To What Extent Was The Reign Of Terror Justified

Over 40,000 people in France were executed from 1793 to 1794. Whether or not this massive killing was necessary is controversial. Leading this reign of terror was dictator, Maximilien Robespierre, who was apart of the Jacobins and ruled France for about a year under absolute power. He ordered that anyone who was against the French Revolution would be imprisoned or executed. The problem with this was that not all who were accused were guilty. Robespierre’s justification for killing all of these people was to protect the revolution. However, the Reign of Terror was not justified due to the fact that the internal threats did not require it, the methods were too harsh, and it went against the ideals of the Revolution.
The threats caused by the French Revolution were not serious enough to justify the Reign of Terror. The biggest threat to the French Revolution was the emigres and the others who opposed the revolution. However there were other ways of solving the problem rather than killing people. In fact the threat level increased as a result of the Reign of Terror. For instance in …show more content…
The French Revolution was all about getting rid of an absolute monarchy and creating a republic where the citizens had certain rights. These rights were documented in the Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizens. Rights such as, “All persons are held innocent until they shall have been declared guilty” were clearly violated during the Reign of Terror (Document A). Additionally, document F illustrates the Reign of Terror with a drawing called Nine Emigres go to the Guillotine that shows nine people waiting in line to be beheaded. They are on a raised platform and being watched by hundreds of people and soldiers. It violates these citizens’ rights because they were not able to be proven guilty. They were only accused of doing something, however no one knows if they are truly