More handpicked essays just for you.
Short note of role of robespierre
Assess the importance of robespierre in the french revolution
Short note of role of robespierre
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Short note of role of robespierre
“Long live the Republic “ is what a guard shouted when Louis XVI got executed. Seeing the gruesome act their king getting beheaded led to many people horrified. The Jacobin leader Robespierre ‘s became very paranoid and killed thousands of people at guillotine . Robespierre’s tried to protect the Revolution but this plan backfired . Also the introduction to the proposal of “Republic of virture“ which angered many people. The Jacobin leader were power hungry tyrants because of the events of the Reign of Terror beheadings of the guillotine, the attempt to protect the revolution and the proposal of a “Republic of virtue”. First, the Jacobin leader Robespierre’s tried to protect the revolution but this plan backfired. It backfired because immediately after the publication of this decree, all suspected persons within the territory …show more content…
They were angered and tired with Robespierre who recently said “Terror is nothing more than quick and strict justice, and we apply it only to protect our country’s most urgent needs”. He is advising the people that terror and violence is the correct way to do things and also the fastest. He was also saying things like “I say no mercy for the innocent! Mercy for the weak! Mercy for the unfortunate! Mercy for humanity! Society owes protection only to peaceful citizens.” This is a prime example of what a power hungy tyrant is. The horrendous acts of the Jacobin leaders during the Reign of Terror led to many unfortunate deads and crimes. Robespierre was a power hungry tyrant, he was unforgiving. He killed Louis and thousands of others because he had become paranoid. His proposal of Republic of Virtue left the people hungry and angry. He also tried to protect the revolution but the plan backfired. All together, these horrible acts prove that the tyrants were extremely power hungry and blood
In this essay I shall try to find whether the Terror was inherent from the French revolutions outset or was it the product of exceptional circumstances. The French revolution is the dividing line between the Ancien Regime and the modern world. After France the hierarchy that societies of the time had been founded on began to change and they began to sweep away the intricate political structures of absolute monarchy, but however to achieve this was the Terror absolutely necessary? And was it planned/ or was it just the extraordinary circumstances, which the French had lead themselves into once they had deposed of Louis the sixteenth. Whatever way it is looked at, the political ideology of the rest of the world was going to change after the French revolution. The conflicting ideology's of the French revolution from socialism to nationalism would now be mainstream words and spearhead many political parties in years to come. The French revolution had been in high hopes that a peaceful transition could be made from absolutist to parliamentary monarchy, but what went wrong? Surely the terror could not have been in their minds at this time? Surely it was not inherent from the start.
Maximilien Robespierre declared at the trial of King Louis XVI. “The King must die so that the nation can live.” Robespierre advocated the kings demise and with it the ways of the Ancien Régime. However, in an ironic twist of fate his words also foreshadowed his own rise and fall as the leader of the French Revolution. Known as “The Incorruptible”, or alternately “Dictateur Sanguinaire” Robespierre is a monumental figure of the French Revolution, but which was he? Was he the incorruptible revolutionist fighting to overthrow the Ancien Regime or a raging radical that implemented his own absolute tendencies under the cover of the revolution? When dissecting the dichotomy of Robespierre’s life and actions during the French Revolution and comparing it to the seven main characteristics of Absolutism it can be seen that Robespierre held many absolutist tendencies.
Aside from giving the guillotine a purpose, the Reign of Terror stands as a necessity in the story of French independence. It might not have been the proudest of times, but the Reign began on a strong premise: holding together a new government by purging the bad apples for the betterment of the whole cart. While the Reign of Terror developed into an overly excessive bloodshed, it was justified by the war stricken circumstances and necessity for the support of the ongoing revolution. Despite the extreme heights the Reign of Terror reached, it was necessary to maintain the fragile presence of the government and preserve the new liberty a majority of the population had been denied before. In a 1793 letter from Vendée —a major counterrevolutionary hub— local government was fending off on-going riots and rebellion while being invaded from the north by Prussia.
The French Revolution, beginning in 1789, was a lengthy process in which the people of France took over the government and instituted a Republic (Chambers). The overarching goal of the Revolution was to place the power of government in the hands of the people. For two years, whilst France was facing internal disorganization and external wartime threats, the government was run by a war dictatorship under Maximilien Robespierre, the head of the Committee of Public Safety (“Reign of Terror”). Amid much internal suspicion and fear, the Reign of Terror began. Much of France was politically divided, and Robespierre’s method for keeping the government stable in a time of crisis involved severe penalties for any suspected of plotting against the new government (Chambers). Soon the accusations began to fly and a handful of people convicted and killed for treason became thousands. Many of the cases turned into the accuser’s word versus the accused, and a government preoccupied with bigger issues often did not care to look into these cases, simply convicting the accused, supposedly to promote a sense of unity and control to the citizens of France, and to forewarn anyone who did attempt treasonous deeds (Chambers). Eventually, Marie Antoinette, guilty of no crime other than marrying the former king, was executed on the grounds of treason (“French Revolution: The Reign of Terror”). Many thought this was taking a step too far. The former Queen was well-respec...
Indeed, the musings of Robespierre, in his advocacy for terror as a means of achieving virtue, are reminiscent of Osama Bin Laden in his “Letter to America,” citing excerpts from the Quran which read, “Permission to fight (against disbelievers) is given to those who are fought against, because they have been wronged,” (Bin Laden 1). For Bin Laden, therefore, as he fights to initiate a new world order––one that is dictated by the teachings of Allah––those who oppose him or his ideology have thus wronged him; for Robespierre, those loyal to the previous regime have thus wronged him; in either case, however, the resultant of such wrongdoing proved to be death––whether that be in the form of a plane hijacking, or the
Maximilien Robespierre became obsessed with this passion to create equality within France and to abolish the segregation that he began to be worshiped by others and seen as a beacon of hope. They both hoped that the Tribunal would bring peace to France. It would crush the Royalists and quiet mob by reassuring that the enemies of the revolution would be punished.” (DiConsiglio).
“Society was cut in two: those who had nothing united in common envy; those who had anything united in common terror.” The French Revolution was a painful era that molded the lives of every citizen living in France and changed their ways of life forever. Beginning in 1789 and lasting ten years until 1799, the people of France lived in a monarch society under King Louis XVI’s rule. He was a very harsh ruler and had many restrictions placed on his people. They eventually overthrow him and become a monarch society. Among his deceptive ways, the people also experienced “The Reign of Terror,” which was a period where many lives were taken by the guillotine. Other revolutionary events included rebellions, constitutions, and groups. One of the popular groups that contributed greatly to the French Revolution were the Jacobins who were led by Maximilien Robespierre.
O: Rage and revolt can describe the country of France at the time of the Revolution faced because of turmoil and struggle they faced. Different estates were formed based on what you did and your class in society. The people of society wanted more say in the government and decisions that King Louis XVI made. The public didn't approve with much of what King Louis did. His lack of ability to be a strong king and leader affected his reputation to the public eye. King Louis was tried for committing treason to the country of France. Treason is the attempt to kill a sovereign and overthrow the government. Some of the reasons were his attempt to flee to Varennes, living in Versailles which was not in Paris, and reforms he passed as a ruler. These actions performed by King Louis isn’t what a King does, but that doesn’t prove any
To accomplish this task, he murdered close to 40,000 people, most by guillotine, and some sentenced to life in jail. The Reign of Terror was one of the most controversial, and terrifying phases of the Revolution. Some French colonists thought it to be a path to democracy; others thought it was just an attempt by Robespierre to assume dictatorship. The other great leader was Napoleon Bonaparte. He believed that the only way to have control in France was to put a limit on democracy.
Do the actions ever justify the end result? The Reign of Terror, the revolution lead by Maximilien Robespierre, began on January 21, 1793 when King Louis XVI and his wife were guillotined due to the way they had led the government into a financial crisis and as a result when Robespierre took over with his radical new government 20,000-40,000 people were brutally executed. So was this radical period in France really necessary or was it just mass killings with little progress. The Reign of terror was not justified because of the threats against the revolution, the methods used by the revolution were not justified, and the ideals of the revolution were not justified.
In 1789, the French people began to stand up to their current monarchical government in order to obtain rights and laws that they felt they deserved. The Reign of Terror followed after the Revolution and seemed to stand for the complete opposite of what the people had previously stood up for. The Reign of Terror began in 1793 and ended in 1794 due to the decapitation of Maximilien Robespierre. The Reign of Terror can be explained as a time period in France when many counter revolutionaries were killed because of their traditional beliefs. Counter revolutionaries believed in preserving the ways of the monarchy, but since the majority of people thought otherwise, these opposing beliefs led to death. The French government did not have good reason to conduct such drastic measures against those who challenged the Revolution.
A rather ominous name for the unaware; “The Reign of Terror”. An oblivious person could completely bypass the horrifying events related to the French Revolution, had it been named differently. The title for these events is appropriate from my perspective. Those four words could easily interest a curious, ordinary person, and so the history can survive, along with the information transferring to yet another carrier. Of course, everyone can benefit from knowing a few terms that can increase your understanding of the topic. An absolute monarch is a person that has absolute power among his or her people. The Estates General is a representative body drawn from the three ‘estates’ into which society had been theoretically divided. A fraternity is a group of people sharing a common profession or interests. A radical person is a person who advocates thorough or complete political or social reform. The device used to execute most people was the guillotine: a machine with a heavy blade sliding vertically in grooves, used for beheading people. The Reign of Terror is generally defined as a period of remorseless repression or bloodshed, but in particular, it is the period of the Terror during the French Revolution. Conservatives are people that hold to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation. Now that we can speak of our topic with more knowledge of terms typically used for this subject, we can address the pending question. Was The Reign of Terror justified? An outstanding amount of people died for good and bad reasons. Every system was corrupt, there was practically no right and wrong; no order, just rebellion. Several conflicting arguments can be made, but there is a definite decision to make in this situatio...
Liberty, equality, and freedom are all essential parts to avoiding anarchy and maintaining tranquility even through the most treacherous of times. The Reign of Terror is well known as the eighteen month long French Revolution (1793-1794). In this period of time, a chief executive, Maximilien Robespierre, and a new French government executed gigantic numbers of people they thought to be enemies of the revolution, inside and outside of the country. The question is: were these acts of the new French government justified? Not only are the acts that occurred in the Reign of Terror not justified, they were barbaric and inhumane.
These methods however, became too extreme and the deaths of the incident was not justified. Although, the Reign of Terror was seen as a way to let the revolution live and was well supported, it was not justified. Because the internal threats propagated radicalism, the external threats raged and became stronger, and the methods became chaotic the Reign of Terror extended its stay in France until the death of the powerful leader Robespierre. The Reign of Terror was an outreach to gain rights, but during this period they were taken away until the fateful day of Robespierre’s death, ending the Terror.
While many may be outraged by Robespierre’s actions, he believed they were justified because the killed enemies of the Revolution by terror with the Republic in mind. In his mind the mass executions were justified, since he had the right reason for doing so and was trying to protect the republic. In this second source, we can see that Robespierre and others, will use any means necessary to protect their beliefs and eliminate any threats to those beliefs. Robespierre put the fear into people that they would be killed if they opposed the Revolution in anyway. One last act of terrorism that I looked at occurred in New York City, on September 11, 2011.