Throughout the French revolution, there were many turning points that irrevocably changed the course of history both within France and in a global scale. The revolutionaries faced many tough decisions with consequences that were beyond the scope of human understanding. These moments also helped define what the French Revolution was and what goals the revolutionaries hoped to accomplish through their actions. In many ways the French Revolution itself was a turning point for both France and humanity as it paved the way for both human rights and one of the most controversial emperors in history.
The French Revolution was not the most peaceful revolutionary movement in history. Once the National Assembly was established, there was a fear within
…show more content…
Once this phase was over, the new government, the Directory, attempted to maintain control of France with limited success through election rigging and continuing some of the practices of the Terror at a lesser extent. They also reversed many of the changes, both positive and negative, established by the Committee of Public Safety throughout the Terror. The French government ended the Terror through the trial and execution of Robespierre and some of his accomplices, in a manner akin to that of Danton’s execution. Once again, with Robespierre’s trial and execution, a leader of the French Nation was charged for treason and all of the faults of the government under his control were attributed to him. Placing all the blame for the actions of the Terror on Robespierre’s feet was also useful to the new government as a way to prevent a second Terror for occurring. This event also resonates with many due to the poetic justice of Robespierre’s execution by guillotine: the prosecutor facing the same fate as those he had avidly …show more content…
One of the few features that remain constant throughout the revolution is that it was a reactionary force. The actions of the revolutionaries, although guided by ideals and morals of building a better France, were propelled mostly by mixture of fear and rage at certain groups with a perceived advantage over the masses. The events of the French Revolution are tightly interconnected to each other, the actions of a previous government causes the next one to compensate in the opposite direction. This tendency to react to the present, both when groups fought to obtain power and when they attempted to keep it, lacked the foresight necessary to form any lasting stability in the French nation. This view of the nature of the French Revolution also sheds some light on why it isn’t possible to form a cohesive description of the French Revolution as a whole. Instead, it is necessary to break down the Revolution into time periods and see the overarching theme within each one. The constitutional monarchy at the beginning of the French Revolution is an entirely different entity than that of the Directory during the Revolution’s slow decline, let alone the quasi police state that existed during the Terror. Some revolutionaries, such as
Clearly there never was just one French Revolution, but rather a series of revolutions. These occurred while the French struggled to create a new political and social system – one that would follow principles radically different to that of the ‘ancient’ regime. There were five regimes during the French Revolution between 1787 and 1800. However, despite this fragmented revolution, the same fundamental principles guided most of the revolutionaries involved. These principles included equality under law, centralisation of government, elimination of feudal rights, religious freedom and careers open to talent, not birth.
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 Prussians and Australians were fighting against the revolution to keep their king and to not have the ideas of the revolutions (Doc C). So in turn Robespierre declared a military draft where all adult males would be forced by the Levee en Masse where the Vendee region in France were totally against (Doc B). Rightfully so as well considering the fact that when Robespierre declared for the draft the threat had practically been stopped and so there was no real need for the draft and in turn no need for the Reign of Terror. employed a shadowy network of informers and spies to achieve these ends. a careless word of criticism spoken against the government could be put in prison or worse.”
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).
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.
Beginning in mid-1789, and lasting until late-1799, the French Revolution vastly changed the nation of France throughout its ten years. From the storming of the Bastille, the ousting of the royal family, the Reign of Terror, and all the way to the Napoleonic period, France changed vastly during this time. But, for the better part of the last 200 years, the effects that the French Revolution had on the nation, have been vigorously debated by historian and other experts. Aspects of debate have focused around how much change the revolution really caused, and the type of change, as well as whether the changes that it brought about should be looked at as positive or negative. Furthermore, many debate whether the Revolutions excesses and shortcomings can be justified by the gains that the revolution brought throughout the country. Over time, historians’ views on these questions have changed continually, leading many to question the different interpretations and theories behind the Revolutions effectiveness at shaping France and the rest of the world.
Even though, the French Revolution saw the Terror as a sign to create peace and restore a new France, it was not justified because the extremities of the internal and external threats spun out of control and the methods of the period were over the top. As the Reign of Terror in France grew and invoked fear, the internal threats became more radical and deadly. The French Revolution began in 1789 as an attempt to create a new and fair government. (Doc A) As year four of freedom lurched, the thirst for power in Maximilien Robespierre stirred and the hunger for more blood provoked him, urging him to create the Reign of Terror.
The France practically changed from being an absolute monarchy to a republic overnight. Everything that the people of France had ever known was changed in a heart-beat. Their once beloved king had just been guillotined and it was now time to set up a new political system. The leaders of the revolution, the Jacobins, imagined a representative government that ruled on the principals of “liberte,” “egalite,” and “fraternity,” liberty, equality and broth...
The essential cause of the French revolution was the collision between a powerful, rising bourgeoisie and an entrenched aristocracy defending its privileges”. This statement is very accurate, to some extent. Although the collision between the two groups was probably the main cause of the revolution, there were two other things that also contributed to the insanity during the French revolution – the debt that France was in as well as the famine. Therefore, it was the juxtaposing of the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy as well as the debt and famine France was in that influenced the French Revolution.
Nardo, Don. A. The French Revolution. San Diego, California: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1999. Print.
During the eighteenth century, France was one of the most richest and prosperous countries in Europe, but many of the peasants were not happy with the way France was being ruled. On July 14, 1789, peasants and soldiers stormed the Bastille and initiated the French Revolution. This essay will analyze the main causes of the French Revolution, specifically, the ineffectiveness of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, the dissatisfaction of the Third Estate, and the Enlightenment. It will also be argued that the most significant factor that caused the French Revolution is the ineffective leadership of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.
The French Revolution evokes many different emotions and controversial issues in that some believe it was worth the cost and some don't. There is no doubt that the French Revolution did have major significance in history. Not only did the French gain their independence, but an industrial revolution also took place. One of the main issues of the Revolution was it's human costs. Two writers, the first, Peter Kropotkin who was a Russian prince, and the other Simon Schama, a history professor, both had very opposing views on whether the wars fought by France during the Revolution were worth it's human costs. Krapotkin believed that the French Revolution was the main turning point for not only France but for most other countries as well. On the other hand, Schama viewed the French Revolution as unproductive and excessively violent.
New York: Barnes & Noble, 1969. Print. The. Kreis, Steven. A. A. "Lecture 12: The French Revolution - Moderate Stage, 1789-1792.
...s on who should have power. Rebellions broke out across France and turned the nation against itself. The major revolutionary revolt was The Storming of Bastille. The third estate demanded for a republic. King Louis was killed, along with his wife Marie Antoinette to pursue the ideas of changing society. Maximilien Robespierre ordered their deaths by the violent and horrific machine, the guillotine. He was also killed shortly after, but provided the Jacobins a leader in his efforts to overthrow the monarchy. Napoleon was the last to save the revolution as it came to a close. The French Revolution has changed history and the lives of everyone in France up to today. Many people sacrificed themselves to change the country for others today. This revolution was life changing and inspired many others around the world to stand up for their beliefs and fight for a democracy.
...ic Safety, stated that the revolutionary government will protect the good citizens while punishing the enemies of the government. He justifies the terror by saying it is only punishing the enemies of the state while protecting the god citizens from another revolution. Being the leader of the committee he has been trusted with making decisions on behalf of the government (Doc4).General Ronsin, a leader of the revolutionary army, stated how for the anti-revolutionary ideas to truly be gone the ideas need to be exterminated at the source. He though that the new France needed an example to truly understand how the new government treated those who were against them. Being a leader of the army he was a true revolutionary and he saw the terror as a great thing for France; this was because he was unaffected by the terror because he was so high up on the chain of command.