Justice In The Count Of Monte Cristo

Not only people apart of the revolution but innocent people who didn’t even want to take part of it. The main person behind this is Maximilien Robespierre. He was a leader of the revolution and is responsible for many deaths. In document E France established the Revolutionary Tribunal. The Tribunal was established for crimes against the state, also to expel anyone who is expected of counter revolutionary activites. This basically means if you are not for the revolution you have the possibility of being jailed or murdered. No one could speak their views or opinions without being prosecuted. In doc E the final sentence “A careless word of criticism spoken against the government could put one in prison or worse”. This is basically telling that if you speak out against the revolutionist you have the chance of having your life taken away. The item that would take people’s life away was the Guillotine. The Guillotine is a very large blade responsible for may decapitations. During the french revolution it was used to kill people in a humane way. What made this very inhumane was the fact that it was a public display. Over 16,000 people were killed by this executioner. Not every single one of these people deserved to die, most of them didn’t follow the revolution but were not even counter revolutionary. This is just the first explanation for why the Reign of Terror wasn’t

Justice is a very sensitive topic today. Many people in the United States and around the world feel like they don’t receive justice that is fair and equal, with some people even being able to avoid justice when they deserve it the most. The Count of Monte Cristo, a masterpiece novel written by Alexandre Dumas, tells the tale of Edmond Dantes and his search for revenge when the existing justice system fails him. Dantes had everything he wanted: a beautiful fiancée, a new high ranking job, his small yet sufficient wealth, and his happiness. Three men, Danglars, Fernand, and Caderousse, want all four of these things, so they frame Dantes for being a Bonapartist, only to have the corrupt justice system, headed by Villefort, fail Dantes and causing

A man challenging another to a duel was not an uncommon event in Colonial America from the 17th to the 19th century. Duels were only legal in certain areas and they had a strict set of rules outlined by the Code Duello of 1777. In a duel, the men would meet along with their representatives, or “seconds,” to decide on a weapon, which could include either a sword or a gun. Then, the group decided on the distance of where they began. The man who was challenged was allowed to fire his weapon at the other first, and then the man who initiated the duel was allowed to fire. Most often the intention of a duel was not to kill a man, but to restore dignity after an insult; therefore, the participants often purposely missed. One of the most famous of these duels was the one between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton.

The Theme of Justice in The Crucible The crucible was set in 1692 in Salem, Massachusetts. The play is based on true facts about events that actually took place. It is about a small secluded town that relies strongly on their religion to keep them feeling safe. Their enemy is the devil and they are always scared of the devil and constantly looking for signs that the devil is there.

Often individuals over dramatize their opinion to convey their attitude. Similarly, Danforth often acts extreme in his attempts to rid witchcraft from Salem when he says, “If retaliation is your fear, know this- I [Danforth] should hang ten thousand that dares to rise against the law” (Miller 129). Danforth displays demagoguery while he explains to Reverend Hale why the executions must happen on schedule because he appeals to Hale’s passionate fear of witchcraft. Danforth’s response to Hale works in the scene to further build the audience’s perception of Danforth as irritable and urgent, yet precise, and support his determination as Deputy Governor. However, Danforth’s determination often misguides his rationality. Furthermore, Danforth supports the thematic topic of law in The Crucible and helps the reader understand the severity of justice Miller conveys throughout the play. Danforth’s role develops the play by illustrating the stubbornness of authority in Salem during the witch trials.

In 1793 and 1794, were conditions in France serious enough to require such a violent response by the revolutionary government.The Reign of Terror lasted less than two years, from the execution of Louis XVI in January 1793 to late July 1794.During those eighteen months, more than 20,000 French people were put to death by guillotine.The behavior by the revolutionary French government was not justified because Any society that invents the machine to publicly cut off people’s heads is off base. The action is unjustified because it is barbaric.The reign of terror was not justified because Robespierre’s s Desperate times required desperate measures not justified In a government that says it values liberty, passing a law like the levee en mass is unjust because it requires people to do things they do not want to do wrong in a government that says it values freedom and liberty. The revolutionary government made too many demands on individuals who were right to rebel against the oppressive revolutionary government. speech sounds rational, but he is out of touch. When a government has to “smother” its own citizens in order to eliminate individuals who challenge it, the government is not promoting freedom.To lay the foundations of democracy and the rule of law, rulers need to follow democracy and the rule of law, not the blade of terror. Any society that invents the machine to publicly cut off people’s heads is off base. The action is unjustified because it is barbaric.Nine people

Innocent lives lost, brawls on the streets, and blood splattered on the ground. These are all things you would find during the Reign of Terror, a period of time during the French Revolution where the newly-created government executed large amounts of people who were suspected enemies of the Revolution. The French Revolution started in 1789 as an attempt to rid of the absolute monarchy that ruled over the French people and create a new government that fit their needs. There were three leading factors that spurred the start of the Revolution. The first was the high debt that rose during this time, primarily from King Louis XVI sending money to aid in the American Revolution.

The French Revolution began in 1789 as an attempt to form a new government in France.For quite a long time outright ruler had ruled the French country with little thought for most of the people.The execution of Louis XVI offered path to a year-long stretch of the French Revolution known as "The Reign of Terror". Should people be oppressed for his or her convictions? The Reign of Terror kept going under two years, from the execution of Louis XVI in January 1793 to past due July 1794. Amid those eighteen months, in excess of 20,000 French individuals have been executed with the aid of guillotine. Guillotines have been tremendous falling slicing edges that were utilized by political enthusiasts known as radicals to execute traditionalists, who had been people that needed to hold the old methods. It isn't always proper for people to be abused for his or her convictions. The Reign of Terror in France became not supported. This claim can be reinforced by way of taking a gander at 3 zones: outer chance, the inner chance, and the techniques.

Have you ever heard of the Reign Of Terror? The Reign Of Terror was during the French Revolution.Maximilien De Robespierre used extreme methods to punish those who didn't agree with him. The Reign Of Terror wasn't Justified. The methods Robispierre used were barbaric and unjust.

Do know in the late 1700s if someone disobeyed you they head got chopped off.the french revolution began in 1789 as an attempt to form a new government in france.it was a revolution that did not follow a simple path .one broadside from the time read ”unity ,indivisibility of republican liberty equality fraternity or death” .it is the last word of course that is troubling. The reign of terror was justified because the the threats to them, the method for punishment and the reasons behind the revolution The reign of terror was unjustified because of all the threats they received from inside and outside enemies. In document c it speaks of all the outside threats. ”in august 1792 an 80,000-man army marched into france.nearly half the force was prussian ,and the other half austria.austria and prussia were

Many people feared the French because they knew the power the French had and how much rule they could obtain. “Yet the greatest of our misfortunes was a certain fear of the concentration of authority necessary to save the state” (Document 5). The citizens’ armies were being beaten and were taken down slowly. In total, 13,347 people had died within the Terror and 10,456 of those killings were because of hostile acts against the state (Document 2). As noticed, the French use of guillotine was very successful in enforcing law and letting the people know where they stood. The French were going around and were murdering everyone who tried to go against them. They had zero tolerance and made sure nothing would stop their plans. “What a pity that a people capable of such incredible energy, should be guilty or rather be governed by those who are guilty of such unheard of crimes and cruelties” (Document 13). The French were absolutely ruthless by killing their own people but were unaware that the killings caused the significant decrease in population. The French believed that what they were doing well but did not realize they were slowly killing their own population. The French way of ruling was the greatest people have ever seen anyone rule, “But their efforts are merely the result of a system of restraint and oppression, the most terrible and gigantic, that has,

The immense sickness wasn’t the only thing dark about Europe’s Middle Ages. The monarchs were cruel and unruly to their subjects while enforcing brutality upon their land and citizens. The laws enforced by these kings and queens were nothing short of diabolical, for there was no set list of limitations and rules meaning that the monarchs could punish anyone for anything, even if that meant simply disturbing the king. The executions of the ‘accused’ were public to the citizens, and were “a pitiless affair” (McGlynn). The kings ruled with an iron fist as their methods of justice were murderous as executions “sent out a message of warning and deterrence” and “offered the ultimate guarantee against repeat offenders”. The message monarchs tried to send while carelessly shedding blood was that they desired to make a statement, and scare citizens into not committing crimes, for they would know the gruesome consequences. If not death, the “standard, mandatory sentence” of all accused peoples was mutilation of “eyes, noses, ears, hands, feet and testicles”. To sum it all up, punishment in the Middle Ages was much more unforgiving than in this modern day of age; being burned at the stake or beheaded by the guillotine are still some of the most spine-tingling punishments to this day. In all of the depressing fog of the Middle Ages, could there truly have been a beneficial factor?

In the story The Last Duel by Eric Jager, fourteenth century in medieval France, a knight by the name of Jean de Carrouges challenges a squire, Jacques Le Gris, to a duel. The reason for this trial by combat, a court-ordered duel intended by fate of God to determine the truth, was to seek vengeance for the sake of his own honor. The wife of Jean Carrouges was the "young, beautiful, good, sensible, and modest" Marguerite. She was expected to maintain a ladylike mannerism and remain loyal to her husband. When the couple traveled to Capomensil to visit Carrouges mother-in-law Marguerite stayed under her watch while Carrouges set out on a journey in desperate need of cash. While away on his journey

Humiliation, Pain and Death: The Execution of Criminals in New France,” is an article that puts

As said by Samuel Johnson, an english writer, “Revenge is an act of passion; vengeance of justice. Injuries are revenged; crimes are avenged”. In other words to desire vengeance can be justified while revenge is unethical. Imprisoned at the Chateau D’if, has a scheme to avenge the felons that wrongfully imprisoned him. Just like Edmond Dantes who was wrongfully imprisoned at the Chateau D’if, while there he created a scheme to avenge the felons you imprisoned him.