Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did pre-revolutionary France have lower inequality than modern USA?
Executive summary
Available reporting and historical estimates in the provided sources indicate late‑18th‑century France was at least as unequal — and by some measures substantially more unequal — than the modern United States: one estimate finds the top 20% in France earned 60–66% of income on the eve of the Revolution (compared with about 52% for the U.S. top 20% in 2018) [1]. Other accounts claim pre‑Revolution France concentrated wealth dramatically — e.g., the top 10% holding ~90% of wealth and the top 1% up to ~60% — figures that, if accurate, would exceed contemporary U.S. wealth shares [2].
1. Wealth vs. income: apples and oranges in the evidence
The sources mix income‑distribution estimates (shares of national income) and wealth‑distribution estimates (shares of accumulated assets), and these are different concepts. Gigafact cites historians’ income estimates for late‑18th‑century France — top 20% getting 60–66% of income — and contrasts that with U.S. 2018 income shares (top 20% ≈ 52%) [1]. Separately, CADTM reports much larger wealth concentrations in pre‑Revolutionary France (top 10% ≈ 90% of wealth; top 1% ≈ 60%) [2]. The two metrics imply different comparisons: income inequality measures current flows; wealth inequality measures accumulated assets — and the sources do not provide a single unified series directly comparing like‑for‑like across centuries [1] [2].
2. Scholarly caution: estimates are sparse and contested
The Gigafact piece notes that income data for revolutionary‑era France are sparse and that historians use “best‑available” estimates [1]. Polljuice reproduces similar caution, saying these are estimates and sometimes uses the authors’ “low estimates” to illustrate a best‑case scenario [3]. That caveat matters: long‑run reconstructions depend on fragmentary records (tax rolls, probate inventories, urban wage reports), so point estimates vary by method and assumptions [1] [3].
3. How big were the gaps? Concrete numbers reported
Two concrete comparisons appear in the materials: an estimate that the top 20% in late‑18th‑century France earned 60–66% of national income (versus ~52% for the U.S. top 20% in 2018) [1], and a separate claim that, for wealth, the top 10% in France held about 90% and the top 1% about 60% just before 1789 [2]. If both sets of numbers hold, pre‑Revolution France was substantially more unequal by either income or wealth measures — particularly by wealth shares — than contemporary U.S. income and wealth distributions reported in these sources [1] [2].
4. Political and social context matters for interpretation
The sources underline that inequality in France coexisted with entrenched social privilege (feudal caste elements, tax exemptions for elites) and political dysfunction, which amplified grievances beyond pure economic ratios [4]. Writers drawing parallels with modern America emphasize not just inequality but the absence or presence of social safety nets, debt burdens, and political institutions as crucial differences — for instance, some argue the U.S. today has large public and future liabilities and different institutional buffers than 18th‑century France [4].
5. Contemporary analogies: useful but limited
Commentators use the France–U.S. comparison to warn about political risk when inequality combines with other pressures, but the sources also show disagreement about how close the analogy is. Polljuice and Forbes pieces urge caution in drawing direct lessons because data are estimates and contexts differ [3] [5]. UnHerd and other commentators highlight both similarities in inequality and stark differences in modern state capacity and welfare arrangements [4]. The provided sources do not settle whether inequality alone predicts revolution; they note historical grievance was multifaceted [4] [5].
6. Bottom line and limitations
Available sources in this set consistently say pre‑Revolutionary France was very unequal and, on the metrics cited, at least as unequal and often more so than modern America (income: top 20% 60–66% v. U.S. top 20% ≈52%; wealth: top 10% ≈90%, top 1% ≈60%) [1] [2]. However, these conclusions rest on historical reconstructions the sources acknowledge are sparse and estimate‑dependent, and they mix income and wealth measures that are not directly comparable [1] [3]. If you want a firmer verdict, seek primary academic studies mentioned in these pieces (e.g., Morrisson & Snyder, Piketty, Lindert & Williamson) and comparable modern series for wealth and income so the same metric is used across periods — those specific primary references are not fully reproduced in the provided sources [3] [6].