Nobles and Common People.

The Clergy belonged to the First Estate. The Clergy was sub­divided into two groups i.e. the higher clergy and the lower clergy. The higher clergy occupied the top position in the society. They managed the churches, monasteries and educational institutions of France. They did not pay any tax to the monarch.

They exploited the common people in various ways. The higher clergy lived in the midst of scandalous luxury and extravagance. The common people had a strong hatred towards the higher clergy. On the other hand, the lower clergy served the people in true sense of the term and they lived a very miserable life.

The Nobility was regarded as the Second Estate in the French Society. They also did not pay any tax to the king. The Nobility was also sub divided into two groups-the Court nobles and the provincial nobles. The court nobles lived in pomp and luxury. They did not pay any heed towards the problems of the common people of their areas.

On the other hand, the provincial nobles paid their attention towards the problems of the people. But they did not enjoy the same privileges as the Court nobles enjoyed. The Third Estate formed a heterogenous class. The farmers, cobblers, sweepers and other lower classes belonged to this class. The condition of the farmers was very miserable.

They paid the taxes like Taille, Tithe and Gable. Inspite of this, the clergies and the nobles employed them in their fields in curve. The Bourgeoisie formed the top most group of the Third Estate. The doctors, lawyers, teachers, businessmen, writers and philosophers belonged to this class. They had the wealth and social status. But the French Monarch, influenced by the clergies and nobles, ranked them as the Third Estate.

So they influenced the people for revolution. They aroused the common people about their rights. Thus, the common people became rebellious. The lower Clergies and the provincial nobles also joined their hands with the common people along with the bourgeoisie. So the French Revolution is also known as the ‘Bourgeoisie Revolution’.

3. Economic Cause:

The economic condition of France formed another cause for the outbreak of the French Revolution. The economic condition of France became poor due to the foreign wars of Louis XIV, the seven years War of Louis XV and other expensive wars. During the reign period of Louis XVI, the royal treasury became empty as extravagant expenses of his queen Marie Antoinette.

To get rid of this condition. Louis XVI appointed Turgot as his Finance Minister in 1774. Turgot tried to minimise the expenditure of the royal court. He also advised the king to impose taxes on every classes of the society. But due to the interference of Queen Marie Antoinette, Louis XVI dismissed Turgot.

Then Necker was appointed as the Finance Minister in 1776. He published a report on the income and expenditure of the State in order to arouse the people. But he was also dismissed by the king.

The next person who was appointed by the King as the Finance Minister of France in 1783 was Callone. He adapted the policy of borrowing in order to meet the expenditure of the royal court. But due to this policy, the national debt of France increased from 300,000,000 to 600,000,000 Franks only in three years.

Then Callone proposed to impose taxes on all the classes. But he was dismissed by the king. In this situation, the king at last summoned the States General. The economic instability formed one of the most important causes of the French Revolution.

Related Articles:

• French Revolution: Influence, Causes and Course of the Revolution
• Coalitions: First, Second, Third and Fourth Coalition | French Revolution
• The Causes of French Revolution
• 6 Great Personalities of the French Revolution

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

Article Contents

• < Previous

Intellectual History and the Causes of the French Revolution

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

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

• Permissions Icon Permissions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Edelstein, The Terror of Natural Right .

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

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

Shovlin, The Political Economy , 171.

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

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

Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation , 251.

Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation , 245.

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

Smith, Nobility Reimagined , 133.

Smith, Nobility Reimagined , 265.

Smith, Nobility Reimagined , 266.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

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

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

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

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

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

• IAS Preparation
• UPSC Preparation Strategy

French Revolution

The French Revolution was a time of social and political upheaval in France and its colonies that began in 1789 and ended in 1799. Inspired by liberal and radical ideas, Its overthrow of the Monarchy influenced the decline of absolute Monarchies in other parts of Europe.

French Revolution – UPSC Notes Download PDF Here

This article will further elaborate on the effects and causes of French Revolution within the context of the Civil Services Examination .

Aspirants preparing for the IAS exam will find the article helpful in preparing for General Studies Paper 1 of UPSC.

French Revolution of 1789 – Background

The French involvement in the American Revolution of 1776 was a costly affair that left the country in a state of near bankruptcy. King Louis’s extravagant spending also did not help matters.

Empty royal coffers, poor harvests and a rise in food prices had created feelings of unrest among the poor rural and urban populace. The matter was further worsened by the imposition of taxes that provided no relief. As a result rioting, looting and general strikes became the norm

Towards the end of 1786, a universal land tax was proposed by the controller general, Charles Alexandre de Calonne. This tax reform would no longer exempt the privileged classes like the clergy and the nobility as had been the case for centuries

The King summoned the Estates-General to pass these measures. The Estates-General was an assembly that represented the French nobility clergy and the middle class. The last time the Estates-General was called was in 1614.

The date of the meeting was fixed on May 5 1789, where grievances of the three estates would be presented to the king.

To know the Difference Between Democracy and Monarchy visit the linked article.

Causes of French Revolution of 1789 

• Social – The social conditions in France in the late 18th century were extremely unequal and exploitative. The clergy and the nobility formed the first two Estates and were the most privileged classes in French society. They were exempt from payment of taxes to the State. On the other hand, the Third Estate which consisted of peasants and workers formed the majority of the population. They were burdened with excessive taxes with no political and social rights. As a result, they were extremely discontent.
• Economic – As a result of numerous wars waged by Louis XVI the State coffers were empty. The situation was made even more complex by France’s involvement in the American War of Independence and the faulty system of taxation. While the privileged classes were excused from paying taxes the Third Estate was more and more burdened with them.
• Political – The Bourbon king of France, Louis XVI was an extremely autocratic and weak-willed king who led a life of obscene luxury. This led to a lot of disenchantment among the masses who then were leading life of extreme poverty and widespread hunger.
• Intellectual – The 18th century was marked by a conscious refusal by French thinkers of the ‘Divine Rights Theory’. Philosophers like Rousseau rejected the paradigm of absolute monarchy and promulgated the doctrine of equality of man and sovereignty of people. They played a pivotal role in exposing the fault lines of the old political system, i.e. the ancien regime, and articulating the popular discontent.

Stages of French Revolution

Stage i – the meeting of the estates-general.

Despite the non-aristocratic members outnumbering the aristocrats in terms of population. Yet, they could be outvoted by the other two bodies.

Before the meeting of the Estates-General on May 5, members of the Third Estate (as the non-aristocratic class was known) began to mobilise the support of equal voting rights which would be based on head and not by status.

While the middle class believed that fiscal and judicial reform was the need of the hour, the nobles were against the idea of giving up the privileges they had enjoyed under the traditional system.

When the meeting was convened, the question over the voting process turned to open hostility between the three orders, thus the original purpose of the meeting and the authority of the king who called for it being neglected.

With further talks having failed the Third Estate met alone and formally adopted the title of National Assembly on June 17, 1789. They gathered in a nearby indoor tennis court and took the oath of office. This oath was known as the Tennis Court Oath. The members of this new assembly vowed not to disperse until reforms had been initiated.

Seeing no other option Loius XVI had the absorb the three assemblies into the new order.

You can find out the difference between constitution and law by visiting the linked article

Stage II – The French Revolution Begins

The National Assembly continued to meet at Versailles. In the meantime, fear and violence had consumed Paris.

Speculations went around regarding an imminent military coup. This led to an insurgency which resulted in the taking of Bastille fortress on July 14, 1789. This event marked the beginning of the French Revolution

A wave of revolutionary fervour spread throughout the countryside, which led to a peasant revolt that saw many homes of tax collectors and burnt as well as those of the aristocrats themselves.

The rebellions caused the nobles of the country to flee en masse. This period is known as the Great Fear when the National Assembly finally dealt a fatal blow to feudalism on August 4, 1789. The old order had finally ended.

Stage III – Declaration of Rights of Man

The National Assembly adopted the Rights of Man and of the Citizen on August 4, 1789. The charter was grounded on democratic principles, drawing from the philosophical as well as political ideas of Enlightenment thinkers like Jena-Jacques Rosseau. The declaration was published on August 26, 1789

The Constitution was adopted on September 3, 1791. It symbolised a new French society where the king would have limited powers with a moderate assembly wielding the most power. This, however, was not enough for the radical elements of the assembly like Goerges Danton and Maximilien de Robespierre, who demanded a trial of the king and a more republican form of government.

The French constitution was adopted on September 3, 1791. Although it was moderate in its stance by limiting the powers of the king, it was not enough for the more radical members of the assembly like Maximilien de Robespierre who wanted Loise XVI to stand trial.

To know the difference between written and unwritten constitutions , visit the linked article

Stage IV – Reign of Terror

The revolution took a more radical turn when a group of insurgents attacked the royal residence in Paris and arrested  Louis XVI on August 10, 1792

The following month many who were accused of being the ‘enemies of the revolution’ were massacred in Paris. Some of these included the moderate voices of the revolution. The Legislative Assembly was replaced by the National Convention which proclaimed the establishment of the Republic of France and the abolition of the Monarchy.

King Louis XVI was condemned to death on January 21, 1793, and executed for treason. His wife, Marie Antoinette would follow him nine months later.

The execution of the king marked the beginning of the most violent and turbulent phase of the French Revolution – the Reign of Terror.

The National Convention was under the control of an extremist faction led by Robespierre. Under his auspices, thousands were executed for suspected treason and counter-revolutionary activities. The Reign of Terror ended with Robespierre’s execution on July 28, 1794.

Robespierre’s death began a moderate phase during which the people of France revolted against the excesses committed during the Reign of Terror . This was known as the Thermidorian Reaction.

Stage V – End of the French Revolution

On August 22, 1795, the National Convention, now composed of moderates who had survived the excesses of the Reign of Terror approved the creation of a new constitution that created France’s bicameral legislature.

The power would be in the hands of the Directory, a five-member group appointed by the parliament. Any opposition to this group was removed through the efforts of the army, now led by an upcoming and successful general, Napoleon Bonaparte.

The Directory’s rule was marked by financial crises and corruption. In addition, they had ceded much of their authority to the army that had helped them stay in power.

Finally, resentment against the Directory reached a fever pitch and a coup d’état was staged by Napoleon himself, toppling them from power. Napoleon appointed himself “first consul”. The French Revolution was over and the Napoleonic era was about the begin during which time French domination of continental Europe would become the norm.

Candidates can learn more about Napolean Bonaparte on the given link.

Significance of the French Revolution 

For all its faults, the French Revolution is highly regarded as the turning point in modern history as the rise of new ideas steeped in liberalism, enlightenment and democracy. These ideals were carried throughout Europe by French armies that fought many wars to preserve the Republic’s existence. It inspired the common folk in Europe to rise against their own Monarchs in a wave of revolutionary fervour. Although most were harshly put down, the revolutions would continue into the early years of the 19th century which saw the fall of many absolute Monarchy all over Europe.

FAQ about French Revolution

What are the main causes of french revolution, what were the impacts of french revolution.

To know more about other Government Exams , visit the linked article. For more preparation materials they can refer to the links given in the table below:

Related Links

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

IAS 2024 - Your dream can come true!

Download the ultimate guide to upsc cse preparation, register with byju's & download free pdfs, register with byju's & watch live videos.

French Revolution: Essay & Important Notes

What led to the french revolution.

At the close of the 18 th century, France had been long involved in the American Revolution and the extravagant spending of King Louis XVI led France to bankruptcy. Additionally, the common people of France were caught in a vicious cycle of poor harvest, cattle disease, and the increasing prices of bread. This led to widespread discontent and made the people revolt against the monarchy.

Prominent Events of the French Revolution

The entire period of the French Revolution saw several events. Some of the prominent ones include:

Rise of the Third Estate

The population of France had been changing for a long time and non-aristocratic members formed a major part of the Third Estate. However, the Third Estate was not provided equivalent powers and by 1798 began to mobilize for equal representation and wanted voting by head and not by status. The nobles were, however, not ready to part with their privileges and powers.

Tennis Court Oath

With increasing hostility between the three orders about the voting rights of the Third Estate, the title of the National Assembly was adopted by it at an indoor tennis court and took the Tennis Court Oath vowing not to disperse until constitutional reform had been achieved.

The Bastille and Great Fear

As the National Assembly continued its work, violence and fear had consumed the capital city. The rumors of an impending military coup further put the people of Paris in fear. Many rioters marched into the Bastille fortress to collect gunpowder and weapons and this is what marked the beginning of the French Revolution. The revolutionary fear spread far and wide and peasants looted and burned homes of tax collectors and landlords who had exploited them. This agrarian revolt is termed as Great Fear and led the National Assembly to abolish feudalism in August 1789.

Declaration of Rights

The National Assembly adopted the Declaration of Rights of Man and of the citizen in August 1789. The declaration proclaimed to replace the ancient regime with a system based on equal opportunities, freedom of speech, popular sovereignty, and representative government.

Reign of Terror

During the French Revolution, the period marred with a lot of violence was known as the Reign of Terror. It was during this period that the revolution turned radical and King Louis XVI was sent to death from treason.

Violence during the French Revolution

End of the French Revolution

In 1795, the National Convention created the first bicameral legislature of France. The executive power was given to the five-member Directory. However, the members of the Directory were involved in corruption, inefficiency as well as the financial crisis. By the 1790s, most of the members of the Directory had ceded much of their power to the military generals. In 1799, frustrated with the leadership, Napoleon Bonaparte staged a coup and abolished the Directory, and appointed himself as France’s “first consul.” This led to the end of the French Revolution.

Important Notes

• French Revolution was started to bring about political changes in France.
• The revolution aimed to create a free and sovereign France.
• There were several important events during the French Revolution that were marred by violence and revolts by peasants.

The revolution came to an end with the ascent of Napoleon Bonaparte.

Related Posts

Home Rule Movement: Essay & Important Notes

The Growth of Nationalism in Europe After the 1830s

Unification of Italy and Germany

Quit India Movement: Essay and Important Facts

10 Most Important Movements For the Independence of India

Narmada Bachao Andolan: Essay and Important Notes

Add comment cancel reply.