estate structure

In the XIV-XV centuries. in France, the consolidation of the estates was completed.

first estate in France, the clergy were considered. By the XIV century. it was recognized that the French clergy must live according to the laws of the kingdom and are an integral part of the French nation. The clergy retained the right to receive tithes, various donations, tax and judicial immunity, and were exempted from any public services and duties. Individual representatives of the clergy could be involved by the king in solving important political issues, acted as his closest advisers, and held high positions in the state administration.

The second estate in the state was the nobility, although, in fact, it was it that played the leading role in the political life of France. The nobility was a closed and hereditary class. Initially, access to the estate of nobles was open to the top of the townspeople and wealthy peasants, who, buying land from the ruined nobles, acquired noble status. However, this rule was later abolished. The purchase of estates by persons of non-noble origin ceased to give them the title of nobility.

The most important privilege of the nobility remained its exclusive right to own land with the transfer of real estate and rental rights by inheritance. The nobles had the right to titles, coats of arms and other signs of noble dignity, to special judicial privileges. They were exempted from paying state taxes. In essence, the only duty of the nobility was to perform military service to the king.

The titled nobility (dukes, counts, barons) occupied the highest positions in the army and in the state apparatus. The bulk of the nobility, especially the lower ones, had to be content with a much more modest position. The well-being of the petty and middle nobility was directly connected with the intensification of the exploitation of the peasants, therefore they energetically supported the royal power, seeing in it the main force capable of keeping the peasant masses in check.

The third estate was finally formed in the XIV-XV centuries. In its composition, it was very diverse and united the free working population of the city and countryside, as well as the emerging bourgeoisie. Members of this estate were regarded as "non-noble" and did not have any special personal or property rights. The Third Estate was the only taxable estate in France, bearing the entire burden of paying state taxes.

Estates General

The estate-representative monarchy in France was established when the separatism of the local nobility, the autonomous rights of the Catholic Church, etc., were not completely overcome. Solving important national tasks and assuming a number of new state functions, the royal power in the implementation of its policy faced powerful opposition from the feudal oligarchy, whose resistance it could not overcome only by its own means. In this regard, the king's political strength largely depended on the support he received from the feudal estates.

It was at the beginning of the XIV century. the union of the king and representatives of the estates finally took shape. The political expression of this union, in which each of the parties had its own specific interests, became special class-representative institutions - the States General and the provincial states.

The first all-French meeting of estates, called the Estates General, was convened in 1302.

The states-general consisted of three chambers. The first chamber included representatives of the first estate - the higher clergy. Elected from the second estate - the nobility - sat in the second chamber. The third estate, which sat in the third palta, as a rule, consisted of representatives of city councils (eshvens). Estates met and discussed issues separately. Only in 1468 and 1484. all three estates held their meetings jointly. Voting was usually organized according to the baileages and seneschals, where the deputies were elected. If differences were found in the position of the estates, voting was carried out according to the estates. In this case, each chamber had one vote, and since decisions were taken by majority vote, the privileged classes had an advantage.

The frequency of the convocation of the Estates General was not fixed. States-General were convened at the initiative of the king, depending on the circumstances and political considerations. The higher clergy (archbishops, bishops, abbots), as well as large secular feudal lords, were personally invited. The States General of the first convocations did not have elected representatives from the nobility. Later, the practice was established, according to which the middle and small nobility elected their deputies. Elections were also held from churches, convents of monasteries and cities (two or three deputies each). However, the townspeople, and especially the legalists, were sometimes elected from the clergy and nobility classes. Deputies elected to the Estates General were endowed with an imperative mandate. Their position on the issues put up for discussion, including during voting, was bound by the instructions of the voters. After returning from the meeting, the deputy had to report to the voters.

The issues submitted to the States General and the duration of their meetings were also determined by the king, who resorted to convening the States General in order to obtain the support of the estates in the fight against the Knights Templar in 1308, when concluding an agreement with England in 1359, during the period religious wars in 1560, 1576, 1588 etc. Although the consent of the Estates General was not formally required for the adoption of royal laws, the king asked their opinion on some bills. The most common reason for the convocation of the Estates General was a request for financial assistance or permission for another tax, which could be collected only within one year. It was only in 1439 that Charles VII received consent to the collection of a permanent royal talis. However, if it was a question of establishing any additional taxes, then, as before, the consent of the States General was required.

The states-general had the right to appeal to the king with complaints and protests, to make proposals, to criticize the activities of the royal administration. Since there was a certain connection between the requests of the estates and their vote, the king in a number of cases yielded to the Estates General and issued an appropriate ordinance at their request. When the estates showed intransigence, the kings did not collect them for a long time. The estates-general sometimes opposed the king, evading making decisions pleasing to him.

The most acute conflict between the Estates General and the royal power occurred in 1357, during a period of deep political crisis (the uprising of the townspeople in Paris and the capture of the French king John by the British). The royal power was forced to issue a decree, called the "Great March Ordinance". According to this act, the Estates General met three times a year without the prior approval of the king, had the exclusive right to introduce new taxes, control government spending, consent to a declaration of war or peace, and appoint advisers to the king. "General reformers" were elected, who had the authority to control the activities of the royal administration, dismiss and punish officials, up to the use of the death penalty. However, the States General failed to consolidate these powers. After the suppression of the Parisian uprising in 1358 and the uprising of the peasants - Jacquerie - the king rejected the requirements of the "Great March Ordinance".

At the end of the Hundred Years' War, the importance of the Estates General decreased, after 1484 they practically ceased to gather at all (until 1560), and from the 15th century. not convened until the 18th century.

In some regions of France from the end of the XIII century. local class-representative institutions began to emerge. By the end of the XIV century. there were 20 local states, in the XV century. they were available in almost every province. At first, these institutions were called "council", "parliament" or simply "people of the three estates". By the middle of the XV century. began to use the terms "states of Burgundy", "states of Dauphine", etc. The name "provincial states" was fixed only in the 16th century. In the provincial states, as well as in the States General, peasants were not allowed. Often, the kings opposed individual provincial states, since the latter were under the strong influence of local feudal lords (in Normandy, Languedoc) and pursued a policy of separatism.

Edict of Fontainebleau

Under Louis XIII

Under the accession of Louis XIII, the regency approved the Edict of Nantes, stating that it must be ʼʼ respected inviolablyʼʼ. Richelieu robbed the Protestant party of its political influence, but the principle of religious tolerance remained in force.

In 1629, in Ala, after the end of the wars with the Huguenots, the Edict of Nîmes (édit de grâce) was issued, repeating the articles of the Edict of Nantes. After the death of Louis XIII, a declaration was issued (July 8, 1643), in which the Protestants were granted free and unrestricted practice of their religion and the Edict of Nantes was approved, ʼʼas far as it turned out to be necessaryʼʼ. Louis XIV declared in a declaration on May 21, 1652: ʼʼI wish that the Huguenots would not stop completely using the Edict of Nantesʼʼ.

Reluctantly submitting to the Edict of Nantes, the Catholic clergy under Louis XIV tried by all means to destroy it or paralyze its significance. Religious persecution began in 1661. On October 17, 1685, Louis XIV signed the edict at Fontainebleau repealing the Edict of Nantes.

Edict of Fontainebleau- Edict of Louis XIV of October 17, 1685. on the abolition of the Edict of Nantes adopted in 1598 by Henry IV, which guaranteed the Huguenots freedom of religion.

Reluctantly submitting to the Edict of Nantes, the Catholic clergy under Louis XIV tried by all means to destroy it or paralyze its significance. Religious persecution began in 1661. In the 9th article of the Edict of Nantes, worship was allowed in those places where it was performed in 1596 and 1597. On this basis, Catholics began to destroy Protestant churches in other places. On April 2, 1666, Louis issued a declaration in which the principle of freedom, recognized by the Edict of Nantes, was destroyed. Finally, on October 17, 1685, Louis XIV signed an edict at Fontainebleau repealing the Edict of Nantes. This document was drawn up by Chancellor Letellier. The king says in it that the Edict of Nantes was drawn up by his ancestor in favor of the Huguenots with the intention of joining them to the bosom of the Catholic Church, but since the best and most numerous part of the subjects converted to Catholicism, the Edict of Nantes turns out to be superfluous.

It was ordered to destroy the last temples of the Huguenots and their schools. Article VII stated: ʼʼWe forbid allowing anything resembling a concession in favor of the Reformed religionʼʼ. The clergy showered the king with praise; Bossuet called the king the new Constantine, the new Charlemagne. Innocent XI in a papal letter (December 13, 1685) congratulated Louis on the accomplishment of a great pious deed. The consequences of the repeal of the Edict of Nantes for France were sad: trade fell into decline, Protestants emigrated in hundreds of thousands - to London (more than 30 Calvinist churches immediately appeared there), to Sweden, Denmark, Russia, America, and most of all to Holland.

States General in France (fr.
Hosted on ref.rf
Etats Genéraux) - the highest estate-representative institution in the years 1302-1789.

The emergence of the States General was associated with the growth of cities, the aggravation of social contradictions and class struggle, which made it extremely important to strengthen the feudal state.

The forerunners of the Estates General were extended meetings of the royal council (with the involvement of the city leaders), as well as provincial assemblies of the estates (which laid the foundation for the provincial states). The first Estates-General were convened in 1302, during the conflict between Philip IV and Pope Boniface VIII.

The States General were an advisory body convened at the initiative of the royal power at critical moments to assist the government. Their main function was the quota of taxes. Each estate - the nobility, the clergy, the third estate - sat in the States General separately from the others and had one vote (regardless of the number of representatives). The third estate was represented by the top of the townspeople.

The importance of the Estates General increased during the Hundred Years' War of 1337-1453, when the royal power was in particular need of money. During the period of popular uprisings of the XIV century (Paris uprising 1357-1358, Jacquerie 1358), the Estates General claimed to be actively involved in governing the country (the States General of 1357 expressed similar requirements in the ʼʼOrdinance of Marchʼʼ). At the same time, the lack of unity between the cities and their irreconcilable enmity with the nobility made fruitless attempts by the French General States to achieve the rights that the English Parliament managed to win.

At the end of the 14th century, the Estates General were convened less and less often and were often replaced by assemblies of notables. From the end of the 15th century, the institution of the States General fell into decline due to the beginning of the development of absolutism, during the years 1484-1560 they did not convene at all (a certain revival of their activity was observed during the Religious Wars - the States General were convened in 1560, 1576, 1588, and 1593 years).

From 1614 to 1789 the Estates General never met again. Only on May 5, 1789, in the conditions of an acute political crisis on the eve of the French Revolution, did the king convene the Estates General. On June 17, 1789, the deputies of the third estate declared themselves the National Assembly; on July 9, the National Assembly proclaimed itself Constituent Assembly, which became the highest representative and legislative body of revolutionary France.

In the 20th century, the name States General was adopted by some representative meetings that considered current political issues and expressed broad public opinion (for example, the Assembly of the States General for Disarmament, May 1963).

XXXIV. The first months of the revolution

(continuation)

Opening of the States General. - Verification of authority. - Proclamation of the National Assembly. - Royal session.

(addition)

if you need BRIEF information on this topic, read the chapters "The States General and the National Assembly" from the Educational Book of New History by N. I. Kareev. Before starting to get acquainted with this lecture by Kareev, it is recommended to read the supplement to it -

The Estates General met at Versailles at the beginning of May 1789. On the 4th there was a church service, on the 5th the solemn opening of the meetings took place. If the government did not have a definite program of action, then the masters of ceremonies, on the contrary, considered everything related to the external side of the meeting, and at court it was decided that the states of 1789 would adhere to the forms of the states of 1614. Deputies of the privileged estates had to be present at both ceremonies in magnificent suits, the deputies of the third estate in simple black cloaks, and when Barentin, the keeper of the seal, was asked if the deputies of the third estate should speak on their knees, he answered: "yes, if it pleases the king." The bishop of Nancy in a church speech asked Louis XVI to accept assurances of devotion (les hommages) from the clergy and respect (les respects) from the nobility, and from the third estate - the humblest requests (les humbles supplications). When, at the solemn assembly on May 5, the king, having taken the throne, put on his hat, the ecclesiastics and nobles also put on their hats, the members of the third estate did the same, but the privileged expressed their displeasure with noise, and Louis XVI immediately took off his hat in order to force everyone bare their heads.

Poll or Possession Voting?

In the solemn meeting at the opening of the states, three speeches were made: the king spoke, the keeper of the seal and Necker. The latter's speech was a long and boring financial statement, crammed with numbers, as if the government only looked at the assembled states as a way to raise money through new taxes. In general, however, these speeches did not contain a direct indication of the most important issue on which the decision and all others depended, namely how the votes were to be cast - without exception or by estate, and even a warning was made regarding innovations - in designating them as dangerous (des innovations dangereuses) . The government itself did not decide the main issue, and therefore it was decided apart from the government. On May 6, the three estates gathered in separate rooms to verify credentials (vérification des pouvoirs), that is, documents on the election of one or another deputy (there were more than 1,100 of them), but the third estate began to demand that everyone take up this matter together and in one room; the privileged responded with a refusal. Arguments began, which lasted for quite a long time and were accompanied by mutual accusations of unwillingness to start the work for which the states general were assembled; this was the first two weeks of the meeting. The last Estates-General, 175 years earlier, ended in a quarrel between the estates, so characteristic of the history of this institution in general, and in the Estates-General of 1789, the same thing happens at the very beginning. In the old days, one royal power benefited from this, but now the circumstances were different, and the victory remained on the side of the third estate, which identified itself with the nation: the latter, indeed, supported its deputies, while the privileged communicated only with the court who continued to stand on his old point of view. Finally, on June 10, the author of the famous pamphlet Sieyès, having found that "it is time to cut the rope," proposed for the last time, in the solemn form of the old judicial procedure, on behalf of the "communities" to summon (sommer) the clergy and nobility, appointing them a period after which those who did not appear ( non comparants) are deprived of their rights. On the 12th, at 7 pm, they began to verify credentials, and the next day representatives of other classes began to join the third estate, for the first time in the person of three parish priests, whose appearance was greeted with loud applause.

The States General proclaim themselves the National Assembly

When (June 15) the verification of credentials was completed, Sieyes pointed out that there were representatives of at least 96% of the nation present in the assembly, who could act without deputies from some bailiffs or ranks of citizens who did not appear, and invited the deputies to declare themselves "an assembly of well-known and authenticated representatives of the French nation." Mirabeau also joined this, who, however, found it better to be called "representatives of the French people." For three days there was a debate about these proposals, until the name was adopted - "national assembly" (assemblée nationale), which was not completely new, since we already find it in the orders of 1789; this time it was prompted to the representatives of the third estate and the deputies of the upper estates who joined them - one deputy, almost completely unknown to anyone.

The solemn proclamation of the national assembly took place on 17 June; on this day the old class division of French subjects into three ranks (ordres) disappeared, and all the French formed a politically homogeneous nation. This decision was accepted with enthusiasm by the Parisian population and influenced the majority of the deputies of the clergy, who decided to join the third estate; the yard, on the contrary, was terribly annoyed. Louis XVI hesitated for some time between the councils, on the one hand, of Necker, on the other, of his wife, younger brother, princes of the blood, and in general the privileged, but in the end decided to arrange a solemn meeting in order to cancel what had happened with his power. Meanwhile, the National Assembly decreed: 1) an end to the collection of taxes, if the assembly were dissolved, 2) the acceptance of the state debt under the guarantee of the nation, and 3) the formation of a special food committee.

Oath in the ballroom

On June 20, the President of the National Assembly, Bailly, received notice from Barentin that the meetings were adjourned; the deputies and the large public, who had gathered to watch the majority of the clergy go to the hall of the national assembly, found this hall locked and guarded by sentries, and learned that preparations were being made for the royal meeting in the hall. The deputies then proceeded to the arena of the Jeu de paume [ball-game], where the famous oath of the members of the national assembly, in the presence of a large public, was made not to disperse, and to assemble wherever possible, until France had a firm constitution. The next day was Sunday. When on Monday (June 22) the representatives of the people wanted to gather again in the Jeu de paume, they were no longer given this room, since c. d "Artois was supposed to play ball there. At that time, a significant part of the lower clergy joined the national assembly, which was invited to sit in the church of St. Louis, "the temple of religion, which became the temple of the fatherland," in the words of one speaker who spoke there. About 150 people from the lower clergy here solemnly joined the national assembly.

Royal meeting 23 June 1789

The announced royal meeting took place on 23 June. From the side of the court and the privileged it was to be the beginning of a reaction against everything that had been done in the name of the new idea of ​​the nation, and for this purpose the form of the former parliamentary lits de justice was applied to the assembly of the representatives of the people. An imperious speech was composed for Louis XVI, which he delivered in a solemn assembly, in the presence of all the deputies, but delivered in an uncertain voice of a man acting not on his own initiative. The decisions of the third estate, as contrary to the laws and the state system, were declared destroyed; it was ordered to keep the old division into estates in full inviolability, it was forbidden to affect any rights belonging to the privileged and royal power; some minor reforms were announced, and it was added that if the states general did not support the good intentions of the government, then the king alone would work for the good of his subjects and consider himself their only representative. “I order you, gentlemen,” said Louis XVI in conclusion, to disperse immediately, and tomorrow morning to gather each estate in the chamber allotted for it.

The clergy and nobles obeyed and left after the monarch, but the third estate remained in their places. Then the master of ceremonies, Dreux-Brese, returned to the hall and said to the president: “Gentlemen! - you heard the order of the king, ”to which he received such an answer from Bayi:“ It seems to me that orders should not be given to the assembled nation. Mirabeau, who, before the arrival of Dreux-Brezet, had made a speech against the insulting dictatorship of the king, who is only a mandate (mandataire) of the nation, and recalled the oath not to disperse until a constitution was given to France, now rose from his seat and uttered the famous words: “yes, we have heard the intentions inspired by the king, and you, who cannot be his organ before the estates general, having no place here, no voice, no right to speak, you are not created to remind us of his speech. However, in order to avoid any misunderstanding and any delay, I announce to you (the legend has reduced all the previous into one phrase: "go tell your master") that if you have been authorized to make us leave here, you must demand orders to use force, for we let us leave our places only under the pressure of bayonets.

Dreux-Brezet retired from the hall, backing away, as if in the presence of the king, and one Breton deputy exclaimed: “What is this? the king speaks to us like a master when he should ask us for advice.” “Gentlemen! Sieyes addressed the assembly: “Today you remain the same as you were yesterday: let’s get down to the debate.” And the National Assembly declared that the decisions adopted by it retained all their force, and decreed the inviolability of the person of the deputy, under the threat of accusing anyone who would encroach on this inviolability with a state crime.

At court, such an outcome of the royal meeting was not expected, Marie Antoinette was glad at first that everything turned out well, and introducing the Dauphin to the deputies of the nobility, she said that she entrusted him to their protection, but news came of the resistance of the third estate, and the mood changed. The coup d'état conceived by the court against the revolution that had taken place had to be recognized as a failure, and the bewildered Louis XVI declared that if they (i.e., the deputies of the third estate) did not want to disperse, then let them stay. Necker was thought to be dismissed, but now the king begged him not to leave his post, and the popularity of this minister, whose absence from the royal meeting was noticed by all, greatly increased after that. The next day, the majority of the clergy appeared in the hall of the national assembly, and then this example was soon followed by a small minority of the nobility, headed by the Duke of Orleans. Finally, on the advice of Necker, the king himself ordered other representatives of the privileged to come to the meeting in the common room. On June 27, the deputies of the clergy and nobility finally merged with the third estate.

Reaction attempts

The court party, with Marie Antoinette at the head, did not want to come to terms with the victory of the third estate. The first attempt at counter-revolution, made on June 23, was to be followed by another - this time with the same bayonets that Mirabeau pointed out. That conservative opposition, which had previously hindered the necessary reforms, was now most resolutely preparing a new reaction, but if previously this opposition had been strengthened to a certain extent by support from the people, who had ceased to trust the authorities, then under the new circumstances that came after June 17, in no way there could not be the slightest solidarity between the privileged and the popular masses. Now, on the contrary, reactionary attempts directed against the national assembly were only supposed to kindle the passions of the people, to direct them in defense of this very national assembly. If on June 23 the deputies of the third estate, recognizing themselves as representatives of a sovereign nation, disobeyed the royal will, not supported by physical force, then in mid-July an attempt to restore the old political system by force, with the help of the army, provoked a violent rebuff from the Parisian people. This rebuff saved the national assembly, but at the same time brought to the political stage the population of the capital, which was then destined to play such a prominent role in the events of the revolution. This is the meaning of the July events, which were followed by the October events, which, as we shall see, were already less favorable not only for the royal power, but also for the national assembly itself.

In the history of the summer and autumn months of 1789, the reactionary attempts of the court and the revolutionary movement among the people go hand in hand. Some historians are inclined to explain the popular uprisings of that time solely by the feeling of self-preservation of the masses of the people in the face of the menacing situation of the court and are therefore ready to blame one court for the anarchy that began then in France, while others, on the contrary, sometimes try to explain the repressive measures solely by this anarchy, to which the court party considered it necessary to resort to. Neither one nor the other can be recognized as true in itself: both are true together, but again with a caveat, since both popular revolts and court reaction had a deeper origin. Of course, the reaction greatly added fuel to the fire, and it caused the grandiose July and October uprisings, and these events, in turn, forced the reactionary party to think about more vigorous repression, but popular unrest long preceded the revolution, having its reasons in the then state of France , in the poor economic situation of the masses of the people, in general social disorganization, in an anxious and excited mood of minds, and on the other hand, the court opposition against all sorts of political and social innovations was not a new phenomenon, since again it was rooted in the general state of France , in the meaning that the court received in the life of the country, in its alliance with the conservative elements of society, in its influence on the royal power. Both forces now entered into an open struggle: the suspicious behavior of the court caused popular uprisings, and popular uprisings served as an excuse for the court to think about repression. In this struggle between the court and the people, which was aggravated mainly due to the reactionary direction of the court party, the position of the National Assembly was, as we shall see, very difficult, and the court party, which did not want to recognize the events that had taken place, by its behavior itself prepared a new coup, even more formidable for it and at the same time turned out to be unfavorable for the national assembly. If on June 23 power passed from the hands of the king into the hands of the representatives of the nation, then there was still a seizure of power directly by the Parisian population, who thought that by doing so they were saving freedom from the intrigues of the court party.

After the failure of the royal meeting on June 23, at the beginning of the next month, troops began to be drawn to Paris and Versailles, consisting mainly of foreign mercenaries of various nationalities; at their head were Breteuil and Marshal Broglie (Broglie), who decided on the most extreme measures against the national assembly and the Parisian population. On July 9, the national assembly, which on that day adopted the name of the constituent assembly or constituents (constituante), asked the king to remove the troops - and in this matter again Mirabeau had to play one of the very first roles - but the king replied that the troops were necessary to protect himself National Assembly, and that if it is disturbed, then it can be transferred to Noyon or Soissons. Meanwhile, the court decided to act again. On July 11, it became known that Necker had received his resignation and with it the order to leave France immediately and without publicity, and that a new ministry was formed from Broglie, Breteuil, the cleric Voguyon and Foulon, to whom the rumor [falsely] attributed these words about the famine: “ if the people want to eat, let them eat hay.” The National Assembly sent a deputation to the king with a request to return Necker and send the troops to their former camps, but this deputation was not accepted. Then the assembly decreed that the nation would admonish Necker and his comrades with an expression of confidence and regret, that the new ministers and advisers to the king, whatever their rank and position, would be responsible for their actions, and that eternal disgrace would cover whoever proposed state bankruptcy.

Medieval France strengthened its position among European powers through active participation in the Crusades. Trade and crafts developed, cities grew. Such a rapid development of urban life and separation from agricultural culture exacerbated social contradictions and led to increased confrontation between the classes of townspeople and the nobility. In such conditions, there was a danger to the existence of the entire feudal way of life.

In the XIV century, France was under the rule of King Philip IV the Handsome, grandson of Louis IX Saint.

The assemblies of the provincial estates and the Royal Council, assembled since the time of Saint Louis, could not give legitimacy to the royal policy towards the papacy during the pontificate of Boniface VIII. The conflict arose because of the unwillingness of the king to submit to papal authority in the field of appointing bishops. King Philip foresaw resistance from Rome in his plan to dissolve the Knights Templar and seize all his property.

To give weight to his decisions, the king issued an edict, according to which in 1302 the States General met as an advisory body, designed to help the government in resolving complex and sensitive issues.

Usually, the States General met on the issue of tax quotas. The estates-general, structurally, consisted of three free classes, the lowest of which was the class of wealthy townspeople. It met separately from influential lords and their vassals.

Especially often the States General were convened during the Hundred Years War (1337-1453), after the suppression of the Capetian dynasty. At this time, the kings of the Valois dynasty were especially in need of money.

In the twentieth year of the Hundred Years War, an uprising broke out in Paris and Jacquerie in 1358. The states general sought active participation in the administration of the kingdom, by analogy with the Parliament of England. The "Great Ordinance of March" of 1357 failed. The role of the Estates General remained nominal due to animosity between the delegates from the estates.

From 1484 to 1560 not a single meeting of the Estates General is recorded. This was due to the development of absolutism and inexpediency, since the king was content with the advice of notables. The situation changed with the outbreak of religious wars, which required the legalization of new taxes for the war. The States General met 4 times in 1560, 1576, 1588 and 1593.

The next convocation of the States General took place in 1614. After the completion of their work, a long break began again, which lasted 175 years. The situation in France on the eve of the Great French Revolution became the reason for convening the new General States. Louis XV convened the Estates General on May 5, 1789. Before the completion of the work, the third estate declared itself a new structure - the National Assembly on June 17, and on July 9 the Constituent Assembly was proclaimed, which led the revolution in France. This was the last meeting of the States General in the format that was adopted in the time of Philip IV the Handsome.

In the twentieth century, attempts were made to revive the institution of the States General. Some assemblies of the Fourth and Fifth Republics adopted this name when important questions of French policy were decided, when extensive public participation was required. The last meeting under the name of the States General met in May 1963. The question of disarmament of the armed forces of France was discussed.

The French state experienced a long period of actual independence of large feudal lords. This seriously weakened the king, made him dependent on the aristocracy. The gradual concentration of royal power coincided with the growth of the urban population and the development of handicrafts.

Where and when did the states general appear in France

The Estates General in France served as the representative of the people. Three main classes took part in them. They were nobles, townspeople.

The convocation of the first Estates-General was due to the weakness of royal power. The king needed the support of the general population. He needed to rely on the entire French people.

The first Estates-General were convened by the king in 1302 in Paris. It was a time of sharp struggle between the king and Pope Boniface. In order to stay in power and strengthen his position, support was important for the king, and the States General became an instrument for achieving his goals.

Features of the Estates General

This form of popular representation lasted until the French Revolution in 1789. The last time the states were convened was just before the overthrow of royalty.

For a better understanding of the work and significance of the states, one should indicate their features:

• It was an advisory body. The states did not make their own decisions. They only developed draft decisions and presented them to the king. And he already decided how to act;
• In the most difficult times of French statehood, the States General tried to expand their powers. This happened during the Hundred Years' War with England and during the period of popular uprisings, when the very existence of royal power in France was in question;
• The emergence of states is associated with the growth of cities. The urban population was free, had property and behaved quite actively. Therefore, it was necessary to take into account the interests of the growing stratum of the townspeople;
• All three estates, admitted to participation in the states, sat separately. Each decision of one estate was considered one vote. At the same time, the votes of all classes were equal.