Reign Of Terror Justified Dbq Analysis

Justification does not mean there will be perfection. One of the biggest turnabouts in history would be The Reign of Terror. In the year 1793, Maximilien Robespierre declared an act called The Reign of Terror. This brought upon the French people heavily consequences for trivial things but it was sentenced with purpose. The chaos that Robespierre broght was truly a tragedy upon the French but it seems clouded by the bias of the statement, was the Reign of Terror, Justified? Thus asking the question was the Reign of Terror justified and the author believes it was. The past can not be repeated so the claim can not have decisive evidence but can be supported by historical proven facts by historians or people who lived through the French Revolution.

The death count was large in the range between 35,000 to 40,000 people, concluding that there are some who were guilty and deserved their punishment. It is impossible to call the executions pointless. “...Six patriots have fallen victim to this rabbles..” (Doc D) clearly argues that France’s corpses were not always carried out by executions but by themselves. It is true that the execution numbers were high, but how much did the French achieve that let it mold into consideration for later possibilities? This supports the claim as it was the people themselves whom they needed the protection thus creating suspicion and caution. Even the actions of the legislative party were going against their belief of “nature rights”, they still continued executions as they tried to protect themselves from further destruction. The National Assembly did contradicted themselves as the said “the aim of all [government]... is the preservation of the natural... rights of man. These are liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.” (Doc A) but the idea they were aiming for for was security of the