Introduction
The French Revolution of 1789 was the outcome of mounting tensions between the monarchy,
the aristocracy, and the common people of France. A popular interpretation is that the revolution
was largely triggered by King Louis XVI’s weak leadership and his inability to control a self-
serving nobility. The documents provided support this view, especially in highlighting how noble
privilege obstructed reform and how the king consistently failed to act decisively. Yet, a broader
perspective reveals that economic collapse, social injustice, famine, and new political
philosophies also played vital roles. This essay will argue that to a larger extent, a weak king’s
inability to manage a selfish nobility laid the groundwork for revolution — but the decisive
conditions were formed through wider structural and ideological pressures.
1. The king’s indecision and failure to lead (Doc E)
Historian J.F. Bosher (Doc E) observes that Louis XVI allowed royal authority to “weaken and
wither” through inaction. He failed to take control at key moments — refusing to back reforming
ministers like Turgot and Necker, and often retreating from governance in favor of personal
hobbies such as hunting. He lacked the charisma, willpower, and decisiveness required to
navigate a country in crisis. His passivity in enforcing taxation on the privileged estates only
deepened the state’s financial and political paralysis.
2. The nobility’s resistance to reform (Docs A & C)
Documents A and C show how the nobles persistently blocked reforms aimed at making taxation
more equitable. The Parlement of Paris (Doc A) claimed that the clergy and nobles “rendered
distinguished service” and were therefore above contributing taxes. Likewise, Marquess
d’Alleray (Doc C) argued that permanent taxation without privileges would be akin to creating a
“republic within the monarchy.” These arguments reflect an entrenched aristocratic ideology that
saw privilege not as a reward, but as a birthright — one they refused to sacrifice, even in the face
of national bankruptcy.
3. The Estates General deadlock and its consequences
When the Estates General was summoned in 1789 to solve the financial crisis, the privileged
orders insisted on voting by estate rather than by head — thereby maintaining their dominance
over the much larger Third Estate. The king’s support of this arrangement reflected his
dependence on noble support and further alienated the commoners. This impasse directly led to
the creation of the National Assembly and the beginning of open defiance against royal authority.
4. Enlightenment ideology as fuel for revolution
The ideas of thinkers like Rousseau, Montesquieu, and Voltaire had become popular among the
bourgeoisie and some reform-minded nobles. Montesquieu’s concept of separation of powers and
Rousseau’s belief in natural rights questioned the legitimacy of divine-right monarchy and
absolute rule. These Enlightenment ideals offered an intellectual justification for revolution,
especially as traditional institutions like the monarchy and Church appeared increasingly out of
touch with the people.
5. Marie Antoinette’s influence and symbolism (Doc B)
In Document B, the Queen describes the king exiling critics and imprisoning Parlement
members. She acknowledges the necessity of using force, but also shows unease with this
approach. Her influence over her husband was notorious; she opposed financial reforms that
would reduce noble privilege and supported the dismissal of reformist ministers. Furthermore,
she came to symbolize royal excess, with extravagant spending at court — even as the
population starved — making her an object of scorn and a symbol of elite indifference.
6. Emergence of noble reformism (Doc D)
Document D offers an important exception: some nobles, like those in Roussillon, willingly gave
up tax exemptions and declared themselves citizens first. This suggests a minority of the elite
recognized the need for reform. However, such positions were rare and appeared too late to
counteract the broader resistance among privileged classes, who had historically rejected reforms
in every major forum — including the Assembly of Notables.
7. The role of the Church in upholding privilege
The Catholic Church, particularly the upper clergy, owned vast estates and collected tithes from
peasants while paying no taxes. It monopolized education and denied it to the lower classes.
Meanwhile, lower clergy, often impoverished, sympathized with the common people. This
internal contradiction led many parish priests to break with the First Estate and support the
National Assembly, showing that religious institutions, too, were fractured by inequality.
8. Financial crisis and unequal taxation
By the late 1780s, France was heavily indebted due to wars, including the Seven Years’ War and
support for the American Revolution. Tax burdens fell almost entirely on the Third Estate, who
faced the taille (land tax), gabelle (salt tax), and corvée (forced labor). Meanwhile, the nobility
and clergy enjoyed immunity. Attempts to reform this system were blocked, plunging the state
into fiscal crisis and making revolution a more appealing solution to the burdened population.
9. The impact of famine and rising food prices
France experienced devastating weather from 1787 to 1788, leading to crop failure and
widespread famine. Bread prices soared beyond the reach of commoners. The government was
both unwilling and unable to provide relief. This misery drove thousands to Paris, where hunger
transformed into anger. The March of the Women to Versailles in October 1789 was driven
largely by food shortages, not politics.
10. The rise of the bourgeoisie and class frustration
The middle class — educated, wealthy, yet politically excluded — became key leaders of the
revolution. Lawyers, merchants, and professionals resented a system that denied them influence
while promoting the incompetent through birth. They demanded merit-based appointments, fair
taxation, and political representation. When denied, they provided the organizational force that
guided the revolution from protest to transformation.
11. The influence of the American Revolution
French soldiers who had fought in the American War of Independence returned with new ideas
about liberty, republicanism, and constitutional rights. The success of the American colonies in
defeating royal tyranny abroad deeply impressed many in France and helped radicalize public
discourse, providing both ideological inspiration and practical example for revolution.
12. Nobles manipulated royal policy (Doc A & C)
In defending their privileges (Docs A & C), nobles not only blocked reform but pushed the king
into decisions that deepened the crisis. By insisting on their historical roles as defenders of the
monarchy, they effectively weakened it. Their argument that equality would harm the state was
self-serving — and ultimately, their inflexibility drove the Third Estate to break from the
traditional system altogether.
13. Repression without vision (Doc B)
The imprisonment of Parlement members and exile of critics, as described in Doc B, show
Louis’s willingness to use repression. However, these actions lacked a coherent reform agenda.
The king acted reactively, not proactively. His efforts to impose control merely inflamed tensions
and highlighted the monarchy’s loss of moral and political authority.
14. Strategic missteps and harmful policies
Louis’s economic decisions also show a pattern of poor judgment. His 1786 treaty with Britain
allowed British goods to flood French markets, crippling domestic industries and worsening
urban unemployment. Combined with bad harvests and high taxes, this created a perfect storm of
discontent, especially in the cities, where unrest became revolutionary fervor.
15. The revolution as inevitable once reform was blocked
Ultimately, the monarchy’s failure to implement reform — due to the king’s weakness and the
aristocracy’s selfishness — made revolution unavoidable. Yet the explosion was fueled by more
than just elite conflict. The masses were driven by hunger, poverty, and dreams of a better
system, inspired by Enlightenment ideals and foreign revolutions. Together, these forces created
a movement that could not be stopped.
Conclusion
The evidence clearly supports the view that by 1789, a weak king’s inability to deal with a selfish
nobility was a key factor in creating revolutionary conditions. Documents A, B, C, and E show
the king’s indecisiveness and the nobles’ resistance to reform, both of which rendered peaceful
change impossible. Yet these failings were dangerous precisely because they collided with
structural injustices, economic disaster, Enlightenment ideas, and popular anger. To a larger
extent, it was the king’s failure to manage a rigid and self-interested nobility — in the midst of
national crisis — that allowed revolution to erupt, but this failure must be seen as part of a
broader web of interconnected causes.
