On May 5, 1789, Louis XVI convened the Estates-General.

Almost immediately, it became

apparent that this archaic arrangement—the group had last been assembled in 1614—would
not sit well with its present members. Although Louis XVI granted the Third Estate greater
numerical representation, the Parlement Of Paris stepped in and invoked an old rule
mandating that each estate receive one vote, regardless of size. As a result, though the Third
Estate was vastly larger than the clergy and nobility, each estate had the same representation—
one vote. Inevitably, the Third Estate’s vote was overridden by the combined votes of the clergy
and nobility.

The fact that the Estates-General hadn’t been summoned in nearly 200 years probably
says a thing or two about its effectiveness. The First and Second Estates—clergy and
nobility, respectively—were too closely related in many matters. Both were linked
intrinsically to the royalty and shared many similar privileges. As a result, their votes
often went the same way, automatically neutralizing any effort by the Third Estate.

Additionally, in a country as secularized as France at the time, giving the church a full
third of the vote was ill-advised: although France’s citizens would ultimately have their
revenge, at the time the church’s voting power just fostered more animosity. There were
numerous philosophers in France speaking out against religion and the mindless
following that it supposedly demanded, and many resented being forced to follow the
decisions of the church on a national scale.

Divides in the Third Estate

Beyond the chasm that existed between it and the other estates, the Third Estate itself
varied greatly in socioeconomic status: some members were peasants and laborers,
whereas others had the occupations, wealth, and lifestyles of nobility. These disparities
between members of the Third Estate made it difficult for the wealthy members to relate
to the peasants with whom they were grouped. Because of these rifts, the Estates-
General, though organized to reach a peaceful solution, remained in a prolonged
internal feud. It was only through the efforts of men such as Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyès
(see below) that the members of the Third Estate finally realized that fighting among
themselves was fruitless and that if they took advantage of the estate’s massive size,
they would be a force that could not be ignored.
“What Is the Third Estate?”
To add insult to injury, delegates from the Third Estate were forced to wear traditional
black robes and to enter the Estates-General meeting hall by a side door. Necker tried
to placate the Third Estate into tolerating these slights until some progress could be
made, but his diplomatic efforts accomplished little. Fed up with their mistreatment,
activists and pamphleteers of the Third Estate took to the streets in protest.

The most famous effort was a pamphlet written by liberal clergy

member Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyès titled “What Is The Third Estate?” In
response to his own question, Sieyès answered, “The Nation.” The pamphlet
articulated the pervasive feeling in France that though a small minority
might be in control, the country truly belonged to the masses. Sieyès’s
pamphlet compelled the Third Estate to action, inciting the masses to take
matters into their own hands if the aristocracy failed to give them due
respect.
The Third Estate’s Revolt
As the impasse in the Estates-General continued, the Third Estate became
more convinced of its entitlement to liberty. Seeing that neither the king nor
the other estates would acquiesce to its requests, the Third Estate began to
organize within itself and recruit actively from the other estates. On June 17,
1789, bolstered by communitywide support, the Third Estate officially broke
away from the Estates-General and proclaimed itself the National
Assembly. In so doing, it also granted itself control over taxation. Shortly
thereafter, many members of the other estates joined the cause.
Blaming the Aristocracy
Although the reconvening of the Estates-General presented France’s
aristocracy and clergy with a perfect opportunity to appease the Third Estate
and maintain control, they focused only on maintaining the dominance of
their respective estates rather than address the important issues that
plagued the country. When the Estates-General convened, the Third Estate
wasn’t seeking a revolution—just a bit of liberty and a more equitable tax
burden. The entire Revolution might have been avoided had the first two
estates simply acquiesced to some of the Third Estate’s moderate proposals.
Instead, they fell back on tradition and their posh lifestyles and lit the
revolutionary flame.