Meslier’s work, while having in its own merits, can be understood as being part of a larger collection of thought originating during the Enlightenment (Devellennes, 2017), a period of European (philosophic) thought which was an outgrowth of the Scientific Revolution of the 16th and 17th century. The scientific revolution had brought about new methods of understanding the world and thus set the stage for human thought to become the primary approach to knowledge. (Bristow, 2017). Generally, the Enlightenment can be understood as focusing on intellectual advances through human thought and reason to improve the well-being of humans (Bristow, 2017). While the Enlightenment as a movement generally aimed for the same goal, there was still diverse thought about the best way to achieve it. With this in mind, scholars have classified Enlightenment thinking into various kinds to generalize approaches aimed toward human well-being through knowledge (Devellennes, 2017). The Enlightenment division important for Meslier is “Radical Enlightenment” which is characterized as (philosophic) thought centered around liberalism through the demolition of the deep connection between philosophy and theology, as well as, the connection between religion, politics, and oppression (Devellennes, 2017).

​

​

For decades before the Enlightenment, and during it, most countries in Europe were ruled under a monarchy. France, Meslier’s homeland, was one of these countries and thus the political structure of France was one of inequity of resources, power, and rights (Devellennes, 2017). Meslier was hyper-aware of the inequity and oppression the people in his town experienced by the monarchy and town’s lord. The monarchy relied on religious institutions to provide the legitimacy of their rule, and in turn, the monarchy strengthened the importance of religion and power religious institutions had (Meslier, 2009). The general aim of the Enlightenment and the mutual reliance of the monarchy on religion (and vice versa) is what sets the stage for Meslier’s Testament.

​

​

With the context of thought, religion, and politics, now understood, Meslier’s motivations for his Testament become clear. There are two institutions that Meslier recognizes as detrimental to human well-being: religion and the monarchy; thus, he provides a two-pronged, and integrative, approach to argue for their dismantlement and replacement. He argues that all religions are false and atheism should be adopted; consequently, the legitimacy provided to monarchies by religion is also false (Meslier, 2009). Then he argues against monarchies, oligarchies, and other inequitable political systems and suggests that a type of communalism is the approach best suited for human well-being (Meslier, 2009). With this contextual backing in mind, I shall summarize Meslier’s main arguments against religion and monarchies, while highlighting the connection Meslier identifies between the two.