Coursework Notes

  • Classic interpretation mainly to describe Marxist and social-revolutionary explanations dominant in the mid-20th century

    • Saw revolution as socially driven, class-based and historically inevitable

    • The feudal system caused deep resentment among the lower orders

    • Rise of the bourgeoisie expanded due to trade and law but lacked political power and equal legal status becoming revolutionary as social progress was blocked

    • Revolution seen as a bourgeois revolution using popular unrest to overthrow feudalism

    • Doyle stresses this interpretation was highly influential and provided clear logical explanation but questions its accuracy by noting it relies on rigid class categories, assumes inevitability and underestimates political contingency

  • Revisionist historians rejected Marxist inevitability and questioned whether France was truly feudal or class-divided

    • Nobility weren't actually declining as were economically successful with many involved in commerce banking and industry so numbers were rising undermining the idea of a decaying feudal elite

    • Social boundaries were blurred as wealthy bourgeois could buy offices, purchase noble status with many bourgeois sought integration not revolution challenging the notion of a hostile bourgeois-noble divide

    • Capitalism and feudalism coexisted with feudal dues often functioning as legal property rights and sources of income compatible with capitalism economic growth occurring within the old regime

    • Shifting focus instead to state finance, administrative failure and political conflict arguing the revolution wasn’t socially inevitable and resulted from a political crisis of the state

    • Doyle accepts that Marxism overstated class conflict, agrees that elite were often prosperous however warns revisionism can downplay genuine social tension and ignore popular grievances

    • Edexcel tip: chapter essential for showing historiographical change from social determinism to political contingency

  • Post revisionists attempt to move beyond the Marxist vs revisionist divide combining social tensions, political culture and short-term crisis Doyle positioning himself closest to this

    • The revolution emerged from financial breakdown, political conflict, ideological change, social anxiety with no lone factor causing it- their interaction with one another did

    • Enlightenment ideas shaped expectations of reform, ideas of representation and "nation" with political debate becoming more public and critical and opposition framing itself as defending "liberty" and "law" but didn’t automatically cause the revolution didn’t make it inevitable

    • Elite conflict was still central as aristocrats and magistrates resisted royal reform with their actions weakening royal authority

      • However Doyle notes didn’t intend revolution and events spiraled beyond their control

    • Importance of contingency meaning wasn’t inevitable and resulted from misjudgments, escalating crises and the collapse of authority (1787-89) 


Aristocratic revolution at the start and changes over time

Bourgeoisie are paying taxation without representation as clergy and nobility are exempt

As Bourgeoisie become wealthier and more educated, they feel like they deserve more

If Bourgeoisie are becoming wealthier and can buy their way into nobility - it exposes a plot hole in the Marxist theory as there is a way for them to get what they want

Marxist historians theory does not mean working class revolution it means that there was class conflict


Danton says that people on the street becoming increasingly literate, they might not be bourgeoise or wealthy but they pump out material at a high rate and it floods the ecosystem and that ideas enlightenment related and its saturating public opinion


 2. LEVVRE

  • decline in the value of skilled workers and crafsmen felt as if they didnt have power compared to the factory owners above them - from the ranks of these people were to be see recruited the sans-culottes

  • Laymen were prevented by the church monopoly from teaching - aspect of regime they didnt like

  • those who were printers, booksellers, men of letters and pamphleteers were of importance at least in Paris - alot of people described lawyers wihtout cases - forced to just write for a living like Desmoulins and Brisot and unclassed nobles like Mirabeau

  • “for centuries the bourgeois, envious of the aristocracy had aimed only at thrusting himself into its ranks”

  • by people cutting their name in half like Derobespierres and Danton to d’anton trying to seem as if they were in the 2nd estate and they gain status

  • the people at the top of the 3rd estate made highly stratified social distinction within the 3rd estate

  • over time it becomes harder the bourgeoisie to rise to the 2nd estate “at the same time, with increasing wealth, the numbers and the ambitions of the bourgeois continued to mount”, suggesting that if the bourgeoisie wanted power they couldnt get it towards the ened of the regime → avoidable if they just made it easier for the bourgeoisie

annoyed disenfranchised bourgeosie classes, paired with the mass spreading of enlightenment ideas gives these people the tools and articulates and gives them the words to use to argue for their way



CHAPTER 5 ESTATES GENERAL

  • the question of “how do we vote” seems procedural and bureacratic but its important as they never get past that barrier - ofc 3rd estate want voting by head due to their large numbers majority


1. Economic Crisis (1780s) — Why France was unstable

Main idea:

France was already weak before 1789, and economic problems pushed it toward revolution.

  • Bad harvests (1787–88) → food shortages

  • Bread prices rose sharply → ordinary people suffered

  • France had a rapidly growing population (20m → 28m+), increasing pressure on food supply

  • Agriculture was unstable because harvests varied heavily year to year

  • Peasants already hated burdens like:

    • taxes

    • rising rents

    • church payments

    • feudal dues

  • Government finances were a disaster:

    • huge debt

    • failed reforms

    • poor leadership

    • bankruptcy threat

Big judgement:
Economic crisis created anger and desperation, but did not automatically cause revolution.

2. Estates-General (May 1789) — Political crisis begins

Main idea:

The Estates-General was called to solve France’s financial crisis, but instead exposed political conflict.

The three estates:

  • 1st Estate = Clergy

  • 2nd Estate = Nobility

  • 3rd Estate = Everyone else

Problem:

  • Voting was traditionally by order (1 vote per estate)

  • This meant clergy + nobility could outvote the Third Estate 2–1

  • Third Estate wanted voting by head (each deputy gets a vote)

Result:
Massive deadlock.

3. Why the Third Estate became radical

Main idea:

The Third Estate felt deliberately blocked and humiliated.

Reasons:

  • Represented most of France but had less real power

  • Nobles resisted reform to protect privilege

  • Government gave no clear leadership

  • Public disorder and panic were rising

  • Rumours of aristocratic plots increased tension

This made compromise harder.

4. National Assembly (June 1789)

Main idea:

The Third Estate stopped waiting and claimed power themselves.

Key events:

  • 10 June: Third Estate invited other estates to join them

  • Some clergy joined

  • 17 June: Third Estate declared itself the National Assembly

Meaning:
They claimed to represent the French nation, not just one estate.

This was revolutionary because sovereignty was shifting away from the king.

5. Royal mistakes made things worse

Main idea:

Louis XVI handled the crisis badly.

Problems:

  • indecisive

  • slow

  • unclear

  • tried to defend old structures

  • gathered troops near Versailles (looked threatening)

This convinced many the king might use force.

6. June 1789 = Revolution becomes real

Main idea:

The crisis escalated because neither side backed down.

By late June:

  • more clergy joined Third Estate

  • nobles became divided

  • public pressure increased

  • king lost authority

The old political system was breaking.

7. August Revolution / End of Old Regime

Main idea:

The Revolution destroyed feudal privilege.

Night of 4 August:
Assembly abolished:

  • feudal dues

  • noble privileges

  • tax exemptions

  • old legal inequalities

Meaning:
The Ancien Régime was effectively destroyed.

8. Declaration of Rights of Man

Main idea:

Revolutionaries created new principles for France.

Core ideas:

  • liberty

  • equality before the law

  • popular sovereignty

  • property rights

  • merit over birth

BUT:
This was not full equality.

Reality:

  • property owners still dominated politics

  • social hierarchy remained

  • many nobles adapted rather than disappeared

Overall argument / big picture

The Revolution happened because economic crisis + political deadlock + weak monarchy + elite resistance combined.

The forces pushing France towards revolution were almost all political - economic factors didnt play an important part and there were no underlying social problems

poor harvest and natural disaster didnt cause the French revolution but it dictated the sort of revolution it turned out to be

political failure = poor invidual decisions

after October, everythig leading up to October 1789 is causes of the revolution

Doyle is saying that the ancien regime is despotic and irresponsible and they cause chaos and that the 3rd estate want to prevent collapse whereas Lefevre is saying that the 3rd estate want to move up the ranks (different motivations for insurrection)

Doyle is saying that one of the priorities was making sure the structure of the ancien regime is clear and understandable, and that doing that is one of the Revolutions greatest achievements

If you are nobled and privileged then you probably own property

Doyle says that nobles and ancien regime make a concious decision to allow the bourgeoise into government which therefore lays the foundation for revolutionary conditions

Parlements kick off is because the financial reforms that the King and ministers are proposing would affect the nobles (who are in the parlement) and they try to defend their rights as nobles

Doyle says its the contingency of the events which lead to the origin of the revolution

Louis is trying to get the assembly and nobles and stuff to pass financial reforms but they are trying to protect their rights in their own interest and reject Louis’s propsals without the calling of the estates - general (not a class conflict, more a loss of faith in government)

Doyle is saying that the cahier is the bridge between people being angry but not knowing why to them being able to articulate their anger and demands

political reforms and events enable the working class people to become revolutionaries, transforming anger into political action to challenge authority



pick out 3 arguments that each historian makes and then present and analyse the argument (2-3 quotations per paragraph) you say this is what they think and add judgements and own knowledge to determine whether their argument makes sense or not