第36章

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE ANCIEN REGIME1.The Absolute Monarchy and the Bases of the Ancien Regime.

Many historians assure us that the Revolution was directed against the autocracy of the monarchy.In reality the kings of France had ceased to be absolute monarchs long before its outbreak.

Only very late in history--not until the reign of Louis XIV.--did they finally obtain incontestable power.All the preceding sovereigns, even the most powerful, such as Francis I., for example, had to sustain a constant struggle either against the seigneurs, or the clergy, or the parliaments, and they did not always win.Francis himself had not sufficient power to protect his most intimate friends against the Sorbonne and the Parliament.His friend and councillor Berquin, having offended the Sorbonne, was arrested upon the order of the latter body.

The king ordered his release, which was refused.He was obliged to send archers to remove him from the Conciergerie, and could find no other means of protecting him than that of keeping him beside him in the Louvre.The Sorbonne by no means considered itself beaten.Profiting by the king's absence, it arrested Berquin again and had him tried by Parliament.

Condemned at ten in the morning, he was burned alive at noon.

Built up very gradually, the power of the kings of France was not absolute until the time of Louis XIV.It then rapidly declined, and it would be truly difficult to speak of the absolutism of Louis XVI.

This pretended master was the slave of his court, his ministers, the clergy, and the nobles.He did what they forced him to do and rarely what he wished.Perhaps no Frenchman was so little free as the king.

The great power of the monarchy resided originally in the Divine origin which was attributed to it, and in the traditions which had accumulated during the ages.These formed the real social framework of the country.

The true cause of the disappearance of the ancien regime was simply the weakening of the traditions which served as its foundations.When after repeated criticism it could find no more defenders, the ancien regime crumbled like a building whose foundations have been destroyed.

2.The Inconveniences of the Ancien Regime A long-established system of government will always finally seem acceptable to the people governed.Habit masks its inconveniences, which appear only when men begin to think.Then they ask how they could ever have supported them.The truly unhappy man is the man who believes himself miserable.

It was precisely this belief which was gaining ground at the time of the Revolution, under the influence of the writers whose work we shall presently study.Then the imperfections of the ancien regime stared all men in the face.They were numerous; it is enough to mention a few.

Despite the apparent authority of the central power, the kingdom, formed by the successive conquest of independent provinces, was divided into territories each of which had its own laws and customs, and each of which paid different imposts.Internal customs-houses separated them.The unity of France was thus somewhat artificial.It represented an aggregate of various countries which the repeated efforts of the kings, including Louis XIV., had not succeeded in wholly unifying.The most useful effect of the Revolution was this very unification.

To such material divisions were added social divisions constituted by different classes--nobles, clergy, and the Third Estate, whose rigid barriers could only with the utmost difficulty be crossed.

Regarding the division of the classes as one of its sources of power, the ancien regime had rigorously maintained that division.This became the principal cause of the hatreds which the system inspired.Much of the violence of the triumphant bourgeoisie represented vengeance for a long past of disdain and oppression.The wounds of self-love are the most difficult of all to forget.The Third Estate had suffered many such wounds.At a meeting of the States General in 1614, at which its representatives were obliged to remain bareheaded on their knees, one member of the Third Estate having dared to say that the three orders were like three brothers, the spokesman of the nobles replied ``that there was no fraternity between it and the Third;that the nobles did not wish the children of cobblers and tanners to call them their brothers.''

Despite the march of enlightenment the nobles and the clergy obstinately preserved their privileges and their demands, no longer justifiable now that these classes had ceased to render services.

Kept from the exercise of public functions by the royal power, which distrusted them, and progressively replaced by a bourgeoisie which was more and more learned and capable, the social role of nobility and clergy was only an empty show.

This point has been luminously expounded by Taine:--``Since the nobility, having lost its special capacity, and the Third Estate, having acquired general capacity, were now on a level in respect of education and aptitudes, the inequality which divided them had become hurtful and useless.Instituted by custom, it was no longer ratified by the consciousness, and the Third Estate was with reason angered by privileges which nothing justified, neither the capacity of the nobles nor the incapacity of the bourgeoisie.''

By reason of the rigidity of castes established by a long past we cannot see what could have persuaded the nobles and the clergy to renounce their privileges.Certainly they did finally abandon them one memorable evening, when events forced them to do so; but then it was too late, and the Revolution, unchained, was pursuing its course.