Convention Terror Roux
Question:
- What kind of primary source is this and what strengths and weaknesses does it have as a source for you study?
- Are there any particular words and phrases in the document that require elucidation or special comment before you can make use of it?
- What can you learn from this source with respect to Paris during the Terror?
Here we have an extract of a speech given by Jacques Roux to the Convention, believed to have been recorded by an official present at the Convention. As a primary source for study of Paris during the Terror, this document of Roux's speech holds its strengths and weaknesses.
As strength, this speech took place on the 25 June 1793, when the Convention was still struggling for power and control, the date alone places this Roux in the early stages of the Terror. The very fact this document is a speech voicing the peoples views against the Government and the terror events is strength for a primary source. It even comments on the hardship the poorer citizens endured, such as the lack of food as a result of high taxes, yet mentions the French Royal family, who had fallen from the grace of the people. Again, it acts as strength by giving some insight on the French Government during the terror.
However, as a primary source for research, its greatest weakness as a document stands almost useless to a historian without other relating evidence. Thou, this speech is now published, it is unlikely to have been a public report during Roux's time, nor may it be an accurate account since the Convention reacted badly to Roux's criticism. Another point against this source is language, apart from possible translation needs; the original document handwritten in French old-style perhaps now too worn out to read clearly, leading to likely mis-interruption. As a delegation on behalf of the people, it seems unlikely all French people supported the same cause, thus, maybe being one-sided.
In this extract of Roux's speech, there are a few words worthy of comments if using the document for study. Firstly, the word ‘Delegates' within the title, stresses the people rights and authority to be heard. In addition, the saying ‘Sacred precincts' is interesting because in this case ‘precincts' represents France, whereas the word ‘sacred' may mean the glory and grace that France meant to the people. The ‘egoist and knives' evidently mean the ignorantly and violence during the revolution years. The French people are named ‘sovereign', a word actually noted to mean treasure, authority, and even royalist; the word itself bears a witting testimony, which we shall come to shortly. The repeated words ‘vain phantom' in the first half of the document, signify disillusions, yet questions - how can one dream of peace, freedom and liberty when struggle remains?
But, to use this document in relation to Paris during the Terror, we need to uncover any witting and unwitting testimonies Roux's speech may reveal. Upon reading this extract, it could be argued that the speech itself forms witting evidence: criticism giving to the Convention supposedly on behalf of the French people. Also, as a witting testimony in the case of criticism, Roux deliberately questions the Convention for its failure to restore law and order. He accuses the government of not caring for ‘the welfare of the people', and holds them responsible for starving the poor with the high taxes on food. In short, Roux wittingly calls them a weak government and a fraud because the rich and noble still sit among them, and he points out actions they should take - execution of criminals and the fallen King, who Roux also regards as cause for France's problems at time. Furthermore, Roux calls the French people ‘Sovereign' the true heirs of France, reminding the Convention where their votes come from.
As for the unwitting testimonies, this document does hold a few. Firstly, Roux opens his speech with ‘a hundred times', these words appear to hold an indirect statement that in some form or another, the Paris Terror had been ongoing throughout France for awhile. Another unwitting point is that, although Roux openly questioned the Convention with criticism, he unconsciously offers them the sans-culottes as bate with a simple solution: feed them and they'll join you. Yet again, when Roux orders the Convention to restore law and order, he unwittingly shows support in the Committee of Public Safety. Most of all, Roux unknowingly ordered his own arrest, not just with his criticism, but also by unwittingly mocking the governments intelligences while telling them to pass new laws. This resulted in his arrest and later suicide by which time the Convention had accepted some Roux's demands, though perhaps as their own ideas.
Now it may be agreeable to say this document holds many details for the historian, but not enough for a full-scale study of Paris during the Terror. More details on Jacques Roux known also as the ‘Red Priest' would help, and also other relating primary evidence from different view point, yet nevertheless this speech alone give some idea of the Terror years.
Biography:
History, Classicism, and Revolution [A103 Course]. Block 3, Open University.
History: Introduction to History, [A103 Course]. Resource Book 2, Open University. Section A. p.5-86
Hamlyn, P. (1968) Larousse Encyclopedia of Modern History …, Librairie Larousse, Paris (paperback edition). P.224-226.
We provide a professional essay writing service that thousands of our customers use as an effective way of improving their grades, improving their research and saving them lots of time.
