Notes to Help with QR Paper I
Bob Schwartz 10/5/2001 |
|
Sacy, “in the way it was governed, resemble in many respects the republics of old.” (Restif, p. 103) |
This is the claim to be tested against the data for five other Burgundian villages. In an era of monarchy and aristocratic dominance, was this wishful thinking? Was it the advocacy of an ideal as opposed to reality, much in keeping with the critical spirit and reforming impulse of the French Enlightenment? To what extent could it have been that certain key principles and practices that the French Revolution would later enshrine and establish were functioning in at least some villages in pre-revolutionary Burgundy? These questions point to the historical significance of the claim to be tested.
The French Revolution of 1789 was made in the name of popular sovereignty and the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity. Liberty meant participation directly or via representatives in the making of laws governing the state. Equality meant equality before the law as compared to unequal treatment according to one’s status as under the Old Regime. It meant, for example, that nobles would not have special courts for their caste and that nobles and commoners alike would be equally subject to a fair share of the taxes needed to run the government and its policies. It did not mean equality in material terms, for “property” was considered a fundamental right and differences in wealth were to be accepted as a normal condition. Fraternity meant the sense of common membership in the nation and a broader brotherhood of man based on the respect for natural rights, which extended not only to the people of France but to people throughout the world. |
|
For educated French men and women of the eighteenth century, including Restif de la Bretonne, “the republics of old” referred to the republics of ancient Greece in Athens and Sparta and the later republic of Rome before it was transformed into an empire. |
(See the the translated extracts from Diderot’s Encyclopedie.) |
|
“Democracy” was defined as a republic in which the sovereign power was held by the people as a whole. “Aristocracy” was considered a republic in which sovereignty was held and exercised by a portion of the people. “Oligarchy” was defined in the Encyclopédie as a corruption of the aristocratic form of government because the real power was in the hands of the very few who dominated the other individuals who were named as magistrates or officials. |
Was Sacy of My Father’s Life a republic of one of these kinds? See page 103 ff. for Restif’s argument.
What institutions and practices of village government fit more or less well with the 18th century definition of ancient republics? In the limited sphere of a village’s own political authority, ultimate authority for decisions resided in the Village Assembly. In this respect, the Village Assembly was “sovereign,” and as the constituent members of the Assembly, all the heads of household held that sovereignty in common. |
|
Village officers: a hierarchy of functions and authority. |
The decisions of the Assembly were carried out by designated village officers who were chosen annually. They were accountable to the Assembly. Officers had differing functions and duties which established a hierarchy of authority and responsibility, more or less as follows from top to bottom: Syndics carried out the executive functions of village governance and were responsible both the village assembly and to the higher authorities of state administration for such things as the payment of royal taxes, the maintenance of village roads, and so forth. Prudhommes were entrusted with certain police and judicial functions: they helped arbitrate local disputes; they inventoried the possessions of deceased villagers to assist with the orderly transmission of property from one generation to another; they set the date for the harvest to begin; they inspected chimneys to reduce the risk of fires that could engulf a number of homes or an entire village. Asséeurs, or Assessors were responsible for drawing up the royal tax roll during their year of service and for allocating the amounts that each head of household was to pay. Messiers, or Field Wardens, were charged with the protection of the village fields and crops; to that end, they damages done by people or animals and cited offending parties in the seigneurial court, who were thereby subject to fines and payments for damages inflicted. |
|
Patterns of office holding: identification and interpretation
|
Some key questions to ask in your analysis include:
The extent of participation: among different socio-economic groups within a village, how broadly or narrowly based was participation in holding office?
The nature of participation? Given the hierarchy of functions and authority, to what extent were the members of differing socio-economic groups more or less likely to hold the office of syndic? That of Prudhommes? Of Asséeur? Of Messier?
Just as very broad participation across socio-economic groups would fit with a “democratic” sharing of the burdens and privileges of village governance, so very narrowly based participation would be consistent with aristocratic or oligarchic rule, depending upon the nature and degree of that narrowness.
Chapter Five in my booklet takes up the idea of a mixture of oligarchic and democratic tendencies in the governance of the village of Civry-en-Montagne.
See the Tables of observed and hypothetical patterns.
|