Contenu du sommaire

In March 1793, the military situation, political uncertainty, and the rise of domestic tensions led to the adoption of exceptional measures. The historiography, which has traditionally stressed the application and consequences of these measures, has left largely unexamined the very formulation of these laws. A study of the preparatory work for the law of 28 March 1793 concerning emigres constitutes an important point of departure for exploring the different approaches to law during the Revolution. This legislative work, which took place at a time when laws of exception were introduced, allows us to understand more fully the operation of Comité de législation, a veritable laboratory of law under the Convention.

Historiography generally postulates that the establishment of the Revolutionary government would have been followed by the suppression of the right of citizens to elect and dismiss public officials. However, the study of the policy conducted by the Paris Commune, and in particular by its mayor Jean-Nicolas Pache, invalidates this interpretation. Together with the National Convention and the Committee of Public Safety, they continued to organize the election of members of the Commune and sectional institutions by the general assemblies of the sections in accordance with the Constitution of 24, June 1793, and chiefly with Article 29 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. The right of revocation, a revolutionary popular initiative, was also guaranteed and put into practice. This study, however, remains limited to the municipal elections in Paris, from September 1793 to 9 Thermidor an II (7 July 1794) and thus awaits complementary work elsewhere.

In June 1794, the Italian army was in a position to make a decisive blow to the kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia, and several plans were prepared for this purpose. Augustin Robespierre, representative on mission attached to this military force, left Nice to have the project of a progression in the peninsula in Paris approved. However, his ambition was opposed to that of a member of the Committee of Public Safety, Carnot, who considered entry into Italy to be a dangerous solution, given the danger posed by the British fleet along the Mediterranean coast. It was in the turbulent context of July 1794 that Carnot and Augustin Robespierre debated the Italian question. Because Augustine's visit to Paris was also linked to the delicate political situation of his brother Maximilian, and it would be the tragic end of the two brothers on 27 July that put a definitive end to the ambitions of the Italian army for the year 1794, in favour of Carnot's projects on the other fronts.

Studies on the theory of « representative democracy » under the Directory have corrected the flaws of the former interpretation that the French Revolution could not solve the enigma of the opposition between « democracy » and « representative government », even theoretically. Pierre-Antoine Antonelle is clearly one of the principal personalities in this context, but other democrats, too, played a not insignificant role. The case of Antoine Français de Nantes in the year VI is particularly noteworthy, for he adopted a discursive strategy different from that of Antonelle to promote a democratic vision of the constitution, political economy, and the political realm united under the enemy banner of « representative government ». To convince moderate opinion and broaden the scope of the « democratic republic », Français de Nantes tried to redefine and radicalize the term « representative government, thereby supporting his vision of « democracy » without explicitly defending the term. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that the Republicanism of Français de Nantes, heir to both the Enlightenment and the Revolution, offers an important approach for better understanding the diversity of strategies adopted by the democrats.

During the Restorations in southern Europe, royalists called on people to take up arms to control the anti-Revolutionary movement. Battalions of royalist volunteers, miquelets, and secret companies made it possible to restore the monarchy, while liberating innovative social forces. Popular royalism was an expression of a punitive violence against elites that compelled the restored State to negotiate to regain control of the situation. This article analyzes the relationship between the royalist milice, the White Terror, and popular politicization beginning in 1799 with the Restorations in Naples, then in 1815 in the South of France, and later in 1823 in Madrid.