Abbé Emmauel-Joeph Sieyès (1748-1836) a middle-class clergyman wrote a pamphlet, “What is the Third Estate”(1789) in which he wrote upon the present state of affairs and the Third Estate (Hunt, p. 107) The Third Estates message was simple. The few privileged noble order at current, was far from being useful to the nation (Hunt, p. 109). The effects of the monopoly ran current state of affairs was shackling and oppressing to all those whom fell out of the category of the noble order. Those, whom did not fall in the noble order, made up the Third Estate, which accounted for ninety nine percent of the population (Hunt, p. 109).
The Third Estate was comprised of the people whom carried out the kinds of work that sustains society, those whom worked the countryside, those whom sold raw materials, finished goods and labor of many varieties. They were the merchants and wholesale traders; they represented the private occupations that served usefully and accordingly to the people (Hunt, p. 108). Contrary to the Third Estate was the noble order. The noble order consisted of the public offices, the army, the courts, the church and the administration (Hunt, p. 109). It was only the lucrative and highly honored privileged order that could take up positions in public office (Hunt, p. 109).
Sieyès’ describes the noble order as an office that deems itself prerogative and of separate order then that of the citizens, claiming that the noble order had privileges, exemption and even rights that were distinctly different then that of the rest of the citizens (Hunt, p. 109). Sieyès’ forcefully condemned the current political and social structures of noble order, accusing them most politely, that the noble order was a “law unto itself” (Hunt, p. 110). T...
... middle of paper ...
... 111). In the Opinion of Sieyès’, that of the Third Estate could only achieve this. “ A body of citizens living under common law and represented by the same legislature (Hunt, p. 110). Without the privileged order, the Third Estate could flourish freely and the best and most honored places could be infinitely bettered filled by that of the Third Estate (Hunt, p.109). In Abbé Emmauel-Joeph Sieyès pamphlet, “What is the Third Estate”, Sieyès describes everything that makes up a democracy. The Third Estate was the right to common laws, political rights and equality of the citizens of the nation equal to all others within the nation (Hunt, p. 111).
Works Cited
Sieyes, Emmanuel. "What is the Third Estate?" Reproduced by Lynn Hunt, editor and translator. The French Revolution and Human Rights: A Brief Documentary History. Boston: Bedford / St. Martin's, 1996.
Sieyes also identifies the reality that if as a society if we were to remove the nobility that The Third Estate could in fact run on its own, if not “something less but something more”. In fact, society as a whole might actually go better without the two others but would cease to exists without The Third Estate. Sieyes actually goes as far to say that the nobility are a “burden for the nation and it cannot be a part of it.” Sieyes speaks to not only the social inequality between the classes but the lack of political representation of more than what is ninety percent of the population. Then nobility itself possess their own representation that was not appointed by the majority, who does not owe any powers to the people due to divinity, and finally it is foreign for the fact that it’s interests lie with private concern rather than public. In chapter two of What is the Third Estate Sieyes proclaims that up until now The Third Estate has been nothing and reform is coming. He says “Freedom does not derive from
Davis gives various examples of the social norms that peasants lived under during the sixteenth century. When Sanxi, Guerre’s father, and his family decided to leave their village, Davis states that the majority of men who leave their village do so because they “were usually not heir to their family’s property, as was Sanxi Daguerre, but younger brothers who could not or would not remain in the ancestral household” (Davis 6). This highlights the idea that being the heir to the family’s inheritance is a great indicator of how one’s life as a peasant would carry on. It is very likely that if one is the heir, then the individual shall stay at their property and assume the role as head of the household once the “s...
the French Revolution. Hunt, Lynn & Censer, Jack. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press (2001)
The French Revolution was a tumultuous period, with France exhibiting a more fractured social structure than the United States. In response, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen proposed that “ignorance, neglect, or contempt of the rights of man are the sole cause of public calamities, and of the corruption of governments” (National Assembly). This language indicates that the document, like its counterpart in the United States, sought to state the rights of men explicitly, so no doubt existed as to the nature of these rights. As France was the center of the Enlightenment, so the Enlightenment ideals of individuality and deism are clearly expressed in the language of the document. The National Assembly stated its case “in
Some people like Emmanuel Sieyès, middle-class writer who was taken by the Enlightenment ideas, believed that all of French Society lay on the backs of the third estate. On the contrary, Robespierre, the monarch at the time, believed that the third estate did not have the power to do anything important to society. The third estate had to pay taxes like the Gabelle and Taille while the first and seconds estates did not have to pay any taxes to the king. Also, the third estates had less of a representation in voting. The first and second estate could outvote the third estate every time and this was a huge inequality. The condition of the third estate was horrible but a good portion of this third estate was the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie had some wealth and social class, so they influenced the rest of the third estate about their rights, while also inspiring some lower clergies and provincial nobles and thus led to a group of rebellious people to fight the monarchy. This fight for political representation and political rights was only one cause of the French Revolution. Another causes lies in the French Monarchs: Louis XlV, Louis XV, and Louis XVl. When Louis XlV was ruling, the monarchy had unlimited power and was known as a
When Abbé Sièyes wondered, "What is the Third Estate [or are slaves]? Nothing. What has it [have they] been until now in the political order? Nothing. What does it [do they] want? To be become something…" (65), he could have just as easily spoken of slave's misery rather than the Third Estate's plight. While, his scope was limited, his pains were not. Following their first revolution, the French National Assembly helped to change the world. Enlightened, they saw, they defined, they tried to ease all of mankind's suffering. Finally, the term man began to transcend color. If man has rights, they must apply to all men. And thus, the concept of racial equality is born. I will argue in order to achieve this end, and to prove the necessity of racial equality, Enlightened thinkers exposed flaws in current social philosophy, demonstrated the logical conclusions of their progress, and finally addressed the implications of abolition.
The bottom part of the society included the peasants which made up 85% of the population, the peasants was divided into sub-classes, and these sub-classes involved the farmers, craftsmen or artisans and merchants (Hackney, 2013). The highest ranking of the peasants were the farmers, farmers who owned their own lands were ranked higher than those who did not. After the farmers, there were the craftsmen or artisans. The craftsmen or artisans worked word and metal and some of them became well-k...
The first estate is now recognizable as a group including politicians and government leaders. These people, similar to the clergy, are able to exert a great deal of control over resources through the coercive powers of government. The function of the first estate is to protect the less powerful consumers, taxpayers, and workers of the third estate from the market control. It is not uncommon, however, for there to be some cooperation between the first and second estates, which often greatly effecting the third estate .
In Political Testament, Cardinal Richelieu explains that the nobility is something to be used as a tool, a perpetual game of appeasement and request of services. He understood that the nobility could be a nuisance and a body of dissent against the King, but that they were necessary to the crown to provide military aid and money. Richelieu explains that one must know how to manage and manipulate them: “To take away the lives of these persons, who expose their lives every day for a pure fancy of honor, is much less than taking away their honor and leaving them a life which would be a perpetual anguish for them. All means must be used to maintain the nobility in the true virtue of their fathers, and one must also omit nothing to preserve the advantages they inherited.” ...
In the 1780s, the rise of the French middle classes provided a major counterpoint to the total dominance of the King, which was powered by enlightenment principles, as well as the success of the American Revolution. Representational government was a huge factor in the rise of revolutionary spirit, since many members of the middle classes were not allowed to vote or speak out their views on political, economic, and legal matters. Political activism on part of the middle classes (and some members of the upper classes) led diplomatic and political methods to coerce the King to allow them greater participation in government. Abbes Sieyes was a member of the Third Estate, a political group that sought representational government for the people, instead of merely serving the First Estate (The Clergy” and the Second Estate (The
Under the rule of Louis XVI, the people of France were divided into three main social classes or estates as they are called. The First Estate featured wealthy members of the Church such as Bishops and Priests who held great political power due to their influence on government affairs. The Second Estate was a class comprised of the wealthy nobles and political officials who held all power in government affairs.
They were only two percent of France’s population, but owned twenty percent of the land. They paid no taxes (Krieger 483). The third estate accounted for ninety-eight percent of France’s population. The third estate was divided into three groups; the middle class, known as the bourgeoisie, the urban lower classes, and the peasant farmers. The third estate lost about half their income in taxes.
small number of people said that the Third Estate, that which was drawn from the
Nardo, Don. A. The French Revolution. San Diego, California: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1999. Print.
Each social group had a varied type of people within their structure, which presented the different views of the people. The First Estate was the Church. During the ancien regime, the church was equal in terms of its social, economic, and spiritual power. The First Estate owned nearly 10 per cent of all land in France.