Modern French institutions and people are derived from 2,000 years of contacts with diverse cultures and peoples. Into the area now defined as France came the Celts, Romans, Franks, and other people producing a mixture of practices and races. Since 1500 the French have formed a relatively unified territorial state in which diversity nevertheless persists. ANCIENT GAUL When Julius \Tcaesar\t invaded \TGaul\t in 58 BC, he found a territory reaching from the Mediterranean to the North Sea, from the Pyrenees and the Atlantic to the Rhine and the Alps. The population of possibly 10 million possessed neither homogeneous roots nor unified rule. Several centuries earlier, the \TCelts\t had surged from their Danubian homeland into the valleys of the Rhine and Rhone and as far as today's Belgium, England, and Ireland. The newcomers mingled with the native Ligurians of the Alps, Iberians of the Pyrenees, and numerous folk elsewhere who were often of Phoenician, Greek, or Roman stock. The Celts Celtic rule in Gaul was decentralized. The Gauls (Latin for Celts) were basically grouped as members of clans that sometimes functioned separately and sometimes formed into one of over 400 tribes, which in turn often joined into one of the 70 or so nations. Thus the Gauls had no single leader or authority, and except for Marseille and Nice, they had no cities or towns either. Most lived in scattered mud huts generally surrounded by a stockade. Hunting, fishing, and pastoral pursuits supplied basic needs. Some surpluses and craftwork in wood and leather found their way to local markets for sale or exchange. Gallic religious life too was localized and pluralistic, with pantheistic worship of rivers, woods, and other elements of nature. The most widespread but not universal cult was that of the \Tdruids\t, centered in Brittany. Roman Conquest Roman legions marched into Gaul in 58 BC not only to protect the Roman republic's Mediterranean holdings but also to promote Julius Caesar's personal ambitions beyond his proconsulship of Cisalpine and Transalpine Gaul. The Gauls contributed to their own subjugation by their tribal rivalries and inability to resist the infiltration of trans-Rhenish barbarians and the Swiss (Helvetii). Caesar's speedy success in stopping the barbarians was followed by the conquest of all Gaul. The Roman victory was not due to superior numbers of troops but to their training, discipline, and weaponry and to Gallic disunity. Even the heroism of the Gallic prince \TVercingetorix\t failed to halt or reverse the Roman conquest. Five hundred years of Roman rule produced striking consequences for Gaul. Politically, the idea was planted of citizenship of a common state with a single set of laws and administrators and a more or less unified tax system. In practice, much localism remained, and the direct and indirect taxes were assessed and collected inequitably. If imperial Rome benefitted by holding provincial Gaul (from financial exactions, manpower, and cheap grain), the Gauls also derived economic advantage from their connection. Security against barbarians and bands of brigands encouraged the Gauls to clear more forests and farm more lands. Better roads, bridges, and communications fostered greater trade. Towns and villages began to appear in place of the mud-hut habitations. Culturally, a taste for learning Latin and Greek was cultivated in rudimentary educational institutions in cities like Marseille, Bordeaux, and Lyons. Frequently, the interest was superficial, and outlying regions remained untutored in Latin. They also continued to practice old Celtic paganism and Druidism despite the spread of Christianity. As missionaries crisscrossed Gaul to convert the pagans and to organize the church, other Christians clustered in monasteries to pray and to establish islands of learning. When the Roman Empire collapsed, the surviving Roman church would be crucial for the retention of Gallic-Roman forms and practices. FRANKISH KINGDOM The 5th-century decline of Rome was disastrous for Gaul's political unity, economic development, and cultural life. An accelerated flow of barbarians--invading in variously sized groups of \TFranks\t, \TGoths\t, and Burgundians, rather than in a single coordinated force--began the process of splintering Gaul. However, as the Romans and Gauls had become assimilated, so too did the Gallo-Romans and the barbarians adopt each other's ways. The France that emerged by the year 1000 was thus a combination of Celts (Gauls), Romans, and barbarians (Franks, Teutons, Visigoths, Burgundians, Vandals, Vikings, and others). Merovingians Out of the welter of political and territorial shifts from the 5th to the 11th century, the church and the successive dynasties of the \TMerovingians\t (431-751) and the \TCarolingians\t (c.747-987) supplied links of continuity. The founder of the Frankish kingdom was \TClovis\t (r. 481-511), a Merovingian. He completed work of his grandfather, the Salian Frankish chieftain Merowen, by first overwhelming the Gallo-Roman forces at Soissons in 486. Thereafter he extended Frankish rule over Burgundy and the whole southern region to the Pyrenees by defeating the Visigoths. A convert to Christianity in 496, Clovis found that his services to the church helped his own status in and beyond his new capital, \TParis\t. Upon Clovis's death in 511, the Frankish kingdom was parcelled out among his four sons, whose heirs subdivided their holdings and waged bitter wars against one another and outsiders. In the last century of their rule, the Merovingians exhibited their declining authority even in their particular kingdoms. Aristocratic landowners whittled away at royal power in administrative, legal, military, and tax matters. Agriculture and trade were in disarray with the countryside ravaged by feuding chiefs and barbarian bands. Towns and villages, although still furnishing some shelter for occupants and rural refugees, dwindled as commerce ebbed. The strong influence of the church continued, with bishops protecting townsmen and monastic orders maintaining some semblance of culture, but even the church could not prevail against Merovingian rot. Finally, at the beginning of the 8th century, after decades of incompetent Merovingian rule over the remnants of the Frankish kingdom, the Carolingians, who had served as palace mayors (or advisors), secured the reins of power. Carolingians Even before a Carolingian, \TCharlemagne\t, became king of the Franks in 768 and emperor in 800, his grandfather \TCharles Martel\t had amassed sufficient power to "save" Europe from the Moors at Tours in 732. Martel's talents and military forces were passed on to Charlemagne's father, \TPepin the Short\t, whose aid to the missionary Saint \TBoniface\t was compensated by the pope's endorsement of Pepin and his sons as the legitimate dynasty of the Frankish kingdom. Upon these foundations, Charlemagne waged innumerable wars and gained all Europe from the Pyrenees to the Vistula. His rule encompassed more than Gaul or the Frankish kingdom, but it left a strong imprint upon France nevertheless. It also foreshadowed the feudal system, which was already being born. Within the Frankish state, the vigorous and attractive Charlemagne extended royal power and financial resources. In exchange for extensive but nonhereditary land grants and the right to levy local taxes, lords of manors furnished military and judicial services to the king, and the lower classes provided labor on road and other public works. As a check on the local notables, Charlemagne sent out teams of missi dominici (usually a bishop and a count) to inspect the districts and report on any irregularities. Two assemblies were held each year, possible forerunners of the States-General (parliament). In the spring session noblemen had opportunity to discuss their problems, and the king could present his program or impressions of the realm. In his capital at \TAachen\t (Aix-la-Chapelle) and in other towns, Charlemagne rekindled intellectual life by gathering holy men, scholars, and literary figures like \TAlcuin\t. Works of Greek and particularly Latin were copied and analyzed in new schools founded by favored churchmen. Charlemagne's encouragement of learning had perhaps more long-range significance for French and Western civilization than his sensational military and political ventures. The Carolingian decline after Charlemagne followed the same pattern as the Merovingians' after Clovis. The same type of partition of lands, notably formalized in the Treaty of Verdun in 843 (see \TVerdun, Treaty of\t), resulted in the area roughly equivalent to medieval France being assigned to the Frankish emperor \TCharles II\t. He and his descendants held an ever-weakening grip over the kingdom against invading Vikings--who, as \TNormans\t, established the duchy of Normandy--and predatory lords. Over the shrunken French state the Capetian dynasty would achieve kingship by 987, and within that state the feudal system would flower. CAPETIAN KINGDOM (987-1328) For nearly 1,000 years, the house of Capet furnished France with kings, first as direct-line \TCapetians\t and later through the branch families of Valois and Bourbon. The line was literally cut by the guillotining of Louis XVI in 1792, although his brothers Louis XVIII and Charles X and his distant cousin Louis-Philippe served as monarchs after Napoleon I. Between Hugh Capet's coronation in 987 and the succession of the Valois in 1328 or the inception of the Hundred Years' War in 1338, the feudal system became crystallized along with the concept of French kingships. Cities and towns revived, peopled by bourgeois citizens engaged in a resurgent trade of agricultural and craft products. A cathedral-building boom satisfied the religious spirit and supplied jobs. The Crusades absorbed the energies of kings, counts, clergy, and commoners. And the Norman conquest of England established the centuries-long connection and rivalry with that island kingdom. \Tfeudalism\t, rooted in land grants of Charlemagne and the subsequent breakdown of his empire, became almost inevitable when weak kings failed to check the Viking incursions of the 9th and 10th centuries. Surely but haphazardly, feudalism developed as a contractual arrangement between lord and king, and \Tmanorialism\t came to determine the relationship between lord and peasant. As warriors for the king, the lords were bound to render military service at their own cost. In return, not only did they receive hereditary title to tracts as large as provinces but also the right to tax, oversee, and judge their inhabitants. Toward their subjects, the lords owed protection and the preservation of order; from them, they were due loyalty, rents, fees, and obligations of a military and economic nature. The relative strength of lords and kings often depended not upon title but upon personal traits and capabilities, extent of landholdings, resources available, alliances possible, and church support. The local lords' power was demonstrated in the election of \THugh Capet\t to the kingship in 987. His predecessors were mere counts of Anjou and Blois, and his supporters included the duke of Normandy. As kings, the Capetians were in actual possession of only their family lands of central France--the Ile de France--situated around Paris and Orleans. It was long a question how much authority would be allowed the kings of France in the lands of the dukes or counts of \TNormandy\t, \TAquitaine\t, \TBurgundy\t, and \TFlanders\t. An outstanding example was the case of the dukes of Normandy. Duke William's conquest of England in 1066 and his ascent to the English throne, as \TWilliam I\t, obviously made the subsequent dukes of Normandy/kings of England awesome competitors to their feudal overlords, the kings of France. The English kings extended their French holdings even further when \TEleanor of Aquitaine\t, after the annulment of her marriage to the pious Capetian \TLouis VII\t, married (1152) the future \THenry II\t of England. To tip the precarious balance in their favor, shrewd Capetian kings frequently encouraged and linked up with the new middle class, whose urban and commercial interests often clashed with the warrior and rural concerns of the feudal lords. Royal charters granted special privileges and wider markets to the bourgeoisie, and the bourgeois could pay. Churchmen too could be wooed to the king's side with his patronage for cathedrals, schools, and crusades. With glaring exceptions and tragic consequences, French participation in the \TCrusades\t stimulated a spirit of national rather than local pride, tied the church more closely to the monarchy, and created contacts with Italy and the Middle East for French merchants and scholars. Of unquestionable vitality in this medieval era was the cultural expression. In monasteries and universities, churchmen and laymen studied, discussed, and debated theological tracts, Greek and Latin works, and a spate of literature beginning to appear in the vernacular French language. CONSOLIDATION OF ROYAL POWER (1328-1715) Such Capetians as Hugh Capet, \TPhilip II\t, \TLouis IX\t, and \TPhilip IV\t succeeded in upholding and enlarging the royal prerogative beyond their family lands; other Capetians failed. The \TValois\t branch (1328-1589), after a dreary start and before a whimpering end, drove the English out of France, consolidated the kingdom, asserted royal authority, launched expeditions into Italy, and ushered in a cultural Renaissance. What the Valois left undone was completed by the \LBourbon\ls. From the Hundred Years' War to the Wars of Religion The expulsion of the English involved the French in the \THundred Years' War\t (1338-1453), a conflict of intermittent intensity. Mixed into the origins of the war were the quest for commercial and political prizes in Flanders and the duel between the English and French kings for Normandy, Aquitaine, and other provinces. One highlight of the war was the contribution of Saint \TJoan of Arc\t. Inspired by visions instructing her to present herself to the Dauphin (later \TCharles VII\t) and free Orleans from the English, she in turn inspired the Dauphin, his advisors, and the public. Although she was burned at the stake in 1431, her mission was accomplished within a generation. Relieved of the English presence, the French monarchs, notably \TLouis XI\t (r. 1461-83), finished the task of consolidating the kingdom. They then began to seek extension of their power beyond the boundaries of France. \TCharles VIII\t invaded Italy in 1494, launching the \TItalian Wars\t and a long dynastic rivalry with the Habsburgs of Austria and Spain. Sixteenth-century France was blessed by two strong kings, \TFrancis I\t and \THenry II\t, and cursed by three weak ones, the sons of Henry II by \TCatherine de Medicis\t. French prosperity and solidarity were spoiled not only by the weak monarchs but by the Wars of Religion (see \TReligion, Wars of\t) after 1560. Catholics battled Calvinist \THuguenots\t, each faction aspiring to control the monarchy. Catherine de Medicis steered a Machiavellian course to maintain her children's status. However, she was barely outlived by her last son, \THenry III\t, who was assassinated in 1589. This paved the way for the first Bourbon, \THenry IV\t, leader of the Huguenots, to fight and compromise his road to the throne by 1598. He satisfied Huguenots by the tolerant Edict of Nantes in 1598 (see \TNantes, Edict of\t) and mollified Catholics by his own conversion so as to enter the Paris he considered "worth a Mass." Bourbon Reconstruction By tact, persuasion, and force, Henry IV reduced religious tensions, stimulated commerce and manufacturing, and curbed the nobility. The last process was vigorously pursued by cardinals \TRichelieu\t and \TMazarin\t, the de facto rulers of France under Henry's weak son \TLouis XIII\t. It was \TLouis XIV\t, however, who truly tamed the aristocracy, at least until the end (1715) of his own absolutist reign. Already deprived by Richelieu of their fortresses in the countryside, prohibited from dueling, and subjected to royal edicts and administrators, the nobles were turned by Louis into powerless courtiers, forced to attend him in the new Palace of Versailles (see \TVersailles, Palace of\t). The grandeur of Versailles, imitated by so many European monarchs, was not merely architectural and social in value. It was also a focal point from which emanated favors and patronage for artists, writers, and scientists. In this period the bourgeoisie was the beneficiary of mercantilist policies (see \Tmercantilism\t) developed most notably by Jean Baptiste \TColbert\t. The interests of the royal treasury often coincided with subsidies for manufacturing and for expanded internal, colonial, and foreign trade. The middle class and the peasantry paid, however, by a heavy tax burden to finance Louis XIV's wars and other enterprises. French influence abroad rose as the secular-minded Cardinal Richelieu engaged Catholic Frenchmen as allies with Protestant princes against the Holy Roman emperors, the German Catholic princes, and Spain in the \TThirty Years' War\t, after which France gained Alsace by the Peace of Westphalia (1648). Louis XIV further expanded French territory in Europe and overseas and placed his grandson on the Spanish throne as \TPhilip V\t--all through wars, diplomacy, and marriage. THE OLD REGIME AND THE ENLIGHTENMENT (1715-89) After Louis XIV's death, the kingdom remained unified, powerful, and prosperous, despite some distressing signs. As Europe's most populous, single unified state, endowed with the greatest military and economic resources, France did not cease to be a great power. It even extended its boundaries by the acquisition (1766) of Lorraine. Colonially, however, the story was different. The \TFrench colonial empire\t that had come into being in the 17th century was largely lost to Britain as a result of the \TSeven Years' War\t (1756-63). Revival of the Nobility \TLouis XV\t and \TLouis XVI\t retained, in principle, divine right and absolute sovereignty--legislative, executive, judicial, administrative, and military. In practice, however, these kings failed to exercise that power, whether through lack of interest, lack of capacity, or lack of ruthlessness. Consequently the nobility of old feudal blood (nobility of the sword) and of the purchased variety (nobility of the robe) moved to displace the bourgeoisie and fill the functions of state at Versailles, in the provinces, army, and church. The first two estates--clergy and nobility--aimed to dominate France and keep their many privileges. This "reinfeudation" displeased the third estate--the rest of the population. Although increasingly prominent in the economic advances of the period, the bourgeoisie found itself excluded from political posts and unfairly shouldering the tax burden along with the lower classes. Enlightenment The most illustrious aspect of the Old Regime was the work and influence of its philosophers of the \TEnlightenment\t. From the essays, tracts, encyclopedias, novels, plays, and letters of such intellectual giants as Denis \TDiderot\t, \TMontesquieu\t, \TVoltaire\t, Caron de \TBeaumarchais\t, and Jean Jacques \TRousseau\t, there flowed a penetrating critique of man and society. Often corrosive of the principles and practices of the Old Regime, the philosophers advocated natural instead of divine law, reason against superstition, anticlericalism versus church domination, and justice as opposed to privilege. REVOLUTIONARY AND NAPOLEONIC ERA (1789-1814) The coming of the \TFrench Revolution\t has been attributed to many causes. The challenging ideas of the philosophers subverted the Old Regime and demanded new solutions to governmental and societal problems. Material conditions--agricultural disaster and depression in commerce, finance, and manufacturing--sharpened class tensions and provoked cries for reform. Conflicting political aims separated aristocratic, bourgeois, and popular elements; and presiding over the nation in this troubled state was the inept Louis XVI. The Revolution All of these and other factors contributed to the drama unfolded in 1788 and 1789. Inflated by aid to the American Revolution, the French public debt reached crushing proportions. The king and his ministers pondered the alternative approaches to resolve the fiscal crisis. Aristocrats, fearful of losing their privileges and desirous of an even larger share in national policymaking, boldly forced the king to call the \TStates-General\t in 1789. In disuse since 1614, the States-General was expected to sit and vote by estate, by order. However, the deputies of the third estate were incensed at the prospect of being outvoted by the first two estates. Their forcing of the king to accept voting by head resulted in the transformation of the States-General into a National Assembly by June 1789. Workers and peasants soon entered the fray by storming the hated \TBastille\t in Paris on July 14, 1789, and by pillaging and burning in the countryside. Between 1789 and 1792, a new France was born, characterized by a declaration of rights, the end of the feudal system, the drafting of a constitution, reform of the church, and reorganization of local government. On paper, the Old Regime was dead--hereditary privilege was terminated as was the absolutism of the king and the hold of the church. The Revolution became more radical after 1792 with the guillotining of the "treasonable" king, the outbreak of civil war at home, the \TFrench Revolutionary Wars\t abroad, and the lower classes' militancy for political and other advantages. The Reign of Terror (1793-94), a period of brutal dictatorship under the leadership of Maximilian \TRobespierre\t, was ended by the Thermidorian Reaction of July 1794. Thereafter, France was ruled by a \TDirectory\t until the victorious general Napoleon Bonaparte established the \TConsulate\t in 1799. He crowned himself emperor as \TNapoleon I\t in 1804. Napoleon I Napoleon's initial reforms incorporated much of the revolutionary decade's intentions and helped pacify France internally. Internationally, his conquests had already created an extended French empire in Europe by 1802. But after a brief respite in warfare, Napoleon renewed his expansionist drive. Setbacks in Spain and defeat in Russia in 1812 turned the tide against him. After defeat in 1814 he was forced to abdicate, and the Bourbon dynasty was restored in the person of \TLouis XVIII\t. Although Napoleon briefly seized power again in 1815, the \TNapoleonic Wars\t were concluded by his defeat in the Battle of \TWaterloo\t (June 1815). A SUCCESSION OF REGIMES (1814-70) The search for permanent political forms hypnotized the French from 1814 to 1870. The conservative \TCharles X\t, Louis XVIII's brother and successor, became increasingly despotic. He curtailed the powers of even the elite deputies in the parliament and threatened the civil rights and freedoms of the middle class. The Restoration regime was supplanted by the constitutional Orleanist monarchy of \TLouis Philippe\t in the \TJuly Revolution\t OF 1830. Initially welcomed by the business interests and professional classes, the new ruler eventually lost their favor as his government slid into corruption, subversion of parliamentary power, suppression of civil liberties, economic mismanagement, and a lackadaisical foreign policy. The February \Trevolution\t of 1848 dislodged Louis Philippe and established the Second Republic. After some months of flawed attempts at handling the economic and social crisis, the Second Republic elected Louis Napoleon (subsequently \TNapoleon III\t), nephew to Napoleon I, as president. He transformed the republic into the Second Empire in 1852 and ruled in an authoritarian fashion with efforts at mass appeal through plebiscites and later liberalization of the empire. Napoleon III's participation in the \TCrimean War\t and the Italian wars of unification brought only faint luster to France. Moreover, the emperor was no match for the Prussian chancellor Otto von \TBismarck\t's diplomatic and military maneuvers of the 1860s. The defeat of Napoleon III in the \TFranco-Prussian War\t (1870-71) led to the proclamation of the Third Republic. This plethora of regimes was produced by many elements. Political issues of restrictive suffrage and office-holding not only alienated the lower social classes from the monarchical form but aggravated the relations of the monarchs with many middle-class citizens. This was especially the case when the Bourbons and Napoleon III gave favors to aristocrats and clergy. On the other hand, the wealthy bourgeois joined church and nobility in abhorring the anticlericalism of republicans. Similarly, although the bourgeois, peasants, and workers were linked by the desire for broader suffrage, neither the peasants nor the middle class looked with relish upon republican inclinations toward costly efforts to ameliorate the industrial woes of the urban workers. Political divisions were multiplied, too, by the social tensions stemming from industrialization, socialist movements, and trade unionism. Nationalist fervor contributed to the lack of consensus for monarchy, empire, or republic. Orleanist feebleness in foreign affairs was viewed poorly by patriotic bourgeois who became attracted to the glorious aspects of the Napoleonic legend. For the Second Empire to survive, it required prestige in international affairs, which it lost when Napoleon III first bungled the endeavor of placing Archduke Maximilian (see \TMaximilian, Emperor of Mexico\t) on the Mexican throne and then was defeated by the Prussians at Sedan in 1870. Despite its poor political record, France did move ahead economically, building railroads and factories, opening mines, actively trading at home and abroad, and modernizing the city of Paris. Intellectual and cultural life too was at a peak as painters, sculptors, and writers displayed their talents in the ages of romanticism and realism. THE REPUBLICS SINCE 1870 Since 1870 the French have experienced the survival of republican forms, the traumas of two world wars and several colonial ones, modernization of the economy, transformation of societal structure and mores, and more than lingering attention to intellectual and cultural questions. Third Republic The Third Republic of 1870 required much maneuvering and luck before its organic laws were formulated by 1875. Repression of the \TCommune of Paris\t in 1871 and facing down the monarchists gave the republic respectability by 1880. The popularly elected deputies of parliament had also gained ascendancy over the executive branch of president and cabinet. Republican forces succeeded in wresting control over the educational system away from the church in the 1880s and finally separated the church from the state in 1905. The republic was shaken by scandals over presidential abuses, parliamentary bribery in the projected building of the Panama Canal, and the court-martial of the Jewish army captain Alfred Dreyfus as an alleged spy. The ultimate effect of the long-drawn-out \TDreyfus affair\t, however, was to discredit further the remnants of antirepublican aristocrats, army officers, and clergy and to solidify the republic. Industrialization proceeded rapidly, although at a slower pace than in Germany or Britain. Along with other major European powers and often in competitive rivalry with them, France engaged in a burst of imperialism, adding substantial holdings in Africa and Asia by 1914. Diplomatically, it escaped from the isolation imposed upon it until 1890 by the shrewd statesmanship of Bismarck. By 1914, French diplomats had forged a system of alliances including a defensive military pact with Russia (1894) and an Entente Cordiale with Britain (1904; see \TTriple Entente\t). Paris in the pre-1914 era--indeed until 1940--was the center for French and foreign artistic and literary figures. World Wars When \TWorld War I\t began in August 1914, the French anticipated a brief conflict in which they could recover both the territory (Alsace-Lorraine) and prestige lost in 1871. In fact, French troops marched into a long war of attrition and emerged shaken by losses and casualties on a greater scale than other belligerents. The Treaty of Versailles temporarily restored French ascendancy, but the Great Depression of the 1930s, with its consequences of domestic political-social polarization, and the challenge of Nazi Germany spelled disaster for France by 1940. At home, Socialist premier Leon \TBlum\t's Popular Front of Socialists, Communists, and Radical-Socialists in 1936-37 preserved the republic against the threat of fascist groups, such as the \TAction Francaise\t, and enacted a wide range of social and economic reforms. A foreign policy of appeasement of Adolf Hitler throughout the 1930s was adopted because of the painful memories of World War I, internal dissension, and uninspired leadership. Appeasement, however, failed to maintain international peace, and \TWorld War II\t finally began in September 1939. Guided by an antiquated military strategy, the French armies suffered blitzkrieg defeat by Hitler's panzers in May 1940. From the rubble rose the collaborationist \TVichy Government\t under Marshal Henri Philippe \TPetain\t, the Free French movement of Charles \Tde Gaulle\t, and the resistance movement within France. De Gaulle managed by 1943 to coordinate the anti-German activities of his Free French forces in London and then Algiers with the resistance groups in occupied France. Allied victory brought liberation in 1944 and had ushered in the Fourth Republic by 1946. Fourth Republic The Fourth Republic strongly resembled the Third in political form and practice. Until 1947 the Communist, Socialist, and liberal Catholic parties worked together to deal with the reconstruction of the country. In 1947, however, the Communists moved into the opposition, and the rise of the Gaullist right in the form of the Rassemblement du peuple francais placed the Socialists and center parties in the quandary of forming fragile coalitions to preserve the republic against the left and right challengers. The Fourth Republic legislated many economic and social reforms, nationalizing several large banks, insurance companies, and war-related industries; finally enfranchising French women; and expanding the previously feeble welfare benefits of French men, women, and children. Under Jean \TMonnet\t's plan, and with U.S. aid, the republic also built the substructure for a modern economy, tied in with the \TEuropean Economic Community\t. To meet the Soviet threat in the cold war, France joined (1949) the \TNorth Atlantic Treaty Organization\t (NATO) but began to develop its own nuclear arsenal. Hostility from the Communist left and the Gaullist right weakened the republic in its functioning and its ability to cope with the colonial wars in Indochina and Algeria (see \TVietnam War\t; \TAlgerian War\t). Fifth Republic On the verge of civil war over the Algerian question in 1958, the French called de Gaulle out of retirement to resolve the situation. His price was the right to draft a new constitution to be submitted to a referendum. The price was paid and the Fifth Republic was born, with the election (December 1958) of de Gaulle as president. The new republic gave more power to the executive than to the previously dominant parliament. Having liquidated the Algerian War in 1962 and introduced prosperity and stability, de Gaulle nonetheless faced a large-scale student-worker revolt in 1968. He weathered this crisis but left office the following year. The Gaullist party and its moderate partners continued to dominate politics through the 1970s under de Gaulle's successors, Georges \TPompidou\t and Valery \TGiscard d'Estaing\t. The energy crisis since 1973 contributed to high rates of inflation and unemployment. The general elections of 1981 produced a dramatic change of direction. Socialist Francois \TMitterrand\t edged the incumbent Giscard out of the presidency, and Socialists gained a solid majority in the parliament. Communists were invited to fill four presumably nonsensitive cabinet posts under Premier Pierre \TMauroy\t. Mitterrand immediately proposed measures to create new jobs, shorten working hours, and extend welfare benefits. He also took steps to nationalize several large banks and selected industries while decentralizing administrative authority by abolishing the Napoleonic prefectural system. In foreign affairs the new president reaffirmed France's commitment to NATO and took a more uncompromisingly critical stance toward the \TUSSR\t than had his predecessor. In 1982 and 1983, a deteriorating economy forced Mitterrand to curtail his social welfare programs and adopt unpopular austerity measures. When the Socialists lost their parliamentary majority in 1986, he had to appoint Gaullist leader Jacques \TChirac\t as premier. This marked the beginning of a "cohabitation" system in which the president shared power with his prime minister. Over Mitterrand's opposition, Chirac lowered taxes and pushed through a privatization plan, selling off many of the banks and industries previously nationalized by the Socialists. After Mitterrand was reelected to the presidency in 1988, his party regained enough strength in parliament for him to oust Chirac in favor of a Socialist, Michel \TRocard\t. Rocard, in turn, was replaced by another Socialist, Edith \TCresson\t, who became France's first woman prime minister in May 1991. Donald J. Harvey Bibliography: Ardagh, John, France Today (1988); Bertaud, Jean-Paul, The Army of the French Revolution, trans. by R. R. Palmer (1988); Briggs, Robin, Early Modern France (1977); Brogan, Denis W., The French Nation: From Napoleon to Petain, 1814-1940 (1958); Brogan, Olwen, Roman Gaul (1973); Cobban, Alfred B., A History of Modern France, 3 vols. (1966); Doyle, William, The Oxford History of the French Revolution (1989); Dunbabin, Jean, France in the Making: 843-1180 (1985); Fawtier, Robert, Capetian Kings of France, trans. by Lionel Butler and R. J. Adam (1960); Funck-Brentano, Frantz, ed., National History of France, 10 vols. (1923-38; repr. 1974); Guerard, Albert, France: A Modern History, rev. ed. (1969); Harvey, Donald, France since the Revolution (1968); Kennedy, Michael L., The Jacobin Clubs in the French Revolution: The First Years (1981), and The Middle Years (1988); Maurois, Andre, A History of France (1956); Mazey, Sonia, and Newman, Michael, eds., Mitterrand's France (1987); Piggott, Stuart, et al., Pre-Roman France (1970); Rude. George, The French Revolution (1989); Thomson, David, France: Empire and Republic (1968); Tilly, Charles, The Contentious French (1986; repr. 1989); Wright, Gordon, France in Modern Times, 4th ed. (1987).