French Reveloution

Question 1

Champion argued? but was rebutted….

Answer 1

the enlightenment had not caused the revolution, it was Bourne out of concrete grievances and the dramatic food shortages of the spring and summer of 1789. but there had been food shortages at both the middle and the end of the century which had been much more severe yet had not resulted in any action as they lacked the ideology of 1789.

Question 2

Soboul

Answer 2

– Saw the revolution as classical bourgeoisies one, the product of a class struggle. The bourgeoisies ended feudalism (the enemy of the bourgeoisie) and created a starting point for capitalist society. The terror was a response to economic situation and was essential in managing the war effort.

Question 3

Cobban

Answer 3

• takes a common sense approach, he differs from the Marxist arguing that it was free of class based motives. According to Cobban France was already a rising capitalist economy before 1789. He argued that the national assembly offered no obviously capitalist economic policy and that growth stagnated in the early 1790s. (due to the policy of terror).

Question 4

Furget

Answer 4

the terror was built into the revolution, the power of the Jacobins was intrinsically connected to mob violence. This is similar to Shama view that revolution and violence went hand in hand.

Question 5

Schama

Answer 5

Reliant on violence to bring about political change. Paints Marat and Robespierre as totalitarian while being sympathetic to Louis 16th.

Question 6

Hobswabm

Answer 6

apart from the period of the terror the French revolution was roman, rationalist and neo-classic. David was its Painter, Reason its supreme being.

Question 7

Burke

Answer 7

offered contemporary analysis of the events taking place, understood rapid change to be dangerous and correctly believed that the revolution would end in violence. He compares the revolution in France to the glorious one of 1688 arguing that it only worked because change was slow and organic.