Traumatic Politics: The Deputies and the King in the Early French Revolution by Barry M. Shapiro (review)

plus intéressants), ce travail académique met le lecteur ordinaire à l’épreuve. Les effets cumulatifs et les répétitions par esprit d’exactitude donnent, d’un chapitre à l’autre, des impressions de “déjà lu”. Là est d’ailleurs la seule critique que l’on pourrait formuler au sujet du livre: nous aurions souhaité que la ligne directrice du projet apparaisse de façon moins stricte et plus argumentée. Cet aspect ne remet nullement en cause la qualité du travail de Shusterman dont le mérite est d’avoir fait un travail systématique, minutieux et exemplaire. West Chester University (PA) Michel Sage SHAPIRO, BARRY M. Traumatic Politics: The Deputies and the King in the Early French Revolution. University Park: Pennsylvania State UP, 2009. ISBN 978-0-271-03542-0. Pp. 204. $65.00. Joining other notable critics who have revisited the French Revolution within the past thirty years, Shapiro sheds new light on the opening days of this momentous event. Relying on modern psychological research, he explores the effects of traumatic stress on the delegates to the Estates-General, later the National Assembly, and the Constituent Assembly. While he admits the challenge in evaluating people from over two hundred years ago, one can project their response. Thus, he studies in detail the causes and effects of trauma. Shapiro maintains that the arrival of troops on 20 June 1789 at the meeting room of the Third Estate deputies, created an unduly stressful situation. Almost none of these men, with the notable exception of Mirabeau, had ever been involved in a brush with the law. Therefore, it was normal that they expected possible arrest and even execution. As the number of troops increased, the deputies’ fears intensified . Letters to friends and family written during this time attest to the mental anguish of several members. However, patriotism and honor prompted them to accept the risks involved in their mandate. Shapiro also notes the oscillation of emotions, typical of trauma. While the deputies distrusted the King at first, after his visits to the Assembly they proclaimed their loyalty to him, more as a father rather than a ruler. In fact, Shapiro maintains, the incipient desacralization of the monarchy was yielding to a paternalistic outlook. In June 1789, the possibility of accommodation with the monarchy still remained a viable option. Thus, the early trauma faded into oblivion, or subconscious suppression, only to reappear later. A second traumatic experience occurred during the July 12–14 riots. The number of troops increased, once again threatening the deputies. Shapiro uses numerous eye-witness accounts, including the hour-by-hour chronicle of Félix Faulcon, a Poitiers magistrate who notes the hazardous circumstances, yet maintains that the members continued their work. The situation was exacerbated by the dismissal of Necker, whom the deputies considered as an ally. His provisional reappointment, along with the dismissal of the troops, may have eased their mounting fears. Yet it was impossible to erase the traumatic ordeal they had experienced . When the King visited the Assembly on July 15, the deputies initially reacted with a favorable emotional outburst. If anyone was to blame, it was the “evil advisors,” not Louis himself. Yet the gulf was widening between king and subjects. When the King swore allegiance to the new Constitution on September 14, the delegates did not rise. Shapiro notes other incidents resulting from the initial trauma, especially the suspensive veto and the exclusion of deputies from 836 FRENCH REVIEW 84.4 the ministries. The veto proposal had produced extensive debate, with the more radical members opposing any veto by the King. Rather than interpreting the result as a compromise, Shapiro sees it as a further step of alienation between the Assembly and the monarch. The exclusion of the deputies from the ministries drastically reduced communication between the legislative and executive powers. Shapiro concludes that these and other enactments were heavily influenced by the deputies’ growing mistrust of the King resulting from the trauma they had experienced. Unaware that the balance of power had shifted in their favor, they could no longer reach any accommodation with the Crown. Shapiro’s interdisciplinary analysis opens new perspectives. He notes that the same momentum...