Was The Reign Of Terror Justified

The main question this essay sets out to answer is whether the Terror was a necessary, justifiable stage in ensuring success for the Revolution, or was it a brutal Jacobin policy put in place for the ruling faction to keep power? This essay argues that while violence and terror are by no means a positive, Maximilien Robespierre and the Committee of Public Safety’s actions were justified. In this paper I critically discuss how Robespierre has been misrepresented by a number of historians, and although he did engage in Terror during the French Revolution, he was not a “bloodthirsty tyrant” as many historians have made him out to be. His actions were constantly underpinned by Enlightenment ideals such as virtue and liberty and he believed he was

striving for the greater good. This essay also outlines a number of other positives established by Robespierre and the Jacobins during their time in power, which may not have been possible had it not been for their use of Terror.
The ‘Reign of Terror’ or ‘The Terror’ as it is also known, was a particularly brutal and violent chapter of the ten year long French Revolution (Doyle, 1986, pg.33).

The French Revolution, a revolutionary uprising to overthrow the French monarchy and establish a democratic France, began in 1789 and arguably ended in 1799. However the ‘Reign of Terror’ only lasted from September 1793 until the end of July 1794. During this ten month long period, the National Convention and the Committee of Public Safety, led by Maximillien Robespierre and the Revolutionary group the Jacobins, brought about tremendous change to France and the Revolution. Many historians argue that Robespierre was a “blood thirsty tyrant” who excessively used the guillotine to kill 17’000 political “suspects” who were deemed counter-revolutionary. However during his time in power Robespierre and the Jacobin Republic ended widespread internal revolt, pushed back the invading Prussian and Austrian armies and established a French national army three times as large as ever before, and at half the cost (Hobsbawm, 1962, pg. 68). Robespierre and the Jacobin dominated Committee did cite violence as a necessary measure to establish their goals, and maintain the initial revolutionary ideals of equality, liberty and a fair French society. However they did justice to their violence by bringing about positive change to France and the

Revolution.
The Reign of Terror and Robespierre cannot be isolated and examined without first examining the lead causes of the French Revolution. The causes and reasons of why the French Revolution took place are still widely debated by historians to this day, however most historians believe that the rise of Enlightenment ideals such as liberty, equality and fraternity for all members of society had a big part to play (Axelrod, 1995, pg. 264). People throughout Europe began to believe that all individuals deserved equal rights, regardless of what class or estate they were categorised in. Ideas outlined by Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire included rational thought becoming the source of truth and authority instead of the interpreted will of an omnipotent God or King. This idea coupled with the disgruntlement of the Third Estate, or commoners, at the unfair taxation scheme introduced by King Louis XVI to bail France out of its considerably large debts, is believed to be the main catalyst for the Revolution.
In 1792, three years into the Revolution, France and the Revolution were facing desperate times. The Revolution, while establishing some progressive, Enlightenment based reforms, and producing the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789, had failed to exact the sort of change that the Third Estate wanted. Between 1789 and 1792, the political situation in France deteriorated substantially and the attempt to shift the political system from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy failed. Robespierre and the Reign of Terror grew out of this political turmoil.
Following the execution of Louis XVI, the Committee of Public Safety, headed by Robespierre, was formerly established.

Robespierre has been defined by a plethora of historians as “the Incorruptible.” “The Incorruptible” moniker while neither a positive or a negative, sheds light on the type of person Robespierre was and how he showed a “single minded, fanatic devotion” to the Revolution. (Breunig, 1977, pg. 47) “Like many young Frenchmen at the time, he aspired to Enlightenment ideals” and he had a strong will to pursue these ideals up until the last. (Axelrod, 1995, pg. 264). While Robespierre and the Jacobins were in power and sat on the Committee of Public Safety many people were guillotined at their behest. However, “his sole explanation for every move was that France demanded it” and with this fixed firmly in the mind, many of his and the Jacobins actions make perfect sense (Eagan, 1970, pg. 12). He knew what he was undertaking was not perfect however as he himself argued it was necessary to achieve and maintain the Revolutions Enlightenment inspired goals of virtue and liberty; “virtue without which terror is murderous, terror without which virtue is powerless.” (Stearns, 1986, pg.

17)
What differentiates him from many other despots who utilised state terror is the fact that Robespierre and the Committee of Public Safety’s terror was constantly underpinned by the endeavour to make France a liberal and virtuous utopia and while he held power over France he “engaged in the raising of the Nations social and political consciousness.” (McLetchie,1983, pg. 1). While this didn't make the Terror any less brutal, it made it more justifiable and it significantly added weight to Robespierre’s argument of the end justifying the means. As outlined by Franklin Ford, “the Incorruptible (Robespierre) did embody a sincere belief that the Revolution would be both a failure and a fraud unless it brought a new standard of justice and security to all Frenchmen, including the lowest classes.” (Ford, 1989, pg. 134). Robespierre knew that this Terror was essential to weasel out the counter-revolutionaries, re-establish the French army as a formidable force, and save the economy. What saves him from being labelled a mindless, bloodthirsty tyrant was his “awareness of what a real revolution had to cost.” (Ford, 1989, pg. 336). This clearly
Radical times seemed to call for radical measures and the Committee of Public Safety were granted a swathe of executive, military, judicial and legislative powers to ensure the Revolutionary goals were met. Among these powers included the right to be able to execute members of society deemed counter-revolutionary by the Committee. Robespierre and the Committee were coming to the conclusion that the ends justified the means, and that in order to defend the Revolution against those who would destroy it, the shedding of blood was justified. And so began the Terror which for many Frenchmen made the choice simple; “either the Terror with all its defects or the destruction of the Revolution, the disintegration of the National State and probably the disappearance of the country.” (Hobsbawm, 1962, pg. 69). The Committee was charged with stabilising France, ending the civil strife within the country, and defending France's borders from impending invasions from foreign powers. Many historians, including Hobsbawm, believe that Robespierre and the Jacobin Republic did all of these things and that their “achievement was superhuman.” (Hobsbawm, 1962, pg. 68) Hobsbawm also outlines the fact that Robespierre and the Jacobins methods, while harsh, finally established some sort of stability within France during the French Revolution. When Robespierre and the Jacobins received control of the Revolution, sixty out of the eighty departments of France were in revolt against Paris; the German Princes and the British were invading and the country was helpless and bankrupt. “Fourteen months later all France was under firm control, the invaders had been expelled, and the French Armies in turn occupied Belgium.” (Hobsbawm, 1962, pg. 68) Clearly this shows that Robespierre and the Jacobins method of governance was effective and was working. In just over a year France was on the front foot militarily, the majority of France was under control except for the Vendee department, and “by March 1794 an army three times as large as before was run at half the cost of March 1793.” (Hobsbawm, 1962, pg. 69)
As previously mentioned, Robespierre and the Committee of Public Safety’s actions were constantly underpinned by ideals such as equality, freedom, and liberty for all men. This can be clearly seen in the Montagnard Constitution which was drafted by Robespierre and the Committee of Public Safety in 1793. (Hobsbawm, 1962, pg. 69). This constitution included rights of insurrection, popular sovereignty over national sovereignty, the right of rebellion and the abolition of slavery, not to mention a number of other economic and social rights. As described by Hobsbawm this constitution was “the first genuinely democratic constitution proclaimed by a modern state.” (Hobsbawm, 1962, pg. 69). Robespierre and the Jacobins abolished all remaining Feudal rights, improved the small buyers chances to gain land and abolished slavery throughout France including French colonies, 70 years before the United States of America abolished slavery. These actions clearly highlight Robespierre’s ideals and beliefs and show that he was not just a “bloodthirsty tyrant” but a strong minded man who wished to see France become a haven for equality. Another aspect of the Terror that clearly shows that Robespierre and the Jacobins were adamant that equality must be established was the demographics of those formally sentenced to death during the Terror. Charles Breunig argues that many historians believed that “the middle and lower classes, having secured control of the government, relentlessly pursued the aristocrats and clergy” (Breunig, 1970, pg. 45). However only 15 percent of those formally sentenced to death were of noble birth or were part of the clergy (Breunig, 1970, pg. 45). This then adds weight to Robespierre's constant pursuit of equality and shows that “political necessity, rather than class antagonism, was the underlying motive for the mass executions of the Terror” (Breunig, 1970, pg. 45) Bruneig goes onto say that Robespierre was a man of the people and who best represented the underprivileged during the Revolution and who “sought to bring about the equality envisioned by Rousseau,” an key Enlightenment thinker (Breunig, 1970, pg. 47).