Sieyès: Political Writings: Including the Debate Between Sieyes and Tom Paine in 1791

by Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès

The abbe Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes (1748-1836) distinguished himself as the chief theoretician of the French Revolution--and as a revolutionary constitutional and social theorist in his own right--through his rigorously analytical theory of representative government and its corollary, the representative character of social life in general. He expressed the essence of his thought in a series of three pamphlets published in the months leading up to the meeting of the Estates-General in 1789. This volume presents all three essays-- Views of the Executive Means , An Essay on Privileges , and What Is the Third Estate? --in their entirety. The third essay, in a new translation by Michael Sonenscher, is followed by Sieyes's 1791 newspaper debate with Tom Paine on the merits of monarchy versus republicanism. Elucidated by Sonenscher's insightful Introduction, these texts will fascinate anyone interested in the history of the French Revolution, the history of social and political thought, or the origins and character of modern liberalism.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, France, Sociology, History

256 pages, Paperback

First published March 15, 2003

About the author

Most commonly known as the Abbé Sieyès, was a French Roman Catholic abbé, clergyman and political writer, Second Consul of France during Napoleonic era, one of the first members of what would become the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences of the Institute of France.
Abbé Sieyès was one of the chief political theorists of the French Revolution, and also played a prominent role in the French Consulate and First French Empire. His 1789 pamphlet What is the Third Estate? became the manifesto of the Revolution, helping to transform the Estates-General into the National Assembly in June 1789. In 1799, he was the instigator of the coup d'état of 18 Brumaire (9 November), which brought Napoleon Bonaparte to power. He also coined the term "sociologie" in an unpublished manuscript, and made significant theoretical contributions to the nascent social sciences.
Despite Sieyès' embrace of Enlightenment thinking, he was ordained to the priesthood in 1773. In spite of this, he was not hired immediately. He spent this time researching philosophy and developing music until about a year later in October 1774 when, as the result of demands by powerful friends, he was promised a canonry in Brittany. Unfortunately for Sieyès, this canonry went into effect only when the preceding holder died. At the end of 1775, Sieyès acquired his first real position as secretary to the bishop of Tréguier where he spent two years as deputy of the diocese. It is here that he sat in the Estates of Brittany and became disgusted with the immense power the privileged classes held. In 1780, the bishop of Tréguier was transferred to the bishopric of Chartres. He became aware of how easy it was for nobles to advance in ecclesiastical offices compared to commoners. Sieyes was an ambitious man; therefore, he resented the privileges granted to the nobles within the Church system and thought the patronage system was a humiliation for commoners. Sieyès accompanied him there as his vicar general where he eventually became a canon of the cathedral and chancellor of the diocese of Chartres.
While remaining in ecclesiastical offices, Sieyès maintained a religious cynicism at odds with his position. By the time he took his orders to enter priesthood, Sieyès had "freed himself from all superstitious sentiments and ideas." Even when corresponding with his deeply religious father, Sieyès showed a severe lack of piety for the man in charge of the diocese of Chartres.[8] It is theorised that Sieyes accepted a religious career not because he had any sort of strong religious inclination, but because he considered it the only means to advance his career as a political writer.

Reviews

[Bernard English · Rating 3 out of 5]

I won't say Burke was more right, there is much to agree with in Sieyes's writing, but it's clear why Burke made such a tremendous impression. Burke made his arguments in unforgettable prose, even when one furiously disagrees with him, readers will likely not stop reading due to his beautiful prose. In comparison, Sieyes's writings, at least in these selections, don't seem very polished at all. It's a bit of a struggle to read. This particular selection does have a helpful introduction.

[Jeremiah Ross · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had to get this used as I couldn't find a digital copy. I now remember why i have been using digital.... I am kind of dumb, and found myself spending alot of time on wikipedia for context.

Without understanding the time and place that produced this series of works, the modern American reader will likely just use the writing as confirmation bias. Taking some time to understand the dialectic that produced these works is a good use of a weekend.

[Marguerite · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Abbe Sieyes is an ancestor Uncle of mine. My son recently visited his grave in Paris. I gave this book to my nephew his second year in college and it was one of the first books the professor assigned.