... thus it could be deemed to provide a timely testimony of the previous day's events; and c) it conveys the feelings and opinions of a politically active woman whose knowledge of, and involvement in, the Parisian politics of 1791 make her a credible source. The document, however, also contains various limitations. Firstly, it is not clear whether the source is an eyewitness account of the massacre or merely an exaggerated and emotional reaction to its aftermath. Secondly, Mme Roland was a supporter of the revolution, and this could prejudice her testimony against the authorities. Furthermore, the rather dramatic tone of her rhetoric suggests that she may have been aware that the letter could be published and used as a conduit of revolutionary propaganda. Therefore, in order to corroborate Mme Roland's version of events, other primary sources would need to be consulted, such as eyewitness statements, newspaper accounts, and official documents ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now