1: The Directory
Given that the Constituent Assembly, Legislative Assembly, the Convention, and the Directory were composed of the same men, it might be assumed that their psychology would be very similar. In ordinary periods, it may have been thus because a simple change in the name of a group does not change its character. But during the Revolution the situation changed significantly, and the group adapted itself to the environment.
Psychology of the Directory
The Directory, which replaced the convention, comprised a number of distinct assemblies, two large groups consisting of different kinds of representatives and one small group consisting of the five directors.
The two larger assemblies were similar to the Convention in their weakness: they were no longer dominated by armed factions or concerned about popular riots, but tended to agree without discussion to the injunctions of the Directors.
The legislators, as a whole, were weary of the Jacobin tyranny and the constant demand to root out those who (allegedly) supported monarchy, and many were ready to see a return to order rather than the perpetuation of chaos. So the first directors were moderates - or so it was assumed.
It is not unusual, particularly when a new regime takes office, for men to seek quick solutions to complicated problems, and violence becomes the sword to cut the Gordian knot. Hence these "moderate" directors became very aggressive in seeking to eliminate the influence of the Jacobins, and persecuted and massacred people with as much enthusiasm as their predecessors.
Before all else, the Directors were conscious of their image, and wished to be recognized as the masters of France. To establish their authority, they resorted to a number of "illegitimate measures" that had little to do with the principles of good government and more to do with projecting an image of power and avoiding embarrassment. As a result, they neglected the task of governing the people and instead focused on governing the government.
One of the advantages of the Directory was in the assembly of the directors themselves: an assembly of hundreds of persons is unwieldy and subject to constantly shifting priorities, whereas a committee of five is less prone to dramatic shifts, and far more capable of being consistent to a set of principles. And to separate power into three houses ensures that and decision must be made three times - which does not ensure the decision will be good, but it should ensure it is well deliberated.
Le Bon observes that the committee of directors may have been incapable of governing, but it never lacked a strong and consistent will. But since the lesser assemblies did little to restrain it, the committee was able to practice despotism, and act without respect for law or the public welfare. As such, the history of the directory exemplifies how disorder can overcome a nation that is deprived of its principles, taking the exigencies of the day and fear of opposition as its motives without a sufficient degree of reason or foresight.
Despotic Government of the Directory
While the structure of the Directory was meant to avoid the caprices of the previous formats of government, the fact that the lesser assemblies consented to the committee of directors without consideration gave the committee despotic powers, of which it availed itself.
First, the directors decided to resume the wars of conquest which had begun under the convention, as the armies were bringing in a significant income from the pillage of bordering states, particularly Italy. Whereas the armies of the revolution had been welcomed as a liberating force, it became clear that they were instruments of pillage, and the bordering states formed a coalition against France.
Second, the directors were also distracted by an "incessant series of conspiracies" by those who wished to usurp power. The revolutionary clubs, now political parties, had not disarmed and disbanded their militias, but continued their campaigns of terror internally, against which there was little hope of establishing a stable and productive society within France.
For this reason, the directory annulled elections. For example, the spring elections of May of 1797 proposed to stock the assembly with members of parties that were hostile to the system - and so the directors annulled elections in 49 states, expelled 154 of the newly elected representatives, and deported 53 of them. To further intimidate the electors, the directors condemned 160 persons to death and deported 330 to the colonies. This was done "rather at random" although it was observed that the Jacobin representatives were disproportionately targeted.
The new masters also proved to be "as bloodthirsty as the most ferocious deputies of the terror." While they did not resort as often to execution or massacre, deportation was widely practiced - at a time in which the conditions in the French colonies gave deportees little chance of survival. To be sent to the galleys was merely a slower and more remote fate than to be sent to the guillotines.
To be deported to Guiana was the equivalent of a death sentence, by means of starvation and disease. One example tracked 193 deportees, of which fewer than forty were still alive after a period of less than two years. Another report mentions that of 120 taken, only one remained when the ship returned with the next lot.
The directors were particularly fearful of the clergy, and imagined that the church was conspiring against them. In one year, the directors deported nearly 1500 priests, and it is noted that a "large number" had also been summarily executed.
There were other matters for which the directory was reviled. Taxation was relentless, to the point that it destroyed the economy of France at the time - workshops were closed, businesses were halted, and even domestic servants were dismissed. The directors also created a "law of hostages" for which a list of citizens was drawn up to be held accountable for all offenses in their province, particularly the non-payment of taxes, who were to be ransomed by their communities.
The result of these measures were economic devastation, an travelers to France had the impression of a country ravaged by war and abandoned by its inhabitants. Everywhere buildings were abandoned, fields lay fallow, and even the roads and bridges were crumbling. Poverty and famine were general among a shrinking population.
The only merchants and producers that seemed to be doing well were those that sold goods or provided services to the government. And it is noted that these individuals became wealthy in short order, and lived extravagant lifestyles while the rest of the nation crumbled. Paris, in particular, was noted to have a "superficial aspect of luxury and gaiety" that gave rise to the notion of a golden age, but it was a pocket of excess in a sea of misery.
The Advent of Bonaparte
Given the general disorganization of the Directory, there was a growing sense that the nation would be better off with a single individual in command. And while the notion of restoring monarchy was unthinkable, there was discussion of appointing one of the generals of the army.
Napoleon Bonaparte had become famous for his campaign in Italy and his march toward Vienna caused the Emperor of Austria to press for peace. Other generals had been pressing him to "take steps to place himself at the head of the republic," but he had refused, recognizing that the skill to command an army was different to the skill required to command a nation.
His rise to power on returning from a campaign in Egypt was prepared by a number of prominent figures in the government, including two of the directors, an the coup was accomplished "with the greatest ease." Napoleon's troops played no part at all in the affair, and what bloodshed did occur was effected by gendarmes of the assembly. In essence, the overthrow of the government was engineered and accomplished by the government itself.
Causes of the Duration of the Revolution
The rebellion against the monarchy lasted only a few months, but a revolution involves the establishment of a stable new government to replace the old, which in the case of France took much longer. In essence, the two assemblies, convention, and directorate were all temporary, each ceding easily to the next form of government and order was not fully restored until Bonaparte took control - so in all, it had taken ten years.
The French, having overthrown one form of government, found itself subjected to an even worse ones at the hands of the revolutionary assemblies, who acted as "odious exploiters" that showed little interest in restoring peace and stability to the nation, but pursued abstract ideals and entertained their own personal lust for power and spoils.
Bonaparte recognized these problems and assuaged the anxiety of the people, who would have fallen behind anyone who would have replaced the tyranny of the assemblies and the revolutionary clubs. In taking command, he did not reverse the revolution, but delivered it.