Introduction
It is important to note that the French Revolution was an event of historical significance that shifted the course of humanity. It is undeniable that it marked a major change and transition in the power distribution from monarchies and aristocracies to the common folk. However, the revolution also had a darker side than the French Revolutionary Terror of 1792, which was manifested in a period of public executions and massacres. The ‘Terror’ was an expression of political weakness rather than strong ideological fervor due to lack of progress, violation of rights, and popular pressure.
Lack of Progress
Firstly, the French Revolutionary Terror was an example of political weakness because Maximilien Robespierre because he justified it due to the lack of progress. It is stated that “Robespierre was frustrated with the progress of the revolution. After issuing threats to the National Convention, he himself was arrested in July 1794.”1 In other words, the leader of the Committee of Public Safety was not pleased with how the development of the revolution was progressing, which resulted in attempted suicide. The latter indicates that failure was the real incentive behind the mass executions and massacres. The French overthrew their monarchs in order to establish a better system of governance, but the chaos in the aftermath of the revolution showed the government’s inability to ensure stability. Therefore, the Terror was justified as a response, which clearly shows a sign of frustration and weakness by political leaders such as Robespierre.
It should be noted that Robespierre was the central figure of the French Revolutionary Terror of 1792. Having started his political career with the demand for equality of citizens and the abolition of the death penalty, M. Robespierre completed it by dividing people into ‘virtuous’ and ‘enemies of the people.’ The result was an evident and direct introduction of mass Terror. It is impossible to give an unambiguous assessment of the activities of M. Robespierre. At the same time, one must understand what history warns about the person of Maximilian Robespierre. The logic of Terror was such that, at first, obvious enemies of the new government, such as aristocrats, priests who refused to swear allegiance to the new regime, participants in royalist uprisings, and monarchists, fell under the knife of the guillotine on the verdict of the revolutionary tribunal. Then Terror fell upon the main political opponents of the Jacobins, such as the Girondins. And in April 1794, Robespierre’s comrades-in-arms in the Jacobin party passed through the revolutionary tribunal. This included leaders of the revolution who took different sides than the leaders of the Jacobins.
Violation of Rights
Secondly, the French Revolutionary Terror was an expression of political weakness because it went against the key postulates of the rights of man. Article 7 states that “no person shall be accused, arrested, or imprisoned except in the cases and according to the forms prescribed by law.”2 In other words, the mass arrests and executions were demonstrative of disregard for the given statement. The government was clearly fearful of social unrest morphing into a nationwide uprising to overturn the new system and establish a more competent one. Article 11 states that “the free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom.”3 It is evident that these legal prescriptions were being abused by emphasizing the punitive aspects rather than enabling freedom of expression and thought.
The logic of Terror was such that, at first, obvious enemies of the new government, such as aristocrats, priests who refused to swear allegiance to the new regime, participants in royalist uprisings, and monarchists, fell under the knife of the guillotine on the verdict of the revolutionary tribunal. Then Terror fell upon the main political opponents of the Jacobins, such as the Girondins. And in April 1794, Robespierre’s comrades-in-arms in the Jacobin party passed through the revolutionary tribunal. This included leaders of the revolution who took different sides than the leaders of the Jacobins. For example, the accusation of restoration of royal power leveled against Danton was absurd.4 However, Danton became the center of attraction for those who, having grown rich during the years of the revolution, now sought to stop it, was a supporter of moderation in social issues, inclined to the need to weaken the revolutionary dictatorship. The guilty verdict for people who had great authority was handed down in gross violation of procedural norms.
On June 10, 1794, at the suggestion of Robespierre, the Convention adopted a decree on the reorganization of the revolutionary tribunal aimed at reducing and speeding up legal proceedings. The interpretation of the concept of “enemy of the people” was expanded, and the judicial procedure was simplified to the limit. The preliminary interrogation of the accused was removed, and they were interrogated directly in court while witnesses were not involved. The arrested were deprived of the right to protection, and appeals were not allowed. The only punishment for counter-revolutionary crimes was the death penalty. In fact, violated Article 9 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen.5 The decree was supposed to give the revolutionary government a powerful weapon to suppress the growing forces of the counter-revolution and to toughen revolutionary justice.
The introduction of these measures, at first glance, was hardly justified. Thanks to the army created by the Jacobins to repel external aggression, the introduction of universal military service on June 26, 1794, victory was achieved over the Austrian army. The threat of a direct invasion of France by European coalitions was eliminated, and the restoration of the monarchy fell away. The adopted law was directed primarily against those deputies of the Convention who managed to warm their hands during the revolution and whose interests no longer corresponded to the position of Robespierre and his associates. Many deputies turned Terror into a means of personal enrichment, executing and pardoning at their own discretion.
The process of transition to Terror is a means of rallying around a common enemy in the face of real or imagined threats from the opponents of the revolution. On the other hand, it was a logically justified explanation for the failures of the revolution, performing a kind of compensatory function of mass consciousness. This political measure itself arose long before the Jacobin dictatorship, but it was the Jacobins who made it a pillar of power.6 It has been repeatedly emphasized that the reason for this was the utopian idealism of Robespierre and his supporters. They desired to create a society where the only ties that should maintain relationships between people would be those of friendship rather than marriage vows or kinship.7 The minutes of court hearings against factions often leave the impression of condemning people precisely for betraying this universal unity rather than criminal offenses.
Popular Pressure
Third, the French Revolutionary Terror was an example of political weakness because the common people became accustomed to and demanding violence, which reflected the popular pressure. For example, “in June 1793, the Jacobins seized control of the National Convention from the more moderate Girondins and instituted a series of radical measures, including the establishment of a new calendar and the eradication of Christianity.”8 The intense degree of division between various political leaders was the main cause of heightened hostility and violence, which led to people being guillotined by the thousands.9 Robespierre himself was unable to control such a crowd of individuals seeking violent executions, which resulted in him being executed on July 28, 1794.10 Therefore, the Terror was dominated by the masses and not by the government, which shows the overall political weakness.
The Terror hardened people, and it is worth noting that this was not uncommon when lynching took place, and the most hated aristocrats were dealt with regularly. A feature of the Terror era in Paris was mass lynching, and executions were fueled by people’s belief in the need for reprisals. If there was not enough food, they dealt with the food sellers; if there were defeats in the war, then with the generals. No one had absolute safety, neither the king nor the baker, and this created an atmosphere of general distress in which people lived in fear. Life has become highly devalued to the point that death has become part of everyday life. However, the executions could not continue indefinitely, and the jubilation ceased when there were no longer any Girondins or others. The militarization of society at the everyday level can be identified as a feature of the Parisian daily life of the Terror era. The most important feature of the period was the revolutionary holidays, the participants of which were the population of the capital.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the French Revolutionary Terror of 1792 was an expression of political weakness because there was a lack of progress, violation of rights, and popular pressure. Although ideological fervor existed in the nation, the fundamental underlying reason was the weakness of the leaders. They were unable to seize control over the population and ensure stability, which meant that they needed to appeal to the masses’ demands. The key rights established at the time were not practiced or were implemented in a punitive framework rather than enabling them fully. No significant progress was made since the revolution and overthrow of the monarchs since the nation was in a state of chaos and disorder. Despite all this, the French Revolution finally eliminated the feudal system in Europe. The face of global civilization has undergone radical changes, and Western society has turned from feudal to Republic-based.
Bibliography
Andress, D. (2015). The Oxford Handbook of the French Revolution. Sage.
History.com Editors. (2021). French Revolution. History.
Jones, P. (1949). The French Revolution: In social and political perspective. Arnold.
National Assembly of France. (1789). Declaration of the Rights of Man – 1789.
Robespierre, M. (1794). Justification of the use of terror.
Footnotes
- Robespierre, M. (1794). Justification of the use of terror. Web.
- National Assembly of France. (1789). Declaration of the Rights of Man – 1789. Web.
- National Assembly of France. (1789). Declaration of the Rights of Man – 1789. Web.
- Andress, D. (2015). The Oxford handbook of the French Revolution. Sage.
- National Assembly of France. (1789). Declaration of the Rights of Man – 1789.Web.
- Jones, P. (1949). The French Revolution: In social and political perspective. Arnold.
- Andress, D. (2015). The Oxford handbook of the French Revolution. Sage.
- History.com Editors. (2021). French Revolution. History.Web.
- Andress, D. (2015). The Oxford handbook of the French Revolution. Sage.
- Jones, P. (1949). The French Revolution: In social and political perspective. Arnold.