dovesandoranges
Anachronism.
M., 20s. Any pronouns. History, mainly frev. Philosophy student doing my thesis on Marat.
849 posts
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Last Seen Blogs
javifanarg
Prometo que vamos a volvernos eternos
lady-indigo47
For the love of the game (and other interests)
pipepencil02-blog
Private Finances For Bad Credit Scores - ARCCT
everybodyhatesluh
Goverment hooker
well-couponz
well couponz
Text
happy birthday M. Robespierre, I'll never forget the pigeon that woke me up by making loud noises outside my window at 7am
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
Warning signs of fascist themes in history media
Fascism is a reactionary, authoritarian and nationalist ideology that opposes peace, democracy, and human rights. Fascists are sometimes attracted to history because they use it to promote violence and myths of racial superiority. Fascist ideas can be found in certain books, movies, social media, Youtube channels and more.
Here I'm going to talk about general patterns to help you recognize fascist shit when you see it, examples I've seen in Roman history studies, and suggestions for what you can do about it.
Fascist themes
I have focused on themes rather than specific dogwhistles, arguments, or symbols, because fascist rhetoric often disguises itself to appear more palatable, and varies across countries. Themes are also useful for analyzing books, podcasts, and other media where political bias isn't always obvious. For specific fascist code-words and symbols, see the links at the end of this post.
Not every item on this list will appear for every fascist, and not every person who does one of these things is a fascist. But any of them should warn you to be on alert.
1. Fascism is reactionary.
Fascism rejects the modern, changing world. Fascists feel like the "natural order" or "old way of life" is threatened and must be preserved. They may call themselves conservatives or traditionalists, but their methods and goals are more radical and disruptive than traditional conservatism.
Fascists often feel like they have been attacked, humiliated, or left out of their rightful place in society. They resent groups of people they believe are getting undeserved benefits or respect. These groups are usually minorities such as immigrants, Jews, queer people, women or racial minorities. The fascist may believe these groups are involved in a conspiracy to undermine or corrupt "decent" people, or to abuse children.
Be especially alert for antisemitism, which accounts for a large number of hate crimes, and has been a key part of most fascist movements.
The fascist portrays modern society as weak, corrupt, degenerate, or oppressive to people like himself.
In history media, this may appear as nostalgia for the past, "reject modernity, return to tradition," and romanticizing a primitive or traditional aesthetic. It can also show up as whitewashing the "heroic" culture and vilifying other cultures, or erasing the existence of minorities from history altogether. The fascist may downplay historical injustices like slavery and the exclusion of women from the workforce.
2. Fascism is authoritarian.
The "natural order" of the fascist is hierarchical, with some people mattering more than others. Those on the bottom of society are there because they deserve it, and their struggles and feelings don't matter. If they demand equal rights, assistance programs or respect, they are seen as entitled, lazy, whiny, and arrogant. Naturally, the fascist assumes his place is at or near the top of the hierarchy.
The fascist usually opposes ambiguity and crossing boundaries - mixed race couples, cultural exchange, women in mostly-male jobs, trans and gender-nonconforming people - because these undermine the artificial divisions in the fascist hierarchy.
A powerful central authority is seen as necessary to fix society. To be good requires obedience; to disagree makes you a traitor.
If the fascist has a leader, that leader is idolized and unquestioned. The fascist leader is typically charismatic, masculine, and "tough on crime." The fascist denies any wrongdoing from the leader, minimizes or tries to justify it.
Opposition to democracy, because democracy requires dissent. The legislature is de-legitimized as representing the people's will, and elections are called fraudulent without evidence. The fascist sees rule of law as a hindrance to "reforming" society. (This separates the fascist from the "mainstream" conservative, who usually cares more about upholding the status quo.)
Many fascists will project authoritarianism onto their opponents because they assume those opponents also view the world this way, just with a different group on top.
In history media this may appear as glorifying anti-democratic leaders, justifying violence as necessary, or denying that shameful events like the Holocaust happened. The fascist is also likely to portray democracy, defense attorneys, and civil rights activists as obstacles to doing "what needs to be done."
3. Fascism is nationalistic.
Fascists usually identify strongly with a certain nation, culture, or race. Different kinds of people are seen as inherently different in moral character, intellectual ability, or skills. You are encouraged to derive your worth from this group identity and to treat other people based on theirs.
This group is elevated at the expense of individual human rights. The fascist only values freedom of speech, freedom of association, and the rights of the accused for himself and his allies. People who are inferior or who disagree are not granted those same rights.
This offers a sense of identity and pride for people whose identity is feels unstable or threatened. It preys upon the lonely, the disillusioned, the failures. Historically, most fascist support comes from middle-class people who feel insecure about their place in the world, and angered by the rise of groups they see as beneath them.
4. Fascism is anti-intellectual.
Although fascists are attracted to history, they are usually more interested in using history as a prop for their mythic struggle of good and evil than in learning what history actually was.
Fascists will readily cherry-pick events and stories that feel glorious, exciting or romantic, or which feed their belief of being victimized. They will ignore or distort information that contradicts this, like historical multiculturalism and facts that make the "glorious race/empire" look bad.
The fascist may also combine myths, occult symbols, or historical details with no connection to each other, looking for a "deep underlying truth" that academics have missed (because it doesn't exist).
Fascists often try to discredit scientists, historians and the humanities. They may accuse "ivory-tower intellectuals" of being wrong, worthless, elitist or out of touch, or even creating a conspiracy to hide the truth. By framing intellectuals as the enemy, the fascist gives himself an excuse not to listen to them or doubt his fantasy of superiority.
When fascists present their own intellectuals, these intellectuals usually fixate on denouncing modern society and supporting fascist ideology, not on new discoveries or creativity. In the fascist mindset, all important truths are already known, all cultural and moral questions are already solved. Art can only conform to accepted standards, not challenge standards or create anything new.
Self-contradiction and hypocrisy. Fascist ideology appeals to people's feelings, not their logic. The enemy is both strong (to present a credible threat) and weak (so they can be held in contempt). The genocide didn't happen - and if it did, it wasn't really that bad. It's wrong for others to offend us, but we are justified in harassing or attacking them.
Intolerance of disagreement and dissent. The fascist mistakes feeling uncomfortable for being harmed, and thus any statements that make him feel uncomfortable, must be attacks from bad people. Critics must be shamed, mocked, harassed into silence, or expelled. Changing your mind is a sign of weakness.
Black and white morality / intolerance of nuance. The fascist has already decided that some people are right, period, and others are wrong, period. There is no room for morally complicated situations or mutual responsibility.
In-group jargon and redefining words. The fascist may refer to his opponents as slurs, say "pedophile" when he means "gay people," or invent new slang, dogwhistles and acronyms. This word-shuffling builds a sense of connection with other fascists, helps to dehumanize the enemy, and allows fascists to deny that they're bad people because they're not using specific bad words. (A fascist may complain about "Zionists" when he means "Jews," use Norse runes instead of swastikas, or say he's "proud of his heritage" instead of a white supremacist.)
In history media, look for dogwhistles, narratives with clear "good guys" and "bad guys," claims of a conspiracy among intellectuals or bankers, and contradictions. Does the text try to persuade you with evidence and logic, or with emotional appeals? Does it downplay or erase facts that would undermine the author's argument?
5. Fascism is violent.
Glorification of violence and war. Fascists believe that violence against their enemies is both necessary and justified to "defend their way of life," or protect society. They exult in shows of physical strength and aggression, and see physical weakness as pathetic. Weapons may be glorified and fetishized as well.
This can also extend to sexual violence and domination. The woman is an accessory to macho fantasies: an object of conquest, a prize to be flaunted and defended, a symbol of the man's own success and competence. A man who feels humiliated or threatened by a woman, perhaps because she rejected or outranked him, may threaten rape to "put her in her place."
The cult of heroic death. To overcome people's natural instinct to live, fascism glorifies veterans and martyrs, and encourages people to identify with and fight for the nation/race. Courage and strength are equated with violence. The costs of war are ignored - homelessness, starvation, massacres, grief, lifelong trauma and disability for many - even on the "winning" side.
Opposition to peace. Pacifists and neutral parties are considered traitors. Compromise is seen as giving in to the enemy. "You are either with us or against us."
Fascist justice centers on punishment, enforcing obedience and purging "bad people" rather than rehabilitation, education, or providing adequate social services.
In history media, look for an emphasis on the military, weapons, symbols of power, brutality, conquest, and sexual violence. Are these things equated with masculinity, power or success? Are we encouraged to identify with the conqueror instead of the conquered? Does the narrative mention people who opposed the war, or are they erased or lumped in with traitors?
6. Fascism is mean-spirited.
You probably noticed resentment, insecurity, anger and contempt in the previous sections. Fascism appeals to these emotions within people, and tells them that their unhappiness is other people's fault.
In fascist communities and blogs you will often see these same negative feelings, and externalized blame. Less overt fascist spaces may seem supportive, friendly, or just like hobbyists having fun, and this draws vulnerable people in. But it's juxtaposed with a deep disrespect for those who are seen as inferior.
Fascist jokes and memes are usually predicated on smugness (at being part of a "superior" race or nation), contempt (for "lesser" people), anger, or violent fantasies. They have a mean streak and may appear ironic ("It's just a joke, lighten up"), for the sake of plausible deniability.
The fascist does not merely hate that the "Other" exists (although they often do) - they resent being expected to treat others with respect, empathy and equality. They may demonize empathy by calling others "special snowflakes" who are trying to enforce "political correctness" or restrict freedom of speech. These are deflections so the fascist can avoid admitting how unreasonable and hurtful his behavior actually is.
Pay attention to how specific communities and media make you feel. Do you feel like you're becoming angrier or more fearful of the world over time? Do you feel less respect for certain kinds of people than you used to, or see the world's problems as those people's fault? If so, those spaces and media may be unhealthy for you, and could be promoting prejudice.
Example red flags I've seen in Roman history studies
Exulting over the Roman empire's size.
War being portrayed as exciting, heroic or brave.
Arguing that conquest (especially Caesar's conquest of Gaul) was justified.
Praising the emperors Vespasian, Titus or Hadrian uncritically - all of whom were involved in brutal oppression of Jewish people.
Arguing that Roman slavery was "not that bad" compared to other forms of slavery.
Unironically calling non-Romans barbarians, savages, or primitive.
Erasure of Rome's cultural and ethnic diversity, the role of women in politics, and queer history.
Portraying the end of free elections, debate, and political opposition as a good thing, particularly under Julius Caesar or Augustus.
Attributing the fall of Rome to "moral decline" or "degeneracy."
Attraction to symbols of power and famous military leaders - legions, centurion armor, idolizing Caesar, even the word "fascism" comes from the Latin fasces.
Falsely claiming that the Nazi salute originated with the Romans. (It's a neoclassical invention.)
Now, just because you see these red flags doesn't automatically mean the person is a fascist. Sometimes people use a word or meme without realizing its implications, and older works often say things that would be offensive today. That's another reason why I focused on general themes.
Look at the underlying patterns in what a person or work is saying, and think about what they want you to believe. As a whole, does it seem reactionary, authoritarian, nationalist, anti-intellectual, pro-violence, and/or mean-spirited? Conversely, if the person or work seems to value open-mindedness, democracy, education, peace, empathy, feminism, and multiculturalism, and if they treat those who disagree with them with respect, those are all good signs.
How should you respond?
A full guide to fighting fascism is beyond the scope of this post. I suggest contacting human rights groups in your area for the best ways to counter fascism in general.
For media with fascist themes or by fascist creators:
Do not share, recommend, or give it a wider audience. Even if it's "just a funny meme," spreading it can give fascists more followers, and make them more confident to attempt violence.
Do not spend money that will support fascist creators, organizers, or groups if you can avoid it. Don't buy their books, anime, hockey team apparel, whatever. Boycott them and tell people why.
Call it what it is. Fascist, racist, white supremacist, or whatever label applies. Don't use euphemisms for the sake of politeness - that only helps fascism appear respectable.
Post or share critical reviews that explain why the media is fascist. This will help others learn to recognize and call out fascism, too.
Sometimes people are attracted to controversial works just to be contrarian or to see what the controversy is about. You might decide it's more effective to avoid naming fascist works and giving them more publicity, and instead to call out the fascist ideas in them, to educate others. This is the approach I took in this post, but which method is better depends on the situation.
Don't use "fascist" for any bigot, conservative, or person you dislike. This waters the word down and makes it less likely to be taken seriously when a real hate group is threatening people. Fascism is a particularly violent, extreme, and anti-democratic type of bigotry. But when you DO see fascism, name and shame it.
If it's on social media or a blog, do not respond to it directly. Make a new post instead debunking it. This will avoid giving the fascists a broader audience, and they're less likely to notice and threaten you. Block and report them; try to get their communities removed from the platform. On a large enough scale, this helps prevent fascist groups from organizing and expanding their membership.
Read, watch, and promote non-fascist media and sources, like I do in my book reviews and favorites page. Bonus points if you can find sources for historical diversity and multiculturalism!
Further resources
This is an updated version of my older post, based on my notes from Umberto Eco's Ur-Fascism and Stuart Hood's Fascism: A Graphic Guide. I also found Miriam Griffin's A Companion to Julius Caesar anthology useful for understanding how fascism and other political movements have co-opted Roman history for their own purposes.
The Alt-Right Playbook video series deconstructs fascist and alt-right arguments, and explains how they gain traction in politics, particularly in the USA.
Subtler signs of fascism: What are dogwhistles? / List of dogwhistles (incomplete) / List of hate symbols / Early Warning Signs of Fascism
Art Spiegelman's graphic novel Maus is a memoir of the Holocaust from the viewpoint of an Auschwitz survivor and his son. It is much darker and more visceral than the preceding books, but also valuable for demonstrating what fascism looks like "on the ground" when it gains power, and the consequences if we do not fight against it.
If you or someone you love has gotten involved with hate groups, Life After Hate offers support and counseling. Also check out QAnon Casualties - Resources, even if the group isn't QAnon. Your past doesn't have to define your future.
For good sources on Roman history, I have a page of recommended media, including links to resources on queer history, Black history, disability studies, women in classical antiquity, and my tips for evaluating whether a history book is reliable.
I am not a historian or political theorist. If I got something wrong or if you have additional helpful info, please don't hesitate to say so!
52 notes
·
View notes
Text
Declaring war on an enemy polycule to distract from domestic turmoil
2K notes
·
View notes
Note
How many political parties were there during the revolution?
Because duo to the popularity (I mean by popularity "the most influential" like "Jacobin" and "Girondins" etc. ) I start to forgot that was there more political parties so could you tell us about them and their most notable achievements ?
It is hard to really talk about political parties when it comes to the French Revolution, at least not in the way in which we today think of the term, with worked out ideologies and party programs for each and everyone. Furthermore, some of these ”parties” are not like the others. Jacobin, Cordelier and Feuillant all refer to people belonging to a certain political club, paying money for their membership, whereas girondins, montagnards, thermidorians, enragés, hébertists (and robespirreists that are not mentioned in the chart) all are loose compounds of people that pushed for (or were at least said to push for) the same political changes, and often were personal friends as well. The vagueness of all of this has lead to debates not only regarding what each group really stood for, but even who really belonged to them. My understanding of these groups is honestly not much deeper than what can be read on wikipedia (each group already has its own page) but to shortly summarize:
Jacobins — members of the Jacobin Club (Society of the Friends of the Constitution) which was founded in 1789 and shut down in November of 1794. It’s main quarter was on rue Saint-Honoré in Paris, but unlike the Cordeliers and Feuillants, it also set up sister clubs out in the provinces. This makes the Jacobins the biggest political group throughout the revolution in terms of official members. When it comes to ideology, the club’s first set of official reglutions, passed on February 8 1790, stated that ”the object of the Society of Friends of the Constitution is: 1, to discuss in advance the questions which must be decided in the National Assembly; 2, to work towards the re-establishment and strengthening of the constitution according to the spirit of the preamble above; 3, to correspond with other Societies of the same type which may be formed in the kingdom” as well as that ”loyalty to the constitution, dedication to defending it, respect and submission to the powers it has established, will be the first laws imposed on those who wish to be admitted to these Societies.” However, as the revolution radicalized, so did the Jacobin club.
Cordeliers — members of the Cordelier Club (also known as the Society of the Friends of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen) which existed from 1790 to 1795. Its head quarter was in the Cordeliers Convent (hence the name) in Paris, located on 15 rue de l'École de Médecine. The Cordeliers had lower fees in comparison to the Jacobins, and as a result, counted more working class men and women among its members. Its leaders were however still middle class. The Cordeliers are traditionally described as more radical than the Jacobins.
Feuillant — member of the Feuillants Club (Society of the Friends of the Constitution), founded on July 16 1791. The group held meetings in a former monastery of the Feuillant monks on Rue Saint-Honoré in Paris, hence the name. The club was for upholding the Constitution of 1791, which designated France as a constitutional monarchy.
Girondins (also sometimes known as Brissotins or Rolandins) — political group which existed within the Legislative Assembly and then National Convention, in particular the 29 deputies ordered arrested by said Convention on June 2 1793. Of these, 20 would be guillotined in Paris on October 31 the same year, while many others fled to be executed or commit suicide in order to prevent it across the following months. The name ”girondin” stem from the fact many of the groups alleged members originated from the department of Gironde. In the article The "Girondins" Were Girondins, after All (1988) Frederick A. de Luna concludes that the earliest labeling of girondins as girondins stem from April 1792, after which they grew to be frequently used by their enemies. The girondins themselves did however never use the name, and in the pamphlet J. P. Brissot, député à la Convention nationale, à tous les républicains de France ; sur la société des Jacobins de Paris (October 1792) Brissot even exclaimed ”Will the slanderers now remain silent? Will they stop pretending to believe and wanting to make believe in a faction of Gironde or of Brissot?” The girondins have traditionally been associated with 1, waging a pro-war campaign within the Legislative Assembly and the Jacobin club from December 1791 to April 1792 (as can be seen above, the first recorded labeling of girondins as girondins is from the same month said war was declared), pushing for a more liberal economy as well as seeking more ”moderate/less violent” solutions compared to the Mountain during the time of the Convention. However, there’s no actual safe connections between these goals and all the men tradionally described as girondins for as far as I’m aware. To give the word to Terror: the French Revolution and its Demons (2022) by Michel Biard and Marisa Linton:
Montagnards — member of the Mountain, a group within the Legislative Assembly and then especially the National Convention, so dubbed because its members occupied the highest benches of the hall of the assembly. I honestly don’t really know what defines this ”party” more than being opponents of the girondins. So while the latter are associated with being pro-war, for a more liberal economy and reluctant to ”violent/exceptional measures”, the Montagnards are instead described as anti-war, for a more planned economy and welcoming of more ”violent/exceptional measures.” However, like in the case with the girondins, were we to line up every person tradionally described as a montagnard and check up his stance on each of these three topics, I’m unsure if we would actually get a very unified result.
Unlike in the case of the girondins, indulgents and exagères, we have proof of the montagnards describing themselves as just that. Here is Robespierre, who might as well be called the leader/heart of the ”party,” defining what a montagnard is on June 12 1794. More than anything, it may however rather illustrate how this wasn’t a properly defined group either, as I’m sure the members of every other ”party” discussed here would be willing to describe themselves in the exact same way:
Yes, Montagnards, you will always be the boulevard of public liberty; but you have nothing in common with intriguers and perverts, whoever they may be. If they try to deceive you, if they claim to identify with you, they are no less foreign to your principles. The Mountain is nothing other than the heights of patriotism; a Montagnard is nothing other than a pure, reasonable and sublime patriot.
The fall of Robespierre marks the beginning of the end for the Mountain, many of who’s members would be expulsed, executed and exiled during the thermidorian convention.
Thermidorians — the name has its origin in the journée of 9 thermidor (July 27 1794), the day Robespierre and his allies fell from power, but it is not fully clear if it is active participation in/support of said journée, or holding power during the period that followed it, which is distinguished by its step back, for better or worse, from the more ”revolutionary measures” taken during 1793-1794 that makes someone a thermidorian. In the article ”Robbers, Muddlers, Bastards, and Bankrupts?” A Collective Look at the Thermidorians (2019) Mette Harder writes that this too is a very poorly defined group — ”Beyond their individual names, there is, however, no clear sense of who the Thermidorians were collectively, how cohesive a group they became, and what exactly they hoped to achieve while in power. Their name itself adds to this uncertainty, as it is used interchangeably to describe a specific group of reactionaries and the entire Convention post-thermidor.”
Indulgents (also sometimes known as dantonists) — group associated around Convention deputy Georges-Jacques Danton, and in particular those executed alongside him on April 5 1794. Traditionally described as driving a campaign that was about softening ”the terror” as well as pushing back from dechristianization from late 1793 up until their execution. This idea is however something that has been heavily contested in more recent years, some historians concluding the Indulgents never were a coherent group with a common goal to begin with but that this was rather something contructed by their enemies in time for their trial (see for example chapter 8 — Le chef d’un groupe indulgent ? — of Danton: le mythe et l’histoire (2016) or Camille et Lucile Desmoulins: un rêve de république (2018).
Hébertists (also known as exagères) — group associated around the journalist Jacques René Hébert, and in particular those that were executed alongside him on March 24 1794. Drove a campaign for a hardening of ”the terror” and dechristianization from late 1793 up until the execution. Like with the indulgents, it’s however hard for me to say if the members themselves identified themselves as a group or if this is a post-construction.
Enragés — just read this. I honestly had trouble finding much more.
98 notes
·
View notes
Text
Marat's critique on scientific academies
"Even though the following letter does not come from the same quill, I felt obliged to include it here anyway, because it reveals some piquant facts that are perfect to show the uselessness of scientific societies and to reveal the shameless charlatanism of their members."
Letter XII
"It is not true, Monsieur, that the academies have never made some discoveries, although their members have often stolen those of others. On the subject, I could mention one hundred traits of infidelity of Messrs. the academicians of Paris; one hundred cases of misuse of funds; one hundred inventions publicly claimed by their authors, and what is even stranger, one hundred mémoirs that have been made to disappear and then carelessly published again under the names of these shameful plagiarists, but I do not want to demoralise you. Thus, I will limit myself to clear your doubts with two anecdotes that you will find amusing and of which you can find proof easily, since they happened before our very eyes.
You remember the enthusiasm about the rise of the first aerostatic globe and the craze of the public for this kind of exhibition. You remember the wonderful discoveries, of which this new experience was the source; you also remember the multiple as well as vain attempts done to steer the balloons. Well? Some fools, who believe that genius resides in the Academy of Science, gave it twelve thousand livres to figure out a way to control [the balloons]. What happened to that money? Do you think it reached its destination? Do not fool yourself. Do you think it was used for some useful research? How naive you are. Just know that our savants shared it among themselves and that it was all squandered at the Rapée, at the Opera and with women. You blush for them, but this is just a small thing, listen to this other bolder courtesy of theirs.
Some months ago, a deputy, prompted by the work of an author, proposed in the National Assembly to proclaim the equality of weights and measures through all the reign. The proposal was well received and sent to the Academy of Science in order to decide how to proceed. It only took them the time to puff themselves up, to put their scribes to work and to rush to the senate that Messrs. the scientists were ready to announce that the Academy had found the best method to fulfil the expectations of the Assembly. It was to derive all the measures from the one of the circumference of the terrestrial globe; a method that some venal quills have immediately presented as a superb discovery by our doctors. But where do you think that this sublime method comes from? From the Egyptians. It was to pass it on to future centuries that the famous pyramids were built, which many clueless travellers took for eternal monuments of the greatness of these people. Eh! And where do you think that our academicians took this magnificent system from? They took it word for word from the treatise on weights and measures of the Ancients, published by Romé de l’Îsle, a distinguished savant, whose name they have taken care to overshadow since his death, in order to steal from him, after having persecuted him his whole life. But the best is yet to come. Under the pretext to measure a degree of the meridian arc - already well determined by the ancients and of which it would be impossible today to alter the measure without overthrowing this admirable system - they have been granted by the minister one hundred thousand écus for the expenses of the operation; a gâteau that they will share among their associates.
Judge for yourself the usefulness of the academies and the virtue of their members. The academies of the capital, which have never done anything for the progress of human knowledge other than persecute true men of genius; those will be preserved by conscript fathers, for the fact that the nation is in charge of [the academies] and that they consist of vile supporters of the despot, pavid advocates of despotism."
—from Jean-Paul Marat's "Les charlatans modernes ou lettres sur le charlatanisme académique", letter n° 12, p. 40
Highlights in italics are mine. I thank @pleasecallmealsip for helping me with a couple of words I didn't know how to translate.
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
Obviously this can be done well + there is nuance but the way that many works of historical fiction would rather cast an actor of colour in the role of someone who was historically extremely racist over doing any research to tell the stories of actual real life poc who existed at the time rlly irritates me. like u people know that there were real black people during the regency right. you know that you don't have to diversify the racist colonialist early nineteenth british upper classes in the weirdest way possible to have black people during the regency because there were in fact actual black people there in real life right
258 notes
·
View notes
Text
happy birthday to the world's most special boy
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
made this based on a illustration i saw ♡
108 notes
·
View notes
Photo
Since the publication of Carnot’s Mémoires, it is classic to divide the Committee of Public Safety into several categories and various political tendencies, [and], notably, to oppose « généralistes » and « spécialistes ». The former would determine the political orientations of the government, whereas the latter would withdraw into their area of expertise. [In his Dictionnaire des membres du Comité de Salut Public,] Bernard Gainot recently reminded us that this division must not be overstated, and that the assignment of a member of the Committee to a particular role often had only a very formal side. […]
The members of the Comittee deliberated most matters in common, as and when they came up, without having a precise agenda. Prieur de la Côte-d’Or evokes a work that began around seven o’clock in the morning for the early risers, in order to continue until late afternoon, interrupted for some members by the sessions of the Convention or the meetings of the Jacobins. After a brief meal, the present members came together again around eight o’clock in the evening for a meeting that went on deep into the night, sometimes until one or two o’clock in the morning, which barely left more than five or six hours of rest for the most hardworking members. Carnot, for his part, estimates the number of matters treated on a single day at several hundred, adding, almost as a corollary, « nights without sleep, indescribable fatigues, endured in order to pull the State out of its terrible crises […] ».
Collot estimates his average workday at the Committee at fifteen hours, [and] also mentions the « long works which often consumed entire nights », an activity which:
… offered such a continuity of details, that I saw myself deprived for eight months of eating at my home. Hastily, I ate a frugal meal everyday in the vicinity of the Committee. Carnot was forced to act likewise, as was Prieur (de la Côte-d’Or). They know about my assiduousness; only theirs and the one of Lindet could surpass it.
All members of the Committee bore testimony to this, signatures en second gave each other confidence and the responsibility was collective. Consequently, the areas that were reserved to one member or another could prove to be very theoretical.
Collot d'Herbois: légendes noires et révolution (Michel Biard), p. 116f.
52 notes
·
View notes
Note
as a frenchman i was confused and surprised at how much you guys as a whole dislike napoleon? he gets a lot of deserved rep for saving the country imo
bro he led 400,000+ French people to their deaths
meanwhile people act like the ~35k killed by the Reign of Terror was the worst humanitarian catastrophe in the history of humanity. it's just the double standard that pisses me off.
#my grandma is a Napoleonist and that's half the reason why I got into 'this part' of frev in the first place#I love her but we cannot talk about history#also prev you are absolutely right
61 notes
·
View notes
Text
I’m doing fine my dear maman. Send me a pocket handkerchief.
I embrace you my dear maman. I’m doing pretty well.
Good evening dear maman. A tear falls from my eyes. It is for you. I’m going to fall asleep in the tranquility of innocence.
Three notes written by Lucile Desmoulins to her mother between her arrest on April 4 1794 and execution nine days later. The last one is generally seen as a final farewell, penned down right after the death sentence had been pronounced on April 13.
116 notes
·
View notes
Text
Goujon's beautiful head, — fine, feminine, beardless, a straight aquiline nose, above a small and serious mouth, a strong chin, and, framing this calm face of such a charming resolve, long hair, that we divine silky, much like the hair of an Erminia escaping from her helmet, — rises above this group. This firm and soft Spartan walks to the front row. Over the benches of the Assembly stood his six-feet* tall figure.
Jules Claretie, Les derniers Montagnards: histoire de l'insurrection de prairial an III (1795), 1867
*probably pied-du-roi, which means Goujon's height was approx. 195cm/6.4ft
40 notes
·
View notes
Text
Having joined the prosecutor’s office to learn procedure without pay, [Tissot] wasn’t as bound by assiduity as his friend [Goujon] and he sometimes took vacations that he would spend in [his hometown of] Versailles. Goujon then felt more than ever the “boredom of scribbling” that he had no means to escape. But when Tissot came back to him, he was soon filled with courage again.
Le conventionnel Goujon (1766-1793), L. Thénard, R. Guyot, 1908
21 notes
·
View notes
Text
Goujon's teenage years among slavers in Saint-Domingue
A wealthy relative, planter in Saint-Domingue, had requested the child to be sent to him, offering to subsequently associate him to his business. Claude Goujon (tn: Goujon's father) agreed, not without apprehension. His son was so young and frail (tn: Goujon was eleven or twelve), and the passage to Saint-Domingue took forty days on average, without accounting for headwinds, storms or dead calms.
He entrusted him to a friend in the Royal Navy, whose ship was departing for the Antilles. This added the danger of getting caught between fires. Jean-Marie saw the British fleet up close, and maybe even witnessed the battle of Ouessant. He must have arrived in Saint-Domingue during the Autumn of 1778.
Saint-Domingue was the realm of "black cattle", the longtime standard for suffering and slavery. He stayed there for eight years, all his adolescence; later in life, he would seldom talk about those years, and only then with a few bitter words: "I have rarely seen," he said, "anyone who was true, who had any morals, and within whom the voice of humanity could be heard." To him, Michelet says, this vision was like "the charcoal fire mentioned in the Bible", a dreadful sight that would haunt him; he remained grieved by it all his life, precociously grave in all things, even in his joys.
Le conventionnel Goujon (1766-1793), L. Thénard, R. Guyot, 1908
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
Goujon and Tissot make their cottagecore fantasy come true
Money was lacking; for one year, Goujon saved up on his clerk wages; Tissot received financial help from his family. On the first days of Spring 1790, they strolled around the Parisian suburbia looking for a suitable lodging to retreat to; in early May, they left the prosecutor's office and moved away from Paris.
They didn't venture too far to find their "Thebaid". They rented to the Countess of Coubron a small house in Meudon, on a hillside by the Seine riverbank, near to the entrance to the woods. From there, in just two hours, Tissot could walk to Versailles and Goujon could visit Mongez, who was taking care of his mail and of questions from prying folks. Jean-Marie hadn't given his new address to anyone; he couldn't even bring himself to announce his leave to his terrible Aunt Cottin. He only informed his mother at the end of May, without saying yet where he had gone to. Mrs Goujon received the news with surprise and without pleasure; she assumed that some suspicious adventure was going on, and that the "intimate friend" Jean-Marie was telling her about for the first time could well actually be a female friend; she judged her son based on young people of the same age, a mistake only someone who didn't know him too well would make. He protested vehemently and begged his mother to calm down and trust him.
Le conventionnel Goujon (1766-1793), L. Thénard, R. Guyot, 1908
21 notes
·
View notes
Text
Les Derniers Moments de Michel Lepeletier
(engraving by Tardieu after David's painting, now lost)
50 notes
·
View notes
Text
I wasn't pleased with the last drawing I did and felt to urge to do an emergency one >.<
...did I make him too cool? :( To my defense, let's say it's Carnot seen by Prieur...
37 notes
·
View notes