Convention And The Committee Of Public Safety example essay topic

Imagine you are writing a study of "The Reign of Terror". In the form of a short essay (not more than 900 words) answer the following questions: What kind of primary source is this, and what strengths and limitations does it have as a source for a study of "The Reign of Terror"? Identify any particular words and phrases in the document that require elucidation or special comment before you can make use of it. What can you learn from this source with respect to "The Reign of Terror"? You should distinguish between the witting and the unwitting testimony. 1 The document is a translated extract of the first two articles from the Law of Suspects, passed by the Convention on 17 September 1793.

Article 1 declares that this law comes into immediate effect and that suspects, who are still at liberty, will be placed under arrest. Article 2 defines six categories of suspects and how they are to be identified. The document carries the authority of the Convention and all in the Republic are held to be subject to this law. The dating of the legislation is significant for two reasons. First, it marks the beginning of what was to become "The Reign of Terror", specifically the Jacobin led Red Terror of 1793-1794 which was characterised by the persecution of royalists and "traitors". In that respect the law may be seen as a catalyst for what was to follow.

Secondly, within the context of the months prior to the publication of the law, it needs to be recognised that this was part of a series of emergency legislative acts designed to counter perceived threats to the Revolution. During 1793 France was in near chaos, waging war with Britain and Spain and engaged in an internal power struggle between the Jacobin led Convention (claiming the support of Paris and the proletariat masses) and the Girondin, "federalist" and counter revolutionary factions. Consequently, the following emergency measures were taken. The establishment of a Revolutionary Tribunal, from which there was no appeal, in March 1793. In the same month the Committee of General Security, a division of the secret police, came into being. In April the Committee of Public Safety, a twelve member executive "war cabinet", was empowered to propose legislation and impose the government's authority.

As a result the Subsistence Commission asserted price and wage controls in May and September, and in August the Levee en Masse introduced general conscription. The Law of Suspects came as a culmination of this legislative process in September. Indeed, its own internal reference in Article 2 to three prior pieces of legislation supports this view. Authorship cannot be ascertained directly from the document, but can be inferred (unwittingly) from its context. It can be established that the issue of "suspects" was a particular concern to the Committee of Public Safety before September. In that Committee, Danton had pressed for a general arrest of suspects on August 12; Barer e had remarked that "the man who complains about everything that happens during a Revolution is a suspect; and Saint-Just had urged making terror the "order of the day" (Thompson, Leaders of the French Revolution, p 193-5).

What was lacking was a legal definition of "suspect". Therefore the Law of Suspects was drafted to meet that specific need, and to do so in a way that conveyed the radical view of its architects, the Committee of Public Safety. A major weakness with this source document arises from the fact that it appears to be an emergency measure, perhaps hastily constructed. There is ambiguity and vagueness in the definition of suspect behaviour, in fact the whole notion appears to be elastic - capable of being stretched to fit anyone and therefore open to abuse. This lack of precision makes the document unreliable as a means of accurately identifying those who were suspects. However, the inherent ambiguity may help us understand the subsequent excesses of The Reign of Terror.

2 In the document there are two occurrences of words remaining in the original French, perhaps signalling that these are either technical terms or have a special meaning tied to their historical context. The first of these, certificat de civisme, appears to refer to an important document conferring proof of revolutionary loyalty. English translations of the phrase render it as a certificate of patriotism or civic responsibility. Within the historical context we know that that a certificat de civisme was necessary to exercise public office or obtain a passport (Goodwin, The French Revolution p 118). Therefore refusal to grant the certificate rendered a person suspect by virtue of the fact that they could not be trusted in public office or travel. The term 'emir " es refers to those who had left the Republic for political reasons, particularly royalist sympathisers of the First and Second Estate.

By 1792 they had consolidated around France's borders and were ordered, by the National Assembly, to be dispersed from what was considered to be armed camps. In January 1792 those who had not dispersed were deemed to be conspirators against the republic, and sentenced to death in their absence together with the confiscation of their property We should also note that the terms, tyranny, federalism and enemies of liberty in Article 2 clause 1 are to be understood from the Convention's viewpoint, i.e. their definition rests on the interpretation of a revolutionary government. 3 We have already indicated that this document was published at the beginning of "The Reign of Terror". Therefore we cannot expect to find witting information regarding subsequent events, because they were not known at the time. Our search for relevance must be confined to the events prior to September 17 and the way in which the Law of Suspects helped to create the conditions and apparatus for what was to follow.

We have also noted the ambiguity surrounding the definition of suspects. It seems to me that a significant part of the witting testimony is the fact that this is also a studied ambiguity, in that it is capable of ensnaring any person, thought for any reason, to be disloyal to the revolution. However, the most important contribution the Law of Suspects makes to a study of "The Reign of Terror" is the (unwitting) part it played in A) politicizing the Paris masses (particularly the sans culottes), and following on from this B) legitimising violence (even though there is no witting evidence for violence in the law, apart from arrest) A) With the support of the sans culottes Jacobins replaced Girondins as the dominant group in the Convention in June 1793 and in a sense this alliance meant that both the Convention and the Committee of Public Safety were answerable to the Paris crowds who provided their popular support. By September these crowds were pressing for the wholesale arrest of suspects and for terror to be adopted as a principle of government. It appears that the Committee thought that anarchy would result if they failed to maintain a strong control backed by popular support. Therefore the Law of Suspects helped to give voice to the political will and concerns of the crowd.

In that sense the law embodied, at least in part, the perceived General Will. Danton expressed the popular view thus: "The patrie will be saved... Everything is in motion, everyone burns to fight... While one part of the people goes to the frontiers, another digs our defences and a third, armed with pikes, will defend our cities and towns... Paris will go to second these efforts...

The tocsin that shall be sounded is not a signal of alarm but a summons to charge against the enemies of the patrie. To vanquish them, Messieurs, we need boldness, always boldness" (from Schama, Citizens, p 632). B) Violence had been very evident the previous September with a massacre of prisoners around Paris. Subsequently there does seem to have been a deliberate policy by the Convention in mid 1793 to take control and direct that violence as a way of asserting its own authority. This in turn led to a legitimising of violence as a political instrument of government. The Law of Suspects become in Schama's view "the charter of the Terror" (Schama, Citizens, p 766).

One member of the Committee of Public Safety, Saint-Just, underscores the relationship of this law with violence when he comments, "Between the people and their enemies there can be nothing in common but the sword; we must govern by iron those who cannot be governed by justice; we must oppress the tyrant... It is impossible for revolutionary laws to be executed unless the government itself is truly revolutionary" (Schama, Citizens, p 767) The Law of Suspects does not in itself advocate violence and capital punishment, but it does enable the circumstances through which such acts may be then perpetrated. It demonisms those whom it perceives as enemies and encourages their elimination, at least as opponents of the revolution. Commenting on the revolution of the tenth of August, Robespierre had rejoiced that "a river of blood would now divide France from its enemies". (from Schama, Citizens, p 792 A 103 Course Team (1998) A 103 Block 3, Units 8-9, (The Open University 1998) A 103 Course Team (1997) A 103 Resource Book 2, A 1 (The Open University 1998) William Doyle, The French Revolution, a very short introduction, (OUP 2001 p 50-62) A Goodwin, The French Revolution (5th edition), (Hutchinson 1988 p 138-147) JM Thompson, Leaders of the French Revolution, (New York: Harper & Row, 1967 p 193-5) Simon Schama, Citizens, a Chronicle of the French Revolution, (Viking 1989 p 630-792).