The Reign Of Terror Dbq Analysis

490 Words2 Pages
The Reign of Terror

In September 1793 to July 1794, the Reign of Terror killed over 40,000 people in France using the guillotine a machine that made it a simple way to execute a mass amount of people. The Reign of Terror was led by no other than , Robespierre. He was trying to form a new government but instead caused thousands of people to be massacred. Ultimately, The Reign of Terror in France was not justified because the threats did not require it, the methods were too extreme and It did not support the ideals of the revolution.
The threats made during The Reign of Terror were not remotely extreme enough to resolve in death and therefore was not justified. In a government that says it values liberty, passing a law like the levee en mass is not justified because it requires people to do things they don’t want to do. Restricting religious practice is wrong in a government that says it values freedom and liberty (Document C). Terror also wasn’t justified because the French
…show more content…
These methods did not justify The Reign of Terror, because the patriots posed as a threat, “forty of their number were killed” (Document D). This issue should have been dealt with differently; there is a way to stop stuff like this other than killing people. Also, the government abolished “Sunday worship, Christmas, and Easter”. The internal threat was perhaps serious enough to abolish Christmas and Easter, but should not have resulted in death.
The Reign of Terror did not support the ideals of the revolution. Unfortunately for French citizens, they were not able to elect tribunal members. The tribunal members, who have absolute power were “appointed by the National Convention” (Document E). French people were rejected in their own country, which is proven by the statement that “conspirators are, in its eyes, only strangers”(Document G). The original ideals were made to protect the people of France but instead they were killing
Open Document