Chapter 25 of 56 · 3992 words · ~20 min read

Part 25

Although the French Revolution seemed to contemporaries a total break in the history of France, it was really far otherwise. Its results were momentous and durable in proportion as they were the outcome of causes which had been working long. In France there had been no historic preparation for political freedom. The desire for such freedom was in the main confined to the upper classes. During the Revolution it was constantly baffled. No Assembly after the states-general was freely elected and none deliberated in freedom. After the Revolution Bonaparte established a monarchy even more absolute than the monarchy of Louis XIV. But the desire for uniformity, for equality and for what may be termed civil liberty was the growth of ages, had been in many respects nurtured by the action of the crown and its ministers, and had become intense and general. Accordingly it determined the principal results of the Revolution. Uniformity of laws and institutions was enforced throughout France. The legal privileges formerly distinguishing different classes were suppressed. An obsolete and burthensome agrarian system was abolished. A number of large estates belonging to the crown, the clergy and the nobles were broken up and sold at nominal prices to men of the middle or lower class. The new jurisprudence encouraged the multiplication of small properties. The new fiscal system taxed men according to their means and raised no obstacle to commerce within the national boundaries. Every calling and profession was made free to all French citizens, and in the public service the principle of an open career for talent was adopted. Religious disabilities vanished, and there was well-nigh complete liberty of thought. It was because Napoleon gave a practical form to these achievements of the Revolution and ensured the public order necessary to their continuance that the majority of Frenchmen endured so long the fearful sacrifices which his policy exacted.

That a revolution largely inspired by generous and humane feeling should have issued in such havoc and such crimes is a paradox which astounded spectators and still perplexes the historian. Something in the cruelty of the French Revolution may be ascribed to national character. From the time when Burgundians and Armagnacs strove for dominion down to the last insurrection of Paris, civil discord in France has always been cruel. More, however, was due to the total dissolution of society which followed the meeting of the states-general. In the course of the Revolution we can discover no well-organized party, no governing mind. Mirabeau had the stuff of a great statesman, and Danton was capable of statesmanship. But these men were not followed or obeyed save by accident or for a moment. Those who seemed to govern were usually the sport of chance, often the victims of their colleagues. Neither Royalists nor Feuillants nor Girondins had the instinct of government. In the chaotic state of France all ferocious and destructive passions found ample scope. The same conditions explain the triumph of the Jacobins. Devoid of wisdom and virtue in the highest sense, they at least understood how power might be seized and kept. The Reign of Terror was the expedient of a party which knew its weakness and unpopularity. It was not necessary either to secure the lasting benefits of the Revolution or to save France from dismemberment; for nine Frenchmen out of ten were agreed on both of these points and were ready to lay down their lives for the national cause.

In the history of the French Revolution the influence which it exerted upon the surrounding countries demands peculiar attention. The French professed to act upon principles of universal authority, and from an early date they began to seek converts outside their own limits. The effect was slight upon England, which had already secured most of the reforms desired by the French, and upon Spain, where the bulk of the people were entirely submissive to church and king. But in the Netherlands, in western Germany and in northern Italy, countries which had attained a degree of civilization resembling that of France, where the middle and lower classes had grievances and aspirations not very different from those of the French, the effect was profound. Fear of revolution at home was one of the motives which led continental sovereigns to attack revolution in France. Their incoherent efforts only confirmed the Jacobin supremacy. Wherever the victorious French extended their dominion, they remodelled institutions in the French manner. Their sway proved so oppressive that the very classes which had welcomed them with most fervour soon came to long for their expulsion. But revolutionary ideas kept their charm. Under Napoleon the essential part of the changes made by the Republic was preserved in these countries also. Moreover the effacement of old boundaries, the overthrow of ancestral governments, and the invocation, however hollow, of the sovereignty of the people, awoke national feeling which had slumbered long and prepared the struggle for national union and independence in the 19th century.

See also FRANCE, sections _History_ and _Law and Institutions_. For the leading figures in the Revolution see their biographies under separate headings. Particular phases, facts, and institutions of the period are also separately dealt with, e.g. ASSIGNATS, CONVENTION, THE NATIONAL, JACOBINS.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The MS. authorities for the history of the French Revolution are exceedingly copious. The largest collection is in the Archives Nationales in Paris, but an immense number of documents are to be found in other collections in Paris and the provinces. The printed materials are so abundant and varied that any brief notice of them must be imperfect.

The condition of France and the state of public opinion at the beginning of the Revolution may be studied in the printed collections of _Cahiers_. The _Cahiers_ were the statements of grievances drawn up for the guidance of deputies to the States-General by those who had elected them. In every _bailliage_ and _senechaussee_ each estate drew up its own cahier and the cahiers of the Third Estate were condensed from separate cahiers drawn up by each parish in the district. Thus the cahiers of the Third Estate number many thousands, the greater part of which have not yet been printed. Among the collections printed we may mention _Les Elections et les cahiers de Paris en 1789_, by C. L. Chassin (4 vols., Paris, 1888); _Cahiers de plaintes et doleances des paroisses de la province de Maine_, by A. Bellee and V. Duchemin (4 vols., Le Mans, 1881-1893); _Cahiers de doleances de 1789 dans le departement du Pas-de-Calais_, by H. Loriquet (2 vols., Arras, 1891); _Cahiers des paroisses et communautes du bailliage d'Autun_, by A. Charmasse (Autun, 1895). New collections are printed from time to time. A more general collection of cahiers than any above named is given in vols. i.-vi. of the _Archives parlementaires_. The cahiers must not be read in a spirit of absolute faith, as they were influenced by certain models circulated at the time of the elections and by popular excitement, but they remain an authority of the utmost value and a mine of information as to old France. Reference should also be made to the works of travellers who visited France at the outbreak of the Revolution. Among these Arthur Young's _Travels in France during the years 1787, 1788 and 1789_ (2 vols., Bury St Edmunds, 1792-1794) are peculiarly instructive.

For the history of the Assemblies during the Revolution a main authority is their _Proces verbaux_ or Journals; those of the Constituent Assembly in 75 vols., those of the Legislative Assembly in 16 vols.; those of the Convention in 74 vols., and those of the Councils under the Directory in 99 vols. See also the _Archives parlementaires_ edited by J. Mavidal and E. Laurent (Paris, 1867, and the following years); the _Histoire parlementaire de la Revolution_, by P. J. B. Buchez and P. C. Roux (Paris, 1838), and the _Histoire de la Revolution par deux amis de la liberte_ (Paris, 1792-1803).

The newspapers, of which a few have been mentioned in the text, were numerous. They are useful chiefly as illustrating the ideas and passions of the time, for they give comparatively little information as to facts and that little is peculiarly inaccurate. The ablest of the Royalist journals was Mallet du Pan's _Mercure de France_. Pamphlets of the Revolution period number many thousands. Such pamphlets as Mounier's _Nouvelles Observations sur les Etats-Generaux de France_ and Sieyes's _Qu'est-ce que le Tiers Etat_ had a notable influence on opinion. The richest collections of Revolution pamphlets are in the Bibliotheque Nationale of Paris and in the British Museum.

The contemporary memoirs, &c., already published are numerous and fresh ones are always coming forth. A few of the best known and most useful are, for the Constituent Assembly, the memoirs of Bailly, of Ferrieres, of Malouet. The _Correspondence of Mirabeau with the Count de la Marck_, edited by Bacourt (3 vols., Paris, 1851), is especially valuable. Dumont's _Recollections of Mirabeau_ and the _Diary and Letters of Gouverneur Morris_ give the impressions of foreigners with peculiar advantages for observing. For the Legislative Assembly and the Convention the memoirs of Madame Roland, of Bertrand de Molleville, of Barbaroux, of Buzot, of Louvet, of Dumouriez are instructive. For the Directory the memoirs of Barras, of La Revelliere Lepeaux and of Thibaudeau deserve mention. The memoirs of Lafayette are useful. Those of Talleyrand are singularly barren, the result, no doubt, of deliberate suppression. The memoirs of the marquise de La Rochejacquelein are important for the war of La Vendee. The most notable Jacobins have seldom left memoirs, but the works of Robespierre and St Just enable us to form a clearer conception of the authors. The correspondence of the count of Mercy-Argenteau, the imperial ambassador, with Joseph II. and Kaunitz, and the correspondence of Mallet du Pan with the court of Vienna, are also instructive. But the contemporary literature of the French Revolution requires to be read in an unusually critical spirit. At no other historical crisis have passions been more fiercely excited; at none have shameless disregard of truth and blind credulity been more common.

Among later works based on these original materials the first place belongs to general histories. In French Louis Blanc's _Histoire de la Revolution_ (12 vols., Paris, 1847-1862), and Michelet's _Histoire de la Revolution Francaise_ (9 vols., Paris, 1847-1853), are the most elaborate of the older works. Michelet's book is marked by great eloquence and power. In H. Taine's _Origines de la France contemporaine_ (Paris, 1876-1894) three volumes are devoted to the Revolution. They show exceptional talent and industry, but their value is impaired by the spirit of system and by strong prepossessions. F. A. M. Mignet's _Histoire de la Revolution Francaise_ (2 vols., Paris, 1861), short and devoid of literary charm, has the merits of learning and judgment and is still useful. F. A. Aulard's _Histoire politique de la Revolution Francaise_ (Paris, 1901) is a most valuable precis of political history, based on deep knowledge and lucidly set forth, although not free from bias. The volume on the Revolution in Lavisse and Rambaud's _Histoire generale de l'Europe_ (Paris, 1896) is the work of distinguished scholars using the latest information. In English, general histories of the Revolution are few. Carlyle's famous work, published in 1837, is more of a prose epic than a history, omitting all detail which would not heighten the imaginative effect and tinged by all the favourite ideas of the author. Some fifty years later H. M. Stephens published the first (1886) and second (1892) volumes of a _History of the French Revolution_. They are marked by solid learning and contain much information. Volume viii. of the _Cambridge Modern History_, published in 1904, contains a general survey of the Revolution.

The most notable German work is H. von Sybel's _Geschichte der Revolutionszeit_ (5 vols., Stuttgart, 1853-1879). It is strongest in those carts which relate to international affairs and foreign policy. There is an English translation.

None of the general histories of the Revolution above named is really satisfactory. The immense mass of material has not yet been thoroughly sifted; and the passions of that age still disturb the judgment of the historian. More successful have been the attempts to treat particular aspects of the Revolution.

The foreign relations of France during the Revolution have been most ably unravelled by A. Sorel in _L'Europe et la Revolution Francaise_ (8 vols., Paris, 1885-1904) carrying the story down to the settlement of Vienna. Five volumes cover the years 1789-1799.

The financial history of the Revolution has been traced by C. Gomel, _Histoire financiere de l'Assemblee Constituante_ (2 vols., Paris, 1897), and R. Stourm, _Les Finances de l'Ancien Regime et de la Revolution_ (2 vols., Paris, 1885).

The relations of Church and State are sketched in E. Pressense's _L'Eglise et la Revolution Francaise_ (Paris, 1889).

The general legislation of the period has been discussed by Ph. Sagnac, _La Legislation civile de la Revolution Francaise_ (Paris, 1898). The best work upon the social life of the period is the _Histoire de la societe francaise sous la Revolution_, by E. and J. de Goncourt (Paris, 1889). For military history see A. Duruy, _L'Armee royale en 1789_ (Paris, 1888); E. de Hauterive, _L'Armee sous la Revolution, 1789-1794_ (Paris, 1894); A. Chuquet, _Les Guerres de la Revolution_ (Paris, 1886, &c.). See also the memoirs and biographies of the distinguished soldiers of the Republic and Empire, too numerous for citation here.

Modern lives of the principal actors in the Revolution are numerous. Among the most important are _Memoires de Mirabeau_, by L. de Montigny (Paris, 1834); _Les Mirabeau_, by L. de Lomenie (Paris, 1889-1891); H. L. de Lanzac de Laborie's _Jean Joseph Mounier_ (Paris, 1889); B. Mallet's _Mallet du Pan and the French Revolution_ (London, 1902); Robinet's _Danton_ (Paris, 1889); Hamel's _Histoire de Robespierre_ (Paris, 1865-1867) and _Histoire de St-Just_ (2 vols., Brussels, 1860); A. Bigeon, _Sieyes_ (Paris, 1893); _Memoirs of Carnot_, by his son (2 vols., Paris, 1861-1864).

For fuller information see M. Tourneux, _Les Sources bibliographiques de l'histoire de la Revolution Francaise_ (Paris, 1898, etc.), and _Bibliographie de l'histoire de Paris pendant la Revolution_ (Paris, 1890, etc.). (F. C. M.)

_French Republican Calendar._--Among the changes made during the Revolution was the substitution of a new calendar, usually called the revolutionary or republican calendar, for the prevailing Gregorian system. Something of the sort had been suggested in 1785 by a certain Riboud, and a definite scheme had been promulgated by Pierre Sylvain Marechal (1750-1803) in his _Almanach des honnetes gens_ (1788). The objects which the advocates of a new calendar had in view were to strike a blow at the clergy and to divorce all calculations of time from the Christian associations with which they were loaded, in short, to abolish the Christian year; and enthusiasts were already speaking of "the first year of liberty" and "the first year of the republic" when the national convention took up the matter in 1793. The business of drawing up the new calendar was entrusted to the president of the committee of public instruction, Charles Gilbert Romme (1750-1795), who was aided in the work by the mathematicians Gaspard Monge and Joseph Louis Lagrange, the poet Fabre d'Eglantine and others. The result of their labours was submitted to the convention in September; it was accepted, and the new calendar became law on the 5th of October 1793. The new arrangement was regarded as beginning on the 22nd of September 1792, this day being chosen because on it the republic was proclaimed and because it was in this year the day of the autumnal equinox.

By the new calendar the year of 365 days was divided into twelve months of thirty days each, every month being divided into three periods of ten days, each of which were called _decades_, and the tenth, or last, day of each decade being a day of rest. It was also proposed to divide the day on the decimal system, but this arrangement was found to be highly inconvenient and it was never put into practice. Five days of the 365 still remained to be dealt with, and these were set aside for national festivals and holidays and were called _Sans-culottides_. They were to fall at the end of the year, i.e. on the five days between the 17th and the 21st of September inclusive, and were called the festivals of virtue, of genius, of labour, of opinion and of rewards. A similar course was adopted with regard to the extra day which occurred once in every four years, but the first of these was to fall in the year III., i.e. in 1795, and not in 1796, the leap year in the Gregorian calendar. This day was set apart for the festival of the Revolution and was to be the last of the _Sans-culottides_. Each period of four years was to be called a _Franciade_.

+----------------------------------+----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+-----------------+---------------+ | AN II. | AN III. | AN IV. | AN V. | AN VI. | AN VII. | AN VIII. | AN IX. | | 1793-1794 | 1794-1795. | 1795-1796. | 1796-1797. | 1797-1798. | 1798-1799. | 1799-1800. | 1800-1801. | +-----------------+----------------+----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+-----------------+---------------+ | 1 Vendemiaire | 22 Sept. 1793 | 22 Sept. 1794 | 23 Sept. 1795 | 22 Sept. 1796| 22 Sept. 1797 | 22 Sept. 1798 | 23 Sept. 1799 | 23 Sept. 1800 | | 1 Brumaire | 22 Oct. " | 22 Oct. " | 23 Oct. " | 22 Oct. " | 22 Oct. " | 22 Oct. " | 23 Oct. " | 23 Oct. " | | 1 Frimaire | 21 Nov. " | 21 Nov. " | 22 Nov. " | 21 Nov. " | 21 Nov. " | 21 Nov. " | 22 Nov. " | 22 Nov. " | | 1 Nivose | 21 Dec. " | 21 Dec. " | 22 Dec. " | 21 Dec. " | 21 Dec. " | 21 Dec. " | 22 Dec. " | 22 Dec. " | | 1 Pluviose | 20 Janv. 1794 | 20 Janv. 1795 | 21 Janv. 1796 | 20 Janv. 1797| 20 Janv. 1798 | 20 Janv. 1799 | 21 Janv. 1800 | 21 Janv. 1801 | | 1 Ventose | 19 Fevr. " | 19 Fevr. " | 20 Fevr. " | 19 Fevr. " | 19 Fev. " | 19 Fev. " | 20 Fev. " | 20 Fev. " | | 1 Germinal | 21 Mars " | 21 Mars " | 21 Mars " | 21 Mars " | 1 Mars " | 21 Mars " | 22 Mars " | 22 Mars " | | 1 Floreal | 20 Avr. " | 20 Avr. " | 20 Avr. " | 20 Avr. " | 20 Avr. " | 20 Avr. " | 21 Avr. " | 21 Avr. " | | 1 Prairial | 20 Mai " | 20 Mai " | 20 Mai " | 20 Mai " | 20 Mai " | 20 Mai " | 21 Mai " | 21 Mai " | | 1 Messidor | 19 Juin " | 19 Juin " | 19 Juin " | 19 Juin " | 19 Juin " | 19 Juin " | 20 Juin " | 20 Juin " | | 1 Thermidor | 19 Juil. " | 19 Juil. " | 19 Juil. " | 19 Juil. " | 19 Juil. " | 19 Juil. " | 20 Juil. " | 20 Juil. " | | 1 Fructidor | 18 Aout " | 18 Aout " | 18 Aout " | 18 Aout " | 18 Aout " | 18 Aout " | 19 Aout " | 19 Aout " | +-----------------+----------------+----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+-----------------+---------------+ |1 Sans-culottides| 17 Sept. 1794 | 17 Sept. 1795 | 17 Sept. 1796 | 17 Sept. 1797| 17 Sept. 1798 | 17 Sept. 1799 | 18 Sept. 1800 | 18 Sept. 1801 | |6 " | | 22 " " | | | | 22 " " | | | +-----------------+----------------+----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+-----------------+---------------+

Some discussion took place about the nomenclature of the new divisions of time. Eventually this work was entrusted to Fabre d'Eglantine, who gave to each month a name taken from some seasonal event therein. Beginning with the new year on the 22nd of September the autumn months were _Vendemiaire_, the month of vintage, _Brumaire_, the months of fog, and _Frimaire_, the month of frost. The winter months were _Nivose_, the snowy, _Pluviose_, the rainy, and _Ventose_, the windy month; then followed the spring months, _Germinal_, the month of buds, _Floreal_, the month of flowers, and _Prairial_, the month of meadows; and lastly the summer months, _Messidor_, the month of reaping, _Thermidor_, the month of heat, and _Fructidor_, the month of fruit. To the days Fabre d'Eglantine gave names which retained the idea of their numerical order, calling them Primedi, Duodi, &c., the last day of the ten, the day of rest, being named Decadi. The new order was soon in force in France and the new method was employed in all public documents, but it did not last many years. In September 1805 it was decided to restore the Gregorian calendar, and the republican one was officially discontinued on the 1st of January 1806.

It will easily be seen that the connecting link between the old and the new calendars is very slight indeed and that the expression of a date in one calendar in terms of the other is a matter of some difficulty. A simple method of doing this, however, is afforded by the table on the preceding page, which is taken from the article by J. Dubourdieu in _La Grande Encyclopedie_.

Thus Robespierre was executed on 10 Thermidor An II., i.e. the 28th of July 1794. The insurrection of 12 Germinal An III. took place on the 1st of April 1795. The famous 18 Brumaire An VIII. fell on the 9th of November 1799, and the _coup d'etat_ of 18 Fructidor An V. on the 4th of September 1797.