Lesson 3 - Long-term socio-economic causes of the French Revolution
Social causes
Economic and social factors are often combined. They provide what the great Anglo-American poet T.S. Elliot called the 'vast impersonal forces'; the gradual, seismic changes that are beyond the control of any individual. The 19th century German philosopher and revolutionary Karl Marx, spent most of life explaining why feudalism was replaced by the modern 'capitalist' world. He argued that fundamental economic changes were the key to understanding historical change; that our ideas are largely determined by the age in which we live. He once put it very simply:
‘Social relations are closely bound up with productive forces. In acquiring new productive forces men change their mode of production; and in changing their mode of production, in changing the way of earning their living, they change all their social relations. The hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill society with the industrial capitalist.’
Karl Marx, The Poverty of Philosophy 1847
Economic and social factors are often combined. They provide what the great Anglo-American poet T.S. Elliot called the 'vast impersonal forces'; the gradual, seismic changes that are beyond the control of any individual. The 19th century German philosopher and revolutionary Karl Marx, spent most of life explaining why feudalism was replaced by the modern 'capitalist' world. He argued that fundamental economic changes were the key to understanding historical change; that our ideas are largely determined by the age in which we live. He once put it very simply:
‘Social relations are closely bound up with productive forces. In acquiring new productive forces men change their mode of production; and in changing their mode of production, in changing the way of earning their living, they change all their social relations. The hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill society with the industrial capitalist.’
Karl Marx, The Poverty of Philosophy 1847
The social causes of the French revolution are best understood as the gradual breakdown in the social system that had more or less remained unchanged since medieval times. In France this was known as the system of the three estates.
|
The three estates system in theory
|
The three estates system by 1780
|
|
|
The First Estate was the Catholic clergy. They made up about 0.5% of the population but they were very rich. They owned about 10% of all the land and they also benefitted from the tithe which raised about 100 million livres a year. How much was this? Well a priest in Paris might earn 10,000 livres a year, whereas a skilled master carpenter might earn 200 livres a year. But a priest in the provinces might only earn 750 livres a year.
The Second Estate was the nobility, the aristocratic landlords. They made up about 1.5% of the population and owned 25% of the land. But as with the clergy there were significant inequalities within the nobility. For example, the Marquis de Mainvillette earned 20,000 a year but the 23 poorest noble families earned less that 500 livres.
The Third Estate was everyone else. As you can see from the diagram above, some of the Third Estate, the middle class (bankers, manufacturers, merchants) could be very wealthy. But the Third Estate also included other members of the middle class like shopkeepers and officials, as well as urban workers and landless peasants.
In brief, by the 1780s the Estates system was no longer working. The development of capitalism and the resultant growth of population and towns, gave rise to new social classes - the urban working class (proletariat) and merchants and businessmen (bourgeoisie) - who didn't fit into the traditional three estates. The population of France in 1715 had been 19 million, in 1789 it was 26 million. The bourgeoisie, in particular, were increasingly important, not least because they might be very rich but have no political power whatsoever. France remained an absolute monarchy, supported by the First and Second Estates. It was a system of mutual support which resisted change. The monarch ruled through divine right which the Catholic Church reinforced. The Church in return benefitted from the tithe, land ownership, exemption from taxation and its own legislative body to advise the king. The aristocracy provided regional governance, law and order and in return it was also exempt from many taxes, received feudal dues and had its own legislative body to advise the king. It was this social system that many French people believed needed to change.
These contemporary cartoons provide a similar message, what is it?
The Second Estate was the nobility, the aristocratic landlords. They made up about 1.5% of the population and owned 25% of the land. But as with the clergy there were significant inequalities within the nobility. For example, the Marquis de Mainvillette earned 20,000 a year but the 23 poorest noble families earned less that 500 livres.
The Third Estate was everyone else. As you can see from the diagram above, some of the Third Estate, the middle class (bankers, manufacturers, merchants) could be very wealthy. But the Third Estate also included other members of the middle class like shopkeepers and officials, as well as urban workers and landless peasants.
In brief, by the 1780s the Estates system was no longer working. The development of capitalism and the resultant growth of population and towns, gave rise to new social classes - the urban working class (proletariat) and merchants and businessmen (bourgeoisie) - who didn't fit into the traditional three estates. The population of France in 1715 had been 19 million, in 1789 it was 26 million. The bourgeoisie, in particular, were increasingly important, not least because they might be very rich but have no political power whatsoever. France remained an absolute monarchy, supported by the First and Second Estates. It was a system of mutual support which resisted change. The monarch ruled through divine right which the Catholic Church reinforced. The Church in return benefitted from the tithe, land ownership, exemption from taxation and its own legislative body to advise the king. The aristocracy provided regional governance, law and order and in return it was also exempt from many taxes, received feudal dues and had its own legislative body to advise the king. It was this social system that many French people believed needed to change.
These contemporary cartoons provide a similar message, what is it?
|
|
Economic causes
|
As capitalism developed in the 18th century, countries that had embraced the changes began to dominate world trade. This economic strength was matched by military might, the Seven Years' War was won by countries that had future orientated 'capitalist' economies. The losers incurred debt and pressure from their people for reform and modernise (see social causes below). Those who wanted to change the political system did so because they wanted a government more responsive to the needs of new businesses. But the ruling classes, the aristocratic landlords, still wanted a political system to govern in its traditional feudal interests, so they were resistant to reform. As the economic situation worsened, the state could only pay its debts by raising more from taxation. The diagram (right) shows you how bad the French government's financial situation was in 1786.
The problem with increasing the taxes (impots in French) was that it fell disproportionally on the poor. The aristocracy and the church were often exempt, or found a way of evading payment of taxes. The main tax on land or income was called the taille. Everyone paid it except the clergy and nobles. In addition, the peasants who made up about 80% of the population, still had to pay the traditional feudal taxes like the tithe or taxes to use the lord's mill or wine press etc. In addition, they still had the traditional labour service called the corvée which meant they had to give up their time to help maintain roads or bring in the lord's harvest. The average family paid about 10% and 15% of its annual earnings in tax. From the 1730s to 1789 the cost of living rose 45% in France but wages rose only 22%. Source B - A cartoon from pre-revolutionary France
|
Source A - French government finances in 1786
|
|
Activity - Part 1 Study sources A and B carefully. 1. How much was the government's debt in 1786? What did the government spend most of its income on? 2. The government has three options. a) increase taxes b) reduce spending c) borrow more. What are the potential problems with each of these policies? 3. Explain the meaning of the cartoon in Source B. How useful (OPCVL) is the source as evidence about the causes of the French Revolution? |
Activity - Part 2
Using information from this section - explanations and examples - add to the notes you made from the film last lesson on the social and economic causes of the revolution.
Using information from this section - explanations and examples - add to the notes you made from the film last lesson on the social and economic causes of the revolution.