22. 1700-1850- The Enlightenment and Women
The Enlightenment is well-known for the philosophical and societal changes it brought to the modern world, and women found their place in this period of rapid change. Great female leaders such as Catherine the Great and Olympe de Gouges inspired leaders of future suffrage movements and women today, and the defiance of male and societal expectations was a recurring theme during this time.
How to cite this source?
Remedial Herstory Project Editors. "22. 1700-1850 - THE ENLIGHTENMENT AND WOMEN" The Remedial Herstory Project. November 1, 2025. www.remedialherstory.com.
In the social upheaval of the Enlightenment, monarchs were overthrown in favor of democracies, and men previously bound to live lives similar to their fathers now found opportunities in government and commerce. While these changes catapulted the world forward into the modern era, it would be more than a century before the same concept of human agency would be extended to women. In kingdoms and empires where female monarchs had been relatively routine, women were barred from the politics of the democracies that replaced them.
Join the Club
Join our email list and help us make herstory!
The Enlightenment
The Enlightenment occurred in Europe in the 17th and the 18th centuries, as a philosophical shift in the views of education, personal liberty, rational and scientific thinking over religious fanaticism, and a deeper division between church and state. This school of thought permeated much of European culture - including their colonies - leading to major conflicts like the American and French Revolutions as people began to question the relationship between the people and their governments. Not only did monarchs start to lose their power, but so too did the church, feeding on the previous Protestant Reformation.
Across the Western world, the rise in state-sponsored schools was motivated by the Protestant belief that it was the duty of the family, church, and state to educate every child - male and female - to gain spiritual understanding. Nevertheless, male attitudes toward women’s intellectual promise remained steadfast. Even profound thinkers of the time could not fathom the need for women’s education.
For example, Immanuel Kant felt women were like incomplete men, stating, “[M]an should become more perfect as a man, and the woman as a wife.” To belittle women further, he added, “[Women] need to know nothing more of the cosmos than is necessary to make the appearance of the heavens on a beautiful evening a stimulating sight to them. [...] Even if a woman excels in arduous learning and painstaking thinking, they will exterminate the merits of her sex.” Another intellectual, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, wrote,
[A woman’s] dignity requires that she should give herself entirely as she is [to her husband] and [...] utterly lose herself in him. The least consequence is that she should renounce to him all her property and her rights. Henceforth, she has life and activity only under his eyes and in his business. She has ceased to live the life of an individual; her life has become a part of the life of her lover [...] Woman [...] cannot and shall not go beyond the limits of her feeling.
The ideas of these men were rooted in ancient thinking, but the world was moving fast toward politics of individualism, and women were bound to have a place in Europe’s movement or social, economic, and political change.
Painting titled, “Weimar's Courtyard of the Muses” where German Duchess Anna Amalia is hosting an Enlightenment Era artistic gathering
Salons and Coffeehouses
Particularly for women of means, early education ignited a desire for more, and many women found their place in intellectualism. In France, laws barred the gathering of intellectuals and political criticism, and women of the aristocracy became increasingly involved in welcoming thinkers in “salons.” Modeled after the coffeehouses of the Ottoman Empire where coffee attracted patrons who then engaged in conversations about religion, family, art, and life, Madame Rambouillet’s salon, known as “la Chambre Bleue,” opened in 1618 as an escape from the shallow and rigid court life. There, great minds sang, recited poetry, and exchanged ideas. Her model was quickly copied by other hostesses around Paris.
The salons established a haven for French intellectuals to discuss ideas freely and women had a front seat for the first time. The women who managed salons could share their ideas with their patrons. They were educated, literate, versed in mediation, and wealthy. They selected their patrons with care, sometimes requiring a letter of recommendation for entrance. These salonnieres managed conversations with ease. For example, noted salonnieres like Madame de Tencin and Mademoiselle Lespinasse had more liberal approaches to their guests diving into divisive topics like politics. Whereas Madame Geoffrin and Madame de Rambouillet strictly managed the topics of conversation. If conversation waned or became uncomfortably dangerous, Geoffrin would put an end to the discussion with her famous simple phrase “Voilà qui est bien,” or “That’s enough.”
Intellectuals from around Europe came to participate in these kinds of discussions, and even the French king’s official mistress was a participant. Jeanne Antionnette Poisson, better known as Madame Pompadour, used her position and wealth to host thinkers like Voltaire and Diderot in the mid-18th century. She also lobbied for the publication of France's first encyclopedia as a means to disseminate knowledge to anyone who could read. Pompadour’s memory has perhaps been mistreated in history as she is most remembered for using sex to influence the king, but in the sheltered court at Versailles, everyone was involved in such political intrigue. The king relied on her as an advisor, sometimes de facto prime minister, and she used that favor to become a patron of the arts and intellectuals.
Not all intellectuals enjoyed the salons or women’s roles within them. Jean-Jacques Rousseau felt that women’s presence in the salons degraded serious conversation among men. He also resented women micromanaging the conversation. He said,
they talk about everything so everyone will have something to say; they do not explore questions deeply, for fear of becoming tedious, they propose them as if in passing, deal with them rapidly, precision leads to elegance; each states his opinion and supports it in few words; no one vehemently attacks someone else’s, no one tenaciously defends his own; they discuss for enlightenment, stop before the dispute begins; everyone is instructed, everyone is entertained, all go away contented.
He seems to be thinking fondly of intellectual conversations that deteriorated into insults, personal attacks, and stubbornly entrenched opinions, over the seeming polite and open-minded discussions found in salons where women were present.
Across the Channel, the coffeehouses of the Islamic world could also be found in Oxford, England, as early as 1652. Much like the salons of France, women frequently attended coffeehouses to take part in “sober” discourse, though coffee house debates could become rowdy. Almost half the coffeehouses were owned by women, and women managed, labored and served in coffeehouses across the United Kingdom.
Thinkers came to the coffeehouses to discuss ideas, science, and chatter. Each coffeehouse had a particular clientele, defined by scholarly interests, politics, or occupation. Famous male intellectuals wrote accounts describing conversing with women at the coffeehouse, as they created a sense of meritocracy and leveled the playing field to allow for the sharing of ideas.
Women were not only patrons within these coffeehouses and salons, they also thought and wrote extensively on Enlightenment ideas. Their works and theories were widely read by their male peers and became staples of Enlightenment thinking, undoubtedly influencing others even if they are not as widely remembered as the works of those like John Locke, Thomas Paine, and Montesquieu.
Salon (n.), social gatherings during the Enlightenment that provided a space for the exchange of ideas, including political theory, philosophy, and literature.
Portrait of Madame Pompadour
Painting titled, “In the Salon of Madame Geoffrin in 1755”
Clientele (n.), the customers of a shop, bar, or place of entertainment.
Maria Theresa
Enlightenment thinking and ideas was often met with some resistance by those in power because they believed the reshaped view of the relationship between the people and the government/church was dangerous or limiting. Maria Theresa, the Habsburg queen - often considered the grandmother of Europe because so many of her children were married to European royalty - was one such monarch who resisted the new norms of the Enlightenment, but still implemented some of their ideas that she found valuable.
She ruled in her own right as Empress of the Austro-Hungarian Empire - a position she inherited - for much of the 18th century. Initially, her legitimacy was not only questioned, but she was also taking the throne at a time of great upheaval. Her father, Charles VI’s reign had been rife with war and tenuous alliances, many of which shattered upon his death. She was immediately thrown into the War of Austrian Succession, which lasted for eight years. She lost some territories, but was largely able to rally her people, use her political acumen, and maintain her throne.
After the war, Maria Theresa sought to stabilize her empire and bring it into a period of growth. She was a vocal opponent of Enlightenment thinking - both as a monarch but also a devout Catholic - but she nevertheless embraced many Enlightenment ideas on behalf of the people. She expanded access to education, even threatening the imprisonment of those who opposed. Her goal was, “to make both sexes good Christians, and industrious, intelligent, and obedient subjects in the different orders of society.” She even pressed for this after much of her aristocracy expressed fear that expanded education could result in the further rise of Enlightenment thinking. She also improved meritocracy in government positions, and initiated a number of social reforms to help the poor.
Hapsburg (n.), a royal German family that ruled over a large empire in Europe from the 15th to the 20th century.
Portrait of Maria Theresa
Catherine the Great
At the same time, in Russia, another monarch dodged political revolution by adopting Enlightenment ideas. Following the westernization reforms of Peter the Great, Catherine the Great further shifted the Russian cultural and intellectual world throughout the second half of the 18th century.
Catherine was born in 1729, as Sophia Augusta Frederica, the well-educated eldest daughter of an impoverished Prussian prince. She was sought by the Russian Empress Elizabeth Petranova as a wife for Elizabeth’s nephew, Peter III, a descendant of Peter the Great, as a means of strengthening the relationship between Russia and Prussia amid their shared struggles with neighboring Austria.
Sophie and Peter were married in 1745, at which time she converted to the Russian Orthodox Church and took on the regal name of Catherine, Peter’s grandmother. The two were married for eight years in what was a rocky and childless marriage. They both had extra-marital affairs at court, she with Sergei Saltykov, a Russian military officer whom even the Empress Elizabeth preferred over her own nephew. When Catherine became pregnant in 1754, this led to wild scandal that perhaps Peter was either sterile or incapable of consummating their marriage, and that Saltykov was her child’s true father. Her son Paul was deemed a legitimate heir, but there was no question that her subsequent three children were fathered by other men as she carried on with other relationships. Historians and contemporaries loved to gossip about Catherine’s love life, which included a lot of lovers whom she was incredibly loyal to throughout and after their love affairs. She bestowed upon her lovers indentured servants, land, and titles. When Catherine died, her unconventional and apparently “lustful life” was an open secret, but had she been male, these love affairs probably would have hardly been mentioned in chronicles.
When Elizabeth died in 1762, Peter's inability to lead was quickly evident. Catherine plotted a bloodless coup to arrest and overthrow her own husband. In custody for only eight days, having ruled for less than six months, Peter died, possibly at the hands of Catherine’s new lover, though there is no evidence that she knew of the plans for his murder. Catherine’s reign continued until her death in 1796, and was marked by vast territorial expansion and governmental reforms. While not all of her reforms were accepted, and her record is not without its authoritarian flaws, she did attempt to strive toward a place of great social equality, proposing that, “The Equality of the Citizens consists in this; that they should all be subject to the same Laws. This Equality requires Institutions so well adapted, as to prevent the Rich from oppressing those who are not so wealthy as themselves.”
Catherine considered herself to be one of Europe’s most enlightened rulers, and historians tend to agree. She wrote numerous books, pamphlets, and educational materials aimed at improving Russia’s education system. She set to modernizing education as a means of putting Russia on an even playing field with the rest of Europe through a series of commissions and the establishing of dozens of state schools, though she faced continued resistance from traditionalists and limited funding to make this effort take root. Nonetheless, these efforts of modernization would become a part of her lasting legacy. Further, she was also one of those rare elite women who used their position to help other women, establishing the first higher education institution for women in Russia.
She was also a champion of the arts, maintaining a lifelong correspondence with Voltaire and other prominent minds of the era. French painter Elisabeth Vigee Le Brun, as a guest of Catherine’s, recalled,
The sight of this famous woman so impressed me that I found it impossible to think of anything: I could only stare at her. [...] The double doors opened and the Empress appeared. I have said that she was quite small, and yet on the days when she made her public appearances, with her head held high, her eagle-like stare and a countenance accustomed to command, all this gave her such an air of majesty that to me she might have been Queen of the World.
Portrait of Catherine and Peter
Catherine II on the balcony of the Winter Palace, greeted by the guards and people on the day of the coup on June 28, 1762
Revolutions
While these leaders showed a willingness to embrace some aspects of the Enlightenment, some monarchs refused, and they paid dearly for it. The American Revolution, waged from 1775-1783, was the first political revolution as a result of Enlightenment thought. The American colonists demanded a change in the relationship between their colonies and their mother country, and were met with force as Britain attempted in vain to maintain their grip. Women were foundational in rallying support for the war, played critical roles in the country’s ability to wage the war, and in imagining and creating the government that would replace the English rule they found increasingly taxing.
Across the ocean, inspired by the American Revolution, French revolutionaries saw an opportunity to overthrow the corrupt King Louis XVI and his unscrupulous wife, Marie Antoinette (the daughter of Maria Theresa). In 1780s, France was divided into three estates: the first was the nobility who represented about 1% of the population, the second was the church which again represented 1% of the population, and the other 98% of the population was the commoners, most of whom lived in abject poverty. While the common people suffered, Louis and Marie Antoinette lived at the palace of Versailles, a hugely expensive and elaborate estate built by previous kings. Antoinette gained a particularly negative reputation as she hosted elaborate parties and bought gowns to the envy of the world although the people were starving for basic necessities like bread.
For years, the commoners tried to negotiate. One of their central demands was for greater representation in the legislature, and when the nobility refused, they broke off forming their own legislature. In May 1789, the commoners declared themselves a National Assembly, which operated outside the monarchy’s supervision. In response, King Louis XVI shut down the spaces where they were meeting, so the men gathered in an indoor tennis court and pledged their unity until France had a new constitution that favored all, not just the wealthy.
Women were excluded from these events. They routinely asked for a seat at the table - just as the people had been asking the sitting government for - and were routinely denied. Yet, this doesn’t mean that women accepted this refusal. While they may not have been granted an invitation, like their American sisters before them, they showed up to the party anyway.
The rebellion in France officially began on July 14, 1789, when a Paris mob stormed the Bastille prison in search of arms and ammunition. At the time, over 30,000 pounds of gunpowder was stored there, and further, the Bastille was viewed as a symbol of the monarchy's tyranny. Women were not just in the crowd when the Bastille was stormed, they were at the front. A woman, dressed like an Amazon, even led the attack.
She was a 26-year-old Belgian named Theroigne de Mericourt. She had only recently moved to Paris to escape a painful past as a prostitute, but she had dressed in men’s clothes and embraced the revolutionary spirit of France. Royalists called her the “patriots’ whore“ and the hideous “war chief“ of the revolution. Her background as a prostitute didn’t help when they accused her of having sex with all 576 members of the National Assembly. Yet, such derogatory comments did not stop the revolution from rolling forward, or stop Mericourt from leading.
Estate (n.), a class or order regarded as forming part of the political body.
Portrait of Marie Antoinette
Theroigne de Mericourt
Women’s March on Versailles
Three months later, Theroigne again led the charge in the Women’s March on Versailles. It was not too difficult to find women to march with her, because women were suffering. As caregivers, they often fed their families before they fed themselves. They were hungrier and angrier as they watched their own children deteriorate because they lacked bread, while women in the aristocracy thrived in elegant gowns and at extravagant dinner parties.
On October 5, 1789, a young woman marched through the streets of Paris beating a drum. She was soon joined by about seven thousand of her fellow countrywomen, some wielding makeshift weapons. They seized a church and began ringing the bells to wake their countrymen, all the while chanting, “When will we have bread?” A group of fishwives, who were perhaps the rowdiest of the marchers and famously vulgar, began shouting, “The old order? We don’t give a f*** for your order!” Their numbers grew into the thousands.
The mob officials steered their anger toward those in charge, King Louis and Marie Antoinette. The mob marched for six hours to the Palace of Versailles, dragging along several cannon and handheld weapons. Once there, women shouted proclamations of outrage and asserted that they had come to overthrow those who were not serving the will of the people. Women began chanting anti-clerical slogans, and one woman slapped a priest who offered his hand in greeting, stating, "I am not made to kiss the paw of a dog.”
It took a while to calm the crowd and eventually they were allowed to elect a delegation of six women to see the king. One of the selected, Pierrette Chabry, was only 17, and fainted when she saw him. In response to the women’s delegation, Louis promised them that food would be sent to Paris to feed the hungry, but few believed this would occur, and more felt that this was not enough.
Thus, early the next morning, an armed group of people - men and women - broke into the royal apartments, famously screaming that they intended to "tear out [the Queen Marie Antoinette’s] heart [...] cut off her head, fricassee her liver.” Two guards were murdered in the process, and Marie Antoinette ran barefoot from her room shouting for someone to save her children. The intruders were stopped by National Guardsmen who whisked the queen and her children away. As the crowd grew to 60,000 or more, the royal family had no choice but to go to Paris. The king emerged on a central balcony with the respected Marquis de Lafayette (a central figure of both the American and French Revolutions) and announced, "My friends, I shall go to Paris with my wife and my children [...] it is to the love of my good and faithful subjects that I entrust all that is most precious to me!"
While the crowd’s tempers toward the king appeared to cool, they continued to call for the queen to make an appearance. She, too, emerged on the balcony with Lafayette and her children while the crowd hurled insults at her and even called on them to send her children back inside while raising their weapons in her direction - a clear threat. She stood still, her arms crossed, as if unphased. As the crowd’s threats died down, they appeared to make an about-face and cheer for her as she went back into the palace to prepare for her family’s departure.
A few hours later, the royal family departed for Paris, and the tens-of-thousands of protestors marched along with them. What started as a demand by women to feed their families, had forever shattered the invincible nature of the French monarchy. As the crowd followed the royal family and wagons full of flour and bread to Paris, women celebrated their victory, singing that they were bringing "the baker, the baker's wife, and the baker's lad to Paris!"
Extravagant (adj.), lacking restraint in spending money or using resources.
The Women’s March on Versailles
The Women’s March on Versailles
Lafayette and Marie Antoinette on the balcony amid raid of Versailles
Continued Hurdles to Political Involvement
Despite their willingness and commitment to the revolution, by 1790, women remained excluded from the political clubs that formed to discuss political ideas and envision a post-revolution world. Only rare examples like the Fraternal Society of Patriots of Both Sexes allowed women to take active roles, hold offices, and mix with male intellectuals. Women also founded their own political clubs such as the Patriotic and Charitable Society of the Women Friends of Truth, the Society of Revolutionary Republican Women, and the Republican Revolutionary Women Citizens Club. These clubs provided a safe haven where women could challenge not only the monarchy, but the patriarchy, which these women grew to see as intertwined. Many women saw the fall of the male monarch as the fall of the patriarchy and took up the revolutionary spirit with fervor.
For example, Pauline Leon hoped women could become equal in every aspect of society, including involvement in the armed forces. She advocated for an all-female national guard to defend Paris from possible invasion by Austria or Prussia. Her initiative was struck down repeatedly by the men within her own movement.
One has to remember the ironic slogan of the male French revolutionaries: “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” or brotherhood. In the case of the French Revolution, society was not inclusive. Despite women playing a central role in the revolution itself, the men of the revolutionary era maintained a negative view of women. The Marquis de Sade, for example, wrote, “Our so-called chivalry, derives from the fear of witches that once plagued our endurant ancestors. Their terror was transmuted [...] into respect but [...] such respect is fundamentally unnatural since nature nowhere gives a single instance of it. The natural inferiority of women to men is universally evident, and nothing intrinsic to the female sex naturally inspires respect.”
Historian Rosalind Miles asked, “Whose revolution was it anyway?” Her answer? “So what if the women of France had marched with them and even ahead of them, had fought and died with them from the start? The revolution was men’s business, and always would be.” Despite all of the political clubs, freethinking, and enlightened minds, the male vision of equality stopped short of sexual equality. Instead, real women were passed over for the “ideal” woman.
Intertwine (v.), connect or link closely; twist together.
Women's Patriotic Club
Transmute (v.), change in form, nature, or substance.
Intrinsic (adj.), belonging naturally; essential.
Olympe de Gouges and Marie Antoinette
While they faced numerous hurdles surrounding involvement in the revolution, French women remained central voices in Enlightenment thinking. Playwright and political activist Olympe de Gouges emulated the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen written by the new assembly but added, “and woman” to the title. She advocated the emancipation of women and freedom for the enslaved people throughout the French Empire. By copying the language used by men, she pointed out the hypocrisy of not extending these same privileges and rights to government and property to women.
De Gouges lived an unconventional life. At 17, she was forced into marriage with an older man she despised. She gave birth to a son named Pierre, and shortly after, her husband died. A year later, she fell in love with a rich man, whose family wouldn’t let her marry him; so, she and her son moved into an apartment near him in Paris, where he paid for her lodgings and provided for her welfare for the rest of her life. Living an independent life for a woman in her time, De Gouges was free to pursue her passions. She joined a salon where she met and shared ideas with “the father of economics“ Adam Smith and American politician Thomas Jefferson.
De Gouges was impressive. With little formal education, she pointedly saw that female inferiority was not necessarily inherent, but ordained by rules promulgated by men. It was the systems of government and society that degraded women’s lives. She noticed that everyday power and decision making were in the hands of men and men alone, so her writings were a direct attack on the principles of male supremacy.
In 1791, she wrote,
Women, wake up [...] recognize your rights! Oh women, women, when will you cease to be blind? What advantages have you gathered in the revolution? A scorn more marked as a stain more conspicuous [...] Whatever the barrier set up against you, it is in your power to overcome them; you only have to want it!
She dedicated the piece to Marie Antoinette, hoping to bring these hypocrisies to the queen's attention and gain support from the most famous woman in the empire. The dedication would prove to be her undoing, as tying peace to the monarchy led many male radicals to accuse her of having monarchist sympathies. She was far from a monarchist. She merely took what the men were saying and extended it to the other 50% of the population. She wanted democracy, and she wanted it for everybody.
This was not the only time she would be accused of being on the “wrong side” of the revolution. She was among a number of writers who pushed for reform, but also objected to the increased violence of the revolution. She objected to the execution of the king, for example, citing that while he was guilty of crimes against the people, he deserved exile over execution. In June 1793, she famously wrote of the increasing violence,
It is time to put a stop to this cruel war that has only swallowed up your treasure and harvested the most brilliant of your young. Blood, alas, has flowed far too freely! [...] like warring brothers [the French] rush to their downfall and, if I do not halt them, they will soon imitate the Thebans, ending up by slitting each others throats to the last man standing.
As tensions in Paris mounted, De Gouges was arrested in July 1793. In October, while De Gouges sat in jail awaiting trial, Marie Antoinnette was dragged to the scaffold in a public spectacle and executed by the guillotine - just as her husband had been nine months earlier - as the French revolutionaries sought to show the public that the power was truly back in the people’s hand.
After the women’s march years prior, the public anger toward the royals never truly abated, and they (and many of their fellow nobles) remained the ultimate culprits of France’s ills. The execution of Louis XVI in January 1793 would seem the culmination of that public anger, but they continued to seek out all aristocratic threats to the public good. This included the queen, despite the fact that,
After the death of her husband, plunged into deep mourning; she refused to eat or do any exercise. There is no knowledge of her proclaiming her son as Louis XVII; however, the comte de Provence, in exile, recognised his nephew as the new king of France and took the title of Regent. Marie-Antoinette's health rapidly deteriorated in the following months. By this time she suffered from tuberculosis and possibly uterine cancer, which caused her to hemorrhage frequently.
Some called for her exile, others her execution, and nearly all for the separation of her and her son to ensure he could not be polluted by her noble ways. Her son was removed from her care in July and was even coached to be a witness against her in her subsequent trial.
While a trial - taking place in October 1793 - was ultimately chosen as the proper path to determine her fate, the University of Melbourne points out the inconsistencies in the notion that the trials of the top nobles were “fair.” Specifically, they question the treatment of women in this legal process, noting that,
Unlike the king, who had been given time to prepare a defence, the queen's trial was far more of a sham, considering the time she was given (less than one day). Among the things she was accused of (most, if not all, of the accusations were untrue and probably lifted from rumours begun by libelles) were orchestrating orgies in Versailles, sending millions of livres of treasury money to Austria, plotting to kill the Duke of Orléans, incest with her son, declaring her son to be the new king of France, and orchestrating the massacre of the Swiss Guards in 1792.
While she denied all the charges against her, she reacted emotionally to a charge as obscene as incest, so much so that “the women present in the courtroom the market women who had stormed the palace for her entrails in 1789 even began to support her.”
However, the trial had begun with the decision already made, and she was found guilty and sentenced on only the second day of trial. The woman who had infamously proclaimed “let them eat cake” when asked how her people should survive when they couldn’t afford bread was seemingly viewed as a necessary sacrifice to the rebel cause. On October 16th, just weeks before her 38th birthday, she was beheaded before a crowd and buried in an unmarked grave. Years later, both her and King Louis’ bodies were moved and given proper burial rights.
Emulate (v.), imitate.
Emancipation (n.), being set free from legal, social, or political restrictions; liberation.
Welfare (n.), the health, happiness, and fortunes of a person or group.
Inherent (adj.), existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute.
Portrait of Olympe de Gouges
Marie Antoinette’s public execution
Mary Wollstonecraft
Mary Wollstonecraft, an Enlightenment thinker and writer, was also in Paris at the time of the revolution. While she had been raised in England, Wollstonecraft had been inspired by the French revolutionary ideals and had long been corresponding with other Enlightenment thinkers in Europe and made her way to Paris only a month before King Louis was executed. She was soon a well-known and respected writer that had been inspired by De Gouges and horrified when De Gouges was executed. Like De Gouges, she had lived an unconventional life, and thus feared facing a similar fate.
Her father had been an abuser, and she spent her childhood protecting her mother and younger sisters, but in her thirties, she fell madly in love with a 51-year-old Swiss artist who was, unfortunately, married. He returned with his wife, so she moved to Paris where she again fell in love, this time with an American schemer and philanderer, Gilbert Imlay. While in Paris, with the social protection of Imlay and friends, she began an exploration of her own ideas concerning the rights of women in society.
Her book, The Vindication of the Rights of Woman, eventually became one of the most well-known pieces of feminist literature in world history. Her writing was in direct response to a drafted plan for a robust public education system produced by male revolutionaries in France. The system only barely included women, who as they saw it, only needed a “domestic education” for service in the paternal home. In response to the plan, Wollstonecraft wrote her now-famous treatise on women’s rights. She was furious and tired of girls being raised solely for domestic service and the whims of men. She believed, like De Gouges, that women deserved to be involved in every aspect of society but could not if they did not receive an education. She noted that women were intentionally and systematically held back by men and then ridiculed by men for then having limitations.
In Paris, she had a daughter with Imlay, but only months after her birth, he left to go to England. Following him there in 1795, Wollstonecraft found he had taken up with another woman. In despair, she attempted to commit suicide twice, once throwing herself into the Thames River. But soon after, she met writer and philosopher William Goodwin who gave her the love and partnership she had long desired. Together they had a daughter in 1797, but just days after, Wollstonecraft died from a ruptured placenta. After her death, her lover published her biography, unintentionally exposing some of the more scandalous aspects of her life. Those who had previously supported her ideas now rejected her fully. Yet, her defiance of feminine norms in her biography may be interpreted as feminist literature in its own right.
Portrait of Mary Wollstonecraft
Treatise (n.), a written work dealing formally and systematically with a subject.
Napoleon
Despite its earlier messaging, the French Revolution failed to establish a lasting democracy. Soon after the Reign of Terror, Napoleon rose to power and imposed himself as an emperor. His rule involved the attempted conquest of most of Europe, but it was short-lived. He was eventually exiled in 1814, but his lasting legacy on the world was far reaching.
While still in power, Napoleon introduced “The Code of Napoleon,'' in 1804, which established a series of new civil laws in France. This included a list of the husband’s rights as the head of household and officially extended men’s power over women. It itemized the financial, political, and social ways women had to defer to their husbands' express will. Freedoms women had held under the monarchy disappeared. Property was exclusively in the hands of a woman’s husband or father, fathers made the formal decisions relating to the children, and divorces, when granted, were typically in the man’s favor. The Napoleonic Code spread across Europe and became the model in the colonies and territories held by European countries.
Conclusion
Despite the hurdles that they faced, and the ignoble ends that some met, these women were immortalized in artwork and their ideas were able to be read around the world. American suffragists led by Elizabeth Cady Stanton adopted the models of De Gouges and Wollstonecraft in crafting their own document, “The Declaration of Sentiments.” Their template was even copied from the Declaration of Independence in a nod to De Gouges.
By 1900, almost every country in the Americas and Oceania had been liberated from their European colonizers using the justification of Enlightenment thinking and representation, just as the Americans had done in 1775. Yet, not one of these countries ensured female suffrage, and many of these countries have yet to see a female head of state or government. Their messages about equality and the greater rights of man over those in power, seemed to extend only to men.
To their credit, Western nations were some of the first to extend the right to vote to women. One of the biggest reasons was the Enlightenment’s emphasis on critical thinking. A number of Asian countries, in the same time period, saw a resurgence of Confucian thinking, putting emphasis on teaching ancient texts rather than new ideas. Similarly, in Muslim countries, emphasis on Quranic studies limited the spawning of new ideas, as well as women’s opportunities.
If true revolution was to be achieved, when would male views of women change substantially? Could they be changed? Would women remain in a constant cycle of revolutions that relied on female participation, yet ultimately denied them liberty?