The broad distinction between conservative, democratic-republican and liberal interpretations of the Revolution persisted in the 20th-century, although historiography became more nuanced, with greater attention to critical analysis of documentary evidence. From the late 1920s to the 1960s, social and economic analysis of the Revolution, often from a Marxist perspective, dominated the historiography of the Revolution in France. This historical trend has been variously called "Marxist, "classic", "Jacobin" or "history from below" and is associated with historians such as
Albert Mathiez,
Georges Lefebvre and
Albert Soboul. From the 1960s, the dominance of social and economic interpretations of the Revolution emphasising class conflict was challenged by revisionist historians such as
Alfred Cobban and
François Furet.
Jean Jaurès Jean Jaurès (1859–1914) wrote a three-volume
Histoire socialiste de la Révolution française (published 1901-04). He analysed the political, social and economic aspects of the Revolution from a socialist perspective. His thesis was that the Revolution established a bourgeois democratic republic which set the preconditions for the emergence of a socialist movement. His history was also notable for its detailed study of the peasantry and urban poor. As a parliamentarian, he was instrumental in establishing the state-funded "Jaurès Commission", responsible for publishing historical documents and monographs on the Revolution.
Alphonse Aulard and academic studies Alphonse Aulard (1849–1928) was the first professional historian of the Revolution; he promoted graduate studies, scholarly editions, and learned journals. He was appointed to the first National Chair in the History of the French Revolution at the Sorbonne in 1891. He trained advanced students, founded the ''Société de l'Histoire de la Révolution
, edited the scholarly journal La Révolution française,
and assembled and published many key primary sources. His major works on the French Revolution include Histoire politique de la Révolution française
(A political history of the French revolution, 1901), La Révolution française et le régime féodale
(The French revolution and feudalism, 1919) and Le Christianisme et la Révolution française'' (Christianity and the French Revolution, 1925). Aulard's historiography was based on
positivism. The assumption was that methodology was all-important and the historian's duty was to present in chronological order the duly verified facts, to analyse relations between facts, and provide the most likely interpretation. Full documentation based on research in the primary sources was essential. Aulard's books focused on institutions, public opinion, elections, parties, parliamentary majorities, and legislation. He was a leading historian in the radical tradition, arguing that the democratic republic was the logical culmination of the Revolution. The suspension of the constitution in 1793 and the Terror that followed were necessary expedients to defeat the counter revolution and push through necessary social welfare reforms. Aulard, however, was critical of the excesses of Robespierre, his hero being Danton. According to Aulard,From the social point of view, the Revolution consisted in the suppression of what was called the feudal system, in the emancipation of the individual, in greater division of landed property, the abolition of the privileges of noble birth, the establishment of equality, the simplification of life.... The French Revolution differed from other revolutions in being not merely national, for it aimed at benefiting all humanity."
Cochin and Gaxotte Augustin Cochin (1876–1916) was a conservative critic of the Revolution whose work was influenced by Taine. He argued that there was a continuous tradition linking pre-revolutionary intellectual groups, the freemasons and the Jacobins. His major works include his posthumously published essays
Les Sociétés de Pensée et la Démocratie ('Intellectual societies and democracy', published 1921) and
La Révolution et la Libre Pensée ('The Revolution and free thought', published 1924). Furet praised Cochin's "rigorous conceptualisation" of the Revolution.
Pierre Gaxotte (1895–1982) was a Royalist critic of the revolution. In his study
The French Revolution (1928) he drew on Cochin's work to argue that the Revolution was a conspiracy inspired by pre-revolutionary intellectual societies and was inherently violent from the beginning. The work of Cochin and Gaxotte became the dominant interpretation of the Revolution in
Vichy France but fell out of favour after the war.
Albert Mathiez Albert Mathiez (1874–1932) was a Marxist historian who argued that the Revolution of 1789 was a result of class conflict between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, and was followed by conflict between the bourgeoisie and the
sans-culottes, who were a proto-proletariat. He defended Robespierre, arguing that the Terror was necessary to defend the democratic republican revolution and that the Jacobins were overthrown when they tried to carry out a property revolution. The Revolution ended on
9 Thermidor, after which there was only reaction. Mathiez established the Society for Robespierrist Studies and its journal, the
Annales Historiques de la Révolution française. His major works include
La Révolution française (3 vol. 1922–1924) and
La Vie chère et le movement social sous la Terreur (1927). Mathiez was a leading figure in what came to be known as the Marxist, Jacobin or "classic" school of French revolutionary historiography.
Georges Lefebvre Georges Lefebvre (1874–1959) was a Marxist historian who wrote detailed studies of the French peasantry (
Les paysans du Nord (1924)),
The Great Fear of 1789 (1932, first English translation 1973) and revolutionary crowds, as well as a general history of the Revolution
La Révolution française (published 1951–1957). He argued that the Revolution represented the triumph of the bourgeoisie and that the Terror was a reaction to an aristocratic plot. He presented the peasantry as active participants in the Revolution who held a fundamentally anti-capitalist worldview. Lefebvre held the Chair of French Revolution History at the Sorbonne from 1939 until 1955. He mentored a generation of historians who generally wrote cultural, social and economic interpretations defending the achievements of the Revolution. These historians included Albert Soboul, George Rudé, Richard Cobb, and Franco Venturi.
Albert Soboul Albert Soboul (1914–1982) was a leading Marxist historian who was Chair of French Revolution History at the Sorbonne from 1968 to 1982 and president of the
Société des Études Robespierristes. He specialised in the analysis of popular movements during the Revolution and detailed studies of the sans-culottes. In
Les Sansculottes Parisiens en l’An II (Paris, 1958; English translation,
The Parisian Sans-Culottes and the French Revolution, 1793-4, 1964) he argued that the sans-culottes reflected a popular movement which drove the radicalisation of the Revolution. In his general history of the Revolution (
Histoire de la Révolution française, published 1962) he argued that the Revolution represented the culmination of the long economic and social evolution which made the bourgeoisie the dominant class.
Alfred Cobban and revisionist historians Alfred Cobban (1901–1968) challenged Marxist social and economic explanations of the revolution in two important works,
The Myth of the French Revolution (1955) and
Social Interpretation of the French Revolution (1964). Cobban argued that the revolution was primarily a political conflict rather than a social one. The revolution wasn't initiated by a rising capitalist bourgeoisie but rather by a declining class of lawyers and office holders, and feudalism had virtually disappeared before the Revolution. The victors of the Revolution were large and small conservative property owners, a result which retarded economic development. American historian George V. Taylor also challenged the class conflict interpretation of the Revolution. In ‘Noncapitalist Wealth and the Origins of the French Revolution’ (1967) and other essays, he argued that there was little economic conflict between the old regime nobility and capitalists and that the share of wealth represented by capitalist enterprises was small. He concluded that the Revolution was not primarily a social one, but a political revolution with social consequences.
Robert Palmer In
The Age of the Democratic Revolution (2 volumes, 1959–64)
Robert Palmer argued against "French exceptionalism". He provided a global interpretation of the Revolution, arguing that the revolutionary conflicts of the second half of the 18th-century amounted to an “Atlantic revolution” or “western revolution”. According to Palmer: “All revolutions since 1800, in Europe, Latin America, Asia, and Africa, have learned from the eighteenth-century Revolution of Western Civilization.”
David Armitage comments: “That judgment might seem guilty of almost every current scholarly sin—Eurocentrism, essentialism, teleology, diffusionism—but it captured the essence of Palmer’s endeavor: to understand the present through the past with the perspective of the longue durée.” Palmer's thesis was rejected by both Marxists and French nationalists. Marvin R. Cox states that Marxist historians accused Palmer of "a brief to provide historical legitimacy for NATO," while French nationalists said it diminished the importance of the French Revolution as an historical event. Other major works by Furet include
Penser la Révolution Française (1978; translated as
Interpreting the French Revolution 1981) and
A Critical Dictionary of the French Revolution (1989).
Other 20th-century historians Some other influential historians of this period are: •
Albert Sorel (1842–1906) – Diplomatic historian:
Europe et la Révolution française (eight volumes, 1895–1904); introductory section of this work translated as
Europe under the Old Regime (1947). •
Ernest Labrousse (1895–1988) – Performed extensive economic research on 18th-century France. •
George Rudé (1910–1993) – Another of Lefebvre's protégés, did further work on the popular side of the Revolution, including:
The Crowd in the French Revolution (1959). •
Richard Cobb (1917–1996) was a leading exponent of "history from below" who wrote detailed studies of both provincial and city life, avoiding the revisionism debate by "keeping his nose very close to the ground". His major works include
Les armées révolutionnaires (published 1961-63, translated as ''The People's Armies'' in 1987). == Modern historiography (1980s to present) ==