The Origins of French Rev DBQ

2. What extent do these sources disagree about Louis XVI’s role in the origins of the French Revolution?

Source B and Source C goes over through some of Louis XVI role in the origins of the French Revolution but is not able to disagree about Louis XVI role effectively; it’s not convincing and is not elaborated. It mentions few points like how it was the fate of the French monarchy to be overthrown not because it had become despotic but because it had become irrelevant. The arguments used in these sources are not fully supported; they aren’t solid or concrete proofs. Most of the arguments lack analysis and evidence to support the argument. There seems to be more facts that agree with the Louis XVI’s role in the origins of the French Revolution than the points that disagree with Louis XVI’s role.

3. ‘The financial crises rather than the absolutism of the French monarchy caused Revolution in 1789.’ Explain whether you agree or disagree with this statement.

I agree and disagree at the same time because it was the financial crisis and the absolutism of the French monarchy that caused the Revolution in 1789. There is no doubt that the ineffectiveness of the absolutism of the French monarchy led to the financial crises. Louis XV and Louis XVI were incapable of ruling the government. Louis XVI had a ‘little voice’ in the government; he was weak. He treated minor problems with great care while he neglected the major affairs. In addition, they used country’s money extravagantly particularly Louis XVI’s wife, Marie Antoinette. The system of absolutism and despotism was created so that the King alone had the power, the authority and the right to authorize necessary reforms. This meant that if the country was in a crisis then the King will eventually bear the final responsibility for everything the state did. Therefore, when the country was in a financial crisis they all blamed the King; the King became the scapegoat for the government when it was actually the ministers who ruled the country. Also, since the King was weak and was ‘controlled’ by his ministers, who were mostly comprised of nobles from the Second Estate, the reforms were rejected because it went in favor of the people of the Third Estate and ‘challenged’ the privileges of the Second Estate. Therefore, many nobles (bourgeois that bought the nobility-ennoblement) were furious about the constant rejection of the reforms that they started the Revolt of the Nobles which triggered the French Revolution. It is clear that if France did not have a financial crisis, the French Revolution would’ve never staged. Also, if the absolutism of the French monarchy was effective than none of these problems would’ve occurred: the financial crisis and the French Revolution. Thus, it was the absolutism of the French monarchy and the financial crises that caused the French Revolution in 1789.