Category: Reign of Terror

How New Inventions Shape Who Holds Power

New inventions gave lower class people access to power and shifted power into the hands of whoever possessed the new technology, allowing them to gain wealth and influence. Starting from the Age of Enlightenment, going through the period of Industrialization, and into the early twentieth century, there are many examples of how new inventions shaped who held power. During the Reign of Terror, the Industrial Revolution and World War I, new people and groups gained power as they came into possession of new technologies.

First, during the Reign of Terror, a new invention let Maximilien Robespierre rise to power. This supposedly fair, quick, and equal punishment was the guillotine, created by Joseph-Ignace Guillotin. After King Louis XVI was executed in 1793 during the French Revolution, Robespierre, a radical Jacobin, dominated the Committee of Public Safety by killing anyone he considered to be a traitor to the revolution. Over 16,000 people were executed by guillotine as he rose to power, taking it from the National Convention and Committee of Public Safety. Without the guillotine, Robespierre would not have been able to rise to power, and the Reign of Terror may never have occured. The Reign of Terror started because of the guillotine, a new invention which Robespierre used to rise to power and kill thousands.

Next, during the Industrial Revolution, new people grew to power because of new inventions. These included the spinning jenny and power loom, which allowed factory owners to produce more cotton than before. Previously, the Cottage Industry produced the majority of textiles, but after the Agricultural Revolution, this industry could not keep up with the demand. Because of this, the spinning jenny was designed to spin raw cotton into thread faster. The increased thread production also led to the invention of the power loom, which produced wool faster. Both led to factories and the new Textile Industry, as entrepreneurs and investors used them to gain more wealth and influence. This took jobs, wealth, and influence from highly skilled workers in the Cottage Industry. The spinning jenny and power loom revolutionized the world, started the Industrial Revolution and allowed factory owners and entrepreneurs to gain more wealth and rise in the social hierarchy.

Finally, another time when new technology shaped who held power was during World War I, when many new technologies changed how the war was fought, as well as the outcome. The war started when the Triple Alliance and Triple Entente formed after Gavrilo Princip, part of the Black Hand terrorist group, killed Francis Ferdinand, archduke of Austria-Hungary, and starting a world war. As the war progressed, the machine gun, artillery, barbed wire, and trench mortar were designed. These made offensive strategies less practical than defensive ones. Germany’s Schlieffen Plan failed to end the war quickly by attacking on multiple fronts, and because of these innovations, Germany was forced to play more defensive. This put offensive countries in a worse position, whereas previously, it was the opposite. Another innovation that completely changed the war was the tank. Britain was able to use it to crush Germany, even though Germany had previously been winning the war after a long stalemate. The tank completely changed who held power by allowing Britain to be much more powerful than Germany, although they were less powerful before. Many defensive weapons during the first world war changed how the war was fought, and the invention of the tank completely turned the tide in the war.

Throughout history, less important and lower class people or groups have always been able to rise in the social hierarchy and displace the previous group or person in power, by using new inventions. These include the guillotine during the Reign of Terror, the spinning jenny and power loom during the Industrial Revolution, and many different weapons during World War I. These inventions have ended some periods and started new ones as different people rise to power.

The Advantages And Disadvantages Of The Terror As An Instrument Of The French Revolution

The Reign of terror, a period of the french revolution lasted from september of 1793 to July of 1794. The terror was a time when france was is complete distress and numerous executions took place. During this time France was also in complete economic disaray. The enlightenment that preceded the Revolution was a time period where many freedoms were valued but disappeared once the terror struck. Led by the comittee of public safety, of which Maximilien de Robespierre was the most powerful member they took full control over the government.

The outcomes of the terror were both good and bad. The reign of terror overall had more disadvantages as an instrument of the French revolution, because it was morally and ethically wrong. The terror was more disadvantageous as an instrument in the french revolution because it didnt allow france to grow and flourish and instead resulted in injustice and brutality.

Thesis supporting paragraphs

What was originally envisioned as a method of purging any foriegn invators and enemies of the revolution, resulted in countless unjustified deaths. As a result of the executions that took place due to the use of the guillotine, drowning or from being shot a total of 14,000 people were killed. A map of france dating back to 1793 displays the number of executions that took place across france. Certain parts of France: Lore, Vendee, and Lyon, had over 495 executions that took place. The high number of deaths resulted from counter revolutionary warfare.

Additionally in a table showing deaths as a result of the terror (by social group), Paris is in one category and everywhere else in france is in another. In Paris the highest numbers of deaths were the nobles and the upper middle class and in the rest of france the highest numbers were in the working class along with the peasants.

In another table titled “geographical incidence of the principal indictments leading to executions during the terror” is separated into 4 areas: Paris, Frontier Departments, troubled departments, and france as a whole. The highest catagories being hostile acts against the state and counter revolutionary opinions. In a revolution new (revolutionary) opinions should be valued and allowed for further growth, but instead as a result of the use of terror those with differing opinions were objected to death.

D Charles James Fox, reformist member of Parliament and sympathizer with the French Revolution, in a speech to Parliament, November 7, 1793 said, “What a pity that a people [the French] capable of such Incredible energy, should he guilty or rather be governed by those who are guilty of such unheard of crimes and cruelties.” The people of France were extremely angry towards this government. The army was just harming France when they thought they were helping it.

In a letter from General Ronsin, a leader of the revolutionary army that subdued Lyon December 17, 1793 In this letter it states “The guillotine and the firing squad did justice to more than four hundred rebels.” Those who sided with the revolutionary army thought that by killing those who opposed the revolution, they were making France a more just and humane place. But instead, this caused major violence and oppression.

A According to Camille Desmoulins, journalist and former ally of Robespierre, in le V ieux Cordelier, December 20, 1793, “You want to remove all your enemies by means of the guillotine? Has there ever been such great folly? Could you make a single man perish on the scaffold without making ten enemies for yourself from his family or his friends? Do you believe that these women, these old men, these weaklings, those egoists, these stragglers of the Revolution, whom you imprison, are really dangerous? Of your enemies there remain among you only the cowardly and the sick. The strong and the brave have emigrated. They have perished at Lyon or in the V endée; the remainder (consisting of some renters and shopkeepers] do not merit your wrath.”

Camille Desmoulins, journalist and former ally of Maximilien Robespierre, one of the leaders of the anti-revolutionary acts, says, ‘Could you make a single man perish on the scaffold without making ten enemies for yourself from his family or his friends?’ (document 6). The Revolutionary Army is taking their acts to the extreme in executing everyone in their path. They may think that they are working for the common good and for the victory of the French Revolution, but they are only killing the citizens of France.

Maximilien de Robespierre, in a speech to the National Convention, December 25, 1793 states, “Revolution is the war waged by liberty against its enemies… The revolutionary government has to summon extraordinary activity to its aid precisely because it is at war. It is subjected to less binding and less uniform regulations…because it is compelled to deploy , swiftly and incessantly, new resources to meet new and pressing dangers. Under a constitutional government little more is required than to protect the individual against abuses by the state, whereas revolutionary government is obliged to defend the state itself against the factions that assail it from every quarter. To good citizens revolutionary government owes the full protection of the state; to the enemies of the people it owes only death….It must adopt the general principles of ordinary government whenever these can be rigorously applied without endangering public liberty. Its force to repress must be commensurate with the audacity or treachery of those who conspire against it….”

In a speech to the Nation Convention, Maximillien Robespierre says, “The revolutionary government has to summon extraordinary activity to its aid precisely because it is at war” (doc 7). Robespierre believes that a revolutionary government’s goal is to defend the state “against the factions that assail it from every quarter” (doc. 7). Robespierre believes that because France is at war, anything can be done to the people. In reports to the government from the public, they completely disagree. If the Revolution is to make state better for the people, and the people are disagreeing with the Terror, then the Terror should not be seen as a good thing.

“But it has been urged, that the French have distinguished themselves in the field; nor will it be denied that, independently of any other circumstance, the spirit of a people called forth by the impulse which acts so strongly in such a situation, may have the effect to make them brave in the moment of action. But their efforts are merely the result of a system of restraint and oppression, the most terrible and gigantic, that has, perhaps, ever existed. They are compelled into the field by the terror of the guillotine – they are supported there only by those resources which their desperate situation affords; and, in these circumstances, what can be the dependence on the steadiness of their operations, or what rational prospect can there be of the permanence of their exertions?

In reports to the government on public opinion, January 28, 1794 it states, “The majority of the citizens agreed in unanimously [sic] saying that the tribunals act well, that they acquit the innocent and punish the guilty , although murmurs are heard among the public at their judgments.”

Reports to the government on public opinion, February 23, 1794 it says, “Bitter complaints already expressed numberless times, were repeated today of the arrest and imprisonment of citizens who are good patriots and are victims of ambition, cupidity , jealousy , and, in short, every human passion.”

“Citizens, how could anyone delude himself that you are inhuman?…Since the month of May last, our history is a lesson about the terrible extremities to which indulgence leads. In that period….Custine had abandoned Mainz, the Palatinate, and the banks of the Rhine; Calvados was in revolt; the V endée was victorious, Lyon, Bordeaux, Marseille, and Toulon were in arms against the French people; our armies were being beaten in the Pvrenees and around Mont Blanc, you were being betrayed by everyone….Y et the greatest of our misfortunes was a certain fear of the concentration of authority necessary to save the state.”

Reports to the government on public opinion, March 2, 1794 “On seeing peasants on the scaffold, people said, What, have these wretches allowed themselves to be corrupted? If they were nobles or rich people it would not be strange, their being counter-revolutionists, but in that class we should expect all to be patriots. ‘The law is just,’ people remarked, ‘it strikes rich and poor indiscriminately.’ The verdicts of the Revolutionary Tribunal are always applauded.”

A March 2, 1794 in reports to the government on public opinion it’s said that “On seeing peasants on the scaffold people said, What have these wretches allowed themselves to be corrupted? If they were nobles or rich people it would not be strange, their being counter revolutionists, but in that class we should expect all to be patriots. ‘The law is just,’ people remarked, ‘it strikes rich in poor indiscriminately.’ The verdicts of the Revolutionary Tribunal are always applauded.” probably biased only interviewed rich/upperclass

In a report to the government about public opinion circa March 30, 1794 the revolutionary committees are described as “every day falling into discredit. You hear daily the consist of a number of intriguers, who plunder the nation and oppress citizens It is a fact that there is no section in Paris which is not dissatisfied with its revolutionary committee or does not seriously desire to have them abolished.” French citizens were appalled with the way the Committee of Public Safety was dealing with the reforms. The government became extremely oppressive and executed anybody speaking out about counter revolutionary ideas causing much uproar and mayhem.

In a contemporary french engraving of a revolutionary committee by an unknown artist, an opponent of the terror is depicted. Titled “Interieur d’un Comité Révolutionnaire Sous La Terreur” circa 1793-1794. A person person probably of a lower class was being interrogated using cruel and unethical punishment in the image everyone’s pointing their finger at the accused person for having differing beliefs

In a journal article written by John Denton Carter called Interpretations of the Reign of Terror, Carter discusses the views on the Terror from many different french historians perspectives. He states “The Revolution was necessary and good; but the excesses of the Terror were to be condemned and its horrors disengaged from the essence of the Revolutionary movement as a whole.” This confirms that the overall opinion of the outcome of the terror is that it was unjustified.

Bibliography

1. Carter, John Denton. ‘Interpretations of the Reign of Terror.’ The Historian 3, no. 1 (1940): 79-96. www.jstor.org/stable/24435897.

The Reign Of Terror During French Revolution: Background And Effects

‘The King must die so that the Country can Live’ (Robespierre), was exactly what the people of France wanted when they discovered their King had abandoned them. This time in Europe was known famously as the Reign of Terror, which took place from September 5th, 1793, to July 27th, 1794. This was a bloody and gruesome time during the French Revolution. The civil war was spreading and quickly surrounding France, the government took dire and cruel measures upon the enemies, by executing as many as possible who were against the Revolution.(Editors of Britannica 2018) There was one man behind all of this, his name, Maximilien Robespierre, also known as ‘The Incorruptible’. He was responsible for the execution of the royal family and stood proudly behind the hundreds of thousands of executions that took place.(History Editors 2010) It would take years to finally figure out the real problem with Europe, and it was Robespierre himself, As the Reign of Terror died off after the execution of Robespierre, France and Paris were left in ruins, with many families and communities devastated.(Jones 2015)

The Revolution was off to an extraordinary start, but lacked an intelligent leader to drive the Revolution even further. His name was Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre. Born into a well educated family, he followed in his father’s footsteps as a lawyer, and at the age of 30 was elected to the Estates General of the French Legislature in May of 1789.(BBC 2014)’ Help others, achieve their dreams, and you will achieve yours’ (Les Brown). Robespierre was well known for his strong opposing views of the death penalty and slavery, and slowly gained his famous nickname ‘the incorruptible’ as he had a strong reputation of defending and representing the lower class. Being a radical thinker and a prominent leader of the Jacobin Club, he was soon able to dominate the Committee of Public Safety in 1793, and was the driving force which lead the Revolution to its peak.(Fife 2004) Within the next several months, Robespierre and the Revolutionary Government instituted the Reign of Terror which began in September. It seemed like Robespierre was power hungry and he encouraged many more executions to take place even when the Government was no longer threatened. By the summer of 1794 they soon realized that Robespierre was out of control.(Biography Editors 2014) On July 27 1794 the National Convention organized a Coup D’état against him which would soon put an end to his evil reign. After realizing that he needed to be stopped, the Thermidorian Reaction was instituted which took out Government policies which were introduced by Robespierre. At this point there was only one option for Robespierre and that was to flee, which was exactly what he did. Not long after he left, the Conventions National Guard attacked the Hotel where he was staying and found him there unconscious as a result of a suicide attempt. His attempt was a complete failure and he spent his final hours with a broken jaw before his execution.(Jones 2015)

‘Pity is Treason’ (Robespierre). The intensity of the revolution was coming full circle as the King and Queen decided that something had to be done. Under the cover of darkness King Louis XVI, his wife Marie Antoinette, and their children devised a plan to flee to Varennes near the border with the help of Count Axel Von Ferson.(J.Liewellyn and S.Thompson 2018) The plan was simple. The family would arrive to checkpoints within certain time slots to meet soldiers for protection. They would switch out horses along the way to avoid stopping to let the horses rest and to avoid being caught. They planned to travel by coach to Montmedy where it was heavily guarded by royalist soldiers, but their journey was cut short when the King was recognized by a local postmaster. The Royal family was immediately detained and escorted back to Paris, but before they reached Paris word had reached the city and the trust of their beloved King was forever lost. At this point the King was under immense pressure and stress.(Halsall 1997) He had just committed a serious crime, which to the average citizen would be punishable by death, luckily the royal family was protected by the constitution, or so they thought.(Jones 1988) Robespierre did not think that the King should be let off this easily, and with his trial approaching King Louis knew the end was near. On December 11 1792, the king was placed on trial for treason and other crimes under the State, he was found guilty, and would soon feel the wrath of the National Razor. (Editors of Britannica 2018)

On January 20th, the National Convention made their final decision. It was quite rare for the King to be found guilty and to be placed on trial, but this time the Constitution would not protect a selfish king worthy of abandoning his people.(Martin 2012) That evening Louis said his final goodbyes to his family before waking early the next morning to a gloomy and miserable day. A guard of around 1,200 horsemen and soldiers arrived to escort the King to the Place de La Nation where his and all executions would take place. The two hour wagon ride seemed to last an eternity as the procession passed thousands of citizens who lined the streets with pikes and some with guns. It was a silent ride as the carriage slowly stopped in the shadow of the guillotine.(Eye Witness to History Editors 1993) Before exiting the carriage he spoke to the guard, ‘ We are arrived, if I mistake not’ (Louis XVI), as he looked nervously at the contraption looming over him. He stood atop the scaffold looking down to his people when he said, ‘I die innocent of all the crimes laid to my charge; I pardon those who have occasioned my death; and I pray to God that the blood you are going to shed may never be visited on France’ (Louis XVI). After his death the people of Paris anxiously awaited the execution of Marie Antoinette. She was the richest of the rich, and was looked up to with great dignity and respect. ‘Let them eat cake’. (Marie Antoinette), Only the best of the best could afford what they got to enjoy and many people were happy to find that even the best would soon face the worst. In August of 1793, Marie was moved from the Temple Prison to solitary confinement where she would spend much of her time thinking about all the trouble she put her people through. On October 3rd, she was referred to the revolutionary tribunal and hoped that her life would be spared. Before she knew it, she was stripped of her pearl white hair and thrown in a wooden cage. She spent the long wagon ride to the guillotine wondering why she did not get luxury treatment her husband had received.(Jones 1988) The tall scaffold caught her attention as the wagon stopped in the same place as her husband’s had only eight months prior. As Marie exited the wagon the crowds looked at each other with wide eyes and shock, the once beautiful and magnificent queen had now became very pale with white hair, and very skinny.(Editors of Britannica 2018) With the King and Queen finally gone, the blade took one more life and the problems of Paris would only be temporarily solved.

Many people were quite happy that the King and Queen who attempted to abandoned them finally got what they deserved but many did not know the true reason behind it.(Halsall 1997) Or more importantly who was behind it all. Maximilien Robespierre was the man behind the greatest and most well known be-headings in all of Europe. Just because the people were happy that the King and Queen were gone, there was still one more person who they had a great amount of hatred for, and that was Robespierre himself.’A true revolutionary should be ready to perish in the process’ (Robespierre). With the death of the royals now over, the people now focused their attention to Robespierre.(Linton 2006) There was no longer a monarchy since Louis XVI’s oldest son had died from mal-nutrition and the people were completely lost.(Leonard 2018) Another aspect that fueled the reign of Robespierre that the people did not like was his idea that terror is better, ‘Terror is nothing more than justice, prompt, secure, and inflexible’ (Robespierre). Many people at this time did not have the opportunity to voice their opinion, as many people did not like the idea of the death penalty and most of the population feared for their lives. Many people did not agree with Robespierre as he did not like the idea of the death penalty but encouraged it for the execution of the King and Queen.(J.Liewellyn, S.Thompson 2018)

As the biggest supporter of the Reign of Terror, Robespierre was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths during this time.(Editors of Britannica 2018) Europe held a vast population so it was quite difficult to determine which individuals were against the revolution or were speaking ideas that Robespierre did not like.(Issawi 1989) In order to control this he came up with a new plan. He would have under cover spies placed throughout Europe, and they would be placed in common places of discussion, such as markets or bread lines. For example, if an individual was complaining about the price of bread, they would be taken and thrown into jail, and if someone was not complaining about the price of bread they may also be imprisoned.(Leonard 2018) At this time nobody was safe and people had to be extremely careful of the words that came out of their mouths. Many individuals were imprisoned and then executed simply because they were married to someone who had been killed, or was part of the counter revolution, or even someone who was friends of them.(Issawi 1989) Thousands upon thousands of people were killed during this period of time because they were simply associated with those who went against the revolution.(Halsall 1997) ‘Omelets are not made without breaking eggs’ (Robespierre), What he means by this is that they cannot take chances with people if they are suspected to be a counter revolutionary. The French Revolution and the Terror it fueled was too delicate and precious to be tampered with. Anyone would be punished for even the simplest of thoughts. During this period around 300,000 suspects were arrested, 30,000 people were officially executed, and around 10,000 died while in prison awaiting trial.(Editors of Britannica 2018)

‘A fair trial is one in which the rules of evidence are honored, the accused has competent counsel, and the judge enforces the proper courtroom procedures – a trial in which every assumption can be challenged’. (Harry Browne) It is important that each trial is treated fairly and each individual has access to a lawyer and to give their side of the story. On June 10th, 1794, the Committee obtained the law of 22 prairial, which suspended the suspects rights to a public trial which only left the suspect with two options, acquittal or death. With the new law in place, it sped up the process of conviction, which also denied an individual access to a lawyer, so most of them ended up dead. Immediately after the new law was introduced, the amount of deaths spiked with an extra 1,400 executions in a month.(Barber 2008) Most citizens who ended up in prison were there for one of two reasons, one was because they were counter revolutionaries, or two they were connected to someone who was a counter revolutionary or their ideas were not admired in the community.(Halsall 1997)

‘What a great time to be born! What a great time to be alive! Because this generation gets to essentially completely change the world.’ (Paul Hawken) This was not the case in Europe. The Reign of Terror had reached its peak, the terror in Europe had never been as worse as it was during this month(Issawi 1989). The September Massacre claimed the lives of thousands, around 30,000 people were ‘officially’ executed, around 300,000 people were arrested, and roughly 10,000 died in prisons. It is unofficial of the total death amount during the Reign of Terror but it is said that there may have been many more deaths that were not recorded. The events of the September Massacre begins its story on September 1st. The Fortress of Verdun had fallen and many were executed, including wagons full of prisoners who were killed on the spot. Prisons were raided, and the prisoners were dragged from their cells and beaten to death in very gruesome and disturbing ways. Over the course of five days between, 1100 and 1300 prisoners out of the 2600 total prisoners held in Paris were killed before reaching trial. Miraculously, the Paris Commune did absolutely nothing to stop the mass killings and actually voted to pay the murderers for what they had done.(Martin 2012) ‘The Revolution had been shaped by violence’ (D.G.Wright). During this time in France it was very true that the Revolution was shaped by violence but was actually seen throughout Europe. Between the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, Europe had lost a great amount of its population to war and violence.(Issawi 1989) The Revolution saw many executions that supposedly were to benefit the Country, but that idea only worked to a certain extent. While 90% of Europe was being destroyed and rocked with mass executions, there was still a small percentage of people who were not affected by the terror at all.(Wright 1993) Robespierre plays a major part in the September Massacres but will soon face the consequences.(Editors of Britannica 2018)

‘Death never takes the wise man by surprise, he is always ready to go’ (Jean de la Fontaine) Maximilien Robespierre was the leader of the Committee of Public Safety, which effectively governed France at the peak of the revolution. Being a leader of this Committee and an active citizen during this time, Robespierre knew the dangers and risks he took as he gave his speeches and spoke his mind.(Halsall 1997) That one day he may pay for what he has said and that is exactly what happened on July 28, 1794.(History Editors 2010) Robespierre had fueled the Revolution and carried it much farther than expected, so after his death it decreased quite a bit. With Robespierre out of the picture, the Revolution was at a standstill. During this time, Robespierre was the only man who truly cared and enforced the fierceness of the terror. When he left, everything declined and the people saw this as an opportunity to reclaim their lives and to bring back society to its natural state. Many would not realize that it would take another five years for Europe to restore to its natural state and completely wash the terror and destruction from Europe. As we look back onto the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror, it is clear that once Robespierre was eliminated, things were fine. Ideas like this will come about in future conflicts with Adolf Hitler in World War Two.(Barber 2008)

The People of Paris could finally see the light at the end of the tunnel. News had reached town that Robespierre was arrested and the people were ecstatic. A few days prior, Robespierre was becoming very upset with the progression of the Revolution and decided it was finally time to make a change. He attempted to make changes to benefit what he wanted and once he was denied, he started to issue threats to the National Convention and was arrested for his actions. Robespierre decided to go into hiding and stayed at the Hôtel de la ville. As the guards were headed up to his room to arrest him, they heard a gunshot and a window break. As the guards burst into the room they found that one man had jumped out of the window, another dead on the floor and Robespierre laying semi conscious on the ground with a broken jaw. On July 28, 1794, Maximilien Robespierre was sent to the guillotine and was claimed a victim of his own terror. After his death, it was said that Robespierre’s testimony was not valid or important and that it would have been easier for him to die at the guillotine than wait several hours with a broken jaw.(Jones 2015) ‘Sleep is good, death is better; but of course, the best thing would to have never been born at all’ (Heinrich Heine) At this time there was another man who rose to power, his name was George Danton. Danton and Robespierre did not quite see eye to eye, as Robespierre believed more in a Republic based on virtue, philosophy, and Justice, while Danton believed in a Republic based on tradition, nobility, and domestic peace. There was only room for one man, and the Revolution was the opportunity to destroy one another. Their differences would eventually split the nation apart and both men would fall victim of what they had created.(Purcell) Most citizens in Paris at this time would strongly agree with this quote that Robespierre caused nothing but trouble and that many were happy at this death. After the execution, the people felt free. Like they have been locked in a cage for years and now they can finally voice their opinions without worrying about who is listening or going to jail.(History Editors 2010) Lastly, the death of Robespierre shows the pain that he caused his people, physically and emotionally.

Joseph Ignace Guillotin had suggested that there should be a more humane and practical way to carry out the death penalty. In 1789, designs were drawn and the guillotine made its first debut. Over the course of several years the guillotine was both feared and loved by many in Paris.(History Editors 2010) Until the death of Robespierre, the guillotine had seen 71 be-headings in one hour, but after his death it was lucky to see 71 be-headings in one week. The amounts of death that were performed over the course of the Reign of Terror dramatically declined which proves that Robespierre was the sole problem of the Revolution.(A.L. 2010) ‘Terror, terror, terror. Life was a reign of terror in the shadow of the guillotine’ (Paulo Coelho)

The Revolution was a time of change, for better or for worse. Many people believe that the Revolution ended with the death of Robespierre, but there were still many executions that took place after his death.(History Editors 2010) With the frigid cold winter soon arriving, and the high price of bread, Robespierre knew that this was the right time to lead his people in a social movement. They would protest against the food shortages and their high prices.(Thompson 2017) With little time left, the great leader Maximilien Robespierre would be remembered for many generations as a man of great intellect, dignity and respect.(Biography Editors 2014)

‘Don’t live in fear of dying’ (Valerie Harper) As the reality of the death of Robespierre set in to the lives of the people, they felt as if a weight had been lifted off of their shoulders. They were finally free, or so they thought.(History Editors 2010) With Robespierre finally gone and the Reign of Terror slowly declining, the amount of executions by guillotine were still high. It took roughly five years for Europe to become normal and the use of the guillotine to become extinct.(Barber 2008) Many people were still executed after his death for sharing their own ideas or being accused of the counter- Revolution. This was still a very dark and gruesome time during the revolution and took time for people to realize that maybe the problem was not all Robespierre’s fault, maybe it was the government.(Wright 1993) This was the first time in history where the use of ‘terror’ became an official Government policy. Their goal was to use violence to achieve a higher goal by serving justice to the Counter-Revolutionaries. During this time the term ‘terrorist’ surfaced and was commonly referred to the French Government, as the members of the Convention voted for the use of terror to be legal only during this time.

‘Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite’ (Motto of the French Republic). Many people lived by this motto in France and respected the ideas that everyone should have equal rights and to be able to live their lives they deserve. Many people could no longer respect this motto when the price of food increased and the people were hit hard by a major food shortage. The Sans Culottes who were the common people of the lower class were hit the hardest by this food shortage, as many of these individuals spent more than half of their income on food in order to survive.(Jones 1988) After the coldest winter in nearly 90 years, the price of bread fueled the anger inside those of the lower class and soon began erupting in anger and violence. Many thought with some time things would start to change but really they only got worse. The harvest did not improve, the winters became even worse, and soon enough they were fed up with the Government. The rural areas began a rebellion against the Revolutionary Government asking them to step in and to do something about the food shortages and the high costs. Members of the Sans Culottes believed that farmers and merchants were taking the grain and keeping it for themselves which led to farms and markets being raided and many people executed.(Thompson 2017)

‘Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way’ (General George Patton) Robespierre led his people through the most difficult and dangerous time of the Revolution. He gained their trust to support what he believed in. Robespierre took up his first leadership role when he was elected to the Estates General of French Legislature in 1789.(Editors of Britannica 2018) During this time he led the Jacobins and fueled the revolution with his powerful yet insane ideas.(Fife 2004) In 1793, he was elected to the Committee of Public Safety and led them into the darkest part of the Reign of Terror.(Barber 2008) As Robespierre slowly began to make his way to the top, he established a new religion as to eliminate the traditional day of prayer.(Editors of Britannica 2018) Robespierre did not have a lot to bring to the table, but when he did he used powerful and moving speeches to convince and attract the ears of his audience. The leadership skills and his many qualities can be seen in similar individuals, such as Adolf Hitler and his Government during World War Two. Together Robespierre and Hitler had shared many qualities within their time, such as elaborate and moving speeches, being active in their communities, and finally their ideas and thoughts led to their defeat and death. A great leader should be friendly to his people and do what is best for his society, which is exactly what Robespierre did, as with many politicians they have a good run from the beginning of their time and usually ends badly or gets worse as their career ends.

There is a great debate between historians over Robespierre and if the revolution and Reign of Terror truly ended after his execution. Statistics prove during days following Robespierre’s death that the amount of deaths by guillotine declined dramatically. This ultimately proved that Robespierre was the root of the problem and was held responsible for all the destruction and death that tore apart Europe.(Editors of Britannica 2018) The terror in France was the least of some people’s problems. Instead many were starving and would not make it through the harsh winter rapidly approaching. It was claimed that Robespierre had led the social movement against food shortages and high bread prices but the people did not need him to tell them what they already knew.(Thompson 2017) The Sans Culottes already knew that there was something wrong with the economy and they did not need a man living the luxurious lifestyle to tell them what they needed to do in order to get what they needed. ‘Let them eat cake’ (Marie Antoinette) was what really started the fire which encouraged the lower classes to fight back against the shortage of food. They felt that it was not fair that the Royals could afford the luxuries while many people could not afford to eat and had to give up everything to enjoy one meal.(Jones 1988) Lastly with Robespierre looking down to his people they soon realized that he only did things which was best for him. Eventually the only solution would be his death. His thoughts and ideas only made things worse and was leading the revolution down the wrong path.(Issawi 1989)

‘When a thing is done, it’s done. Don’t look back, look forward to what’s coming next’ (anonymous) A revolution is what they wanted and a revolution is what they got was the unofficial motto which Maximilien Robespierre lived by during his time.(Editors of Britannica 2018) He was responsible for many actions during The Reign of Terror but most famously the trial and death of Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette after being found guilty of treason.(Jones 1988) The guillotine was hard at work with hundreds of innocent fathers, shop owners, peasants and many other people being executed every single day. Robespierre was never praised more as he was the sole reason of the Reign of Terror and eventually became victim of his own terror.(Issawi 1989) In a final analysis it is without a doubt that Maximilien Robespierre had encouraged the Reign of Terror throughout Europe until the incorruptible fell victim of what he had created.(Halsall 1997)

Bibliography

1. ‘Maximilien De Robespierre’, Biography.com, A&E Networks Television, 9, Nov 2015, www.biography.com/people/maximilien-de-robespierre-37422
2. Barber, Nicola. The French Revolution. Wayland, 2008
3. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Reign of Terror.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 29 Aug. 2018, www.britannica.com/event/Reign-of-Terror.
4. Danton versus Robespierre, inside.ucumberlands.edu/academics/history/files/vol6/Aaron Purcell94.html
5. Fife, Graeme. The Terror: the Shadow of the Guillotine ; France 1793-1794. Portrait, 2004.
6. Halsall, Paul Internet History Sourcebooks, Aug 1997 sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/robespierre-terror.asp
7. ‘History-historic figures: Maximilien Robespierre (1758-1794)BBC,www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/robespierre_maximilien.shtml
8. Issawi Charles ‘web.b.ebscohost.com’ The cost of the French revolution, summer89, web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail
9. Jones, Colin, and Richard Cobb. Voices of the French Revolution. Salem House Publishers, 1988
10. Liewellyn J, and S Thompson. ‘The French Revolution’, alphahistory.com/French revolution/.
11. Linton Marisa. ‘web.b.ebscohost.com’. Robespierre and the terror, Aug 2006, web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail
12. Louis XVI, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/Louis.htm
13. Martin, Dave. The French Revolution. Hodder Education, 2012.
14. ‘Maximilien De Robespierre’, Biography.com, A&E Networks Television, 9, Nov 2015, www.biography.com/people/maximilien-de-robespierre-37422
15. Michael Leonard, World History class 2018
16. Remains of the day- Ebsco information services connection.ebscohost.com/remains of the day
17. The Editors of History.com, Watch Full Episodes of your favourite shows, History.com, A&E Television Networks, www.History.com/.
18. The Editors of History.com, watch full episodes of your favourite shows,History.com, A&E Television Networks,www.History.com
19. The Fall of Robespierre-EBSCO information services connection.ebscohost.com/the fall of Robespierre
20. The French Revolution – EBSCO Information Services. connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/34108651/french-revolution
21. Thompson, Scott.’About food shortages in the French Revolution’. Synonym, 28 sept 2017, classroom, synonym.com/anout-food-shortages-in-the-french-revolution-12078373.html/
22. Wright, D. G. Revolution and Terror in France: 1789-1795. Longman, 1993.

The Roles Of Ideologies In Revolutions

The role ideologies play in revolutions is not to be underestimated. Neither the French nor the Chinese Cultural Revolutions would have been possible without the ideologies that spurred on the revolutionaries. As celebrated historian Morris Berman said, “an idea is something you have; an ideology is something that has you”. The ideologies of each revolution held the nations and assisted in creating leaders and organisations, caused international influences on the revolutions, and fosters extreme violence and terror.

The Chinese Cultural Revolution lasted from 1966 until 1976 and was instigated by Chairman Mao Zedong to continue developing Marxism-Leninism in China and quash his enemies. In the 1960s, opposition against Chairman Mao was growing amongst the general population, and the revolution was a way for him to demonstrate his strength and capabilities, as well as removing any potential threats to his power. The heart of the Chinese Cultural Revolution was found in the ‘4 olds’ – the central ideologies of the revolution. Old ideas, culture, customs and habits of mind were seen by the Chinese Communist Party and Mao as threats to their power, and disguised as a movement for the people, Mao destroyed these elements of Chinese culture. Mao recorded his ideologies in his ‘Little Red Book’ which became compulsory reading for the military, but soon everybody owned it and the book was elevated to Bible-like status. The main followers of the powerful leader were known as Red Guards, who idolised Mao and his ideologies, and committed humiliating and violent acts against those who refuted these ideologies. Mainly composed of students, the Red Guards were entirely loyal to Mao, not his party. They had been conditioned into believing the propaganda they had seen in schools, such as songs, newspaper articles and posters, and publicly humiliated, tortured or murdered those who did not. The ideologies of the revolution had consumed the Guards, who were reduced to violence when faced with opposition of them. Just as much as the Red Guards depended on the revolution, however, the revolution depended on the Red Guards. They were a massive popular organisation, with numbers well into the millions, and had the power to completely sway the revolution in Mao’s favour. Military and political organisations also tended to sway towards Mao, immediately quelling any protests against Mao’s ideologies. As most power stems directly from government and military organisations, it was vital for Mao to sway them towards his ideologies. However, Mao also believed that power could be obtained by harnessing the masses, so much of his revolutionary propaganda was aimed at proletarians and students, who had the most mouldable minds and could be harnessed more easily than intellectuals, who were more likely to question his teachings. To combat this, Mao branded intellectuals and the bourgeoisie ‘class enemies’ who were against his revolutionary teachings. He quietly encouraged violence and dazibao, or ‘big character posters’, a poster condemning somebody as anti-socialist and anti-communist, against these groups to force them to retreat and assert his dominance, but he could not control everyone. In 1971, Belgian professor Simon Leys said, ‘The ‘Cultural Revolution’ had nothing revolutionary about it except the name, and nothing cultural about it except the first tactical excuse. It was a power struggle fought at the top between a handful of men and behind the smokescreen of a fictitious mass movement.’ However, he does acknowledge that Mao’s ability to create effective propaganda did eventually create a revolutionary movement. Although it was not intentional, Mao’s ideologies were so attractive to the people of China that a genuine revolution occurred.

The French Revolution, a decade-long period of political upheaval, occurred between 5 May 1789 and 9 November 1799. One of the most famous slogans of the revolution, ‘liberté, egalité, fraternité’, or ‘liberty, equality and fraternity’, is still one of the official French mottos to this day. It first appeared painted on the front of Parisian houses in 1793, and grew to become the main ideologies of the entire revolution. This ideology was spread quickly through France through societies and groups such as the Jacobins, led by revolutionary leader Maximilien Robespierre. Robespierre was not the only leader, however – there were also people like Marquis de Lafayette Gilbert du Motier, the author of the Declaration of the Rights for Man and of the Citizen, and Napoleon Bonaparte, a revolutionary general who became the first Consul of the Republic after the Directory was overthrown in 1799. The French Revolution was characterised by not only the leadership, but also the organisations.

Dozens of political organisations were formed during the Revolution, each member representing their organisation’s own ideologies. Two of the most radical opposing groups were the Jacobins and the Royalists. The Jacobins believed strongly in the idea of having a republic as opposed to a monarchy, and are often associated with a period known as the ‘reign of terror’, where anybody suspected of treason would be arrested and executed. The Royalists staunchly opposed the Jacobins’ ideologies, and believed in an absolute monarchy. Both organisations were highly elitist and exclusive, and were mainly composed of upper class citizens. The main popular organisation was made up of sans-culottes, named after the fact that they did not wear breeches like the upper classes, who were the lower-middle classes of French society. Their demonstrations were characterised by spontaneity, mass involvement, and violence, and as a result the French Revolution is considered one of the most violent revolutions in modern history. Although previously this violence was only thought to occur during the Reign of Terror, historian François Furet has challenged this notion, believing that it occurred all through the revolution. This is supported by evidence at the storming of the Bastille, which occurred in 1789. Members of the garrison were murdered by uprisers, and the commander’s head was displayed on a pole as a message to royalists. There were many more violent events preceding the Reign of Terror; the March to Versailles, Louis XVI’s execution, the September Massacres, and the Champ de Mars are just some of the examples. All of these events resulted in bloodshed at the hands of the revolutionaries, and all of them occurred before the beginning of the Reign of Terror in September 1793. These attacks were also all governed by a central ideology: to end the monarchy and replace it with a new era of rule. Other nations were concerned by this ideology, and sought to end the revolution. Neighbouring monarchical countries such as Great Britain, Austria and Prussia defended the French monarchy in the hopes of preserving their own, in what came to be known as the French Revolutionary Wars. French victories in these wars resulted their revolutionary ideologies being spread around the world. The ideologies shaped the French Revolution, and in turn the world around it.

Ideologies are one of the key factors in revolutions, and the French and Chinese Cultural Revolutions are no exception. Mao’s “4 olds” and the French “liberté, egalité, fraternité” helped spread the messages of the revolution across the nations. Each revolution was violent, and involved powerful leaders and influential organisations. There was also some international influence, however this was less noticeable. The revolutions revolved around the ideologies, and they have shaped the nations to this day.

Bibliography

1. Fielding, M & Morcombe, M 1999, The Spirit of Change: France in Revolution, McGraw Hill, Sydney, NSW.
2. Hammond, C 2006, ‘The French Revolution and the Enlightening of Military Justice’, Journal of the Western Society for French History, vol. 34, pp. 1-3, viewed 8 September 2019, Library – University of Michigan, Regents
3. Leys, S 1978, The Chairman’s New Clothes: Mao and the Cultural Revolution, St. Martin’s Press, Brussels
4. Silva-Grondin, M 2010, ‘Degrees of Violence in the French Revolution’, Inquiries Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-1, viewed 8 September 2019, Inquiries Journal, Student Pulse LLC
5. Encyclopaedia Britannica n.d., French Revolutionary Wars, viewed 8 September 2019, https://www.britannica.com/event/French-revolutionary-wars
6. France Diplomatie n.d., Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, French Government, viewed 8 September 2019, https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/coming-to-france/france-facts/symbols-of-the-republic/article/liberty-equality-fraternity
7. Wikipedia n.d., List of political groups in the French Revolution, viewed 8 September 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_groups_in_the_French_Revolution

Terror Management Theory In Understanding Violence And Conflict

Terror management theory (TMT) assumes humans have protective defence mechanisms for existential anxiety experienced when they contemplate their mortality. Unlike animals, the ability to conceive our own death internalises an immense fear. What makes us overcome this and distinguishes us from animals is ‘culture’. Culture provides a lens through which to view and interpret the world; a source of meaning and value; dependant on conforming. (Greenberg et al, 1986).

Terror is managed by a cultural worldview, containing an anxiety buffer including two components: a personalised version providing meaning, standards of value and promising either literal or symbolic immortality (Greenberg et al, 1997). Secondly, self-esteem is built on the belief that standards of value have been adopted by one’s worldview and upheld, which ultimately decreases anxiety associated with mortality (Solomon et al, 1991b). Literal immortality is the belief of life after death supported by spiritual concepts such as an everlasting soul. Conversely, symbolic immortality, refers to what remains from our lives after death such as culturally valued achievements; a sense of self-importance (Greenberg and Kosloff, 2008). Empirical research assessing TMT has focused on two general hypotheses. The anxiety-buffer hypothesis; increasing self-esteem reduces anxiety in response to awareness of death and physiological arousal in response to the threat of pain (Greenberg et al, 1992) Conversely, the mortality salience hypothesis (MS), (Harmon-Jones et al, 1997) states that reminders of mortality increase the need for faith in the worldview, increasing positive responses that support it and violence to anything that threatens it (Arndt et al, 1997).

Various studies have demonstrated that MS increases negativity toward alternate worldviews; individuals defend their cultural worldview showing they possess socially valuable attributes (Greenberg and Kosloff, 2008). MS has demonstrated an increase in violence against conflicting worldviews (McGregor et al, 1998) and amplifies inter-individual intergroup discontinuity effect, inclining aggressive attributes (McPherson and Joireman, 2009). TMT proposes that withdrawing death-related thoughts, leads to stronger worldview defence and support for extremist violence. Studies have examined the effect of MS on behavioural aggression. Solomon et al (1991a) suggested that reactions to the threat posed by an alternative conception of reality include both derogation and aggression. Additionally, behavioural violence and conflict toward outgroups is a primary coping mechanism of cultural worldview defence (McGregor et al, 1998). Moreover, Greenberg et al, 2001 found increased support for white racism following a MS manipulation experiment suggesting increases in conflict.

According to McGregor et al, 1998, individuals need confidence in their worldviews and are likely to be displeased with those who threaten this sometimes resulting in aggression. Attempts to neutralize threats, has resulted in asserting conflict to destroy or intentionally hurt those who are different (Solomon et al, 1991a). Violence is defined as behaviour with intent to harm however evidence suggests there are other modes of defence in response to MS. Berger and Luckmann, 1967 found worldview threat can be diffused through accommodation. Grouping certain compelling elements about threatening alternative worldview while discarding the threatening components. This is used alongside, the threat of force to terminate conflict using verbal aggression for example in the fear of being overpowered by a conflicting threat (Greenberg et al, 1998).

Undoubtedly situational and dispositional factors affect the worldview defence mechanism of violence and conflict. According to the theory’s main hypothesis of self-esteem, this trait differs between individuals and how they act when faced with threat. High self-esteem protects individuals from mortality concerns; it serves as a gauge of leading a meaningful, valued life in the context of one’s cultural worldview (Wisman and Heflick, 2016). Additionally, Harmon-Jones et al, 1997 demonstrated high self-esteem is associated with less death thought accessibility. However, low self-esteem, reduces life satisfaction and feelings of vitality while increasing negative effects; anxiety which could ultimately lead to conflict, and violence (Bushman et al, 2009). Koc and Kafa, 2019 concluded low self-esteem increases negative thoughts, resulting in difficulties coping with threat, which sequentially results in acts of conflict. Nevertheless, high self-esteem individuals learn to rationalise and face pressures optimistically.

Research reveals both genetic and environmental factors have a profound effect on the development of self-esteem and security. According to Bowlby 1969, inner working models help cope with regulating emotions during child development. The influence of parental relationships coping with anxiety during childhood have similarities with coping with death anxiety. Mortality becomes more apparent with age, parental protectiveness decreases, however death anxiety is eased by attaching their worldview (Harmon-Jones et al, 1977). Examining TMT and the influence of attachment, indicate, attachment style impacts terror of death and coping mechanisms. Koc and Kafa, 2019 identified, securely-attached individuals have lower death anxiety and a higher sense of symbolic immortality resulting in less fear of death. Conversely, anxious-ambivalent attachment types, experience overwhelming fear and fail to develop efficient coping mechanisms. Struggles to avoid sources of threat and repressing negative emotions, alongside the inability to attain a sense of symbolic immortality, increases violence as a means of coping (Mikulincer and Florian, 2000). Consequently, attachment type is an important factor in understanding how violence and conflict relate to TMT.

It is evident violence and conflict is often a response to worldview threat but not always applicable. Underlying reasons could be traced to individual interactions, genetics, attachment type, mental-health and personality. Furthermore, from a TMT perspective religion plays a pivotal role. Religious beliefs are well suited to mitigate death anxiety as it promises literal immortality. MS produces increased faith in afterlife and spiritual beliefs. Rothschild et al, 2009 describes how relating to religious systems in a fundamentalist way tend to justify hostility against out-groups. Despite the need to engage in secular worldview defence when mortality is salient, this tends to result negatively, often in violent postures towards out-group members (Vail et al, 2010). Norenzayan et al 2009, demonstrated that those who are religious, respond contrarily to existential threats with believers responding in a more defensive way. Future empirical research may benefit from differing worldviews on the topic of violence, conflict and how it relates to terror management; those who hold secular or religious views (or agnostic) have

Was the Reign of Terror Justified: Argumentative Essay

France had many struggles. They had corrupt monarchies. France’s king did not know how to handle his people. King Louis only cared about the money that was given to him by his allies and the money that the Third Estate made. The king was unorganized. The commoners were suffering because of all the labor they were doing. The Third Estate never got to keep the money, it all went to the taxes. While the other citizens were privileged. The citizens didn’t care about the issues that France was facing. The nobles and clergy are the other citizens. All the political and economic problems were not being solved. It all just kept adding up. One problem on top of another. Until France lost its power. The Third Estate took action and tried to make France’s issues disappear. After all the corrupt monarchies, crazy dictators, and different types of government France was finally at peace. The French Revolution was a success because a lower class of people took control of power from the higher powers.

Just like any nation France had social classes. The Third Estate(commoners) used its population to stand up for themselves. The first and second estates are the nobles and clergy. They were privileged. The commoners wanted taxes to be spread equally among the other estates. Whenever there would be meetings between the three General Estates to communicate about the problems, the Third Estate General would always lose because their votes were not seen. The nobles and clergy would team up to outvote the Third Estate. The reason for that was that the two estates would always want to continue living their lavish lives. They would want to spend their money on luxury items and fancy places. The monarchs would play a part in this situation too. Queen Marie Antoinette spent her money recklessly as well. She was called “madame deficit”. King Louis XVI was able to do a lot of things. Considering he is an absolute monarch. One of his powers was that he was able to declare war whenever he wanted to. War did

not come cheap. It cost a lot of money. He put France in debt. He depended on the commoners who were already struggling for money to pay taxes for his mistakes. France was agriculturally based, the citizens depended on farms. Whenever terrible weather, heavy rain, hard winters, and hot summers, would affect the crops by causing them to die. The third estate owned 65% of the land. The nobles and clergy would hog all the bread so that the rest couldn’t get any. They were very selfish. That selfishness would cause conflict. Citizens would fight people for food to be able to feed themselves and their families. Bread riots would break out across France. Since the upper estate did not have to pay taxes it was easy to gain bread at any time of their need. Commoners made up most of the population. The Third Estate paid 100% of government taxation. The bourgeoisie was rich and smart, but they had to pay taxes. They believed in Enlightenment and they were eager for a change. The Third Estate created the National Assembly. Since it was made up of 96% of the population, the commoners united to stand up to the king. They believed that they deserved attention. The National Assembly made a constitution. It was a list of grievances from the commoners. On that list the Third Estate wrote it in a sweet way so that the king will take pity on them; So that eventually, the king would agree with them. The National Assembly pledged an oath called the Tennis Court Oath. The third estate all went to the tennis court and did not leave until the king agreed to listen to them. The third estate used its population to persuade the king to give equal distribution in taxes. This was the first deliberate act of revolution.

Women in France had no equal rights but were given an opportunity to achieve them. The National Assembly is based on liberty, equality, and fraternity; Fraternity means brotherhood. In France only men had rights. Rousseau, Voltaire, and John Locke influenced them.

Enlightenment inspired the third estate to stand up for themselves. The king’s rights were limited. The church was also being devoted to by the citizens. The enlightenment influenced the citizens to know what was right and what was wrong. Their rights were supposed to unify them to minimize conflict. Taxes were spread evenly amongst the citizens including the nobles. Enlightenment thinkers were influenced by the making of rights. Locke believed that people have natural-born rights and the right to rebel. France became a republic, meaning one man one vote. Instead of relying on the monarchy. The success of the American Revolution inspired the upbringing of the French Revolution. The National Assembly abolished the feudal system. The old regime, government-controlled by the monarch, is gone. The feudal system was supposed to bring order. The feudal system was exchanging work for land. But all the power went to the upper estates and the work was left with the lower estates. It represented the social class that angered the commoners. Girls were learning how to be helpful at home and how to be a wife. Women’s rights were always argued. August 4, 1789 feudalism is gone. The rights of men and citizens were only meant for men not women. King Louis XVI was going to dismiss the National Assembly. It angered many citizens and women united to attack Versailles. The women’s march on Versailles was successful. It portrayed women as strong and independent. After that women were declared to be equal to men. Women were affected by the Enlightenment by having the right to vote. At first, women were not allowed to vote but men were. A feminist named Mary Wallstone Craft saw that it was unfair and wrote books that influenced other women. They had a chance to stand up for themselves. They had organizations and they protested. They succeeded and were finally able to vote. There were monarchs who were also affected by the enlightenment. They were called Enlightened Despots. They put enlightenment ideas into their rules. Catherine the

Great was an Enlightened Despot. She supported arts and funded philosophers. Also, she helped kids and young ladies. Being a woman and ruler made Catherine The Great admirable because she was influenced by enlightenment ideas and in return spread them as well.

Enlightenment thinkers challenged the position and purpose of Absolute monarchs. Absolute monarchies were rulers who had absolute power. No one was allowed to question them. Because of the enlightenment, citizens started to challenge not only monarchs but the church as well. Absolute monarchs like king Louis XVI would punish people who opposed him. Some absolute monarchs were greatly fully influenced by the enlightenment. Catherine The Great gains power from 1762 until 1796. She was a great ruler. She was corresponding with Voltaire. The philosopher believed in freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and separation of powers. The monarchs despised the parliament. The parliament is the representative of the people. John Locke was a philosopher who believed that people have natural-born rights and the right to protest. France became a hotspot for Enlightenment thinkers. A philosopher named Diderot created an encyclopedia. It was a threat to governments and churches because it had knowledge that did not come from the church itself. Louis XVI was an absolute monarch. He inforced and made laws. He showed unfair criminal justice. Also, he took away the freedom of speech and the press. He was against enlightenment. Louis XVI was only able to fire and hire management for financial problems. There was no food and only bread because of the bad weather. It caused so much conflict. This issue would lead to a revolt because the citizens rely on their king to be able to provide his people with food. The citizens wanted to change because of the economic problem and weak leaders. Because of the unsolved and unfair issue, the National Assembly is to unify the commoners. The National Assembly limited the power of King Louis XVI. So he decided that he

was going to dismiss the National Assembly. The storming of the Bastille was where the citizens of France imprisoned the royal family. The fall of the Bastille became a symbol. July 14 became an independence day in France. Because of the revolution, there was a lot of fighting. Nobles hired outlaws to terrorize the commoners. The commoners broke down the manor houses. Parisian women rioted because of the price of bread. Because of all the chaos, the king and his family escaped. Louis tried escaping because of the attacks that the commoners were going to attack his home. His escape was a failure. Supporters and enemies saw the king as a traitor because he tried to escape. The National Assembly didn’t know what to do with the king. There was a power vacuum, where a leader was taken out and the citizens tried to take power. The Legislative Assembly was created to limit the king’s power, again. There was a new constitution that still gave the king the power to enforce laws. There were 3 general groups, radicals, moderates, and conservatives. The Radicals were the ones who were mostly in power. The nobles hoped for the Old Regime to come back. Austria and Prussia wanted Louis XVI to be an absolute monarch again. The Legislative assembly declared power in April 1792. Tuileries threatened Parisians and Parisians invaded them because the royal family stayed there. Nobles, priests, prisoners, and supporters of the monarchy were killed by the Radicals. These killings were called September Massacres. Then a new governing body was made, called the National Convention. They abolished the monarchy and made France a republic. Women were not given the vote. Members of the Radicals were the Jacobins. They sentenced Louis XVI to his death. And was beheaded by the guillotine. France had even more enemies. England, Spain, Austria, the Netherlands, and Prussia are all against France. The other monarchs are afraid that their own citizens will rise up to power and take their crown away from them. Robespierre was a part of the Radicals. He was

the leader of the committee on public safety. He wiped out France’s past. Changed the calendar to no Sundays. He closed all the churches because he believed that the church admired the monarchy. His rule became known as the Reign of Terror. The committee of public safety was formed to defend France against internal and external enemies. The purpose of the organization was to take out enemies. Robespierre justified the Reign of terror by using inhumane ways to kill people. He used enlightenment ideas to equally punish people. The guillotine was his weapon of choice. It would quickly chop off the heads of the wrongdoers. He killed those who showed hatred against him, others, and or his ideas. Also, he would punish people who showed admiration for the king. He killed whoever showed wealth in their clothing. The killings caused people to live in constant fear. Whenever they would go outside and just see dead bodies. That fear made people follow him and see him as a leader. They were too scared to stand up against Robespierre because they knew the consequences. Other citizens saw the fear he was causing and actually went against him. He had also caused fear among his co-workers. Robespierre believed that the only people who have the right to be in France are the people who support the Radicals. The National Convent wanted Robespierre dead. He was executed. The citizens were desperate for a strong leader. The directory called for Napoleon Bonaparte. He became a hero. Napoleon crowned himself, showing that he is so much more powerful than the church. He started to lose power and got exiled. After going back and forth he was exiled again and died. France did not have a leader, again. Then the Congress of Vienna came to help out France. The nations of an entire continent worked together to control political affairs. The nation’s choices were fair and agreed with each other. Whenever meetings were being held, the congress made sure everyone’s opinions were heard to avoid any conflict. The congress also made the nation’s surrounding

France gets together so that no nation can overpower anyone else. They left France with almost no power, which was a good idea because it created peace. They also brought back legitimacy; Meaning the monarchs who were supposed to be ruling France came back. But they were constitutional monarchs. The Congress of Vienna left a lasting peace for France.

The French Revolution was not successful. Enlightenment ideas caused many conflicts. The citizens were being punished for believing in the fact that they can completely overthrow the monarchy. The monarchy had more power over them even if they were limited. The parliament couldn’t stop monarchies from being limited to their absolute power. If there are any issues within governments or politics, those issues will constantly be in the way of decision-making for the citizens. The National Assembly couldn’t limit king Loui’s power. He was still able to dismiss them if the Radicals didn’t attack. The Radicals attacking the royal family caused them to kill people that were not part of the issue. At the end, when the Congress of Vienna made sure France had no power, they still put back the monarchy. But his power was limited, which still means he was still on top of the citizens.

France was put in trouble when they started the Revolution. They had even more enemies to begin with. Other nations attacked France because of the ideas they were spreading. The other nations did not want their nation to be in a Revolution as well. During the Reign of Terror, there were a lot of casualties. Even his co-workers were afraid of him that they had to kill him with his own killing machine. Napoleon crowned himself in front of everyone in a church. He challenged the church by showing he had more power than them. The leaders that France had been always craving for power. Once they have the power they start taking advantage of it and it would leads them to their death.

Getting what people want is not an easy road. Especially, if it’s a whole nation. Where thousands of people’s opinions are constantly changing. France went through a lot of leaders, enemies, and death to arrive at their goal. In the end, France’s citizens got equal rights. Also, after all the challenges they went through; They finally overcame them.