Wednesday, 28 November 2007

Maximilien Robespierre

I’m sure you’re all going to agree that This lecture was very much to the style of Maximilien Robespierre (MR) style of speaking. MR was a man who was known for his rambling speeches in which he was not taken seriously!

In the first 31 years of MR’s life not a lot was known about him. He was born in May 1758 in the French town Arras. He was the son of a lawyer and received a scholarship to study law. MR became a lawyer and went to establish a reputation as a lawyer who would represent the probono cases that he felt the system was unfairly treating these people of lower class.
MR was a man of roughly 5ft 2; he held his body upright, often clenched his fists, neck and shoulders. His clothes were also very neat, traditional and fashionable. His eyes were dull and melancholy; he also wore green tined glasses. He was not a good public speaker. He had the appearance of and insignificant man and one of which people did not trust. MR had shown and voiced how he thought the estates general should a representation of the people of France. MR was successful in his election. At his first huge appearance in the states general in 1789 he was ignored or laughed at. This was because of his meandering speeches and it made him notoriously ineffective.

Soon RM got involved in the Jacobin club; this was a club of like minded deputies from parliament which was the first modern political party, this became a sensation and was the first political venue that MR was effective in his speeches.

So really how does a young liberal lawyer in 1789 become a killer?

In the summer of 1789 the people of Paris rose up and stormed the Bastille to retrieve guns and weapons. MR was willing to excuse violence and he sided with the majority public. In 1791 MR opposes the war because to many political people were in favour of it and he figured it was a conspiracy. He felt that France should deal with the enemies within before dealing with foreign enemies; which they were beginning to form across Europe. The events of the revolution had finally led to the over throw of the monarch. In 1794 MR signs the death warrant of his old school friend “Des Moulins”. Des Moulins was the best man at MR’s wedding yet MR signs his death warrant. Des Moulins is beheaded twenty four hours later. This is a key event it marks the change from the liberator to an extremist. At this stage there were public killings of officials for being involved in the resistance against the people. There was also resistance from the aristocrats and the clergy men as they were loosing privileges with every step MR took. This all builds up enemies inside and outside France and war becomes eminent.

France declared war in 1794 with Austria this went extremely badly for France by 1792 Austria had gained control of nearly the whole of France. This evolves to the biggest war Europe had ever seen. This was a war between France and the whole of Europe. This then lead to World War one was a new type of war one in which the world had never seen before. MR believed in going to war Full heartedly and the Million strong Army came about. During this time MR becomes involved in his own religion “the cult of supreme being” and begins setting himself as a political messiah and begins excluding large groups of society there was a quote from an onlooker who said “look at that bugger he thinks he’s the pope” this was the beginning of his downfall. People started to believe he wanted a dictatorship. In the midst of all of this mayhem MR has a breakdown MR experienced periodical depression and went into hiding through out his life time. This arguably may have been for strategic reasons or simply to deal with this depression; or possibly both. When he returns he begins to speak of alleged conspiracies but will not reveal who the perpetrator is so the people loose faith in him. MR resorts to an attempted suicide but he is not successful and just blows his jaw off however the next day he is executed.

28 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ellen although your blog entry is very good, in fact well done it’s great. I have to however pull you up on point or two. In my opinion the blog does not put across the short of man "MR" really was, although you describe him in great detail in you blog, one cannot get the feeling that he was a remarkable man who had a huge rebellious spirit. "MR" was a great man he had spirit and he wanted a republic so much so that he was willing to sacrifice his friends life for this.

    In your blog you make out that he had little or no confidence when in fact he had this in abundance, this can indervertly be seen from how he acted, the decisions he made in the civil war. Yes he was not that great at public speaking "hay who is", but he did have great confidence, when he was in the jaccob club he was well out spoken.

    One final point that just want to mention as a matter of interest, which links into what you were saying about his attempted suicide which went horribly wrong. when the day of his execution came about his jaw was bounded on by cloth, however because of the cloth his head would not fit through the guillotine, so it was removed, laving his jaw to swing freely, when this happened he let out a great roar (yelp in pain) it was at this monument that the guillotine beheaded him. Letting both his jaw and his head hit the ground. (This has never been proven but it is a cruel but very interesting story.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Robespierre was a man who had a lot going against him both physically and psychologically.This meant that he struggled to make an impact on big crowds but trived on the speeches he made at the jacobian club.i think in small groups he was a much more confident man as his stature didnt have an impact on the speech or whatever he was talking about.

    i also think he was a cunning and sly man who didnt show his comtemporaries his true plan for france and what role he plans to take and also his religious beliefs until france had killed a number of powerful enemies.

    I liked the chap up until this point in the lecture and cause as well he set up france for the likes of napolien to rule.....

    oh by the way the some of your dates are mixed up elles bells

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maximilien Robespierre, refered to by some people as "the Incorruptible," is one of the most controversial figures of the French Revolution.

    Ellen you left out the most infamous event in the French revolution caused by Robespierre which made his name become emblematic in that period. 'The Reign of Terror' which was responsible for the deaths of thousands mainly executed by the guillotine. This terror goes down in French history as one of the most heinous events ever to occur in France.

    Certainly he was a man who contained great influence and power over the course of events of the French Republic between 1792 and 1794. He said it was "necessary to take any means to protect the state". And by all means he did. He showed this view when he signed the death warrant of his best friend 'Des Moulins' which he was later executed. This showed he was an extremist.

    Ellen another thing which confused me is you said "This then lead to World War one" world war one didn't start until 1914-1918 along time after the French revolution and the French revolution was certainly not the reason for the out break of world war one. Explain please?

    Robespierre's failure and destruction can be viewed as that of a man “narrow-minded in his views that eventually couldn't conceive of anything outside of them. A man so firmly convinced of his own absolute rightness that he could not see the errors he made”. This is how he failed and the reasons for his execution
    Although he started out with the best of motives, it came to the point where protection of the ideals for which he stood was everything to him, shadowed over the protection of the people whom the ideals were originally to protect meant nothing.

    To summarize my point he was a talented man who forced his way to power but still he was a cold blooded murderer who caused deaths of thousands of people during the Reign of Terror. This is why he is compared to people like Stalin and Hitler the notorious dictators of the twentieth century.

    ReplyDelete
  5. some great posts here - looking forward to reading the answers!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Classic Story: a person starts out with good intentions, and the power goes to his head. Absolute power corrupts absolutely!

    When you look at it, there are a lot of parallels between Robespierre and Hitler: rising from nothing to become the leader of the country, ruling with fear, starting a "cult of the leader" thinking their people is a "superior race", getting to the point where they almost believe they are gods, the fall from power, and the suicide (but in Robespierre's case that didn't go according to plan)

    ReplyDelete
  7. chris im sorry but what are you talking about, "MR" is nothing like hitler, Robespierre did not have nothing his father had money and he sent Robespierre to college to study law, hitler was the one who had nothing, and couldnt get into art colege in Vienna. and hitler knew what he was doing from the start, he wanted to get rid of the jews becaues he felt that it was their fault he was poor and had horible adelession life. so he was always mad. "MR" didnt have a power trip, he was mis under stood.

    and there is no evidnce that "MR" taught he was a god chris, stick to the facts. yes when people get into power in some cases they take advantage however there is no evidence to show "MR" was in one of the few.


    and Micheal please elabrate as to how "MR" had alot going agnest him psychology ? sure he asnt the most confident of blokes but hay that doesnt make him a nut !

    ReplyDelete
  8. wat i meant was that he suffered from sporadic bouts of depression which put a real strain on his mental health

    I think the lads are right in saying that he is right to be compared to the likes of stalin and hitler. they all have a lot of similar traits maybe not in there personal backgrounds but in there political aspirations and in the way they where all either dictators or rulers in all but title...Also didn't stalin suffer from occasional bouts of depression and withdraw ffrom the world much the same the robespierre did

    ReplyDelete
  9. he did exactly what hitler and mussolini did, he went mad with power and started to belive his own hype. he thought he was the greatest person ever.

    ReplyDelete
  10. chris im sorry but your taklking aload of tripe he was nothing like hitler or mussolini. and mussolini was not even as bad as hitler he was a wana be dictator he was never in the calibour of hitler. jut stick to the facts so what if "MR" exicuited some people he did it for the good of france or so he taught,. chris hitkler only killed them jews because he was getting revingue which he taught he was intitled to as a result of his misfortune when he was growing up.

    "MR" is nothing like hitler, ther is no evidence what so ever to imply that he went on a power trip. stuick to tbhe facts chris

    ReplyDelete
  11. First things first I think this fella is a complete nut!!!
    But with a name like Maximilien Robespierre he really hadn’t got a chance in life had he?
    I found it really hard to follow this lecture as the guest speaker kept going back and forward with dates and i got a bit lost!
    But I think Ellen has done a very good job with this blog.
    Although I think MR was a bit weird I do admire the confidence that he had.
    He wasn’t a good public speaker and dreaded speaking to large crowds and with good reason to! The first few times he spoke out on his thoughts he was ignored or laughed at and from what we were told of his appearance he wasn’t the most attractive man in the world with his green tinted glasses which wouldn’t be a great help!! But his fear of public speaking is not a bad thing in my opinion as it is a lot of peoples biggest fear which shows a human side to him. The fact that over came his fear and rose up to power is what I find truly amazing!
    He seems to me like he was a very wise man as he disapproved the war because he thought it was just one big conspiracy and he was right!
    He also knew that if France was to win a war with a foreign country they would need the support of the whole country. So he suggested that France deal with the enemies within the country before they make some outside of France!
    Now on to him being a nut job!!....
    MR made up his own religion! Who does that other that crazy people?!
    He said that was a political messiah! He may have been a great political figure but he wasn’t modest and i sure as hell don’t think he was a political messiah!
    Chris I cant really see why you would compare him to Hitler, I know that he had his friend executed and that makes him kind of evil but by no means was he like Hitler! Power does corrupt because with all great power comes great responsibility and some people just can’t handle that and it breaks them.
    I can see more of a comparison between MR and Cromwell and even that’s pushing it. My reasons for this are because Cromwell rose to power and it corrupted him as well.
    But this fella is mental really like he blew off his own jaw!! Like hello everybody knows that would be extra painful!!
    And I no he didn’t mean it and he meant to commit suicide before you all tell me! But seriously he had a very large shot gun it shouldn’t have been that hard!! Like I really can’t get my head around it! I kind of pity him when he went to the guillotine and they took of the bandages and his jaw fell down. It must have been very degrading!
    you could argue that he was beheaded because of his "jaw dropping" good looks!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jaw dropping!!! haha lets have a giggle over that before we get into the serious malarkey!

    k now into the serious jazz!

    k John political leaders generally must acquire the skill of public speaking they must convince there public that they are the way to go and there is no other way so "hay" ya must really actually have good communication skills. so he was at a disadvantage already!.

    I agree John he had a tremendous spirit that was highly admirable. He was a strong believer in liberating the people and really representing the peoples wishes. That’s what he set out to do at the beginning of his career. However I strongly disagree with you John he's certainly not a “great man” great men do not transform into killers and don’t sacrifice friends for there cause, great men posses a quality known as Loyalty!

    Michael... I totally agree with you he had the physiological front facing him every corner he turned and this was a huge part of his personal and political life. Although I don’t think he was a sly man with ruthless ambition I think he truly went to power with the idea of representing the people; although this did change mid course I think it may have been due to him becoming wrapped up in his status and power in society.

    As he did side with the majority even though they were not morally right decisions do you's think this may have been as a lack of confidence stemming from his days as a ineffective political nobody?

    I agree Lee the reign of terror is huge but what can we say about it. Thousands were killed and even though this was an outrage to happen I think the other stuff is more influential in showing MR's downfall and conversion to an extremist.

    Oh were are you getting your quotes too? the lecturer?.

    I don't believe that MR felt he had made any errors; that was his downfall! I don’t think he just overlooked his errors or anything like it he didn’t feel they were errors. he became an extremist and didn’t represent the people anymore he became a dictator.

    I can see why yous are comparing him to Hitler and Stalin but he really wasn’t all that bad. He killed a lot of people but this was a time of unease in the country with enemies boiling over the France borders. Hitler and Stalin are slight exadurations but valid comparisons.

    Oh I also want to put in that MR's attempted suicide would not have implied that he was a coward or anything like it. In this era it was seen as a better way to die. A warrior would have rathered fall on his own sword than one of the enemy. Clearly MR wasn’t successful in dying with dignity he was done away with like any other. A pity all the same we would do it to Bertie even though he’s making a mint off us in taxes with his “loans” from left right and centre!

    ReplyDelete
  13. ellen great leaders wuold not put ther friends first, no they would put the country first and tahts what i think "MR" done but hay it was kinda funny that he ble his jaw off haha sap lol.

    ReplyDelete
  14. and again micheal i dont think you can comepair him to Hitler or stalin. infact stalin doesnt even come into it sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  15. of course you can compare hitler and stalin to robespierre they where leaders of there country and thry where all ruthless killers who all killed there closest allies and friends cause they where paro that they would take power from them. Hitler killed all his other political challengers and even the leaders of the s.a and s.s cause he thought that they would attempt to take power from him. When stalin was in charge of the communist party he killed all his other rivals in the great show trials or had them executed. By the end of it he was the only one left from lenins original politburo. robespierre also had no from problem in killing people close to him. like the dude had no problem in signing the death warrant for the execution of des moulins. it shows how called hearted that he was as des moulins was robespierres best man at his wedding and he no problem signing his death warrant.Robespierre also had significant influence in having several former allies such as danton and herbert.
    so they acutally can be compared!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  16. People in the class are split on the question of is Robespierre like the twentieth centaury dictators like Hitler and Stalin. This comment will prove that he is right up there with the worst of them.

    Firstly I agree with John, Hitler grew up in a different background than Robespierre but that certainly doesn't excuse them from both being mass murderers.
    Footballers, singers, movie stars, entrepreneurs and politicians all come from different background but like these dictators they all poses the same feelings, the drive to succeed and the fierce determination to achieve what they want. Dictators have different methods of achieving their goals mainly through fear and violence.

    i have to agree with Chris "there are a lot of parallels between Robespierre and Hitler" Robespierre is the prototype of a particularly "odious kind of evildoer:" and Hitler is probably the worst one.

    John Kekes a historian on French revolution said, "Robespierre, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Pol Pot are of the same mould. They are the characteristic scourges of humanity in modern times"

    For those people in the class who don’t think he wasn't that bad i would advise you's to look him up to give you's a better understanding of him and i am certain your opinions will change.

    Here is a little account of what happened to the people during the reign of terror who opposed Robespierre
    "Having secured Paris, in 1793 Robespierre appointed commissioners to enforce his interpretation of the Revolution outside the capital. In the city of Lyon, writes Simon Schama in Citizens, the guillotine began its work, but it was found to be “a messy and inconvenient way of disposing of the political garbage. A number of the condemned, then, were executed in mass shootings. As many as sixty prisoners were tied in a line by ropes and shot at with cannon. Those who were not killed outright by the fire were finished off with sabers, bayonets, and rifles
    They also punched holes in boats and Prisoners were put in with their hands and feet tied and the boats pushed into the centre of the river. . . . The victims helplessly watched the water rise about them. Young men and women [were] tied naked together in the boats".

    These ways of killing people made getting hung look like a present. people were degraded by getting striped naked and one of the worse ways of being killed was drowning. heartlessly Robespierre ordered this.

    What iam trying to say is during the lecture by DR. Joseph Clarke he didn't really put Robespierre across as an evil man but through my further reading and my past knowledge he is a very evil man who can’t be justified for his mass murders.

    What Robespierre had unloosed were the most corrupt desires. The resulting anarchy temporarily served his purpose much as Kristallnacht served Hitler’s, the purges served Stalins. Each one of these perpetrated the terror to frighten the people and oppositions into contemptible submission and establish himself more securely in power.

    This proves that Hitler and Stalin are like Robespierre so if anybody has to say anything different I would like to hear it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. micheal you simly cannot compair 2 people to each other becaus ether is an ounce of simularty yes "MR" did excitue people bu it was nothing compaired to the numbers of people Hitler exicuted so i strongly disagree with you.
    infact i think you talking thruogh your a*se, they were nothing alike.
    and will every on stop going on about how he signed his best friends death warrent, he dont it for the good of france im sure he didnt make th edession lickly, i mean if you were a judge and were allowed judge on cases that persinll ones were involved in, even tho you would not want to sentenc then you must as this is the write right thing to do.

    yes micheal he did kill alot of people and yes he did indeed use voilence but, ther are many people in todayd worls who are leaders and are doing the same, but this alone does not intitle us to comoair them to the evilet villan of all time hitler.

    to Micheal to conclude even though you gave some great examples that are totaly not relivent, Hitker and "Mr" were not alike.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. here if addy can compare swift to madonna im sure i can compare robespierre to hitler and stalin.As ive already shown they killed there political rivals to consolidate there position as leader no matter how close they where to them.and if u acutally look at the circumstances that led to Desmoulins being killed then you will see that robespierre turned his back on him and left him to be hung out to dry.

    also both hitler and robespierre had very little intrest in politics in there early careers.They only got involved in politics when they where trusted into it by circumstances.hitler was told to infiltrate a political parrty and robespierre only got involved in politics cause of the turmoil that was happening in france.

    Another thing is that all three men where very religious.Robespierre had created his own religion the cult of the supreme being.Stalin was awarded a scholarship to the georgian orthodox seminary and his mother wanted him to be a priest and he regulary attended mass when he was in power.Hitler was raised a roman catholic and when he came to power he refered to catholicism in his speeches but he acutally prefered protestantism as it was a more open religion and his beliefs fitted better within it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Miceal, you can compaire who you want with hitler or mandon doesnt make it fact, and the way you are compairing then is wrong, my copusen is small and wears glasses somtimes green does that mean i can compair him to "MR"? no.

    Im not saying that Hitler and "MR" didnt share similarties, what im saying is that ther simply bisnt enogh similarties to compair then as people.

    and as for the madon fiasko tahst crap. haha funny but rubbish factually.



    btw HAPPY CHRUISTMAS TO all execpt you micheal haha jus buzzen

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Miceal, you can compaire who you want with hitler or mandona doesnt make it fact, and the way you are compairing them is wrong, my couzen is small and wears glasses, somtimes green. does that mean i can compair him to "MR"? no.

    Im not saying that Hitler and "MR" didnt share similarties, what im saying is that ther simply isnt enogh similarties to compair them as people.

    and as for the madona fiasko thats crap. haha funny but rubbish factually.



    btw HAPPY CHRUISTMAS TO all execpt you micheal haha jus buzzen

    ReplyDelete
  23. There is a serious argument that has caused a few major debates and discussion in my class. The question “can you compare M. Robespierre with the 20 centaury dictators like Hitler and Stalin” I would really appreciate it if you could get back to me on this and give me your views please.


    From reading different accounts on this extraordinary character Robespierre, there is one piece of evidence that stuck me. It is that there could be a possibility that Robespierre sincerely believed his ideology and acted on it in good faith. The reason this struck me was because if he believed in it so bad then in his mind he taught he was doing no wrong. After reading this over and over another character came to mind who ordered mass murders and because he justified himself he taught he was doing no wrong. 'Cromwell' ... Cromwell he was a man who caused mass murder in Ireland, killing innocent women and children.
    Like Robespierre he didt like the way the king was ruling so he yoused his drive to politically move up the ranks to gain enough power to eventually overthrow the king and execute him. Cromwell also believed he was doing no wrong because he used god to justify his actions.

    On comparing him to Hitler and Stalin it’s easy because in all these cases they show that Absolute power corrupts. Robespierre cant be excused from his actions even if in his weird sadistic mind he taught he was doing good, because if you could excuses him from his wrong doings then we could surely excuse "SS concentration-camp guards, if they were sincere Nazis; KGB torturers, provided they were committed Communists."

    Fair leaders will question their ideology if they see that it leads to inflicting horrors. And if they do not question it and commit these horrors then they are justly held responsible not for what they believe but for what they have done. Stalin Hitler and even Robespierre would have anybody killed if they would question their ideas. So its clear that these three men new and fully understood there ideology but they choose not to act on it even dough it was killing lots of people. This shows another link between these cold hatred men.

    the reason people followed these men was mainly trough fear because they saw first hand what would happen if you don’t follow the leader "Robespierre wielded his power over life and death as arbitrarily as Hitler, Stalin, and Mao" did.

    So I agree with John different people have different personalities and you can’t compare people just on looks this is why I think Addie’s comment about Madonna was irrelevant and wrong. But I also agree with Michael because in this comment I proved again that Robespierre is like Hitler and Stalin.

    im after sending an e-mail to john Dunne an Acting Head of Department of History, Philosophy and Politics in the university of Greenwich in London (Kent). When he mails me back I will put his comment on the blog and show you's his views.

    thats really all i have to say on this argument.

    ReplyDelete
  24. leo i actually have to agree wit you if through history you could compaire "M" to any one it would be Cromwell.

    as for the class althought i can see where you are getting the comparrisions to hitler, my point is however he was not a bad as hiter and did not have the intention of reviengue as apose to hiter getting ride of all the juews. but with reguards ordering exicutions without blinking in some cases yes most defonatly. although and im sorry im 100% sticking to this he was nothing like stallin.

    ReplyDelete
  25. John I think sometimes that you just disagree with people for the sake of it! I personally believe its impossible not to see the definite parallels between “MR”, Hitler, Mussolini and especially Stalin! The fact that you said Stalin doesn’t even come into it really shows how you didn’t even take the comparison into consideration.

    You don’t compare people by sheer numbers of deaths they produced, I mean if you did that then the British Parliament would bet the biggest villains in History. There have been a lot more people killed at the hands of the British Empire than did to the Nazis, I mean who invented Concentration camps?

    Looking at it rationally you can see that all these stories started with good intentions. Hitler wished to unite the long suffering state of Germany into one powerful continental force, as it had been before WW1, Stalin wanted to Prove that mother Russia could stand on its own two feet and be used as an example to spread the good word of communist throughout the globe and Mussolini wanted to reinstate the Italians as a dominant people after the embarrassments they had suffered in the past after WW1.

    We all know how it went wrong in the end for each of these parties but you’d have to be blind not to see how his downright obsession with conspiracy echo’s Stalins own fixation on maintaining a position of power at all costs. Not even his friends were safe, Stalin it could be said coped a little better… but the similarities are there and would have been clear to you if you had taken the time to really think about what Chris and Michael said rather than start counting casualties on your fingers.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Oh leo, now that you mention it Madonna and Mr Swift did share a distinct likeness...

    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b389/Cherry_babylon/maddona-1.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  28. ha ha ha ha addy ye mad nut how did you do that thats cheating...... did you draw the spot on his face aswell

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.