How Did The French Revolution Turn Peasants Into Citizens

The uneven compensation for work completed by German peasants fueled their disdain for the nobility. The forced serfdom of the peasants was an undesirable situation to be in, which caused the peasants to question the motives of the nobility. “The Articles of the Peasants of Memmingen” shows how peasants were forcibly repressed into serfdom unless they paid the “lords” a “reasonable amount of money” (Doc 4). The peasants had to pay for their freedom from serfdom, which explains why “they believe the rich should share with the poor, especially those rich persons who had acquired their rich property… or had otherwise won it from the poor” (Doc 8). The peasants realized the oppression that the nobility was putting them through with unfair acquisition of land and of peasantry serfdom that the peasants felt that their

The French Revolution began in the year of 1789, which would soon change the course of history for both France and surrounding nations. During this time, peasants were rebelling because they were being treated unfairly and changes needed to be made for the future of the country. While rebelling, the people used some of the ideas from the American Revolution, which had a positive impact on the people. The revolution did not only affect the French people, but it also had an impact on the countries watching. One can argue that the French Revolution wasn’t effective, however, the members of the third estate rebelled because they weren’t given social or economical equality and their rebellious actions lead to a change in government and the Declaration

In the 16th century, European social hierarchy consisted of the superior classes, such as the nobles, who got special privileges, and the inferior classes, like the peasants, who were treated unfairly. This caused social tension and stress between the different social classes. Gradually, the peasants’ anger caused by differences in politics, religion, and economy culminated to create the violent peasant revolts that occurred from 1524 to 1526. The peasants’ belief that God gave them the right to rebel, their desire for a mutually respectful relationship with their lords, their demand for release from serfdom, and their requirement by the lords to do their work are what caused the German peasant revolts to arise. Consequently, the responses

During the Early Modern Period (around 1500-1800), the many peasants of Europe rebelled more and more against those in power. Though, by modern standards, rebellion seeks to change and reform a system, peasant rebellions sought to revert to a former status quo or keep the existing system of governance. As the documents show, rebellions’ goals were focused on a fairness towards the mistreated lower class in alignment with their Christian beliefs. The Early Modern Period is a notably violent moment in history, with many wars and bloody uprisings.

The population losses among the previously overpopulated peasant class, who at this time were underemployed due to this overpopulation, were able to haggle for higher wages and better terms when it came to working, renting, and owning land. At the same time, the sudden loss in population meant the nobles could not demand high prices for product which weakened their power of wealth. This coupled with the higher earning wages of the peasant class meant they could move up in the social order to become farmers themselves or merchants of equal social standing. This period of social mobility didn’t last long, but it allowed for the end of feudalism as it was known during the Middle Ages. The end of feudalism meant the end of kings and nobles being able to give land in return for anything they could ever need including food and protection from knights. While it was still an important part of social class, land was no longer in the very center controlling every decision. In the years before the Black Death, it was the peasants who gave food and work to the knights. The knights then gave protection to nobles which gave money and the knights’ protection to the kings. In return, the king passed down land throughout the social classes. Although, the lower classes had the opportunity to accumulate land for the services they provided, in the end

Peasant Society (pg 18): In 1450, most European were peasant, farmworkers who lived in small villages. There working rights were taken in for labor workers. They also created local markets to help their economy.

In 1798 utilitarian Thomas Malthus published An Essay on the Principle of Population as an argument against an utopian society based on social and economic equality. Malthus believed that if the human population is left unchecked then the population would outgrow the resources necessary to maintain the population. Malthus’s argued that the population will continue to grow and the burden will unavoidably put on the poor population. However, the inequality of population would be a good thing in terms of controlling the population.

The eighteenth century revolutions predate the Marxist framework which would ultimately changed the way in which revolutions are understood; as highly participatory mass-moments which sought to change some kind of social order. Gordon Wood acknowledges this as he states; “The social distinctions and economic deprivations that we today think of as the consequences of class divisions…were in the eighteenth century usually thought to be caused by abuses in government.” Skocpol also acknowledges the difference between modern and what the “liberal revolutions” of the eighteenth century. She writes that all revolutions that occur within the modern capitalist systems accomplish nothing but a more concentrated and centralized state bureaucracy. However Skocpol’s analysis takes a retrospective structuralist approach to understanding these eighteenth century social revolutions. Her analysis does not rely on the deprivation hypothesis nor any kind of ideology, but instead highlights the importance of the “revolutionary moment” where elites and peasants unite (through an “equal powers” negotiation) against the state (Stevens 10/16/17). By applying Skocpol’s model to the French, Haitian, and American Revolutions, we can see how well it holds up when applied to these various intertwined 18th century revolutions despite their drastically different outcomes.

Peasants were members of the lowest class, those who work. They were the most common class. They were the millers, blacksmiths, butchers, carpenters, farmers, and other trades people. Peasant women in particular, spent much of their time taking care of children, making clothes, and cooking meals. They also tended gardens, took care of animals by tending chicken, shearing sheep, and milking cows (Cels 16). Within peasants, there were two main groups of people, the serfs and the freemen. Both were employed by the lords. And serfs were people that paid more fees, and had less rights. Freemen on the other hand paid less fees and had more rights than serfs (Noiret). While freemen could leave the manor when at whim, serfs were not allowed to leave

The next group to be focused on in the sixteenth century in the village of Artigat is the group known as the peasants. The peasants were not able to enjoy lives filled with lavish and did not have many or any privileges at all. This is shown in the text when it talks about a family that belongs to the group of the peasants it states, “In contrast to the village elite we come across Beard Bertrand and his wife, who have an inadequate sixteen sesterees of land to support themselves and six children” (Davis 12). This showed the struggle of a peasant who was living in a sixteenth century village. It illustrates a life of struggle due to not having enough land or wealth to provide for one’s family. The text expands on the struggle of the peasants

From 1300 to 1750, for the average peasant, people’s work and social life mixed, families lived on small pieces of lands growing their own crops at home.They lived in small cottages or, the richer people, who lived in castles. But during the

It is easy for a contemporary observer to think that with all the hardships of life on the manor, life in medieval cities would have been better for commoners. Although cities offered valuable experience and opportunities, it was extremely difficult to find jobs in large cities, while there was a more consistent pay, food and shelter when living on a manor. This essay will analyze the positives and negatives of life on manors, as well as the positives and negatives of life in the cities for commoners. Despite the many negatives, the evidence suggests that life on the manors for peasants in the middle ages was mostly better than life in the cities.

Is the French Revolution best understood as a ‘class struggle’, or were the major divisions instead about attitudes to monarchy, privilege and religion?

Life as a serf or peasant was not easy. Serfs were bound to their lord's land and required to do services for him. Although they could not be sold like slaves, they had no freedom (Ellis and Esler 219-244). Peasants farmed for the goods that the lord and his manor needed. They went through difficult hardship because of this. Peasants were heavily taxed and had to provide for themselves the goods that they needed (“The Middle Ages”). According to the medieval law, the peasants were not considered to 'belong to' themselves (“The Middle Ages”). Although serfs were peasants and had relatively the same duties and similar rights, what differentiated a peasant from a serf was that a peasant was not bound to the land (“The Middle Ages”). Peasants had no schooling and no knowledge of the outside world (Ellis and Esler 219-244). They rarely traveled more than a couple miles outside of their villages. All members of a peasant family, including children, tended crops, farmed, and did some sort of work to help out (Ellis and Esler 224). Very few peasants lived past the age of 35 because of hunger in the winter and the easy development and transmission of disease (Ellis and Esler 224).

For many centuries, a feudal system had been in use in France. The peasants and serfs