nesiacha - Tumblr blog

[nesiacha]

Napoléon and Sainte Hélène

Well you know me so you know what I think but I'll let you decide :)

[nesiacha]

Wow in the poll that Ronsin would be jealous to not have a good popularity between his three other Hébertist colleagues

But very happy to see a lot of people liking Momoro too :)

Thank you to everyone for participating :)

[nesiacha]

I already talk about horrible movie about the frev. Today I will make a critic about the bad points about a good movie with a very good historical accuracy that I really like but it’s also important to criticize good historical films even if we liked them as a whole (I must say that I liked them personally and I continue to do so) . Firstly, even if it may not have been the intention, because it was not the theme of the show as the writers had planned several themes with the people, including the Night of Varennes, I didn't like that the politicians were seen prominently while the people were too much in the background (minor criticism because the show was discontinued after the success of 'La Terreur et la Vertu,' so maybe they intended to do it later).

Next, the women of the French Revolution are too sidelined, and Lucile Desmoulins is portrayed more as simply worried for Camille Desmoulins without showing Lucile's political side, which accentuates the sexism. Camille Desmoulins is depicted as more naive than he actually was, in my opinion, perhaps to absolve or infantilize him, I don't know.

I would have liked it if we briefly mentioned the retaking of Lyon by Couthon, even just in passing. We have 4 representatives of the indulgent faction (Fabre d'Eglantine, Danton, Camille Desmoulins, and Philppeaux) compared to only 2 on the Hebertist side (Hébert and Chaumette). We only mention Vincent, Ronsin, and Momoro briefly, but I would have liked them to have the same amount of screen time. We should also see their trials and the fact that they were going to the guillotine instead of that, the topic is quickly dismissed.

Moreover, although Castelot and Decaux had a very good debate that I invite everyone to watch, there's something that bothers me. It is said that the CSP (Committee of Public Safety) is at fault for parodying justice against the indulgent, but as usual, we forget the parody done to the Hebertists and also forget that done to the Enragés like Jacques Roux when the CSP, the CSG (Committee of General Security), and the Convention relentlessly attacked him illegally to the point where he committed suicide. Double standard once again, and the parody of justice is justified a bit too much for my taste (which also executed many innocents like Lucile Desmoulins, Marie Françoise Goupil, even Chaumette who had, however, refused the insurrection of Hébert, Gobel, etc)...

Then to say that Barère is acting in good faith from Decaux's point of view? No seriously, I don't buy Barère's whitewashing, he's generally a weathervane (the only time the show mentions it from this side is when Danton says that Barère is for the tipping scale).

Another point is that I found Robespierre a bit too naive at times. In real life, he knows that deep down Danton is a dubious character, but he thinks that the Hebertist wave is more dangerous. It's a political calculation until he realizes that he underestimated the indulgent movement and will opt for a middle policy. There he is almost surprised by some of Danton's movements.

Finally, the end of 'La Terreur et la Vertu' is not bad and very emotionnal; there is an explanation that Saint Just did not move during the insurrection. But personally, I think that our five deputies certainly had scruples regarding the legality of the Convention, as has been said repeatedly, but they mainly hesitated because of it. If they were 100% against not moving against the Convention due to legality, they would have said so. My theory is that they felt exhausted and confused because 17 out of 49 sections had risen, which was a significant number but not enough to justify an uprising, not to mention they were at least somewhat legalistic.

Finally, I would have liked an explanation of why Hanriot was so loyal to Robespierre (we know this if we research the character a little, but a line or two of mention wouldn't have cost much), but I'm glad he wasn't demonized. Far from me the idea of wanting to put this excellent film on trial, but as I said earlier, it is also necessary to see the negative aspects of this film to have a better improvement of the content (although today it regresses even more).

I would have liked it if we also briefly saw Tinville refuse to prosecute Fleuriot Lescot; it would have added a little more humanity to his character (although I don't like Tinville at all, I find that he is always too caricatured to be believable. Fortunately, the TV movie shows his "human" side, but not enough).

The only problem is that I have the impression that they are telling the false message that the execution of Robespierre and his colleagues marks the end of the social revolution when in reality the coup de grace was not done for me. that with the execution of Romme and his friends (the episode of the execution of the Hébertists, Cordeliers, indulgents and of Robespierre and his colleagues was above all only a continuation of weakening between 'internal struggle') and the end of the frev was only after Bonaparte coup d'etat . After seeing that the show was suddenly stopped, perhaps the writers intended to rectify it.

A small gratuitous jab nonetheless from a line in a TV movie: Barras: You will take Robespierre and Saint Just.

Me: Wow, and does Couthon count for nothing, I guess? The poor has just been royally ignored."

[nesiacha]

I realise that I forget a couple in the poll, when I was sure that I put them: Gracchus and Marie Anne Babeuf. I want to bang my head against the wall

[nesiacha]

Favorite couple frev

I know the question was already asked and there are a lot of surveys in this but I will do it again

My favorite is Jean Paul Marat and Simone Evrard but my second is Charles and Sanité Bélair

[nesiacha]

Don't kill yourself, please.

If you’re suffering from depression and are looking for a sign to not go through with ending your life, this is it. This is the sign. We care.

If you see this on your dash, reblog it. You could save a life.

[nesiacha]

Napoleon: enjoys ridiculing Queen Louise of Prussia by defaming her in the press and by his sexist attitude among other things, not to mention his machismo by saying for the umpteenth time that women are not made by politics and for wars . Me seeing this: He is having fun doing this but I am sure that faced with a confrontation with Catherine II if she had still been alive (or with Marie Thérèse of Austria, but no chance that she would have could have lived until this Napoleonic period), he would not have even been able to do the quarter of eighth grade without taking a big humiliating beating and leaving faster than expected. I even think that the withdrawal would have been even more humiliating than Napoleon's failure in Moscow and maybe the opposite would have been trumpeted in his press despite the censorship, there will surely be pamphlets to count his humiliation XD

[nesiacha]

Short response: I understand your point, but I must say without a doubt that Jean Clement Martin is a very good and brilliant historian recognized by all. He has written excellent biographies, including one of Robespierre, without falling into either the golden legend or the black legend. He has engaged in very good debates on Radio France with Hervé Leuwers and Patrice Guennifey, a sign of very high quality that I highly recommend. He has even developed an interesting thesis that the Terror was never actually put on the agenda, raising very good arguments.

The problem is that we live in an era where historians who know what they're talking about are rarely listened to unless it fits the narrative of our dear media (which is why, for example, Jean Marc Schiappa is less listened to compared to Lentz, even though they are both respected historians in their communities, not to mention the ignorant polemicists who replace them). That's why Jean Clement Martin, despite being a good historian, is regularly cut off, even though his participation is genuine in most of his interventions, as seen in the mediocre show "Robespierre Bourreau de la Vendée," where his participation has often been cut with equally mediocre polemicists.

It's the same case for the video game "Assassin's Creed," although I wouldn't blame the creators of video games for their political sympathies. We all know what they are, and I'm not inclined to reproach them because this video game doesn't take itself seriously and isn't meant to make players believe it's historical reality. But once again, Jean Clement Martin has probably been very little listened to, and his name is only mentioned for show, not because he was taken seriously.

at this point i am no longer sure if i can call jean-clément martin a historian anymore, dude really shatposted about his role as “scientific”(?) advisor to the Video Game that We Do Not Talk About implying that slandering Marat as an overbearing brother and generally unloveable person, slandering Saint-Just as a selfishly revenge-driven criminal, etc, is comparable to depicting the use of flying machines in the 1790s (and I don’t even want to get into how the hot air balloon was already put into military use in the Battle of Fleurus).

Obviously I cannot be the person to systematically write a long call-out post for Jean-clément here, because I’m not a historian. But really I’d avoid any source that mainly cite him.

as always, save me o more well-read mutuals of mine. Save me. I mean, correct me if I’m wrong.

[nesiacha]

Help for information about of Germaine Stael

Good evening, everyone. Today, once again, I'm asking for your help regarding a historical figure about whom I don't have much knowledge: Germaine de Stael.

She's often described as one of the principal and most important opponent of Napoleon ( a lot in the media), but I get the impression that she was primarily a « salon opponent », if you'll pardon the expression (especially when compared to figures like Prieur de la Marne, Sanité Belair, Jean-Baptiste-Antoine Lefranc, and what they endured or suffered under repression). Perhaps my biases stem from her father, who adopted a false friend of the people stance that Marat rightfully denounced.

The problem is that my only source is Jean Tulard, who is a historian known to be partial to Napoleon (he claims that Madame de Staël offered her services to the Emperor in exchange for two million francs). It’s not a problem to be partisan, I always think that objectivity in history can’t exist, you can only try to be objective, but I wish more views of other historians. Frankly, I don't know much (if anything—I was more focused on the banker and former finance minister Necker than her ), so I invite anyone knowledgeable on the subject to help me on Madame de Staël and to point me towards good sources about her

[nesiacha]

Tribute to all these revolutionary women coming from the overseas departments and Haiti who fought at risk of their lives for their freedoms and forgotten even more than the women of the French revolution in metropolitan France already well despised.

In this post, although there are many of them, I will cite two of them, I will perhaps write a more detailed post when I have time because it is shameful that these women are not better known: -Sanité Bélair: Lieutenant of Toussaint Louverture, considered the soul of the conspiracy, particularly with her husband Charles Belair and fighter against Leclerc. She was captured, sentenced to death and shot. She showed great courage during her execution like many of her peers. She died but not her ideals and became a great symbol She is considered one of the great heroines of Haiti's fight for independence alongside Catherine Flon, Cecile Faitman and Dédée Bazile. On the Guadeloupe side we have Rosalie alias Solitude, whose historian Mathilde Larrère has written a magnificent article that I invite everyone to read. This woman had joined the community of "maroons". While she was a few months pregnant, she fought against the reestablishment of slavery. Captured, she will be executed like so many others after giving birth. When will there be more tribute to these women by exploring these parts of France? Personally I prefer a hundred (or even a thousand) times more to pay homage to them than Napoleon, who in my opinion, if he survived, failed as emperor, where the people I cited who died for their ideas had a posthumous victory. on the abolition of slavery and the independence of Haiti). Frankly beside the point when we are presented with Madame de Stael or Louise de Prussia as the only female figures standing against Napoleon, I am very sorry that they make a very pale figure regarding the women mentioned earlier (I am not saying that in a goal to clash with Louise of Prussia and Madame de Stael but rather the "thinkers" we can see in media, movie, who voluntarily cite only them to obscure the others because they believe that we can judge Napoleon magnanimously on what he did concerning slavery and do not focus only on the Europe part or worst to the goal to justify the horrors that France did to Guadeloupeans, Reunionese, Haitians, etc, or to the thinkers who only believe in white feminism, etc…).

[nesiacha]

Presentation

I introduce myself as 26 years old, a completely failed law student struggling at university and wondering if one day she will have a diploma. Proud to be a feminist, and a lover of history, revolution, the Tudors, the Ottoman Empire. Watch different series like Magnificent Century, Game of Thrones, House of Dragon and love GRR Martin like everyone else. Don’t hesitate to discuss or discuss anything as long as it’s done respectfully! Here are some posts:

Magnificent century :

https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/743859035572436992/i-repeat-one-of-my-comments-posted-on-youtube-if?source=share How I would write the characters of Mustafa,Bayezid, Mihrimah,Cihangir,Mehmed and Selim

The problem of the sexism of Magnificent century : https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/743846341308006400/the-problem-of-magnificent-century-the?source=share

Fustration in the arc of Safavid in MC and MCK : https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/744149939270123520/one-of-my-many-frustrations-as-an-mc-and-mck-when?source=share

About the historical Bayezid and Mustafa https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/744961298653200384/one-of-my-posts-in-youtube-when-i-see-bayezid?source=share

An horrible emission historical about Suleiman https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/746859397476696064/after-being-critical-about-the-episode-secrets?source=share

French Revolution :

https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/744398816808222720/womens-rights-suppressed?source=share About women right suppressed in french revolution and after under the Empire

https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/744763300619878400/i-never-understood-the-term-reign-of-terror-i?source=share

The difference in treatment between the Indulgents and the Cordeliers or Hébertistes

https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/744960791081631744/the-difference-in-treatment-between-the-indulgents?source=share

Mistakes made by the jacobin ( or Montagnard in the period 1793-1795)https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/745212185045811200/in-your-opinion-what-was-the-most-significant?source=share

About the movie of Heffron about french revolution part I : https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/746585301251670016/analysis-of-the-french-revolution-film-by-robert?source=share

About the movie Danton of Wajda : https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/747406751607947264/the-major-problem-with-wajdas-film-danton-in-a?source=share

Tribute to some womens of Haiti and Guadeloupe against the slavery https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/748481647920480256/tribute-to-all-these-revolutionary-women-coming?source=share

About la Camera explore le temps la terreur et la vertu https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/748832638732812288/firstly-even-if-it-may-not-have-been-the?source=share

House of dragon :

https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/743847492068802560/one-of-my-many-complaints-about-house-of-dragon?source=share

https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/744329650462998528/i-already-talk-about-how-i-dislike-the?source=share

Algeria :

Movie the last queen : https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/743941849968967680/i-recommend-for-those-who-have-not-seen-the-movie?source=share

Feminism :

Abortion right : https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/743655296639090688/big-day-for-us-the-senators-included-abortion?source=share

In defense for :

Marie Antoinette :https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/748299652332486656/in-defense-for-marie-antoinette?source=share

[nesiacha]

In defense for Marie Antoinette

A long time ago following a passionate debate and good reblogs that you can easily find on Tumblr (if everyone agrees I will put the link), I had fun defending Marie Antoinette (although a fervent sympathizer about the Montagnards).As in two weeks it will be the defense of Manon Roland, I will put this ability to defend to the test by publishing what I had already written about the former queen of France. Here we go:

The problem with Marie Antoinette is that her education was often neglected, and her mother, the Great Marie Thérèse, an excellent politician, instilled in her very conservative ideas, not to mention the fact that she wanted her daughter to become a spy but without the great talent political of her mother. This will be one of the reasons why it will be a great problem when she arrives at the Court.

She won't have the necessary mental strength to face the heaviness of the protocol, and although she caused major problems initially in terms of expenditure, her frankness, unsuitable for a dauphine then a queen, and her frivolity don't help. In addition to the expenses she incurs to please her friends (notably Polignac), wanting to forget the pressure her mother puts on her, despite Louis being a good husband to her, with no children, which is a source of gossip, she decides to increasingly take refuge in Trianon, which again leads to excessive spending, not to mention new clothes. But it's important to note that once she had children, she behaved much less frivolously, more reasonably, less extravagantly, but refused to reintegrate Versailles, which she deemed as heavy and hypocritical (rightly so, but as her mother said, with privileges come duties; if she had made a concession on this side, perhaps she could have obtained less absurd protocol).

Once she had children with her husband Louis XVI, they did everything to ensure that their offspring did not have a high opinion of themselves. Just look at the fact that she wanted her children to dress equally to some of the household children and in her letters indicates that she does not want her daughter to be as arrogant as her aunts. She even tells them that since there are more and more poor people in France, they won't have gifts at a certain period. So she's not a snobbish woman.

Contrary to popular belief, Louis XVI is never influenced by his wife; in fact, she herself knows how to stay in her place as a queen consort and simply prefers to organize certain festivities. But her excessive frankness, rejection of her duties, frivolity in expenditure, and the fact that she sometimes openly shows disdain, for example, for Turgot (one of the few good financial controllers of Louis XVI) will make her the object of all vices in France and a scapegoat for all the decisions of the old Regime.

Do you know who agrees on this point? The revolutionary Saint Just himself in his writings in 1792, who immediately grasped the personality of the Queen in these terms: "Rather deceived than deceitful, rather light than perjured, entirely devoted to pleasure, she seemed to reign not in France but at Trianon."

Moreover, Joséphine de Beauharnais, who was a hundred times more spendthrift and frivolous than her, was much more loved because she took care of her image unlike Marie Antoinette. Perhaps because Marie Antoinette was more frank than her .

In the end, Marie Antoinette stole less from the coffers, so to speak, because her husband wouldn't have let her, and she herself wouldn't have wanted to. Theresia Cabarrus, who profited well from Tallien's scam, was seen as wonderful because she took care of her image. Furthermore, Marie Antoinette clearly displayed her allegiance and stuck to it until the end (although this allegiance was outdated, her mother's conservative ideas about absolute monarchy), faithful to the people she loved (she insisted on sheltering her friends, but Lamballe returned despite the queen's pleas not to do so to support her, faithful to her husband, despite the arranged marriage, because even though she insisted they leave, she didn't want to leave him alone), isn't a friend of the good day only, compared to Cabarrus, who claimed to be imbued with Enlightenment ideas, said she didn't like bloodshed, but in the end, went from one bloody person to another not out of survival (as she liked to say) but out of wealth before marrying a royalist. Yet Theresia and Beauharnais (who took part in the serious scandal during the creation of the Bank of France as a shareholder) did not receive as much criticism.

Of course, we can also understand Marie Antoinette's criticism of Necker, a proud man who is content to borrow and pretend to be more competent than he really is and stabs people in the back (he criticized Turgot but if Turgot hadn't played the "villain," Necker wouldn't have been able to borrow a penny to cover his good reputation not to mention his weather vane attitude and his false attitude as a friend of the people that Marat denounced ), although I don't understand the contempt she had for Turgot.

For her betrayal towards France, I agree with all of you , it's inexcusable, I won't go back on that. What Louis XVI did (primarily him because he was never influenced by his wife, but she also has some responsibility in this regard) is involuntary mass homicide against the French people for the return of absolute monarchy. The problem is that at that time we didn't have the necessary evidence to condemn her (although there was legitim suspicion of the truth), it was a parody and even Saint Just seemed to oppose this execution by telling Robespierre that "this act (the execution) would not benefit national sovereignty." Unfortunately, the person who said this in one of the forums, however, very educated, lost the citation from this book, so let's go cautiously, especially since if the letters had been found, I think Saint Just would have been in favor of the execution of Marie Antoinette. But as mentioned above, at least Antoinette did not betray any ideals, she was clear about that unlike Cabbarus who claimed that she rejected Tallien because of the blood in his hand but then go to Barras, said that she is attired by « les idées lumières » and go to wedding a monarchist, etc., who do not receive as much criticism. But I also understand the hatred she received from Jacques Roux, from a Momoro, and from so many others who never had luxury and found her expenses and behavior legitimately scandalous. But like everyone else outraged and shocked by the behavior of Hébert (and Pache, Chaumette, and Jacques Louis David should not be forgotten even though I like Pache and I find Chaumette unfairly maligned by their best moments it’s was not their best moments and should have died of shame for using such a method, as for Hébert and even to a lesser extent Jacques Louis David, let's not even talk about them).

At least Marie Antoinette unlike other didn’t betrayals the ideas of the revolution unlike some who claimed themself child of the revolution and then betray the revolutionnaries.

If we want to fight against the dishonest people who have blamed everything on people like Saint Just, Robespierre, Couthon, Billaud Varennes (isn't Fouché and Turreau?) we must also do the same thing even for people who are against the revolution even if I agree that the martyrdom of the upper class is tiring and that making Marie Antoinette a pure feminist and innocent icon is just as wrong (but I am here to defend her in this post).

P.S.: I know that Theresia and Joséphine did not harm people unlike their husbands and lovers at least not as much; I do not want to absolve Napoleon, Barras, Tallien; they did not need these women to do what they are reproached for, but to better situate them in relation to Marie Antoinette.

[nesiacha]

In defense

Hello everyone,

Here are the defenses that will appear in order (you will need to count from two weeks):

Manon Roland

Billaud Varennes

Fouquier Tinville

Collot d’Herbois

Jacques René Hébert

I warn you that after my defense for Collot and Hébert, my mental health will take a hit, so I'm not sure if I'll repeat the experience XD

[nesiacha]

Marguerite David

Announcement requesting help to all: I am desperately looking for information in the context of the French revolution of information on Marguerite David who would be a supporter of Jacques Roux and a militant from the Parisian section of Gravilliers in 1793. If anyone has them information please let me know.

[nesiacha]

speaking of underrated historical figures you know who never gets featured in frev stuff ever?? augustin robespierre. i swear you could watch all the most popular frev movies and not even know maximilien robespierre HAD a brother. much less that that brother was at least somewhat important. didnt even merit an ALLUSION in the new napoleon movie even though it showed that bizarre version of thermidor. in lrf he is just physically not present when he should be. he might not have been the most notable politician but... that even the incredible courage and loyalty of his decision to share his brother's fate is so forgotten even in accounts that center his brother... it's a little heartbreaking to me

[nesiacha]

Post fed up with the day I know that it is urgent to reform our justice, that many people have slipped through the cracks ( Polanski, our politicians, etc…) which is scandalous but I have the impression when I come across some people who want expeditious justice in Alabama at the time of the lynchings (in fact, most of the people I have met who say that have not studied law or didn't simply analyzed the judicial system and stupidly believe that prisons are luxury hotels, if they were I think many of us would fight to be there instead of racking our brains at work to earn a living) or they say that acquitted people don't do not mean exonerated (regarding for example the Outreau affair when I see a lot of commentary if you want my opinion on the very controversial affair, perhaps one day I will give it to you, horrible case ) I want to bang my head against the wall. This kind of speech is understandable for the victims and the victims' families but less so for the ignorant who have never experienced anything. It makes me think of the Roscoe Arbuckle affair in which they attacked an innocent actor (while there were other stars who would have deserved this relentlessness from the justice system, but they didn't) and hated even after being acquitted. Today there are excuses for him but it's too late he is dead and buried and his career has never completely recovered. Justice must not be blind to the guilty and that often exists, but we must not go to the other extreme either, which is to always doubt the innocence of suspects. So think about those who want to hear nothing about the possible innocence of the suspects, today it's them, tomorrow it might be you and you would surely like us to take into account the presumption of innocence.