Reasoning behind the War of the First Coalition
“Their said majesties the emperor [of the Holy Roman Empire] and the king of Prussia are resolved to act promptly and in common accord with the forces necessary to obtain the desired common end [the reestablishment of Louis XVI’s absolute monarchy],” declared Holy Roman Emperor Leopold II of the Holy Roman Empire and King Frederick William of Prussia in their Treaty of Pillnitz, continuing to promise to “give such orders to their troops as are necessary in order that they may be ready to be called into active service.” Although they later deny it, this treaty was virtually a declaration of war on the French Republic; it clearly revealed the fact that Austria and Prussia were prepared to employ military force against the free French nation that had taken its fate into its own hands. Reasonably enough, the despots of Europe, drunk with blood and pride, feared for their thrones in light of the liberal and egalitarian ideals flowing from France; however, rather than accepting their existence and instituting new reforms and freedoms as the Assembly in France was, the despots chose instead to attempt to extinguish the light of liberty and crush the Republic underfoot. They stated that they were ready to use force, and all that remained was a trigger to “justify” a war.
Rather than play the victim, France, recognizing war to be inevitable, chose to take the reigns and declare war for themselves, which they did on 20 April 1792. There were, in fact, further reasons for declaring war than just subduing the despots of Europe. Jacques Pierre Brissot, the Legislative Assembly’s greatest proponent of war, argued that war would spread the Revolutionary ideals to neighboring countries as the armies of the Republic ventured out on their campaigns, and that the war would serve as a goal that the whole country could rally behind, consolidating the Revolution.
Peace was not a possibility; the absolutism of the despots would not allow it. The Republic must, as Joseph Chénier wrote in his masterpiece song Chant du Départ, “prevail or perish,” for the enemies of France would never yield otherwise. The tyrants thirsted for French blood, but it would be their own “impure blood” that would “water the furrows of France,” as Claude-Joseph Rouget so brilliantly wrote in his song La Marseillaise. Searching for evidence of the cruel and barbarous absolutism of the despots, especially of Austria and Prussia, one needs look no further than the Brunswick Manifesto, issued by the Duke of Brunswick, commander of Prussian and Austrian invasion forces, on 25 July 1792 as he neared Paris. He warns that “any towns and villages who may dare to defend themselves” shall be “punished immediately according to the most stringent laws of war, and their houses shall be burned or destroyed.” Furthermore, in his insane blood frenzy, he admonished the French populous, “if the least violence be offered to their Majesties the king, queen, and royal family, and if their safety and their liberty be not immediately assured, they [Prussia and Austria] will inflict an ever memorable vengeance by delivering over the city of Paris to military execution and complete destruction.” In other words, should the Parisians offer any defense at all, they’ll all be slaughtered mercilessly and the city leveled to the ground. No one other than the most tyrannical despot would make such an offer.
After the War of the First Coalition, which Spain and Britain would later join as allies of Austria, the French Republic stood victoriously above the rest, shining as a beacon of hope to the world. With General Bonaparte’s victories in Italy he was able to seal peace with the fair and benevolent Treaty of Campo Formio. In effect, France had begun liberating Western Europe. Italy, which was splintered and dominated by an oppressive Austria, had been reorganized by Gen. Bonaparte into a set of republics, most notably the Ligurian and Cisalpine Republics. In accordance with the ideal of equality, Gen. Bonaparte went so far as to liberate Italian Jews from the ghettoes they had been subjected to, even demolishing the walls of the infamous Roman ghettoes, after which the manacles of the Star of David on their clothing were removed as they were finally allowed to join society as free men, equal in rights. There were initially problems with fighting a war while the state was still embroiled in revolution, especially with internal enemies such as the Royal Family, who gave away troop movements to the enemy and begged for them to continue the war with France, and traitorous members of the Assembly such as Mirabeau, who earlier had conspired with the Royal Family, but thanks to Robespierre’s insistence, a Revolutionary Tribunal was established, followed by the Committee of Public Safety, which weeded out many traitors, which in turn inspired the soldiers on campaign.
In light of all of this, there can be no doubt that the war was a good decision, not only because France won the war, but because of what would ultimately result from the war. War consolidated the people, and in that state the government was able to all but annihilate the internal enemies of France. Outside of France, people were shown a new style of life, namely one where they could be free to live life as they wished. They saw first-hand the benefits of choice of profession, of freedom of religion, of freedom of speech and of the press, and many more that they could hardly dream of. After the War of the First Coalition, England would bribe the tyrants of Europe into forming coalition after coalition, creating a state of perpetual warfare on the continent which, while defending la patrie, Napoleon Bonaparte could further expand the glorious ideals of the revolution to not only his own country but also to all of Europe and the United States of America through his Code Civil, otherwise known as the Code Napoleon, which would eventually influence countries worldwide. Although France would in the long-run lose the Wars of the Coalitions, it sacrificed itself for the modernization and liberation of Europe and the whole world. Without the war, all of that would most likely not have happened, or at least not at the expedient rate at which it had.
