Was The Reign Of Terror Justified

Michael Garcia
3­11­15
Period 2

Was the Reign Of Terror Justified? The reign of Terror was a violent and savage part of the French Revolution. 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 20,00 French people were put to death by the guillotine. Now the revolutionary government was inspired by enlightenment ideas of freedom and equality, found itself using extremely cruel measures against the french people. Were these measures used against the french people justified? This paper will argue that. The reign of Terror was not justified this claim can be supported by three main reasons the threats to the government weren't big enough, the methods did not justify it, and the actions of the government contradicted the ideals of the revolution. Starting off, the Reign of terror was not justified because none of the threats to the government were not big enough to justify such drastic action. One of the claims made by France was that they were under constant attack by Austrian and Prussian troops. This claim couldn't be further from the truth as the attacks ended in September
1792 were as the Reign of Terror started in January 1793 (Doc C). Another claim the government made was the exaggeration of the Vendee revolution. The Vendee revolution was merely made up of just peaceful demonstrations (Doc C). All of this shows that the Reign of Terror was not justified by the threats to the French government because they were not big enough to even affect France.

Following this, a second reason the Reign of Terror was not justified were the methods of the government used were too extreme. One of the methods used was the guillotine to kill people. Killing 40,000 people by the guillotine can never be justified
(Doc F). Other methods used was the use of spies on the French people. This system of spies would get people in trouble and even death for just speaking out against the government (Doc E). This kind of behavior by the government is never justifiable. This evidence shows that the Reign of Terror was not justified because the methods the government used on the French people were beyond extreme by letting an insane amount of people die. Finally, the Reign of Terror was not justified when it came to how the actions of the government contradicted their own enlightenment ideas. One instance of this is their enlightenment ideas states that all people are held innocent until proven guilty (Doc A).
This idea was heavily contradicted when the government killed the accused without allowing them to have a lawyer and not using actual evidence (Doc E). Another enlightenment idea that was contradicted by the government was not silencing anyone based on their opinions or religious views(Doc A). This again was contradicted when they beheaded people who spoke against the government (Doc E). In conclusion, the opposite argument could be made about the Reign of Terror.
For example one might say although the Reign of Terror did abolish a government and give power to the people, the methods and reasoning behind the Reign of Terror were not justified. The methods used by the government, the threats to the government , and the contradiction of the enlightenment ideas of the government did not justify the Reign of terror. The so called threats the government claims to have had were nothing but pity lies. The disgusting methods used by the government from killing 40,000 people to having a network of spies on the french people can never be accepted. Their own enlightenment ideas by which they supposedly abide by get contradicted and instead are thrown out the window, as they slaughter people convicted without even a proper

trial. In the end none of what the government did in the Reign of Terror mean reasonable sense at all and had no evidence to support the kind of behavior they committed.