The French Revolution is one of the most ideologically charged historical events in Western History and the historians who study this event fall into schools of thought based on their conclusions about the who brought about the cause of the Revolution, the efficacy of the methods used during the Revolution, especially the radicals during the Reign of Terror, and the idea of using a total history when evaluating the Revolution and if there were other factors than those first given during the immediate aftermath of the event. Some historians for example critique the Revolution as a just revolution only until a certain point or not all, depending on their political identity, while others find the actions of the people were fair given their circumstances …show more content…
In the period following the Revolution the literary style of the time was very important since the world had just seen two major revolutions in the span of 20 years and writers were forced to reevaluate their mode of discourse in order to address the problems uncovered by the Revolution. Problems such as the Reign of Terror, the way a monarchy should be disposed, the value of revolution as a whole, and what it truly means to be a citizen in a nation-state. Each of these questions were outgrowths of the Revolution and demanded answers, the response given helped shaped the Romantic literary style and the two main strains of thought regarding the Revolution’s legitimacy. As stated previously the two offshoots of the Contemporary School are the Right Conservative and the Left …show more content…
Burke disapproved of the Revolution and saw it as a poor reflection on the French monarchy that they could not keep appease their subjects by instituting a parliamentary system like the British and given their subjects rights but still keep the monarchy intact. Burke thought that the Revolution of 1789 went too far even before the Terror started. Ultimately Burke saw the Revolution as a threat to the status quo Adolphe Thiers in his 1834 piece Histoire De La Révolution Française on the other hand focuses on the differences in the Revolutionary leaders. He praises the moderate leaders of the Revolution and condemns the radicals. His main critique came from Thomas Carlyle on his lack of historical fact and harsh view on the Terror. Hippolyte Taine in Les Origines De La France Contemporaine agreed with Burke’s analysis and found that the fault lied with the French government’s excessive centralization which began during l’Ancien Regime and intensified during the
In this essay I shall try to find whether the Terror was inherent from the French revolutions outset or was it the product of exceptional circumstances. The French revolution is the dividing line between the Ancien Regime and the modern world. After France the hierarchy that societies of the time had been founded on began to change and they began to sweep away the intricate political structures of absolute monarchy, but however to achieve this was the Terror absolutely necessary? And was it planned/ or was it just the extraordinary circumstances, which the French had lead themselves into once they had deposed of Louis the sixteenth. Whatever way it is looked at, the political ideology of the rest of the world was going to change after the French revolution. The conflicting ideology's of the French revolution from socialism to nationalism would now be mainstream words and spearhead many political parties in years to come. The French revolution had been in high hopes that a peaceful transition could be made from absolutist to parliamentary monarchy, but what went wrong? Surely the terror could not have been in their minds at this time? Surely it was not inherent from the start.
Burke, Edmund (the Right Honourable), “Reflections on the Revolution in France” from The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke from Project Gutenberg: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/15679, Vol. III/12, No. 04/22, Pp. 1-15, Public Domain, 2009
Another social factor which prompted Burke to oppose the French Revolution was the threat of violence, which he saw as an inevitable consequence of revolution. It was after the storming of the Bastille that the idea of the revolution became repugnant to Burke, perhaps due to his opposition to the potential violence of revolution. The contrast Burke draws between a “mild and lawful monarch” and “fury, outrage and insult” of the rebels highlights the needless violence that had already materialised during the revolution in his attempt to persuade the English people that the events taking place in France were unjustified and lamentable. Burke did not view the monarchy as the tyrannical force which the French saw them. Instead he saw them as glorious
Many changes occurred in France during 1789 until 1799. This ten-year span, not only brought major upheaval to the government, but to social aspects within the country as well. Both, Edmund Burke’s, Reflections on the Revolution in France and Mary Wollstonecraft’s, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman’, were published during this revolutionary time period. Although Burke and Wollstonecraft possess contradicting views, their works both include opinions about justice, equality and tradition. Burke’s conservative views persuade the reader to understand that the government follows a natural and cyclical path just as nature does.
The ideas of change in the French Revolution came from Jean- Jacques Rousseau. Rousseau, from his book, Discourse on the Moral Effect of the Arts and Sciences, had the idea that civilization corrupted people and had once said “Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains”. His ideas were the beginning of socialism. He believed in the common good. More extremely, there was Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) who fueled ideas for the Russian Revolution. He was the Father of Communism, a more radical form of socialism. Those who followed Rousseau’s and Marx’s ideas felt that the...
“Society was cut in two: those who had nothing united in common envy; those who had anything united in common terror.” The French Revolution was a painful era that molded the lives of every citizen living in France and changed their ways of life forever. Beginning in 1789 and lasting ten years until 1799, the people of France lived in a monarch society under King Louis XVI’s rule. He was a very harsh ruler and had many restrictions placed on his people. They eventually overthrow him and become a monarch society. Among his deceptive ways, the people also experienced “The Reign of Terror,” which was a period where many lives were taken by the guillotine. Other revolutionary events included rebellions, constitutions, and groups. One of the popular groups that contributed greatly to the French Revolution were the Jacobins who were led by Maximilien Robespierre.
Over time, historians’ views on these questions have changed continually, leading many to question the different interpretations and theories behind the Revolutions effectiveness at shaping France and the rest of the world.
At a personal level, Burke’s assertions appear to support efforts for self-preservation because of his status in the social and political spheres of London. Because he was a Statesman, it was evidently easier for Edmund Burke to advocate slow changes for equality in France because he was already enjoying power in the British House of Commons (par. 32). For that reason, Thomas Paine’s calls for democracy and liberty for the people of France are more appealing. Naturally, if the French needed time to elevate the social and political statuses of the commoners, then the Revolution would not have been necessary. However, the noble-born were not ready to lose their supremacy, and there are very high chances that had they been aware of what the low-class citizens were planning, they would have retaliated with brutal force. Consequently, an upheaval was a need to change France, and anything contrary to that would need concrete proof that the Crown was ready to consider the problems of the people. On that note, contrary to Burke 's views, the people obviously had enough sense to realize that they were never going to have any privileges without force. Correspondingly, Paine 's statement that contemporary times demanded changes was plausible when one considers the fact that the American colonies had previously revolted against the English Crown. Evidently, liberty was in the minds of the revolutionists in France, and that defied all traditions that sustained loyalty to the French
A rather ominous name for the unaware; “The Reign of Terror”. An oblivious person could completely bypass the horrifying events related to the French Revolution, had it been named differently. The title for these events is appropriate from my perspective. Those four words could easily interest a curious, ordinary person, and so the history can survive, along with the information transferring to yet another carrier. Of course, everyone can benefit from knowing a few terms that can increase your understanding of the topic. An absolute monarch is a person that has absolute power among his or her people. The Estates General is a representative body drawn from the three ‘estates’ into which society had been theoretically divided. A fraternity is a group of people sharing a common profession or interests. A radical person is a person who advocates thorough or complete political or social reform. The device used to execute most people was the guillotine: a machine with a heavy blade sliding vertically in grooves, used for beheading people. The Reign of Terror is generally defined as a period of remorseless repression or bloodshed, but in particular, it is the period of the Terror during the French Revolution. Conservatives are people that hold to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation. Now that we can speak of our topic with more knowledge of terms typically used for this subject, we can address the pending question. Was The Reign of Terror justified? An outstanding amount of people died for good and bad reasons. Every system was corrupt, there was practically no right and wrong; no order, just rebellion. Several conflicting arguments can be made, but there is a definite decision to make in this situatio...
The essential cause of the French revolution was the collision between a powerful, rising bourgeoisie and an entrenched aristocracy defending its privileges”. This statement is very accurate, to some extent. Although the collision between the two groups was probably the main cause of the revolution, there were two other things that also contributed to the insanity during the French revolution – the debt that France was in as well as the famine. Therefore, it was the juxtaposing of the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy as well as the debt and famine France was in that influenced the French Revolution.
Even though, the French Revolution saw the Terror as a sign to create peace and restore a new France, it was not justified because the extremities of the internal and external threats spun out of control and the methods of the period were over the top. As the Reign of Terror in France grew and invoked fear, the internal threats became more radical and deadly. The French Revolution began in 1789 as an attempt to create a new and fair government. (Doc A) As year four of freedom lurched, the thirst for power in Maximilien Robespierre stirred and the hunger for more blood provoked him, urging him to create the Reign of Terror.
The Reign of Terror History is said to be written by the winners, but is it possible to rewrite the history of the rewrite? In a way, the French, like many who have preceded them, and many who will proceed have done the impossible, rewriting history. From trivial folklore, such as George Washington chopping down a cherry tree, to the incredibly wrong, the African slave trade; people's views of history can be. shaped and molded by the. The French have done a superb job of instilling all of us.
Sparknotes editors. “Sparknote on The French Revolution (1789-1999)”. Sparknotes.com. Sparknotes LLC. 2005. Web. 1 Oct. 2013.
The Reign of Terror was a time during the French Revolution hundreds of thousands of people were executed by various means: guillotine, shot, and drowned. The Committee of Public Safety, lead by Maximilien de Robespierre, were in charge of these executions, and with the job of finding anti-revolutionaries forces. Many thought that what Robespierre was doing would just lead to a greater anti-revolution movement, which would in turn increase the number of executions. Others did not take action against the terror; for fear that they themselves might be executed. Those who were still loyal to the revolution saw the terror as a noble cause; they saw it as a way to rid France of anti-revolutionary forces. While the terror started as an advantage to the revolution ridding anti-revolution ideals from France it began to change in to a disadvantage; it was a disadvantage because, it showed just how radical the revolutionaries could be.
The French Revolution had an important influence on the writing of the Romantic period, inspiring writers to address themes of democracy and human rights and to consider the function of revolution as a form of change. In the beginning, the French Revolution was supported by writers because of the opportunities it seemed to offer for political and social change. When those expectations were frustrated in later years, Romantic poets used the spirit of revolution to help characterize their poetic philosophies. In this essay I am going to concentrate on the influence of the French revolution on two great romantic writers, William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge.