Book Reviews from the June 1968 issue of the Socialist Standard
History of the French Revolution by Jules Michelet (edited by Gordon Wright) University of Chicago Press. 32s
The Crowd in the French Revolution by George F. Rudé OUP Paperback 8s. 6d.
At some stage in the year 1789—the precise moment is debatable—there
occurred in France a great social and political upheaval. This French
Revolution gave rise, in embryonic form, to important concepts such as
the class struggle, revolutionary dictatorship and, in the later stages,
“elitist egalitarianism" in the form of Babeuf’s Conspiracy of the
Equals.
Those, however, who see the revolution as a popular, egalitarian
movement have failed to understand its true character. The French
Revolution was a successful attempt by the bourgeoisie to destroy the
feudalism which shackled their economic enterprise with old-fashioned
regulations and which denied them the political rights they felt were
their due. Throughout the, revolution’s course it was the bourgeoisie
which controlled the various legislatures and executives, and its
results were trade and commerce emancipated from feudalism, a law
banning any trade unions (le loi Le Chapelier) and a system of
indirect election benefitting the well-to-do. This was, of course,
before Napoleon imposed upon the revolution the dynastic ambitions of
the Buonaparte family.
There are, indeed, those who have protested that the first National
Assembly, far from being a body composed of strictly bourgeois elements,
was in fact packed with lawyers and other members of the liberal
professions. But lawyers have always represented the interests of trade,
commerce and industry—activities which are essential to their
prosperity. The doctors, journalists and other professional people who
sat as legislators were all notably in sympathy with liberal economic
doctrines, and they were always shown to be afraid of popular uprisings
such as that in Paris in July 1789. Thus the professions had effectively
allied themselves with merchants, industrialists, bankers and
agriculturalists, and could be relied upon to serve their interest.
These two books represent, in widely differing form, attempts to understand the role of the common people in the revolution. Michelet’s History
first appeared in seventeen volumes in the 1840’s (of which this
edition is a continuous selection). As such it is a good example of, and
a grand monument to its age. Michelet is as much French Romaniticism’s
representative historian as Victor Hugo is its representative literary
figure. With a vigorous style, full of life, Michelet gives us his
impassioned, apocalyptic and panoramic view of the revolution as the
climax of the spiritual battle between the Catholic Order and the
“principle of Justice”.
Unfortunately, in his eagerness to present the revolution as the victory
of a united force—“the people”—Michelet overlooks important points of
detail and produces certain inaccuracies. So insistent is he, for
instance, in asserting that the revolution was a spontaneous outbreak of
“Justice” and “the People” against a misery and oppression which he
paints very eloquently, that he overlooks important differences in the
interests of the bourgeoisie and “the people”, the main one being the
contradictory demands of free trade and controlled bread prices.
Michelet’s book, however, has certain valuable aspects. It contains a
brilliantly eloquent denunciation of Christian theology and extremely
shrewd assessments of the true character of the so-called Absolute
Monarchy and the mediaeval church in France.
Totally different in character and outlook is George Rudé The Crowd in the French Revolution.
Originally published in 1959 and now available in paperback, it was
described by one historian as “a significant book which opened up some
entirely new sources and showed how statistical precision can be brought
to the study of riots”. It is indeed a close study of the behaviour and
composition of the Parisian crowd. Rudé, writing from the Marxist
viewpoint, is concerned with breaking away from the tradition which
until recent times treated the crowd, as he says, “as a disembodied
abstraction and the personification of good or evil”, and with examining
the crowd in a more scientific spirit. (The book is amply supplied with
tables showing the composition, geographically and class-wise, of the
crowd and the prices of various commodities at different stages of the
revolution).
The crowd, or sans-culottes—called thus because they could not
afford breeches—was a heterogeneous body, composed not only of the
working class but of small shopkeepers and independent craftsmen as
well. Rudé paints a picture of a working class still in transition
between feudal and capitalist societies, and not truly distinct from
other sans-cullote elements.
However, although the wage-earners in Paris had as yet developed little
class solidarity, they did have a vague idea of their cohesion as a
class. The breakup of the guild system had accentuated the gulf between
masters and journeymen, and there had been a strike as early as 1724.
Disputes over wages and conditions continued up till 1789. However, the
large demands which food made upon a man’s wages produced a situation
where the crowd was concerned more with keeping down prices than with
raising wages.
Rudé points out that a variety of motives existed for the crowd’s
revolutionary actions, among them dismay at high prices and uncertain
food supplies, a belief at first in the king as its champion against the
aristocracy and the church, and then in a republic. The crowd was not a
totally inarticulate mob merely seeking immediate economic gains.
Although economic factors may have influenced them, strongly and often,
these went hand in hand with beliefs, however unsophisticated, in
political principles.
In this context, Rudé well notes that the bourgeoisie, even at that
early stage, were determined to prevent the wage earners gaining any
influence, and that, although “whenever it (the crowd) advanced . . .
the aims of the revolutionary bourgeoisie, it has been represented as
the embodiment of all popular and Republican virtues”, the bourgeoisie
were unwilling to share power with this “virtuous” body. Property
qualifications were required from would-be representatives. Rudé also
points out “the ferocity with which the bourgeois . . . of the National
Guard dispersed the Champs de Mars demonstration” (a protest at Louis
XVI’s flight from France).
Rudé’s book is an informative and extremely readable study of the popular aspect of the French Revolution.
Amit Pandya
