2F - Finance and the economy: problems after Colbert
Learn why France could sustain major wars after Colbert's death while exposing its economy and finances to severe strain. New taxes, borrowing, famine and reform proposals show why raising money immediately was different from creating a healthy long-term tax base.
Colbert's legacy and the financial system
Colbert died in 1683 after attempting to improve royal finances, encourage manufacturing, develop commerce and increase state supervision of economic activity. His programme left useful institutions and industries, but did not remove the monarchy's dependence on an uneven tax system and financial intermediaries. The problems after his death were therefore more than the disappearance of one capable minister.
France was still predominantly agricultural. Harvests supported the population, provided much of its income and influenced its ability to pay taxes. Manufacturing and trade were important, especially in particular towns and regions, but they did not make the crown independent of rural conditions. When cultivators lost crops, taxes that seemed reasonable on paper could become difficult to collect.
Privilege complicated the tax base. Nobles commonly enjoyed exemption from the taille, an important direct tax, although arrangements varied and noble status did not exempt people from every levy. The clergy negotiated contributions rather than paying on exactly the same terms as ordinary lay taxpayers. Provincial privileges and differing rates of indirect taxes further limited uniform collection. The burdens borne by the population and the amount reaching the treasury were not identical.
Ministers also relied on financiers who advanced funds and collected revenue. This could solve an immediate cash shortage, but part of future income would then repay advances and charges. Colbert had worked within this system; his successors inherited it rather than choosing between a completely reformed treasury and effortless decline.
The key distinction is between royal finance, the government's income, debts and payments, and the economy, the production and exchange sustaining the population. The crown could obtain more money in a particular year by drawing more heavily on resources while making the economy less able to support future demands.
War expenditure and emergency finance
The scale and persistence of war were central to the financial difficulties after 1685. The Nine Years War lasted from 1688 to 1697, and the War of the Spanish Succession from 1701 to 1714. The interval allowed only a short period of peace before another major commitment. France had to sustain multiple armies, garrisons and naval operations while meeting other obligations of government.
War expenditure continued beyond a battle. Soldiers needed pay and clothing; horses, artillery and provisions required transport; captured fortresses needed maintenance and garrisons. Distant campaigns and simultaneous fronts multiplied these demands. A military victory could create further commitments if it added territory that had to be defended.
The crown borrowed, sold offices and used advances against future revenues to close immediate gaps. Office sales brought cash and secured support from purchasers, but created holders with rights and expectations. Loans and anticipations brought tomorrow's income forward; their repayment reduced what later ministers could spend. When lenders doubted repayment, obtaining funds became more difficult or expensive.
Changes to the currency and other emergency expedients could also provide temporary fiscal relief while unsettling trade and confidence. These were attempts to keep the state operating under pressure, not a reliable replacement for income from a prosperous economy. A government could maintain the army while accumulating weaknesses that became visible only over time.
Pontchartrain, Chamillart and, from 1708, Desmaretz faced these demands as successive controllers-general of finances. Their choices deserve assessment, but blaming successors alone ignores the king's commitment to wars and the inherited structure of taxation. Administration determined how burdens were managed; policy determined much of the burden to be managed.
Capitation and the dixième
New taxes attempted to reach resources the existing system did not collect adequately. The capitation, introduced in 1695, assessed people through ranked classes of status and occupation. Its principle extended liability more broadly than the taille, including privileged groups. The royal declaration and its tariff survive, providing direct evidence of how the tax was designed. BnF: declaration establishing the capitation, 18 January 1695.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account