How Did Robespierre Influence The French Revolution

The French Revolution began in 1789 as an attempt, by the revolutionaries, to form a new government that would give the people more liberty, equality and value people’s rights. Between 1793 and 1794 the government used extreme ways to achieve their goals. This period of time, led by Robespierre, was called the reign of Terror because between 20,000-40,000 french people were killed by the government forces. The Reign of Terror was not justified for three reasons:The external and internal threat did not deserve it, they denied natural rights against people who opposed them and the methods of the Terror were too extreme.

So that leaves question as to how it was that Robespierre transformed from a man who believed in a government for the people to nearly becoming a tyrant himself. To understand this, one must understand the circumstances which arose in France during the late eighteenth century that forced him to take action. The driving problem throughout, however; was essentially the monarchy. The regime of Louis XVI could hardly be considered that of a tyrant, but nevertheless his inability to properly govern his country led to frustration and anger among the people of France. Robespierre shared this sentiment in his speech, stating that “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....” This also hints at Robespierre’s earlier ideologies concerned with Rousseau as he does make reference to the need for a nation to have a democratic system. Louis XVI was a failing king, and even long before the National Convention had come into power much of France vowed to see the monarchy abolished. By 1791 it had become increasingly clear that Louis was no longer fit to govern – a moment marked by his attempted flight to Varennes. This cost the king his credibility and he effectively ‘died’

The careers of Robespierre and Napoleon were very similar. They both accomplished many big things and both crashed in a terrible way. Robespierre stood behind the idea of a great republic instead of a monarchy and followed the ideology no matter what. His purity allowed him to make decisions that got him to one of the highest positions in the National Assembly. He even managed to get to become the one that was making the decisions. He was a member of the Jacobin’s club which was strongly republican. However, after Robespierre started getting too violent and also, little bit after he ordered the death of, the people loved, D’Anton, the common people started to not like him. The common people saw him as another dictator how was trying to get to the place of Louis

     Maximillien Robespierre is commonly viewed as the symbol of the Reign of Terror, the short period in which thousands of people were executed because they were thought to be traitors. However, Maximillien was actually an idealistic reformer with an image of peace and equality driving him on, who is unfairly credited with the Terror, and assumed to be a power-hungry tyrant.

The internal threats against France were minimal because when someone did disagree with the revolution they were punished and more than likely, executed. When these executions took place, people would see what would happen to them if they acted the same way. This shows that there was not many people that rebelled against the government; however, people still did, which is one of the reasons the number executions and murders was so high. People had a right to be angry with the government, nevertheless. Many citizens of France were drafted to the levee en masse, the military draft during the revolution. (Document C) They were very mad about this because they were forced to fight even if they didn’t agree with the method France was using to protect itself from internal and external threats. In Document D, a local government official from Western Europe sends a letter to the National Convention asking for more soldiers because the 3,000 men army wasn’t enough. In the letter, the official says that the men sent by the government have failed to stop the “rabble”. Adding to the many reasons the Reign of Terror was unjustifiable, this leads to the official asking if he can kill the men for not doing their job. Killing nearly 3,000 men because they cannot stop the multitude of soldiers is greatly insensitive. Robespierre overreacted when he believed that the internal threats were serious, because on the contrary, they made little

During the Reign of Terror anyone against the French Revolution was killed by guillotine. Over 40,000 people were killed by orders of Robespierre. The Reign of Terror was justified because, it put fear in people against the revolution, it made the people for the revolution feel safe, and it gave France more power.

He was one of the most influential people of the French revolution, and was the political figurehead of France after Louis XVI was executed. Maximilien did not believe in forgiving the rioters in the French Revolution and instead executed them and began the Reign of Terror, something he believed was necessary.

The Reign of Terror caused many enemies against the French Revolution. The Reign of Terror in France was justified because the Threats were required, however the methods were too extreme; It had supported the ideals of the Revolution. Due to the Reign of Terror, France rid itself of Monarchy and traits to France. On February 5, 1794 Robespierre had inferences of why the Reign of Terror was justified (Document G).

The Reign of Terror was a notorious event of the revolution, Led by Robespierre, where alleged enemies of the revolution were brought before Revolutionary Tribunals to be heard of for cases of treason in the name of radical liberalism. The Reign of Terror was not justified because their methods of terror took it a step too far and didn't work in some cases, external and internal threats impacted the perception and spread of revolutionary ideas, and the people and the government went too far in order to protect their ideals of the revolution.

Sources A and B support the claim established by contemporaries and historians that Robespierre was “incorruptible”, however Robespierre was also despotic, extreme, and radical. Robespierre’s strong opinions, extremism, and despotism support that he was not easily persuaded or corruptible. Source A shows Robespierre saying “the sword that gleams in the hands of the heroes of liberty resembles those in the hands of the henchmen of tyranny”. This statement supports that the government was despotic, which shows that Robespierre was a brutal leader not easily persuaded or corrupted. His statement, “Let the despot govern by terror his brutalised subjects; he is right, as a despot” supports that Robespierre had very strong opinions, showing that

The French Revolution was based on an assortment of Enlightenment ideals. French philosophers, including Voltaire and Rousseau led the revolution leading up to the revolution, so to speak, coming up with progressive ideals as to government, social structure, and the nature of people. Indeed, the ideals which the revolution was fought in the name of progressed throughout France and, eventually, Europe. Though the revolution took wrong turns along the way, the ideals which it was based on never wavered. Even during the heart of his Reign of Terror, Robespierre spoke of a state where each citizen wants to do good by his country. This shows Robespierre with an unwavering commitment to the state, an ideal which came out of the Enlightenment. Though he may have carried out his beliefs in a gruesome and perhaps wrong way, his ideals were the same as the Enlightenment philosophers: make the state better for all to live in.

During the period of The French Revolution, Maximilien Robespierre, French lawyer and politician, was probably one of the most influential and well – known figures. I selected him because I found his personality interesting, and wanted to know more about him. To this day, among historians, Robespierre is a very controversial figure. Some support his actions during the Reign of Terror, while others do not. Furthermore, in his early days as a politician, he was known as ‘The Incorruptible’ due his strict moral values and ideas, yet, during the Reign of Terror, he was responsible for the executions of thousands. I found the contrast between his two ideologies really shocking, and wanted to know more about historians’ perspective of him, so I decided to research and do this project on Robespierre.

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

Robespierre was the main person to implement the laws he put forth.[Footnote] He believed in solving all his problems through violence. Those who were born to a particular family, having certain opinions, or simply being at the wrong place at the wrong time, would fall victim to him. Although Robespierre was obsessed with violence, he never actually performed acts himself, unless assured he would succeed, he’d have other people to do his work for him. The most common device used to punish people was the guillotine. Robespierre used other methods at times; he’d burn, hack, stab, shoot, and even cannonade a person. Those he objected, or had been his enemy would soon be imprisoned, and eventually executed. He was relentless and ordered people dead with no trial, killing people without proving or even knowing if they were truly “guilty”. He believed the mass murders he was responsible for were justified.

The Royal Family of France’s attempted escape on June 20th, 1791 made many people very unhappy with the King. The mob, ever ready to exercise the uncontrolled Rights of Men, made a mock parade of the King’s Arms in the market places, and, dashing them and the figure of a crown to the ground, they trampled upon them, crying out, “Since the King has abandoned what he owed to his high situation, let us trample upon the ensigns of royalty” (Ascherson 48)! The Royal Family not only lost many of its followers through their attempted escape, but also because King Louis XVI kept making bad decisions, ones that had no benefit to France or its people. The people wanted someone who would lead them into a revolution and change France for the better, not because they wanted the power, but because they believed in France and wanted it to become a great nation. That man was Robespierre, who after the flight of the King followed the Jacobin club in its move toward republicanism. He called for universal male suffrage and the end of property qualifications for voting and office holding (Blumberg 290). Robespierre wanted to make France a republic, a government for the people and by the people, a country where everyone had the freedoms and rights they deserved. In January of 1793, Robespierre voted on whether or not he thought that King Louis should be executed for his actions. At the Convention on the trial