Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution (Paperback)

~ (Author) "IN THE brilliant spring of 1778, Talleyrand went to pay his respects to Voltaire..." (more)
Key Phrases: constitutional bishop, famine plot, refractory priests, National Guard, Committee of Public Safety, French Revolution (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

In what PW called a "sprawling, provocative, sometimes infuriating chronicle that stands much conventional wisdom on its head," Schama argues that the Revolution did not produce a "patriotic culture of citizenship" but was preceded by one.
Copyright 1990 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From School Library Journal

YA-- This well-written, thoroughly documented book should be on every high-school library shelf. It explains the self-destructive, bloody orgy that occurred in France but not in England or Prussia, countries in similar states of poverty and with similarly deprived, disenfranchised populaces. Schama theorizes that the cause of France's revolution lies in the self-deception of the ruling intelligentsia, who believed that they could make a Utopian France by allowing controlled violence, murder, and the destruction of property in the name of liberty, and all to exist simultaneously with good government. Schama presents Talleyrand, Lafayette, and others with more understanding than they are given in most histories, setting them amidst a web of violence of their own making. This book speaks to today's world, as nations strive to move from despotism to democracy. A more modern view of these same problems is found in Z. Brzezinski's The Grand Failure (Scribners , 1989) .
-Barbara Batty, Port Arthur I.S.D., TX
Copyright 1990 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 976 pages
• Publisher: Vintage (March 17, 1990)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0679726101
• ISBN-13: 978-0679726104
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.2 x 1.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 3.6 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (58 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #144,026 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #26 in	Books > History > Europe > France > Revolution
  #37 in	Books > Bargain Books > History > Europe

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

46 of 47 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A remarkable, life-changing read, November 15, 2004

By	M (Syracuse, NY USA) - See all my reviews

This monumental book attempts to chronicle the French Revolution from its inception to the end of the Reign of Terror in 1794, using a slightly different style than most conventional histories. In the preface, Schama notes that studies of personalities have largely been replaced by studies of grain supplies, indicating a pattern to seek explanations for historical events and trends in obscure economic factors, rather than in the personalities of the leading figures involved. This Schama is determined to fight against, and he resurrects the nineteenth-century chronicle, with its emphasis on people, high and low. The first section is largely concerned with the Old Régime, which the author reveals a dynamic and rapidly changing society, where the pace of change was indeed too fast instead of too slow, as the popular perception goes. He meticulously shows the rise of revolutionary and nationalist culture, as well as of a new economic order, and the incapacity of Louis XVI and his governments to deal with the new realities. The accounts of the demise of the Old Regime and the beginnings of Revolution are extremely detailed, but also move at a fast pace, with numerous stories of the participants interspersed in the narrative. Schama's use of primary sources is exhaustive, and sometimes even tends to be overwhelming, but the overall effect is an impressive display of historical writing at its finest. But it is in relating the power struggles within the National Assembly and the Convention that Schama truly shines. We hear the strident rhetoric of the Brissotins and later the Jacobins, calling for the bloody consummation of the Revolution. We are at the side of the major players as they are elbowed aside, which often means assassination or execution. We are taken to the provinces, where the Vendéan revolt and the subsequent massacres of thousands by the revolutionary authorities provide horrifying preludes of twentieth century violence and genocide. Indeed the most striking aspect of the book is just how much the forces of totalitarianism in our time owe to their Jacobin predecessors. The speeches of Saint-Just and Marat could have just as easily been uttered by Lenin. The vast outdoor pageants and revolutionary festivals conceived by Jacques-Louis David could measure up considerably well to Albert Speer's monstrous but impeccably designed rallies for Hitler. Schama pulls off an astounding effect, for as the reader progresses in the story, the revolutionary fervor almost creeps out of the page, and one feels the all-encompassing madness. The ending of the book is bleak, showing a disturbing lithograph of Robespierre decapitating the last executioner amidst a forest of guillotines and in the shadow of a giant chimney of cremation bearing the inscription "Here lies all of France." The Terroristes' own pathetic endings provide no closure, merely a bitter aftertaste of disgust.

Schama's contentions are well-reasoned and he succeeds magnificently in exposing both the workings and the soul of the Revolution. His view is a bit too complex to encapsulate in a few words, but it largely centers on the idea that violence was not just another "aspect" of the Revolution, but was always a crucial part of it. The two were effectively inseparable. The roots of this violence were to be found in the patriotic culture and in the enormous influence exercised by Romanticism and especially by the writings of Rousseau, wherefrom came the notions of patriotic sacrifice and patriotic death. Schama claims, with considerable credibility, that the Revolution did not achieve any of the significant reformist objectives of 1789 (indeed, the Jacobins were almost immediately forced to impose economic paternalism), and worse, it inaugurated an era when violence determined the direction of the state more than anything else. What the Revolution did create was "a military-technocratic state of immense power and emotional solidarity," but "its other principal invention had been a political culture that perennially and directly challenged it." The meaning of the entire book, and indeed of the Revolution itself, is summarized next: "Suddenly, subjects were told they had become Citizens...Before the promise of 1789 could be realized, it was necessary to root out Uncitizens." Citizens is a remarkable book, a life-changing read that will reveal mankind at its darkest but also at its most complicated, and that will fiercely bring to life one of the most momentous events in history.

19 of 19 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars If you read one book about the French Revolution..., February 4, 2005

By	Robert E. Murena Jr. "tedmurena" (Fairfield, CT United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Citizens is a very well written history of the French Revolution covering a massive amount of events, details and personalities with a good deal of background to boot. I am no expert on the subject but I have read a few books on the French Revolution including "The Oxford history of the French Revolution" and "Twelve who Ruled". I found that Citizens at succeeded where the other two failed: it managed to remain interesting. This is of course is because of Simon Schama writing style. The history of the French revolutionary period of course really is fascinating but the problem with it is unless you are scholar of French history you will need to have a decent amount of background to put the events of 1789-95 in perspective. That being said it can also be said that if you are going to read a single book on the subject Citizens provides the background and explanation required to get a true sense of what happened during the revolutionary period.

It is understandable that readers find that there is too much anecdote and detail in this book however I argue that it is all for a purpose. Simon Schama is one of those writers that doesn't simply want to provide readers with the chronology but he wants to enrich the events with information and details that not only shed light on what happened but provide a volume of supplemental knowledge that in pieces may do little but together solidify the reader's understanding of the subject. This is vastly important to getting a grasp on this book. I believe Schama uses anecdotes not as flourishes but as mnemonic devices for the readers understanding as well.

It is not meant to be a quick read. Citizens is very deliberate. Schama's verbose style is also this works beauty. Anyone who has seen him speak or seen his television programs understands that he wants to envelop his audience completely not only as way of maintaining their attention but as a service for their time spent. As a reader too, we spend time behind a book for a purpose: to learn. Schama understands this and furnishes us with enough information that we don't need to waste our time sifting through other books to gain understanding of this of the material.

Finally, to discuss the argument. Schama provides a good counter to the argument that the revolution was a people's movement. Naturally, you need power to take power, argues Schama, the revolution was not a movement of the people but the middle class who cared little for the proletariat. They certainly used them when necessary but not out of altruism but to achieve their aims. This accounts greatly for much of the horror of the period.

Of course it is not complete. Schama, or any worthy author of history, wouldn't ever make this claim. However it is a very good starting point for all readers of history and good basis to start studying more specific aspects of the period. I recommend Schama greatly because of his style. If you have enjoyed his other works you certainly will be pleased and if you are looking for a strong book to start understanding the revolution this is an excellent book for you.

--Ted Murena

154 of 184 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Very well written, but ultimately unconvincing, May 25, 2001

By	[e-mail] (Edmonton, Alberta Canada) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

This is a popular work of history, and it is easy to see why. 1) Schama has a wonderful eye for anecdote, starting with the tale of the plaster elephant at the site of the Bastille, to how Talleyrand could not conduct a proper mass to save his life, to how Lafayette tried to escape from the Austrians and all too typically failed. 2) The book is lavishly illustrated with many compelling contemporary images. Not only do we see the passion for science in chandeliers resembling Montgolfier balloons, but we see the patriotic enthusiasm in revolutionary coffee cups and the revolutionary calendar. We are also blessed with Schama's skill as an art historian. Everyone recognizes David's The Oath of the Horatii, but how many now the bloodthirsty conclusion to the tale? Schama does, and this helps his point about the sanguinary and murderous side with the obsession with classical virtue. 3) Schama is a very effective writer, and few will be able to read his accounts of the September Massacres or the suppression of the Vendee or the execution of the Malesherbes family during the terror without a shudder of revulsion. Moreover he is capable of discussing a wide variety of topics, whether it is the nature of the fiscal crisis of the Bourbon monarchy or the cultural construction of the citizen. 4) In contrast to Richard Pipes' The Russian Revolution, Schama is able to consult the most recent literature to support his attack on the French revolution. He cites Chaussinand-Nogaret on the progressive, entrepreneurial and capitalist nature of the aristocracy. He builds on Darnton to emphasize the pornographic libels against Marie Antoinette. He builds on the Anglo-American empiricists like Behrens and Doyle to attack the idea of a bourgeois revolution, and the ideological emphasis of Furet and Baker to argue that 1789 was merely the Terror with a lower death count. 5) The result is a work with a compelling thesis, that the Ancien Regime was in many ways a progressive regime, advancing towards capitalism, abolishing torture and increasing toleration for Protestants. Unfortunately bad luck and ideological fanaticism caused the revolution to go wildly off course, ending in a disaster of massacre, bloodshed and ruin.

So what's wrong with the book? 1) Well, anecdote can be misleading. At one point in order to emphasize the Convention's proto-totalitarian nature he points to their discussion of a deputy's plans to take children away from their parents so that they could be educated by the state. But Isser Woloch and Jean-Pierre Gross have shown that this particular discussion was more an act of respect to the deputy, who had recently been assassinated, than a serious proposal. Their actual plans for public education were far more moderate and liberal. And while readers may agree with Schama that it is of great symbolic importance that the great painter Delacroix was fathered by Talleyrand, Delacroix's most recent biographer, Barthelmy Jobert strongly argues that it didn't happen. 2) Schama's emphasis on culture and ideology as the winds that smashed the revolution against the rocks are full of problems. American revolutionaries also cited classical antiquity with apparently no ill effects. The two most famous sayings of the American Revolution, "Give me liberty or give me death," "I regret that I only have one life to give to my country," both come from Addison's Cato. Can it really be said that everyone lost their heads over Rousseau, when his admirers, like the Masons and the quasi-Protestant Jansenists, split both ways when the revolution came? 3) It is one thing to quote recent scholarship. But other recent scholarship strongly points out the problems with Schama's account. Gwynne Lewis has pointed out that the nobility cannot really be said to be as capitalist and entrepreneurial as Schama believes. Timothy Tackett has pointed out that the revolutionary deputies were not so besotted with abstract ideology as revisionists believe, while the nobility's deputies were richer, of older lineage, and more Catholic and less liberal than Schama would lead us to believe. Alan Spitzer has pointed out that the evidence of a fundamental fiscal crisis cannot be so easily disposed with. He also points out that one reason why foreign trade collapsed so heavily in the 1790s was because so much of it depended on slavery, which the Convention abolished. Barry Shapiro has pointed out that counter-revolutionary plots were not a paranoid delusion, and that the revolutionary government in its first years had a moderate and responsible attitude towards them. Paul Spagnoli has pointed out that the revolutionary decades saw a clear increase in life expectancy which was not matched in the rest of Europe. Allan Kulikoff has pointed out that the American republic took decades to recover from its own brutal war of American independence. 4) Schama's basic position is elitist and shallow. He equates progress with unregulated markets, views popular movements for democracy with contempt and suspicion and enthuses over a forward looking bureaucracy/elite which could have solved France's problems if political discussion had not gotten in the way. One should point out that Spain, Italy, Germany and Japan have tried this path to the modern state, and they ended up with fascism. Russia tried this path and the State collapsed so badly that only Lenin's Bolsheviks could pick up the pieces. If we are to praise this neo-Burkean vision of the Revolution, we should remember that shortly after Burke's own death 50,000 Irish would be slaughtered by the forces of Order, leaving a legacy of rancid sectarianism for future centuries.