Search icone
Search and publish your papers

The debate on the trial and the condemnation of Louis XVI during the 18th century and their consequences

About the author

etudiante
Level
Advanced
Study
political...
School/University
sciences po...

About the document

Published date
Language
documents in English
Format
Word
Type
term papers
Pages
8 pages
Level
Advanced
Accessed
5 times
Validated by
Committee Oboolo.com
  1. Introduction
  2. The debate on the trial and the condemnation of Louis XVI during the 18th Century and their consequences
    1. Anger towards the King
    2. Xenophobia's role
    3. The storming of the royal palace of the Tuileries
    4. The important disagreements
    5. The constitution of 1791
    6. The Girondins
    7. The Vendeans and Chouans
    8. The army of Dumouriez at Neerwinden and their loss to the Austrians
  3. Conclusion
  4. References

At first the king seemed inclined to work with the revolution and to try to solve the problems. But the influence of the queen and of the courtiers were too strong. He was encouraged by them to disregard all promises he had made and sought to flee from France in order to obtain aid against the revolution from Austria.
It led to the storming of the royal palace of the Tuileries on Aug. 10, 1792. The king and his family escaped before the mob arrived and took refuge in the hall of the Legislative Assembly. The Assembly declared that the king was suspended from office and ordered that he and his family should be imprisoned. They then called a new assembly, the Convention, to decide whether France should continue to be a monarchy.
On 20-21 September, on Abbé Grégoire's motion, the Conventionnels steeled themselves to abolish the monarchy and establish a republic. By December, even advocating the restoration of the monarchy was punishable by death. Then one of the Assembly's most pressing task was to decide what to do with the person of the ex-ruler, Louis ?Capet?.
So a debate started in the Convention, opposing the Jacobins and the Girondins, about whether yes or not the king would be judged.
Firstly, it was not easy to clothe the revolt of the country against the king in the forms of law, for the country as a body had no legal standing under the old regime. There were no conventionally specifiable legal rules or moral principles by which a king could be judged, and there was no one who could judge him, that's to say exercise authority over him . Moreover, it was a legal maxim in both England and France that the king could not do wrong. This principle the revolutionaries were committed to deny, and their denial was a large part of the revolution they made.

Top sold for modern history

Critical analysis of the letter collection of Einhard

 History & geography   |  Modern history   |  Presentation   |  09/29/2010   |   .doc   |   4 pages

Was Bismarck Prussian or a German nationalist?

 History & geography   |  Modern history   |  Presentation   |  01/27/2011   |   .doc   |   3 pages

Recent documents in modern history category

Rise of The Modern World

 History & geography   |  Modern history   |  Presentation   |  03/17/2020   |   .doc   |   3 pages

Women in Victorian era

 History & geography   |  Modern history   |  Presentation   |  05/03/2019   |   .doc   |   9 pages