Ending the French Revolution

Reviewed by: Ending the French Revolution: Violence, Justice, and Repression from the Terror to Napoleon Maxime Dagenais Brown, Howard G. —Ending the French Revolution: Violence, Justice, and Repression from the Terror to Napoleon. Charlottesville and London: University of Virginia Press, 2006. Pp. 461. The French Revolution has been the subject of numerous studies, heated discussions, and passionate debates. These have predominantly focused, however, on its origins, the pre-Directory period, and its positive impact on western society with the expansion of liberal and democratic principles. Historian Howard G. Brown's Ending the French Revolution: Violence, Justice, and Repression from the Terror to Napoleon does not follow such historiographical trends. Not only does he consider [End Page 617] the revolution's often ignored post-Directory period, but he also holds a different opinion regarding its legacy. Despite the ringing slogans of 1789, liberal democracy was not the most important outcome of the French Revolution. Rather, after a decade of disorder, ordinary citizens made a Faustian act with enhanced instruments of repression. By doing so, they fostered the emergence of a modern "security state," one founded on the legitimacy that came from at last providing public order. (p. ix) Although overlooked by historians, the subject of violence and the French Revolution has produced the occasional study. In Violence et Révolution. Essai sur la naissance d'un mythe national, for example, historian Jean-Clément Martin considers how popular violence was manipulated and employed as a political tool by revolutionaries and counter-revolutionaries alike. Brown's study, a significant addition to the field, adds to Clément's work by considering the consequences of such violence on the revolution and the Great Nation. Divided into three sections, Ending the French Revolution demonstrates how, between 1795 and 1802, protecting the democratic principles of the constitution was secondary to ensuring public safety in France. Initially, the Directory intended that the rule of law, and the population's submission before it, would finally put an end to popular violence. However, such moderate policies were unable to restore order. Widespread violence continued to plague the French nation as the countryside was overwhelmed with countless hold-ups, assaults, and riots. New methods were sought to manage the problem. Force, repression, and the military were thus used to restore peace and order. However, such methods led the Directory away from the liberal and democratic principles of the constitution and down a dangerous path toward authoritarian, and even, at times, absolutist practices. According to Brown, soldiers were sent to execute the government's mandates, disperse illegal gatherings, seize criminals and fight banditry, siege towns, and patrol the countryside. Moreover, as a result of partisan civil authorities, military courts were used to judge criminals and other public disturbers. Although local authorities complained about the state's interventions in matters that had traditionally been under their jurisdiction, Brown argues that these measures were adopted as a result of a public outcry for greater security. After years of living in fear of crime and violence, the people of France were ready to accept any measures that would restore public order. One of the most contentious aspects of Ending the French Revolution is the author's conclusion regarding the end of the revolution. Although it is still fiercely debated, most historians have maintained that 1799, the year in which Napoleon was named First Consul, marked the end of the revolutionary period. However, according to Brown, the revolution ended in 1802, a year that has yet to be considered by historians. Unlike most others, Brown does not base his conclusions on when the democratic principles of the revolution truly ended or when Napoleon's dictatorship began, but rather on "conditions that generally mark the end of [End Page 618] revolutions" (p. 3). He explains that a post-revolutionary regime must be structurally secure and must no longer face the threat of being replaced. Such conditions are usually achieved when the new government is recognized by the political elite, the political elite is stable and under control, and, finally, government is able to regulate whatever opposition has yet to be fully vanquished. According to Brown, in 1802 the First Consul adopted a series of measures

Criminology · Democracy · Economic Justice · Legitimacy · Political repression · Political science · Politics · Sociology · European Political History Analysis · History · Law