What do you think?
Rate this book
The People's Armies (The Armees Revolutionnaires : Instrument of the Terror in the Departments April 1793 to Floreal Year II)
1987, bright clean copy, no markings, Professional booksellers since 1981
792 pages, Paperback
First published September 10, 1987
About the author
Richard Cobb
50 books7 followersRichard Cobb was a British historian. He became Professor of Modern History at the University of Oxford, after an initially unconventional academic career in which he spent a dozen years working as an independent scholar in French archives. His work was recognised in France by the award of membership of the Legion d'Honneur. He is known for his work on the background to the French Revolution, and for his autobiographical writings.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
September 13, 2021
The book assumes familiarity with details of the French Revolution. Hence my rating of three stars. This is not a book for the general reader. I am not a professional French historian.
This book is a discussion of the “people’s armies”, in French “armees revolutionnaires”. These armies were a group recruited to defend the French Revolution. Specifically, they were recruited to ensure that supplies were delivered to the cities and to repress the opponents of the Revolution. The army of Paris was the most important, but there was a host of others in outlying departments. The people’s armies were only active for less than a year (1793-4), but in that time, they became notorious for brutality.
This book discusses the type of individuals who joined these groups as well as the group’s activities. There is a concluding section about the disbanding of the armies. The book is a swarm of details.
The author is fairly clear that he believes that the armies’ reputation for violence is unwarranted. The armies were intended to terrify the opponents of the Revolution, and a number of those who were part of the armies claimed to dealt severe blows to the counter-revolutionaries. The author argues that these claims were exaggerations. He also claims that the major function of the armies was enforcing of economic laws guaranteeing maximum prices and supplies for the cities. In that respect, the armies were an urban force coercing the rural population. He further argues that the noteworthy episodes of butchery were exceptions, and that in general the armies enforced the order of revolutionary authorities. At times, he excuses very bad behavior because those involved were sincere. He also argues that the armies were not that important in suppressing dissent, though they did help ensure supplies for the cities. He is correct to put some activities in context—late 18th century armies did pillage as a matter of course.
The degree of detail is bewildering, in part because the author is cataloguing the people and events of this period. Using these examples, the author draws some more general conclusions. This book does not have a strong narrative.
Again, I am not a French historian. I did note that the author is very sympathetic to the people’s armies and their cause, and I wonder if this sympathy did not distort the picture.
This book is a discussion of the “people’s armies”, in French “armees revolutionnaires”. These armies were a group recruited to defend the French Revolution. Specifically, they were recruited to ensure that supplies were delivered to the cities and to repress the opponents of the Revolution. The army of Paris was the most important, but there was a host of others in outlying departments. The people’s armies were only active for less than a year (1793-4), but in that time, they became notorious for brutality.
This book discusses the type of individuals who joined these groups as well as the group’s activities. There is a concluding section about the disbanding of the armies. The book is a swarm of details.
The author is fairly clear that he believes that the armies’ reputation for violence is unwarranted. The armies were intended to terrify the opponents of the Revolution, and a number of those who were part of the armies claimed to dealt severe blows to the counter-revolutionaries. The author argues that these claims were exaggerations. He also claims that the major function of the armies was enforcing of economic laws guaranteeing maximum prices and supplies for the cities. In that respect, the armies were an urban force coercing the rural population. He further argues that the noteworthy episodes of butchery were exceptions, and that in general the armies enforced the order of revolutionary authorities. At times, he excuses very bad behavior because those involved were sincere. He also argues that the armies were not that important in suppressing dissent, though they did help ensure supplies for the cities. He is correct to put some activities in context—late 18th century armies did pillage as a matter of course.
The degree of detail is bewildering, in part because the author is cataloguing the people and events of this period. Using these examples, the author draws some more general conclusions. This book does not have a strong narrative.
Again, I am not a French historian. I did note that the author is very sympathetic to the people’s armies and their cause, and I wonder if this sympathy did not distort the picture.
May 21, 2018
A comprehensive and academic book about a brief period during the French Revolution when "peoples' armies" were used to enforce the revolutionary terror. It is a detailed unpicking of exactly how these "armies" worked based on exhaustive use of archival material.
What that means is that this book is sometimes a touch dry, and the fact that it is translated probably doesn't help. It also assumes a base level of knowledge of the history of the French Revolution and the place of the Terror in that.
If you can accept that, then this is a superb work of history (although with a worryingly stereotyped approach to the women involved). Probably more appropriate to the specialist than the general reader, but very much worthwhile.
What that means is that this book is sometimes a touch dry, and the fact that it is translated probably doesn't help. It also assumes a base level of knowledge of the history of the French Revolution and the place of the Terror in that.
If you can accept that, then this is a superb work of history (although with a worryingly stereotyped approach to the women involved). Probably more appropriate to the specialist than the general reader, but very much worthwhile.
March 7, 2008
I had to read this in graduate school, and I remember it as among the worst books on the reading list.
Read
September 28, 2015A deep and detailed look at the Revolutionary Armies
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews