We might concede that women’s roles as memoirists were partially determined by their social statuses, since only members of the upper class could write well. But the author never says that their roles in the Revolution were partially determined by social status. Instead, she references Madame de La Villirouët as an example of a female memoirist who wrote about women’s participation in the Revolution.

P1 explains why so few memoirs were written by lower-class women. But the author never explains why so few women published accounts of the Revolution. She just references Madame de La Villirouët as an example of a female memoirist who wrote about women’s participation in the Revolution.

In P2, the author concedes that partisanship can bias recollections, but she never claims that this is inevitable. In fact, she thinks that the women’s memoirs are subjectively and factually reliable. She just references Madame de La Villirouët as an example of a female memoirist who wrote about women’s participation in the Revolution.

In P3, the author says that women’s memoirs of the Revolution “describe how women participated, individually and collectively, in the events of the Revolution.” She cites Madame de La Villirouët as an example of women’s participation in the Revolution.

Madame de La Villirouët was a royalist, but the author never suggests that royalist and republican memoirs focused on different themes, so she can’t be citing Madame de La Villirouët to illustrate this point. Instead, Madame de La Villirouët is given as an example of women’s participation in the Revolution.