BOOK REVIEW
THE TERROR-THE MERCILESS WAR FOR FREEDOM IN
REVOLUTIONARY FRANCE, DAVID ANDRESS, FARRAR, STRAUS AND GIROUX, NEW YORK, 2005
This year marks the 223rd
anniversary of the beginning of the Great French Revolution with storming of
the Bastille on July 14th 1789. An old Chinese Communist leader, the
late Zhou Enlai, was once asked by a reporter to sum up the important lessons
of the French Revolution. In reply he answered that it was too early to tell
what those lessons might be. Whether that particular story is true or not it
does contain one important truth. Militants today at the beginning of the 21st
century can still profit from an understanding of the history of the French
Revolution.
There are many books that
outline the history of that revolution. I have reviewed some of them in this
space. Probably the most succinct overview, although it was written over one
half century ago, is Professor Georges Lefebvre’s study. For those who want a
more up-to-date overview of the main events and political disputes reflecting
the tremendous increase in scholarship on the subject the book under review has
a lot to recommend it. The author, a professor at the University of Portsmouth,
England, covers all the main points from the pre-revolutionary problems
confronting France at the time including, its terrible debt problems caused in
the main by its support of the American Revolution to the political, social
and, yes, sexual inadequacies of Louis XVI. As has been noted by many
commentators on revolution, including the author and myself, one of the
prerequisites for revolution is that the old regime can no longer govern in the
same way. The personage of Louis XVI seemingly fits that proposition to a tee.
Professor Andress goes on to
highlight the key events. Obviously, and most visibly the storming of the
Bastille that opened up the cracks in the old monarchial regime. He details the
struggle to create a constitutional monarchy through the various legislative assemblies
that sought to carry out the reforms necessary to bring France into the modern
age short of declaring a republic. And also the attempts, including by Louis
himself, by forces of the old regime to return the old monarchy or stop the
revolution in its tracks. When those efforts failed and the revolution began in
earnest the Professor Andress goes into great detail analyzing the internal
struggle by the revolutionaries, most notably the great fight between the
Girondins and Jacobins for power, and the formation of the republic. After the
defeat of the Girondins this led to the further fights to ‘purify’ the
revolution among the Jacobin forces and the reign of the Robespierre-led
Committee of Public Safety that consolidated the gains of the revolution
through the ‘Reign of Terror’. Finally, the professor highlights the downfall
and execution of Robespierre in 1794 represented the reaction that most
revolutions exhibit when the political possibilities for further revolutionary
moves is no longer tenable.
The author has done more than
that though for those who are trying to understand the sometimes confusing
political alignments in Paris and in the country. He discusses the voting
patterns of the those in the various legislative assemblies; the role of the
sans-culottes in pushing the revolution left; the falling out among the
Jacobins; the international situation (meaning the immediate European one);
and, most importantly, the reaction in non-Paris, the countryside that rebelled
for various reasons against the central authority in the capital. Other
subjects include the murder of Marat by Corday that set the revolution bloodily
leftward, the Festival of the Supreme Being as an attempt to finally destroy
the power of the Catholic Church and other reforms by the left-Jacobins to
consolidate the revolution. The major negative of this work is political. As
almost always in any discussion of the first five years of the French
Revolution there is an almost fatalistic portrait of the emergence of
Robespierre intertwined throughout all of the earlier events giving the
impression that he was inevitably bound to take power. And, also inevitably,
due to the excesses of the ‘Reign of Terror’ to lose it. This may be a good way
to save one’s political soul but it is bad history. Revolutions, particularly
great revolutions, are few and far between. They are messy affairs at the time
and as seen through the historical lens. Nevertheless if the social tensions in
society could always, or should always, be resolved in a nice non- violent
parliamentary way there would be no revolutions. Damn, where would that leave
us as the inheritors of the sans-culottes tradition?
No comments:
Post a Comment