The French Revolution
(some material adapted
from
http://www.assumption.edu/HTML/Academic/history/Hi118net/FrenchRevolutionChronology.html)
WHICH
IDEAS DON’T BELONG
TOGETHER?
tyranny
liberty
peace
violence
free
market
socialism
Overview
- In 1789, the French
Revolution started out to end the arbitrary rule of kings and their high taxes.
- Instead the Revolution brought the "Reign of Terror" and the execution of
as many as 40,000 people here was runaway inflation, war and chaos, ushering in
Napoleon who established the first modern police state and started more
wars.
What happened? What led up to the French
Revolution?
1. political reasons
2. economic reasons
3.
philosophical reasons
1. political reasons - begin with the
King
Pre Revolution History
- France was an absolute
monarchy. (“The state is myself” - Louis XIV)
- Louis XIV (1643 –
1715), France’s Sun King, was the envy of all other rulers in Europe. During his
reign he had centralised the government and had encouraged trade and
manufacture.
- DOWNSIDE: Court at Versailles, 20 mi. outside Paris
* 30
yrs in the making
* Grand Canal, FOuntain of Apollo, miles of gardens, 1361
foot high chateau, 240ft long Hall of Mirrors
* 7000 court officials
*
small army of servants, priets, gardeners, playwrights, musicians, doctors,
etc.
* expensive food
* ate with a knife and fingers (hated forks)
*
especially loved potatoes
* Versailles is very overcrowded (perfume
instead of baths)
--> This many seem weird, but consider these current
stats about France:
• Fully 50% of the men, and 30% of women, do not
use deodorant.
* In the late 20th century, 96 percent of the French live
in homes equipped with showers or baths
* But only 47 percent bathe every
day, according to a roundup of national surveys published in the daily Le
Figaro in 1998 (source)
• Average British citizen
uses 3 pounds of soap annually. The German uses 2.9 pounds, and the average
Frenchman uses 1.3 pounds. (source)
• Of those surveyed 67% of French
respondents said they brush their teeth twice a day. Le Figaro did the
math. If that were true, sales of toothpaste should be more than 240 million
tubes a year, and not the current (1998) 198.5 million.
• Le
Figaro cited experts who concluded that "more than one French person in two
does not respect elementary rules of body hygiene."
- His undoing was
the long list of over ambitious wars that he had participated in. His successors
Louis XV (1715 – 74) and Louis XVI (1774 – 93) also participated in lengthy and
costly conflicts.
- France had suffered defeat in the Seven Years War
against Britain (1756 – 63). Her army in Europe was crushed by the Prussians.
The involvement in the American Revolution was for revenge against Britain after
the Seven Years War.
- A fatal weakness in the French absolute monarchy
system, was its inability to produce strong monarchs. Louise XVI was not
strong.
On the eve of revolution all sections of French society had
reason to be unhappy:
* The nobles wanted power that was taken from them by
the monarchy
* The bourgeoisie resented the privileges of the nobles
*
The Bourgeoisie and the Peasants criticised the tax system
- Ancien
Regime refers to the old order in France; the social and governmental system
that lasted until the Revolution.
- The Government order in France was
an Absolute Monarchy. Due to the increasingly large powers of a monarch over
society including: National System of Justice, Influenced the Catholic Church,
The Right to decree Taxation and Leader of the military forces, the monarch has
to be a string and stable person. Louis XVI was neither strong nor stable.
Three Estates
- The population was divided into three
states, two privileged
- The Third Estate was made up of the
bourgeoisie, wage earners and the peasantry. They were the majority of the
population. The Third Estate was also known as the estate of the commoners.
- The Second Estate was for the nobility. They numbered 400,000 with
most of them being of minor rank.
- The First Estate comprised the
clergy. The Upper Clergy were very wealthy and powerful and therefore they
related to the First Estate. The Lower Clergy related more to the Lower Estates.
The First Estate numbered around 100,000.
- The first two states enjoyed
privileges over the Third Estate.
- Although they were the richest, they
were exempt from taxes.
- They were also the only members in society who
could hold positions of importance such as Officers in the army.
- This
caused great discontent within the Third Estate.
2. economic
reasons
Growth of Trade and Industry and of town life in
general
- This new growth lead to problems within the Ancien regime.
- Business expansion saw prices steadily rising.
- This did not help the
privileged classes whose incomes were fixed.
- The Bourgeoisie largely
profited from this rise and they became wealthier and more powerful.
- The
Bourgeoisie made up the largest proportion of society in France compared to the
rest of Europe.
- This saw them gaining more attention and power.
- Town
life increases highlighted this fact as more and more bourgeoisie profited from
good business expansion.
- This also made the Bourgeoisie despise the
current tax system as it meant using money to pay tax that they could be using
to expand. They favoured a uniform tax system.
Tax reform?
-
There was great need for tax reform in France before the Revolution.
- The
inefficiency of only taxing the lower estate showed in the Government’s
budgets.
- The peasants were burdened with huge amounts of taxation that were
nearly impossible for them to pay.
- This led to a rather discontented
peasantry within France.
- The Government was experiencing large debts and
eventually went Bankrupt.
- This was made worse by the Nobles
non-cooperation when it came to Taxation.
- The nobles were determined not
to give up their tax concessions.
- This proved to be a great problem for
Louis and his advisers.
- The peasants and bourgeoisie were also unhappy due
to the large taxes that they had to pay.
- Micromanaging the economy:
State intervention necessary?
::contrasts with the United States couldn’t
be more striking:
--> the top five percent of taxpayers paid 56.5
percent of all income taxes in 2000, or about $554 billion.
--> Those
making over $55,225 (top 25%) paid 84% of 2000 income taxes, according to
IRS
-->Those earning only $27,682 or above (top 50%) paid 96.1% of the
2000 income taxes
- 1980: top 1% pays only 19.05% of federal income
taxes
- 2000: top 1% pays 37.42% of federal income taxes
SEE
HISTORICAL CHART AT: http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincometable.html
-
The French Monarchy was successful in running deficit budget after deficit
budget.
- Instead of implementing tax reform Louis was insistent on not
annoying the nobility.
- Therefore he had to borrow the differences in
expenditure and revenue.
- These saws a constant loan cycle develop. When
Turgot tried to stop this, he was overthrown by Marie Antoinette’s hatred of him
and the nobility’s wish to see him
fired. This saw the more complacent
Necker.
The aristocrats were exempt from taxes
- When
Turgot tried to change this, Necker promptly replaced him.
- This shows the
power that the nobility actually held over the King regarding tax concessions.
- A more powerful and strong King may have chose to crush the nobility or to
force taxes upon them. Louis did not.
- Instead France went without tax
reform.
Necker’s reckless loan policy worsened the situation
- Necker the French financial adviser was sacred of the Nobility.
- This saw him refuse to recommend tax reform.
- This is understandable
after the demise of Turgot.
- Necker’s fatal mistake had been in introducing
a loans scheme that saw the public debt rise each year.
- This put the
financial situation of the monarchy in a very precarious position.
This was all worsened by French Aid to the Americans (1776 – 83)
- Expense of sending troops and supplies to aid Washington’s
army
- The expense of sending troops and supplies to America was huge.
-
This is even worse considering France’s already poor financial position.
-
The main reason for sending support to the Americans was to extract revenge
against the British after the humiliating Seven Years War.
- During the last
year of support (1783) the government’s financial difficulties reached a state
of emergency and still Necker and Louis XVI did not introduce tax
reform.
- Due to over ambitious wars and extravagant spending on courts,
Louis XIV and Louis XV had been successful in helping to bankrupt France.
-
Their extravagant spending on courts could be seen by the beauty and sheer size
of Versailles.
- The cost of the wars was great in two ways. The French had
suffered big defeats and therefore had lost men and supplies. They also had
failed to gain any territory; in fact they often lost it.
- The worst war
was the Seven Years War as this economically drained France and saw France lose
most of her colonies to Britain.
3. philsophical
reasons
Growth of new critical ideas – especially amongst the
Bourgeoisie
- Growth of new ideas amongst the Bourgeoisie reflected
their high education levels.
- It also was prompted by the new ‘Age of
Enlightenment’ that was taking place in France.
- Revolutionary thinkers
such as Voltaire, Rousseau, the Encyclopedists combined with economic theorists
combined with new theories.
- They presented an idea of a liberal society
that flourished with free commerce.
- This appealed especially to the
businessman in the ranks of the Bourgeoisie.
- The thinkers also challenged
the absolute right to rule and presented ideas of equal rights and the abolition
of the class system.
- All of this appealed to Bourgeoisie
grievances.
sidebar: Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
- Of
all the great thinkers of the cosmopolitan 18th century, Rousseau was perhaps
the most quotable.
- In his conception of a Republic of Virtue, Robespierre
idolized the genius of Rousseau
- To provide a particularly notorious
example, in The Social Contract (1762), Rousseau worked out the notion of
the General Will, which, simply stated, referred to the will of the
people, reflected through the rational needs of the body politic.
- The
General Will is not specifically the mere representation of a majority opinion.
- If people should unwisely oppose themselves to the General Will, it might
become necessary to force them to be free. Here are Rousseau's own
words:
...whoever refuses to obey the general will shall be
constrained to do so by the whole body; which means nothing else than that he
shall be forced to be free; for such is the condition which, uniting every
Citizen to his Homeland, guarantees him from all personal dependence, a
condition that ensures the control and working of the political machine, and
alone renders legitimate civil engagements, which, without it, would be absurd
and tyrannical, and subject to the most enormous abuse.
American
Revolutionary Ideas
- The cost of support to America was not just
associated with money.
- Already in France a new school of thought was
developing amongst the Bourgeoisie. - This was further aided by the transmission
of Revolutionary thoughts from America back into France.
- Many French
Troops (mainly the Bourgeoisie) came back encouraged by the revolution to
introduce a revolution in France.
- These ideas included that:
* It
is right to take up arms against tyranny
* There should be no taxation
without representation
* All men should have liberal freedoms
* A
Republic is superior to a monarchy.
- Obviously these new ideas provided
much conflict with the ideas prevalent in the Ancien Regime.
- Ideas
expounded by Voltaire and Rousseau held the Bourgeoisie captive.
- They
captured the attention of the Bourgeoisie by promising free commerce and more
liberal freedom.
- Thinkers also challenged the dogmas of absolutism.
-
Reason they believed was a higher force than the monarch’s claim to divine
right.
- The brotherhood of men, equal rights and responsibilities should
replace privileges.
- Men should develop through opportunity and education
and not because of birth.
- This all encouraged critical thinking among the
Lower classes especially the Bourgeoisie.
- They became critical of
absolutism, the class system, privileges and the lack of liberal rights.
Add up these three factors and you get discontent, which lead to
revolution
Discontent was becoming more General and Vocal.
- Discontent was no longer confined to one section of society.
-
This new Disposition of Mind had encouraged various sections of society to
become more vocal and critical of the system.
- People were now willing to
speak up about their grievances and their was more pamphlets published in this
time.
Longstanding Critical Ideas were sharpened by those from
America
- Longstanding criticism f the monarchy was only reinforced
by the revolutionary ideas imported from America (see above).
- These ideas
gave the thinkers an actual system other than Britain that they could refer to
in their writings.
The Aristocrats were denouncing the monarchy’s
absolutism
- The Nobility were long discouraged by their loss of
rights.
- They worked back into surrounding the monarchy with themselves in
positions of power.
- The special concern of the nobles was to see that the
King did not introduce tax reform.
- They wanted more political power to
make sure events like this did not happen.
- While they denounced the
monarchy’s absolutism, they wanted to set up their own form of it.
The Bourgeoisie also attacked it; they also attacked privileges of
the Nobility
- For centuries the Bourgeoisie had accepted a position
of social inferiority to the nobility.
- Due to the increasing monopoly that
the nobility were holding on privileges and the Bourgeoisie’s own improving
conditions this caused many Bourgeoisie to despise the aristocracy.
- They
also despised the absolutism of the monarchy.
- They had been the most
influenced by the Disposition of mind.
The peasants were attracted to
the ideas of the Bourgeoisie
- The ideas attracted the peasants for
two man reasons:
--> Firstly they related to peasant grievances
-->
Secondly the Bourgeoisie was really the only class that the peasants associated
with.
- The peasants saw the idea of tax reform and equality as the way to
the abolition of the seigneurial system, which was their main grievance.
The Character of King Louis XVI
- He preferred personal
interests to court interests.
- Often this bored him and he left his work up
to his advisers and ministers.
- Or even worse he would make hasty decisions
that would cause even worse consequences in France.
- He was influenced and
often embarrasses by his pleasure loving wife, Marie Antoinette
- She held
great power over Louis.
- Often she stood in the way of his proposed reforms
by talking him out of it.
- It was well known that she had talked him into
firing Turgot, who may have been able to prevent the revolution through his
economic reforms.
- She was also hated by a lot of the population due to her
foreign birth.
- This did not help her later when she was executed.
-
Her pleasure loving also talked Louis into spending extravagant amounts on the
court and her.
He was incapable of strong decisive action
-
Louis XVI should have been capable of overcoming his problems with the
Aristocracy.
- His powerful position should have allowed him to force tax
reform onto the nobility.
- He also should never have allowed himself to
call the Estates-General.
- Instead he should have introduced mild reforms
to gains the support of the public again.
- Then he could do, as he wanted.
- If he had of been a stronger person, he also would not have been as easily
influenced by the nobility, his advisers or his wife.
The Immediate
Causes of Revolution
- Due to financial problems and the conflict
between classes the Year 1788 proved to be a trying year for all.
- All
classes were discontent at the Ancien regime and wanted change.
- Louis XVI
did not take advantage of this situation to introduce reforms and gain the
support of the people.
Under pressure Louis agrees to summon the
Estates General
- A few reforms would have prevented Louis from
summoning the Estates General.
- Instead this encouraged further criticism
of the Ancien regime and provided stronger force against absolutism in France.
- This was the beginning of the end for Louis.
Bitter conflict
over the form it should take (elections and voting)
- Bitter conflict
between the classes over the form it should take provided further problems.
- The Third estate wanted a vote by head count.
- They also wanted to
double their numbers so that they would have a majority.
- Louis agreed to
double their representation but not their voting counts.
Revolutionary
boldness; Third Estate called itself the National Assembly
- On the
17th of June the Third Estate decided to break the deadlock in the voting issue.
- They decided to declare themselves the representative body of France (the
National Assembly) and to disregard the Kings opinion.
- Louis was alarmed
at this and decided to close down their assembly hall.
- This did not deter
them; in fact it led them to the infamous ‘Tennis Court Oath’. Here they swore
to not stop until they had given France a constitution.
- Popular support
for the National Assembly rose and a small group of liberal nobles joined as
well. So did members of the clergy, although mainly the Lower
clergy.
Therefore Absolutism ended and Constitutional Monarchy
began
- Due to overwhelming support for the new National Assembly
Louis was forced to recognise it.
- He therefore issued a decree that stated
that it was now the parliament of France.
- All of the Estates General
members joined.
- This is where the doubling of the Third Estates
representation came in important.
- They now held the majority in France’s
new constitutional monarchy.
- In this new Constitutional monarchy the
Bourgeoisie was the most powerful section.
The National Assembly (1789
– 91)
- A Paris crowd stormed the Bastille (July 14th, 1789).
-
This proved to be a significant event in the revolution.
- The Bastille had
long been regarded as a symbol of political oppression.
- Here people were
sent when they had opposed the Ancien Regime.
- The Bastille was
initially approached for the gunpowder it held.
- In confusion, however,
shots were fired and the huge crown stormed the Bastille.
- This
demonstrated that the capital was in the Revolutionaries hands and the King’s
regiments were withdrawn.
- The Paris Commune was established and the
National Assembly continued to meet with the realisation that they needed to
meet the needs of the masses.
- The Law of the Lamppost was used during this
period. Profiteers, aristocrats, government officials and army officers were all
hung from lampposts.
Peasants then stormed the 40,000 bastilles
(monasteries, chateaux)
- The storming of the bastilles was carried
out by the peasants it signified the first use of violence to achieve
Revolutionary aims by the peasants.
- It also signified the start of the Le
Grande Peur. The Le Grande Peur was a period in which the popular masses rose up
and attacked the Aristocracy and privileged few.
- This resulted in many of
the Aristocrats becoming emigres. The Peasants gained from this loot and
sometimes the land of the fleeing Aristocrats.
The flight of the
emigres
- The flight of the emigres followed these events.
- Most
of the emigres went to the sympathetic countries such as Austria, Russia and
Britain.
- They hoped to gain support from Russian and Austrian troops and
German Princes.
- The Austrian Emperor and Prussian King threatened war if
Louis XVI was harmed.
The National Guard
- On July 13th
1789 there had been formed the Paris Commune (Municipal council) and the
National Guard.
- The National Guard was comprised of 200 men from the six
different sections of Paris.
- They were under the command of the Marquis de
Lafayette.
- The units of the National Guard were responsible to the
municipal councils.
- These new councils were strongly bourgeoisie and were
interested in protecting property from crowd violence.
- This gave the
bourgeoisie a revolutionary force to use as a militia and police organisation.
- It was designed to settle the rioting of the popular masses.
-
Lafayette tried to protect the constitution from both the King and the mob.
- The first time the National Guard saw action was on the 14th of July 1791
when the Guard fired on a crown in the Champs de Mars and 50 were
killed.
The Abolition of Feudalism
- On the Night of the
4th of August the National Assembly met and the abolition of feudalism was
brought about.
- Tears accompanied this as many of the members of the
National Assembly gave up
their privileges and looked towards equality.
-
All exemptions from taxation, all feudal dues and tithes, tolls and pensions
were abolished.
- As Mason in his book ‘Revolution’ noted: "Here the
revolution had achieved a vast change. The overthrow of feudalism legitimised by
the nervous deputies of Versailles, dampened down the fires of the peasant
revolution in the countryside. Now Paris took and held control of the pace of
the Revolution. The peasantry was basically satisfied. Paris still hungered for
satisfaction’.
The Declaration of the Rights of Men
- On
the 26th of August 1789 the National Assembly issued the Declaration of the
Rights of Men.
- The purpose of this document was to produce equality within
France and to abolish the class system that was prevalent in France.
- This
meant that a man could achieve high status despite his parentage.
-
According to the Declaration all citizens had the right to decide what taxes
should be levied and how public revenue should be spent.
- Other fundamental
human rights included freedom of speech, freedom of the press, religious liberty
and freedom from unlawful arrest or imprisonment.
- Therefore the
Declaration was essentially a democratic document.
- It proclaimed the
sovereignty of the people.
The March to Versailles
- On the
5th of October 1789 a group of 7000 starving men and women marched on the court
at Versailles.
- They were going to ask the King for some bread.
- They
camped outside the palace.
- That night some women broke into the palace and
attempted to murder Marie Antoinette.
- She escaped and ran to the Kings
room.
- The invaders stopped here, as the King was still considered sacred.
- Lafayette prevented any bloodshed by assuring that the King returned to
Paris with the mob.
- Here Louis became a virtual prisoner in the Palace of
Tuileries.
The Development of Local Government and
Departments
- The National Assembly reformed the local government
system.
- France was divided into 83 departments.
Each of these had the
same laws, customs, weights and measures.
- Internal Tariffs were also
abolished in France.
This greatly improved the economy of France.
It
also presented the country with more equality and abolished the certain
privileged areas of France.
- The main problems were that the Government
failed to have a clear connection to the Local Governments and also the Local
governments hardly had any revenue, thus leading to bankruptcies.
The
System of Justice
- The System of Justice was also reformed under the
National Assembly.
- This allowed for open public trials and the abolition
of the hated Lettres de Cachet.
- This allowed for the trails of all people
in the same court.
- Before the assembly they had been conducted in
different courts depending on class.
- Imaginary crimes such as heresy and
magic were abolished.
- There was a court of final appeal for civil and
criminal cases and a high court for cases of treason.
Freedom of the
Press
- The press was now free to criticize etc.
- The freedom of
the press was absolute and this led to it becoming a form of propaganda.
-
It was instrumental in the rise of principal figures such as Robespierre and
Danton.
Military Forces
- Early in 1789 revolutionary
committees of sailors and soldiers were formed.
- This often caused conflict
with the regular army and navy.
- In February 1790 the forces were made
responsible to the National Assembly.
- This effectively took from Louis any
chance of using the military to regain his position of
influence.
Assembly’s policy on the Church
- Notre Dame
Cathedral renamed the Temple of Reason
- “God” changed to “Supreme
Being”
- Calendar changed: 1793 to be Year 1 of the new age
- Firstly
Church property was confiscated (1789) and it was to be sold at auction.
-
The clergy were to be paid by the state.
- Assignants were issued in order
to buy the land.
- Unfortunately too many assignants were issued and this
led to the later problem of inflation.
- The wages of the clergy were to be
paid by the Assembly.
- This led to wages being doubled (again another
inflationary pressure).
- Then came one of the National Assembly’s biggest
mistakes.
- This was the Development of the Civil Constitution of the
clergy.
- They forced the Clergy to take an oath to them (the state) instead
of just
Rome.
- They were also to be elected.
- This succeeded in
alienating the Clergy (especially the Lower clergy) from the Revolution.
-
It also outraged Louis.
Louis flight to Varennes
- On the
night of the 2oth of June 1791 the King and his family attempted to escape to
the friendly borders of Austria.
- This was encouraged by Marie Antoinette
and was aided by her friend Count Axel
de Fersen.
- They were however
caught and returned to Paris.
- The King before leaving had left behind a
declaration that complained of his lack of powers. He also condemned the work of
the Revolution.
- Paris received him in silence when he returned.
- The
Republican movement gathered great strength after this event.
- On the 16th
of July the Government passed a decree reinstating the King despite
protests.
The Constitution 1791
The new constitution
established 6 main points:
1. Hereditary Constitutional Monarchy
2. A
parliament consisting of a single elected chamber (the Legislative Assembly).
3. There was to be a separate executive (with no power to make laws)
4.
All judges were to be elected
5. ‘Suspensive’ veto for the King
6. The
franchise was to be given to all that paid taxes equivalent to 3 days wages or
more.
The Good and the Bad
Good Points of the National
Assembly include:
* The issue of the Declaration of Rights
* It
abolished the evils of the old Regime
* It established a limited monarchy
* It set up 83 departments
* It curbed the power and the wealth of the
Church
Bad Points of the National Assembly include:
* The
Constitution did not extend Universal Suffrage
*The lower clergy were
alienated
* Finance had been bungled and led to a rise in inflation
*
The mobs had not been kept in check
* Slavery was still allowed in the
colonies
* It failed to allow the experienced members of the National
Assembly into the Legislative Assembly
The Revolution Leads to War –
and Napoleon
- The interrelations of the Royal families of Europe
made sure they remained pretty close.
- Therefore they supported each other
in their respective Royal families.
- When France presented the idea of
abolishing absolutism and ultimately the monarchy the European monarchs became
fearful that this would spread to their
countries.
- Both Emperor Leopold
II (Austrian Emperor and brother to Marie Antoinette) and Frederick William II
(King of Prussia) issued the Declaration of Pillnitz which vouched to restore
the old order within France.
- They promised to launch a counter-revolution
greatly influenced by the French emigres.
- The counter-revolutionaries
were still numerous inside of France.
- This made sure that the work was cut
out for the Legislative Assembly in trying to defend attacks from this group.
- The revolution also increasingly faced more opposition from the Church.
- The National Assembly was to blame for this due to the introduction of the
Civil Constitution of the clergy.
- The Girondin Advocates for war
increasingly put pressure on the Legislative Assembly to declare war on Austria
and Prussia. The Girondins and Jacobins were the radicals in the Assembly.
-
They did not hold a majority at the Assembly’s formation.
- This lead to the
Legislative Assembly presenting Austria and Prussia with a set of demands.
-
When these were refused, the Girondins gained even more support in their calls
for war.
- The war was seen as a way to spread the revolutionary cause to
all parts of Europe.
- This missionary zeal to spread the doctrine of
liberty, equality and fraternity made sure the French had great enthusiasm.
- It was also seen as a chance to untie all of the French people under one
banner.
- Many of the members of the Legislative Assembly believed that
France would unite under one banner to defend itself.
Sidebar:
Jacobins
--> At Paris, in and around 1789, a group of individuals
coalesced. This group shared the same principles, "the principles of extreme
democracy and absolute equality." Their views, it was thought, were, as far as
politics go, extreme and radical in regards to social organization. This
republican club met at Paris in the old convent of the Jacobins.
--> Those
who subscribed to their principles became known as Jacobins. Thus, a Jacobin is
one who does not believe any one has rights to property.
--> Edmund
Burke, in 1795, was to ask the question:
"What is Jacobinism? It is the
attempt ... to eradicate prejudice out of the minds of men, for the purpose of
putting all power and authority into the hands of persons capable of
occasionally enlightening the minds of the people. For this purpose the Jacobins
have resolved to destroy the whole frame and fabric of the old societies of the
world, and to regenerate them after their fashion. To obtain an army for this
purpose, they everywhere engage the poor by holding out to them as a bribe the
spoils of the rich."
- exploit class warfare
5.The
Declaration of War
- On April 20th 1792, the French Legislative Assembly
charged Austria with plotting aggression and declared war, starting the first
‘War of the Peoples’ in the modern world.
- This was followed by a French
invasion of the Austrian Netherlands and two months later the King of Prussia
joined Austria in the struggle against France.
The invasion of France
and The Convention
- The French Forces were quickly overcome by the
Austrian Forces in Belgium and were driven back into France.
- The Duke of
Brunswick that issued a manifesto saying that Paris would be burnt to
the
ground if the Royal family were hurt.
- This infuriated the people as it
gave the impression that they had collaborated with the invading Armies.
-
This turned the balance in Paris towards the radicals.
- This saw the
replacement of the bourgeoisie dominated Paris Commune and saw it replaced with
a radical dominated Commune.
- This lead to the invasion of the Tuileries by
Georges Danton and his supporters.
- On the 10th of August a crowd of
10,000 invaded the Tuileries and killed the Swiss Guard.
- Louis XVI escaped
and asked for the protection of the Legislative Assembly.
- They suspended
him as monarch and locked him and his family in a prison known as the tower.
- This went against the Constitution and it saw the end of the Legislative
Assembly.
- The Assembly had remained a futile body and it had failed to
achieve any of its aims to keep order.
NATIONAL
CONVENTION
- This saw the establishment of a new government called
the National Convention.
- This new convention was to be elected by universal
suffrage.
- Danton’s organizing men and labourers supplied the army with men
and weapons.
- This enabled Dumouriez to defeat Brunswick at Valmy
(September 20th 1792).
- It was on the 21st of September that the Republic
was proclaimed.
- This was also the start of the Revolutionary calendar.
(Note with the proclamation of the Republic the government was switched from the
Legislative assembly to the National Convention).
The Convention and
it’s Committee of Public Safety
- In the first week of September
there was a call to arms by Danton to the Parisian mobs.
- They marched off
to defend France.
- All those suspected of being against the revolution and
being held in
prison were also massacred.
- The massacres were initiated
by the comite’ de surveillance of the Paris Commune under the leadership of Dr.
Paul Marat.
- Marat joined Robespierre and Danton in a triumvirate dedicated
to the establishment of a proletarian republic.
- The National Convention
meet on the very day that the French had defeated the enemy forces at Valmy.
- The main aims of this new National Convention can be narrowed down to
four.
Defeating the enemies of France Giving the country a Republican
Constitution Stabilizing the finances Restoring law and order
- The
National Convention then voted to execute Louis XVI as a show of contempt to the
monarchy.
- This outraged the monarchs of Europe as they set about forming a
coalition against France.
- Meanwhile the Jacobins had succeeded in
eliminating their main opposition, the Girondins in the Convention.
- This
came about after the general Dumouriez, a Girondin, defected to Austria.
-
The Jacobins labelled all Girondins as traitors and the National Guard arrested
them.
- The Jacobins then formed the Committee of Public Safety, a cabinet
that dominated the convention. In this committee there was Robespierre, Danton,
Marat and Carnot.
The Committee of Public Safety and Total War
Effort
- The Committee of Public Safety had nine members.
- They
were established with the power to do anything to save the Republic from
internal and external perils.
- They were later enlarged to a committee of
12 members and they exercised control over every aspect of French Life.
-
The main external pressures came from the new coalition formed by the European
Monarchs.
- This included Austria, Prussia, Great Britain, Spain, Russia,
Sardinia, Tuscany, the Netherlands Republic and the states of the Holy Roman
Empire. Lazare Carnot, an organizational genius, organized the conscripted
armies of France.
- They drove back this threat of the enemy. Any General
who lost a battle was executed, as it was thought they were a traitor to the
Republic.
- Within France the Committee dispatched the army to crush the
royalist uprisings and instituted the Reign of Terror.
The Reign of
Terror
- With the committee of Public Safety a revolutionary tribunal
was also set up.
- The Revolutionary tribunal was to try counter
revolutionaries.
- Then the Committee developed a new policy that involved
the use of the guillotine, an Italian import, across France.
- said to take
off 22 heads in 36 minutes
- 17,000 killed
- June 10, 1794: Robespierre
changes jury verdict to either acquittal or death --> more decapitations
-
Many were killed, most from the aristocracy classes or those that were of
wealth.
The Committee was in favour of imposed equality by direct democracy,
punishment and violence.
- The guillotine was the scythe of equality, the
people’s axe.
- When Danton believed that the external and internal
threats had been dealt with he called for an end to the terror.
-
Robespierre had him and his closest followers executed.
--> Danton: “Make
sure you show my head to the people, it’s well worth it!”
- This shocked many
of the moderates within the convention as they thought if Danton was not safe
who would be.
- They labeled Robespierre a terrorist and he was executed on
July 28th 1794.
Overthrow of the Jacobins…. The Thermidorian
Reaction
- With the passing of military danger, the desire appeared
for a relaxation of these emergency measures.
- The Jacobins were outvoted
in the Convention and Robespierre accused and executed.
- The Jacobins were
then outlawed, and the "Terror" officially ended.
- The Committee of Public
Safety had been successful in making some epoch reforms.
- These included
establishing the metric system of weights and measures, abolishing Negro slavery
and establishing culture centres such as libraries and art galleries that were
open to the masses.
- The Convention then abolished the Committee of Public
Safety after the fall of Robespierre and also the Revolutionary
Tribunals.
The Directory (1795 – 1799)
- The Convention
then formed the Constitution of Year III (Year III of the Revolutionary
Calendar). This included
A Directory, or executive, of five directors, who
were to hold the chief executive office in turn A Parliament consisting of two
Houses a) The Council of Five Hundred
1.The Council of Elders A limited
franchise (like the one in 1791).
- This signified a return tot he
protection and support of the Bourgeoisie.
- It was a move away from the
masses and the peasants.
- This also brought an end to the experiment of
democratic government in France.
- On the announcement of this constitution
there were mass uprisings.
- These were stopped by Napoleon.
- Napoleon
was becoming more and more popular with the Convention for his crushing of these
attempted coup d’etat.
- Another problem had arisen though as the Second
Coalition was formed.
This included Britain, Russia, Turkey, Austria and
Naples.
- Napoleon meanwhile was furthering his popularity with the success
of his Italian Campaign and his Egyptian Campaign.
Napoleon Seizes
Power
- The period of 1795 to 1799 was marked with attempted coups
and rebellions.
- However the Directory was able to continue in Government as
it had the backing of the military.
- If this backing were to ever be
removed the Directory would cease to exist.
- A final coup was organized by
Napoleon Bonaparte.
- On returning to France in 1799 he joined with three of
the Directors in a conspiracy to take control.
- His three Director
collaborators resigned and the remaining two were arrested.
- When the
council of elders did not welcome him with opening arms, he secured the
government buildings with his army.
- A partial council of his friends were
formed and voted Bonaparte and two others as temporary consuls. This was the
start of the Consulate Government.
The Consulate (1800 –
1803)
- The first task of Napoleon was to rid the threat if the
Second Coalition.
- For this he marched his own armies against them.
-
Fighting his second Italian Campaign he inflicted a defeat on Austria at Marengo
in 1800.
- General Moreau defeated the Austrians at Hohenlinden.
-
Russia hastily withdrew form the coalition and the Austrian emperor agreed to
peace.
- Then the Peace of Amiens was achieved with Britain in 1802.
-
This got rid of the external threats for the time being.
- Napoleon than
worked on reorganizing France and closing the Revolution. These
included:
Local governments were made more efficient and became highly
centralized. The ‘Code of Napoleon’ was instituted The Concordant was signed
with the Vatican France reverted back to the Christian Calendar Education was
placed under a central control
- These changes made sure some of the
good points of the Revolution were carried on.
- These included the
abolition of the feudal system and the old class order.
- It also kept and
guaranteed the land settlements of the Revolution and gained for Napoleon the
support of the peasantry and the clergy.
- The costs of all these reforms
affected all Frenchmen.
- Personal Liberty disappeared; the press was
censored; the schools and Church taught loyalty to Napoleon; the secrets police
imprisoned or murdered Napoleon’s enemies.
- Napoleon claimed Frenchman only
wanted glory, aggressive Nationalism and demagogic leadership. ‘I sealed the
gulf of anarchy and unraveled chaos. I purified the
Revolution and
strengthened the monarchy’.
The French Empire (1804 –
1815)
- Napoleon started enlarging ports and docks and the British
took this as an offence and disregarded the Peace of Amiens.
- In 1805
Britain formed the third coalition containing Britain, Russia, Prussia and
Austria.
- Napoleon defeated the Austrians at Ulm on the 15th of October
1805 and he entered Vienna.
- The British naval commander Lord Nelson
destroyed his fleets in the ports of Spain and France.
- This ruined any
chance of Napoleon invading Britain.
- By winning the battles at
Austerlitz (2 December 1805), Jena, Averstadt, and Friedland (June 1807),
Napoleon defeated the Austrian, Prussian and Russian Armies.
- Austria
accepted the Peace of Pressburg and Russia the Treaty of Tilsit.
- In 1807
Russian and France became Allies.
- Napoleon improved his infrastructure to
make campaigns more efficient.
- The continental Blockade was issued
after the Berlin Decree that stated no British ships could trade with Europe.
- This was followed by a counter blockade.
- This greatly affected
France more and this was abandoned in 1813.
- By 1810 the French Empire had
reached its biggest position.
- Napoleon then failed in his campaign s in
Portugal and Spain.
- Austria, encouraged by Spanish success, rose in revolt
in 1809.
- They were crushed in and in the Treaty Napoleon demanded the hand
of the Austrian emperor Marie - Louise.
- In 1811 Napoleon suffered a
humiliating defeat in Russia. Prussia also rose in revolt and was crushed.
-
However Austria and Russia joined forces and defeated Napoleon at Leipzig.
-
On April 14th 1814 Napoleon abdicated and was banished to the Island of Elba.
- Ten months later he returned but was defeated by British Prussian forces
on the 18th of June at Waterloo.
The Importance of
Napoleon
The Good
* His early victories saved France
* He
established law and order in France
* He established national unity under a
string centralized government
* He made permanent some of the gains of the
Revolution. For example legal equality, land settlement and the departments for
the local government
* Organized France into a string unified state eg.
Concordat, Code of Napoleon, Bank of France
* European Countries were
affected by abolishing class privileges and spreading nationalism.
The
Bad
* His wars continually drained France
* They caused a great loss of
life and destruction
* His continental system dislocated trade and industry
* Private interests and rights became subordinate to the Emperor
Note: Napoleon thought that the only way he could be respected was to
continually bring back glory through his military campaigns.
So what
can we say about all of this??????
Significance of the Period 1789
– 1815
The following is a list of those things that occurred due to
or during the Revolution which had a considerable impact on French Society or
the World.
Immediate Effect on France of Napoleon’s Defeat at
Waterloo
- With the defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo, there was a
return of the Bourbons to the throne with Louis XVIII.
- All of Napoleon’s
conquests were lost by France and divided among those countries of the coalition
that defeated France.
- Economically the wars had crushed France and left
industry and commerce in ruins.
- This ruined France’s opportunity to rival
Britain’s industrial power.
- Politically the coalition who had defeated
France demanded a return to the old rulers and structure within France.
-
This saw the middle classes fight bitterly to hold their basic legal and
political rights.
- It was not until 1870 that France would again become a
Republic.
The place of the Revolution in the Long Anti-Feudal
Process
- The French Revolution summed up the whole Anti –Feudal
process in Europe by swiftly putting an end to all the feudal privileges, laws
and institutions in France.
- With Napoleon’s conquest the Anti-Feudalism
Process was spread further through Europe.
- This was made Napoleons
conquests easier as the peasants of the countries were happy to see the end of
Feudalism.
- After Napoleon’s defeat however most of Europe restored some of
the feudal taxes and this undid the work of Napoleon and the
Revolution.
Economic Gains of the Bourgeoisie and the
Peasants
- The Bourgeoisie economically benefited the most from the
Revolution.
- Firstly they secured the abolition of tax injustices within
the Ancien Regime.
- Tax Privileges were abolished, so were corrupt taxing
methods, local and provincial tolls, taxes on legal and market transactions,
indirect taxes on goods and the harsh system of tax supervision which hampered
the growth of industry and
commerce.
- The Revolution also established a
uniform standard of weights and measures. This was the metric system.
- The
Government also helped establish protective tariffs for French
industries.
- The Revolution continued the process of Emancipating the
Serfs and creating peasant proprietors.
- France emerged as having the
richest peasants in Europe.
- Their land gains gave them wealth and power.
- Therefore the peasants became conservatives in French Politics.
-
To the workers and non-land owners the Revolution did not really benefit them.
- They were still not allowed to vote or form trade unions.
- Their
working conditions still could not be negotiated.
- This may explain why
there was later a Revolution against the Bourgeoisie.
‘Liberty’ –
Liberal Advances but not yet Democracy
- In its first victory the
Revolution had put an end to absolutism in France.
- Instead of the ‘divine
right of the Kings’ there was the ‘will of the people’.
- This was
understood to mean limiting the powers of Government through a constitution and
secondly electing an assembly and parliaments.
- Free speech, freedom of the
press and freedom to form political parties were seen as basic human rights even
though they did not really exist after Napoleon established a dictatorship.
- Universal Suffrage was started and then abandoned quickly.
- Political
Liberties won by the revolution led to a constitutional parliament but not a
democracy.
- The Revolution had provided one democratic election (National
Assembly, and not for women) and this would be remembered throughout French
History.
‘Equality’ – Civic Equality but not Income
Equality
- The Revolution brought an end to privileges and the class
system.
- Everybody came under the same law and taxation.
- Promotion
became open to talent and citizens were equal before the law.
- Neither the
new set of Nobles nor the returned set in 1815 could extract the same privileges
present in the Ancien Regime’s nobility.
Effects in
Europe
- The Revolution was successful in spreading new political
ideas such as Nationalism through a previous unpolitical Europe.
-
Napoleon’s armies quickened the change brought on by the revolution.
- They
gave Europe a glimpse of greater efficiency of modernised institutions and law.
- Napoleon was however no liberal, he did not destroy absolutism but he
created a more efficient form of it.
- At the very least the countries of
Europe learnt to equip their countries with more centralized bureaucracies and a
Secret Police Force.
- The forces of liberalism were planted in Europe
however and they would continue to make demands on absolutism in
Europe.
The Revolution as a source of New Ideas and
Doctrines
- The actions and ideas of the French Revolution have been
keenly studied by political theorists.
- They have arrived at three
different conclusions about which type of government should have resulted:
-
Democratic parliamentary government is the best solution and it leads to endless
reforms
- That another revolution is necessary to gain the social justice
that the Bourgeoisie denied to the lower classes.
- This idea was to be
embraced by socialist and later communists.
- That good government can be
expected only from a leader Genius like Napoleon.
COMMUNISM AND
SOCIALISM
- The French Revolution did not directly produce the 19th
century ideologies known as socialism or communism.
-But the Revolution did
provide and intellectual and social environment in which these ideologies, and
their spokesmen, could flourish.
- In other words, the history of the
socialist tradition is something more than the words of Marx and Engels
- We
must remember that Marx and Engels, major prophets of this tradition that they
were, were educated in the peculiar circumstances of late 18th and early 19th
century revolutionary activity.
- What, after all, would Marx and Engels
have been had it not been for the French Revolution?
- To place the
responsibility for the ills of society on the institution of private property,
without actually calling for its abolition, was fairly common in the 18th
century.
- The idea that law was nothing more than a device to protect the
accumulation of the rich and to rationalize the exploitation of the poor had
ancient roots.
- The philosophes of the Enlightenment were familiar with all
of these arguments, trained as they were in the classics.
- Furthermore, the
conviction that simplicity in possessions and life-style was conducive to virtue
was held by almost all enlightened thinkers.
What went wrong
with the French Revolution?
- Long before the Revolution, the
government had become highly centralized.
- The national government
appointed officials to run local governments.
- The king issued decrees, and
there wasn't an independent legislature.
- Nothing like the separation of
powers which developed in the United States.
- This history of socialism
begins more than two centuries ago, at the time of the French Revolution, with
the radical conspirator Babeuf, who wanted to carry the revolutionary ideas of
the times even farther, to a communist society.
Question: The
American Revolution ended with a stable republican government, while the French
Revolution brought on the Reign of Terror and ended in the dictatorship of
Napoleon. Why?
In some ways, the American and French Revolutions
resembled one another. Both reflected Enlightenment ideas. Both put forth claims
about natural human rights; both spoke of equality before the law; both turned
from hereditary rule to republican government. Yet the revolutions turned out
very differently. Historians have long debated the question you are being asked
to confront. One of the earliest and most influential interpretations was put
forward by Edmund Burke. He was a Member of Parliament who had supported the
American Revolution but fiercely criticized the French. It would lead, he
predicted, to excess and slaughter. In the end, he predicted, the French would
follow blindly some "man on a white horse," some military hero. Since these
predictions turned out to be correct, Burke's underlying argument demands
respect. In sum, it is:
The American colonists had experience with self
government. Thus, they could turn their colonial governments into state
governments, maintaining law and order, even as they were fighting a long war
against the British. The French had no such experience nor did they understand
how essential it was. Burke was unimpressed with Enlightenment claims of
"natural" rights, whether made by Americans or French. What mattered were
historical traditions and experience. The American tradition was one of
self-government. The French tradition was monarchical. This meant, for Burke,
that the Americans were likely to succeed and the French were sure to fail. He
wrote:
I flatter myself that I love a manly, moral, regulated liberty
as well as any gentleman of that society, be he who he will; and perhaps I have
given as good proofs of my attachment to that cause in the whole course of my
public conduct. I think I envy liberty as little as they do to any other nation.
But I cannot stand forward and give praise or blame to anything which relates to
human actions, and human concerns, on a simple view of the object, as it stands
stripped of every relation, in all the nakedness and solitude of metaphysical
abstraction. Circumstances (which with some gentlemen pass for nothing) give in
reality to every political principle its distinguishing color and discriminating
effect. The circumstances are what render every civil and political scheme
beneficial or noxious to mankind. Abstractedly speaking, government, as well as
liberty, is good; yet could I, in common sense, ten years ago, have felicitated
France on her enjoyment of a government (for she then had a government) without
inquiry what the nature of that government was, or how it was administered? Can
I now congratulate the same nation upon its freedom? Is it because liberty in
the abstract may be classed amongst the blessings of mankind, that I am
seriously to felicitate a madman, who has escaped from the protecting restraint
and wholesome darkness of his cell, on his restoration to the enjoyment of light
and liberty? Am I to congratulate a highwayman and murderer who has broke prison
upon the recovery of his natural rights? This would be to act over again the
scene of the criminals condemned to the galleys, and their heroic deliverer, the
metaphysic Knight of the Sorrowful Countenance.
When I see the spirit of
liberty in action, I see a strong principle at work; and this, for a while, is
all I can possibly know of it. The wild gas, the fixed air, is plainly broke
loose; but we ought to suspend our judgment until the first effervescence is a
little subsided, till the liquor is cleared, and until we see something deeper
than the agitation of a troubled and frothy surface. I must be tolerably sure,
before I venture publicly to congratulate men upon a blessing, that they have
really received one. Flattery corrupts both the receiver and the giver, and
adulation is not of more service to the people than to kings. I should,
therefore, suspend my congratulations on the new liberty of France until I was
informed how it had been combined with government, with public force, with the
discipline and obedience of armies, with the collection of an effective and
well-distributed revenue, with morality and religion, with the solidity of
property, with peace and order, with civil and social manners. All these (in
their way) are good things, too, and without them liberty is not a benefit
whilst it lasts, and is not likely to continue long. The effect of liberty to
individuals is that they may do wha they please; we ought to see what it will
please them to do, before we risk congratulations which may be soon turned into
complaints. Prudence would dictate this in the case of separate, insulated,
private men, but liberty, when men act in bodies, is power. Considerate people,
before they declare themselves, will observe the use which is made of power and
particularly of so trying a thing as new power in new persons of whose
principles, tempers, and dispositions they have little or no experience, and in
situations where those who appear the most stirring in the scene may possibly
not be the real movers.
Further, historians who follow Burke
maintain, the Americans started from a position deeply suspicious of power
which, they believed, was likely to prove tyrannical no matter who exercised it.
They therefore exerted much of their energies in seeking ways of limiting the
authority of the state. French revolutionaries instead envisioned a state which
somehow embodied the best interests of the people (Rousseau's notion of the
"General Will" -- this is the same "general will" invoked in the Declaration of
the Rights of Man and of the Citizen) and upon whose powers, therefore, they
imposed no limits. You can find Rousseau's view of the Social Contract here. If
you read section 6 of Book I and the first three sections of Book II, you will
see that Rousseau is more a follower of Thomas Hobbes than of John Locke in the
sense that he imagines a state
capable of exercising complete power. In this
way Robespierre and his colleagues, who were self-professed disciples of
Rousseau, some historians argue, blazed a trail for Napoleon.
A second,
equally influential interpretation, is that of Alexis deTocqueville who, in
addition to Democracy in America, wrote a history of France under the "Ancien
Regime." Tocqueville stressed the importance of the long undermining of
tradition and deference associated with the Enlightenment and with the rise of
commerce and a middle class. His argument runs:
The French Revolution was
a social as well as a political revolution. Different "estates" had enjoyed
different rights and privileges. Tocqueville asserted that the abolition of
"privilege," such as manorial claims on the labor of peasants or clerical
exemption from many taxes, was at the heart of the revolution. The disputes over
"privilege" necessarily pitted different classes of French men and women against
one another. In other words, as different groups came to the fore during the
Revolution, they did so with specific demands which could be satisfied only at
the expense of specific classes and/o ranks. The success of the American
revolutionaries, on the other hand, did not require a wholesale reorganization
of the American social order. No group of revolutionaries had demands which
could be met only by harming the interests of some other group in the society.
So, although the American Revolution also faced "domestic enemies," the
Loyalists, they were drawn from all sectors of the society (as were the
"patriots") and were much less of a threat to the ultimate success of the
revolutionary effort than were the French aristocratic emigrés.
Modern
History Sourcebook:
Maximilien Robespierre:
Justification of the Use
of Terror
Maximilien Robespierre (1758? 1794) was the leader of the
twelve?man Committee of Public Safety elected by the National Convention, and
which effectively governed France at the height of the radical phase of the
revolution. He had once been a fairly straightforward liberal thinker -
reputedly he slept with a copy of Rousseau's Social Contract at his side. But
his own purity of belief led him to impatience with others.
The
committee was among the most creative executive bodies ever seen - and rapidly
put into effect policies which stabilized the French economy and began the
formation of the very successful French army. It also directed it energies
against counter-revolutionary uprisings, especially in the south and west of
France. In doing so it unleashed the reign of terror. Here Robespierre, in his
speech of February 5,1794, from which excerpts are given here, discussed this
issue. The figures behind this speech indicate that in the five months from
September, 1793, to February 5, 1794, the
revolutionary tribunal in Paris
convicted and executed 238 men and 31 women and acquitted 190 persons, and that
on February 5 there were 5,434 individuals in the prisons in Paris awaiting
trial.
Robespierre was frustrated with the progress of the revolution.
After issuing threats to the National Convention, he himself was arrested in
July 1794. He tried to shoot himslef but missed, and spent his last few hours
with his jaw hanging off. He was guillotined, as a victim of the terror, on July
28, 1794.
But, to found and consolidate democracy, to achieve the
peaceable reign of the constitutional laws, we must end the war of liberty
against tyranny and pass safely across the storms of the revolution: such is the
aim of the revolutionary system that you have enacted. Your conduct, then, ought
also to be regulated by the stormy circumstances in which the republic is
placed; and the plan of your administration must result from the spirit of the
revolutionary government combined with the general principles of democracy.
Now, what is the fundamental principle of the democratic or popular
government-that is, the essential spring which makes it move? It is virtue; I am
speaking of the public virtue which effected so many prodigies in Greece and
Rome and which ought to produce much more surprising ones in republican France;
of that virtue which is nothing other than the love of country and of its laws.
But as the essence of the republic or of democracy is equality, it
follows that the love of country necessarily includes the love of equality.
It is also true that this sublime sentiment assumes a preference for the
public interest over every particular interest; hence the love of country
presupposes or produces all the virtues: for what are they other than that
spiritual strength which renders one capable of those sacrifices? And how could
the slave of avarice or ambition, for example, sacrifice his idol to his
country?
Not only is virtue the soul of democracy; it can exist only in
that government .... . . .
Republican virtue can be considered in
relation to the people and in relation to the government; it is necessary in
both. When only the govemment lacks virtue, there remains a resource in the
people's virtue; but when the people itself is corrupted, liberty is already
lost.
Fortunately virtue is natural to the people, notwithstanding
aristocratic prejudices. A nation is truly corrupted when, having by degrees
lost its character and its liberty, it passes from democracy to aristocracy or
to monarchy; that is the decrepitude and death of the body politic....
But when, by prodigious efforts of courage and reason, a people breaks
the chains of despotism to make them into trophies of liberty; when by the force
of its moral temperament it comes, as it were, out of the arms of the death, to
recapture all the vigor of youth; when by tums it is sensitive and proud,
intrepid and docile, and can be stopped neither by impregnable ramparts nor by
the innumerable ammies of the tyrants armed against it, but stops of itself upon
confronting the law's image; then if it does not climb rapidly to the summit of
its destinies, this can only be the fault of those who govern it.
. .
.
From all this let us deduce a great truth: the characteristic of
popular government is confidence in the people and severity towards itself.
The whole development of our theory would end here if you had only to
pilot the vessel of the Republic through calm waters; but the tempest roars, and
the revolution imposes on you another task.
This great purity of the
French revolution's basis, the very sublimity of its objective, is precisely
what causes both our strength and our weakness. Our strength, because it gives
to us truth's ascendancy over imposture, and the rights of the public interest
over private interests; our weakness, because it rallies all vicious men against
us, all those who in their hearts contemplated despoiling the people and all
those who intend to let it be despoiled with impunity, both those who have
rejected freedom as a personal calamity and those who have embraced the
revolution as a career and the Republic as prey. Hence the defection of so many
ambitious or greedy men who since the point of departure have abandoned us along
the way because they did not begin the journey with the same destination in
view. The two opposing spirits that have been represented in a struggle to rule
nature might be said to be fighting in this great period of human history to fix
irrevocably the world's destinies, and France is the scene of this fearful
combat. Without, all the tyrants encircle you; within, all tyranny's friends
conspire; they will conspire until hope is wrested from crime. We must smother
the internal and external enemies of the Republic or perish with it; now in this
situation, the first maxim of your policy ought to be to lead the people by
reason and the people's enemies by terror.
If the spring of popular
government in time of peace is virtue, the springs of popular government in
revolution are at once virtue and terror: virtue, without which terror is fatal;
terror, without which virtue is powerless. Terror is nothing other than justice,
prompt, severe, inflexible; it is therefore an emanation of virtue; it is not so
much a special principle as it is a consequence of the general principle of
democracy applied to our country's most urgent needs.
It has been said
that terror is the principle of despotic government. Does your government
therefore resemble despotism? Yes, as the sword that gleams in the hands of the
heroes of liberty resembles that with which the henchmen of tyranny are armed.
Let the despot govern by terror his brutalized subjects; he is right, as a
despot. Subdue by terror the enemies of liberty, and you will be right, as
founders of the Republic. The government of the revolution is liberty's
despotism against tyranny. Is force made only to protect crime? And is the
thunderbolt not destined to strike the heads of the proud?
. .
.
. . . Indulgence for the royalists, cry certain men, mercy for the
villains! No! mercy for the innocent, mercy for the weak, mercy for the
unfortunate, mercy for humanity.
Society owes protection only to
peaceable citizens; the only citizens in the Republic are the republicans. For
it, the royalists, the conspirators are only strangers or, rather, enemies. This
terrible war waged by liberty against tyranny- is it not indivisible? Are the
enemies within not the allies of the enemies without? The assassins who tear our
country apart, the intriguers who buy the consciences that hold the people's
mandate; the traitors who sell them; the mercenary pamphleteers hired to
dishonor the people's cause, to kill public virtue, to stir up the fire of civil
discord, and to prepare political counterrevolution by moral
counterrevolution-are all those men less guilty or less dangerous than the
tyrants whom they serve?