Which was of greater significance to the weakening if the authority of the crown? (1786-89) a)The Paris Parlement b) The Tennis Court Oath

France in the 1780s found itself in a situation where most of the population were calling for change as the ancien regime failed them, and the issues of unfair taxation and privilege were the main roots of the problem. However, when Brienne went to the Paris parlement in 1787 attempting to make change, they strongly rejected his proposals of tax reform. In rejecting any plans for reform, the Paris parlement prevented Louis XVI from taking action to do what many, including the third estate and even members in the second estate, were calling for. This aided in the weakening of the crown as the problems revolving around unfair taxation needed to be settled as soon as possible due to the dire financial situation France was in; the fact that these problems were left unresolved added to the simmering social unrest, and as the absolute monarch, it was inevitable that Louis was to blame. Furthermore, as a result of their inability to cooperate with the crown, Louis then exiled the Paris parlement to Troyes on the 15 August 1787. Although this drastic step was taken to try and help France move forward, as the parlement repeatedly hindered any chance for reform, his plan completely backfired. Even though it could be said that the parlement was at fault in this situation seeing as they only refuted the taxation reforms to try and protect their own privileges, the exile greatly angered the French and Louis XVI was heavily accused of despotism. Consequently it is clear that the Paris parlement had some significance in the weakening of the crown as it hindered Louis XVI from making significant changes. Moreover, as it can be seen with the exile of the parlement, although Louis XVI may not always be at fault, he will always be the figure that is blamed for any mistakes made, leading to greater weakening of the crown.

              

               Another factor which aided the weakening of the crown was the Tennis Court Oath taken on 20 June 1789. The Tennis Court Oath is particularly significant as it was a pact made by the national assembly to never dissolve until France had its own constitution; it was an action that was fuelled by anger at the crown, sparking a greater passion for change and involved members from each of the three estates. Following a lack of leadership and response from the government, especially regarding the introduction of a constitution, which all the estates had requested in their cahiers, the Tennis court oath appeared to be a direct challenge to the crown. Thus the Tennis court oath had a greater significance in weakening the crown relative to the Paris parlement. In spite of the fact that the actions of the parlement and Louis’ response to them helped undermine the position of the crown, the effect of the parlement was much more indirect. In comparison, the tennis court oath was an act that explicitly went against the government, demanding change and undermining the crown’s power and leadership. For that reason, it had a more immediate consequence that would be remembered for the next generations to come. Moreover, the Tennis court oath was so resolute and had a very clear vision for change, unlike that anger sparked by the actions of Louis XIV and Paris parlement. Furthermore, though both events sparked public outrage, the three estates were much more united in their anger and more radical in their thinking when it came to the Tennis Court Oath, and so the threat to Louis which came out from it were evidently much stronger.