The Making of Revolutionary Paris (review)

In his superb history of eighteenth-century Paris, David Garrioch explores the social, political, and cultural transformations that contributed to making Paris the epicenter of the French Revolution. Among the more important of these transformations was the breakdown of deference, caused in part by the ideals and practices of the Enlightenment, the growth of the bureaucratic state, the increasing secularization of society, and the disintegration of the traditional neighborhood. The key to understanding the impact of these changes, however, lies in events surrounding the attempted suppression of Jansenism and the papal bull Unigentius.

At first the importance of these events may not seem obvious, but Garrioch ably demonstrates why appearances can be deceiving. Jansenism, a version of Catholicism that stressed individual piety, an austere lifestyle, an individual's personal understanding of the Bible, and the belief that commoners could be as virtuous as clergy or nobles, threatened the existing social order. This was the reason for the papal bull and for the active support of the Unigentius by the king and the archbishop of Paris. Unfortunately, the subtle transformations that had been occurring in Paris during the first half of the eighteenth century produced widespread discontent with the official response to Jansenism.

Slowly, the traditional neighborhoods, dominated by the clergy of local parishes, came instead to be dominated by local elites, generally well-to-do merchants, lawyers, and officeholders who had become prominent figures in local parishes as churchwardens. Many of these also adhered to the principles of Jansenism, as did many of the less-educated parishioners. When Christophe de Beaumont became archbishop of Paris in 1750, he reemphasized the papal bull by denying the sacraments to those who refused to denounce their heretical beliefs. Many parish priests and lay parishioners resisted, even challenging Beaumont's actions in the Parlement of Paris. When the magistrates of the Parlement demonstrated their sympathy with the Jansenists, the archbishop turned to the king for support, giving the attempted suppression of Jansenism political as well as religious implications. The local elites saw the Unigentius and the king's support of the bull as threatening not only the long tradition of Gallicanism but their own political and social importance. Widespread criticism of the crown now joined criticism of the unpopular bull. According to Garrioch, these events came to "mark a sea change in Parisian political life" (167).

As the eighteenth century progressed, other transformations contributed to making revolutionary Paris. The spread of Enlightenment ideals through salons, Freemasonry lodges, and scientific academies democratized educated society: deference, the hallmark of traditional society, was on the wane. Urban and police reforms further eroded the traditional social structure of the city. Improved traffic patterns made it easier for people to move beyond their neighborhoods, broadening their social interactions and interests. Residents increasingly turned to royal officials to resolve local problems and conflicts. This, in turn, served to undermine the influence of the local elite: "Public health, fire prevention, street maintenance, law and order, and taxation had all been transferred to the police or to other authorities" (255). By the time of the Réveillon riot in 1789, a protest had the potential of becoming something more than simply a local complaint about the perceived unjust pricing of bread. It could become a social and political protest that attracted the support of people from across the city and required royal troops to suppress.

While some of the factors Garrioch attributes to the transformation of eighteenth-century Paris (such as the urban renovation and the relocation of cemeteries) seem somewhat tangential to his arguments, his overall analysis is solid and his case arguing the importance of Jansenism is convincing. Add to this Garrioch's ability to enliven his analysis with the vividly portrayed lives of relative unknowns who illustrate key points of his arguments, and the result is a text that is at once scholarly and a vivid, highly readable work. The Making of Revolutionary Paris proves itself to be equally accessible to historians...