Historical Interpretations
www.educationforum.co.uk
What is Historiography
 Literally historiography refers to the study of the
academic study of history.
 One of the areas of interests of historiography is
therefore the different theories, perspectives and
interpretations historians bring to historical
events.
 For your study – the French Revolution – there
have been a number of important interpretations.
 You will need to show an awareness of these in
your evaluation of causes.
The Marxist View
 The Marxist interpretation of the French
revolution is often referred to as the ‘classical’
view because it came first.
 Marxists see the French Revolution as a
‘bourgeois’ revolution. It was caused by the
demands of a growing middle class or
bourgeoisie and once it had occurred it set the
scene for bourgeois or middle class dominance
of French politics and French society.
The Marxist View of History
 Such a view is based on the Marxist view of
history summarised by Karl Marx in the
‘Communist Manifesto’ in 1848
‘The history of all hitherto society is the history of
class struggle’
The conflict between classes is seen as the ‘motor’
of history – i.e. The thing that drives it forward.
Individuals and ideas in history are therefore not
particularly important as it is economic and social
forces which drives history forward
Stages of History
 Marxists say history therefore progresses in
stages:
Feudalism – economic dominance based on
ownership of land – class struggle between
landowners and the middle class gives rise toCapitalism – economic dominance based on
ownership of factories, capital, land, business –
class struggle between owners (bourgeoisie) and
workers (proletariat), gives rise to –
Communism – workers abolish all classes and
class struggle is ended.
Criticism of Marxist View
 It can appear deterministic - history seen as
rigidly following a set path.
 It underemphasises the role of the individual
in history.
 It can produce a closed approach to
research.
Marxism and the French Revolution
 The first historian to describe the French evolution as a ‘bourgeois




revolution’ was the French socialist and historian Georges Lefebvre
(writing in the 1930’s).
Lefebvre asserted that the Revolution resulted in a shift in power from
the old landed feudal class to the new middle class (bourgeoisie)
The Revolution was caused by bourgeois grievances and the ideas of
the Enlightenment are characterised by Lefebvre as a new bourgeois
ideology
The Revolution got rid of feudalism and replaced it with a society in
which the bourgeoisie could dominate and capitalism develop.
A more recent example of a Marxist interpretation of the French
Revolution is Roger Magraw (University of Warwick) in ‘France 18151914: the Bourgeois Century’ (note – this is in the library – read the
introduction on interpretations of the French Rev for a good overview!)
The Revisionist View
 A revisionist is someone who revises or
changes an established view or orthodoxy.
 As the Marxist interpretation quickly became
the accepted orthodox view of the French
revolution historians who cast doubt on it are
referred to as ‘revisionists’
 The main example is Alfred Cobban and
English historian writing in the 1950’s
onwards
Cobban and the ‘myth’ of the French
Revolution
 Cobban refers to the idea of the French Revolution as the death
of feudalism and the start of capitalism and bourgeois
dominance as a ‘myth’
Evidence
1. Cobban claims that feudalism was long dead before the French
Revolution in 1789
2. He also argues that a recognisable bourgeoisie in Marxist terms
did not actually exist in 1789 – the ‘middle classes’ who
dominated the Revolution far from being a new assertive
industrial class were in fact lawyers, professionals and state
officials – a class in decline out to protect their narrow interests.
3. Cobban produced a mass of evidence of the social make up of
members of the national and legislative assemblies to prove this
Revisionists like Cobban are therefore far more likely to see
the Revolution as a response to a financial crisis than a
massive social upheaval
The Marxist Response
 Marxists have dismissed revisionist evidence by
saying that what the assemblies did was far more
important than who they were.
 The assemblies set the conditions by which
industrial capitalism could develop and bourgeois
dominance assert itself – votes for the middle
classes, a constitutional monarchy, confiscation
of church and aristocratic lands, formal abolition
of feudalism – ending of feudal rights and duties
Role of the Individual/Cultural
approaches
 Historians like Daniel Mornet see cultural factors
(ideas, values) as more important than economic
factors
 Mornet describes the French revolutions as a
‘conspiracy of Enlightenment intellectuals’
 Enlightenment ideas and the central importance
of key thinkers therefore seen as more important
than big social and economic factors
 Mornet argues that the ‘pillars’ of the old order –
church, monarchy and feudalism – were brought
down by the power of revolutionary ideas
How to use this in your assignments



















A02(b) marks
Analysis and evaluation of differing interpretations and representations of the past, in relation to the
historical context
Level 1
1-3
Shows little, if any, understanding of historical debate or interpretation
Level 2
4-6
Shows some understanding of a limited range of historical debate or interpretation
Level 3
7-9
Shows an understanding of the nature of historical debate and/or interpretation and provides some evaluation of it
Level 4
10-12
Shows good understanding of the nature of historical debate and is able to assess the relative value of
interpretations
Level 5
13-15
Shows clear and consistent understanding of the nature of historical debate and is able to appreciate
effectively how others have interpreted the past
Assesses the relative merits of differing interpretations and provides a convincing, well supported
judgement