WHAT IF ANYTHING WAS REVOLUTIONARY ABOUT THE FALL OF CHARLES X AND THE ACCESSION OF LOUIS PHILIPPE IN 1830? The survival of the Bourbon monarchy which had apparently been assured by the final defeat of Napoleon in 1815 came to a sudden and unexpected end in 1830.The cause was the riots in Paris sparked off by the hugely unpopular ordnances issued by Charles X at St.Cloud. Historians and politicians are especially notorious for rushing to declare as a revolution or revolutionary any events that lead to the ouster of a ruler whose outlook or policies are different from their own. It is in this regard that the question must be asked as to what exactly transpired in France in 1830.If a revolution generally refers to radical political or social or economic changes in a country then there is little that was revolutionary about Charles X’s ouster and the accession of Louis Philippe. The aim in this essay is to show that besides the rejection of monarchical absolutism, foreign domination and confirming the politico-social ascendancy of the upper bourgeoisie, little else was revolutionary about the events of 1830. What was probably revolutionary about 1830 was that there was an implied rejection of foreign domination. Charles X’s Bourbon dynasty had been restored to France through a European consensus achieved at Vienna that year. The Bourbons had been forcibly brought back to the French throne in the “baggage of the allies” after having been forcibly ejected by the French themselves in the revolutionary upheavals of 1792. The speed with which Napoleon had been able to attract support in France just a few months after the Bourbon restoration is further proof of their unpopularity. As far as the French were concerned the Bourbons “owed their throne to the national humiliation of Waterloo”. Thus in ousting the Bourbon Charles X who had been imposed upon them and choosing Louis Philippe, the French reclaimed from the foreigners the right to determine their own political destiny. Probably another revolutionary aspect of 1830 was that monarchical absolutism and its accompanying concept of the ‘divine right of kings’ was laid to rest. Despite ruling through a charter the restored Bourbons expressly regarded themselves as absolute rulers whose authority derived not from the (French) people but from God. Louis XVIII not only referred to 1814 as “nineteenth year of our reign” but more significantly wrote into the preamble of the charter that he had granted it “voluntarily, and by the free exercise of our royal authority.” All that implied that the French Revolution had not occurred in 1789 and that the Bourbons retained absolute power and could at any time revoke the constitutional limitations they had voluntarily placed on themselves. Charles X was far more reactionary than his predecessor vowing that he would “rather chop wood than reign after the fashion of the king of England.” Louis Philippe did not have such delusions on the other hand for it was clearly written into his charter that he was “King of the French by…the will of the nation.” He was expressly and legally a constitutional monarch and political power now derived expressly from the people and not from God. With the new charter the king’s powers were considerably clipped. Among other things the king lost the prerogative of issuing ordnances. Legislative initiative now lay with the chamber of deputies while the king was only accorded a suspensive veto. Although he retained the right to nominate peers the chamber of peers was revamped losing its hereditary character. The fall of Charles X and Louis Philippe’s accession was probably revolutionary in that it confirmed the upper bourgeoisie as the power brokers in France. Unlike Charles X, Louis Philippe’s power rested on upper bourgeois support. He even proclaimed himself the ‘bourgeois king’ or the ‘citizen king’ as a tribute to his bourgeois leanings. He increased the franchise by a hundred per cent to 200 000 to accommodate more upper bourgeois voters. Considering the fact that France had a 40 million strong population, Louis thus turned the country into a plutocracy of the upper bourgeoisie. By contrast, the power of the Bourbons had rested largely on aristocratic and clerical support. It was no wonder therefore that Charles X instituted pro-aristocratic policies like the granting of compensation to the émigré aristocracy for the losses they sustained during the revolutionary upheavals beginning in 1789. His pro-clerical policies included making religious issues such as sacrilege a criminal offence attracting capital punishment. The franchise had also been tightly restricted to only 100 000 mostly aristocratic and clerical royalists. Thus the fall of Charles X and the advent of the bourgeois king marked a revolutionary shift in the power base as discussed above. Viewed from another angle the events of 1830 were not revolutionary, if anything what happened was merely a legalisation of what already existed in fact. The restored Bourbons had promised to abide by the terms of the 1814 charter which provided for parliamentary government and civil liberties among other things. This was the same charter albeit with a few amendments which Louis Philippe was compelled to abide by. That charter had practically rendered the Bourbons constitutional kings irrespective of their views on the issue. This same charter was merely reworded on the accession of Louis Philippe to expressly state that he was a constitutional king ruling by the will of the nation and sworn to defend the constitution. All that was not revolutionary as it only confirmed an already existing fact of constitutional kingship and discredited the concept of the ‘divine right of kings’. The so-called ‘1830 Revolution’ was merely a defence of the liberal status quo that had been achieved by the 1789 revolution and confirmed by the same 1814 Vienna Settlement which restored Bourbon rule. The real revolution had occurred in France in 1789 when Louis XVI’s absolute rule was abolished and the monarchy was compelled to share power with a legislative assembly voted in by a predominantly upper bourgeois electorate. What was also revolutionary was the guaranteeing of civil liberties as demanded by the liberal upper bourgeois elements. Charles X was overthrown in 1830 for presumably undermining the upper bourgeoisie, revoking civil liberties and attempting to restore the supremacy of the nobility and clergy of the by-gone ancien regime. Louis Philippe was enthroned that same year to protect and maintain the preponderance of the upper bourgeoisie as well as to uphold liberal values. Hence what took place in 1830 was just a rear-guard action in defence of the status quo and not a revolution. Finally, the ouster of Charles X and the subsequent advent of Louis Philippe were not revolutionary as France’s constitution retained the same restrictions on political participation which effectively rendered the country a plutocracy. Even with the new Louis Philippe regime, tax and property qualifications remained as impediments to the achievement of universal suffrage and attainment of political office. Peasants, workers and the lower bourgeoisie who made up the bulk the population remained excluded from voting and political power. The franchise registered an inconsequential increase to 200 000. Although this was by a hundred per cent it was grossly inadequate considering that 1830 was sixteen years after the setting of the original figure and the population had increased at a higher rate since then. In short Louis Philippe’s plutocracy succeeded the plutocracy of Charles X and that certainly was not revolutionary! By way of concluding, it is apparent that the imagination would have to considerably stretch to find anything that can be deemed revolutionary about 1830. At the most there can be talk of the rejection of monarchical absolutism, foreign domination and the socio-political ascendancy of the upper bourgeoisie. Even these developments were hardly revolutionary as there was nothing new as Louis Philippe’s accession gave legal force to what already existed in fact.
Posted on: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 08:44:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015