Living The French Revolution Summary

The initial impulse of the French revolution was destructive. For those who lived through all, or even part, of these vast upheavals, the shock was overwhelming. Maximilien Robespierre was a proud disciple of the enlightenment and declared that no political writer had foreseen this revolution. Robespierre (1758-1794) was one of the leaders of the Committee of Public Safety, the effective governing body of France during the most radical phase of the revolution. The leaders of this revolution attempted, perhaps more than any other revolutionary leaders before or since, to totally transform human society in every way. (Supreme Being) Although Robespierre began with patriotic intent he still was the face of the Reign of Terror and was viewed as being a radical person.

For my report I read The French Revolution and the People by David Andress to learn what were the reasons causing the French Revolutionary War. The main thesis of the book is the known problems and reactions which affected the events and outcomes of the revolution in every stage, now everyone in France was affected by the revolution. I agree with the author’s thesis on many different levels. Since the multiple troubles the people had at that time did not originate just then but decades before. As well with constant economic pressure of all the upper classes upon them only worsened the situation. Since all the troubles and problems of the poor were never looked after, now everyone in France gets a taste of the revolution.

France during the 18th century, was a country of great progress of society and established Paris as an urban powerhouse. When talking about the causes of the French revolution, many will point to a variety of factors that they believe to have been the root cause of the ordeal. Some might focus on the growing number of the farm employees who were contracted to keep order in areas of business, some might focus on the blurring of class lines that occurred in France as new venues of income transformed every portion of society, and some might point to implementation of these unfair taxes that were placed on the people to repay debts that had been occurred in previous administrations. The ideas previously mentioned played a key role in the development of revolutionary Paris and many other topics that weren’t mentioned also played a critical role in the changing of France, but arguably the most significant of these causes was that of the desacralization of the French monarchy and how aspects such as literature and secularization would lead to the eventual downfall of the once great colonial power.

During the time of the French Revolution in 1789, there were many tensions across political, social, and economic classes. There were extreme divisions between the 3rd Estate and the 1st and 2nd Estate, leading to multiple removals and reinstatements of leaders. While many issues were involved with the French Revolution, there were three that were the most vital to it actually occurring. The three most critical causes of the French Revolution were the Enlightenment, the oppression of the Third Estate, and the general fiscal crisis of France.

During The French Revolution, many citizens (mostly the 3rd estate) were not treated the way they should have been. The French Revolution was the cause of the rebellions and difficult economic situations that many citizens had to endure. During the reign of King Louis XIV and Queen Marie Antoinette, many citizens (especially the 3rd estate) were livid about how poor they were being treated.

The first cause of the revolution to be discussed: the inequality in estates. To understand this, one must first understand the meaning of the word estate. An estate was a form of social classes made up of the first estate (clergy), the second estate (nobles), and the third estate (peasants and bourgeoisie). The problem with these estates was that the third estate was taxed much more heavily than the second estate, while the first estate was not taxed at all. This led to poverty and starvation as “the price of bread has risen above people’s ability to pay” (Doc A). Even worse for thee third estate, while they were starving and fighting to provide for their families, the first two estates were going on about their lives without concern for those dying of preventable causes.

McPhee particularly seeks to counter the judgments of Richard Cobb of the "irrelevance" of the Revolution to the lives of the great mass of people and that it was primarily an urban phenomenon, leading him to focus on rural France. McPhee also has a rural background and therefore can be sensitive to the outlook toward the inhabitants of the countryside. Based on both archival research and an impressive acquaintance with secondary sources, McPhee's research begins with the involvement of the rural cities of France in the revolution. To understand the involvement of rural citizens, McPhee undertakes a new perspective upon the revolution which battled other historical work, which McPhee addresses other historical work to be “inevitably examined the impact of the Revolution on “the people”.’ McPhee argues that the lives of social elites are much easier to access, however he reasons to address the lives of the citizens in rural cities for they “had little occasion to make unsolicited statements about their world.” The war contribution by the men of France, which are stated by McPhee to be “some 7 per cent of the population”, is seen to by McPhee to be one of conquest, which it may have been, but is made to an assertion that the war had been cause of “premature death for many and sullen disappointment for the rest.” His point is further reinforced by Historian Professor Michael Kennedy of South Carolina who asserts that the original volunteerism of the military was insufficient to deal with the many problems of France . However, Kennedy addresses an aspect that McPhee seems reluctant to discuss – the success of the military. Kennedy addresses the organisation of the Jacobin cavalry in the war which he concludes his article with to be “under a general of genius, eventually made the armies of France invincible. ” McPhee’s argument of the military endeavours

The author explained how the French Revolution starts and also how choice made by the royal government affect the old regime which moved the country into different conflicts. For example, in chapter 1 “The

The French Revolution Why was there a French Revolution? This is a question of continual interests not only to professors and philosophers, but to everybody who takes an interests in the history of the world. Genuinely, therefore, it is also a subject of much contention. The statement citing the fundamental cause of the French Revolution as the collision between a powerful rising Bourgeoisie and an ingrained aristocracy, defending its privileges it had for centuries, has great relevance in reiterating the great conflict of 1789.

When analyzing the French Revolution, the idea of political transformation and citizen involvement play a huge role in actually understanding how the revolution altered from enlightened conversations in salons to its completion, resulting from the French “voice” uniting to halt The Terror that Paris had become. Reflecting back on this event, historians still debate on the specific moment this aristocratic revolution of 1789 turned into the blood-bath radical revolution due to the momentum and contingency that each event has on the overall Revolution. The two authors, Jeremy Popkin, and Timothy Tackett, explain their historical opinion on this period of French history, in which both share a similar

to get all the power of France. It should also be said that not all the nobles

It helped me understand the core issues the economy was facing. I also found the merging of different viewpoints pivotal to my research as the combination of feudal issues with the economy provided me with a relevant historical debate. Whilst this book did not entirely focus on the economy, the relevant passages proved vital as it provided a historical debate whilst also exploring different viewpoints to the extent which economic distress was a major factor in the French revolution. I found particularly useful the analysis between the relationship of the finance ministers and economic distress and the extent to which it hindered France economically thus forming a coherent argument which I incorporated into my

In this way the privileged classes had combined to outvote the third estate, which included more than 90 percent of the population. Another cause was the fall of Bastille. The falling of the Bastille marked a turning point-attempts at reform had become a full-scale revolution. One of the causes was the economic problems of many common people had become worse, because poor weather conditions had ruined the harvest. As a result, the price of bread, the most important food of the poorer classes had increased. Violence grew in both the cities and the countryside during the spring and summer. While hungry artisans revolted in urban areas, starved peasants searched the provinces for food and work. These vagrants were rumored to be armed agents of landlords hired to destroy crops and harass the common people. Many rural peasants began to panic, known as the Great Fear. They attacked the homes of their landlords to protect local grain supplies and reducing rents on their land. Also Lewis XVI gave in so reluctantly, for example, taking months to approve the Declaration of Rights, which made hostility of the crown only increased.

Edmund Burke published the Reflections on the Revolution in France in 1790; after the Bastille had been stormed by the Paris mol. He reflects upon about how France was very chaotic. Burke opposed the values of his contemporary revolutionaries; and he predicted that the French revolution would cause problems of fear and chaos to the country. Burke also believed that the revolutionary leaders were more interested in themselves and that they wanted power, however; and really did not care about the well-being of the French people. He believed in the concepts of liberty, equality and the right for everyone; he argues that people should have the opportunity to own their private property. Furthermore, Burke viewed the revolution as a violent takeover of the government, emphasizing that citizens should not have the right to do this. He also argues about importance of tradition in that tradition is what holds society together.

Many Historians have come to the decisive conclusion that the French Revolution, an event that characterises Modern European History, has changed Europe. It was a time period that took place prior to the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, between 1789 and the late 1970s. it denotes a time period in which the French civilians were aroused unanimously in overturning the traditionalistic “institutions” such as the monarchy and the feudal system. Though the causes of such an event remain inexplicit, intriguing arguments can be drawn in considering an array of reasons that initially sparked it. One plausible assumption has been that it was merely the result of the assumed divine power that King Louis XVI had that ignited the civilians’ revolt. This is particularly acceptable, seeing that this event was draped in the uprooting ideals of Enlightenment. From this pivotal event in Modern History, Historians have gained an insightful scope of not only the evolution of peasantry and lower-societal revolts against an usurping power (i.e nobility) and in some occasions their demise, but have also gained insights into the unnoticed power of the working class. Ultimately the major havoc-inducing factor that led to the crisis of the Ancien Regime can be a derived from a state of hierarchal power. The division of class and the prestigious stance of the nobility helped rouse the