Reign Of Terror DBQ

During the French revolution, French citizens went against absolute monarchy and the feudal system that was antiquated. They were influenced by Enlightenment ideas such as inalienable rights and popular sovereignty. Louis XVI was the ruler at the time; he believed that his power was given to him by God, thus making him think his ruling was right despite people’s opinion. The citizens of France especially the 3rd estate disliked the king for treating them poorly. Eventually the Jacobins convicted Louis XVI to death by a guillotine for treason after finding a large iron box holding Louis XVI’s secret correspondence with foreign monarchs. The beheading of King Louis XVI was justified because he took people’s rights away and made people follow his inadequate rules and biased judgments based on status. Furthermore, if he were to be left alive it would have posed a threat to the security and stability of France.

Was the Reign of Terror justified in killing those who were against the French Revolution? The Reign of Terror began during the French Revolution in 1784. It was an 18 month period during the revolution which was lead by many dictators including Robespierre. The dictators executed a large amount of those who were against the revolution. First off, those who lead the Reign of Terror did not accomplish what they wanted.

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.

The Reign of Terror seemed to be the only thing that could help achieve some sort of equality between the Three Estates. Before the Reign of Terror, the Third Estate was the most financially unstable out of all three estates. Despite this, they were the only one burdened with the mandatory payment of taxes. Due to Louis XVI’s constant spending and a horrible drought, food prices rose and the entire country was deep in debt, with the Third Estate struggling more and more at every occasion he carelessly gave out currency. With no other options, people decided to take up arms against the Revolution. Every riot or problem that revolutionaries caused was most likely justified in some way because their needs were never accounted for. The Reign of Terror was justified.

The question asked by this DBQ is: Was the Reign of Terror justified. To answer this question, one must begin by defining a few terms. Harm as defined by The New Oxford Dictionary is: Physical injury, especially that which is deliberately inflicted. Justifiable as defined by the New Oxford Dictionary is: Able to be shown to be right or reasonable; defensible. Bankrupt as defined by The New Oxford Dictionary is: Declared in law unable to pay outstanding debts. After that one must proceed by analyzing the events preceding the Reign of Terror. In early July of 1789 the french revolution began. This forced Louis XVI to share his power with the people.

"Where there is little or no public opinion, there is likely to be bad government, which sooner or later becomes autocratic government" (William Lyon Mackenzie King). In 1793, Maximilien Robespierre, head of the Committee of Public Safety, took over the unmanned French government. His ruling consisted of killing anyone that thought of enlightenment ideals or ill of him. Running as a dictator for only less than a years worth of time, Robespierre caused the Reign of Terror, a time where around 40,000 individuals who were rather innocent were killed for having slightly different

figure, Marat (doctor and journalist) was murdered in his bath. The Jacobins knew that the revolution could only be saved if they had popular support; therefore they created plenty of social laws.

The period of the French Revolution was from September 5, 1793, to July 27, 1794. Louis XVI was sentence to death due to crime like unfair tax system and having France be bankrupt. In a 10 month period which suspect enemies in the revolution were guillotined even innocents. Was the Reign of Terror justified? The Reign of Terror was not justified because they were threatened, methods that aren't that necessary, and no evidence of how they

Was the reign of terror truly justified? In the 1780’s there was a king named Louis the XVI. Louis was an absolute monarch with all the power. King Louis and his wife were in serious dept, and the people of France were starving while the king and queen filled their bellies with all the food they wanted. The people of France wanted liberty, equality, and fraternity, so they revolted in 1789 and all three estates were fighting for power which lead to the reign of terror. The reign of terror was not justified because lots of innocent people had died, the amount of people that died, and they also the Committee of Public Safety which took away their rights.

but I believe that there was good reason behind it. The Reign of Terror was justified because the people wanted a change in the government, internal forces were resisting the revolution, and enemies outside of the country were also battling against the French Revolution.

In 1789 the French felt that their basic needs were not being met and revolted against the monarchy. The National Convention, which was the new pro-French Revolution government, created a new constitution that gave the people rights called the Declaration of the Rights of Man. As a man named Robespierre came to power, he began something called the Reign of Terror to try and stop the revolts happening in France. This was a time of mass killings and executions where evidence was no longer needed to be accused or sentenced. If the Reign of Terror was just going to be like the monarchy in order to switch back to a Republic later on, than the Reign of Terror was just as bad and unjustified as the horrible way the monarchy treated its citizens before. This is largely due to the fact that it hugely benefitted Robespierre and the rest of the National Convention by creating fear and panic in order to stop revolts against them. The Reign of Terror was unjustified because it was just like the monarchy in the fact that they took away the rights they had just given to the

During the French Revolution, a radical by the name of Maximillian Robespierre was appointed leader of the Committee of Public Safety. The Committee of Public Safety was created to protect France from its enemies. In the process, they killed 40,000 people. The committee of Public Safety did not protect France’s Revolution from the enemies, especially through the way they expressed ideals and their various laws.

The three words of the french Revolution were liberty, equality, and fraternity. was the Reign of Terror Justified? The Reign of Terror was not justified because of human rights, internal threats, and external threats.

The excess can be seen in the treatment of the monarchy. Louis XVI was forced to abdicate power, and eventually the monarchy was established in 1792. However, even before that--in 1791--the royal family attempted to flee France (Doc B). Had the National Assembly simply decided to let the royal family go, they would have achieved the same outcome of total removal of the monarchy. Instead, though, they decided to behead the king and queen, adding to the terror. These deaths had no logical backing, and were rather due to passionate anger. This would have contributed to unrest and the rise of counter- revolutions, adding to the death toll later, as seem in the Vendee Revolution, which resulted in the death of over 80,000 (Doc C). Had the Republic been more tolerant and listened to the ideas of its people against the draft and complete, humiliating destruction of the nobility, thousands more would have lived on to contribute to France’s prosperity. The Reign of Terror was extreme and rigid, not allowing concessions which would have appeased the militants. This intolerance surfaced again with tribunals. According to Steven Otfinoski, dissenters were tried based on intuition rather than evidence, and even simple words of criticism could sentence one to death. Otfinoski had a negative view of these tribunals, describing it

The Reign of Terror was justified because it necessary; it produced immediate results. If France didn’t force their beliefs on people they risked and attack from Austria that they would most likely lose. So instead, they made people join the military, attacked Austria, and eventually gained success with the Battle of Valmy, (Doc B). Without the Reign of Terror, France would have fallen to another country. It helped them get to a different place and evolve as a country, and that is more important that a few lives. France may have been extremely different if not for the Reign of Terror.