More handpicked essays just for you.
Social causes of the french revolution
Social disruption in french revolution
Social cause of the french revolution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Social causes of the french revolution
. King Louis XVI decision to leave Paris in 1791 had a significant effect for the course of the revolution and in the accumulating terror that was growing across the countryside of France. To be fair, there are possibilities that the course of the revolution combined with the accumulating terror prior to the Kings decision that is well known as The Flight To Varennes that could have already determined his fate before being killed by the guillotine. When discussing the accumulating terror and course of the revolution it affected more than just the city of Paris, it affected the entire countryside of France. Through the course of the revolution it’s important to keep in mind the subjects of these cities and towns feelings towards the monarchy This is a major problem because this democratic pressure on these resources shows social tensions, casing alarm towards the outside the city to the country side where angry ideas are brewing about the wide diversity in the economy between the wealthy elites compared to both commoners and nobles.2 The biggest concern is the drastic difference between economic interests between subjects that create personal interests and personal networks. A great example of this is when an Entrepreneur was given exact orders from the state to take advantage of specific economic economies like the slave trade, and external markets. Another way these powers were abused was by landowners(who were elites or wealthy nobles) who wanted to make more money just simple so they raised their own incomes by raising the rents(renters were usually nobles,
King Louis nation had a massive reaction focused on the King’s plight and return. The Reaction was not only seen in Paris alone but also on the other provinces, where a widespread phobia caused by foreign invasion led to the utter news of the King’s escape. Nevertheless, Tackett identifies the royal family plight to flee France as one of the most critical moments in the history of the French revolution. The king’s flight opens a window to the whole of the French society during the revolution. The purpose of the Kings flight was to offer freedom of action in terms of power and this was in regards to the King’s power and rule. The royal couple together with their advisers had unclear political agenda for their nation. Similarly, it is in the vent of these unclear goals factored by the Kind’s technical knowhow of not making decisive decisions that led to the stoppage of the royal family at Varennes and thereafter their return to Paris. The consequence of their return to Paris was the onset of the constant possibility of the end of the Monarch reign. On the same case, it is as a result of the royal family escape attempt and failure necessitated the integrity of the King as a constitutional monarch. On a much more political notion, The King’s hope of survival is mitigated
Taking into account the reality of the effect of the Reign of Terror and its acts to secure the government, it is important to highlight the circumstances that made the Reign the most necessary: war. Marching an 80,000-man army into France, Prussia and Austria moved to attack and capture the providences of Longwy and Verdun. Along with the pressing overseas forces, an additional “10,000 French army officers.formed armies and allied themselves with France’s foreign enemies” (Document B). To match the amassing legion that was shaping against them, the French government had to enforce regulations (in example: The Tribune) to divert the internal forces they were spending calming riots back to their needed place on the front lines. Similarly, without the Committee on Public Safety “employing a.network of informers and spies” (Document E) it’s impossible to say how the French would have suffered if the infantile government had lost information to enemies, especially considering many of their own countrymen had abandoned their patriotism and fled to the Austrian-Netherlands.
The French Revolution, beginning in 1789, was a lengthy process in which the people of France took over the government and instituted a Republic (Chambers). The overarching goal of the Revolution was to place the power of government in the hands of the people. For two years, whilst France was facing internal disorganization and external wartime threats, the government was run by a war dictatorship under Maximilien Robespierre, the head of the Committee of Public Safety (“Reign of Terror”). Amid much internal suspicion and fear, the Reign of Terror began. Much of France was politically divided, and Robespierre’s method for keeping the government stable in a time of crisis involved severe penalties for any suspected of plotting against the new government (Chambers). Soon the accusations began to fly and a handful of people convicted and killed for treason became thousands. Many of the cases turned into the accuser’s word versus the accused, and a government preoccupied with bigger issues often did not care to look into these cases, simply convicting the accused, supposedly to promote a sense of unity and control to the citizens of France, and to forewarn anyone who did attempt treasonous deeds (Chambers). Eventually, Marie Antoinette, guilty of no crime other than marrying the former king, was executed on the grounds of treason (“French Revolution: The Reign of Terror”). Many thought this was taking a step too far. The former Queen was well-respec...
A rather ominous name for the unaware; “The Reign of Terror”. An oblivious person could completely bypass the horrifying events related to the French Revolution, had it been named differently. The title for these events is appropriate from my perspective. Those four words could easily interest a curious, ordinary person, and so the history can survive, along with the information transferring to yet another carrier. Of course, everyone can benefit from knowing a few terms that can increase your understanding of the topic. An absolute monarch is a person that has absolute power among his or her people. The Estates General is a representative body drawn from the three ‘estates’ into which society had been theoretically divided. A fraternity is a group of people sharing a common profession or interests. A radical person is a person who advocates thorough or complete political or social reform. The device used to execute most people was the guillotine: a machine with a heavy blade sliding vertically in grooves, used for beheading people. The Reign of Terror is generally defined as a period of remorseless repression or bloodshed, but in particular, it is the period of the Terror during the French Revolution. Conservatives are people that hold to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation. Now that we can speak of our topic with more knowledge of terms typically used for this subject, we can address the pending question. Was The Reign of Terror justified? An outstanding amount of people died for good and bad reasons. Every system was corrupt, there was practically no right and wrong; no order, just rebellion. Several conflicting arguments can be made, but there is a definite decision to make in this situatio...
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels see the French revolution as a great achievement in human history. However they also discuss serious criticisms of it. Marx and Engels discussed the struggle between two distinct social groups during the French Revolution which are the city poor and the privileged classes and what happens when power fell into the hands of the revolutionary “petty bourgeoisie” and the paris workers creating a class struggle and it impact on political issues . This essay will explain how Marx and Engels view the French revolution and their analysis of the revolution’s achievements and shortcomings.This essay will also apply their analysis of the French
Beginning in mid-1789, and lasting until late-1799, the French Revolution vastly changed the nation of France throughout its ten years. From the storming of the Bastille, the ousting of the royal family, the Reign of Terror, and all the way to the Napoleonic period, France changed vastly during this time. But, for the better part of the last 200 years, the effects that the French Revolution had on the nation, have been vigorously debated by historian and other experts. Aspects of debate have focused around how much change the revolution really caused, and the type of change, as well as whether the changes that it brought about should be looked at as positive or negative. Furthermore, many debate whether the Revolutions excesses and shortcomings can be justified by the gains that the revolution brought throughout the country.
O: Rage and revolt can describe the country of France at the time of the Revolution faced because of turmoil and struggle they faced. Different estates were formed based on what you did and your class in society. The people of society wanted more say in the government and decisions that King Louis XVI made. The public didn't approve with much of what King Louis did. His lack of ability to be a strong king and leader affected his reputation to the public eye. King Louis was tried for committing treason to the country of France. Treason is the attempt to kill a sovereign and overthrow the government. Some of the reasons were his attempt to flee to Varennes, living in Versailles which was not in Paris, and reforms he passed as a ruler. These actions performed by King Louis isn’t what a King does, but that doesn’t prove any
Although, the Reign of Terror was seen as a way to let the revolution live and was well supported it was not justified. Because the internal threats propagated radicalism, the external threats raged and became stronger, and the methods became chaotic the Reign of Terror extended its stay in France until the death of the powerful leader Robespierre. The Reign of Terror was an outreach to gain rights but during this period they were taken away until the fateful day of Robespierre’s death ending the Terror.
Although there were still clear boundaries between rich and poor, this no longer played a practical role in the political system. However in France the rigid system which dictated the social and economic standing of all the country's citizens, from the King to the poorest peasant, was still very prominent. The King was second only to God, while the clergy and nobles, many of them very wealthy, paid no taxes and the peasants lived in poverty serving the landlords and carrying the weight of the rest of France through the heavy taxes they were forced t... ... middle of paper ... ... restricted the growth of industry and trade and the increase in food prices led to riots among the lower classes.
The essential cause of the French revolution was the collision between a powerful, rising bourgeoisie and an entrenched aristocracy defending its privileges”. This statement is very accurate, to some extent. Although the collision between the two groups was probably the main cause of the revolution, there were two other things that also contributed to the insanity during the French revolution – the debt that France was in as well as the famine. Therefore, it was the juxtaposing of the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy as well as the debt and famine France was in that influenced the French Revolution.
Each social class in France has its own reasons for wanting a change in government. The aristocracy was upset by the king’s power, while the Bourgeoisie was upset by the privileges of the aristocracy. The peasants and urban workers were upset by their burdensome existence. The rigid, unjust social structure meant that citizens were looking for change because “all social classes.had become uncomfortable and unhappy with the status quo.” (Nardo, 13)
contributed to the execution of King Louis XVI so that French citizens might find a better existence under honest rule. To keep citizens focused on the revolution, he established a
...wn the monarchy because “World History,” states that, “Louis was well-intentioned and sincerely wanted to improve the lives of the common people.” (Beck Roger, Black Linda, Krieger, Larry, Naylor Phillip, Shabaka Dahia, 653) However, King Louis XVI lacked the conviction and initiative to carry out any of his plans to truly improve the lives of the French citizens. Proof of this was that the French citizens were desperate enough to riot the streets of France and storm the prison of Bastille. After all that has been said, it is clear that the citizens were indeed justified to overthrow the monarch.
The bad living conditions of France and its depressed economy was one of the primary drivers for the French Revolution. The people of France were so poor that they had no shoes to wear and no food to eat. The poverty of France breaks its economy at its root. The economy got so bad that “By December 1788, there was a nationwide revolt against food shortages and rising prices, which continued to spread till the summer of 1789, when there was another bad harvest”(Todd 528). One ...
At the start of the revolution, in 1789, France’s class system changed dramatically (Giddens, 2014). Aristocrats lost wealth and status, while those who were at the bottom of the social ladder, rose in positions. The rise of sociology involved the unorthodox views regarding society and man which were once relevant during the Enlightenment (Nisbet, 2014). Medievalism in France during the eighteenth century was still prevalent in its “legal structures, powerful guilds, in its communes, in the Church, in universities, and in the patriarchal family” (Nisbet, 2014). Philosophers of that time’s had an objective to attempt to eliminate the natural law theory of society (Nisbet, 2014). The preferred outcome was a coherent order in which the mobility of individuals would be unrestricted by the autonomous state (French Revolution). According to Karl Marx, economic status is extremely important for social change. The peasants felt the excess decadence of the ancient regime was at the expense of their basic standards of living, thus fuelling Marx’s idea of class based revolutions and the transition of society (Katz, 2014). This can be observed, for example, in novels such as Les Liaisons Dangereuses, a novel that had a role for mobilizing the attitudes of the