Reinterpreting the French Revolution: A global-historical perspective by BAILEY STONE
Authors: BAILEY STONE
Ads: Link
assimilation of “new” civilian officeholding (or “robe”) no-
bility to older military (or “sword”) noblesse, and of wealthy bourgeoisie
to recent “robe” nobility. In this sense, the crown was indeed an agent
of social evolution – more specifically, of the metamorphosis of exclusive
nobility into more inclusive “notability.” Yet it is just as incontrovertible
that there were limits in the old regime to this kind of social change.
Take, for instance, the case of the secretaries of state at Versailles. Al-
though it is incontrovertible that distinctions still existed between the civil-
ian and military branches of government personnel in Louis XIV’s time, we
know that the Sun King himself labored continually to reduce the “prestige
differential” between the two branches. And indeed, at the level of secre-
taries of state this invidious differential had all but disappeared. In this
purlieu of power men chosen from the robe nobility, recently risen from
bourgeois ranks, were authorized to integrate with and become the equal of
the highest nobles of the realm. As a result, their status was henceforward
so high that they dominated the Second Estate. The eighteenth-century
situation – in which even such commoners as Cardinal Guillaume Dubois
and Jacques Necker could serve as secretaries of state – was, by virtue of
this process, far removed from that of the seventeenth century.89 Still, we
may relevantly ask how many other cases of commoners acceding directly
to such elevated responsibilities at Versailles could be cited by historians
of the old regime. Granted, the balance between robe and sword within
the ranks of high officialdom was shifting; yet upward mobility into those
ranks was not exactly revolutionized.
88 For all these calculations, see Doyle, Origins of the French Revolution , pp. 119–20, 129–30.
89 J. Franc¸ois Bluche, “The Social Origins of the Secretaries of State under Louis XIV, 1661–
1715,” in Ragnhild Hatton, ed., Louis XIV and Absolutism (London: Macmillan, 1976), pp. 90, 95–96.
The ancien régime
43
Research done on the eighteenth-century provincial intendants leads
to similar conclusions. It would appear that, toward the end of the eigh-
teenth century, a greater proportion of Louis XVI’s intendants were new
to the nobility and to the robe than had been the case with their pre-
decessors under Louis XIV. As a matter of fact, Louis XVI’s intendants
were still busily engaged in making themselves “acceptable” in the highest
ranks of the social hierarchy. Service to the king on his Council and in the
provinces, therefore, may well have furnished increasing opportunities for
social advancement in the twilight years of the ancien régime.90 Moreover,
the crown, assuming new domestic functions even as it pursued an ever
more ambitious foreign policy, needed administrators with technical ex-
pertise in specific areas of domestic life – thus providing one more reason
for recruiting into government the skills of those still engaged in the pro-
cess of consolidating their status in society.91 Yet, again, for the intendants
struggling to manage provincial affairs as for the secretaries of state work-
ing at Versailles, the reality was that careers were not yet “open to talent”
in any fully revolutionary sense.
In the ranks of the ever more indispensable financiers, too, a logical
if somewhat less than revolutionary correlation between state service and
social promotion manifested itself throughout the last century of the old
regime. The Farmers-General, managers of the crown’s indirect taxes, illus-
trated this correlation particularly well. As late as 1726, one investigator
has noted, the membership of the “Company of General Farmers” was
“a motley of financial speculators, stock jobbers, court favorites, and newly
rich bureaucrats drawn from the upper echelons of the General Farms.”
Before Louis
bility to older military (or “sword”) noblesse, and of wealthy bourgeoisie
to recent “robe” nobility. In this sense, the crown was indeed an agent
of social evolution – more specifically, of the metamorphosis of exclusive
nobility into more inclusive “notability.” Yet it is just as incontrovertible
that there were limits in the old regime to this kind of social change.
Take, for instance, the case of the secretaries of state at Versailles. Al-
though it is incontrovertible that distinctions still existed between the civil-
ian and military branches of government personnel in Louis XIV’s time, we
know that the Sun King himself labored continually to reduce the “prestige
differential” between the two branches. And indeed, at the level of secre-
taries of state this invidious differential had all but disappeared. In this
purlieu of power men chosen from the robe nobility, recently risen from
bourgeois ranks, were authorized to integrate with and become the equal of
the highest nobles of the realm. As a result, their status was henceforward
so high that they dominated the Second Estate. The eighteenth-century
situation – in which even such commoners as Cardinal Guillaume Dubois
and Jacques Necker could serve as secretaries of state – was, by virtue of
this process, far removed from that of the seventeenth century.89 Still, we
may relevantly ask how many other cases of commoners acceding directly
to such elevated responsibilities at Versailles could be cited by historians
of the old regime. Granted, the balance between robe and sword within
the ranks of high officialdom was shifting; yet upward mobility into those
ranks was not exactly revolutionized.
88 For all these calculations, see Doyle, Origins of the French Revolution , pp. 119–20, 129–30.
89 J. Franc¸ois Bluche, “The Social Origins of the Secretaries of State under Louis XIV, 1661–
1715,” in Ragnhild Hatton, ed., Louis XIV and Absolutism (London: Macmillan, 1976), pp. 90, 95–96.
The ancien régime
43
Research done on the eighteenth-century provincial intendants leads
to similar conclusions. It would appear that, toward the end of the eigh-
teenth century, a greater proportion of Louis XVI’s intendants were new
to the nobility and to the robe than had been the case with their pre-
decessors under Louis XIV. As a matter of fact, Louis XVI’s intendants
were still busily engaged in making themselves “acceptable” in the highest
ranks of the social hierarchy. Service to the king on his Council and in the
provinces, therefore, may well have furnished increasing opportunities for
social advancement in the twilight years of the ancien régime.90 Moreover,
the crown, assuming new domestic functions even as it pursued an ever
more ambitious foreign policy, needed administrators with technical ex-
pertise in specific areas of domestic life – thus providing one more reason
for recruiting into government the skills of those still engaged in the pro-
cess of consolidating their status in society.91 Yet, again, for the intendants
struggling to manage provincial affairs as for the secretaries of state work-
ing at Versailles, the reality was that careers were not yet “open to talent”
in any fully revolutionary sense.
In the ranks of the ever more indispensable financiers, too, a logical
if somewhat less than revolutionary correlation between state service and
social promotion manifested itself throughout the last century of the old
regime. The Farmers-General, managers of the crown’s indirect taxes, illus-
trated this correlation particularly well. As late as 1726, one investigator
has noted, the membership of the “Company of General Farmers” was
“a motley of financial speculators, stock jobbers, court favorites, and newly
rich bureaucrats drawn from the upper echelons of the General Farms.”
Before Louis
Similar Books
