Economic French Revolution
During the era of constitutional monarchy, the government undertook a programme to reform France. This increased tension among various numbers of groups who condemned the policies. The economic climate played an important role in weakening the constitutional monarchy. However, the analysis of key events and actions will show that the economic climate was not the sole aspect in causing the downfall of the monarchy. Many other factors contribute to the downfall of the monarchy. The actions of Louis XVI, divisions within the revolutionary movement, and the role of the Sans Culottes and the political clubs also had a crucial part to play in the years leading to the monarchy’s collapse in 1792. Source 1, 2 and 3 offer a range of views supporting
…show more content…
and disagreeing with the statement. Source 1, explains how the economic situation led to becoming a major problem for the government in France. Source 2, an excerpt from David Andrews’ The Terror, attributes the cause of the downfall of the monarchy to the actions of Louis and his wife. Source 3 refers to the cause of the weakening position of the constitutional monarchy.
It is fair to state that the deteriorating economic climate played a crucial role in bringing the downfall of the monarchy. Source 1 supports this statement to an extent, “1791 harvest was poor, causing food prices to start rising…” describing how the economic situation was deteriorating in the early years of the Revolution. Source 1 eludes that the worsening economic situation infuriated the most of the public, who took part in ‘subsistence riots’ leading to the murder of Mayor Simmoneau in March 1792 for ‘failing to agree to the fixing of bread prices’. Historical evidence of the food shortage in Paris, which led to a crowd of women to storm the Hotel de Ville demanding for bread, can be used to partially agree with the statement. The rise in bread prices was not helped by the depreciating assignats and rising inflation, and therefore, kept the financial crisis in France to build up and lead to food riots to occur.
It could be argued that the worsening economic situation from the war generated discontent amongst the radicalised urban poor and so led to support for political clubs, such as the Jacobins. Therefore, as supported by Source 1 and 2, the deteriorating economic climate played a significant role in the breaking down of the constitutional monarchy. Again, Source 2 collaborates with Source 1 over the military situation. The cost of war had resulted in the economy to worsen. This clearly supports the statement since the war restricted the government in spending on poor relief. Therefore, this angered most of the public who felt that the monarchy was to be blamed for the worsening economic situation, which affected mainly the poor.
Source 2 shows the importance of Louis and his wife in the years leading up to the war with Austria and Prussia.
“He was seen to be working with Marie Antoinette…” to arrange, “the massacre of all patriots”. This indicates that the King and his wife were working against the Revolution and did not support the constitutional monarchy. Source 2 implies how the King and Queen were seen as enemies to the Revolution and how they caused the public to gain the incentive to go against the monarchy. Historical evidence suggests that Marie Antoinette betrayed France in the soul aim to bring back absolute monarchy. Apparently, she sent details of French military plans to the Austrians. This claim is supported by Source 2, where Marie Antoinette “had discussed French military strategic nuggets of military information in letters to Axel von Fersen”; it showed the monarchy as traitors to the Revolution. This put Marie in a bad light with her family declaring war on France. The rising tension with Austria meant that the monarchy could no longer be rulers of France; the public backed the Revolution and saw anyone against it as enemies. This led to the monarchy to fail. Source 2 clearly suggests that the King was prominent in the counter revolution. Talks arose over the thought that a dead King would subdue all talk of anti-revolution. Consequently, the ferocious protestors believed that violence was the best way to achieve their aims. Therefore, it should be argued that the monarchy did not …show more content…
fall only because of the deteriorating economic climate, but also for the reason that the King and his wife were against the Revolution since they passed on military strategic plans on to Austria to have the French defeated. This angered the public and so ignited the rise of the political clubs, which were essential in spreading the cause for a Republic.
Furthermore, what made clear the fact that the King was an enemy to the Revolution was the flight to Varennes. This is a perfect example of Louis making consistent errors which gave him a negative image towards the public. Louis’ proclamation during the flight to Varennes was clear evidence that he was anti-revolutionary. This is significant since it boosted support for a republic and decreased the chances of constitutional monarchy to survive. The significance of the flight to Varennes is noted in “Among those who had been republicans since Varennes” indicating the event was one of many reasons to see the King as a ‘perjured traitor’. Also, with the fear of the counter-revolution, a sense of panic was created. In this situation, it is expected that the King would try to make the public feel a sense of trustworthiness in him. However, when all refractory priests and émigré nobles were declared traitors, the King vetoed these laws. This evidently showed him to be even more untrustworthy than he already was. Source 2, therefore, disagrees with the statement by suggesting that the role of King Louis and Marie Antoinette were also a very important cause of the downfall of the constitutional monarchy.
Moreover, Source 3 claims that the true role of the deteriorating economic situation was not the breakdown of order.
It was the ‘demands for a republic returned and developed.’ This indicates that the economic climate was significant in the downfall of the monarchy since it enabled revolutionaries to see the economic protest as a chance to show their demands for a republic. This increased tension as well as accumulating strength to the drive for a republic. Source 1 agrees with this argument stating that “the political temperature in a rapidly polarising situation was raised by the deteriorating economic situation”. An important factor to discuss when concerned with the failure of the constitutional monarchy is the rise of the political clubs. Source 2, “those who had been republicans since Varennes” implies that the people became republicans because of the rising tension created by the flight to Varennes. It is fairly accurate to say that the Jacobins played an influential role in the rising tension amongst the public. Source 3 supports this claim, where the demand for a republic, “put forward by the Parisian sections and upheld by the Jacobins”, suggesting that the leading Jacobins, such as Robespierre played a crucial role in advancing the republic movement. This rise in popularity can be supported by the fact that after the flight to Varennes, radicals were angry at the Constituent Assembly, which ‘no longer represented the people’. The Cordeliers took the lead and
persuaded the Jacobins to join them in the aim to remove the King.
In conclusion, the poor economic conditions affecting France after 1791 were influential in causing the breaking down the constitutional monarchy. Source 1 mostly agrees with this view, since it argues about how the economic climate raised political tension. Therefore, causing, riots to occur, which evidently had a significant impact on the sans-culottes and the gain of control for the Jacobins. However, source 2 and source 3 heavily question the truth in the statement, and hence, disagree with it. They argue that the tension rising from foreign intervention of Austria and the actions of the King and his wife was significant in causing war. This effectively ended any chance of constitutional monarchy to survive, since French people increased their hatred towards the monarchy because of the defeat. However, the sans-culottes were also important, as referred to in source 3 and own knowledge, since they created the greatest conflict in the attack of the Tuilleries which brought out the weakness of the King. On the other hand, it should be argued that source 2 and 3 point out why the political clubs also had a significant impact on the downfall of the monarchy. Therefore, referring back to the statement in question, it is agreed that the deteriorating economic climate did not bring about ‘the downfall of constitutional monarchy in France in 1792’.
and disagreeing with the statement. Source 1, explains how the economic situation led to becoming a major problem for the government in France. Source 2, an excerpt from David Andrews’ The Terror, attributes the cause of the downfall of the monarchy to the actions of Louis and his wife. Source 3 refers to the cause of the weakening position of the constitutional monarchy.
It is fair to state that the deteriorating economic climate played a crucial role in bringing the downfall of the monarchy. Source 1 supports this statement to an extent, “1791 harvest was poor, causing food prices to start rising…” describing how the economic situation was deteriorating in the early years of the Revolution. Source 1 eludes that the worsening economic situation infuriated the most of the public, who took part in ‘subsistence riots’ leading to the murder of Mayor Simmoneau in March 1792 for ‘failing to agree to the fixing of bread prices’. Historical evidence of the food shortage in Paris, which led to a crowd of women to storm the Hotel de Ville demanding for bread, can be used to partially agree with the statement. The rise in bread prices was not helped by the depreciating assignats and rising inflation, and therefore, kept the financial crisis in France to build up and lead to food riots to occur.
It could be argued that the worsening economic situation from the war generated discontent amongst the radicalised urban poor and so led to support for political clubs, such as the Jacobins. Therefore, as supported by Source 1 and 2, the deteriorating economic climate played a significant role in the breaking down of the constitutional monarchy. Again, Source 2 collaborates with Source 1 over the military situation. The cost of war had resulted in the economy to worsen. This clearly supports the statement since the war restricted the government in spending on poor relief. Therefore, this angered most of the public who felt that the monarchy was to be blamed for the worsening economic situation, which affected mainly the poor.
Source 2 shows the importance of Louis and his wife in the years leading up to the war with Austria and Prussia.
“He was seen to be working with Marie Antoinette…” to arrange, “the massacre of all patriots”. This indicates that the King and his wife were working against the Revolution and did not support the constitutional monarchy. Source 2 implies how the King and Queen were seen as enemies to the Revolution and how they caused the public to gain the incentive to go against the monarchy. Historical evidence suggests that Marie Antoinette betrayed France in the soul aim to bring back absolute monarchy. Apparently, she sent details of French military plans to the Austrians. This claim is supported by Source 2, where Marie Antoinette “had discussed French military strategic nuggets of military information in letters to Axel von Fersen”; it showed the monarchy as traitors to the Revolution. This put Marie in a bad light with her family declaring war on France. The rising tension with Austria meant that the monarchy could no longer be rulers of France; the public backed the Revolution and saw anyone against it as enemies. This led to the monarchy to fail. Source 2 clearly suggests that the King was prominent in the counter revolution. Talks arose over the thought that a dead King would subdue all talk of anti-revolution. Consequently, the ferocious protestors believed that violence was the best way to achieve their aims. Therefore, it should be argued that the monarchy did not …show more content…
fall only because of the deteriorating economic climate, but also for the reason that the King and his wife were against the Revolution since they passed on military strategic plans on to Austria to have the French defeated. This angered the public and so ignited the rise of the political clubs, which were essential in spreading the cause for a Republic.
Furthermore, what made clear the fact that the King was an enemy to the Revolution was the flight to Varennes. This is a perfect example of Louis making consistent errors which gave him a negative image towards the public. Louis’ proclamation during the flight to Varennes was clear evidence that he was anti-revolutionary. This is significant since it boosted support for a republic and decreased the chances of constitutional monarchy to survive. The significance of the flight to Varennes is noted in “Among those who had been republicans since Varennes” indicating the event was one of many reasons to see the King as a ‘perjured traitor’. Also, with the fear of the counter-revolution, a sense of panic was created. In this situation, it is expected that the King would try to make the public feel a sense of trustworthiness in him. However, when all refractory priests and émigré nobles were declared traitors, the King vetoed these laws. This evidently showed him to be even more untrustworthy than he already was. Source 2, therefore, disagrees with the statement by suggesting that the role of King Louis and Marie Antoinette were also a very important cause of the downfall of the constitutional monarchy.
Moreover, Source 3 claims that the true role of the deteriorating economic situation was not the breakdown of order.
It was the ‘demands for a republic returned and developed.’ This indicates that the economic climate was significant in the downfall of the monarchy since it enabled revolutionaries to see the economic protest as a chance to show their demands for a republic. This increased tension as well as accumulating strength to the drive for a republic. Source 1 agrees with this argument stating that “the political temperature in a rapidly polarising situation was raised by the deteriorating economic situation”. An important factor to discuss when concerned with the failure of the constitutional monarchy is the rise of the political clubs. Source 2, “those who had been republicans since Varennes” implies that the people became republicans because of the rising tension created by the flight to Varennes. It is fairly accurate to say that the Jacobins played an influential role in the rising tension amongst the public. Source 3 supports this claim, where the demand for a republic, “put forward by the Parisian sections and upheld by the Jacobins”, suggesting that the leading Jacobins, such as Robespierre played a crucial role in advancing the republic movement. This rise in popularity can be supported by the fact that after the flight to Varennes, radicals were angry at the Constituent Assembly, which ‘no longer represented the people’. The Cordeliers took the lead and
persuaded the Jacobins to join them in the aim to remove the King.
In conclusion, the poor economic conditions affecting France after 1791 were influential in causing the breaking down the constitutional monarchy. Source 1 mostly agrees with this view, since it argues about how the economic climate raised political tension. Therefore, causing, riots to occur, which evidently had a significant impact on the sans-culottes and the gain of control for the Jacobins. However, source 2 and source 3 heavily question the truth in the statement, and hence, disagree with it. They argue that the tension rising from foreign intervention of Austria and the actions of the King and his wife was significant in causing war. This effectively ended any chance of constitutional monarchy to survive, since French people increased their hatred towards the monarchy because of the defeat. However, the sans-culottes were also important, as referred to in source 3 and own knowledge, since they created the greatest conflict in the attack of the Tuilleries which brought out the weakness of the King. On the other hand, it should be argued that source 2 and 3 point out why the political clubs also had a significant impact on the downfall of the monarchy. Therefore, referring back to the statement in question, it is agreed that the deteriorating economic climate did not bring about ‘the downfall of constitutional monarchy in France in 1792’.