During the second phase of the Revolution 1792-4, the Revolution became more violent and doctrinaire. The Swiss historian Burckhardt stated that as the Revolution sped up, the representatives of the previous stages were more ‘moderate’. The catalyst of the change was war. Most of the Assembly were enthusiastic about taking on France’s neighbours, the Feuillants assumed that national struggle could strengthen the authority of the king, but the Girondins believes that a ‘people’s war’ would destroy the monarchy which in the end turned out to be true as D. I. Wright stated ‘revolutionized the revolution’. The awaiting invasion of Prussia caused a wave of terror and the search for internal enemies cause a notorious massacre of September 1792. The Feuillants were defeated in the elections for the new National Convention and the power was shared between the Girondins and Montagnards. As a result of the war a republic was formed on 25 September 1792 and Louis XVI was executed the following January. (Lee (1982) p.12)
The third period of the Revolution 1794-9 was traditionally seen as the Revolution had reached its climax with the overthrow of Robespierre on 9 Thermidor 1794 which allowed Bonaparte to take over in 1799. Historians used to ignore the period 1795-9 as being outside of the revolution. Recent works however, contradicts this and the Termidorians and the Directory are now part of the context of the Revolution. C. Church stated that the Directory had ‘a board of executors for the revolutionary settlement’ while 1799 rather than 1794 is now seen as the end date of the Revolution. The Directory proved to be more valuable than any other revolutionary regimes to the ‘military takeover and the emergence of the cult of personality’. The success of Brumaire 1799 shows that the Directory had never before experienced the stability it had brought the Revolution. The Directory made the mistake of assuming that the parties would undermine the regime. La Revelliere Lepaux argued that it would be better ‘to die with honour defending the republic and its established government than to...live in the muck of parties’. This obsession with ‘faction’ became the Directories downfall which left the Directory with hardly any authority. By 1799 Sieyes and Ducos had become aware of a possibility of a Jacobin revival that they asked the Bonaparte for a revision of the constitution. This resulted in the beginning of the Consulate period. (Lee (1982) p.15-17)
Contemporaries see the French Revolution as an event of high importance. The Duke of Dorset wrote to the English government on 16 July 1789 and stated ‘the greatest Revolution that we know anything of’. However, English and American historians do not seem to agree on this matter and believe the Revolution was not very significant. They believe that the reforms which took place at the time were anyway going to take place under the regime. (Townson (1990) p.120)
Most cahiers in 1789 did not want the abolition of the monarchy. However, with the beginning of the August Decrees and Declaration of Rights, changes occurred which swept away the institution of the old regime. American historian G. V. Taylor states ‘The revolutionary state of the mind expressed in the Declaration of the Right of Man and the decrees of 1789-91 was a product – and not a cause – of a crisis that began in 1787’Therefore, this can be seen as the revolutionaries made the Revolution but the Revolution made the revolutionaries. The monarchy was abolished in 1792 but it returned in 1814. The powers of the monarchy were limited; an elected assembly had the right to pass a law whereas before the king passed the laws. (Townson (1990) p.120)
Most peasants benefited from the Revolution. They all gained from the abolition of indirect taxes and their total tax burden was reduced. Peasants also gained from inflation which grew steadily between 1792-7 and were therefore able to pay off some of their debts. The Revolution affected peasants in different ways and most peasants gained from it. (Townson (1990) p.125)
The poor suffered the most during the Revolution, a quarter of the city’s population relied on the poor relief. This number increased with the rise of unemployment and at the same time the means of receiving relief was disappearing. The main help came from the church, when the tithe was abolished and church’s lands were nationalised the church could no longer support the poor. The Constitution of 1793 said the public had the right to public support but revolutionary government had a lack of funds. As late as 1847 the number of hospitals in France was 42% less than in 1789 but the population was seven million more. The poor were unable to cope with the economic crisis of 1794-5 especially as the church could not support them. (Townson (1990) p.126-7)
Marxists believe that getting rid of feudalism and unifying the national market in Soboul’s words ‘marked a decisive stage in the transition from feudalism to capitalism’. However, most English historians treat such an interpretation of the Revolution with disdain. They continue to believe that the Revolution was an economic disaster. The most rapidly expanding sector of the French economy was overseas trades, the economy only grew slowly to the 1840s. (Townson (1990) p.127-8)
The French Revolution came too early, before the French society had developed the level of communication necessary to transform the desire for realization into effective political consciousness. A great mass of people were left out from active participation in nation building for another half century. Alexis de Tocqueville warned his compatriots in the 1850s that the French Revolution had strengthened the state at the expense of society ‘this new power was created by the Revolution or, rather, grew up almost automatically out of the havoc wrought by it’. The Revolution created citizens who were equal to one another but who were unable to oppose the state’s power. (Gillis (1983) p.97)
The Revolution had a big impact; it was more of a revolution in the mind than a revolution of reality. The revolutionary principles did revolutionise the way in which the next generation viewed politics and society. The Revolution was a political revolution with political consequences, it is therefore, not surprising that it modified the old regime rather than destroyed it. William Doyle suggested that some elements of the old regime lingered even as late as the twentieth century. (Blanning (1987) p.56)
To conclude we can see that the cause of the Revolution was not a single factor but a series of events which caused the French Revolution.
Bibliography:
Blanning, T. C. W., (1987) The French Revolution Aristocrats Versus Bourgeois?. London: MacMillan Education Ltd.
Gillis, J. R., (1983) The Development Of European Society, 1770-1870. London: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Lee, S.J., (1982) Aspects of European History 1789-1980.London: Richard Clay (The Chaucer Press) Ltd.
Rapport, M., (2005) Nineteenth-Century Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Townson, D., (1990) France in Revolution. London: Hodder & Stoughton.