French government in the 18th century. France in the 18th century Beginning of the French Revolution. Domestic policy of France at the beginning of the 18th century

Industry, commerce and agriculture achieved notable results in the 17th century, primarily due to the economic policy of absolutism. Under King Henry IV, the collection of taxes was streamlined, and the introduction of new crops began. The import of finished products into the country was sharply limited and the export of industrial raw materials was prohibited. During the years of Richelieu's reign (1624-1642), many new manufactories were created in France, and a merchant fleet was built. Under the Minister of Finance, Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1665-1683), the volume of the royal talis was reduced from 50 million to 35 million livres per year, which allowed the seigneurs to more effectively collect taxes from the peasants both in their own favor and in favor of the king. Under Colbert, taxation of industry and commerce increased, especially through indirect taxes. Under him, a whole system of measures was developed to increase exports and reduce imports. During these years, French manufactories (especially the so-called royal ones) received great support from the state. Experienced craftsmen were invited from abroad to work in various industries. All this allowed the products of French manufactories to compete in European markets. In the second half of the 17th century, France began an active seizure of overseas territories, including in India, Canada, and the West Indies. Particular attention was paid to the development of the North American territory along the banks of the Mississippi River, recaptured from Spain and named Louisiana. In 1664, the French East India Company was formed to trade in South and Southeast Asia.

At the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th centuries, France found itself in a period of economic crisis, because. feudal crisis broke out. In addition, there is a crisis of the workshop - the violent organization of manufactories, there is no free labor force. Feudal land is liquidated as agrarian space. Prosperous peasants ("granzhane") are formed. Census ("chinsh") - a form of feudal rent in the form of a tax (was levied by the central government in favor of the feudal lord). But not all peasants switched to qualifications - in some places there were corvee and dues. On the other hand, serfdom disappeared as a personal form of dependence of the peasant. A huge amount of taxes was imposed, which took away about 70% of the income. This is shampar - a tax on land (20-30% of income), and tag - a tax on the maintenance of state. apparatus, gabel - salt tax (50% of the price of salt). Rent payments were collected in cash. The third estate appears in France. City dwellers paid utility bills, not taxes.

In the second half of the 18th century, France took second place in Europe in terms of economic development. The industry was dominated by small centralized manufactories. In 1716, the Central Bank was formed in France. In 1719 it was renamed the Royal Bank and nationalized. In the 1720s, France fell into a period of financial crisis associated with the fact that the director of the Royal Bank, John Law, undertook an unprecedented adventure. In 1716, in the face of an acute shortage of metallic money, the Banque Generale issued a huge amount of paper money. This mass of money was not provided with material values ​​and gold and foreign exchange reserves, so paper money soon depreciated and inflation began to rise in the country. Agrarian problems became the main prerequisite for the growth of contradictions in society, since the noble monopoly on land remained the basis of agricultural production in France. The last straw was another budget crisis caused by the exorbitant expenses of the Bourbon royal family, whose needs always did not match the budget. By the end of the 1780s, the budget deficit exceeded 100 million livres (with tax collection of about 650 million livres per year). It's time for a revolution.

The main prerequisite for the growth of contradictions in society was agricultural problems, since the basis of agricultural production in France was still the noble monopoly on land. In the second halfXVIII century, of the 26 million people who made up the population of the country, 22 million were peasants, who for the most part were on the quitrent system. The main form of peasant payments was the qualification, or cash dues, as well as a number of other payments, in the amount of 25-30% of the value of the land. In some places natural quitrent (champar) was preserved; its value reached 20-25% of the grain yield. There was also a corvée - from 5 to 15 days a year, banalities persisted everywhere. Some of the land was leased by the seigneurs and representatives of the bourgeoisie who bought the land. Most often, rent took the form of share-cropping, i.e. half of the crop should be given to the owner of the land, as a rule, in kind, and also to work out the corvee in harvesting, in repair work on the estate, etc. Seniors could uncontrollably impose countless taxes on the peasants: ferry, bridge, lift, for the right to fish, etc. .d. The peasants suffered great losses due to the fact that nobles and the royal court hunted in their fields. Under pain of punishment, they could not destroy pigeons and rabbits that were damaging crops. Neither the censors nor the tenants could get away from the feudal lords, since they were completely entangled in debts. There was no one to complain to the peasants, since everywhere the decisive role belonged to the seigneurial courts, which mercilessly punished the peasants for the slightest misconduct. There were so many different duties that the nobility and clergy kept a strict record of them in special books. The number of arrears with which the peasants could not pay off was constantly increasing, and for their non-payment it was allowed to take away cattle and other peasant property.

In addition to feudal obligations, the peasants had to pay debts to usurers, since they had to constantly borrow considerable sums for housekeeping. But the heaviest were various taxes. In addition to the royal talya, which increased more than 2.2 times during the 18th century, the peasants also paid the state a poll tax and "twenty" - 1/20 of their crops. The church "tithe" was also preserved. Particularly heavy oppression fell on the peasants indirect taxes, and in the first place - gabel(salt tax). Peasants were required to buy at least 7 pounds of salt per person (about 3.5 kg) annually at a price set by the state, since the sale of salt was a state monopoly. Violation of this monopoly was punished very strictly - hard labor, exile to the galleys. All this led to the fact that the peasants did not have the means to increase production, improve the cultivation of the land. And since the feudal-dependent peasants made up the bulk of the economically active population, it became clear that such relations were a brake on the development of a market economy. In addition, French agriculture in the 18th century experienced 30 lean years that brought the country's agriculture to the brink of complete collapse.

France of the era of the "old order". The second half of the 18th century is the final stage of the "old order" - the political and socio-economic regime of France. The concept of the "old order" entered the scientific circulation after the appearance in 1856 of the book by Alexis Tocqueville "The old regime and revolution"

This "old order" appeared approximately at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th centuries. As the French historian P. Huber wrote, “The monarchy of the Old Order was born in civil wars... in the second half of the 16th century.

Features of the "old order" largely predetermined the French Revolution and its character. According to P. Huber, the “old order” is, first of all, a form of society.” A connoisseur of modern history A. Tocqueville wrote that "without a clear idea of ​​the old society" it is not possible to understand the French Revolution.

economic position France in latest quarters of the 18th century; general characteristics . France entered the last quarter of the 18th century, being one of the most developed and populous European countries. In terms of population (27 million in 1775), it was only relatively slightly inferior to Russia (30 million), was in a more or less equal position with Austria and significantly surpassed Spain (a little over 10 million), England (about 10 million .) and Prussia (6 million).

France made great strides in the 18th century in heavy industry. Wealthy noble families invested in it. At the end of the century, more than 50% of metallurgical enterprises belonged to the nobility, more than 9% - to the church. It was during this period that the noble family of the Vandels founded the famous metallurgical plant in Creusot, where in 1787 the first coke smelting in France was carried out. In the 80s, the use of the first steam engines began.

In France, as P. Huber writes, the financial system functioned successfully in general; the solid silver content of the French livre was recorded (about 4.5 g of silver), which remained unchanged almost until the revolution of 1789.

France's foreign trade developed rapidly and grew 5-6 times during the 18th century. In terms of its total volume, France ranked second in the world after England. Moreover, the gap between the two countries gradually narrowed, as French foreign trade grew at a faster pace.

Hundreds of French ships from France carried rum and fabrics to Africa, where they filled the holds with black slaves for the plantations of the West Indies, from where they returned to the metropolis loaded with raw sugar, coffee, indigo and cotton. Colonial raw materials were processed at numerous enterprises that surrounded the seaports, after which the finished products were partly consumed in the country itself, partly sold abroad. Foreign trade stimulated the development of shipbuilding, textile and food industries.

Internal trade also developed. This was facilitated, in particular, by road construction; over 40 years, 4,000 km of roads were built. 30 The construction of roads, bridges and canals launched by the state contributed not only to the expansion of domestic trade, but also to the specialization of various regions in the production of certain types of products for the market.

There was progress in agriculture. Large noble and farming households were oriented to the market, specialization was established. At the same time, “agronomic education” was carried out; educational agricultural societies worked with the active support of the authorities. In general, the growth of the gross agricultural product from 1709 to 1780 amounted to 40%.

However, like the mythical Tantalus, who suffered from hunger in the midst of an abundance of food, as A. Tocqueville wrote, the majority of the population in the rich, economically developed France of that time was burdened with problems and suffering.

The last decades of the "old order" for some Frenchmen remained in memory as the years of greatness, for the majority - as the years of a vivid manifestation of the "squalor and vices" of French society.

Class structure of French society. On the "upper floors" of French society were the nobility and the clergy. They had exceptional economic opportunities and political rights. The French historian R. Munier, studying the social status of the nobility, its hierarchy, singled out the court nobility and the highest provincial nobility into separate groups.

G. Richard, studying the economic activities of the nobility, notes the activity of the aristocratic part of this social stratum in the metallurgical industry, as well as in the activities of joint-stock companies. His research made it possible to single out two economic types among the higher nobility, who had their own economic preferences and interests: the "new" or "business" nobility and the old tribal nobility.

According to E.A. Kutseva, a progressive-minded minority stood out among the French high nobility, applying new technologies in the economic sphere (in agriculture and industry) and adhering to liberal views in politics, which actively sought to transform the country.

English historians A. Milward and S. Saul calculated that in France at the end of the 18th century the average income of the aristocracy was 10 times higher than the average income of the bourgeoisie.

Most government posts could only be occupied by nobles, they also formed parliaments, where it was almost impossible for representatives of the third estate to get into.

To enter the "upper floors" of French society, the sale of titles of nobility was put into practice. The new stratum of nobility, formed through the purchase of titles, was called the "nobility of the mantle", while the old hereditary aristocracy was called the "nobility of the sword". According to many historians, by the XVIII century. any significant differences between the new and the old nobility disappeared, and they formed a single "caste".

The attitude towards the nobility in France was far from revered. The words "aristocrats" and "aristocracy" at that time became abusive, and the nobles themselves and their families became the object of terror, bullying and attacks from the masses. French historians F. Furet and D. Richet believe that this was the result of a “humiliation complex” that formed among the masses of ordinary French.

As for the third estate, it included about 98% of the population of France, and was heterogeneous. The largest social groups in its composition were the peasantry (more than 85% of the population) and the bourgeoisie. The "bourgeoisie" in France was understood as the middle class, which had a good income, its own "bourgeois" lifestyle. The mentioned historians A. Milward and S. Saul wrote that the income of the bourgeoisie was about 10 times higher than the average income of workers and peasants.

Those "bourgeois" who managed to get rich, buy themselves a title of nobility, left the ranks of the bourgeoisie, joining the aristocracy.

The most difficult was the situation of the peasants, who bore the brunt of taxes and fees, suffered from the arbitrariness of the landlords and the bureaucracy and had no political rights. According to estimates, the total tax burden of peasants in relation to the landowners, the state and the church (taxes, rent, tithe, etc.) averaged 30-40% of the gross crop (or about 45-50% of the net crop, excluding seeds). In addition, peasants were often involved in forced unpaid work for the state (building roads, etc.) and for landowners.

According to French contemporaries, 3/4 of the peasants in France all year round, both in summer and winter, they walked in the same worn-out clothes, since they had no other, and in wooden boots (sabo) on their bare feet; in winter they were very cold, since there was no heating in their dwellings, and the forests, as a rule, were the property of the landlords or the king, and entry there was forbidden. Therefore, peasant revolts were a constant phenomenon in the life of France.

land relations. In most of the French territory, there was a large landownership along with small peasant landownership. Most of the peasants owned their own "homestead" small plots of land and at the same time rented land from the landowners. Only in the very south of France did free individual peasant farms exist; large landed estates there were completely destroyed during the Huguenot revolution of the 16th century.

For many decades, agriculture in France was carried out by patriarchal methods, the yield was low. But from the middle of the 18th century, innovations in agriculture began to appear in France.

A characteristic feature of the agrarian relations of the era under consideration was banalities - the "feudal" obligations of the peasants to the landowners. These included, for example, fares on the road, the requirement to grind flour at the landlord's mill (for a high fee), a ban on the sale of wine during the peak season of demand for it, working off a certain number of days for the landowner (corvee), etc. d.

Many historians believe that banalities were not a "relic of feudalism", but were a new phenomenon that arose during the 16th-18th centuries. And the leading role in its wide distribution was played not by the old hereditary aristocracy (“the nobility of the sword”), but by the “nobility of the mantle” - a new layer of the aristocracy that emerged from among the wealthy bourgeois. 44 According to some estimates, through banalities, the landlords pumped out of the peasants, in addition to the rent for the land, an average of about 15% of the latter's annual gross income.

A characteristic feature of France of that era was periodically repeated, as they were called in France, "crises of survival"; although in reality we are talking about famines. During severe famines, repeated approximately once every 15 years and covering a significant part of the country, the mortality rate among the population reached 10-20%; but small local "crises of survival" in certain provinces occurred almost every year. Historians see one of the reasons in the existence of large landed estates. So, there were no famines in the south of France, where large landownership had previously been destroyed. Historian S. Kaplan points out that famines were often the result of grain speculation organized by the local aristocracy - landowners and officials.

Position in the trade and financial sphere. France of the last decades of the era of the "old order" was characterized by an extremely weak development of money circulation and trade. Inside the country, there were many internal customs, which prevented internal trade. In the field of foreign trade until the middle of the XVIII century. there was a state monopoly that prevented its development.

The financial sector, as already mentioned, functioned generally normally. But there were also considerable problems, which, by the way, did not exist in neighboring countries. France was at that time the only country in Western Europe that did not have a state bank called upon to be responsible for this area of ​​activity. Quite often facts were made public when representatives of a large aristocracy and various businessmen minted a counterfeit coin with which all of France was flooded.

Many of the lower strata did not have much confidence in money. Peasants often paid with part of their crops, while representatives of other classes wrote IOUs, which, ultimately, were repaid through offsets.

It is no coincidence that during the mass uprisings, the peasants demanded, in today's language, "the curtailment of commodity-money relations." This was due not only to distrust of French money, but also to the desire to reduce the scope of abuse and corruption, with the collection of monetary taxes by officials.

There were problems in the tax sphere. There was no uniformity in the field of tax collection, each city and province had its own special tax regime and its own special taxes; and in the same way, the amount of taxes levied on one household could be very different from the amount of those taxes that were levied on the neighboring farm. As a result, as A. Tocqueville pointed out, French peasants, even those who had good incomes, tried to pretend to be beggars so as not to arouse the envy of others and not incur biased tax allocations.

Problems in trade and money circulation were one of the reasons for the extreme static nature of the population, which, by the way, strengthened the "patriarchal" nature of its thinking. As studies by historians have shown, the vast majority of French peasants of the first half of XVIII centuries never in her life traveled beyond the boundaries of her village for a distance of more than a few kilometers.

position in society. The Church occupied an important place in the life of French society. She was not only the largest landowner, but also a political institution: the entire third estate was obliged to pay a special church tax (church tithe), which in some provinces reached 10-12% of the gross harvest. The payment of church tax did not give the peasants the right to use the services of priests - they had to pay them separately (for the baptism of a child, holding a mass, wedding, etc.), which caused constant discontent among the population and demands for the abolition of tithe, which was perceived as an unfair tax on the third estate. 55 Later, during the revolution, the church, along with the aristocracy, will be attacked, persecuted and terrorized.

One of the first acts of the French Revolution, - wrote A. Tocqueville, - was an attempt on the Church, and among the passions generated by it, godlessness was the first to ignite and the last to die out. ... Christianity kindled such bitter hatred not as a religious doctrine, but as a political institution; not because the priests undertook to settle the affairs of the other world, but because in this world they were proprietors, lords, tithe collectors, administrators; not because the Church could not take a place in the new society that was about to be founded, but because she already

occupied the most privileged and most powerful place in that old society which was about to be reduced to dust.

The position of various social groups in society largely depended on the laws adopted by the royal government and parliaments. The laws were complex and intricate, their implementation was by no means obligatory, and there were many exceptions to any law. A. Tocqueville wrote: “They often complain that the French despise the law; Alas! When could they learn to respect him? It can be said that among the people of the old order, the place that the concept of law should occupy in the human mind was empty.

The judicial system was extremely complex and confusing. Only in one district of Paris there were about 40 different courts and tribunals. The judges were exclusively representatives of the first and second estates. All judicial positions were sold and inherited, which predetermined a large representation among judges of a large aristocracy. For example, there were about 20-30 thousand of landlord courts alone (where the landowner acted as a judge) in France. Historians note the constant discrimination against the third estate, especially peasants, in legal proceedings.

French absolutism; its features. This final qualifying work can be attributed to French studies to the section

"The Causes and Preconditions of the French Revolution at the End of the 18th Century". Hence the need for an excursion into history. state institutions"Old order", analysis of French absolutism, its features.

Perhaps the first of the Russian historians who began to reflect on this topic was N.I. Kareev. As is known, he is traditionally recognized as the "patriarch of the Russian school", not only expressed his point of view on French absolutism in the well-known training course on the history of modern times, but also devoted a separate work to this topic called

“Western European absolute monarchy of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. general characteristics bureaucratic state and class society of the "old order". According to N.I. Kareev, French absolutism was the embodiment of the "absolute monarchy of the new time", "non-freedom", "social feudalism" and "inequality".

Royal power, thought N.I. Kareev, "considered it her right and her interest, identifying them with the right and interest of the state itself, the only judge of which, moreover, was the monarch himself." 61The absolute nature of power french king, the historian argued, manifested itself in the fact that "the whole nation was concentrated in his person, and the state, as it were, was embodied in the personality of the sovereign."

Under absolutism, wrote N.I. Kareev, "royal power and bureaucracy" ruled. According to N.I. Kareev, absolutism was characterized by a frankly voluntaristic nature of governance, when political decisions were determined solely by the "peculiarities of the psyche of the persons" who were at the head of the state, which led to "contradiction, inconsistency or general absurdity in the conduct of affairs."

Many features of government under absolutism state structure in France had an outward resemblance to other European countries. However, there were also important differences that made France unlike its neighbors. The most important of these consisted in the system of sale of public posts, covering the entire state apparatus both in Paris and in the provinces. The system of selling positions gradually became something so strange that the world had never seen before.

The cost of the highest government posts in the last decades before the French Revolution reached 200-300 thousand livres (pounds) or more, which was equivalent to the cost of a luxurious hotel with full furnishings. Together with the purchase of a position, an official received the right to a lifetime "rent", which, as a rule, made it possible to repeatedly recoup the costs incurred. Officials believed that by acquiring a position, and even for life and with the right to inherit, they receive complete independence in their actions from the central government. The system of buying and holding public office for life was a constant source of corruption. Having acquired a position, each official sought to recoup the costs incurred, while using his official position. Historians give examples of large fortunes accumulated by officials over the years of their service, while at the time of the beginning of their careers, some of them were poor.

In 1771, the then King of France tried to cancel the purchase, sale and inheritance of a number of posts, but this plan met with strong opposition from the aristocracy, and after the death of the king they forgot about it.

Let us return to the reasoning of N.I. Kareeva. He wrote: “The royal power and the bureaucracy took over the legislative function of the state, completely eliminating social forces from any participation in the issuance of laws and in transformative activities states. The same thing happened in the field of administration and the judiciary, which became more and more bureaucratized.”

Huge influence under absolutism, according to N.I. Kareeva, had the police. Claiming that "everything was subject to police brutality," he even called the French monarchy a "police state." “What especially characterizes the police state is disrespect for personal rights: ... arbitrary arrests, confiscations, persecution of heterodoxy, perusal of private correspondence, censorship prohibitions, burning books by the executioner’s hand, persecution of writers, etc.” The court was deprived of any independence whatsoever, being "only one of the administrative departments, not much different from such, for example, departments as the police."

The “Kareevskaya” interpretation of French absolutism, as the unlimited power of the king, later became a “methodological indication” for our historians for such historians as: E.V. Tarle, M.N. Pokrovsky, N.M. Lukin, S.A. Lotte, F.W. Potemkin, A.Z. Manfred, V.G. Revunenkov.

Modern researcher of the new history of France A.V. Chudinov asks the question: “Is the royal power in France under the “last” Louis was really absolute”? It would seem that the answer is obvious.

And the answer is contained not only in the historical studies of many French historians and these Russian authors. After all, many French lawyers in the service of the monarchy wrote about the "absolute" nature of royal power in France during the period of the "old order". A.V. Chudinov believes that the French legal treatises "was more about the desired than about the real." He argues that “recognition of absolute power for the king in no way meant that he had unlimited power, which he could use at his own discretion.

A.V. Chudinov refers to the French author Claude Seissel, who argued that "the absolute power of the sovereign and the monarch, which, if used unreasonably, is called tyranny, is limited and ordered." In Seissel's view, such restrictions are of a moral nature (religious precepts), legal (laws) and institutional (sovereign courts - Parliament and the Accounts Chamber). Moreover, sovereign courts, he emphasized, "are specially created for this purpose - to limit the absolute power that sovereigns would like to use."

Since the time of Jean Bodin, the generally accepted difference between monarchy and despotism has been that the monarch rules by law, and the despot - guided by his own whim. It was about this that the greatest political thinker of the French Enlightenment, Ch.-L. Montesquieu in his treatise “On the Spirit of Laws” (Book 2, Ch. 1), defining a monarchical government, “under which one person rules, but through established immutable laws; while in the despotic everything, outside of any laws and rules, is moved by the will and arbitrariness of one person.

By the way, Sh.-L. Montesquieu did not consider France a despotic state, although he was quite critical of the orders that existed in it. The French kingdom, in his opinion, was a classic example of a monarchy, where the power of the sovereign has institutional and legal restrictions.

But what about famous words“The State is me!” allegedly uttered by Louis XIV? “Alas, this statement, quoted by an endless series of authors in support of the French monarchs’ claims to unlimited (“autocratic”) power, is nothing but apocryphal,” A.V. Chudinov. Thus, the historian argues, the French monarchy of the "old order" "did not have the slightest resemblance to that quasi-totalitarian state, the image of which for more than a hundred years was created by the domestic historiography of the French Revolution."

If we try to compare the "political regimes" of Louis XV and Louis XVI, then, of course, we can find some differences. In the monarchy of Louis XV, the features of the French version of "enlightened despotism" appeared. The monarchy of Louis XVI, on the one hand, looks more traditional in interpreting the question of the relationship between the will of the king and legality. On the other hand, the duty to protect the natural rights of the individual, erected as a principle, was far from traditional. Consciously, the king did this or not, but it turned out that in the name of observing the laws and the rights of his subjects, he yielded to the parliaments. However, probably, from the point of view of Louis XVI himself, this did not damage his absolute power, if he understood it according to Fenelon as the power to judge in the last resort. After all, the last word still remained with the king.

The image of France of the period of the late "Old Order" as a state of the "absolutist" type has existed for centuries, and even today it is clearly visible in our and foreign scientific and journalistic literature.

The question naturally arises; why did this image exist and exist for so long? The French historian J. Revel answers this question.

He believed that the Revolution itself created " abstract concept absolutism." After the real absolute monarchy fell, its mythologized image, according to the historian, became part of the collective imaginary, where it acted as the antipode of the new order established by the Revolution. “It (the monarchy) continued to exist in the political and moral imaginary as a kind of mechanism, the structure and significance of which was no longer understood, but the individual elements of which seemed unambiguously vicious.

Concluding the introductory chapter, the following assertions should be made.

First, the economic and political situation in France of the last decades of the "old order", recent years The reign of Louis XVI shows that there was no “feudal-absolutist system” in the country in its Marxist understanding, which needed to be “crushed”, there was no need to clear the “ground for capitalist development”, since capitalism, market relations already existed in the economy.

Secondly, the French monarchy of Louis XVI had nothing to do with despotism, had not the slightest resemblance to that “quasi-totalitarian” state, the image of which was created over the years by some researchers, both in domestic and foreign historiography of the French Revolution. The power of King Louis XVI had institutional and legal limitations.

The above statements do not mean at all that France did not need transformations and reforms. These transformations and reforms were determined by well-known objective and subjective circumstances.

J. Revel pointed to some of these circumstances: privileges, lawlessness, arbitrariness, Bastille and letters de cachet, abuses, immorality, robbery and ruin of the Nation. All this was a manifestation of the essence of pernicious politics, the French historian concludes. It was precisely the named, for the most part, that led the vast majority of the French to the revolution.

So, speaking about the peculiarities of the French monarchy without supporting the thesis of the "despotism" of royal power, it is still necessary to state that all the mentioned and not named vices of royal power, the upper aristocratic circles were sufficient grounds for breaking the existing system at the end of the 18th century.

France until the end of the 18th century

Socio-economic development

In the second swarm in the 17th century. France before-with-tav-la-la co-battle is one of the largest and most valuable and t-ra-li-zo-van-states of Europe. Po-be-yes in the Three-tsa-ty-years-her war (1618-1648) provided-ne-chi-la to her in-en-but-po-li-ti-ches-some pre-ob- la-da-nie in Ev-ro-pe. France was a country ag-rar-noy-, with on-se-le-ni-em more than 28 million people (To the se-re-di-not of the 16th-2nd century .on-se-le-tion of France was about 21 million people. By 1800 in France, according to sta-tis-ti- ke, us-chi-you-va-moose 27 million people); about 90% of its cos-tav-la-whether kres-t-yane, some-eye war-on brought-la increase-li-che-na-log-gov (they grew- whether almost three times), a lot of dead and wounded. However, in the country, it was not by-t-ro once-vi-va-lis-se-yan-nye ma-well-fak-tu-ry, using-pol-zo-vav-shie labor cross- t-yan. Would it be basically new tech-s-til-nye pre-p-ri-yatiya, you-launched production both on the internal-ren-nii- and on the external -ny market. French-with-kaya-mys-len-ness from-go-tov-la-la the main way of pre-me-you ros-ko-shi: expensive fabrics , go-be-le-ny, hours, vi-na and other things. Su-s-t-in-va-li and cent-t-ra-li-zo-van-nye ma-well-fak-tu-ry: weapons-pre-p-ri-yatiya, bu- major ma-nu-fak-tu-ry, books-go-pe-cha-ta-nie, etc. In some flat-to-native northern regions France has already gone and rented a ka-pi-ta-lis-ti-ches-ko-go ti-pa.

The local noble-s-t-in France, who lived on his neck at the expense of the lands and the cross-t-yan, os-ku-de-va-lo, attached to him. “Dvor-ryan-s-t-man-ties”, i.e. courtiers, judicial ranks, etc., were half-gone at the expense of you walkers from bourgeois-zhu-asia. But in de-li-chie from an-g-liy-sky dzhen-t-ri fran-tsuz-s-kiy dvo-rya-nin could not for-no-mother-sya neither bargaining-ley-, nor pro-mice-len-noy de-yatel-nose-tew. Dvo-ryan-s-t-in in-en-noe - “dvor-ryan-s-t-in sword-gi” - also when-ho-di-lo in the down-dock. Several times there were "numbers-t-ki" of the nobles-s-t-va: the court-rya-nin should have been yuri-di-ches-ki before- say your rights. On-rozh-dav-sha-yasya French-tsuz-kai bourgeois-jou-asia in the 17th century. would-la still weak-fight-, not pre-ten-do-va-la on-li-ti-ches-kuyu sa-mo-the-yatel-ness and need-da-las in under-der-zh -ke ab-so-lu-tiz-ma.

The second in-lo-vie-on the 17th century. in France, it was basically in the fight against ab-so-lu-tiz-ma, strengthening-living-she-go-xia during the reign of car- di-na-la Richelieu (1624-1642). After his death and the death of Lu-do-vi-ka XI-II Bur-bo-na (1643) re-gen-t-shey with little-lo-years-it Lu-do-vi- ke XIV (he was only 5 years old) became his mother An-na Av-s-t-riy-sky. Fak-ti-ches-ki the country ruled its f-vo-rit Italian-Janian Ma-za-ri-ni, better-chiv-shiy kar-di-nal-s-ky san.

The policy of Ma-za-ri-ni and Fron-dy. Ma-za-ri-ni, po-li-tik smart and out-of-the-mouth-whether-out-, in-do-but Richelieu, strove -ti-ku ab-so-lu-tiz-ma. This is a call-wa-lo not-to-will-with-t-in in various layers of society. In the south-pas-de-France, the cross-t-yane rose, with someone-ry-mi races-p-ra-we-were the envoys of the authorities-ty-mi howl -ska. In op-po-zi-tion to pra-vi-tel-s-t-vu on-ho-di-lis and par-la-men-you cities-ro-dov, since the power of tre-bo-va- la their san-to-tion on new na-lo-gi. When-yes-pa-rizh-s-ki par-la-ment - the highest su-deb-naya pa-la-ta - from-ka-hall-sya ut-ver-dit on-lo-gi, which ro-lion-with-kim with-ka-zom would-whether zap-re-shche-us for-se-da-niya. Once upon a time there was a fight-ba, and par-la-ment Pa-ri-zha made a decision about a number of reforms against the ko-ro-left-with-kids -call, under-der-zhan-noe on-ro-house and city-with-ki-mi ma-gis-t-ra-ta-mi. In 1648, would there be two ares-to-va-ny two de-ra par-rizh-with-ko-go par-la-men-ta. In response, pa-ri-zha-not pos-t-ro-or in Pa-ri-same you-sya-chi bar-ri-cad. This movement was called-wa-but Fron-doy. She is usually considered to be par-la-men-t-with-koy-, although she would-la shi-ro-koy in native and continued from 1648 to 1649 In 1650-1653 Fron-du voz-g-la-vi-la part of aris-tok-ra-tii, co-paradise pot-re-bo-wa-la og-ra-ni-chit ko-ro-lion-s- what power and to create the General states. Second Paradise Fron-yes, in Lu-chi-la, the name is “Front of Princes”. Ma-za-ri-nee coped with this Fron-da.

Absolutism of Louis XIV.

In 1661, Ma-za-ri-ni died, and Liu-do-vic XIV began to rule alone. Namely, under Lu-do-wi-ke XIV, French ab-so-lu-tism reached its apo-gay, but it was also the beginning of its decline ka. This pe-ri-od hour is called-zy-va-yut “golden-th century”, “ve-com Lu-do-vi-ka XIV”, and its sa-mo-go - “ king-role-sol-n-tse. Under him, the power of ko-ro-la sharply increased and strengthened the go-su-dar-s-t-ven-naya price-t-ra-li-for-tion. Voz-ve-li-chi-va-nie especially-ko-ro-la, tor-zhes-t-ven-ny court-yard ce-re-mo-ni-al, demon-ko-nech- feasts-d-nes-t-va, co-wielding a lush co-ro-lion-with-co-re-si-den-tion in Ver-sa-le - all this should be but it would be sim-in-li-zi-ro-vat tor-zhes-t-in ab-so-lu-tiz-ma.

The main environments-s-t-va go-su-dar-s-t-va pog-lo-scha-whether war. Of the 54 years of the sa-mo-to-yatel-no-go right-le-niya Lu-do-vi-ka XIV, 33 years passed in the war. However, their main goal - to beat the ge-ge-mo-nii in Europe - would not be dos-tig-nu-ta. Almost demon-p-re-jerky heavy wars, some France waged both with del-we-mi countries and with -ali-qi-yami countries, absorbing a lot of funds and people's lives. In the rezul-ta-te of the four-you-reh wars under Lu-do-vi-ke XIV, the country was strong-but juice-ra-ti-moose. If in the last quarter of the 17th century. in France there were more than 15 million people, then in the beginning of the 16th-2nd centuries - only 12 million. -on for Is-pan-with-some us-ice-with-t-in (1701-1714). During this war, in the Se-Viennese mountains, do not uti-ha-li re-stand ka-mi-za-ditch (from the word che-mis - ru-bash-ka: having risen cross-th-yane on-de-wa-whether on top of clothes white ru-ba-hi).

Wars are strong-but in-dor-va-li eco-no-mi-ches-something in the same way-su-dar-s-t-va. In Paris and other cities, pos-it-yan-but I feel-elk not-to-will-with-t-in-the-native masses, bourgeois-asia and yes, noble-s-t-va. Pro-is-ho-di-whether me-te-zhe and resurrection. Yes, in-torture ta-lan-t-li-vo-go eco-no-mis-ta - ge-ne-ral-no-go con-t-ro-le-ra pro-mys-len -nos-ti, trade-whether and fi-nans-owls of France Kol-be-ra couldn’t you-weight France from the same-lo-go eco-no-mi- che-ko-go-lo-zhe-niya. Kol-ber active-tiv-but pro-dil in-li-ti-ku mer-can-ti-liz-ma. He introduced pro-tek-qi-onis-t-s-kie posh-li-na, sub-si-di-ro-val creation of large ma-nu-fak-tour, pre- gave them various personal privileges. For the establishment and establishment of new co-lo-nies, would you create with the participation of the state-su-dar-s-t-va East India, West -Indian, Le-van-ty-sky tor-go-com-pa-nii.

The Crisis of French Absolutism

After the death of Liu-do-vi-ka XIV, the pres-toll went to his five-year-old rights-well-ku Liu-do-vi-ku XV (1715-1774). Duke Phi-lipp Or-le-en-s-ki-, who ruled for 8 years, became the regent under him. The main task of-yes-whose but-in-go right-vi-tel-s-t-va would-lo you-vest-ti-country-well from eco-no-mi-ches-ko-go cri-zi -sa. The general con-t-ro-le-rum was named the Scottish Lancer John Lowe, who led France to fi-nan-co-vo- mu kri-zi-su, you-let-tiv og-rom-noe-whether-chess-t-in-nothing provides-pe-chen-nyh de-tender-nyh ban-to-notes.

In the 40-60s of the XVI-II centuries. France took part-t-in-va-la in the wars, some-rye was-lies-no-whether it was already heavy eco-but-mi-ches-some sos - something. France high-to-pi-la on the hundred-ro-not of Prussia in the war-not against Av-s-t-rii (1740-1748), but in the Se-mi-year-old war- not (1756-1763) - against An-g-lii. As a result, after the last war, she lost all her colonies in the New World and India.

The financial crisis of the court usi-li-val-sya og-rom-ny-mi tra-ta-mi on its sophisticated luxury, keeping pa-ra-zi- ti-ches-coy ad-vor-noy aris-tok-ra-tii. The king-role pos-vya-shal time hoh-te, fa-vo-rit-kam (mar-ki-za de Pom-pa-dur, Count-fi-nya Du-bar-ri). If Liu-do-vi-ku XIV with-pi-sy-wa-li words-va: “Go-su-dar-s-t-vo is me,” then Liu-do-vi-ku XV: "After us at least a little."

In the se-re-di-not of the 16th-2nd centuries. us-ko-ri-moose development of pro-mouse-len-nos-ti, trade-whether and village-with-ho-zyay-st-va. On-se-le-nie of France grew-lo, dos-tig-nu in 1790 26 million inhabitants-te-lei-, of which 84% remained village-with-ki-mi zhi-te-la-mi. The process of introducing-re-niya ka-pi-ta-lis-ti-ches-ko-go-uk-la-da into ag-rar-nye from-no-she-niya pro-te-kal bo-lee in -ten-siv-but. Usi-li-las so-qi-al-naya dif-fer-ren-qi-ation kres-t-yang-s-t-va. In some areas of France, part of the nobles-zem-lev-la-del-tsev is re-ho-di-la on ca-pi-ta-lis-ti-ches- cue path ve-de-niya ho-zyay-st-va. Kres-t-yanam at-above-le-zh-lo, for example, but 40% of the earth in the form of a price-zi-you (forever-but-us-ice-s-t-ven-but- go state). Kres-t-yanin could not leave, and the vla-de-lets (usually sen-or) could not bend him and deprive him of the earth. About 90% of the cross-t-yan would be personally free-of-us, but still in some places the personal protection of the cross was still preserved -t-yan (i.e. ser-importance). Kres-t-yane - both personally free, and personally for-vi-si-my - would it be connected with many old old customs cha-ev. Almost to my re-in-lu-tion, the custom of “mer-t-howl hand-ki”, i.e., pla-ta when re-re-da-che us-ice-s-t-va, for you-oven-ku bread-ba and milling grain-on in the vla-de-ni-yah sen-ora, etc., although long ago for a long time, but there was no longer any pe-for-no-one, no mill-ni-tsy, and the lords themselves no longer lived in their own places. Soh-ra-nya-foxed not only the price-zi-va, but also the sham-par (on-tu-ral-ny-tax), de-sya-ti-na in favor of the church-to- vi, all-possible road-roads, bridges and other pos-li-ns.

Although France was-ta-va-las village-with-to-ho-zyay-st-vein-country-noy, the industry-mice-len-ness of the game-ra-la is already significant-chi-tel- role in her eco-no-mi-ke. For the French-with-coy pro-mice-len-nose-tee would-lo ha-rak-ter-but shi-ro-some race-p-ros-t-ra-non-manual-no-go pro-from-water-s-t-va, but ma-well-fak-tu-ra dos-tig-la you-with-a-step-pe-no development. Increase-li-chi-elk the number of large prices-t-ra-li-zo-van-nyh ma-well-fak-tour, on them on-chi-na-yut apply-me-nyat-sya cars. Us-ko-rya-et-sya for-mi-ro-va-nie ob-schef-ran-tsuz-from-to-go market, raz-vi-va-et-sya internal-ren-nya and international trade.

Together with the development of the ka-pi-ta-lis-ti-ches-kih from-no-she-ny age-ra-ta-the role of tor-go-in-pro-mice-len-nyh circles, strengthen-whether-va-et-sya their eco-no-mi-che-kaya and so-qi-al-naya value-chi-bridge. One-to-the-far-ne-she-mu-development of trade-whether and pro-mys-len-nos-ti in France interfered with ab-so-lu-tizm. The development of ka-pi-ta-lis-ti-ches-kih from-but-she-niy tre-bo-va-lo destroy-the-same-niya su-shches-t-wo-usche-go building, soh-ra-nyav-she-go-sya in the village-with-ho-zyay-st-ve, as well as the workshop-ho-howl sys-te-we and mo-but-pol-nyh at -vi-le-giy-, pre-dos-tav-la-im-from-del-nym with-vi-le-gi-ro-van-ny com-pa-ni-yam and vla-del-tsam “ko -ro-lion-s-kih ma-nu-fak-tour. Warehouses-va-niyu ob-shchef-ran-tsuz-s-to-go market-ka me-sha-li os-tat-ki fe-odal-time-d-rob-len-nos-ti: from-day-s-t-vie unified system of measures and weights, internal customs, etc.

Dissatisfaction with you-zy-va-la sis-te-ma citizen-dan-s-to-go not-ra-veins-s-t-va and sos-lov-nyh pri-vi-le-gyi-, to- then-ry-mi about-la-yes-whether noble-s-t-in and du-ho-ven-s-t-in. They, for example, would be os-in-god-de-na from the up-la-you of the os-nov-nyh taxes, could-for-no-mother the highest debts f-nose-tee in ad-mi-nis-t-ra-tion, su-de, ar-mii. In the second swarm in the 16th-2nd centuries. against ab-so-lu-tiz-ma under-no-ma-et-xia powerful wave-on op-po-zi-tion. Pro-mice-len-ni-ki, someone no longer needed the guardianship of ab-so-lu-tiz-ma, were they at the head of this op-po-zi- tions. In ten-qi-al-nym, her co-use-no-one became the native masses and before all the cross-t-yan-s-t-vo. A part of the Obur-zhu-aziv-she-go-sya nobility-s-t-va also leaned towards union with the bourgeois-zhu-azi-she. In op-po-zi-tion to ab-so-lu-tiz-mu on-ho-di-lis steam-la-men-you led by par-rizh-with-kim. They tre-bo-va-li og-ra-ni-che-niya ab-so-lu-tiz-ma in favor of the pri-vi-le-gi-ro-van-nyh sos-lo-viy. It would be la aris-tok-ra-ti-ches-kaya op-po-zi-tion ab-so-lu-tiz-mu.

In this way, by the end of the 16th-2nd centuries. in France, na-ras-ta-et general-t-ven-noe not-to-will-with-t-in-industry-mice-len-ni-kov, li-be-ral-no-go noblemen-s-t-va, kres-t-yan and on-them-nyh ra-bo-chih.

French Enlightenment

To the se-re-di-not of the 16th-2nd centuries. there was a powerful take-off of the French-with-to-go she-go an-ti-fe-odal aspirations of the French-tsuz-coy bourgeois-zhu-asia and the people of the masses. His creator-tsa-mi has become a brilliant plethora of poison you-yes-those-is-those-lei-, pi-sa-te-lei-, scientists. There appeared a lot of words in many different races of science (by the se-re-di-not of the 16th-2nd centuries, there were already more of them more than 600), many-volume publications: “Estes-t-ven-naya is-to-riya” by Byuf-fo-na, “Enzik-lo-pe-diya na-uk and re -me-sel "Did-ro and D" Alam-be-ra. lo 28 volumes; for the first time in it, such words as de-pu-tat, des-po-tia, con-s-ti-tu-tion, ad- vi-le-gia and others. -t-ny books about p-te-shes-t-vi-yah Ku-ka, La-pe-ru-za, Rei-na-la and others. li-ote-ki so-bi-ra-li only mo-us-you-ri and aris-tok-ra-you, then to the se-re-di-not of the 16th-2nd centuries bib-li-ote-ki already had pi-sa-te-lei-, chi-nov-ni-kov, ap-te-ka-rey-, from-kup-shchi-kov, etc. In many French -from-cities-ro-dah us-t-ra-iva-lied book auctions; books were not-cha-ta-lis in Holland, Switzerland, and whole armies of books-go-nosh re-rep-rav-la-whether them to France. - mo-da-nah with a double or triple bottom; books-go-no-shi re-rep-ly-va-li with no re-ki; almost in all major cities of France - Pa-ri-same, Lille-le, Rouen, Mar-se-le, etc. ro-shen-nyh mills-ni-tsakh, old co-nyush-nyah so-ra-nya-la-la-ve-zen-naya because of the gra-ni-tsy not-le-gal-naya line- te-ra-tu-ra.

In the second swarm in the 16th-2nd centuries. all over the country there are secret ti-pog-ra-fii and warehouses with zap-re-schen-ny-mi books-ga-mi. Za-re-shchen-ny-te-ra-tu-ru pri-judg-yes-whether par-la-men-you, chi-nov-no-ki and other officials qi-al-nye faces, but in pain-shin-s-t-ve slu-cha-ev whether-te-ra-tu-ra did not destroy something-zha-las, szhi-ga-lis tyu -ki with not-need-us-mi boo-ma-ga-mi. Za-re-shchen-nye books-gi-gi-yes-va-whether usually at expensive prices-us, and since-ku gram-mot-ness among-di on-se-le- niya zna-chi-tel-but you-grew-la, then their chi-ta-whether yes, ku-che-ry, mountains, and sometimes villas. Ras-p-ros-t-ra-not-nie-do-it-the-ra-tu-ry in France eye-for-lo su-s-t-ven-noe impact on app -whether or not re-in-lu-qi-on-no-go explosion: pro-is-ho-di-la, as it were, “spirit-hov-naya se-ku-la-ri-for- tsiya ”- the mass-so-high-in-god-de-nie from the spirit-how-no-th yoke.

French pros-ve-ti-te-li - fi-lo-so-fy, pi-sa-te-li, eco-no-mis-you, is-to-ri-ki - convinced pro- tiv-ni-ki fe-odal-no-abso-lu-tis-t-with-to-go building under-ver-ha-whether demon-for-sparing cri-ti-ke of his idea-olo-gi -ches-kie mustache, high-tu-pa-whether for freedom and civil-dan-with-some ra-ven-s-t-in. Du-hov-ny-mi leader-dya-mi this-th-che-niya would-whether Vol-terre, Monte-tes-kye, Rus-so, Did-ro, D "Alam-ber and others pro-ve-ti-te-li. Their ideas are closed-lu-cha-li in se-be og-rum-ny re-vo-lu-qi-on-ny in-ten-qi-al and syg-ra -whether a great role in the development of the spiritual culture of France in the 16th-2nd centuries, having had a great influence on the countries of the West Noah Europe, North and South America, Russia and other countries.

Revolution Eve

The crisis of the fe-odal-no-abso-lu-tis-t-with-to-go system in France sharply substantiated at the end of the 80s of the 16th-2nd centuries. In 1787-1789. unfolded tor-go-in-pro-mouse-len-ny crisis. Usu-gu-beat him to-go-thief with An-g-li-she in 1876, from-to-ryv-shiy French-tsuz-s-ky-ry-nok for more de-she-out en-g-liy-skih from de-liy. Drop-dock and zas-that pro-from-water-s-t-va, without-ra-bo-ti-tsa oh-va-ti-whether country. Due to the not-custom-tea-but su-ro-howl of winter, in 1788, a bad harvest was received, which led to a neh-wat-ke-zer- on, to-ro-go-vis-not pro-to-will-s-t-via. Justified the needs and troubles of the native masses. 68

With all the obvious-nose-tew, about-on-ru-zhi-la-beared-in-the-property of the state-under-s-t-woo-th class-sa get out of cri-zi-sa . Go-su-dar-s-t-ven-ny debt from 1.5 billion grew over 14 years by 1789 exactly three times. Mo-nar-hiya eye-losed on the fi-nan-so-go ban-to-mouth-s-t-va. General con-t-ro-ler of Tyr-go pre-lo-lived in-lo-live part of the on-log-gov on the pri-vi-le-gi-ro-van-nye sos-lo -Wiya. There was a time-ra-bo-tan project of the demon-sos-lov-but-go-on-the-ground-but-go-on-lo-ha.

In 1787, on-de-is-beam under-der-g-ku noble-s-t-va and du-ho-ven-s-t-va - two pri-vi-le -gi-ro-van-nyh sos-lo-viy-, mo-nar-khiya soz-va-la meeting “no-tab-lei-” - chosen-ran-nyh co-ro-lem name -no-tyh before-with-ta-vi-te-lei of these cos-lo-viy. However, they are on-the-cut from-ka-za-to approve the pre-lo-women-re-forms and pot-re-bo-wa-li to convene Gene-not- ral states, ras-cal-you-wai-o-ra-no-chit-ro-left-with-kuyu power in their in-te-re-sah. The slogan of the co-zy-wa of the Gen-ne-ral-ny states, some of which have not been co-bi-ra-lied since 1614, was under-x-wa-chen shi-ro-ki -mi circle-ha-mi-third-of his sos-lo-via, put out-vi-nu-she-go your own-li-ti-chess program. The convocation of the states was appointed for the spring of 1789. -ta-there, in some-ryh it’s clear-but-tu-pa-whether tre-bo-va-niya and hope-dy sos-lo-viy. In pain-shin-s-t-ve kres-t-yan-s-kih-to-ka-call-whether-ti-che-thre-bo-va-niya did not come out-vi-ha-lis, for -whether there were requirements from me "bad customs", a decrease in taxes, etc. Ku-pe-ches-kie on-ka-zy co-der-zha-whether tre-bo-va-niya from me-we-we-not-ve-ko-howl reg-la-men-ta-tion pro-mice-len-nose- ty, equal to-on-lo-go-about-lo-same-tion of all cos-lo-viy and even not-something-ro-go-o-ra-no-che-niya to- ro-lion-with-coy power. In turn, even the word “con-s-ti-tu-tsiya” came in, which many people expected from the General states. Lu-do-vic XVI (1774-1792) you-needed to go to the us-tup-ki. To the post of ge-ne-ral-no-go con-t-ro-le-ra fi-nan-owls, pro-mys-len-nos-ty and trading-whether he called for a seamstress-king-s -ko-go ban-ki-ra Nek-ke-ra - side-ron-no-ka moderate reforms, in-pu-lyar-no-go in industrial-mouse-len-nyh and fi -nan-co-vy circles.

Based on the number of-whether-chess-t-va you-bor-shchi-kov, the number of de-pu-ta-tov is the third of his cos-lo-via ud-vo-it. Could you-bi-rat-could all the husbands-chi-we-na-chi-naya from the age of 25, having a post-it-yan-noe place of a resident-s-t-va and an extra-siv- na-log. Go-lo-co-va-nie pre-la-ha-moose, as before, in a cos-lov-noe (in France, de-le-nie went according to cos-lo-vi- yam, i.e., not according to the im-s-t-ven-no-mu sos-to-yaniyu zhi-te-lei-, but according to the pri-vi-le-gi-pits, someone-ry-mi they were used), i.e., the first two estates could have twice as many seats as the third.

French Revolution of the 18th century

The formation of the revolutionary situation and the beginning of the revolution (May 5, 1789 - August 10, 1792)

From the spring of 1788, a powerful national movement developed. Bread riots, on-pa-de-niya on the lands of lords, once-g-rum on-lo-go-th con-tor, elemental-workers-bo-chie stupid-le-niya - all this has become a common thing. The biggest of them was the height of the ra-bo-chih Pa-ri-zha in response to the torture of bo-ga-that-th wallpaper Re-vel-ena to reduce the ra-bo-chim for-ra-bot-pay. Ra-bo-chee times-g-ro-mi-whether his house and ma-nu-fak-tu-ru, entering into a ru-ko-pash-nuyu fight with a howl-ska-mi. Print almost os-in-bo-di-lass from the cen-zu-ry. You-ho-di-lo in the light of many-zhes-t-in bro-shures, pam-f-le-tov, av-to-ra-mi-something-ryh would be public-li-cis-you from the lie-be-ral-nyh nobility or third estate. One of the most popular became and bro-shyu-ra ab-ba-ta Siy-es-sa “What is the third estate?”. In these bro-shu-rahs, the for-mu-li-ro-va-la program-ram-ma re-re-do-y people of the nobility-s-t-va and the third of his cos-lo- wiya: civil-dan-with-some ra-ven-s-t-vo, li-be-ral-ny rights and freedoms, og-ra-ni-che-monar-hii pre-with-ta-vi-tel-ny uch-dir-de-no-eat.

On May 5, 1789, with a huge ste-che-nii on-ro-yes, in Ver-sa-le, the Generals met. They gathered, as in the previous time, in a cos-lov-but. The first sos-lo-vie - du-ho-ven-s-t-in - pre-s-tav-lyal 291 de-pu-tat; about 200 of them, village-s-kyu-re, ho-ro-sho who knew the life of their parishioners, were prone to reform-mothers. Only 90 out of 270 de-pu-ta-tov from the nobility-s-t-va would have us-t-ro-enes li-be-ral-but.

The third sos-lo-vie pre-s-tav-la-li 578 de-pu-ta-tov. In the big-shin-s-t-ve, would it be lawyers, you-walkers from in-tel-li-gen-tion, merchants, banks-ki-ry, pro-mouse- len-ni-ki, earth-lion-la-del-tsy. But among them there weren’t those who are already sometimes called the fourth cos-lo-vi-em, i.e. cross-t-yan and poor notes. De-pu-ta-you are the third of its sos-lo-via from-ver-g-whether according to the sos-loving principle of pre-s-ta-vi-tel-s-t-va and beyond -se-da-nii June 17 pro-voz-g-la-si-li se-bya Na-tsi-onal meeting-ra-ni-em (400 votes against 90), t e. half-but-moch-ny-mi before-s-ta-vi-te-la-mi of the whole nation (by this time-me-neither from the first and second-ro- go sos-lo-viy in the third resh-whether about 100 de-pu-ta-tov). The collection of the prize-va-lo does not pay for-log-gov, if it will be ras-more-but. The king-role at-ka-hall close the hall for-se-da-ny and post-ta-vil there a military detachment for oh-ra-na. On the morning of June 20, de-pu-ta-you Na-tsi-onal-no-go meeting did you go to the hall for playing ball and, according to the prize, de-pu- ta-ta Mi-ra-bo pok-la-lis not dis-ho-dit-sya, until you-ra-bo-ta-na con-with-ti-tu-tion.

On June 27, the king-role was you-needed to pre-pi-sat the os-tal-nym de-pu-ta-tam with-vi-le-gi-ro-van-nyh cos-lo-viy with-co- go to the Na-tsi-onal-no-mu meeting. July 9 National meeting -di-tel-nym.

Wanting to stop na-chi-nav-shu-yusya re-vo-lu-tion, the co-role of pop-ro-bo-shaft enters into Paris on-em-nye-ska. On July 11, Necker was replaced. On July 12-13, skirmishes with howls did not stop, and stones were sent into the course. People zah-va-you-shaft weapon-shops and in-weapons-sorry-sya. Cities-with-kie zas-ta-you, where you took import duties for pro-to-free-s-t-vie, would it be once-ru-she-na .

Storming of the Bastille

On the morning of July 14, people stormed into the House of in-va-li-dov, where they-ho-dil-sya ar-se-nal, and captured weapons. Then, the crowd moved to the fortress of Bas-ti-liya, who served as a kind of prison-my and became a symbol of scrap about -from-to-la and des-po-teese-ma. Na-rod pot-re-bo-val, so that ko-men-dant cre-pos-ti at-ka-hall remove the push-ki from the tower and give out weapons, someone -swarm stored in the cre-pos-ti. But co-men-dant from-ka-hall-sya do it. Crowds of pa-ri-zhan and soldiers of the French-tsuz-with-koy guards storm-mum took Bas-ti-lea, the gar-ni-zone kre-pos-ti surrendered. Ko-men-dan-tu cre-pos-ti mar-ki-zu de Lo-ne from-ru-bi-li go-lo-woo, water-ru-zi-whether it to pee-ku and how tro- fairies carried around the city. Bass-ti-liya would-la times-ru-she-on.

Three lists have been preserved, in some of them there are those who took the Bas-ti-lea. In one of them, 662 people are named and their professions are indicated. Most of all in the list of the owners of small la-wok and re-mes-len-ni-kov - 426 people, under-masters, students -kov and ra-bo-chih - 149, sol-dat - 77, com-mer-san-tov - 4, servant - 5, teacher - 1. After taking the Bass -lie France would-la oh-wa-che-on a powerful rise in the people-of-the-no-th movement. The people overthrew the old orga-ns of the authorities, for-mi-ro-wa-las on the native mi-li-tion. Cres-t-yane on-pa-yes-whether on the castles of the seniors and mo-us-you-ray-, from-bi-ra-whether zah-va-chen-nye seniors-ora-mi ob- schin-nye lands. The mayor of Pa-ri-zha was from b-ran Bai-i, co-man-du-chim Na-tsi-onal-noy guard-di-e Pa-ri-zha - La-fai-et. Fak-ti-ches-ki ab-so-lu-tism was overthrown-g-chute, on-cha-las of the emigration of the nobility-s-t-va. Re-al-naya in-li-ti-ches-kaya power on-ho-di-los in the hands of Uch-re-di-tel-no-go sob-ra-niya, i.e. would-la from-nya-ta at aris-tok-ra-tii and re-sh-la, the main way, to the third estate.

Frightened by the raz-ma-home of the genus-no-go movement, the Uch-re-di-tel-noe meeting in August 1789 received two important for-to-but-yes-tel-nyh ak-ta. On the night of 4 to 5 August-gus-ta - many owls-re-men-ni-ki na-zy-wa-li her "night of miracles" - you were-ra-bo-tan for-ko -nop-ro-ekt, someone who came-no-small-sya in the form of about-on-ro-to-van-nyh Dec-re-tov from 4 to 11 August-gus-ta, from -me-nyav-shih sos-lov-nye pre-im-shches-t-va, fe-odal rights-va, church de-sya-ti-nu and announced-yav-lyav-shih ra-ven-s-t-in all before-for-ko-nom in pack-la-te go-su-dar-s-t-ven-nyh on-log-gov. One-on-one, all the cen-zy, sham-pa-ry - the main ones, connected with the earth in wine-nos-ti - os-ta-va-lis in si-le and under -le-zha-whether you-ku-pu. These de-re-you-lo-ji-whether on-cha-lo in-li-ti-ke hour-tych-y-y-y-y-y-yanam and pro-bi-whether a gap in the fe- odal-nyh from-but-she-no-yah. At the same time, a Gathering of races-sy-la-lo ka-ra-tel-nye squads against those cross-t-yan, some-rye tre-bo-va- whether more re-shi-tel-nyh measures. There was an announcement about the destruction of the same kind of all kind of privilege and “free-nos-tey-”. In order to us-to-co-it not-to-free-kres-t-yan and the city-with-a plebs, it would be re-she-but publish-whether-to-vat in the de -nie to bu-du-con-with-ti-tu-tion, since she herself couldn’t be under-go-to-le-na so fast-t-ro.

August 26, 1789 Meeting of the pri-nya-lo "Dec-la-ra-tion of the rights of man-lo-ve-ka and citizen-yes-no-na" - do-ku-ment og-rum-no-go re-in-lu-qi-he-no-go-meaning. In its os-no-ve le-zha-li ideas of Enlightenment, pro-voz-g-la-sha-lis the principle of na-rod-no-go su-ve-re-ni- te-ta, r-ven-s-t-in all before-for-ko-nom, right-in-lo-ve-ka for safety and so-ro-tiv-le- nie ug-not-te-niu, freedom of speech, pe-cha-ti and co-weight-ti. No-doubt-no-but that "Dec-la-ra-tion is not-for-we-si-bridge-ty of the United States," from an earlier date, July 4, 1776, eye-for- la influence on the "Dec-la-ra-tion of the rights of man-lo-ve-ka and citizen-yes-no-na." In the last article, the 17th article of “Dek-la-ra-tion”, pro-voz-g-la-sha-moose “sacred and unp-ri-kos-no-vein-noe » right hour-t-noy sob-s-t-ven-nos-ti.

The revolution is on-ras-ta-la, but the eco-but-mi-ches-something of France has not improved. Neh-wat-ka bread-ba, spe-ku-la-tion, do-ro-go-vis-at-usi-li-va-li not-to-will-with-t-in-ro-yes. On October 5, about 20 thousand people moved to Ver-salles - re-zi-den-tion of the ko-ro-lion-with-family and Uch-re-di -tel-no-th meeting. Refusal to ko-ro-la sub-pi-sat “Dek-la-ra-tion is right” and de-re-you 4-And av-gus-ta called mass-co-voe not-to-ve -rye to ko-ro-lu.

On the same day, about 6 thousand aroused women, and behind them the rest of the thieves went to the Ver-sal-s-kiy palace. On-rod tre-bo-val pe-re-ez-yes-ko-ro-lion-with-koy family in Paris. October 6-rya in hundred-li-tsu pe-re-eha-li co-role and Uch-re-di-tel-noe meeting; so-kim about-ra-zom the king-role of the eye-hall-sya under the con-t-ro-lem on-ro-yes and you-need-to-pi-sat Dec-re-you 4-11 Av -gus-ta and “Dek-la-ra-tion of the rights of a person-lo-ve-ka and a citizen-da-ni-na”. National movement October 5-6, sor-va-lo hostile-deb-ny re-in-lu-tion for-thoughts of the palace, zak-re-pi- lo her first for-in-eva-tion and provide-pe-chi-lo us-lo-via for her further development.

Activities of the Constituent Assembly

Having strengthened their positions, Uch-re-di-tel-noe meeting, in some-rum pain-shin-s-t-in at-above-le-zha-lo pro-mice -len-ni-kam and li-be-ral-no-mu noble-s-t-woo, in-lu-chi-lo the opportunity to continue to reap your ra-bo-tu and to carry out further re-forms. A prominent role in it is played by mar-quiz La-fay-et, participant-t-nick of Amer-ri-can-with-coy re-vo-lu-tion, and Count Mi-ra-bo, ora-tor-tri-bun, man-lo-age not-for-a-order-no-th mind, no-burdens-of-given passions and gro-mad-no-go chess-of-love. However, in the Assembly, there were already new forces, so long as you didn’t put out-vi-nu-shi-esya in the first ranks; among them - mo-lo-doy ad-vo-kat from Ar-ra-sa Mak-si-mi-li-en Ro-bes-p-er (1758-1794) and not-something his side-no-ki.

Following the principle of chi-pu civil-dan-with-to-go ra-ven-s-t-va, in 1790-1791. Collection from-me-ni-lo sos-lov-nye at-vi-le-gyi, lik-vi-di-ro-va-lo in-s-ti-here us-ice-s-t -ven-no-go nobles-s-t-va, nobles-ryan-s-th coats of arms and ti-tu-ly. Ut-ver-g-giving freedom to pre-p-ri-ni-ma-tel-s-t-va, it destroys something-zhi-lo go-su-dar-s-t-ven- new reg-la-men-ta-tion and tse-ho-vuyu sys-te-mu. From-me-on the inside-ren-nih-ta-mo-women, tor-go-vo-go to-go-vo-ra 1786 with An-g-li-her way-s-t- in-va-la warehouse-dy-va-niyu on-chi-onal-no-go market.

Providing the bourgeoisie-asia with freedom of con-ku-ren-tion and hiring-ma, Gathering from-ka-za-lo ra-bo-chim in the right to create sob-s-t-ven-nyh or-ga-ni-za-tsy and fight-boo for their in-te-re-sy. Sometime in 1790-1791. participated in strikes of ra-bo-sneezes and began to start-no-kat ra-bo-chie unions, Uch-re-di-tel-noe meeting at-nya-lo so on-zy-va-emy military-en-ny law on su-ro-howl races-p-ra-ve with w-m-m-mi and under-s-t-re-ka-te- la-mi, i.e., about the death-t-noy kaz-not without court-yes. On July 14, 1791, Le Chapelier's law was adopted (by the name of the pre-lo-living-she-go of his de-pu-ta-ta) on the za-re-sche-nii org-ga -no-for-tsy and a hundred-check. This law was canceled only in 1864.

A new rise of the kres-t-yan-s-of the re-stations in-bud-dil Gathering to return to ag-rar-no-mu wop-ro-su. Dec-re-vol November 2, 1789 . Announced by na-ci-onal-im-im-ess-t-vom, they would be pus-sche-us for sale. Since-ku-the-la-la was sold for you-with-a price-well, it’s-ku-pa-whether in the basic new-bourgeois-asia and for-zhi-toch -nye chair-t-yane. The poor kres-t-yane could not co-pat these lands.

Constitution of 1791

In September 1791, Uch-re-di-tel-noe meeting for-ver-shi-lo you-ra-bot-ku Kon-s-ti-tu-tion. All citizens, wouldn’t they be different, de-lena, into “active” and “passive”, i.e., those who had the right to from-bi-rat and not having -shih this is the right-va. “Active-us-mi” citizens-yes-na-mi would be a husband-chi-we from the age of 25, someone-ry-we-were so-s-t-veins-no-ka-mi and pla-ti-whether my direct tax is not less than 1.5-3 liv-ditch . Out of 9 million men, this right is about-la-yes-whether 4.3 million. bi-ra-lis you-bor-shchi-ki (there were about 50 thousand of them), then de-pu-ta-you. You-bor-shchi-ki vno-si-whether not three-d-nev-ny-, but de-sya-tid-nev-ny tax, but can-di-yes-you are in de-pu-ta -you Gather-ra-niya should-wh-would you pay a tax in one-well brand se-reb-ra (i.e. 52 liv-ra) and give more ze-mel-noy sob-s-t-ven-nose-tew. Kon-s-ti-tu-tion didn’t ras-p-grow-t-ra-nya-las on a co-lo-nii, the slave-s-t-in them didn’t come from me.

The constitution of the us-ta-no-vi-la in France con-with-ti-tu-qi-on-nuyu mo-nar-chiu. For-ko-but-da-tel-naya power at-over-le-zha-la one-but-pa-lat-no-mu For-ko-no-da-tel-no-mu so-ra-niyu , is-half-no-tel-naya - us-ice-s-t-ven-no-mu mo-nar-hu and called-on-chen-nym by them mini-nis-t-ram. The king could for a while from-to-lo-thread approved Meetings-ra-ni-em for-to-us, since he had the right to "for-de-zhi-va -thing-th-ve-something. France once-de-la-lased on 83 de-par-ta-men-ta, in some-ryh the power of os-shches-t-in-la-la-las you-bor-us-mi co-ve -ta-mi and di-river-to-ri-yami, in the cities and de-rev-nyah you choose-bor-us-mi mu-ni-qi-pa-li-te-ta-mi.

In this way, Uch-re-di-tel-noe collection of ut-ver-di-lo and yuri-di-ches-ki ofor-mi-lo so-chi-al-noe and according -whether-ti-ches-something gos-under-s-t-in im-schi. In la-ge-re, re-vo-lu-tion na-cha-moose so-qi-al-no-po-li-ti-ches-some times-me-the-va-nie. The third cons-lo-vie was no longer the same. The people's masses and more ra-di-kal-nye layers of the bourgeoisie are high-to-pa-li for the continuation of the re-in-lu-tion. The tops of the bourgeois-zhu-asia and the li-be-ral-noe-ryan-s-t-in, after getting what they were up to for-tor-mo-zit her.

Varenna Crisis

This time-same-va-nie is clear, but about-on-ru-zhi-moose during the War-ren-nsko-th crisis-zi-sa, calling-van-no-go-try- which run-s-t-va ko-ro-la. Lu-do-vic XVI with her family decided to run from Paris to Varennes, where many emigrants from France and close gathered, in Belgium, there was an av-s-t-riy-sky army, for some-ruy and count-you-va-la ko-ro-left-s-kaya family. On the night of June 21, 1791, under the guise of ku-che-ra, carried-she-go ba-ro-nes-su Korf, Lu-do-vic XVI and Mary An-tu-anet-ta, pe-re-dress-taya mountain-nich-noy-, you-left-whether from Pa-ri-zha, as if co-ro-leader-day Russian ba-ro-nes-su, and on sa -mom de le french-tsuz-s-kuyu ger-tso-gi-nu de Tour-nel to Belgium. But at the first postal station, the son of the head of the station recognized the co-ro-la, and the crowd-pa-ro-da zas-ta-vi-la from-p-ra-vit run-le-tsov under the horse-in-it about-rat-but to Paris. Namely, this is the event of calling-wa-lo for-mi-ro-va-nie of good-ro-free-squads (in-lon-te-ditch) in-for-shchi-tu re-in-lu-tion. Upon returning to Paris, to ko-ro-lyu would have been attached-tav-le-on guard. On the streets of Pa-ri-zha, once-bi-va-li bus-you-ko-ro-la and na-zy-va-li him from me-no-one.

Clubs, folk societies, print

Dissatisfaction with the masses of the people and part of the li-be-ral-no-go nobles-s-t-va de-yatel-nos-tyu hundred-yav-shih among the moderate authorities mo-nar-his-tov-kon-s-ti-tu-qi-she-lists-tov na-ho-di-lo your own re-re-ing in clubs, some-rye- mi-ro-va-lissed in-li-ti-ches-kim in-te-re-sam and played a role that has not yet arisen in France in-li-ti-ches- some parties. These would be the clubs of the Fel-Yans, Yako-Bin-tsev, Cor-del-Eur, etc. In 1791-1792. on-for-lee de-mok-ra-tich-nym was the club of cor-del-ers, to someone-ro-mu cha-go-te-whether so on-zy-va-emye brother-s-kie society-t-va, i.e., the association of re-mes-len-ni-kov, “passive” citizens; Marat, Dan-ton, De-mou-len, etc. enter into something. erov - mo-on-hov, but-siv-shih vla-sya-ni-tsy and under-yasy-vav-shih-ve-roar-koy (from French cor-de).

The club of Yako-bin-tsev, co-bi-equal-shi-sya in mo-us-you-re St. Jacob had a great influence; member-s-t-in it op-la-chi-va-moose to-ro-go, especially-ben-but vna-cha-le. He united the parties-ron-ni-kov of different ori-en-ta-tsii. The club had fi-li-alas in pro-vin-qi-yah. In 1791 there were more than 400 of them, in the future - more than 1000. Its members were Mi-ra-bo and Ro-bes-pi-er. In re-zul-ta-te ras-ko-la in 1791, the club of yako-bin-tsev ob-ra-zo-val-sya (except for yako-bin-with-ko-go) con- s-ti-tu-qi-on-no-mo-nar-hi-ches-cue-li-ti-ches-cue fel-yanov club, proz-van-ny so on-name-no-va- nyu-hov-no-go or-de-na, in mo-us-you-re-something-ro-go members of the club for-se-yes-whether. Li-de-ra-mi club would be M. La-fay-et, A. Bar-nav, A. La-met.

The revolution called-wa-la to life-no many-zhes-t-in newspapers. Big av-to-ri-tet for-vo-eva-la ga-ze-ta "Friend on-ro-da", from-da-va-emaya Ma-ra-tom. Her chi-ta-whether more than anything in the pre-mes-t-yah, ra-bo-chih quarter-ta-lah and common-t-wah. Would-be-la-po-lyar-ness ga-ze-you zhur-na-lis-ta Eber-ra "Pa-pa-sha Du-shen", in some swarm he li-chal aris-tok-ra-tov and bo-ha-chey-, using the French fol-k-lore, and sometimes even just a river heat- gon.

Beginning of revolutionary wars

The revolution in France is you-zy-va-la demon-for-some-st-in and not-on-vist of the mo-nar-hs and nobles-s-t-va of the European-ro-pei-ders -zhav. More than anything, they feared the French-tsuz-with-coy re-vo-lu-tion Av-s-t-ria and Prussia. In February 1792, in Sak-so-nii, in the castle of Pil-nitz, pra-vi-tel-s-t-va Av-s-t-rii and Prussia-this zak-lu-chi- whether in-en-ny union against re-in-lu-qi-on-noy France. The king and his side-no-ki strove for war, for you see-de-whether it is the only spa-se-ing from re-vo-lu -tion. Part of the fel-yans, as well as Ro-bes-pier, Marat and many members of the yako-bin-with-to-go club were against the war and op -sa-lis her. Zhi-ron-dis-you, in the main-new trade and industrial and industrial circles from de-par-ta-men-ta Zhi-ron-dy and other de -par-ta-men-tov, would-whether for a howl-well, and ras-count-you-wa-whether on a fast-t-ruyu in trouble.

The sides took over the top, and on April 20, 1792, France announced the war-well of Av-s-t-rii. It would be a war-on the re-in-lu-qi-on-noy of France against the mo-nar-chi-chess of Europe. Na-cha-lo war-ny would be un-successful for France: old army de-zor-ga-ni-zo-va-na, many officers emig -ri-ro-va-li; in-long-te-ry would not be trained-che-us, badly in-we-we-we-wouldn’t-believe-whether ofi-ce-ram.

Legislative Assembly

Another October 1, 1791, after the reception . Its composition is from-li-chall-Xia from Uch-re-di-tel-no-go. The right part of Za-ko-no-da-tel-no-go meeting of sos-tav-la-li fel-yana - a party of large fi-nan-sis-tov and not-go -qi-an-tov, court-dov-la-del-tsev-ra-bo-tor-gov-tsev and plan-ta-to-ditch, large land-own-s-t-veins -no-kov, pro-mouse-len-ni-kov and we-kav-she-go to her li-be-ral-no-go-ryan-s-t-va. This party was-la for-in-te-re-so-va-na in the so-ra-non-nii of the mo-nar-hii and Kon-s-ti-tu-tion of 1791

The left part of the collection consisted of sos-to-yala from de-pu-ta-tov, connected with yako-bin-with-kim club-bom. Soon they split up into two groups. One of them, in-lu-chi-la, is called-va-nie zhi-ron-dis-tov (many of the most prominent de-pu-ta-you of this party would be from-b-ra-ny in de-par-ta-men-te Zhi-ron-da) - their pre-s-tav-la-whether merchants, pro-mouse-len-ni-ki and new lands-left-la-del-tsy, the main way of the southern, south-western and south-eastern de-par-ta-men-tov, for-in-te-re-co-van-nyh in pe-re-us-t-roy-st-ve society-t-va. At the first time, they also supported the Kon-s-ti-tu-tsu of 1791, but in the future they re-decided on the re-pub- li-kan-s-kie-zi-tion.

Extremely left-wing group-pa de-pu-ta-tov in Za-ko-but-da-tel-nom sob-ra-nii would-la pre-s-tav-le-on mon-tan-yara-mi . They, in a lu-chi-whether this is a name-va-nie in a way that in Za-ko-but-da-tel-nom sob-ra-nii for-ni-ma-li place on sa -my upper-x-them benches in the hall for-se-da-ny-, on the “mountain” (la mon-tag-ne). In the conditions-lo-vi-yah mas-so-vo-go re-vo-lu-qi-on-no-go rise 48 par-rizh-s-kih sections on-cha-li active -but participate in the general-t-ven-noy life. Sections us-ta-nav-li-va-li connections with each other and pre-p-ri-ni-ma-li collective actions. They are in the basis of new and sub-go-to-we-whether re-in-lu-tion on August 10, 1792. -vuya owl-mes-t-but with fe-de-ra-ta-mi, sections of energy-gich-but go-you-whether over the same mo-nar-chii. Stands of houses in Pa-ri-same for-dog-t-re-whether p-zy-va-mi to resurrection. Na-for-lea-re-shi-tel-but us-t-ro-en-nye sections pri-nya-whether a post-ta-new-le-tion about from-me-not mo-nar-hii ( 32 sections out of 48).

CONTENT
INTRODUCTION

2. SECOND REPUBLIC
3. SECOND EMPIRE
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES50
INTRODUCTION
One of the richest stories in the world is the history of France, full of romance and drama at the same time.
The Great French Revolution marked the beginning of a new history of France. Since this greatest moment in the history of this state, the flywheel of history has spun with incredible force. In just a century, France managed to survive about five revolutions. Monarchy was replaced by a republic, a republic by an empire, an empire by a monarchy. Then circle again. Four times France became a republic!
Over the past century since the beginning of the French Revolution, France has experienced minutes greatest glory during the reign of Napoleon and moments of shameful oblivion during the fall of Bonaparte's empire.
It seems that for a long time the country could not escape from this hellish circle into which it was dragged by the flywheel of history.
France showed the whole world that the people can and must win rights and freedoms, and if necessary, win them again. For the citizens of this state, freedom is not an empty phrase, it is a value won by them with blood.
The revolution of 1848 is a prime example of this.

1. RESTORATION OF BOURBONS. JULY REVOLUTION OF 1830

The new rulers of France had to recognize the "redistribution" of landed property, the bourgeois civil code developed under Napoleon and, consequently, the destruction feudal relations, as well as the new administration of France.
They agreed to gift France with a written constitution, known as the Charters of 1814. The authors called it "free and monarchist".
The charter of 1814, as it followed from its content, was supposed to reconcile the tops of the bourgeoisie with the nobility. Accordingly with this:
a) it was recognized that citizens "are equally admitted to civil and military posts";
b) what sovereignty The king was limited by the legislative powers of the chambers and the irremovability of judges. Two chambers were created: the upper, appointed by the king, and the lower, elected by a narrow collegium, consisting of persons paying at least 300 francs of direct taxes; a member of the chamber was required to pay at least 1,000 francs in tax.
Under this system, no more than 90 thousand people voted (out of 30 million, about 15 thousand had the right to be elected).
Such was this constitution, designed, in her own words, "to meet the expectations of an enlightened Europe." By depriving the nation of all legal political action, by placing power in the hands of a small handful of its enslavers, the Charter declared the "cherished desire" that "all French should live as brothers."
It is not surprising that when Napoleon, having decided on his last "flight of the eagle", landed in France with a handful of veterans (1815), the anti-popular monarchy was thrown into the mud from which it had previously been picked up.
Restored to the throne after the Battle of Waterloo, Louis XVIII reigned until 1824. His place was taken by Charles X (Artois), the recognized head of French reaction.
The first business of the new king was to reward the nobles who lost their land during the revolution. This compensation amounted to a huge amount - 1 billion francs.
His next case was to restore the death penalty for "insulting" the Catholic religion.
In 1830, Charles X issued 6 decrees (ordinances). The newly elected chamber (which seemed “liberal”) was dispersed, the electoral right was even more narrowed, the legislative competence of the lower chamber was reduced, and freedom of the press and assembly was eliminated.
The new reign was furnished with a new constitution.
There were few changes, however. The electoral qualification was reduced slightly - to 200 francs; for deputies - up to 500. Therefore, the total number of voters increased slightly, amounting to only 240 thousand people (instead of 6 million, as it would be with universal male suffrage).
The main thing was not in the constitution, but in the orientation that the July Monarchy adhered to. The words uttered at the coronation of Louis Philippe, "From now on, we - the bankers will rule" came true. There came a period when the leading role in the state was in the hands of a small group of financial magnates.
Under Louis Philippe, K. Marx rightly wrote, it was not the French bourgeoisie as a whole that dominated, but only one of its factions - bankers, stock exchange and railway kings, owners of mines and mines, as well as a part of landowners associated with them - "the so-called financial aristocracy"1 .

2. SECOND REPUBLIC

The further this process went, the more definite its main consequences became:
a) increased hostility between the working class, on the one hand, and the bourgeoisie, on the other;
b) their general dissatisfaction with the regime of the July Monarchy.
The industrial bourgeoisie was unwilling to tolerate the political monopoly of the financial aristocracy. The workers could no longer endure the terrible poverty.

Taking advantage of the situation, the opposition circles of the bourgeoisie demanded a reduction in the electoral qualification. In this way they hoped to win the Lower House for themselves.
The government was well aware of these intentions. Not wanting any reforms, it (in the person of the head of the ministry of the historian Guizot) answered the opposition with a memorable phrase: "Get rich, and you will become voters."
Guizot called the proposals for the expansion of the suffrage "fanaticism of the mind." “In 1789,” he said, “the electoral system proclaimed a universal suffrage ... which, however, neither party was willing to accept in its entirety; no one will let that happen now."
The bourgeois opposition protested, but things did not go beyond attacks in the newspapers and at specially arranged banquets.
On February 22, the day of the shamefully canceled banquet, the working-class suburbs of Paris rose up in defense of the electoral reform and against the government of Guizot. The government, which had already gained a hand in suppressing the "revolts", sent troops against the demonstrators. Cavalry and infantry attacked unarmed and peaceful people who demanded bread and reform. In response, Paris was covered with barricades. The fight continued throughout the next day. In the hope of resisting, Louis Philippe resigns Guizot, expresses his consent to the reform. Too late!
In a bloody battle, the rebels capture the Tuileries, the royal palace. But the king was no longer in him: having renounced the throne, he fled, saving his life. His throne was dragged out into the square and burned on a huge fire. France became a republic for the second time.
Having conquered the republic, the workers hoped that it would be social, as they said then, that is, it would provide them with sufficient earnings, first of all, take care of their old age, education for children, etc. These hopes were dashed.
The Constituent Assembly, which opened on May 4, broke with all the social illusions of the February revolution. It bluntly proclaimed a bourgeois republic, and only that.
The provisional government, formed from the leaders of the bourgeois opposition, took care that the composition of the Constituent Assembly was strictly bourgeois.
The workers revolted again, this time not together with the bourgeoisie (as in February), but against it. This is great historical meaning June barricade struggle. For the first time in history, the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat was revealed in all its irreconcilability. As we now see, this antagonism had to be passed through, passed to the extreme, so that both classes - even after a century - were convinced of the possibility of some kind of social peace how he established himself - with all possible reservations - in the advanced countries of Europe, America and even Asia.
The reason for the uprising was the deliberate liquidation of the National Workshops, which provided income to thousands of unemployed. The dismissed were to go to work in the provinces (where they were less dangerous to the government). At the request of the workers to cancel the order, the government threatened to use force. “Excellent,” said the head of the workers' delegation, Pujol. “We now know what we wanted to know.”
The battle went on for five days. The barricades, starting on the outskirts of the city, stubbornly moved towards the center, towards the city hall. The government entrusted the massacre of the rebels to General Cavaignac. In the words of one of the ministers, it decided to "arrange a massacre."
The uprising was spontaneous. Nobody prepared it. There was no definite plan of action, no clear program, no directing center. Nevertheless, on June 24, lists of the proposed government began to be passed over the barricades: it contained the names of the socialist Louis Blanc, the utopian communist Cabet, the staunch revolutionary O. Blanca, the worker Albert, but also Louis Bonaparte and some others.
On the morning of June 25, it became clear that the government, with a huge preponderance of forces, was winning. Nevertheless, the rebels did not think about surrender. The glorious Faubourg Saint-Antoine remained the last bastion. Here the rebels hung a poster defining the goals of the struggle, as they were then understood: “We want a social and democratic republic. We want the autocracy of the people.” The offer of "reconciliation" was proudly rejected here. The rebels agreed to lay down their arms if the Constituent Assembly was dissolved, the troops were withdrawn from the city, and on the indispensable condition that "the people themselves work out a constitution for themselves."
On the morning of June 26, the battle stopped, but captured rebels were shot everywhere - in barracks, in quarries and in many other places. The bourgeois National Guard distinguished itself in atrocities, bringing hundreds of people to execution. The bodies were dumped into the Seine, and she carried them into the sea.
In the February battles, the Parisian proletariat lost more than 5 thousand people killed and wounded. In June, according to the estimates of English newspapers, at least 50,000 people were killed alone. More than 3 thousand rebels were killed in cold blood after the uprising. At least 15 thousand people were exiled without trial.
The government carried out its dastardly plan, begun with the dissolution of the National Workshops, to the end.
On the side of the bourgeois republic, wrote K. Marx, who closely observed the events described, stood the financial aristocracy, the industrial bourgeoisie, the middle strata, the petty bourgeoisie, the army, the lumpen proletariat organized into a mobile guard, the intelligentsia and, finally, the peasantry. The Parisian proletariat had only itself on its side.
Terror was still rampant when the Constituent Assembly resumed discussion of a new constitution.
I. The Constitution of 1848 declared France a republic, whose motto was supposedly "family, labor, property and public order."
It was, of course, a bourgeois republic, and even one that reflected all the fears that had just been experienced before the victory of "anarchism, socialism and communism."
From the text of the constitution it followed that the "right to work" meant nothing more than "equality in relations between the worker and the owner" and the organization of "public works intended to provide employment to the unemployed." However, already in the course of the debate it was clear that neither the Assembly, nor those who would follow it, intended to hold on to the "right to work" in any form. Even those who defended him mostly agreed to "the promises that were made in February" or called for "compassion," as it sounded in the speech of the head of the interim government, Lamartine. Indeed, everything that was written in the constitution about "labor" remained an empty phrase.
II. The constitution left intact the entire old organization of government, the municipalities, the judiciary and the army. Some of the changes she made were not in the content, but in the table of contents, not in things, but in names.
Sh. The most significant of the innovations was the legalization of universal male suffrage, proclaimed February revolution 1848. The Constituent Assembly did not dare to abolish it. But on the other hand, a restrictive clause was introduced - six months of residence.
In 1850, the residence requirement was increased to three years, and this - along with the deliberately complicated procedure for establishing it - threw out three million citizens, mainly poor people (day laborers, farm laborers, seasonal workers) from the electoral corps.
IV. The Constituent Assembly took care to stuff the constitution of 1848 with pseudo-democratic phraseology. And each time, after the solemn proclamation of another freedom, a clause followed, limiting it or nullifying it.
Here are the relevant examples:
“Teaching is free. The freedom of teaching can be exercised under the conditions prescribed by law and under the supreme supervision of the state” (Chapter 2, Article 9). Or:
“Citizens have the right to form unions, to organize peaceful and unarmed assemblies ... to express their opinion in the press ...” But the second part of the article read: “The exercise of these rights knows no other restrictions than the equal rights of others and public safety.”
“Each paragraph of the constitution,” Marx rightly wrote in The Eighteenth Brumaire, “contains in itself ... its own upper and lower chamber: freedom in a general phrase, the abolition of freedom in a clause”4.
V. Guided by the doctrine of "separation of powers", the constitution entrusts the publication of laws to the National Assembly, the executive power - to the President of the Republic.
It was decided to make the National Assembly unicameral. Most of the constitutionalists belonged to the bourgeois republicans, and they were afraid to create an upper house, usually pro-monarchy.
For the election of the president of the republic, the same procedure was determined as for the election of the National Assembly: universal suffrage - plebiscite.
This decision was worth a lot of debate. The cautious ones proposed that the "minister-president" be elected and removed by the National Assembly. This proposal was rejected. It ran counter to the separation of powers, which the constitution declared "the first condition of free government."
Direct elections (with secret ballots) created for the president the same authority as the "people's choice" as for the National Assembly itself. The republic had "two heads", and the president could at any time oppose himself to the National Assembly.
The squabbling between the legislative and executive powers was inevitable, and it was foreseen. "The game of constitutional forces" - this is how the displaced and embittered Guizot called this system.
All means of executive power were in the hands of the president: he handed out positions, including officer positions, local governments depended on him, and the armed forces (including the National Guard) were actually subordinate to him.
Having endowed the president of the republic with all the attributes of royal power (up to the right to pardon), the Assembly, despite the soothing speeches, was tormented by fear for the future.
From time to time the deputies turned their eyes to Louis Napoleon, the nephew of the great Bonaparte. Five departments voted for him with 300,000 votes. Of all the deputies of the Assembly, he was the most likely contender for the presidency.
It was decreed (§ 68 of the constitution) that any attempt by the president to dissolve the Assembly was treason; in this case, the judges of the Supreme Court were instructed to “convene immediately” for the trial of the president.
In less than four years, the constitution of 1848 was forever buried. What remains of it as an invention that has made its way across the whole continent is this state of siege (v. 106), periodically applied in each of the successive crises in the course of French history.

3. SECOND EMPIRE
In December 1848, Louis Napoleon was elected President of France. Out of 7300 thousand votes, he got 5400 thousand.
The peasantry of France voted for Louis Napoleon, associating with this name the revival of the former greatness of the country, the abolition of taxes and the destruction of the republic. The workers voted for Louis Napoleon in order to prevent the hated executioner Cavaignac, who, like Napoleon, was one of the presidential candidates, from coming to power. The big bourgeoisie welcomed Napoleon as "a transitional step towards the monarchy."
Deprived of the rights of re-election, the President of the Republic had to wait for the expiration of the legal four-year term, followed by the end of greatness. Louis Napoleon decided to avoid this fate at all costs,
Relying on all sorts of rabble, organized in the society "December 10" (the day of the election of Louis Napoleon), the president of the republic was preparing its overthrow. All those who could resist him were removed or moved. All those who, due to their unscrupulousness and venality, were suitable for the conceived business, approached.
Special efforts were made to attract army units to the conspiracy. The Parisian garrison was almost completely renewed.
A special detachment made up of policemen was ordered to arrest 78 people, among whom 16 were opposition leaders in the National Assembly. They could not find grounds for the arrest, and therefore they wrote in the orders: "Participation in a conspiracy (conspiracy) against the security of the state."

From the text of another proclamation, one could conclude that the coup was carried out for the sake of the following state structure: the president, elected for 10 years; a state council that develops bills; the legislative body and the "balancing" senate; ministries appointed and removed by the will of the president.

The beginning of the new dictatorship was marked by bloodshed. Infantry and cavalry units, resorting to grape shot, rifle fire, saber strikes, fell upon the peaceful crowds of Parisians. The victims of this pogrom, dictated by vile feelings, were about two thousand people. Several barricades erected in defense of the desecrated republic were taken, their defenders were shot to the last man. Tables with drinks and snacks were placed near their corpses, at which officers and soldiers had fun.
Wild reprisals against the Republicans were committed throughout the rest of France.
In January 1852, a new constitution was approved.
At the center of the entire system of government was the president. His power concerned both legislation and administration. He appointed and dismissed ministers. The court was administered in his name. In his power were the army and the police. He declared a state of siege. He issued decrees and approved laws.
The constitution saw the only "limitation" of the president's power in the system of popular polls - plebiscites.
The introduction of a permanent (although not often used) plebiscite element into the state system creates the illusion of democracy, but does not in the least threaten the foundations of the regime.
Accordingly, the plebiscite prepared by the authorities always gave the result that the government was counting on.
At the same time, really sharp issues of government policy that touched the interests of the people were never submitted to the plebiscite.

Real power was in the hands of the financial and industrial bourgeoisie. Never before had such favorable conditions been created for her.
The second empire, like the first, was born at a time when, frightened by the democratic movement and democratic reforms the bourgeoisie was in a particularly counter-revolutionary mood.
An example of this is the decree of 1852, which deprived the press of guarantees of independence. The comic actor Grasso was arrested for saying in one of the cafes where he was kept waiting: “Here, as in Sevastopol, you can’t get anything” (meaning the Crimean War)5.
The second empire lasted until 1870. The very first battles Franco-Prussian War discovered the decay of the French government and army. Finally, near Sedan, the Prussian-German troops forced the 100,000-strong French army to capitulate. This catastrophe raised Paris to its feet. The people broke into the Legislative Assembly. Under his direct pressure, the abolition of the empire and the restoration of the republic, the third in a row, were decreed. This happened on September 4, 1870.
Power ended up in the hands of a small handful of professional politicians and military men who appropriated the name of the "national defense" government. The new government of France focused its efforts mainly on reaching an agreement with Prussia at any cost: they were afraid of a revolutionary situation that developed as a result of military defeat, economic ruin, and the poverty of the masses. And, we will notice, were afraid not in vain.

CONCLUSION
The coalition of states that had won a decisive victory over Napoleon hastened to build on french throne senior representative of the "legitimate" (legitimate) dynasty - Louis XVIII.
In 1824, Charles X (Artois), the recognized head of French reaction, took his place. Under him, the right to vote was further narrowed, the legislative competence of the lower house was reduced, and freedom of the press and assembly was eliminated.
The response to this policy was the July Uprising of 1830. After bloody street fighting, Charles X was overthrown and fled. The big, mainly financial, bourgeoisie that led the revolution put Louis Philippe of Orleans on the throne, who was related to the "legitimate" dynasty.
In the 40s years XIX century France makes notable progress in industrial development. The capitalist factory takes the place of manufactory and handicraft industry. The era of large-scale machine production is coming.
The industrial bourgeoisie is no longer willing to tolerate the political monopoly of the financial aristocracy.
Two disasters, combined in 1847, brought general discontent to revolution: the first disaster was a crop failure, the second was a world commercial and industrial crisis.
As a result, in February, and then in June 1848, France underwent two more revolutions.
The constitution of 1848 declared France a republic.
The most significant of the innovations was the legalization of universal male suffrage and the separation of powers into legislative and executive.
The Constitution entrusts the publication of laws to the National Assembly, the executive power - to the President of the Republic.
For the elections of the National Assembly and the President of the Republic, the same procedure was determined: universal suffrage - plebiscite.
In December 1848, Louis Napoleon was elected President of France.
On the morning of December 2, 1851, a special proclamation informed Paris that "in the name of the French people" the President of the Republic was dissolving the National Assembly.
Under the guise of a republic adorned with universal suffrage, a dictatorship of one person was decreed.
In November 1852, Napoleon eliminated the contradiction between title and power. First the Senate, and then the plebiscite, proclaim him Emperor of France under the name of Napoleon III.
Real power was in the hands of the financial and industrial bourgeoisie.
The second empire lasted until 1870.
On March 18, 1871, the proletariat of Paris rose up after a six-month siege of the city by Prussian troops, exhausted by hunger and unemployment. Organized into the National Guard, the proletariat proclaimed the Commune, in which it saw the realization of the principles of that "social republic" for which it fought in vain in 1848.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Mishin A. A. Constitutional (state) law foreign countries: Textbook. - M.: White Alvy, 1996. - 400 p.
2. Chernilovsky Z. M. General history State and Law: Textbook - M.: Yurist, 1995. - 576 p.

1 K. Marx and F. Engels. Op. T.7. - p.8
2 See: Senbos Sh. Political history modern Europe.T.1. - St. Petersburg, 1903, - S. 141-142.
3 Marx K. The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte // K. Marx and F. Engels. Op. T.8. - S. 126.
4 K. Marx and F. Engels. Op. T.8. - S. 132
5 Senbos Sh. Political history of modern Europe.V.1. - SPb., 1903, - S.151

The main trend is the strengthening of French absolutism. The appearance of flight. Active colonial policy. 2 major wars - Thirty Years and Spanish Succession. Three periods of regency: Marie de Medici, Anne of Austria and the Duke of Orleans. Coming to the fore in solving state issues of the cardinals. Rigid policy of Richelieu, more flexible - Mazarin. The development of the institute of quartermasters who had real power in the province. Attempts by parliamentarians and the nobility to take the initiative into their own hands and somehow limit the power of the kings were suppressed. The movement of opposition to the arbitrariness of the regents and cardinals - the Fronde. The gradual deterioration of the position of Protestants, the tightening of Catholic oppression. The development of the ideas of the Enlightenment, which became popular primarily among the nobility and the parliamentary opposition. The rapid development of society and the economy while maintaining obsolete foundations - the senior system and class privileges.

Henry IV was able to restore the system of state administration and the system of finance in a short time. In this he was helped by his lieutenant Sully. Poletta was introduced - a system for the sale of government posts (an official pays 1/60 of the cost annually, in exchange for getting the opportunity to inherit and further sell). The attractiveness of positions increased dramatically, and the money began to quickly flow into the treasury.

Peasants still formed the backbone of the country's economy. It was forbidden to describe labor tools for debts, the plowing of empty lands was encouraged.

The king tried to pursue an active colonial policy. The development of Canada, the fortress of Quebec was founded. Reorganization of the army (established regular supply of troops, the creation of a military medical service). The use of foreign mercenaries.

The main problem is that Henry did not have a legitimate heir to the throne. It was necessary to conclude a new marriage. The chosen one was Maria Medici, daughter of the Duke of Tuscany. In 1601 she gave birth to an heir. Leaving for war, the king entrusted the regency to Mary. After the death of her husband, she canceled Henry's order on the regency council and the herd of a full-fledged regent with her son. There was a general explosion of loyal feelings for the deceased king and his son in the country, so Mary managed to avoid unrest and ensure the continuity of royal policy. Henry's advisers retained their positions, the Edict of Nantes was confirmed by the new king. But gradually the Medici began to elevate low-born temporary workers, which outraged the nobility. They had to be coaxed from the treasury, which quickly emptied. After that, the princes turned to military action.

The first rebellion of the princes (1614) did not receive wide support and was pacified financially.

During the mutiny, the slogan of the convocation of the Estates General was put forward. The princes failed to enlist the support of the deputies. But the states as a whole did not manage to solve anything at all, and they were dissolved (they did not gather until the revolution). Mary's attention was attracted by the piscop, who later became Cardinal de Richelieu. He was increasingly involved in solving important political problems.

The decision to strengthen relations with Spain through a series of dynastic marriages. Soon, young Louis XIII showed independence: he sent his mother into exile. Richelieu was returned back to his diocese and removed from public affairs, but temporarily. Soon, Mary regained influence over her son and achieved the inclusion of herself and Richelieu in the Royal Council. In fact, the role of the cardinal in the political life of the country has increased. When did it start Thirty Years' War between Catholic and Protestant states, Louis (himself a zealous Catholic) at first did not want to interfere. Richelieu was able to convince the king to take a decisive position towards Spain. Soon he became the first minister and concentrated an unprecedented power in his hands. An active struggle was waged against the uprisings of the nobility. Strategy for Restoring the Religious Unity of the Country. Laws were passed that restricted the activities of protest pastors.

When France went to open war (1635), a series of setbacks followed. The army was poorly organized, though numerous. The transition of the cardinal to emergency methods of government. According to Richelieu: the king had unlimited power, he had the right to ignore ordinary laws in an emergency situation in the name of the common good.

Since the mid-30s - the development of the institute of quartermasters. These are officials of a new type, they did not own the position. Without their efforts, France would not have won the war. They were appointed by the king to investigate and inspect important matters and local officials. But Richelieu awarded them with special powers: they combined judicial and executive functions, they were obliged to ensure the fulfillment of specific tasks (tax collection, strengthening defense, etc.). In fact, they replaced the governors. Quartermasters - visitors, could not have personal or political sympathies in the provinces. Powers are strictly limited (no more than 3 years in one province).

A new period in the history of France is associated with the regency Anna of Austria and the government of Mazarin. After the death of Louis XIII, the queen mother became regent. She followed the policies of her husband and Richelieu. Retained as successor to Richelieu - Giulio Mazarin. An acute crisis broke out in the country in 1648-1653, after the end of the war. It was called the "Fronde". 2 periods: 1) parliamentary fronde, or old (1648-49) 2) princes' fronde, or new (1650-53). The suppression of the movement resulted in the complete consolidation of royal arbitrariness and the final humiliation of parliament and the aristocracy, that is, two forces that had at least some chance in the fight against absolutism.

officials were dissatisfied with the sale of new positions and the introduction of strict taxes, so they canceled a series of new fiscal edicts and put forward 27 points of declaration demanding that taxes be placed under parliamentary control, the institute of quartermasters should be abolished (royal power is practically under control). Anna of Austria is forced to yield. But Mazarin decided to take revenge. He arrested two instigators of the parliamentary resistance. In response to this, extensive popular unrest began, barricades in Paris. I had to let go, negotiations with parliament resumed. On the eve of the conclusion of the Peace of Westphalia, 27 points were adopted, and Anna of Austria left Paris. It was immediately occupied by Prince Condé (at first he collaborated with Anna and Mazarin). The war of Parliament against Condé was short-lived, but fierce. On March 15, a resolution on reconciliation was signed. Thus ended the parliamentary Fronde.

The Prince of Condé demanded a reward for saving the country from turmoil. He also demanded the removal of the foreign cardinal from power. But Mazarin arrested him and his relatives in 1650. In response, a new riot broke out. Mazarin left for Germany, before that we will release the princes. In 1651, Louis XIV was proclaimed an adult. Here Prince Conde rebelled again and began to gather an army of supporters. The army of the king pushed Condé away from Paris, but he was able to take possession of the capital for a while. However, the municipality advocated peace with the king. Then Conde dealt with them in the City Hall. After that, almost all the parliamentarians went over to the king. Louis and Mazarin returned in triumph to Paris. Thus ended the Fronde of Princes.

Administrative monarchy of Louis XIV. The king tried to concentrate all power in his hands. main role the Supreme Council played in the system of government institutions, the State Council considered smaller issues. General Comptroller of Finance - chief position. The commissaries remained in the provinces, whose powers were constantly expanding. The heyday of absolutism, but not lawlessness. "The state is me!". Louis limited or even eliminated the privileges of the Parlement of Paris. In 1685 he repealed the Edict of Nantes and persecuted the Huguenots. Publication of the Civil and Criminal Ordinances. Education a large number monopoly companies for trade, granting privileges for the production and marketing of products to the owners of manufactories.

Louis wanted to change the balance of power in Europe and achieve French dominance, but after the devastating War of the Spanish Succession, his intentions collapsed.

After the death of Louis in 1715, the new king, due to the lack of other heirs (died), was the five-year-old son of his grandson, the Duke of Anjou. The question of a change of dynasty arose again. Another contender is the Duke of Orleans, the king's nephew (but he deprived him of the right to inherit in his will). However, the duke challenged this in Parliament and became regent. He again returned to the decision of state affairs the princes of the blood and the highest nobility. But in fact, the monarchy did not undergo any serious changes during this period.

The new King Louis XV married a Polish princess who was older than him. She bore him 10 children and an heir. But he quickly lost interest in her. He did not possess special qualities of management, he handed over the reins of government to his advisers. They led the ministers, and those officials in the field. The foreign policy failures of the king (failure in the Seven Years' War) led to the emergence of parliamentary opposition. Previously, the king was challenged by the ancestral nobility. The opposition rejected a bunch of reforms, in response to this, Louis dissolved the parliament and formed a new one (he appointed the members himself). Despite the development of the ideas of the Enlightenment, Louis was not interested in them. His grandson was more intelligent.

In France, a struggle broke out over the issue of reforms. 2 reasons:

1. active development of capital relations (due to participation in world trade and development of colonial centers)
2. remnants of the Middle Ages in many areas of life.

Insufficient were the guarantees of private property. Preservation of the senior system and estate privileges. The privileged classes sought to close access for the third estates to their ranks. An economic crisis erupted. In fact, these are the prerequisites for the political crisis of 1789 and the subsequent revolution.