1: The Psychology of the Constituent Assembly
Psychological Influences Active During the French Revolution
The psychological influences during the revolution included both the rational and the mystic, the individualistic and the collectivistic, and the pursuit of short- and long-term objectives. Different individuals were influenced at different times by different combinations of motives.
The rational element, which is central to historical accounts and prominent in public communications of the time, had but a very slight influence in reality. Logic is used in arrears to assign a greater significance to actions than impulsiveness, and used in advance to provide justification. In essence, logic is for most participants merely a veneer over based motivations. Pure reason holds little motivational power, as men are moved by their passions.
(EN: More recent thinking in psychology specifies that emotion is the basis of desire, and reason may be engaged afterward to plan a course that will achieve desires. This is not to say that reason is not engaged to define the desires, nor that the planning process is strictly rational.)
When we consider the events of history, it becomes clear that the mystic element held greater sway: individuals acting on vague beliefs that had no foundation in any clear logic or reasoning. What makes the revolution so difficult to explain or comprehend is that its motives were largely irrational and sometimes quite nonsensical.
It has been observed that the revolution had about it more semblance to a religious revolution than a political one - though, from some perspectives, politics is simply a form of religion that deals in mysticism and emotion more than demonstrable facts and rational logic. It is not necessarily thus, but emotions are more conveniently accessed than logic.
The Birth of the New Regime
Revolutions are "sketched out in men's thoughts" long before any action takes place. In that sense, the French Revolution was being sketched out during the reign of Louis XVI, when the discontent of the middle classes gave rise to calls for reform.
However, it would be a mistake to lay the blame on the king himself, as Louis was a weak man and could not impose upon the clergy and nobility, to whom the rule of France had been consigned.
A meeting of the "states general" was convened for the first time in nearly 200 years, in which 1,200 representatives of the people gathered to form a grand parliament to address the issues of the day, though less than half of these were of the "third estate" and the majority represented the nobility and the clergy.
From the very beginning, this convocation showed a strong division between the three classes, and it became clear that the representatives of the people would be disregarded: they were made to meet in different halls than the nobility and clergy, and their resolutions were not considered.
And so, the representatives of the third estate, considering themselves to represent 95% of the population, declared themselves to be constituted as a separate assembly from the deputies appointed by the nobles and clergy - at with this decision, the revolution was set on its course.
The Constituent Assembly
The "constituent assembly" was created by the third estate, who had gathered as deputies of the States General but were clearly being ignored and excluded by the deputies of the nobles and the clergy. For its earliest sessions, this Assembly spoke and acted as a sovereign body and assumed the authority to issue binding decrees.
"The power of a political assembly resides, above all, in the weakness of its adversaries," and the weakness of Louis XVI was considerable. The king ordered the hall where the Assembly met to be closed - so they simply met elsewhere. The king demanded that the assembly be dissolved, but they refused and continued about their business, resolving to remain united as a legislative body until a new constitution had been established. (EN: This is the "tennis court oath" recorded in history - an oath to remain united, taken on the tennis courts after the meeting hall had been shuttered.)
Eventually, the king relented, and was compelled to recognize the assembly as a body representative of the people who had appointed them, and to take their resolutions seriously. At this point, the absolute power of monarchy was no more.
Once the clergy fell in with the commoners, the nobles felt themselves threatened, rallied the royal army and sent abroad for regiments of foreign mercenaries - in response to which threat the Assembly assembled a militia and stormed the Bastille to free political prisoners and avail themselves of the munitions stored there.
Le Bon acknowledges this event was less glorious than historian depict. That is, the imposing fortress was a symbol of the king's power, but few were actually imprisoned there and there were very few guards to defend the place - and as such its practical significance was negligible, and the people "stormed" the equivalent of an abandoned warehouse with a few security guards who gave little resistance to protect it. The rebels took possession of a small cache of arms and liberated but five prisoners: four men accused of forgery and an idiot.
However fruitless, the storming of the Bastille was important as a symbolic act, and is remembered by history of the first action taken by the common people in defiance of the king - which was the commencement of a popular government.
It's also mentioned that the riot was not a spontaneous uprising of the people, but the cooperation of several "clubs" of revolutionaries, who contributed soldiers and directed their actions against the Bastille. This gave rise to the power of these clubs, and the appearance of a coordinated force (rather than a rabble of peasants) struck fear in the regiments of foreign mercenaries who had not expected to fight against soldiers but merely oppress peasants, to such degree that they had to be disbanded.
While the Assembly had been "proud and haughty" toward the king and the nobility, they were "extremely pusillanimous" before the people. Those who directed the revolutionary clubs, as they provided and commanded the armed forces, held true power and it can be seen that the early resolutions of the Assembly were disorganized and petty.
The constitution, proclamations, declarations, and speeches of the Assembly spoke of the rights of man and described a new form of government - none of which was of the least interest to the clubs and the mob. The clubs meanwhile operated independently, often ignoring or even contradicting the degrees of the Assembly. In the time that followed, the Assembly was regularly "embarrassed by riots" organized by the clubs, which had little to do with the purposes of the Assembly itself.
There was little real engagement or negotiation with the nobility, whose power decreased by the day - it was in fact considered to be irrelevant by many among the revolutionaries. The Assembly was considered by some to be "royalist" in that it did not describe a new form of government and seemed pleased to perpetuate monarchy, so long as the king would be bound by the terms of their constitution.
This led the leaders of certain clubs to turn against the Assembly, which assembled the national guard to defend the Assembly against the people whom it claimed to represent. Occasionally, the leader of a revolutionary club would send a band to interrupt the proceedings with bands of armed men, or "delegations" which interrupted the Assembly to present demands backed by threats - and on a few occasions mobs were assembled outside of the meetings, some of which had to be dispersed by force.
After a period of three years, the Assembly completed their constitution, which was accepted by the king. Effectively, this put a stop to many of the abuses of political power by the noble classes and laid the groundwork for a parliament that was composed of members of the third estate - in effect, the institution of a republic, to which the monarchy was subordinated though not entirely disbanded.
However, the revolutionary clubs did not disband, and continued to sow discontent - which was the chief reason that the French Republic did not last long, and was replaced in rather short order by the first French Empire.