Robespierre Dbq

951 Words2 Pages

“History is a set of lies agreed upon” Napoleon Bonaparte said during the French Revolution. Analysing the accuracy of the portrayal of the French Revolution seems almost ironic, because one person’s account may not match another’s. However, what Charles Dickens wrote in A Tale of Two Cities seems to leave out a lot of the more important factors which would have influenced the thoughts and actions of the people involved in the French Revolution. One of these things was that there is no mentioning of any of the influential figures, namely Robespierre, who was an important leader in the Revolution. Another missing point is that many of the actual events in this time period were not displayed. Finally, the actually reason for the uprisings in …show more content…

He came into power as a member of the third estate in the late 1780s, under the Jacobin party. However, as a member of the Mountain political party, he was an advocate for democracy in France and universal male suffrage. He became increasingly popular with the common people because of his attacks on the monarchy and his advocating for more rights for the common people. This eventually lead the Reign of Terror, after which he was executed via Guillotine and Napoleon took power. Robespierre was one of the main reasons the French Revolution was a success, and was highly influential to the people during this time period, however he, nor any other real leader in the revolution is ever mentioned, breaking the realism of the story. The leaders of the revolution are made out to be the Defarges, who are not real characters and therefore cannot accurately portray the revolution. Similarly, another lack in A Tale of Two Cities is the absence of real life events that take …show more content…

This was the result of the heavy debts of the country from their part in the American Revolution, bringing them near bankruptcy. However, this taxation was not affordable long-term, and many peasants began starving in a widespread famine, and often lost their homes, land, and many other things. While these things are touched upon, Dickens writes the story as if the main reasons for the uprisings were the pure hatred towards aristocrats, such as stating “A few passers turned their heads, and a dew shook their fingers at him as an aristocrat; otherwise, that a man in good clothes should be going to prison, was no more remarkable than that a labourer in working clothes should be going to work (252). This is also a contributing factor, however would probably not be enough to cause an entire nation to rise up in arms and begin mass murder of said people. A counter-argument that could be that the scene regarding Foulon represented the struggle of famine during this time period. Foulon, “who told the famished people that they might eat grass,” is one of the only mentionings of the people’s struggles (218). However, this point is invalidated because this becomes an issue of aristocrats when the townspeople brutally drag him through the town and stuff grass in his mouth. The repercussions of this are also less food-related and more hatred between the two groups. This may be the

Open Document