Harry Sandwith is a 16 year old English boy. He is sent to live in France with the Marquis de St. Caux who is the brother of a man his father knew. The marquis believes with Harry’s schooling history he can influence and become friends with his two sons. Harry thinks he will get bigger opportunities when he moves to France and joins the British army. In 1790 Harry sets off for Paris. While living with the family in France the French Revolution begins to worry the Cox family because they support the King and Paris. After the royal family fails to flee Paris the St. Caux family moves to Paris to support the king and avoid the growing chaos of the peasants living in the countryside. After moving to Paris an order of events start to happen after an arrest warrant is ordered for all the members of noble families. With so much chaos and trouble will the family make it out alive?
He justified and proved that what he is doing is “right” by doing speeches and even using an audience to watch deaths of the many “enemies of the state”. Robespierre said in one of his speeches, “Terror is nothing more than speedy, severe and inflexible justice; it is thus an emanation of virtue; it is less a principle in itself, than a consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to the most pressing needs of the patrie”. He is saying that terror is what is needed in his time, there are no other plausible solutions. This is the only one. But I want to ask him, is a person aged 18 that sawed a tree that represents this so-called liberty deserved death? Is a woman that was charged with the crime of having wept at her husband’s execution just? What is worst as said by the description of The Terror at Bordeaux, “the woman was condemned to sit for hours under the blade which shed upon her, drop by drop the blood of her dead husband…before she was released by death.” This is so inhumane that it gives me frightening goosebumps. Is this what you called “solution”? This is a solution that is impractical, illogical and of course,
Should people be persecuted for their beliefs? 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. Guillotines were large falling blades that were used by political extremists called radicals to decapitate conservatives, who were people that wanted to keep the old ways. It is not right for people to be persecuted for their beliefs. The Reign of Terror in France was not justified. This claim can be supported by looking at three areas: external threat, the internal threat, and the methods.
The ‘Reign of Terror’ was not justified because the it took away the rights that the French government had achieved during French Revolution. One piece of evidence for this was that during the reign of terror the French people had no freedom of religion. A detail that supports this was the fact that during the Reign of Terror, people were not allowed to practise any religion, especially Christianity.
With the changes seen in the economy, war & leaders, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 can be considered a part of the Enlightenment. Evidence shown through historical documents proves this stance. Although some historical events during the Glorious Revolution refute my stance, the Glorious Revolution was indeed a part of the Enlightenment because of the major shifts England had during and after this time period: Influencers, Religious tolerance and changes in governmental policies.
The Reign of Terror was one of the worst times in world history. This was a period of time when thousands of people were being executed for unfair reasons because of Robespierre- an absolute monarch who believed that torture and terror were required to have a strong constitutional law. The reign of terror was not justified because Enlightenment ideas were ignored, the rights of the common people were violated, and the methods of punishment were too harsh.
Over the course of time, many leaders attempted to control their nation and increase their own power in order to dictate their citizens. Some examples of such leaders are, Louis XIV of France and Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union. During the age of absolutism, Louis XIV also known as, the “Sun King” became the ruler of France through the theory of divine right, which allowed him to rule his people as an absolute ruler. He controlled his people by implementing a centralized government and forcing the 3rd estate to pay unfair taxes. Joseph Stalin, who was another ruler, who went down in history as one of the most ruthless dictators the world has ever known. He used the political system of totalitarianism in order to remain an authority figure
The French Revolution was a very problematic time period. After the execution of Louis XVI, the Reign of Terror began during the years of 1793 - 1794 which was led by French politician, Maximilien Robespierre and lasted for 18 months. This topic is controversial when the question, “Was the Reign of Terror justified?” is asked. The Reign of Terror was ultimately unjust because the promises for a democracy were put to the side due to a desire for power. It was inhumane to murder a colossal amount of people based on accusations and from being blinded from greediness.
Do the ends justify the mean? If you were an American soldier ready to be deployed for a massive land invasion of Japan, the atomic bombs saved your life. World War II ended when the United States dropped the atomic bombs and saved thousands of American lives. The French Revolution faced a similar dilemma. The rallying cry for the revolution was equality, liberty, and fraternity, bringing the first democracy to France. The Reign of Terror was led by Maximilien Robespierre, he violently suppressed counter-revolutionary forces within and outside the country. Did the French government have good reason to conduct a violent campaign to uphold the ideals of the French Revolution? The Reign of Terror was justified because of three reasons: the revolutionary
the committee of public safety were effectively protecting the revolution. they were showing promising strength and would take a lot to stop it. other monarchs wanted it crushed so their people wouldn’t get the idea of revolting against them. qall efforts to stop them failed due to a constant show of force.
I don 't agree with the way the Committee of Public Safety was being operated and how they solved problems, like cutting peopleś head off,but the way they solved their problems was effective, and it protected their country against their enemies. The Committee of Public Safety was keeping all people who were against the French Revolution away from the country. They were keeping people who seemed suspicious of treason away from France, to protect the revolution which was its job. I don 't agree with the idea that death is the answer to every single problem, there were less violent punishment they could of did more of like jails and slave work because violence isn 't the only solution. Altogether, I do believe they were successful at
Within the period of 1750 to 1914, changes were taking place around the world. New empires and nations began growing and expanding their territory, and as a result of these actions, wars, bankruptcy, and rebellions became more common. An example is the American Revolution, in which the American colonists, who were influenced by new philosophies and the sense of nationalism, fought and gained their independence from Britain. This revolution eventually inspired others throughout the world as it was successful in gaining the colonies independence from a powerful European empire. Those revolutions include the Haitian and French Revolution. The Haitian Revolution can be compared to the French revolution in that they were both influenced by the Enlightenment
First, the Magna Carta is a legal document that was written in 1215. It was written to acknowledge the carelessness of the kings doing in England to abuse his power while watching the other English people suffer, and to enforce a set of rules that everyone, including himself, would have to follow.
The French Revolution was a major failure and a minor success. After all of the blood shed, the laws, civil rights, and codes did not get instituted effectively and did not represent the values that the citizens had fought for. Examples of this were the Napoleonic Code and Declaration of Rights of Man. Another reason it was a failure was because during the revolts and reforms more than 40,000 men and women died. This enormous massacre of people went against Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, all of which the national assembly declared were every man 's right. Much of the killing can be blamed on Robespierre and King Louis XVI. Although it was mostly a failure, some achievements can be seen through the Revolution. The French Revolution helped the French people become a more equal and socialist state. This showed Europe that the French were capable of revolting and they were not afraid to stand up for what they believed. They demonstrated pure democracy by abolishing the 3 estates and assuming power for the people. These two points are miniscule compared to death, destruction, and economic failures that the Revolution brought. The French Revolution was mostly a failure because of the ineffective execution of reforms and unnecessary massacre of lives. However it was a minor success because of the socialistic ideologies that were given birth to during the Revolution, which helped reform France into what it is today.
The Reign of Terror what 's a phase the revolution where if anyone who was revolting was captured they would be executed by guillotine. A guillotine was a device used to execute people by cutting off their head. This made people scared to revolt. This phase lead to the end of the monarchy and the rise of the republic.