Opposition in the period of 1789-1791 was also dealt with quite effectively. An example of this would be the Champ de Mars – it took a year for the popular movement to rise up once more after this massacre on their people. Despite the sans-culottes playing leading parts in the July Days and the October Days, they received few rewards and were kept under control by the Assembly. This could be achieved because the people of France were not extremely radical in this period. Many agreed with the aims of the bourgeois and the Assembly, and many did not want to overthrow the Assembly when they were benefiting well from the changes taking place. The peasants, for example, did not wholly agree with what was happening in France, but they did not attempt to revolt because they feared that they would lose some of the improvements they had had since the Assembly’s rise to power. The fact that passive citizens were not admitted into the National Guard could explain the control the Assembly kept over France, as revolutionary groups did not have the organisation or weaponry they needed in order to take over. The Civil Constitution of the Clergy split the Church, tying some to the Revolution and beginning the massive support of the counter-revolution, establishing the counter-revolutionaries as enemies of the state. The Constitution of 1791 established the Assembly’s control in France, which effectively demonstrated that during this period the Revolution was controlled and directed by the bourgeoisie, through the Assembly.
However, the outbreak of war changed matters in 1792. A Republican movement emerged, supported by sans-culottes although led by middle class men such as Robespierre and Danton. The military defeats and desertions of army officers in the war along with the King increased his unpopularity and weakened the arguments of the moderates considerably, which weakened the Assembly who were constitutional monarchists. The Republicans and revolutionaries grew increasingly in power, especially with the arrival of the federes, which was evident in the storming of the Tulieres, which was faced with little opposition. The strong sans-culottes were feared by the Assembly, who after they took over Paris and set up the Revolutionary Commune, agreed to pass all measures that they and the Commune demanded, even the execution of the King. The execution of the King in January 1793 weakened the Convention further as the Jacobins, influenced by the sans-culottes, gained ascendancy in the Convention and were able to achieve their aims. In the Convention of 1793, the policies introduced by the bourgeoisie were abolished, replaced by the sans-culottes’ aims of centralisation, fixed prices, requisitioning and conscription. During the Terror of 1792-1794, the means by which the Jacobins and the CPS controlled France were not bourgeois methods, with popular democracy being introduced and much more radical policies surpassing those made by the National Assembly.
However, despite the sans-culottes having a huge influence on the course of the Revolution, especially in 1793, they were a group that lacked organisation, meaning they never took power, even though they had the chance. The 1793 Constitution, which featured so many concessions to them, was never implemented or put into practice in France. Also, the Convention that was so heavily influenced by the Jacobins and sans-culottes was dominated by bourgeois, as was the Jacobin party. This means that effectively, although the Revolution was influenced by the working class in the period 1792-1793, the middle class still technically controlled it, as they were the educated men making the decisions. In 1794, when sensing the sans-culottes were gaining too much power and influence over the country, the middle class Jacobins had the power to shut down the working class and control them by dissolving popular societies and ending direct democracy in the Sections. By the end of 1794, the sans-culottes had lost the influence they had had before over the government and the Jacobins had regained it.
In 1795, the influence of the sans-culottes had vanished. They were no longer a force as they had been in 1793. In the 1795 Constitution, the aims of the bourgeois had been reinstalled, with indirect voting and there was a return to most of the policies of 1791, which upheld the values of the middle class. The Thermadorians were dominated again by the bourgeois and it is clear that in 1799, France was much closer to the middle class than any other group. The Vendemiaire Uprising demonstrated the total fall in power of the sans-culottes and that was controlled by bourgeoisie. This period was again directed by the middle class, despite it not representing the exact same values as the Constitution of 1791. I believe that this comment is valid to a certain extent. This is because the bourgeois did direct the course of the Revolution in the period 1789-1791 through the Assembly – dismantling the Ancien Regime and recreating a new system of government to benefit all, especially themselves. However, the outbreak of war and mistakes made by the King lost the Assembly credibility and support, instead a Republican movement emerged from which the sans-culottes gained influence in Paris. The creation of the Convention, although dominated by bourgeois, also helped the sans-culottes as they were able to intimidate it in order to achieve their aims, as witnessed in the 1793 constitution, the only constitution directed at them rather than the bourgeoisie. Despite this, this Constitution was never implemented and popular democracy was never put into practice, and the sans-culottes never seized power due to their lack in organisation. Instead, Robespierre and other middle class Jacobin ministers regained power in 1794 from the sans-culottes and the sans-culottes were weakened considerably, and eventually lost complete power in 1795 in the Vendemiaire uprising. The Thermadorians took power instead, and created the 1795 Constitution that restored the policies introduced by the National Assembly in 1791. The Thermadorians themselves were middle class.
Looking over the entirety of the French Revolution, I believe that the comment was valid to a good extent, as it was always the bourgeois who controlled the Revolution – be it from the National Assembly, the Legislative Assembly, the Convention or the Directory. The Constitutions made over this time reflect this statement. However, in 1792, the sans-culottes grew in power and dominated the middle class government, getting their aims achieved rather than those of the middle class. Here it could be said that the sans-culottes directed the Revolution instead, especially in 1793. However, afterwards it is easy to see that the bourgeois regained their control and that over the whole period it was they who benefited most as they dominated the groups that directed the course of the Revolution and created the Constitutions. Thus, I agree to this comment despite the huge impact of the sans-culottes in 1792-1793.