The French Revolution By Andre Castelot

During that time, the economy of France was very poor, Marie Antoinette wore his lady fashion cloth and ate meals in front of public. Her life after married to Louis XVI became very luxurious, because the only thing she knew was spending money in her entertainments. Both of them spent money from government on their entertainments. They made the economy even worse when they wasted money. Instead of ruling the country, Louis XVI chose to spend money and have fun on his entertainment. When the citizens had no money to pay for their taxes, they were spending the money on their entertainment.

Before the French Revolution began, people were openly expressing their dissatisfaction with French society through written means. The discontent comes from many areas, but a large focus comes from the nobility. Voltaire, Candide, or Optimism, Isabelle de Charrière, The Nobleman (1763), and Nicolas Toussaint le Moyne des Essarts, The Noailles Affair (1786), gives a clear representation of how the nobility is viewed in the second half of the eighteenth century. Writers represented most of French nobility as mainly being only concerned about their family heritage and luxurious privileges, which greatly corresponds with reality as can be seen in William Doyle’s The Oxford History of the French Revolution.

While the arguments are generally in stasis that Marie Antoinette was not the sole cause of the French Revolution, the legacy of Marie Antoinette continues to be a point of disagreement. This debate does not directly influence the history of the French Revolution, but it does affect the overall understanding of Marie Antoinette and her actions throughout her queenship. The first side of the argument presents Marie Antoinette more negatively, blaming her for her unconcerned attitude. David Grubin supports this viewpoint, establishing Antoinette’s failings as a queen by explaining her indifference towards her subjects and the wealth that made her ignorant toward the needy. Grubin

Although the Lais of Marie de France may seem to be ordinary tales of knights and chivalry, each explores the complicated issues surrounding love, loyalty, and gender. Marie uses four stories in particular to make statements on the relationships between men and women of that time.

The French Revolution of 1789 was inarguably a significant turning point in the history of Europe. However, there have been historical debates over the major contributing factor that had caused the French Revolution. Many historians have argued that the French Revolution was sparked by the emerging new age ideas of Enlightenment in the 18th century, which encouraged people to think logically and critically about their society. Many notable writers such as Diderot and Voltaire began to publicly criticise the social structure and the governance of France. (Darlington et al., 2004, p.25) But other historians argue that ideas affected the way people saw

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

Marie de France lived in a time when social graces were paramount to a good reputation, lordships and to securing good marriages. A woman was considered less valuable if she lost her virginity; a wife was subjected to her feudal lord, father, brother or son after her husband’s death. According to Angela Sandison’s article “The Role of Women in the Middle Ages”, this was because in the Middle Ages the Church and the aristocracy controlled public opinion and the legal system. These authorities of the times believed a woman’s place was in a submissive role to a man. In The Lay of the Nightingale, we will see how this social and religious hierarchy will impact the behaviors of the three people involved.

The published letter of the king’s reasoning for departure also served the public with rage, and, “equally significant for the future of the Revolution was the dramatic change in attitude toward the king…everything was transformed by the king’s flight.” (Tackett, 101) People in the streets of Paris were throwing out their portraits of the royal family and were seeing the king, the one they praised a week ago, as a deserter and conspirator to their newly-formed and praised government. The use of rumor and newspapers by members of The Cordelier Club also helped spread certain radical ideals in which prompted the idea of turning France into a republic, and of dissembling the monarchy and the king altogether. It was this power in the streets of Paris that would soon grow with every day after the king fled, as, “Outside the Legislative Assembly, however, the more radical revolutionaries had managed to hold the loyalty of most of the provincial club network, giving them a powerful propaganda tool.” (Popkin, 58) The National Assembly was still strong in its number of members favorable of this new constitutional monarchy, but it was in the streets and with the people that the actual aspect of the Revolution was shifting. Members of the National Assembly were getting restless

Timothy Tackett’s book When the King Took Flight focuses on arguably the most consequential event in the French Revolution. King Louis XVI and his family’s attempt to escape France would influence an atmosphere of violence that would only continue to worsen. King Louis XVI regretted signing and accepting the Civil Constitution of the Clergy earlier in July 1790. Deciding to flee the country he assumed that through foreign intervention or negotiating he could change parts of the constitution he disagreed with. However he would be recognized and captured in Varennes. The king underestimated the true meaning and appeal of the revolution (87). His misunderstanding of the revolution led the way for the destruction of kingship and the monarchy itself. This decision had given power to the sans-culottes and the idea of a republic. While the kings flight to Varennes had many unintended consequences it serves as a crucial turning point for the revolution.

The story of revolution and resistance in 18th-century France is a complicated one, and no two historians tell the story the same way. However, it is clear that for the revolutionaries, Marie Antoinette’s significance was mainly, powerfully symbolic. "She and the people around her seemed to represent everything that was wrong with the monarchy and the Second Estate: They appeared to be tone-deaf, out of touch, disloyal (along with her allegedly treasonous behavior, writers and pamphleteers frequently accused the queen of adultery) and self-interested"( Moore 17 ). What Marie Antoinette was actually like was beside the point; the image of the queen was far more influential than the woman herself.

The nobility of the Kingdom of France has been evaluated by various scholars of history. There is something to be said, however, for those who chronicled their impressions while living them in the 17th and 18th centuries. The excerpts of Charles Loyseau’s A Treatise on Orders, written in 1610, and Isabelle de Charriere’s The Nobleman, written in 1763 provide two very different glimpses on the French nobility from differing time periods. From these two accounts, it is clear that there was a marked shift in the way some viewed the nobility and their role in the operation of the French state. While Loyseau praises the nobility nearly wholeheartedly,

For Marie Antoinette and for the nobility of the 18th century, luxury became a basic need. Meanwhile to The Third Estate, a basic need became a luxury and luxury can be a deadly aberration in times of crisis. Sadly for history, that was evidence by Madame Déficit’s death under the guillotine on October of

Madame de Pompadour is most famously known for her role as King Louis XV’s chief mistress. It is through this role she acquired influence over the king and, in turn, France’s political landscape at large. She advised King Louis XV on matters regarding the management of the Seven Years’ War, internal affairs affecting the nation, and the creation and dissolution of several alliances with other countries. In this way, Madame de Pompadour's immense clout was a consequence of the king’s affection for her, but on a more personal level, her own identity was sculpted by the king’s love for her. By this, I refer not only to how she tailored her identity to accommodate the king’s predilections as a way to retain power but also to how her reputation, during both her lifetime and society’s current remembrance of her, was based on her relationship with King Louis XV. Her overt use of sexuality, while regarded unfavorably during her lifetime, has earned her more propitious representation in current media (Stamberg).

Numerous historians and scholars have long been interested in history of French Revolution and the female historical figure, last Queen of France, Marie Antoinette. In the book of The Family Romance of the French Revolution, the author Lynn Hunt focuses on the relationship between nation, family and sexuality.

Before Marie Antoinette married Dauphin Louis XVI in 1770, the situation in France was already beginning to become disordered. The peasants, which made up about 90% of the population at the time, were treated unfairly and began to feel frustrated and upset with the Monarchy. At the time, Marie Antoinette was distrusted because of her foreign birth and many of the peasants saw her as the source of their problems and disliked her. She was often seen in the past as a bad Queen due to her careless spending and seemingly frivolous lifestyle, now with more evidence and sources, opinions have shifted. Many see Marie Antoinette as a victim of her own circumstances, as it can be seen by the state of affairs in France before her arrival, her upbringing and public opinion before her death during the French Revolution. This essay will illustrate that Marie Antoinette was indeed a victim of her circumstances.