|
|
|
|
|
Although the monarchy had always struggled against elites over the definition
of royal power, virtually no one could imagine France being governed without
a king. At the outset of the Revolution, only a handful of citizens had
even contemplated a republic. Yet only a few years later, in August 1792,
Louis XVI was deposed, and the following year, revolutionaries executed
him and Marie Antoinette. In this chapter, we explore how this transformation
occurred in such a short time.
The conflicts of 1787 to 1789 over the monarchy's financial problems
led to a major shift in the way France was governed. In part because of
the long drawn-out wars of the eighteenth century, the French government
had for some time been spending much more than its annual revenue. Usually
this money was borrowed. However, for reasons that historians still argue
about, this source of funds dried up in the 1780s. Mounting debt and a
continuing high level of expenses then forced the monarchy to seek fundamental
financial change to put the state on a secure fiscal foundation.
To address this budget crisis, in 1787 the royal government proposed
a series of major reforms concerning taxation and reducing expenditures.
These proposals met with furious resistance both from a special Assembly
of Notables and from the King's own law courts, particularly the Parlement
of Paris. In their objections, these bodies stressed the need to return
to the tradition by which, in times past, the French people had consented
to royal decrees through a representative body known as the Estates-General.
Although this body had not been convoked since 1614, many considered it
the only national body with the authority to enact fiscal reforms and,
if necessary, new taxes. At first, the King resisted. However, imminent
bankruptcy forced Louis XVI to call the Estates-General in the fall of
1788.
Although French people across a wide social spectrum were pleased to
hear of the calling of the Estates-General, there was also wide disagreement
about how it should be elected and should conduct its deliberations. Traditionally,
the Estates-General consisted of three estates with equal numbers of deputiesthe
clergy, the nobility, and the commonseach of which had a single
vote. Under this arrangement, the nobility always dominated, since the
clerical deputies included a majority of nobles. While leading nobles
wished to retain this tradition of "voting by order," which
would have ensured their continued dominance, many commoners reacted angrily
(which Chapters 1 and 4 take up in greater detail).
In May 1789 the Estates-General finally met, and social divisions deepened.
Although many publicly pressed for unity among the three orders, the differences
between noble and commoner deputies only grew more irreconcilable. Later
there would be attempts at unity, but for now the problems accelerated.
Within a month, leading deputies from the Third Estate had decided that
to gain a share of power, they would have to seize it. Thus, on 17 June
1789, in a truly radical departure that eclipsed past old regime conflicts,
the deputies of the Third Estate declared that they alone represented
the "nation." Therefore, only they had the right to constitute
the body holding genuine political sovereignty (the authority to consent
to the government). Although, as the documents make clear, the Third Estate
was motivated by a sense of how unproductive and unfair noble privileges
were, by swearing this oath they directly attacked the political basis
of the monarchy. Unsure of how to respond to this declaration of national
sovereignty, the King refused to recognize the Third Estate deputies as
the "National Assembly." At the same time, Louis agreed to become
a constitutional monarch, ruling in consultation with, rather than over,
his people. Over the following year, Louis would follow this ambivalent
posture with regard to the Revolution. On the one hand, after the delegates
of the Third Estate reaffirmed their stance in the famous "tennis
court oath," the King locked them out of their meeting space; on
the other, he participated enthusiastically in a celebration marking the
anniversary of the taking of the Bastille.
|
|
|