True the ideas that were promoted by the philosophies were a contributor to The French Revolution but they were not the cause. The cause was the economic and social problems that faced France in those years of turmoil. I believe that The French Revolution was caused by The Social and Economic woes of the days. The rule of the aristocracy lasts as long as the rural population continues to ignore or neglect the crafts, and the ownership of land continues to be the soul basis of wealth. When handicrafts and commerce take hold among the people and create a new source of wealth benefiting a new class of working people, this paves the way for a revolution in political structure. A new distribution of wealth opens the way to a new distribution of power. In the same way that the possession of land creates an aristocracy, industrial property increases the power of the people; it provides the means to achieve its freedom. Antoine P. J. M. Barnave also believed that without the economic tribulations that were pending in France there would have been no need for change. The third estate could be broken down into three parts: the rich, bourgeoisie; the middle, lawyers, doctors, businessmen; and the poor, the peasant, farmer. There was much change in the economic world of the third estate. For instance the bourgeois were gaining land and therefore making money. 35% of the land was left to the 22 to 23 million peasants, the bourgeoisie held about 30% of the land, the 350 000 members of the nobility held about 20% of the land, and left with an unequally shared 10% the 130,000 member of the clergy. This shows how much land the bourgeois actually had. They were making large amounts of money off this huge percentage of land. Like those today who make money they needed to be taxed, there was only one difference between now and then, they [the third estate] were the only ones being taxed.