Blog #7 Week 12/14-21 French Revolution
“The essential cause of the French Revolution was the collision between powerful, rising Bourgeoisie and an entrenched aristocracy defending its privileges.” Asses the validity of this statement as an explanation of the events leading up to the French Revolution of 1789. (Remember to respond to the question in 6-8 sentences (yes it can be longer) and to respond to two of your classmates answers in 4-6 sentences. Do not just agree or disagree without defending or justifying your argument.) Think above and beyond the common answers that you may see. Be sure to challenge your classmates with controversial tactics, actions or selections. Good Luck!!!! Go Mustangs!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
i'd say this is a pretty valid statement other than the fact that i wouldnt describe the government as a rising power since well, they were in debt. the french revolution was fundamentally caused by the rivalry between the monarchy and aristocracy.
after the seven years war lalala the bourgeoisie were having problems financing itself and helping the american revolution did nothing to help the situation. so obviously that means their going to start taxing the nobility which would ultimately remove that fine line which separate nobles and peasants (the whole not taxing nobles thing). the aristocracy immediately declared that the imposed taxation was unfair and refused to acknowledge them. so the only taxation laws that worked were on peasants. this pretty much ruined the monarchy financially leading to the french revolution.
oh, and the kings during this time were louis XV and louis XVI. they wanted an absolute rule like back in the good ol' days of louis XIV. it should be noted that the french government always consisted of negotiation between the king and the aristocrats. after louis XIV died the nobles tried reclaiming their influence on the government. so when louis XV and XVI pop up wanting to have a secure absolutist rule it's crystal clear that the nobles didn't digest that too well.
to sum it all up the government wanted to be a great power again and they were having financial problems to they start taxing the nobles who refused to comply and that lead up to the revolution.
~exhale~
I agree with the validity of the statement. There was always rivalry between the monarchy and aristocracy which ended up causing the Revolution. The monarchy was unsuccessful in searching for adequate revenues leading to the conflicts with the aristocracy. The monarchy’s debt increased causing the revolution. French absolutism always came in the way between the negotiations of monarchy and local aristocracy interests. In 1770, Louis XV appointed Rene Maupeou as a minister. He was determined to abolish the parlements and exile the members to different parts of the country. Disputes rose because the parlements were dominated by the aristocracy and they defended their cause. Jacques Necker produced a public report that suggested that many expenses went to the income of the aristocrats. This angered the aristocrats. Charles Alexandre de Calonne went to the Assembly of Notables which consisted of upper class aristocracy to seek support for his plans of removing internal barriers, he was refused. They were demanding the privileges they enjoyed in the 17th century before Louis XIV came into the monarchy.
The third estate also known at the bourgeoisie made it clear that the monarchy and the aristocracy would decide the future of the nation. The demand for more opinion and say in monarchial matter led to the French Revolution. The aristocracies tried to limit the power of the Third Estate by the Assembly of the Notables and were outvoted by the aristocracy. The third estate elected twice as many representatives rather than the nobility. So, then it could dominate the estates general. The bourgeoisie or the third estate declared itself the National Assembly. In conclusion, the statement is correct because the aristocracy defended their privileges and the bourgeoisie rose causing the French Revolution.
Hint: Bourgeoisie is the middle class. We aren't saying aristocrats vs. monarch, we're saying people vs. aristocrats.
In general, I believe this statement is true. The core of the matter was that the middle, well... lower-ish class felt they were treated unfairly. Which, to be honest, they were: more taxes (but it wasn't hard to have more when the upper class had none...), longer work hours (ditto my last parentheses), and less privledges as a whole. The whole "entrenched aristocracy" is definitly true... they weren't at all willing to give up some of their privledges to benifit their people (which is understandable and yet regretable).
I think I'm not thinking very clearly right now, so the point is that yes, the statement sums it up pretty well: the French Revolution was caused by an angry mob of peasants finally saying "Enough!" to a very stubborn aristocratic social group.
Sadly for the aristocrats, stubbornness rarely gets you anywhere against pitchforks and guillotines.
Ego and pride were both contributing factors to the french revolution. for one, the french nobility didn't really appreciate having the "fine line" as anu said erased and being that much closer to the peasantry in status. The inequality in the estate system and the social unrest throughout the country also attributed to the french revolution. in essence, i agree with the validity of the statement.
Umm...comments:
Anu i agree with you on the whole tax thing and louis XV/XVI being pro-absolutism, and think that that was also a cause of the F.R
hailey i concur with your argument that the french middle class was treated unfairly (obviously).
During this time, the Bourgeoisie did gain a lot of power after they realized that they had it. The nobility, stubborn as they were, did not try to negotiate with the rising lower-class. Increase on taxation was vitally needed in order to preserve the economy, but this only left two options. Either tax the nobility or increase tax on the peasants. Since the nobles refused to pay, the government had to take the other option. This took the expected course of revolt. If the aristocrats recognized the threat the middle- class posed against them, maybe they would have tried to help solve the problem.
This statement is completely valid. The aristocracy and the bourgeoisie were both defending their rights. The rise of the Bourgeoisie threatened the aristocracy. Those in power or with any small effect on the economy, or social aspects did not want to lose the privileges that they were given. The Bourgeoisie was the upper middle class and the aristocracy, the nobility. The war had put France in a large amount of debt that the only way to get out of was taxation. And the possibility of being taxed offended the upper classes. The realization that they [middle class] could affect the government. With the National assembly, which consisted of the middle class, they were able to change some laws and enforce new ones. Through the national assembly they were able to have a voice in society.
responses::
i agree with anu. the kings louis xvi and louis xv did not like the idea of a consitutional monarchy they were trying to have complete control over france.
ill respond to another one later =]]
“The essential cause of the French Revolution was the collision between powerful". Of course it was the collision of power. Without this aspect there would be no "French Revolution. I agree with this statement and its completely true. The war left France in debt and what else to do than tax the Bourgeoisie and the lower class (also known as the 3rd estate). Prices of bread rose to high for people to purchase, leaving people starving. On the contrary, guess who wasn't taxed, the "aristocracy." Then the revolution started because of the unfairness.
I agree with Aby on how she explained how the war had left France in debt. And the only way to get out of that position was to tax the people.
I also agree with jordan about how "Ego" and pride contributed to the revolution. There was always a "fine line" drawn between each others rights.
My responses:Anu: I agree with Anu on her statement. The aristocracy immediately declared that the taxation they received was unfair which only applied to the peasants.
Abby: I also agree with Abby that the war put France in debt causing the taxation to start.
I believe that this statement is valid.The French monarchy was deeply in debt after the Seven Years' War and was not able to "command sufficient taxes to finance itself."Even after this, The French monarchy still decided to help the American revolt against Great Britain which deepened the financial crisis. At this point, Louis XVI was forced to call the Estates General. When they had all gathered, a new set of problems and issues came about, directly leading to the revolution. One of the reasons was that when Brienne suggested that they reform the land tax, he was ignored because the Estates General was all that had the actual authority to do so, and obviously it would not allow such thing to take place. When Louis XV appointed Rene Maupeou as minister, Maupeou was driven on breaking the parlement and increasing taxes on the nobility.
My Responses:
I completely agree with Abby when she said that the only way for France to get out of their debt was by taxing people. Their attempt to tax the nobility would have definitely helped them regain their stability financially speaking.
I also agree with Evan when he stated that the French monarchy had no choice but to tax the peasants which led to the revolution.
I agree mostly with this statement. The revolution was caused by the government getting weaker and weaker, and falling deeper and deeper into a financial hole of debt. Once they'd lost enough money, they decided that the only way the government was going to survive was by doing the unthinkable: taxing the 1st estates. *GASP*. Of course they were angry, to say the least. Why should they, the noble 1st estate, have to pay taxes just like the miserable 3rd estaters? Needless to say, this did not go down well, and they simply refused to pay up. This is the biggest reason the revolution started. And then it ended just like it started; the 1st estate didn't pay up, and the 3rd estate did.
I am guessing that Athma is the "Sri Lankan" -.-;; anyways i do agree with him on the part about the bread getting expensive and stuff, but how about the "fine line"? It wasn't really a "fine" line. That line was pretttyyyyyyy darn big. There were countless differences between the 1st and 3rd estates, so even if they were taxed, its not like it would automatically make the 1st estate like the 3rd one. I think even though it was kind of unfair, the 1st estate still shouldve paid, cuz they wouldvt still been rich, ya know?
Abby, you said that the middle class got the chance to enfore/change some laws. Is this really true? Because then you shouldve said in your response that the middle class was responsible also for making a bunch of dumb laws. Dont you think so?
Gahh... buh bye
the french revolution was a revolution, but with many complications. first France was in MAJOR debt and they couldn't fully support themselves or anyone els. they had no money for wars and their economy. in a way of increasing money, they increased taxes and bread prices which angered many civilians. some philosophers thought that this revolution was a glorious revloution that changed the European world, but happened to have many political and religious difficulties along the way. most of their battles, their wars were all internal wars. EX: the march to Varsilles, women forced louis XVI i believe to move back to Paris and stay there, and the attack on Bastillie, the quest for arms gone bad. there were 3 estates, too, that were in control at that time,1)the clergy 2)the noblities 3) everyone else. the 1st & 2nd estat paid no taxes but the third did. they later revolt and became known as th National Assembly. Louis XVI tried to force them back to their original ranks, but he soon failed and gave up to the people.
I agree with Anu. the kings tried to stayed as an absolute ruler during their reign, like how it was supposed to be, but it never worked out that way. thay tried so hard not to admit defeat but it soon came.
i agree with megha about the 3rd estate. they were "the bourgeoisie" as she says. they were being used and later had to revolt which frieghtened the government. they later became a group called The National Assembley and stayed in this power for many years (all they did was change their name a couple times)
Prompt: “The essential cause of the French Revolution was the collision between powerful, rising Bourgeoisie and an entrenched aristocracy defending its privileges.”
My Comment:
Sorry that I am responding so late…because my computer was experiencing some network connecting problems.
So….uh… Yes, in my opinion, I think this quote is true. Politically, the French Revolution was due to the incapability of the two kings, Louis XV and Louis XVI. They both failed to deal with the government’s financial and administrative problems. On the economic side, the cause of the French Revolution was due to the large amount of debts that Louis XIV had left for his country. On the social side, both the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie wanted to defend their privileges. Other factors, such as the Enlightenment, and the participation of the French soldiers in the American War of Independence, would also be some of the inspirations of the French Revolution.
Let me first analyze the 3 events that had led up to the French Revolution. The first one was the assembly of the three Estates (Estates-General). Louis XVI called this meeting because he needed money to solve economic problems that were presented in his country. Although France was a very prosperous country, the French government / monarchy still had to confront the bankruptcy because of the kings’ lack of effective leadership; they were unable to force the 1st and 2nd Estates to pay taxes. I think this was one of the events that had led up to the French Revolution because the Estates were voting by order. 300 representatives of the 1st Estate, 300 representatives of the 2nd Estate, and 600 representatives of the 3rd Estate were presented in the Estates General. Although the 3rd Estate had a lot more people than the 1st and 2nd Estate, the 1st and 2nd Estate will always win because they were voting by order. This caused the 3rd Estate to become more discontented about the clergy and nobility and the king. The second event that led up to the French Revolution was the Tennis Court Oath. Besides what we already know that “they would not disband until France has a constitutional monarchy”, the Tennis Court Oath also was a result of the discontent of the 3rd Estate of Louis XVI and that they wanted to vote by head rather than by Estate in the Estates General. The Tennis Court Oath was a movement that they took to express their discontent. The third event that led to the French Revolution was the “Storming of Bastille”. On July 14, a mob of Paris stormed Bastille for weapons and gunpowder. This is the point where the revolution intensified.
As a result, the French Revolution finally began in 1789. However, different demands were presented to the monarchy during this time. For example, the nobility wanted a constitutional monarchy where they could exercise a substantial degree of control in the government. On the other hand, the bourgeoisie wanted an end to the mercantilist restrictions on industry and trade, reforms on corrupted laws, and the establishment of a constitutional monarchy with an elected parliament and guarantees of civil liberties. What the peasants really wanted was to end all the privileges that were enjoyed by the clergy and the nobility. In addition, the peasants wanted to abolish the gabelle and corvee and the manorialism system.
One of the big parts that almost everyone had mentioned was the taxation. France was poor because of the debts, so the government needed money so bad to solve their economic problems that they were facing. France had two options during that time. One is that they would start to tax the 1st and 2nd Estates (France was very rich but the only reason why they have to face so many economic problems was because the nobility and clergy weren’t participating in paying taxes.). The second option they had was to tax heavier on the peasants. If you think about it, they first option wouldn’t work because the 1st and 2nd Estates always enjoyed being exempted from taxation, of course they would not acknowledge the king’s request. As a result, the monarchy had to choose the second option, which was to tax heavily on the peasants. What the monarchy was doing was taxing people that don’t have anything at all in their pockets. This decision of the king exhibited his administrative incapability and the failure to control his people (nobility won’t listen to the monarchs). Taxation was one of the big causes of the French Revolution.
In Sieyes’ “What is the third Estates”, Sieyes said that the 3rd Estate had contributed the most in France and the 1st and 2nd Estates were useless because they didn’t contribute anything to France. So, his pamphlet was supporting that the 1st and 2nd Estates’ special privileges should be taken away and let the 3rd Estates to become the most important part in France. Even during the French Revolution, the aristocracy and the Bourgeoisie were still constantly fighting with each other. For example, the National Assembly was mainly consisted of the 1st and 3rd Estates, but because of this, the National Assembly had to create a Legislative Assembly because the 1st and 3rd Estates would never agree with each other.
My Responses:
Anu: “the french revolution was fundamentally caused by the rivalry between the monarchy and aristocracy.” I think you misinterpreted the prompt. The prompt was saying Bourgeoisie (middle-class) V.S. aristocracy (nobility). However, I think you did a pretty good job if the prompt was on monarchy V.S. aristocracy.=]
Pj butta #13: I believed this is phillip. I agree with him on the part where he said, “they increased taxes and bread prices which angered many civilians,” A mob action was actually taken place on the night of October 5-6 of 1789. This happened in Paris, the mob as composed largely of women who were angry about the price of bread. This also showed that the women were starting to involve more in politics.
* Again, I am really sorry for this late response because my computer had no connection at all last night=[[[…I am sorry!
Post a Comment