#A Study of Provincial Life

[xkcdbracket]

Literal March Madness

Middlemarch, A Study of Provincial Life. Novel by George Eliot

Ides of March. Assassination of Julius Caesar

[canisalbus]

a few quick questions on Machete, what breed is he? I love the angles of his snout and the proportions remind me of a borzoi though I don't think he is one. Also, does he have a set age for when he's a cardinal? I picture him to be around mid-30s or so. Wonderful art! love your stuff and find you an inspiration :)

He's a fictional breed called Podenco Siciliano, which is closely related to modern day Ibizan Hound (pictured below) and other Mediterranean rabbit-hunting podencos. I usually just default to calling him a sighthound since he's somewhat of a provincial mongrel and not meant to be purebred anyway.

As for the age, mid-30s sounds about right. I think the current timeline goes something like this:

0 - Born to a lower-middle class family in Sicily, father is a tradesman, has three older brothers. Generally considered a runt, is weak and sick all the time, parents suspicious of his unusual colors.

3 - Gets left at a monastery and raised by monks as a foundling. Nervous and meek kid, but the monks think he's endearing and do their best to support him. Is taught to read and write, which is a massive advantage at that day and age, and learns rudimentary Latin through exposure.

9 - Apprenticed to a Neapolitan priest, moves to southern part of mainland Italy (or Kingdom of Naples as it was called, it was ruled by Spain actually). Does chores and runs errands in exchange for education and experience.

15 - The priest gets elevated to a bishop and decides to sponsor Machete's further studies at an acclaimed university in Venice (in Northern Italy). There he studies theology, medicine, arts, law, philosophy and gets fluent in Latin and adequate in Greek. Befriends Vasco but their relationship is short-lived.

21 - Ordained a priest. Leads a parish somewhere in Papal States (Central Italy). Is generally well liked but doubts his career choice from time to time.

26 - Becomes a part of the Papal Court in Vatican, mostly because of the recommendations of his former mentor and professors, good reputation, excellent track record and sheer luck. Still a priest but assists bishops, cardinals and the pope himself directly. Moves to Rome. Becomes pope's unofficial confidant due to his obedient and hardworking nature and because of his lack of prestigious family connections that would render him a threat. Slowly starts to gain wealth.

30 - Created a cardinal (which is the second highest position in the church after the pope, and it's at the sole discretion of the pope who becomes one). Is also a bishop as a technicality. Handles administrative jobs, tons of paperwork, at some point he's in charge of a lot of the political correspondence and diplomatic missions. Still the old pope's trusted advisor but disliked by the majority of the cardinals, who see him as an outsider, sycophant and a potential disruptor of the status quo.

34 - Meets Vasco again. Vasco has become a succesful politician in Florence, he's married with three children.

38 - The pope dies and Machete's status falters. He starts to work with the Roman inquisition more. Oversees trials, torture, excommunications and executions of heretics, witches and most of all, protestants (since we're reaching Counter Reformation times and the Vatican is Very Worried about the spread of Luther's ideas). Isn't having a good time at all but keeps up the appearances. Gets infamous. The beginning of the true villain era.

40 - Grows increasingly more disillusioned with life and his ideals, as well as the corruption of the Curia. Burned out, paranoid and desperate. Uses scare tactics, extortion and legal trickery to expose and undermine his enemies, but gains them faster than he can keep up. Employs spies, thugs and assassins. Feared and loathed.

43 - Gets assassinated and dies in disgrace.

[mengjue]

What's Happening in China? The November 2022 Protests

Hello! I know that there's so much going on in the world right now, so not everyone may be aware of what is happening in China right now. I thought that I would try to write a brief explainer, because the current wave of protests is truly unprecedented in the past 30+ years, and there is a lot of fear over what may happen next. For context, I'm doing this as someone who has a PhD in Asian Studies specialising in contemporary Chinese politics, so I don't know everything but I have researched China for many years.

I'll post some decent links at the end along with some China specialists & journalists I follow on Twitter (yeah I know, but it's still the place for the stuff at the moment). Here are the bullet points for those who just want a brief update:

Xi Jinping's government is still enacting a strict Zero Covid policy enforced by state surveillance and strict lockdowns.

On 24 November a fire in an apartment in Urumqi, Xinjiang province, killed 10. Many blamed strict quarantine policies on preventing evacuation.

Protests followed and have since spread nationwide.

Protesters are taking steps not seen since Tiananmen in 1989, including public chants for Xi and the CCP to step down.

Everyone is currently unsure how the government will respond.

More in-depth discussion and links under the cut:

First a caveat: this is my own analysis/explanation as a Chinese politics specialist. I will include links to read further from other experts and journalists. Also, this will be quite long, so sorry about that!

China's (aka Xi Jinping's) Covid Policy:

The first and most important context: Xi has committed to a strict Zero Covid policy in China, and has refused to change course. Now, other countries have had similar approaches and they undoubtedly saved lives - I was fortunate to live in New Zealand until this year, and Prime Minister Ardern's Zero Covid approach in 2020-2021 helped protect many. The difference is in the style/scope of enforcement, the use of vaccines, and the variant at play. China has stepped up its control on public life over the past 10 years, and has used this to enforce strict quarantine measures without full regard to the impact on people's lives - stories of people not getting food were common. Quarantine has also become a feared situation, as China moves people to facilities often little better than prisons and allegedly without much protection from catching Covid within. A personal friend in Zhengzhou went through national, then provincial, then local quarantines when moving back from NZ, and she has since done her best to avoid going back for her own mental and physical health. Xi has also committed China to its two home-grown vaccines, Sinovac and Sinopharm, both of which have low/dubious efficacy and are considered ineffective against new variants. Finally, with delta and then omicron most of the Zero-Covid countries have modified their approach due to the inability to maintain zero cases. China remains the only country still enacting whole-city eradication lockdowns, and they have become more frequent to the point that several are happening at any given time. The result is a population that is incredibly frustrated and losing hope amidst endless lockdowns and perceived ineffectiveness to address the pandemic.

Other Issues at Play:

Beyond the Covid situation, China is also wrestling with the continued slowdown in its economic growth. While its economic rise and annual GDP growth was nigh meteoric from the 80s to the 00s, it has been slowing over the past ten years, and the government is attempting to manage the transition away from an export-oriented economy to a more fully developed one. However, things are still uncertain, and Covid has taken its toll as it has elsewhere the past couple of years. Youth unemployment in particular is reaching new highs at around 20%, and Xi largely ignored this in his speech at the Party Congress in October (where he entered an unprecedented third term). As a result of the perceived uselessness of China's harsh work culture and its failure to result in a better life, many young Chinese have been promoting 躺平 tǎng píng or "lying flat", aka doing the bare minimum just to get by (similar to the English "quiet quitting"). The combination of economic issues and a botched Covid approach is important, as these directly affect the lives of ordinary middle-class Chinese, and historical it has only been when this occurred that mass movements really took off. The most famous, Tiananmen in 1989, followed China's opening up economic reforms and the dismantling of many economic safety nets allowing for growing inequality. While movements in China often grow to include other topics, having a foundation in something negatively impacting the average Han Chinese person's livelihood is important.

The Spark - 24 Nov 2022 Urumqi Apartment Fire:

The current protests were sparked by a recent fire that broke out in a flat in Urumqi, capital of the Xinjiang province. (This is the same Xinjiang that is home to the Uighur people, against whom China has enacted a campaign of genocide and cultural destruction.) The fire occurred in the evening and resulted in 10 deaths, which many online blamed on the strict lockdown measures imposed by officials, who prevented people from leaving their homes. It even resulted in a rare public apology by city officials. However, with anger being so high nationwide, in addition to many smaller protests that have occurred over the past two years, this incident has ignited a nationwide movement.

The Protests and Their Significance:

The protests that have broken out over the past couple of days representing the largest and most significant challenge to the leadership since the 1989 Tiananmen movement. Similar to that movement, these protests have occurred at universities and cities across the country, with many students taking part openly. This scale is almost unseen in China, particularly for an anti-government protest. Other than Tiananmen in 1989, the most widespread movements that have occurred have been incidents such as the protest of the 1999 Belgrade bombings or the 2005 and then 2012 anti-Japanese protests, all of which were about anger toward a foreign country.

Beyond the scale the protests are hugely significant in their message as well. Protesters are publicly shouting the phrases "习近平下台 Xí Jìnpíng xiàtái!" and "共产党 下台 Gòngchǎndǎng xiàtái!", which mean "Xi Jinping, step down/resign!" and "CCP, step down/resign!" respectively. To shout a direct slogan for the government to resign is unheard of in China, particularly as Xi has tightened control of civil society. And people are doing this across the country in the thousands, openly and in front of police. This is a major challenge for a leader and party who have prioritised regime stability as a core interest for the majority of their history.

Looking Ahead:

Right now, as of 15:00 Australian Eastern time on Monday, 28 November 2022, the protests are only in their first couple of days and we are unsure as to how the government will respond. Police have already been seen beating protesters and journalists and dragging them away in vehicles. However, in many cases the protests have largely been monitored by police but still permitted to occur. There seems to be uncertainty as to how they want to respond just yet, and as such no unified approach.

Many potential outcomes exist, and I would warn everyone to be careful in overplaying what can be achieved. Most experts I have read are not really expecting this to result in Xi's resignation or regime change - these things are possible, surely, but it is a major task to achieve and the unity & scale of the protest movement remains to be fully seen. The government may retaliate with a hard crackdown as it has done with Tiananmen and other protests throughout the years. It may also quietly revamp some policies without publicly admitting a change in order to both pacify protesters and save face. The CCP often uses mixed tactics, both coopting and suppressing protest movements over the years depending on the situation. Changing from Zero Covid may prove more challenging though, given how much Xi has staked his political reputation on enforcing it.

What is important for everyone online, especially those of us abroad, is to watch out for the misinformation campaign the government will launch to counter these protests. Already twitter is reportedly seeing hundreds of Chinese bot accounts mass post escort advertisements using various city names in order to drown out protest results in the site's search engine. Chinese officials will also likely invoke the standard narrative of Western influence and CIA tactics as the reason behind the protests, as they did during the Hong Kong protests.

Finally, there will be a new surge of misinformation and bad takes from tankies, or leftists who uncritically support authoritarian regimes so long as they are anti-US. An infamous one, the Qiao Collective, has already worked to shift the narrative away from the protests and onto debating the merits of Zero Covid. This is largely similar to pro-Putin leftists attempting the justify his invasion of Ukraine. Always remember that the same values that you use to criticise Western countries should be used to criticise authoritarian regimes as well - opposing US militarism and racism, for example, is not incompatible with opposing China's acts of genocide and state suppression. If you want further info (and some good sardonic humour) on the absurd takes and misinfo from pro-China tankies, I would recommend checking out Brian Hioe in the links below.

Finally, keep in mind that this is a grass-roots protest made by people in China, who are putting their own lives at risk to demonstrate openly like this. There have already been so many acts of bravery by those who just want a better future for themselves and their country, and it is belittling and disingenuous to wave away everything they are doing as being just a "Western front" or a few "fringe extremists".

Links:

BBC live coverage page with links to analysis and articles

ABC (Australia) analysis

South China Morning Post analysis

Experts & Journalists to Check Out:

Brian Hioe - Journalist & China writer, New Bloom Magazine

Bonnie Glaser - China scholar, German Marshall Fund

Vicky Xu - Journalist & researcher, Australian Strategic Policy Institute

Stephen McDonnell - Journalist, BBC

M Taylor Fravel - China scholar, MIT

New Zealand Contemporary China Research Centre - NZ's hub of China scholarship (I was fortunate to attend their conferences during my PhD there, they do great work!)

If you've reached the end I hope this helps with understanding what's going on right now! A lot of us who know friends and whanau in China are worried for their safety, so please spread the word and let's hope that there is something of a positive outcome ahead.

[sharkrocket]

THE SUPER SCUFFED THANATICA LABS MODERN AU

There is so much groundwork that me and my partner failed to cover/did not think about, but I think we're going to just lay out what we have and just build upon it as more solid ideas come to fruition, so here we go

THANATICA LABS

Research corporation funded by the Powers That Be(?)

Dedicated to defeating death by prolonging life

Akin to Black Mesa or Aperture Science - Unethical experimentation going on behind the scenes

-----

DANIIL DANKOVSKY

Maybe not the founder? Maybe lead researcher?

Maybe founded it when it was a small lab and was bought out by The Powers to greatly expand funding?

Not exactly on the level - HAS done and WILL do shady things again

KNOWS what he's doing is illegal to some extent, but he tries to wash his hands of the dirty work (alleviate some guilt maybe?)

Hands the recruiters a list of requirements for his new hires (potential lab rats), lets them do the searching and he'll conduct the interviews

I have no idea what these requirements are

Sometimes the lab assistants go missing, he doesn't know anything about that, don't ask him

He LIKES his designers clothes - SOMETIMES it comes from Thanatica's grant money, SOMETIMES it's a few hundred here or there, BIG DEAL

-----

ARTEMY BURAKH

Studied in the Capital or IS studying in the Capital, and is in SO SO SO much debt

Is having trouble getting work because nobody is going to hire a surgeon with no ACCREDITED experience (cutting up bodies in your dad's unlicensed clinic does not count)

Looking to expand the medical practices of his provincial studies(?)

Maybe father has an illness(?) Perhaps Isidor suffering some kind of debilitating disease called the sand pest?

Was contacted by Thanatica Labs for a low level Lab Assistant position - It's Thanatica Labs, of course he's going to respond, that's a lot of money for an entry position, and he's going to have his name attached to a prestigious establishment

He's hired - Is under the pretense he can save up some money, maybe get some lab experience to eventually propose his own research somewhere else

Alternatively, went to university, left university to go home to tend to family business, came back to the Capital to resume studies and is looking for ways to expand his thesis?

Keeps his head down and minds his own business, the less he's under the eye of the lead scientist, the better

Doesn't mean he isn't talking to people and keeping a watchful eye - things are happening that aren't adding up, and it isn't just the grant money

Because he's so desperate for a job, it may mean he's more agreeable to participate in some of Thanatica's shady dealings

-----

THEIR RELATIONSHIP

This is so stupidly long, continued under cut

Daniil interviews Artemy and is so rude and condescending about it

Artemy is either biting back insults or being too sassy for his own good

Artemy gets the job either way, but it's VERY funny to imagine that Artemy failed the interview UNCONDITIONALLY, but was hired anyway under the pretense that Daniil didn't expect him to stick around for very long

"He's so handsome, shame that he's such a dick"

"He's so handsome, shame that he'll be medically indisposed for the sake of research"

Artemy figures out Thanatica is doing illegal experimentation but somehow despite this, it sort of falls in line with what Artemy is hoping to accomplish with his own studies (untested and unproven methods of healing that haven't been approved by any board)

Artemy decides to do his own experimentation behind Daniil's back

Daniil smells something suspicious, equipment and samples are missing (its his lab, he WILL get to the bottom of this)

He's been watching the new hire closely (assessing his potential for experimentation), eventually finds out that he's been performing experiments of his own with methods he's never seen before

Wants to put him under a microscope (literal) --> Wants to put him under a microscope (figurative)

Their confrontation can go a couple ways

Daniil approaches Artemy and offers him the resources to continue his work in exchange for doing some underhanded deeds to progress Daniil's own research

OR Artemy blackmails Daniil with the evidence he's gathered in exchange for resources - Daniil is largely unfazed by this, but sees Artemy's morals aren't exactly on the level either and he finds him very interesting so he allows him his resources in exchange for dirty work

Laughing at the idea that Daniil finds out that Artemy has no accredited experience and he lied on his resume to get an interview - Now he's even MORE desirable for underhanded work (thank you inkpot-demigod)

This would be the point Artemy is bagging bodies

Starts off with superficial antagonistic attraction (purely on looks, otherwise has disrespect for each other, condescending and rude) --> eventually develops into mutual respect for each other's work (cordial, maybe even friendly, "oh god why do they keep looking at each other like that") --> eventually develops into unprofessional workplace relationship (they are fucking in places where they definitely have no business doing so)

-----

"can we have artemy need a place to stay and daniil offers a space in his apartment and artemy packs him lunches to take to work. daniil thinks he's being subtle but just the fact he's eating lunch... all of his coworkers Know"

At some point during the relationship (most likely early on) Artemy mentions that his lease is ending and he's going to need to spend time looking for an apartment (or suggests that he needs to find a roommate to save some money because BOY DOES HE NEED IT)

Daniil IMMEDIATELY blurts out that he has space in his apartment (HE IS NOT JEALOUS, THIS IS JUST THE MOST ECONOMIC AND REASONABLE CHOICE, HE IS THE LEAD RESEARCHER AND HE CAN AFFORD A NICE SPACIOUS PLACE THAT HAPPENS TO ACCOMMODATE TWO)

It's closer proximity to the lab

They can keep discussing things in the privacy of his home

Not that Daniil NEEDS to save money, but having some extra is a plus

Artemy makes meals, food just APPEARS and Daniil never has to think about it

Co-workers are noticing that Daniil is ACTUALLY bringing lunches and eating food, hmmm very suspicious.....

Eva (lab receptionist, more on this later) notices the two of them coming into work at the same time in alarming frequency both carrying lunches and she's like SUSPICIOUS EYEZOOM

-----

"if the kids are involved with this i think it'd be kind of funny if daniil and artemy are desperately trying to hide the fact that they kill people but the kids definitely know that they kill people"

Not sure if they can live in Daniil's apartment if Artemy and Daniil have a living arrangement - Could be frequent visitors if Artemy is living there

Not sure about their relation to Artemy - would love to have him be uncle to his brother's adopted kids but this might get complicated

The kids are savvy enough to know about fucked up corporations, they are doing some MURDER in there

"Are you a mad scientist?"

"No pumpkin, I do very important research to extend the human lifespan"

"Oh…. That means people are dying in there right?"

"……."

-----

"i'm having a vision of daniil wanting to properly court artemy after a few trysts but he doesn't communicate this very well and he also has very little experience with this so he invites him to a fancy dinner or maybe even a gala and artemy is clearly out of his element the whole time and daniil is trying to make this work and its NOT... if anything artemy thinks daniil is trying to pull some power move on him AND THEN. at the end of the evening when daniil is trying to charmingly flirt and do a kiss, artemy is just like. what are you DOING and they do at least SOME communicating. its a START. this au is a murder romcom"

Daniil coming to terms with the fact that he's so gay for the new hire, oh god he's so gay, who allowed Artemy to be so handsome AND intelligent AND clever AND funny what the hell

He keeps looking in Artemy's direction and Temy thinks he's scrutinizing his work, but god knows Daniil needs to get ahold of himself

He has an idea: Invite Artemy to the next charity gala, show him off to some higher ups, thus giving him the opportunity to sing his praises, and Artemy should get the idea, then later in the night have some drinks and who knows

Daniil extends the invite to Artemy, Temy thinks he's getting some kind of promotion, so he agrees

The event is way bigger and way fancier than Artemy was anticipating, Daniil is showing him off to a lot of executives and Temy is trying to hold his own here - If this is some kind of test, he's going to wring Daniil's neck

"Why is Daniil being so flattering, is he making fun of me"

The two are finally alone and Daniil is sitting where his leg is bumping into Artemy's, he has his hand on Temy's thigh and he's leaning in so, so, so close and Temy panics - Not that he doesn't have his share of attraction to his boss but what is he getting at here? Some kinda power move? A cruel test? Blackmail?

They have been misreading each other this entire time and the both of them are UNBELIEVABLY embarrassed

Time to talk things out and admit some things to each other

-----

SOME LOOSE MUSINGS ABOUT OTHER CHARACTERS

Eva Yan

Receptionist at Thanatica, maybe specifically for Daniil's office/lab whatever

The only thing that matters is that she always sees Daniil and Artemy going in and out of the place

Privy to a lot of gossip and goings-on of the place, knows about some of the shadier stuff but she's far from put-off

In fact, she wants to be Daniil's next experiment and he is not having it

Dresses like "I have to go to the office but I'm going to a music festival at 6" boho chic

Yulia Lyuricheva

Works for the government helping to orchestrate shady evil things but she's not actively invested in being evil this is just a job where she can apply her mathematical genius

Eva of course goes on about wanting to be an experiment and neither Eva's enthusiasm nor the fact that Thanatica is so shady is surprising to her

Clara

She doesn't have to be here but if she is here than she runs around Thanatica like a rat and no one knows where she came from

She claims to be an experiment gone wrong but really she is just a girl in need of some caring parental figures in her life

Lara Ravel

In the city on a revenge mission to kill Alexander Block for the death of her father

DANIIL AND LARA MURDER SPREE WHEEEEEEE LET THEM HAVE IT I WANT IT

I have no idea how to make this happen

Block

Thanatica is not surviving this one Dankovsky oooooo it is not surviving

Head of the military operation to destroy all evidence related to Thanatica's experiments?

Roles of other characters unclear..... To be determined....

THANK YOU FOR READING THIS TEXT DUMP, MORE TO BE ADDED IF WE THINK OF IT

[otmaaromanovas]

Vera Ignatievna Gedroits - the openly lesbian, first woman professor of surgery in Russia, who worked alongside the Romanovs

Princess Vera Ignatievna Gedroits was a doctor, surgeon, poet, and pioneer of medicine. Vera worked alongside Tsarina Alexandra and Grand Duchesses Olga and Tatiana Nikolaevna, working with the Red Cross to treat injured soldiers during the First World War. 

** content warning for mention of suicide **

Born as a Princess of royal Lithuanian descent in 1870 in Kyiv, Vera is thought to have developed an interest in medicine following the passing of her little brother Sergei during childhood. Vera later wrote under the pen name ‘Sergei Gedroits’ in honour of him. 

In 1892, Vera was arrested for participating in the Populist movement. Freed and undeterred, Vera was adamant to continue her medical studies. An open lesbian, Vera entered into a marriage of convenience with friend Nikolai Belozerov, permitting the obtaining of a new passport to travel, allowing her to pursue her dream of a medical career without the restriction of borders and her previous name being on police records. Despite their marriage being one of convenience, rather that romantic love, Vera and Nikolai were close friends, and stayed in contact through letters.

In 1903, Vera obtained the title of ‘female doctor’, but later that year attempted suicide. Vera’s mental health had declined due to an overwhelming personal family life, the death of her sister, exhausting workload, and breakup of a relationship with a lady in Switzerland. The following year, Vera had recovered, and the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese war led to her working in horse-drawn mobile hospitals. 

Working with wounded patients, Vera took detailed notes which allowed the making of the connection between injuries and the weapon used to inflict them. Interestingly, Vera did not shy away from abdominal operations, which was irregular due to previous thoughts that such injuries were ‘inoperable’. Often, patients with such injuries were refused surgery and were sadly left to pass away.

Following the War, Vera worked provincially, attending to 125,363 patients. This pioneering work was recognised by Tsarina Alexandra Feodorovna in 1909, who invited Vera to take the position of Senior Court Physician. Vera was the first woman to serve as a physician in the Imperial Palace. Vera wrote ‘Conversations on Surgery for Sisters and Doctors’ to help the Palace understand the profession. Vera would eventually write 58 scientific papers. Vera earned a Doctorate of Surgery on May 11 1912, the first woman in the history of the University of Moscow to do so. 

Following the outbreak of the First World War, Vera helped to install physiotherapy equipment and X-ray machines in hospitals to aid recovery. Vera taught Tsarina Alexandra Feodorovna and her daughters, Grand Duchesses Olga and Tatiana, medical work, and they assisted with operations. Vera worked alongside Imperial Physician Dr. Evgeny Botkin to help connect infirmaries to railways and supplies. Vera occasionally travelled to the front lines to help provide surgery directly at the scene, and in one case performed over 30 operations over a three day period. 

Vera is recorded as having little patience for the infamous Grigori Rasputin, with one source recording the shoving of Rasputin ‘into a corridor when he refused to get out’ of the way.

There are no records that suggest that the patients or the Romanovs objected to Vera's sexuality, though there was disapproval of her continuing to remain in Tsarskoe Selo to continue military surgery after the Revolution. If anything, she was renowned as one of the most capable and intelligent women of the era. Vera wore a surgeon's cap rather than the head coverings that nurses and Sisters of Mercy wore.

During the First World War, Vera met fellow nurse Countess Maria Dmitrievna Nirod-Mukhanova, a widowed maid-of-honour at the palace. The pair fell in love and started a relationship, which would last for the rest of Vera’s life. Maria had three children: Dmitri Feodorovich, Marina Feodorovna, and Feodor Feodorovich. The children knew about their mother's relationship with Vera, as they lived as a married couple whilst caring for and raising them. Some sources suggest that Vera and Maria had a marriage ceremony.

By the late 1920s, Vera was living with Maria, who worked as a surgeon, in Kyiv after the couple and Maria’s children escaped Revolution, taking refuge with monks. They spent eighteen years together. The pair lived as a married couple. In 1932, Vera passed away aged 61 after a diagnosis of uterine cancer. Maria continued Vera’s work by operating a pharmacy that provided free medicine to the poor. Maria passed away in 1965 aged 86. The above image is the only photo that has been attributed to her.

Vera defied all the social norms, becoming a pioneer of medicine and challenging traditions within the profession, saving thousands of lives in the process. Vera’s legacy lives on today.

SOURCES:

Hands that bring back to life. Vera Ignatievna Gedroits - surgeon and poet by V.G. Khokhlov

Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library

Wartime albums of Olga Nikolaevna and Tatiana Nikolaevna, Last Romanovs on Flickr

The Princess who Transformed War Medicine - BBC

Princess Vera Gedroits: military surgeon, poet, and author by J.D.C. Bennet

The Diary of Olga Romanov : Royal Witness to the Russian Revolution by Helen Azar

Tatiana Romanov, Daughter of the Last Tsar : Diaries and Letters, 1913-1918 by Helen Azar and Nicholas B.A. Nicholson

[haveyoureadthisbook-poll]

[czerwonykasztelanic]

Really interesting thing about Les Miserables is that it combines a number of semi-independent stories - each of which, when isolated, is a fairly standard interpretation of a given trope - into a larger, inter-connected whole; and wherever the individual archetypes interact with each other, they set the stage for the introduction of things that are less generic and cannot be treated as a one-dimensional paradigm. Such a layered "collage" is possible because of two factors: first, a large (and varied) cast of characters; second, the fact that the events in the novel span a relatively long period of time (some 40 years*).

However, unlike many historical works of similar calibre, Les Miserables usually favors a surgical approach - in a way, the individual "puzzle pieces" and their intersections matter more than the final "big picture".

When you look at the collage, you start to notice patterns and parallels: how Éponine is a distant echo of Javert, and in turn how Grantaire can be likened to Éponine; the mirrored fates of Enjolras and Gavroche; the analogous-yet-divergent fates of Valjean and Fantine, and many more.

In and of itself, the joined tale of Marius and Cosette is a variation on the theme of Werther et al. But when you broaden your perspective and consider the preceding stories of the two characters, it suddenly expands beyond the conventions of the genre. They are more than archetypical Romantic lovers: Marius - by virtue of his conflict with his grandfather and his involvement in the June Rebellion; and Cosette - owing to the detailed account of her turbulent past. The lover, the wayward son and the patriot-martyr are all characters extremely common in nineteenth-century literature - it just so happens that Marius is all three. Similarly, Cosette's childhood is a typical, if harrowing, Realistic depiction of abuse and poverty; and yet she is also the angelic, aethereal "kindred spirit" venerated by the lovestruck Marius-Werther.

Then you have Valjean, whose life is part morality play, part Positivistic* success story, part psychological study of an eternal outcast; Javert, who is simultaneously a caricature of single-mindedness, a universal parable about the dangers of blindly following authority, and Hugo's way of critiquing the reactionary police-state of Napoleon III; Éponine, at once a cautionary tale and a sympathetic look at the seedy underbelly of 'civilised' society; and bishop Myriel, both a textually canonized saint and the jolly protagonist of a pastoral about the highs and lows of life in a provincial parish.

The characters evoke emotion not because they can be losslessly stencilled into the new millenium, but because their reality is multi-faceted enough for us to become immersed in it. It's as if Hugo put a bucket-load of archetypes and genres in a well-researched and digression-prone blender, and out of that marring of ideals came something that has perhaps lost some of its everyman appeal and universality, in favor of immortalizing a kaleidoscope view of life in the early eighteen-hundreds; and yet it remains relevant because the problems he tackles are relevant still.

[ahenvs3000w24]

01: Finding Place and Peace with Nature

Welcome folks to my Environmental Science Nature interpretation Blog! I am eager to share my thoughts, opinions, and some of my life with you all over the term. To orient you all, I am currently in my fourth and final term at the University of Guelph. My degree is in Arts and Science program with a focus on Biology and Psychology. I have experience in ecology, plant biology, and field experience that I will share with you all. Throughout my degree, I have found value in understanding how the natural world that surrounds us supports our functioning and the role we must have in protecting it.

From the ripe age of three, my parents bundled me up and took me on my first camping trip. I am reminiscent of those experiences as they have influenced my relationship with nature as a young adult. Hiking, youth groups, and time spent on the beach are some of the fondest memories of my childhood. Each summer, I have taken the initiative and have continued the camping tradition for myself. I am no longer reliant upon my parents to facilitate the trip and have introduced my closest friends to the joys of living with nature. Nature has taught me some of the most valuable lessons a child should learn and I feel inclined to share my lessons with those around me.

As a young adult, university has been a pivotal moment in my life. With university comes additional responsibility and pressure on the future. The COVID-19 pandemic commenced in my first year of study at the University of Guelph. The pandemic, in many ways, was a period of reflection and revaluation for my life and how I wish to lead it. In moments of high stress, I tend to forget the peace that nature brings. The pandemic allowed me to reconnect with nature the way I once did as a child and recentered my headspace.

More recently, I had the opportunity to travel to fourteen different countries across the United Kingdom and Europe. From breathtaking hikes in the Swiss Alps to walking the vineyards of Tuscany, I had the pleasure of exploring new areas and ecosystems of the world I never could have dreamed of experiencing. As I share stories of my adventures with those around me, I express the wonder and fulfillment I felt in those moments. Through facilitating conversations surrounding my travels, I remind my peers that nature does not need to be expensive or extreme. Nature is exciting in the simplest form and we as Canadians are blessed with an extraordinary country to explore. I have found a "sense of place" in some of the smallest corners of the world that ultimately challenged my perspective of what nature is capable of.

As described in the textbook, place is not a consistent entity; it may change and take new meaning through experiences (Beck et al., 2018). No one person or experience offered a sense of place in nature rather it has been a combination of many. As I have previously mentioned, I embark on a camping trip annually at one of our provincial parks. I have attended the same provincial park for nearly a decade. From the perspective of a young child, the campsite was simply a plot of land with large trees lining the perimeter as a source of protection; the beach was a place I would play and dive in to find beach glass. As I have matured, this "big picture" has evolved into a collection of smaller snapshots (Beck et al., 2018). I believe that the metaphorical lighthouse that guides my understanding of heritage will continue to change as I develop a stronger sense of self and interact with the environment (Beck et al., 2018).

In conclusion, my journey as an interpreter of nature is evolving. I found a voice and advocacy for our Earth in my travels. My metaphorical lighthouse has guided my path to places I have only dreamed of. The metaphorical lighthouses that assist in developing a "sense of place" may guide our path in several different directions throughout our lifetime (Beck et al., 2018). With each step, our connection and interpretation of the world around us may change (Beck et al., 2018). Like Shel Silverstein's, The Giving Tree, life will continue to evolve and in some moments we may take more of the Earth than we replenish. At the end of it all, it is our connectedness with others that can produce change. Regardless of socioeconomic status, there is wealth in the natural world that surrounds us all.

I have included some of my most favourite pictures of my adventures abroad. If you have been contemplating whether or not traveling abroad is worth it, this is your sign to book that flight!

References

Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018). Interpreting cultural and natural heritage: for a better world. Sagamore Venture.

Silverstein, Shel. (1964). The giving tree. Harper & Row.

[djuvlipen]

(...) For almost five centuries, their slave labour resulted in huge earnings for their masters: landowers, the feudal aristocracy and the Orthodox Church. Romani people's status was that of subjugated people, the absolute property of their masters: their masters' personality, faith and habits dictated their whole existence.

After 1500, even though the number of slaves decreased dramatically in Catholic and Protestant Europe - as slaves were transferred to overseas colonies to work - slavery flourished in Romanian Principalities. 'In the 16th, 17th, and 18th century we were probably the only country in Europe which had a class of people with this label of slave or bondsman', states Professor doctor Constantin Bălăceanu Stolnici.

Roma bondsmen were subjected to atrocious treatment.

For five centuries, they were denied the status of human being. Among the cruellest punishments was that of wearing a collar fitted with iron spikes on the inside that prevented the wearer from lying down to rest.

Most of the writing we have about this topic comes from foreigners travelers, staggered by this behaviour.

"The squires are their absolute masters. They sell or kill them like cattle, at their sole discretion. Their children are born slaves with no distinction on sex"

- Comte d'Antraigues.

Jean Louis Parrant, who was in Moldavia during the French revolution, asks himself: 'What can be said about this numerous miserable flock of beings (because they can’t be otherwise described) that are called gypsies and are lost for the humanity, placed on the same level with the cattle of burden and often treated even worse by the their barbaric master whose revolting (so-called) property they are?'

Mihail Kogălniceanu, a former Romanian politician who played a significant role in the abolition of slavery, remembers growing up in a provincial Romanian town and seeing people 'being with hands and feet enchained, with iron circles around their forehead or metal collar around their neck. Bloody whips and other punishments such as starvation, hanging over a burning fire, the detention barrack and the forcing to stay naked in snow or in the frozen water of a river - this is the treatment applied to the miserable gypsies.'

Legislative texts, referring to them under a double denomination - gypsies or bondsmen - stated that they were born slaves; that every child born from a slave mother was a slave; that their masters had power of life and death over them; that each owner had the right to sell or offer his slaves; and that every masterless gypsy is propriety of the state. The list goes on... (...)

In 1600, a gypsy fit for work was worth the same as a horse. In 1682, a gypsy woman was worth two mares with foals. In 1760, three gypsies were worth the same as a house, and in 1814, Snagov Monastery was selling a gypsy for the price of four buffalo. There were also cases when gypsies were sold according to their weight, exchanged for honey barrels, pawned off, or offered as presents.

The abolishment of Roma slavery began with young artistocratic Romanians leaving to study in Western Europe. Upon returning home, they gave voice to progressive ideas denouncing slavery.

At the same time, Western Europe, and France especially, exerted considerable pressure on the newly formed Romanian state regarding the abolition of slavery. In the middle of the 19th century, there were half a million slaves on Romanian territory: 7% of the population.

Unfortunately, until now, Roma slavery has not been yet included in most history school books, and there are still very few Romanians who are aware of this historical reality. (...)

[anotherhumaninthisworld]

Since today is Charlotte Robespierre’s 163’th birthday, I thought I’d attempt something I’ve not seen anyone else yet do, which is to write a mini biography over her entire life. I’ve already translated a study from the 1960s which deals with Charlotte, but since it’s a bit all over the place and spends almost more time describing the people Charlotte had any sort of connections with rather than Charlotte herself, I decided to try to make some more sense of things by a more chronological approach.

Marie Marguerite Charlotte de Robespierre was born in Arras on February 5 1760, around half past two in the afternoon. Her baptism record, written three days later, goes as follows:

”Today is the eighth day of the month of February, the year 1760. We priests of the parish of Saint-Étienne of towns and Diocese of Arras, have supplemented the ceremonies of the baptism for a girl born around half past two in the afternoon in said parish in the legitimite marriage of maître Maximilien-Barthélemy-François de Robespierre, lawyer at the Provincial Council of Artois, and of demoiselle Jacqueline-Margueritte Carraut, her father and mother; she was delivered by us parish priest the day after her birth, six of the same month and year as above, with the permission of the bishopric dated the same day signed by Le Roux, vicar general, and below, by ordinance Péchena. The godfather was master Charles-Antoine de Gouve, adviser to the King and his attorney for the town and city of Arras, subdelegate of the intendant of Flanders and Artois, in the department of Arras, of the parish of Saint-Jean in Ronville, and the godmother demoiselle Marie-Dominique Poiteau, widow of Sieur François Isambart, procurator to the said provincial council of Artois, of the parish of Saint-Aubert, who gave her the name Marie-Marguerite-Charlotte, and who signed with us the parish priest, and the father here present, the same act on the day and year mentioned above. The child was born on the fifth. Marie Dominique Poiteau     De Gouve Derobespibrre     Willart, parish priest of Saint-Etienne.”

That Charlotte wasn’t baptisted until three days after her birth may be a sign that her parents for a moment feared for her life, considering Charlotte’s three siblings — the older Maximilien (born 1758), and younger Henriette (1761) and Augustin (1763) — all were baptised the same days they had been born.

Charlotte would later recall the memory of her mother Jacqueline (1735) with fondness. ”Oh! Who would not keep the memory of this excellent mother!” she wrote in her memoirs. ”She loved us so! Nor could Maximilien recall her without emotion: every time that, in our private interviews, we spoke of her, I heard his voice alter, and I saw his eyes soften. She was no less of a good wife than a good mother.” But they did not get to keep her for long — on July 4 1764 Jacqueline gave birth to a baby who didn’t make it past his first twenty-four hours alive, and was buried in the Saint-Nicaise cemetery without having received a name. She was not to survive him for much longer, twelve days later she died as well, a few days before her twenty-ninth birthday. The funeral held the following day was, according to the mortuary act, attended by Jacqueline’s brother Augustin and Antoine-Henri Galbaut, Knight of Saint-Louis, assistant major of the Citadel, but not by her husband. In her memoirs, Charlotte reported that Jacqueline’s death had been ”a lightning strike to the heart” for him — ”He was inconsolable. Nothing could divert him from his sorrow; he no longer pleaded, nor occupied himself with business; he was entirely consumed with chagrin. He was advised to travel for some time to distract himself; he followed this advice and left: but, alas! We never saw him again; the pitiless death took him as it had already taken our mother.” 

Different documents tell us that the father actually didn’t leave Arras until December 1764, five months after Jacqueline’s death, after which he sporadically appeared in his hometown, sometimes for months at a time. The last known stay is from 1772. It is nevertheless probable that he no longer was in a state to look after his children after the death of his wife, and therefore, as Charlotte recounts in her memoirs, quickly handed them over to different relatives. Charlotte and Henriette, seperated by an age gap of less than two years, were therefore sent to live with their two unmarried paternal aunts, Henriette and Eulalie de Robespierre. According to contemporary Abbé Proyart, who knew the family, the aunts ”lived in a great reputation for piety.” Maximilien and Augustin, the latter still with his wetnurse, were in their turn taken in by their maternal grandparents. According to Charlotte, the loss of their parents had left a big mark on the former:

”He was totally changed. Before that point he had been, like all children of his age, flighty, unruly, rash; but since from this time he saw himself, in the quality of eldest, as the head of the family, he became poised, reasonable, laborious; he spoke to us with a sort of imposing gravity; if he joined in our games, it was to direct them. He loved us tenderly, and there were no caresses that he did not lavish on us […] He had been given pigeons and sparrows which he took the greatest care of, and close to which he often came to pass the moments which he did not consecrate to his studies.”

The children were reunited every Sunday, during which Maximilien would show his sisters his drawings and place his sparrows and pigeons into their cupped hands. One time, Charlotte and Henriette begged him to let them have one of his birds, and after much hesitation he gave in, much to their joy. Unfortunately, some days later the girls forgot the pigeon in the garden during a stormy night, by which it perished. When he found out about it Maximilien’s tears flowed, and he rained reproaches on Charlotte and Henriette and refused to give his birds to them when he left to study in Paris. ”It was sixty years ago,” Charlotte writes in her memoirs, ”that by a childish flightiness I was the cause of my elder brother’s chagrin and tears: and well! My heart bleeds for it still; it seems to me that I have not aged a day since the tragic end of the poor pigeon was so sensitive to Maximilien, such that I was affected by it myself.”

On December 30 1768, Charlotte was sent off to Maison des Sœurs Manarre, — “a pious foundation for poor girls, who may be admitted from the age of nine to eighteen, to be fed, brought up under some good mistress of virtue and to improve oneself in lacing and sewing or in another thing which one will judge useful; to learn to read and write until they are able to serve and earn a living,” situated just across the border in Tournai (modern-day Belgium). She was actually a few months too young to be enrolled, but an exeption was made in her favor, obtained by the influence of her godfather Charles-Antoine de Gouve. Two years later Charlotte was joined at the convent school by Henriette, who in her turn was enrolled without yet having a scolarship. Perhaps this is a sign that their relatives were struggling to provide for the four orphans and thus had to send them away as quickly as possible. On October 1769, Maximilien was enrolled at the College of Louis-le-Grand in Paris, his taste for study having awarded him with a scholarship to the prestigious school, while Augustin in his turn was sent off to the College of Duoai. The children were thus dispersed and no longer saw anything of each other, except for in the summers when they were reunited in Arras. According to Charlotte these were days of great joy that passed too quickly, even if many of these years were also ”marked by the death of something cherished.” In 1770, their paternal grandmother died, in 1775 their maternal grandmother and in 1778 their maternal grandfather. 1777 saw the death of their father, who at that point was living in Munich, but it’s unknown if Charlotte and her relatives actually found out about it or not. Finally, on March 5 1780, Henriette was buried, a little more than two months after her eighteenth birthday. According to Charlotte, the death of the sister had a big impact on Maximilien, it rendered him ”sad and melancholy” and he wrote a poem in her honor. She does not, on the other hand, report how the death affected her, Henriette undeniably being the family member she had spent the most time together with… Nevertheless, she did not get a chance to say goodbye, as the names of neither her nor her brothers feature on the mortuary act of Henriette or any of the other dead relatives.

One year after Henriette’s death, Maximilien graduated from Louis-le-Grand, nine days after his twenty-third birthday. Now a fully trained lawyer, he returned to Arras to work as such. We don’t know when Charlotte left the convent school, but she soon enough joined her older brother. Augustin, however, Charlotte continued to see very little of, as Maximilien arranged for him to take over his scholarship and started his studies at Louis-le-Grand on November 3 1781. He didn’t return until 1787.

The siblings had obtained half of the 8242 livres from when their late grandfather’s brewery was sold to their maternal uncle Augustin in 1778, but they were still in a rough financial situation. In 1768 their father had resigned from any inheritance whatsoever from his mother ”both for me and my children,” a wish he had then repeated both in 1770 and 1771. In 1766, he had also borrowed seven hundred livres from his sister Henriette which he never paid back, leading to some tension between Henriette, her husband and Maximilien in 1780.

Charlotte and Maximilien at first moved into a house on Rue du Saumon, but their stay there was short — already in late 1782 they were forced to leave the house to instead move in with aunt Henriette on Rue Teinturiers. According to the memoirs of Maurice-André Gaillard, Charlotte told him in 1794 that she and Maximilien weren’t exactly welcomed with open arms by Henriette’s husband — ”It’s strange that you didn’t often notice how much [his] brusqueness and formality made us pay dearly for the bread he gave us; but you must also have noticed that if indigence saddened us, it never degraded us and you always judged us incapable of containing money through a dubious action.” 

Eventually, Charlotte and Maximilien moved again, to Rue des Jésuites, and finally, in 1787, they moved from there Rue des Rapporteurs 9. There they were soon enough joined by Augustin, by now too a qualified lawyer. According to Charlotte’s memoirs, the bond between the three siblings was strong — ”good harmony would not have ceased for a sole instant to reign among us.” While her brothers worked, Charlotte took care of the house. We know the name of one of her domestics — Catherine Calmet, who helped Charlotte out for six months. When Calmet was arrested in Lille in 1788, Maximilien wrote a letter pleading in her favour: ”[Calmet’s] conduct appeared to me faultless during the time she stayed with me; I rejoice in her slightest recovery. As for the certificate you’re speaking to me about, my sister has told me that the girl brought it with her.”

The siblings had many friends. One of them was mademoiselle Dehay, who in 1782 gave Charlotte and Maximilien a cage of canaries which they both appriciated a lot. ”My sister asks me, in particular,” Maximilien wrote to her on January 22, to show you her gratitude for the kindness you have had in giving her this present, and all the other feelings you have inspired in her.” Mademoiselle Dehay would later also do other animal related favors for the two. ”Is the puppy you are raising for my sister as sweet as the one you showed me when I passed through Béthune?” Maximilien asked her in 1788. ”Whatever it looks like, we receive it with distinction and pleasure.” 

Charlotte leaves a long list of Maximilien’s closest friends in her memoirs. Of those included there, important for her story as well is her brother’s fellow lawyer Antoine Buissart, ”intensely estimable savant” and his wife Charlotte. The couple lived on rue du Coclipas, a ten minute walk from Rue des Rapporteurs, and would become close with all three siblings. Another one of Maximilien’s colleagues that would play an important role in Charlotte’s life was Armand Joseph Guffroy, who, like Charlotte, witnessed Maximilien’s uneasiness when it came to the death penalty while the two worked as judges together.

Then there was the family — maternal uncle Augustin Carraut who with his wife Catherine Sabine (1740) had had four children — Augustin Louis Joseph (1762), Antoine Philippe (1764), Jean-Baptiste Guislain (1768) and Sabine Josephe (1771). The two paternal aunts Eulalie and Henriette had married in 1776 and 1777 respectively — Henriette to Gabriel-François Durut, doctor of medicine in Arras at the College d’Oratoire, Eulalie to Robert Deshorties, merchant and royal notary in Arras. Deshorties had five children from his previous marriage — two sons and three daughters. One of the daughters had according to Charlotte been courting Maximilien since 1786 or 1787. ”She loved him and was loved back. […] Many times it had been talk of marriage, and it is very probable Maximilien would have wedded her, if the the suffrage of his fellow citizens had not removed him from the sweetness of private life and thrown him into a career in politics.” However, if such plans existed, they were soon broken up by the revolution, and the step-cousin instead got engaged to another lawyer, Léandre Leducq, who she married on August 7 1792.

Charlotte was perhaps also finding love. Joseph Fouché was a science professor from Nantes, a year older than herself, who had joined her uncle Durut at the College of Arras in 1788. ”Fouché”, Charlotte writes in her memoirs, ”was not handsome, but but he had a charming wit and was extremely amiable. He spoke to me of marriage, and I admit that I felt no repugnance for that bond, and that I was well enough disposed to accord my hand to he whom my brother had introduced to me as a pure democrat and his friend.” But somehow, this engagement too ran out into the sand, and Fouché got married to Bonne Jeanne Coiquaud in 1792.

Life changed on April 26 1789, when Maximilien was elected as a deputy for the Estates General and settled for Paris for an indefinite period of time. Letters from Augustin to the family friend Antoine Buissart reveal that the he went to visit his brother in September 1789, as well as from September 1790 to March 1791. Charlotte may not have been so fond of Augustin’s trips, ”My sister must be very cross with me,” Augustin wrote to Buissart on November 25 1790, ”but she easily forgets, that consoles me, I will try to bring her what she wants.” Charlotte herself couldn’t or wouldn’t join him — ”I did not see [Maximilien] for the duration of the Constituent Assembly,” she affirms in her memoirs. In November 1791, after the closing of said assembly, Maximilien made a visit back to Arras, Charlotte, Augustin and Charlotte Buissart meeting him at the coach depot in Bapaume. In her memoirs, Charlotte could still remember the pleasure of getting to embrace her brother after not having seen him for two years. However, Maximilien’s stay was short, and on November 27 he was back in Paris to never see his hometown again.

Maximilien, like Augustin, frequently wrote long letters to Buissart, telling him about the situation developing in the capital. He did however never ask him to say hello to his siblings in them, nor do we have any conserved letters adressed from him to them. Charlotte still affirms that ”we wrote to each other often, and [Maximilien] gave me the most emphatic testimony of friendship in his letters. “You (vous) are what I love the most after the patrie,” he told me.” According to Paul Villiers, who claimed to have been Maximilien’s secretary for seven months in 1790, the latter also sent part of his deputy’s salary to ”a sister in Arras, whom he had a lot of affection of for.”

But despite the extra money, Charlotte and Augustin were having a hard time. “We are in absolute destitution,” the latter wrote to Maximilien in 1790, ”remember our unfortunate household.” Joseph Lebon, a former priest soon to be mayor of Arras, wrote to Maximilien on August 28 1792 that “the bearer of this letter, Démouliez, has planned arrangements with your brother, to procure for him the execrable silver mark.” They also had to deal with the loss of some more loved ones, as Henriette and Eulalie, the aunts that had had the raising of Charlotte and her sister, both died in 1791. 

Even if Charlotte was unable to go to Paris with her younger brother, she was still politically active on a local level. This is shown through a letter dated April 9 1790 which she sent Maximilien:

”We’ve just received a letter from you, dear brother, dated April 1, and today it is the 9th. I don’t know if this delay is the fault of the person to whom you gave it. Please send it to us directly next time. At the moment, I’ve just learned that one is happy with the patriotic contribution. M. Nonot, always a good patriot, has just told me this news with this one which he has from M. de Vralie and which greatly formalizes those who love liberty. I don't know if you know that a whip-round was made about four months ago for the relief of the poor in the town. Each citizen contributed to it according to his faculties. Today the municipal officers are of the opinion that the whip-round should continue for another three months. There are many people who no longer want to pay. They give the reason that the poor should not be fed idle, that they should be made to work demolishing the rampart of the town. The mayor, who apparently knew that one would refuse to pay, said that if one refused to pay, he would obtain authorization from the National Assembly and tax himself what must be payed. If M. Nonot is not mistaken, for the remark is so ridiculous that I cannot persuade myself that it is true, M. de Fosseux will be busy, for there are those who will refuse on purpose in order to see what that will result in. I don't know if my brother has forgotten to tell you about Madame Marchand. We fell out with her! I took the liberty of telling her what the good patriots must have thought of her paper, and what you thought of it. I reproached her for her affectation of always putting infamous notes for the people, etc. She got angry, she maintained that there were no aristocrats in Arras, that she knew all the patriots, that only the hotheads found her paper aristocratic. She says a lot of nonsense to me and since then she no longer sends us her paper. Take care, dear brother, to send what you promised me. We are still in great trouble. Farewell, dear brother, I embrace you with the greatest tenderness. If you could find a position in Paris that suits me, if you knew one for my brother, because he will never be anything in this country. I am not sending you this letter by post in order to give the person who gives it to you the opportunity of getting to know you, which he has long wanted.”

However, contrary to her prediction that Augustin ”would never be something,” her younger brother was in fact elected to the council of administration of Pas-de-Calais in 1791, and in August 1792 prosecutor-syndic of the commune of Arras and president of les Amis de la Constitution. Finally, one month later, on September 16, Augustin was elected to fill a seat in France’s new government body the National Convention.

Thus, Charlotte’s hopes of going to Paris were finally coming true, as this time she was not left behind when Augustin once again set off for the capital. The first evidence of their arrival is from October 5, when Augustin’s name is first mentioned in the debates of the Jacobin Club in Paris. However, it’s possible Charlotte went to Paris still earlier, as she in her memoirs claims to have stood witness to a conversation between her older brother and his friend Jérôme Pétion ”a few days” after the Paris prison massacres between September 2-4. Maximilien would have reproached Pétion for not having interposed his authority to stop the excesses, to which the latter dryly would have replied: ”All I can tell you is that no human power could have stopped them.” Pétion also mentioned a meeting between him and Maximilien on the subject, but in his version it was rather he who accused Maximilien of doing a lot of harm — ”your denunciations, your alarms, your hatreds, your suspicions, they agitate the people; explain yourself; do you have any facts? Do you have any proof?”

Regardless, Augustin and Charlotte settled in the front of an apartment on 366 Rue Saint-Honoré, where their brother lodged since 1791. Owner of the house was one Maurice Duplay (1738), who lived there with his wife Françoise-Éleonore (1739) and their unmarried daughters Éleonore (1767/1768), Victoire (1769) and Élisabeth (1772), son Maurice (1778) and nephew Simon (1774). According to the memoirs of the youngest daughter, Élisabeth, Maximilien had become something of an additional family member — ”He was so nice! […] He had a profound respect for my father and mother; they too regarded him as a son, and we as a brother.” The letters Maximilien wrote to Maurice while on the short trip in Arras reveal that the feelings seem to have been mutual — ”Please present the testimonies of my tender friendship to Madame Duplay, to your young ladies, and to my little friend.” 

Charlotte on the other hand, soon found herself on second thoughts regarding the family, or, to be more exact, Françoise Duplay. ”I should tell the whole truth,” she writes in her memoirs, ”I have nothing but praise for the demoiselles Duplay; but I would not say the same for their mother, who did me much wrong; she looked constantly to put me in bad standing with my older brother and to monopolize him.” According to Charlotte, the family exercised an ascendancy over Maximilien — ”founded neither on wit, since Maximilien certainly had more of it than Madame Duplay, nor on great services rendered, since the family among whom my brother lived had not for some time been in a position to render them,” which her older brother was simply too kind to stand against. Before, no one had interfered with Charlotte’s management over the domestic square, but now she was subordinate to Françoise, who treated Charlotte badly — ”if I were to report everything she did to me I would fill a fat volume” — and sometimes even drove her to tears. Françoise’s daughter Élisabeth, on the contrary, wrote in her memoirs that her mother loved Charlotte a lot, never refused her anything that could please her and even treated her as a daughter of her own.

Charlotte also had a hard time getting along with Éleonore, Françoise’s oldest daughter. According to Élisabeth and Maximilien’s doctor Joseph Souberbielle, she had been ”promised,” to the latter, something which Charlotte believed to be as false as later claims of Éleonore being her brother’s mistress. ”But”, she added, ”what is certain is that Madame Duplay would have strongly desired to have my brother Maximilien for a son-in-law, and that she forget neither caresses nor seductions to make him marry her daughter. Éléonore too was very ambitious to call herself the citoyenne Robespierre, and she put into effect all that could touch Maximilien’s heart.” All of this was once again to much distress for Charlotte, and, according to her, Maximilien as well, as he had no interest whatsoever in any type of marriage.

Charlotte was however on good terms with Éleonore’s two younger sisters — Victoire and, especially, Élisabeth. ”I have nothing but praise for [Élisabeth], she was not, like like her mother and older sister, stirred up against me; many times she came to wipe away my tears, when Madame Duplay’s indignities made me cry.” Élisabeth reported back that ”I was good friends with [Charlotte], and it was a pleasure to go see her often; sometimes I even pleased myself with doing her hair and her toilette. She too seemed to have much affection for me.” Charlotte often asked Françoise for permission to bring Élisabeth with her to the Convention, something which she agreed to. It was there, on April 24 1793 that Élisabeth met her future husband Philippe Lebas, who came up and asked Charlotte who Élisabeth and her family were, after which he urged the two to come to another session. They did so, bringing sweets and oranges, Élisabeth asking Charlotte if she could offer Lebas one. During yet another session, Lebas gave Charlotte and Élisabeth a lorgnette, while Charlotte showed Lebas Élisabeth’s ring, which the latter unfortunately brought with him without returning it. Charlotte consoled Élisabeth, telling her to be calm and that she would explain to her mother of how it had happened if she was to ask. But Élisabeth didn’t get her ring back until two months later, when she and Lebas also professed their love for one another. Françoise and Maurice agreed to let them marry, however, the engagement was soon complicated by Maximilien’s old collegue Armand Joseph Guffroy. 

The lawyer had stayed in Arras at the outbreak of the revolution, authoring many pamphleths in support of the new developments. In them he often displayed radical ideas — among others things that women should have the right to be included as both electors and representatives in the new regime. He had also frequently corresponded with Maximilien about the situation in Arras (we have nine letters from 1791 conserved), before being elected to the National Convention on September 9 1792 and, like Augustin, heading to Paris in order to take a seat in the new government. Now he slandered Élisabeth to Lebas, saying that she had multiple love affairs. Élisabeth and Lebas soon discovered that he had only said so in order to get Lebas to marry his own daughter, Louise Reine, at that point already pregnant with the baby of her father’s printer. ”This malicious man was known less than favorably on more than one account,” Élisabeth bitterly stated in her memoirs, ”he knew only how to bad-mouth everyone; he was despised by all and viewed negatively by his colleagues. The Robespierre brothers had a great contempt for him…”

Six months before the marriage between Lebas and Élisabeth, Charlotte and her two brothers had dinner together with Rosalie Jullien, mother of the young Convention deputy Marc-Antoine Jullien. On February 2 1793, she wrote to her son: ”Robespierre, his brother and his sister are to dine with us today. I shall get acquainted with this patriotic family whose head has made so many friends and enemies. I am most curious to see him close up…” Eight days later, Rosalie could report that she had not been unhappy with the result: ”I was very pleased with the Robespierre family. His sister is naive and natural like your aunts. She came two hours before her brothers and we had some women’s talk. I got her to speak about their home life; it is all openness and simplicity, as with us. Her brother had as little to do with the events of August 10th as with those of September 2. He is about as suited to be a party chief as to clench the moon with his teeth. He is abstracted, like a thinker; dry, like a man of affairs; but gentle as a lamb; and as gloomy as the English poet, Young. I see that he lacks our tenderness of feeling, but I like to think that he wishes well to the human race, more from justice than from affection. Robespierre the younger is livelier, more open, an excellent patriot; but common for the spirit and of a petulance of humor which makes him make a noise unfavorable to the Mountain.”

On July 19 1793, a decree from the Committee of Public Safety tasked Augustin with the mission of going to the Army of Italy. ”It’s a painful mission,” Augustin wrote to Buissart the following day, ”I have accepted it for the good of my country; I’m convinced that I will serve it with utility, if only by destroying the calumnies with which my name has been nourished.” Perhaps Charlotte saw this mission as an opportunity also — an opportunity to escape the circumstances which her conflict with Madame Duplay had put her in and get to see new parts of the country. She asked to be brought along, which her younger brother joyfully agreed to, and the two departed together with Jean François Ricord, another representative on mission, and his wife.

Augustin was right in that the mission would be painful, something which Charlotte too would go on to carefully describe in her memoirs. On their way to the army, they made a stop in Lyon, which was currently in insurrection. Augustin and Ricord went into the Hôtel de Ville to talk to some municipal officers, while Charlotte and Madame Ricord remained in the carriage. They were soon surrounded by a growing crowd, showing them their national cockades as proof of their patriotism and asking what was said of the lyonnais in Paris. The two women answered that they knew nothing about it. Meanwhile, Augustin and Ricord conversation with the municipal officers had erupted into a quarrel, and the two representatives decided it was best both to leave Lyon as well as abandoning the main route when doing so. They set out for Manosque where they remained for two days, but their stay there, as Charlotte admitted, ”was not without danger.” They were badly regarded by the people who reconized them and had two soldiers brought along for protection. When it was time to resume the journey, said soldiers they went ahead in order to scout out the country. As the group was preparing to cross the banks of Durauce, the soldiers returned in a hurry to tell them about Marseillais armed with canons on the opposite bank. They therefore returned to Manosque from which they then went to Forcalquier without misfortune, where they were offered services and supper. But hardly had they sat down at the table after not having eaten since morning when an express from the mayor of Manosque came to tell them to take flight immidiately as the Marseillais were once again in pursuit of them. It was eleven o’clock in the evening, and the only course to take was to reach the mountains between Forcalquier and the department of Vaucluse. They took horses, since a carriage would prove useless in the mountains, and walked the whole night on horrible roads, scaling uneven cliffs where the animals had difficulty carrying them and were constantly making false steps. The next morning the group reached a village where the pastor showed them hospitality, and after having taken a few hours rest, they were on the road again, reaching Sault in the evening. After three pleasurable days spent there, they returned to Manosque, lying about being followed by six thousand troops in order to keep the situation under control. Finally, after a troublesome journey, they reached Nice in the beginning of September.

Public spirit in Nice was no better than in all of Provence, but there they at least had no counter-revolutionaries after them. The general in chief, Dumerbion, and his general staff protected Charlotte and Madame Ricord while Augustin and Jean François made frequent outings. But there was still unsafety to be reckoned with. Charlotte remembered that she and Madame Ricord stopped attending the theater after having hostile locals attempt to throw apples at them. They instead kept occupied by making shirts for the soldiers, and in the evenings they went for walks and horseback rides in the countryside. But soon, ”several journals paid by the aristocracy” back in Paris started accusing them of acting like princesses with their equestrian outings, and Maximilien wrote to let his siblings know. Augustin vetoed any more horse back rides, and Charlotte promised to abstain from riding from then on. But not long after, Madame Ricord, who according to Charlotte ”was the most frivolous and inconsiderate person in the world,” proposed they should go on yet another one. Charlotte reminded her of what her brothers had said, but Madame Ricord just laughed it off. As the coach and the horses were already prepared, Charlotte resigned and joined her on the ride.

Two days afterwards Augustin returned. When he didn’t reproach Charlotte for the carriage ride she assumed he was aware of the fact she had been forced into it. But the following day he did call her out for it, and Charlotte, feeling the need to explain herself, called Madame Ricord to testify that the ride had been her idea. To her ”surprise and indignation”, Madame Ricord, instead of telling the truth, enforced the lie that it was Charlotte that had wanted the ride and taken her with her against her will. Augustin chose to believe her, much to Charlotte’s distress. ”[Augustin] knew I was incapable of lying. Why then did he not want to believe me?” Charlotte wept much over the scene when she was alone, but refused to show anything to her brother, who didn’t speak more about the incident but kept a certain coldness in regards to Charlotte which caused her more despair. 

Then, Madame Ricord suggested to Charlotte that they should go to Grasse together, which she agreed to. But hardly had they arrived when a letter was brought to Madame Ricord. Madame Ricord told Charlotte that the letter was from Augustin and that he prayed her to return as promptly as possible to Paris. Charlotte was shocked, but nevertheless obeyed, the next morning she got into a private coach and went back to Paris.

Charlotte would later refuse to believe that Augustin had actually asked her to leave — according to her, Madame Ricord must have forged the letter and afterwards slandered her to her brother, saying that she didn’t care about him and that this was the reason for her brusque departure. But Charlotte also hints at there being something more between Madame Ricord and Augustin:

”How should one esteem a woman who knows so little of the rules of propriety and her duties as a wife to commit the gravest offenses against them? How should I have loved a person who continually compromised my younger brother with her advances, to which he believed it essential to his honor and duty not to respond? In truth, if modesty did not hold back my pen, I would say some things which would not be to Madame Ricord’s advantage.”

The memoirs of Paul Barras (1895), him too a representative to the Army of Italy at the same time as Augustin, lean in the same direction: 

”Fully convinced that women constituted a powerful aid, [Bonaparte] assiduously paid court to the wife of Ricord, knowing that she exercised great influence over Robespierre the younger, her husband's colleague. […] Robespierre the younger was particulary attached to Madame Ricord.”

If Charlotte is right and both she and Augustin fell victim to a trap set up by Madame Ricord, or if Augustin consciously sent his sister away so she wouldn’t be in the way of his love affair is something we can never know for sure…

Regardless, Charlotte returned to Paris somewhere in the fall 1793 (Mary Young, biographer of Augustin, fixes the date for her departure somewhere around October 26). According to Mauricé-André Gaillard’s memoirs, it was now that Charlotte’s grapple with Françoise and Éleonore became too much to bear, and she started persuading Maximilien that, occupying such a high rank in politics, he ought to have a home of his own. ”Maximilien recognized the fairness of my reasons,” Charlotte writes, ”but long fought my proposition that he should separate from the Duplay family, fearing to distress them.” In the end, he agreed, although hesitantly, to move into an apartment on rue Saint-Florentin. Being interrogated after thermidor, Simon Duplay revealed that Augustin too went to live there after his return from the army of Italy, although, according to Charlotte’s memoirs, he didn’t want to see his sister during his stay. Already in mid-January he was sent off on another mission. As for Maximilien, he soon enough fell ill (given his periods of illness, this most likely happened in February 1794). When Françoise came to visit, she made a great fuss over not having been informed about it. ”She said some very disobliging things to me,” writes Charlotte, ”she told me that my brother had not had all necessary care, that he would have been better cared for with her family, that he would lack nothing.” She managed to convince Maximilien into moving back to her house. ”My brother at first refused weakly; she redoubled her insistences, I should say, her obsessions. Robespierre, despite my protests, decided finally to follow her.”

Charlotte stayed behind at rue Saint-Florentin, probably feeling bitter and unloved. ”At the end of the day, should he not have considered that his preference for Madame Duplay distressed me as much at least as his refusal could have afflicted this lady? Between Madame Duplay and me should he have hesitated? Should he have sacrificed me to her?” She still went to see her brother quite assiduously — the new apartment after all only a five minute walk from the one on Rue Saint-Honoré — and sent him jams, fruit comfits or other sweets. Françoise always received her in a disgraceful (I could not use another term, Charlotte writes) manner. One time, Charlotte charged her domestic (possibly madame Delaporte) to bring Maximilien a few jars of jam. But Françoise stopped her and told her angrily: “Bring that back, I don’t want her to poison Robespierre.” Receiving news of this, Charlotte, like in the case of Augustin, chose not to tell her brother, in fear of causing him pain and provoking a scene, and instead swallowed in sadness her grief and indignation. Eventually, she too moved back to Rue Saint-Honoré, but her relationship with the Duplays hardly got any better.

But there were more things than family affairs occupying Charlotte’s mind. In an undated, anonymous letter the sender asked the receiver to inform her brother (these two are undoubtly Charlotte and Maximilien) about some pieces deposited at the Committee of Public Safety concerning Dorfeuille and Merle, two hébertists of Commune Affranchie (Lyon) and Ain and their relations with Collot d'Herbois. “The impunity still enjoyed by the counter-revolutionaries in the department of Ain raises fears that knowledge of it has been taken away from him,” the sender writes, undoubtly thinking Charlotte could have some influence over Maximilien and get him to do something about the situation.

Still more relevant is this letter, penned down on April 25 1794 and sent off to Charlotte :

”We passed through Arras without stopping; while we relayed, I acquitted myself of your commission. What has been said of your country is true; for six weeks one hundred and fifty people have been guillotined and about three thousand imprisoned. Citizens went to find a friend of your brother (Buissart); he was told: ”Only you can make the truth heard. Robespierre trusts you.” He answered them: ”How could I write, since every evening we already witness the departure of letters?” Saint-Just's report and the decree that those accused of conspiracy will be brought before the Revolutionary Tribunal in Paris (the decree of 27 Germinal Year II/April 16, 1794) had given rise to some hopes; but yesterday it was published that throughout the Republic, the city of Arras alone would not enjoy the sagression of this law. It has long been agreed that a man invested with great powers does more harm than good when he is sent to his country. For a long time, we have agreed on the moral virtues of priests. What is the use of being such good theoreticians? I do not doubt that there existed in Arras counter-revolutionaries and fanatics; but terror must weigh on them alone, and the patriot must be able to rely on the impassivity of the judges and the freedom of debate and opinion. I'll spare you other details that are too atrocious to be believed, when you haven't been an eyewitness. If I had more time, I could have given you more detailed facts; I cannot tell you what I have heard from different people without having had the time to verify it. We go into the countryside tomorrow. I forgot to tell you that the prosecutor of the revolutionary tribunal is arrested and the revolutionary commissar broken. Adieu, salut et fraternité. Bruslé, employed by the citizen Richard.”

Charlotte’s hometown Arras, situated near the Belgian border with several enemy armies just a few dozen kilometers away, had since a few months back been the target of severe repression. On October 29 a Committee of Public Safety decree written by Maximilien had entrusted Joseph Lebon, Arras’ former mayor who had now become a Convention deputy, to serve as representative on mission to the department of Pas-de-Calais (of which Arras is the capital). Lebon showed great severity in dealing with offences against the revolution. Around 500 death sentences were passed in Cambrai and Arras, of which two-thirds were handed out in the latter town between March and July 1794 — a high number for an area that, unlike places like Lyon and Toulon, had never risen in revolt against Paris. One of the people most active in the repression was none other than Charlotte’s cousin Antoine-Philippe Carraut, who, according to Louis-Eùgene Poirier, amused himself with stripping, plundering and threatening the prisoners. The law of 14 frimaire had stated that all future suspects were to be tried in Paris, however, a few exceptions were made with the prisoners of Arras being one of them. It was once again Maximilien who had been the author behind the decree informing the authorities of Arras about this, dated April 19. On the same day, Lebon had issued arrests against members of the former Revolutionary Tribunal of Arras: its president Beugniet, the public prosecutor Démouliez (who, as seen above, had helped Charlotte and Augustin out financially before they moved to Paris), Gabriel Leblond, Denton and his wife. The five were taken to Paris by gendarmes on May 4 to appear before the Revolutionary Tribunal. This affair had caused great emotion in Arras. The Buissart couple had initially been positive in regards to Lebon, as shown through a letter written to Maximilien on February 2 1794, but as winter turned to spring their feelings started to cool, and on April 25 Antoine wrote to Maximilien to reproach him for his silence, claiming to have attempted to warn him for three months about what was going on in Arras.

Someone else who wasn’t fond of Lebon was Armand Joseph Guffroy, who’s position had diminished since his arrival to the Convention. On the fourth anniversity of the revolution, July 14 1793, he had founded a newspaper called le Rougyff ou le Frank en vedette, in which he had violently demanded the guillotine for anyone threatening the republic. But on March 3 1794, he had been expelled from the Jacobins after being denounced by the deputy Chasles, who called the Rougyff ”the tomb of common sense.” At the same time he had also been forced to resign from his functions as member of the Committee of General Security. Guffroy was accused of having connections with the former Marquis de Travanet, and of forcing the Revolutionary Committee of the Picques section to release Dumier, Louis XVI’s former locksmith. English letters were also found in his papers.

Guffroy, at the same time as he was expelled from the Jacobins, boldly attacked Joseph Lebon in his journal and pamphlets which he edited, printed and published himself. He was denounced by Darthé, the public prosecutor of Arras, but still wasn’t worried. On May 7, Guffroy tried to get into contact with Maximilien to try to persuade him to do something about Lebon — ”You said the other day at the Jacobins that in wanting to make virtues reign we did not want to be persecutors,” he wrote that day. ”I think you mean what you say. Why then do you protect the persecuting priest Joseph Lebon, who killed patriotism in Arras, and who made scum and crime reign there? He advised him to quickly recall Lebon and in his place send ”a firm and prudent man to restore confidence in Arras, Florent Guiot for example.” The very same day, Buissart wrote a letter to Guffroy, from which we learn that Charlotte had been in contact with both the former and the latter: “We salute the citoyenne Robespierre; my wife has just received her letter; tell her as soon as possible that I will immediately give her the clarifications she requests.” Guffroy claimed in his Secretes de Joseph Lebon et ses complices (1795) that Charlotte, along with other women, attempted to take steps in favor of the arrested deputies mentioned above:

”I was not discouraged; Leblond's sister, Demeulier's (sic) daughter, Buissart's wife, Robespierre's sister, to whom he was also almost invisible, took every means to reach him.”

Furthermore, Marc-Antoine Gaillard (1757), a friend of Charlotte’s brothers and former suitor Fouché (the latter of which he had worked together with at the College of Arras) claimed in his memoirs to have met Charlotte somewhere in May 1794 (given what we know it must have been early in the month). Gaillard had by then taken steps in favor of the magistrates of Melun, denounced by the Popular Society of the city for having signed an address to Louis XVI denouncing a demonstration of June 20, 1792. He had gone to Charlotte to hear her opinion on the subject. Charlotte would have named with great bitterness the prodigious number of very honest people dragged to the scaffold by Lebon and asked Gaillard to tell her how he had been able to save himself from prison. After Gaillard asked her for help, she raged against the Duplays:

”When my younger brother passed through Melun, the three of us were living together; I still hoped to be able to bring back Maximilien, to snatch him from the wretches who obsess over him and lead him to the scaffold. They felt that my brother would eventually escape them if I regained his confidence, they destroyed me entirely in his mind; today he hates the sister who served as his mother… For several months he has been living alone, and although lodged in the same house, I no longer have the power to approach him… I loved him tenderly, I still do… His excesses are the consequence of the domination under which he groans, I am sure of it, but knowing no way to break the yoke he has allowed himself to be placed under, and no longer able to bear the pain and the shame of to see my brother devote his name to general execration, I ardently desire his death as well as mine. Judge of my unhappiness!… But let’s return to what interests you. The addresses to the king on the events of 1792 are already far from us; it seems to me that the signatures of these addresses are persecuted less than those who protested against the day of May 31. Try to see Maximilien, you will be content; he was very glad that our younger brother saw you at Melun. On this occasion he spoke with interest of the exercises of your pupils and of the attention you had in entrusting him with presiding over them. I won’t introduce you to him, I would not succeed; I even advise you not to speak to him about me. You will be told he is out, don't believe it, insist on your visit.”

Gaillard went to the Duplays, where he was greeted by what he called ”the son of the family” (could be both Jacques-Maurice or Simon). Indeed, the first thing he was told was: ”the representative isn’t home.” Gaillard insisted and gave Jacques-Maurice/Simon a paper for him to pass to Robespierre, on which he reminded him of their former relation. After a short time, Jacques-Maurice/Simon returned, saying ”the representative didn’t know you” before violently shutting the door. Meeting up with Charlotte again, Gaillard reports her as saying:

“I prepared you for it. No one can approach my brother unless he is a friend of those Duplays, with whom we are lodging; these wretches have neither intelligence nor education, explain to me their ascendancy over Maximilien. However, I do not despair of breaking the spell that holds him under their yoke; for that I am awaiting the return of my other brother, who has the right to see Maximilien. If the discovery I just made doesn't rid us of this race of vipers forever, my family is forever lost. […] Maximilien, who makes me so unhappy, has never given a hold, as you know, in terms of delicacy. Imagiene his fury when he learns that these miserable Duplays are using his name and his credit to get themselves the rarest goods at a low price from the merchants. So while all of Paris is forced to line up at the baker's shop every morning to get a few ounces of black, disgusting bread, the Duplays eat very good bread because the Incorruptible sits at their table: the same pretext provides them with sugar, oil, soap of the first quality, which the inhabitant of Paris would seek in vain in the best shops... How my brother's pride would be humiliated if he knew the abuse that these wretches make of his name! What would become of his popularity, even among his most ardent supporters? Certainly my brother is very proud, it is in him a capital fault; you must remember, you and I have often lamented the ridicule he made for himself by his vanity, the great number of enemies he made for himself by his disdainful and contemptuous tone, but he is not bloodthirsty. Certainly he believes he can overthrow his adversaries and his enemies by the superiority of his talent.”

Afterwards, Charlotte arranged for an interview between Gaillard and Couthon. While the two men discussed the situation at hand, Charlotte and Couthon’s wife Marie stood by a window overlooking the Tuileries. But the cordial interview turned to tragedy once Gaillard exclaimed: ”Today, we are leading to the scaffold seventy unfortunates whose condemnation has no other reason than the signature of this address (to the king regarding the demonstration of June 20 1792).” Charlotte, seeing Couthon burst into fury at Gaillard’s words, threw herself upon him and held him still in the armchair he was sitting while yelling at Gaillard to escape from there and meet her up later. The two found each other at the Orangerie and walked from there to Place de la Révolution. Charlotte told Gaillard that he was a victim of the profound hypocrisy of Couthon who wanted to get to the bottom of his thoughts. But, she added, Couthon doesn’t know that he doesn’t live in Paris and probably doesn’t remember the name of the city where the accused judges sit. She therefore urged him to flee, which Gaillard also did.

If Charlotte supposed that things between her and Augustin would have patched themselves up, and that Augustin would even come to take her side in her struggle against the Duplays, as shown in Gaillard’s account, she was very wrong. In a letter to Maximilien, her younger brother wrote the following:

“My sister does not have a single drop of blood that resembles ours. I have seen and learned so much about her that I regard her as our greatest enemy. She abuses our spotless reputation to lay down the law on us and threatens to take a scandalous step in order to compromise us. We must take a decisive stand against her. We must make her leave for Arras, and thus take her away from us, a woman who causes our common despair. She would like to give us the reputation of bad brothers, her calumnies spread against us aim at this goal. I would like you to see the citoyenne La Saudraie (Augustin’s mistress), she would give you certain information on all the masks that it is interesting to know in these circumstances. A certain Saint-Félix seems to be from the clique.”

This letter is unfortunately undated, but the context allows us to fix at April-May 1794. By then, Augustin would not have seen Charlotte since January, or, if what Charlotte writes in her memoirs is true and he didn’t want to meet her during his short stay in Paris either, October. What had caused him to think this ill of his sister? Had he found out about her contacts with men that, in his and Maximilien’s eyes at least, were to be considered ”unpatriotic?” That is what Guffroy believed — ”Robespierre, speaking about me with someone, treated me like an aristocrat; he reproached his sister for frequenting a conspirator” he wrote in Secretes de Joseph Lebon et de ses complices (1795). On another occasion the same year he claimed that ”[The brothers] drove her out of their house because she did not think like they did, because she came to see my wife and because she met citizens who were sincere friends of justice and truth.”

Even if an account dated post-thermidor deserves to be treated with caution, it can nevertheless be observed that the Saint-Félix Augustin believed to have belonged to Charlotte’s ”clique” was Emmanuel Musquinet (Saint-Félix was his alias), since February 19 1794 under loose house arrest for being compromised in a case of false assignats. The arrest had caused great indignation for Hébert who spoke of “vile merchants who arrest a fine person like the friend Saint-Félix for having made the enemies of the people known.” Saint-Félix also had been a frequent visitor to the imprisoned hébertist Ronsin before the latter’s execution. His brother Musquinet-Lapagne had, according to a report dated October 24 1793, denounced Marat and Robespierre to the Popular Society of Le Havre of which he was the president. He had then been arrested in November 1793 and guillotined on March 16 1794, accused of having tried to ignite civil war between the communes of Ingouville and Le Havre, abused his functions as mayor to make home visits to the citizens of the commune and use these occasions to steal precious objects, as well as for arbitrary kidnappings. A copy of a letter written by Musquinet-Lapagne on September 6 1793, in which he attempted to justify himself, bore at the bottom the following text: ”for certified copy: Guffroy.”

On May 14, the Committee of Public Safety recalled Joseph Lebon from Arras. Robespierre was the author of the decree, but judging by its tone and content it would not appear like he was cross with Lebon after what people like Guffroy and Buissart had told him about his conduct:

”Dear Colleague,  The Committee of Public Safety needs to confer with you important objects, it does justice to the energy with which you have suppressed the enemies of the revolution, and the result of our conference will be to direct it in an even more useful way. Come as soon as possible, to return promptly to the post where you currently are.”

Lebon came back, and, after having justified his conduct, quickly set off for Arras once again, this time bringing with her none other than Charlotte. According to Guffroy, this decision was made the following way:

”Lebon returned to Paris for 24 hours. He spoke to the committee, to Lebas, to Saint-Just and to Robespierre. He was very diligent with the latter. His sister, worthy of the esteem of all good citizens, reproached him for his cruelty, he denied it, and under the pretext of making her an eyewitness, he brought Robespierre’s sister with him. Robespierre wanted to get rid of her: his correspondence proves it.”

While Guffroy’s account probably deserves to be nuanced, we can still ask ourselves if the ”more useful way” Maximilien had hinted Lebon should use his energy for was in fact the mission of bringing Charlotte back to Arras, considering how little time passed between his arrival to and departure from Paris. Was it willingly or forcibly that Charlotte boarded a carriage together with a man who she, according to Gaillard and Guffroy, had deplored of and accused of bloodlust a few days earlier? We don’t know. Nevertheless, Charlotte and Lebon reached Arras on May 17, as announced in a letter written by the deputy Darthé two days later: 

”Lebon returned from Paris the day before yesterday, the Committee of Public Safety has rendered him all the justice that he deserved and his slanderers were covered with contempt. […] He also brought with him citoyenne Robespierre.”

Charlotte’s uncle Deshorties had died in December 1792, not long after her departure for Paris, but waiting for her in Arras were Deshorties’ son Régis, brother of Maximilien’s old fiancée Anaïs, and of course Antoine and Charlotte Buissart. According to Robespierre (1935) by J.M Thompson, the house on Rue des Rapporteurs had been sold, so it’s probable Charlotte stayed with one of her friends or relatives instead.

Charlotte didn’t make known how bad the relationship with her brothers had gotten to her friends. It’s also probable she spoke ill of the Duplays once again, as a letter from Buissart to Maximilien, dated June 28, contains mistrust of them: ”This letter will be delivered to you under the address of my wife, because I do not have the greatest confidence in your secretary and in many other people that surround you. It is still friendship that makes me speak like this.” In the same letter Buissart also told Maximilien that since a month back, he, his wife and Charlotte had been insulted by one Carlier, who called the first one a conspirator and the two latter his accomplices.

Eventually Charlotte set out for Paris once again, promising step-cousin Régis Deshorties to inform him once Augustin arrived there too. She first went to Lille, where she met up with a man who then escorted her back to the capital. This was Florent Guiot, who Guffroy had suggested Robespierre should replace Lebon with in the letter cited above. Guiot had been sent to Arras by the Committee of Public Safety on November 22 1793, where he too had quickly become an enemy of Lebon. 

Charlotte’s motivation for leaving Arras is unknown, but given Buissart’s letter it is possible she felt threatened. Guffroy goes further than that and claims it was in order to evade arrest — ”Lebon had [Charlotte] denounced to the popular society of Arras, by his cutthroats, as an aristocrat. Her apparent crime, and at least the pretext for her arrest, was to have been with Payen de Neuville la Liberté, an estimable farmer, whom Lebon had guillotined, and brother of another Payen, member of the constituent assembly who had served as father and friend to Robespierre, and whom Lebon likewise had guillotined.”[…] Without Florent Guyot (sic), who brought her back to Paris, she would have been imprisoned there.” While his statement should again be treated with a grain of salt, it can nevertheless be observed that the execution date for the two mentioned Payen brothers (June 21 and 26) actually matches rather well with the time Charlotte would have departed from Arras…

She was nevertheless back in Paris by at least July 1, as a letter from the same date written by Buissart to his wife attests — ”embrace [Augustin] for me, render the same service to Maximilien and his sister.” Charlotte Buissart had she too gone to Paris together with her son in order to try and convince Maximilien to get Lebon recalled. According to Guffroy, they lived with Charlotte during their time there, although the above cited letter from Antoine is still adressed to Rue Saint-Honoré.

Charlotte had however no plans to return there, nor to go live on Rue Saint-Florentin again. Augustin was back from his last mission since at least June 28, when he’s listed as speaking at the Jacobins, and clearly had the intention of moving back into the house. We don’t know if there was a final confrontation between the two, but nevertheless, on on July 6, Charlotte sat down and authored this letter to Augustin:

”Your (votre) aversion for me, my brother, far from diminishing, as I flattered myself, has become the most implacable hatred, to the point that the mere sight of me inspires horror in you; also, I must not hope that you will ever be calm enough to listen to me, which is why I will attempt to write to you.  Crushed under the weight of my sorrow, incapable of connecting my thoughts, I will not undertake my apology. Yet, it would be so easy for me to demonstrate that I have never deserved in any way to excite this fury which blinds you, but I abandon the task of my justification to time, which unveils all perfidies, all darknesses. So, when the blindfold which covers your eyes will be torn apart, if you can distinguish the voice of remorse in the disorder of your passions, if the cry of nature can make itself heard, returned from an error which is so fatal to me, do not fear that I will ever reproach you for having guarded it for so long; I will only occupy myself with the joy of having rediscovered your heart. Ah! if you could read at the bottom of mine, you would blush for having insulted it in such a cruel manner, you would see there, with the proof of my innocence, that nothing can erase the tender attachment from it which ties me to you, and that this is the only emotion to which I relate all of my affections; without complaining about your hatred, what does it matter to me that I am hated by those who are irrelevant to me and who I despise? Their memory will never come to trouble me, but being hated by my brothers, I, for whom it is a necessity to cherish them, this is the only thing which can render me as unhappy as I am.  This passion of hatred must be atrocious, since it blinds you to the point of bringing you to slander me among my friends. Nonetheless, do not hope in your delirium to be able to make me lose the esteem of a few virtuous persons, which is the only good which remains to me, along with a pure conscience ; full of a just confidence in my virtue, I can defy you to detract it and I dare to tell you that, beside the good people who know me, you will lose your reputation rather than harming mine.  Thus, it is important to your tranquillity that I am far away from you, it is even important, as they say, to the public sake that I do not live in Paris! I still do not know what I have to do, but what seems the most urgent to me is to clear you of the sight of an odious object, also, as from tomorrow, you can return to your apartment without fearing to meet me there. I will leave from today unless you formally oppose it.  My stay in Paris should not bother you, I take care not to connect my friends to my disgrace, the misfortune which persecutes me has to be contagious, and your hatred for me is too blind in order not to fall on everyone who shows interest for me. Also, I only need a few days in order to calm the disorder of my thoughts, to decide on the place of my exile, because, in the obliteration of all of my faculties, I am in no state to take a course of action.  Therefore, I leave you since you demand it, but, in spite of your injustices, my friendship for you is so indestructible that I will not retain any bitterness from the cruel treatment which you make me endure. When, being disillusioned sooner or later, you will come to hold the feelings for me that I deserve, when shyness does not prevent you from informing me that I have recovered your friendship and, wherever I may be, may I even be beyond the seas, if I can be useful to you in anything, know how to inform me of it and I will soon be by your side.   I send you the exact summary of the expenditures which I have made since your departure for Nice. Sorrowfully, I have learned that you have singularly degraded yourself through the manner in which you have spoken of this affaire d'intérêt. Because of this, I oblige you to observe that, in all of these expenditures, there are debts for the shoemaker, the tailor, a washtub, and powder, prior to my return from Nice, you will also observe that the money that was returned to Madame Delaporte had been lent by her to René during my stay in Nice, that the 200 livres given to René are for his wages which had not been paid to him in the last year, finally, you will also distinguish postage for letters, and if you still have any doubts after this, you can share them with me, I will elucidate them, I will give all of my remaining money to you, and it this does not match my expenditures, this can only be because I have forgotten a few items.  Robespierre  PS: You will observe that the polisher is not paid, nor is the locksmith who has made a key for your secretary.   PS: You have to think that, while leaving your apartment, I will take all necessary precautions in order to not compromise my brothers. The quarter where citoyenne Laporte lives, to whose home I plan to retreat temporarily, is the place of the entire republic where I can be ignored the most.”

According to Hector Fleischmann and Albert Mathiez, Charlotte must have had someone help her write this letter, given as there are typos only in the first half of it. Both identify this person as Guffroy. Whatever the case, Charlotte left the letter in her old apartment and went to live on 200 Rue de la Réunion (today rue Beaubourg?) with Madame Delaporte (Laporte), who, as shown through the letter to Augustin, had been the siblings’ domestic while on Rue Saint-Florentin. Her husband, François Sébastien Christophe Delaporte, had recently been appointed judge for the Revolutionary Tribunal in Paris, whose sessions he participated in since July 9 and forward. In his memoirs, he only had the following to say regarding Charlotte and her brothers:

”I never had relations with any member of the former government, nor with Robespierre, my wife having gotten to know his sister took her into our home, when she was proscribed by him because of her feelings which were quite opposed to his. Certainly, one could not be the friend of this implacable man, when one welcomed his enemies.”

According to the memoirs of Charlotte, she never saw her younger brother again. She found herself with Maximilien one or two more times; but then in the presence of several others, so that it was impossible for her to speak to him of personal things. She met Joseph Fouché from time to time on the Champs-Elysées, where the latter went for walks almost every day. Fouché adressed Charlotte like nothing had happened between him and Maximilien, but once Charlotte found out that he was her brother’s declared enemy she didn’t want to speak with him anymore.

Back in Arras, step-cousin Régis Deshorties wondered why Charlotte lingered with giving him information about her younger brother’s whereabouts. Confused, he wrote to Augustin on July 18 telling him: “Charlotte Robespierre had promised to inform me immediately of your arrival to the capital. Not receiving a letter from her either on this subject or on any other letter of which she should have acknowledged receipt, I imagined (as several people had assured me) that you were going to come to Arras and that this was the reason for your sister's silence.” But Charlotte was not the only person Deshorties was thinking about:

”I left Citoyenne Charlotte a memoir for you. If you see Isabelle Canone before I write to her, tell her that she will soon receive a letter from me. I must, no doubt, be very busy, since I can't find the time to reply to her last two epistles. This would be the place to tell you about my trip to Paris, if I were not quite sure that care will have been taken to inform you about it and that a citoyenne, who alone is worth more than a committee, will have attached some commentary of a half-dry playfulness to it. Be that as it may, I gave Citizene Canone a great proof of devotion, such that none of her friends, I dare say, would have wanted to do the same in the circumstances in which she found herself. However, I was sad to see that of all the people who knew of my precedent, she was the one who felt it the least. This incontestable indifference will not prevent me from being useful to her and serving her with the same zeal on all occasions, for it is in my heart to oblige the unfortunate to the fullest extent of my power. By the way she announces to me that she intends to return to Arras, I believe that she does not enter into the very business where they would have the right to express their opinion and where their advice could be of any use to her.” 

And Deshorties ended by asking Augustin to ”embrace Charlotte Robespierre and her friends for me and receive the tender greetings of your devoted fellow citizen and cordial friend.”

If Augustin received the letter, it must have been one of the very last. Nine days after it was penned down he volunteered to share his brothers fate when the latter’s arrest was issued by the Convention. The following day the two were executed along with 19 others.

This was bad news for anyone who had been allied with the brothers. The following day saw the execution of a total of 71 people declared to have been their ”accomplices.” Men were also quickly sent out to arrest other people close to the brothers — among the very first was the Duplay family, whose members were arrested on thermidor 10, 13 and 14 respectively. The person in charge of arresting Sophie and Victoire Duplay was none other than Florent Guiot, the man who had brought Charlotte back to Paris.

Charlotte herself was arrested three days after her brothers’ execution. She was by then hiding out under her mother’s name Carraut at Rue du Four, No 482 at the home of one Vincent Pierre Béguin, secretary for the commission of the representatives of the people of the Army of Italy, and his wife Marie-Joséphine. Vincent Pierre had previously been appointed by Augustin when he was in Antibes. It is likely that Charlotte got to know him during her stay in the South and that she after her return to Nice also had made made acquaintance with his wife.

The warrant states Charlotte was arrested together with many others:

”13 thermidor. Citizens Laporte, Canone, Gérard, Widow Gérard, Carraut, the Robespierre sisters. Arrest.”

The citoyenne Canone could very well be the Isabelle Canone mentioned by Régis Deshorties in his letter to Augustin.

Brought before her interrogators, Charlotte admitted who she was, while at the same time lying about her age:

”Section du Contrat-Social. The 13th of Thermidor, Year II. There was brought before us Citoyenne Carraut, who was found at Citoyenne Béguin’s in the Rue du Four, No 482, Section du Contrat-Social. She was asked her name, age, rank and residence. She replied that she was called Marie Marguerite Charlotte Robespierre, twenty-eight years of age, living on her income, and residing for about a month past at Citoyenne Laporte’s, No. 200, Rue de la Réunion.”

When interrogated, Charlotte claimed that she had been obliged to leave rue Saint-Honoré on the orders of her brothers and Madame Duplay. Madame Duplay had also reproached her for seeing revolutionaries among which was ”Guffroy, representative of the people.“ Charlotte said that ”her older brother resented her because she had the courage to let him know the danger he ran in being surrounded so badly,”  and that “the men around him were trying to deceive him.” She further added that "if she had suspected the infamous plot that was brewing, she would have denounced it rather than see her country lost.” She herself also denounced a man named Jean-Baptiste Didier, “who was for a period of time secretary to her elder brother, and that after that was appointed as juror to the Revolutionary Tribunal.” As for Delaporte, Charlotte claimed to have been unaware of the fact that he had been an appointed member of the Revolutionary Tribunal.

Others arrested together with Charlotte were more blunt:

”Section du contrat social  Comité révolutionnaire  13 Thermidor, Year 2 of the Republic There appeared before us citoyennes widow Girard, residing on rue du Doyéné, section of Thulieries n. 289, and Canone, residing in the same house, arrested at the home of citoyenne Béguin, residing on rue du four Honoré. When asked what had urged them to go to citoyenne Béguin, they replied that they had learned that citoyenne Robespierre was with citoyenne Béguin and that they were going to congratulate her on the happiness she was currently enjoying when she was finally free from the infamous tyrants Robespierre who had never had another purpose but to sacrifice their sister. When asked to tell us if they knew people who more usually frequented Robespierre, they responded that they did not know the people who habitually associated with the infamous Robespierre, that they had never seen him, that they only knew their unfortunate sister;  Reading to them the protocols made of their requests and answers, they said that they contained the truth and signed:  Cannone   Widow Girard”

When Madame Béguin was interrogated, she claimed that Daillé and the juror Lebrun (Topino Lebrun) had told citoyenne Lavaux and Mérimey (Mérimet) that she should stop seeing Robespierre’s sister ”as Lebrun knew that anyone who saw her would be guillotined,” and that Fouquier-Tinville frequently went to Robespierre the older and “that one sent lists of those that one wanted to guillotined.”

We don’t know when Charlotte was released, but she was soon once again having a hard time. On November 18 1794, she wrote to her uncle Durut back in Arras the following letter. She evidently still had contacts with Antoine Buissart, who had hurried to denounce her older brother after thermidor.

28 Brumaire, year three of the French Republic  My dear uncle, I have instructed Citizen Buissart, who left here yesterday, to see you on my behalf in order to give you my news. If I had known of his departure an hour earlier I would have asked him to give you a letter which would have contained all the affections he promised to give you from me. He told me that you were in good health, and that his hasty departure from Arras had not left him time to warn you about it: I easily believed him when I did not see a letter from you, I hope you use the facility of the post office to give me news about you.  Providence always serves me very badly my dear uncle, the 400 livres note you sent me was found to be fake, a person I know who had changed it for me in time brought it back to me yesterday very affected by the affront that she had experienced; it had only been a slight accident if I had been able to give change for the note, however, the person did not want to bother me with it: she had the honesty to tell me that she would wait for the one who gave it to me to return the sum; I send it back to you in this letter so that you give it to the person who deceived you, I urge you, my dear uncle, to be very careful not to receive these counterfeit notes; and as I believe that you know them no more than I do, to have them examined before receiving them; because one is exposed to many inconveniences when one has the misfortune to present oneself with a counterfeit note and it is a loss which is very disturbing when one is not rich.  I hope you won't be long in giving me news of you. I expect from your friendship the consolations that my misfortune requires, you say yourself that one cannot expect much from men, which proves that you are of the small number of those who honor misfortune. It is in vain that I confide in Providence before making it sensitive to my pain; why leave me so mistreated by fate that there has never been on earth such a terrible position as mine, foreign to everything, I want to see my sad existence end and if I can I will drag it beyond the seas. Farewell my dear uncle, give me your news, spare your health and remember your niece who embraces you wholeheartedly.”

At some point, Charlotte was asked by Guislain Mathon (1759) commissioner of transport, to move in at his place. Mathon was him too from Arras, had been a friend of Charlotte’s brothers, and featured on ”a list of patriots with more or less talent” written by Maximilien somewhere in 1793. At first Charlotte refused his offer, but, once her situation got so bad that she lost all means of existence, she accepted it. But Mathon had him too been implicated after thermidor — the very same day as the execution of Augustin and Maximilien, a certain Godard had accused him of having “accompanied this rascal of the great Lacroix on a mission to Brussels” and to have been appointed to this position ”thanks to his childhood friend Robespierre the older.” To save her friend from the denounciation he was facing, on March 14 1795 Charlotte picked up her pen and wrote to the Committee of General Security the following letter:

”…Alas, calumny is so active, so ingenious in forging its appearances; innocence has been its victim so many times and I am so unhappy that I must suspect myself even of the most unnatural events.  I will not undertake the apology of Citizen Mathon. I will only tell you that, forced to leave my brothers, unjustly irritated against me, he had the courage to offer me an asylum with him in spite of their protests. He did not incite me into accepting it. I went to live with him when my misfortunes became greater and made me too burdensome to those who had first taken me in.  If I hadn't lost all my means of existence, I would never have exposed anyone and preferred to die rather than associate my friends with my disgrace. This is now what redoubles the horror of my situation. It is to get rid of this idea which overwhelms me that I conjure you citizens, in the name of humanity and justice, not to tolerate that those who have lavished on me the generous care of friendship are for that exposed to an unjust proscription. Seek further information from citizen Mathon and you will only find the purest patriotism and the virtues of a good man in his entire conduct.  Salut, fratérnité,  Robespierre.”

Help was coming, from none other than Guffroy who at the bottom of Charlotte’s letter wrote: ”The Committee of General Security orders that she should be left alone, as should citizen Mathon with whom she is staying, who is known by several members.” Guffroy had since the execution of Charlotte’s brothers been reinstated to the Committee of General Security. This was not the only help he would provide Charlotte with, in another, undated decree, he wrote the following:

”Guffroy, member of the Committee of General Security to his collegues:  The French people honor the unhappiness.  It is to obtain one of these acts of justice which would honor the nation, that I present the following claim:  I know that the citoyenne Caroline (sic) Robespierre, sister of the two deputies whom the sword of national justice has struck, is plunged into a state of dependence which makes her truly free soul groan. Friendship, however, has sought to soften her sorrows, but the state of destitution in which she finds herself, the deterioration of her health, caused by long sorrows, does not allow her to devote herself to assiduous work.   I am well aware of the ingratitude and injustice of her brothers towards her, while she did everything for them in the just belief that they would not abandon her. The ties of blood made it their duty, and those of gratitude made it more imperative; because I know that the Robespierres, from their mother, only had an income of 100 livres, their father who had abandoned them died in a hospital at... (the name has been left blank in the original); well, the two brothers after studying at the college of Louis Legrand (sic) sold the capital of their income to support themselves, and their generous and imprudent sister, despite the prediction of an aunt, also sold for them the capital of her 400 pounds income when it was a question of helping them get to Paris. They drove her out of their house because she did not think like they did, because she came to see my wife and because she saw citizens who were sincere friends of justice and truth. She even exposed herself to prosecution when Lebon took her to Arras, and without Florent Guyot, who brought her back to Paris, she would have been imprisoned there, because Lebon's accomplices had denounced her in their infernal club which they called popular society.  The citoyenne Robespierre had the delicate idea of ​​giving her brothers about a thousand pounds which she had saved and six silver spoons and forks, two of which, at least, belonged to her, but she didn’t even want to be suspected. She has no wealthy relative who can take her in, her good uncle, Durut, a doctor, has sent her some help.  At the moment she is staying with one of our mutual friends. She owns nothing aside from her clothes. Her sagging life, her bosom altered by grief, prevent her from making lace, on which she could make a living. She could work, but the little she does is far from procuring her even so much as bread. It seems to me to be part of the dignity and part of the justice of the Convention, to anticipate misfortune and to honor virtue in the sister of a conspirator. The nation should, in my opinion, offer her help so that she can procure furniture and a pension capable of sustaining her in the state of infirmity and languor to which grief has reduced her.  GUFFROY  I ask that the Committee of General Security be good enough to refer this memorandum to the Committee of Support with recommendation.”

A few months later, Guffroy also wrote the following decree, which was counter-signed by none other than Edme-Bonaventure Courtois, the man behind the (im)famous Rapport fait au nom de la commission chargée de l’examen des papiers de Robespierre (1795).

”24 germinal, year 3 (April 13 1795)  After having received the most exact information on the patriotism of citoyenne Caroline (sic) Robespierre, the Committee declares that the results are all in her favor, that it knows that this citoyenne was persecuted by her brother and forced to leave him; that the Supervisory Committees of the sections of Paris, and the Committee of General Security have already rendered her justice, that the purity of her conduct and her civic principles stems from the Rapport de la Commission de Papiers de Robespierre made for the National Convention by the representative of the people Courtois; it therefore declares that wherever citoyenne Robespierre wishes to travel and retire, she deserves the confidence of good citizens and the protection of the constituted authorities, who are invited to lend her the aid and assistance that the purest and most civil good citizenship deserves and French loyalty must grant. The members of the Committee of General Security: Sevestre, Mathieu, Guffroy, Auguis, Thibaudeau, Lemartin, Delecloy, Perrin, Gauthier, Courtois, Monmayou, Chénier, Rovère, Clauzel.”

We don’t know if Guffroy’s idea of providing Charlotte with a pension was followed up or not. But on September 24 1803, two years after his death, we find on the other hand the following request made by ”Mademoiselle Robespierre, then residing on Rue Jacob 26”, give rise to the following decision:

“The Grand Judge will give her 600 francs once paid and 150 francs a month. Bonaparte.”

This is supplemented by a story recorded in Charlotte’s memoirs, but there the sum is much bigger. According to it, Charlotte was advised to ask for an audience with Napoleon after the latter became first consul. ”Bonaparte received me perfectly, spoke to me of my brothers in very flattering terms, and told me that he was prepared to do anything for their sister: “Speak, what do you want?” I exposed my position to him; he promised me to take it into consideration; in effect, some days later I received a certificate for a pension of 3,600 francs.” Charlotte had earlier also been friends with Napoleon’s wife Joséphine, the future empress even giving her a portrait of her in 1790 as a token of friendship. They continued to see one another after thermidor, until one day, they broke entirely, Charlotte meaning Joséphine had ”showed all the insolence of a grande dame of the court of Louis XV.”

Besides the money given by Napoleon, from an archival document we also learn that Charlotte received a “relief” of 150 francs three times during the first six months of the year XII (1803) and a relief of 200 francs on several occasions during the year XIII (1804). Finally, from February 8 1805, we find this decree, written by none other than Charlotte’s former suitor Joseph Fouché, by then Minister of Police:

Madame Collot (d’Herbois)   their titles are common Mademoiselle Robespierre   as well as their distress. Per month: 200 livres. Per year: 2400 livres. for special help.

With this pension, or to be more exact, matter of relief, Charlotte was set to live for another 29 years on Rue de la Fontaine (later rue de la Pitié and today Rue Larrey) with her ”excellent and respectable friend” Mathon and his daughter Reine-Victoire (born 1785), the latter of whom, according to Laponneraye, ”loved Charlotte like a mother.” Reine-Victoire stayed by Charlotte’s side after her father’s death in 1827. According to Pierre Joigneaux, in the 1830s, the two women occupied themselves with making underclothing together.

Perhaps Charlotte continued to hide under her mother’s lastname Carraut. According to Joigneaux and Laignelot (letter dated 1825) she also took the pseudonym of Caroline Delaroche during the Restoration. Delaroche was the name of a relative who had served as mentor for Maximilien during his first few years as a student in Paris.

Charlotte was far from universally loved. Albertine Marat, when asked about Robespierre in 1835, exclaimed: ”Oh! His sister, his sister, his bad sister!” Her hostility was confirmed by Pierre Joigneaux who wrote in Souvernirs historiques (1891) ”I recollect that, about 1833 or 1834, a sister of Marat lived on the top floor of a house on the Place Saint-Michel […] Mlle Marat disliked Robespierre’s sister, who was also still alive and in Paris, and did not associate with her. Mlle Marat had character: Charlotte Robespierre was absolutely lacking in strength of mind.” François-Vincent Raspail, the man interviewing Albertine, wrote that ”everyone knows today that [Charlotte] was the Charlotte Corday of her brothers, minus the selflessness and courage.” Likewise, Élisabeth Lebas, once Charlotte’s friend, reproached her for her name change: ”Yes, I preferred to go take in wash on a boat rather than ask assistance of our poor friends’ assassins. I feared neither death nor persecution. I was not the one who repudiated my name; it pains me to say it, but Mlle Robespierre was the one who took her mother’s name, Charlotte Carreau (sic).” Élisabeth’s son Philippe wrote in his Dictionnaire encyclopédique de l’Histore de France (1840-1845) that Charlotte ”does not blush to receive from the assassins of her brothers a pension of 6000 fr. at first, then reduced successively to 1500, which was given to her by all the succeeding governments until her death. She left memoirs which contain curious information, but where the false is too often mixed with the true.” As for the conflict between Charlotte and her mother, Élisabeth had only this to say: ”Poor mother, she thought Charlotte was as pure and sincere as her brothers. Good God, that was not the case."

By May 24 1830, it would however appear that Charlotte had gone back to her original surname, the particle included, as she used it when writing the following letter to the editor of the journal l’Universel:

”Monsieur,   In your issue of the 5th of this month, you contest the authenticity of the Memoirs of Maximilien Robespierre. In general there can be no reply to the rightness of your reasoning; but there is in this article a phrase conceived thus: “Yet the editor sought faithful documents, and, if what I have been told is true, he could have found them. An elder sister of Robespierre vegetates in Paris, in the most obscure corner of a Faubourg, and this woman is overwhelmed by age, poverty, and the weight of her dreadful name. Having bought a few rescued souvenirs from her, it was not difficult to compensate for what other biographers have omitted to rectify, errors in facts, errors in dates, etc. etc.” What you have been told, Monsieur, is not only inexact, but it is false. It is true that Maximilien Robespierre’s sister, not his eldest, but his junior by twenty months, vegetates, overwhelmed with poverty, age, and, you could have added, serious and painful infirmities, in an obscure corner of the patrie that gave her birth; but she has constantly repulsed the offers of intriguers who, for the past thirty-six years, have tried numerous times to traffic with her name; but she has sold nothing to anyone; but she had had no relation direct or indirect with the editor of her brother’s so-called Memoirs; and those who have said that Maximilien Robespierre had known need in his childhood, and that he was a choirboy in the cathedral of Arras are imposters. I regard, Monsieur, as injurious to my honor and my probity, the idea that anyone could have bought any rescued souvenirs from me. I belong to a family which has not been reproached with venality. I will bring to the tomb the name that I received from the most venerable of fathers, with the consolation that no one on earth can reproach me with a single act, in the long course of my life, which does not conform to the prescriptions of honor. As to my brothers, it is for history to pronounce definitively on them; it is for history to recognize one day whether Maximilien is really guilty of all the revolutionary excesses his colleagues accused him of after his death. I have read in the annals of Rome that two brothers were also outlawed, massacred in the public square, their bodies cast into the Tiber, their heads paid for in their weight in gold; but history does not day that their mother, who survived them, was ever blamed for having believed in their virtue.  Monsieur, I have the honor of saluting you, De Robespierre” (when this letter was published within Charlotte’s memoirs, the particle was removed).

We don’t know if Charlotte wrote this letter under the influence of Albert Laponneraye (1808). This young man had moved to Paris in 1828 to work as a private teacher, but already in 1831 he was in prison along with other republicans. He there wrote le Cours public d’Histoire de France depuis 1789 jusqu’à 1830 which appeared in 1831 and where particular tribute to Robespierre. Laponneraye was released the same year, only to again be arrested and sentenced to two years in prison. On June 27, 1833, Laponneraye was again sentenced by the Seine Court of Assizes to three months in prison and fined 50 francs for a letter written to the Proletarians from the Sainte-Pélagie on February 1, 1833.

We don’t know exactly when or how Charlotte and Laponneraye got into contact with one another. According to the latter, Charlotte wanted to get to know him after getting hold of his writings and reading the positive things he had to say about her brother. ”I will always remember the strong emotion I felt on seeing her for the first time; for her part, she was no less moved, and, unable to speak to me at first, she pressed my hands with an expression that I will never forget.” The two developed a close friendship and had long and frequent conversations. Laponneraye’s imprisonment made the interviews more rare, but Charlotte nevertheless came to visit him in the nursing home to which he’d been transferred. The one letter we have between them displays much affection. It is written by Charlotte on February 20 1834, two weeks after what would turn out to be her last birthday:

”It is not easy for me, my friend, to express to you the feeling of tenderness that you make me feel; the verbal reply I made to your lovely sister proves to you that I appreciate all its grandeur and delicacy. I repeat, you are worthy of making your offer, and you do not deserve to be refused. I therefore accept from the best, from the most human and from the most tender of sons (a thousand times happy the mother of such a son!), I accept a quarter of your offer, because I believe that that will be enough for me, given that I receive two hundred francs a year. This friend didn't promise me anything, but she is so regular in giving me her gift that I think she will continue. I shall therefore receive from him who is willing to have for me the feelings of a son, whom I regard as such, and for whom I had so much affection, I shall receive, not only with gratitude, it is a completely natural thing, but with pleasure. Receive with pleasure! this word contains everything, I believe you will be satisfied with me. A few thoughts come to me which, my friend, I must share with you. The good that you want me to enjoy will cost you trouble, work, perhaps awake hours, finally privations, and I ask you if the heart of a mother does not feel anything from making these reflections? Nevertheless, I do not deny myself of it; you no, you won't refuse me, deprive me of the means, because it is irresistible. Oh! how my brothers would have loved you! Farewell. Receive my regards for all your family, which is mine. Robespierre  A thousand kind words from Mademoiselle Mathon.”

The hard work Charlotte says Laponneraye has ahead of him may be an allusion to her memoirs, which he based on notes from and conversations with Charlotte.

Charlotte died on August 1 1834, aged 74. According to Laponneraye, she refused to have a priest visit her, saying that saying that she had practiced virtue all her life, and that she was dying with a pure and calm conscience. Four o’clock in the afternoon, she passed away in Reine-Victoire’s arms. It was the latter who announced Charlotte’s death the very same day:

”Paris, August 1, 1834 Mlle. Reine Louise Victoire Mathon has the honour to inform you of the death of Marguerite Charlotte Robespierre, who died at four o’clock yesterday (sic) afternoon. The obsequies will take place on Sunday afternoon, August 3rd. The funeral procession will leave the house of the deceased, 3, Rue de la Fontaine, at ten o’clock in the morning.”

Charlotte had already been preparing for her death, as her testament was written already in 1828:

”I, Marie-Marguerite-Charlotte de Robespierre, undersigned, enjoying all my intellectual faculties, wishing, before paying to nature the tribute that all mortals owe her, to make known my feelings towards the memory of my eldest brother, declare that I have always recognized him as a man full of virtue. I protest against all the letters contrary to his honor which have been attributed to me. In wanting to dispose of what I will leave after my death, I appoint for my universal heiress mademoiselle Louise-Victoire Mathon, by which I want that all that I will leave on my death be collected in full ownership. In faith, done and written by my hand, in Paris, February 6, 1828. De Robespierre.”

Charlotte left behind a very modest inventory, including the aforementioned portrait of Joséphine, a mahogany bed, three mattresses, a small mahogany table, a small walnut painting, six chairs and an old armchair, three silver cutlery with the family initials, a dozen old napkins, in good condition together with tablecloth, six old pairs of sheets, a dozen worn shirts, a wholesale old dress from Naples, and three other dresses in canvas, twelve aprons and dishcloths, a stove and its pipes, two dozen plates, several dishes and a few black bottles, a decanter and six glasses, various kitchen utensils, and, perhaps most conspicuous of all, a lithographed portrait of her older brother and a painted portrait of her younger. Charlotte died without leaving any debts behind.

The funeral was held on August 3, two days after Charlotte’s death. According to Laponneraye ”a considerable crowd of patriots followed the procession,” a description which was confirmed by Pierre Joigneaux, who wrote that ”a number of people accompanied Charlotte to the field of rest, on Laponneraie's [sic] recommendation.” Laponneraye, being imprisoned, was unable to attend the funeral, but he nevertheless wrote wrote a speech that was delivered by one of his friends. The speech contained nothing but praise for both Charlotte and her brother Maximilien, but also phrases that from an objective point can only be called false:

”[Charlotte] was slandered, she was reproached for having denied her brother, for having made a pact with those who immersed themselves in the blood of the martyr of Thermidor. What a horrible blasphemy! No, virtuous and unfortunate Maximilian, your sister did not deny you, she did not apostatize herself by trampling under her feet the principles which have been the gospel of her whole life.” 

Laponneraye published Charlotte’s memoirs the same year she died. And as with most memoirs, the truth was sometimes twisted in them to fit the narrative its author wished portrayed. It’s impossible to know if these distortions were the work of Charlotte, Laponneraye or both.

Perhaps the most blatant lie came when describing the circumstances regarding Charlotte’s arrest — according to the memoirs, on 10 Thermidor, Charlotte would have ran to the Conciergerie prison where her brothers had been imprisoned and begged to see them, only to be repulsed, insulted and struck by the soldiers in front of her. She was led away by a few people, having lost her reason, and once she regained it she was in prison together with another woman. The woman told Charlotte that a lot of people had been arrested at the same time as her and would probably mount the scaffold, their only crime being to have known her before thermidor. For a fortnight she begged Charlotte to write to the members of the committees who had left the last struggle victorious, and implore their pardon. She finally gave in, but asked the woman to actually write and for herself to just put her signature on the paper. They so did, and the next day both were freed. This story easily falls apart when confronted with actual documents regarding Charlotte’s arrest.

Regarding the long letter written on July 6, the memoirs not only felt the need to correctly point out that it had been adressed to Augustin and not, as told by the deputy Courtois when publishing it in his Rapport fait au nom de la commission chargée de l’examen des papiers de Robespierre (1795) Maximilien, but also to falsely claim that it contained apocryphal phrases. An encounter with the fac-simile proves that it in fact did not.

As for the engagement with Fouché, ”Charlotte” now changed the story so that the wedding plans had taken place during the revolution. Fouché had only sought her out because her brother occupied the first place on the political stage, and the engagement had been broken up after Maximilien’s horrified reaction to Fouché’s actions in Lyon. This can hardly have been true considering Foché, as mentioned, was already married by the time Charlotte even arrived in Paris.

Charlotte also took her time to reveal her thoughts on people she thought had wronged her — in particular madame Ricord and the Duplays. She attacked the idea of Éleonore having had anything ressembling a romantic relationship with Maximilien – ”He told me twenty times that he felt nothing for Éléonore; her family’s obsessions, their importunities were more suited to make feel disgust for her than to make him love her. The Duplays could say what they wanted, but there is the exact truth. One can judge if he was disposed to unite himself to Madame Duplay’s eldest daughter by something I heard him say to Augustin: “You should marry Éléonore.” “My faith, no,” replied my younger brother.”

But mostly, Charlotte wanted to use the memoirs to underline her attachment to her two brothers, and sweep under the rug anything that might prove evidence to the contrary. ”I am proud to carry your name;” Charlotte wrote, ”it is glorious to be of your blood, to belong to the great Robespierre, who was the inflexible enemy of all injustice, of all corruption, and who now would be extolled by those who create history to the gages of the aristocracy, if he had made pacts with the people’s oppressors.” That she had been exiled to Arras, very likely on the order of her brothers, she made no allusion to, nor to the connections she had had with people such as Guffroy, Gaillard and Saint-Félix. Laponneraye, when publishing the memoirs, also included a preface in which his love for Charlotte and esteem for her brother truly shines through, but which from an factual point of view sometimes can’t be taken seriously…

”Charlotte Robespierre had received from nature the sweetest and loveliest of virtues. Without gall, without violent and hateful passions, she was always even-tempered, always affable in character. […] The turbulent agitations of politics would have made her flee to the ends of the earth, if the ardent tenderness which tied her to her brothers had not kept her in her homeland. Passionate about the private life, she could never bring herself to leave it, and was always careful not to imitate those women who, forgetting the role that suits their sex, throw themselves madly and ridiculously into a career that is not made for them. So she played no part in the extraordinary events that signaled the time when her older brother was in power. […] Charlotte Robespierre occupied herself with politics only as much as is necessary for her to follow her brothers with her eyes in the arena where they fight hand to hand with crime.”

Sources for this:

Mémoires de Charlotte Robespierre sur ses deux frères (1835)

Charlotte Robespierre et ses amis (1961) part 1, part 2  by Gabriel Pioro and Pierre Labracherie

Charlotte Robespierre et ”ses mémoirs” (1959) by Gabriel Pioro and Pierre Labracherie

Charlotte Robespierre et Guffroy (1910) by Hector Fleischmann 

Le Testament de Charlotte Robespierre (1919) by Jean Gaumont

Charlotte Robespierre et le 9 Thermidor (1920) by Albert Mathiez

Une lettre de Charlotte Robespierre (1939) by Louis Jacob

Maximilien et Charlotte Robespierre, article published in Le Petit Temps, May 28 1909 by Maurice Dumoulin, with extracts from La Révolution, la terreur, le Directoire, 1791-1799, d'après les mémoires de Gaillard (1909).  Gaillard full memoirs unfortunately can’t be found online.

Les secrets de Joseph Lebon et de ses complices (1795) by Armand Joseph Guffroy

Correspondance de Maximilien et Augustin Robespierre (1926) by George Michon

La famille de Robespierre et ses origines. Documents inédits sur le séjour des Robespierre à Vaudricourt, Béthune, Harnes, Hénin-Liétard, Carvin et Arras. (1452-1790) (1914) by A. Lavoine

La Jeunesse de Robespierre et la convocation des Etats génétaux en Artois (1870) by J.-A. Paris

[aboxthecolourofheartache]

☔ for the wip asks!

*cracking my knuckles* right, so.

There is, in the recesses of my mind, a Nirvana in Fire fic that I will probably never write but it is perpetual daydream material. It's too far removed from the source material and relies far too much on personal headcanon. (I am aware I wrote/am still planning to finish - EVENTUALLY - a 100k+ fic in which Lin Chen is a magical fox spirit that involves dragon politics, which is basically nothing BUT divergence from canon, so "too far removed from the source material" sounds like a lame excuse, I know, I know D': )

Also, you don't Nirvana in Fire, but you asked for the Conceptual Thing!! ^^;; The story would follow Mei Changsu and Lin Chen around the jianghu in the years prior to Mei Changsu's return to the capitol/culmination of his plans. They haven't known each other for 13 years, yet. They don't fully understand each other - yet. They haven't quite gotten to "having you is better than having ten doctors."

It would be a series of vignettes capturing moments when they start to realize that they've finally found another person who can keep up with them. We see Mei Changsu beginning to grasp how much ruthless intelligence and martial skill Lin Chen hides. Meanwhile, Lin Chen grows to admire and trust Mei Changsu's conscience, that he means what he says about justice, stewardship, and equity.

There are martial arts showdowns in bamboo forests, brutal decisions made about information brokering/management of intelligence networks, efficient and compassionate deployment of a growing jianghu sect as disaster relief, and clever uses of the legal system to oust corrupt provincial officials. There is also at least one "unfortunately, my doctor is kind of hot when he's covered in someone else's blood" moment and several "my father knew exactly what he was doing when he tasked me to babysit this very pretty, eloquent, and persuasive idealist, fuck my life" moments. Exactly zero romantic or sexual tension is resolved because they are too busy being insufferable sapiosexuals and aesthetic appreciators. Also I just don't like writing romantic or sexual resolutions. Not my cup of tea.

I just...don't know enough about the genre, culture, or history to write any of it in a way that doesn't feel like stepping way the hell out of my lane and going 50mph down the freeway against traffic? Yes, I could certainly study up! Perhaps there will be a day when I think I might have enough of a grasp to attempt it! The premise for the fox fic has a fuck-off massive bibliography, and I still put my foot in it constantly and get nervous about the whole damn thing. Hence the reason it is taking me. Literal years. I am so sorry.

So, in the meantime, the jianghu adventures fic is daydream fuel that will remain in my brain.

[blueiskewl]

The Tomb of Marquis of Haihun in China

Dethroned after 27 days, the shortest reign among Western Han emperors, Liu He (92-59 B.C.), master of the Haihunhou Tomb, was banished as a commoner, and later allowed to reside near a lake and given the title of the Marquis of Haihun. He died in his early 30s.

Such vicissitudes might have deprived his life of imperial glory, but the relics unearthed from his tomb tell a different story, revealing a dynasty's grandeur.

The tomb near Nanchang, capital of east China's Jiangxi Province, turns out to be the best-preserved Western Han Dynasty (206 BC - 24 AD) cemetery ever found, with the most integrate structure, distinct layout and complete sacrificial system.

One of China's top ten archaeological discoveries in 2015, the tomb has yielded the largest number of relics boasting of  the most variety and the finest craftsmanship in Jiangxi.

Among a raft of  relics including gold, bronze, and jade artifacts, archaeologists discovered a broken lacquer "screen" in the main chamber of the tomb and restored two portraits, one of which is believed to be the earliest portrait of Confucius ever found in China.

Also unearthed were more than 5,000 pieces of bamboo slips of Confucian classics, indicating the prevalence of Confucius' teachings among the royal more than 2,000 years ago.

The Qi version of The Analects of Confucius, which had been lost for about 1,800 years, was found in the unearthed bamboo slips which have been subject to infrared scanning and are ready for further study.

It is also the only tomb with a chariot burial site in the south of the Yangtze River. Five well-preserved horse-drawn vehicles, each with four sacrificed horses, were found, indicating that the owner was among the highest echelons of the Han Dynasty.

Liu, the marquis, was the  grandson of Emperor Wu, whose reign ushered in  a  prosperous period  of the Han Dynasty that is believed on a par with the reign of the first emperor of Qin Dynasty.

"To know Emperor Qin and his dynasty through archaeological artifacts, one can turn to Terra-cotta Warriors. Nevertheless, before the Haihunhou tomb, there were not many artifacts for an in-depth study of Emperor Wu," said Yang Jun, a researcher at the Jiangxi Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and the leading archaeologist.

In Yang's view, the Haihunhou tomb shed light on the mightiness of the Han Dynasty as all treasures bearing the mark of the marquis had been buried with him.

The 4 million unearthed Wuzhu bronze coins attested to the dynasty's opulence. This finding  is the first hard evidence of the Chinese using a string of 1,000 coins as a monetary unit, pushing the original date back 600 years.

[videbi]

The Best Books

The list is made from an academic point of view. More books may be added or any book may be taken out of the list at anytime.

Books that enlightened, outraged, provoked and comforted us

Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen, 1813

Emma by Jane Austen, 1815

The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas, 1844

Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte, 1847

Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray, 1848

Great Expectations by Charles Dickens, 1860

Les Miserables by Victor Hugo, 1862

Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, 1866

Little Women by Louisa May Alcott, 1868

Middlemarch: A Study of Provincial Life by George Eliot, 1874

Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy, 1877

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, 1884

Germinal by Émile Zola, 1885

The Short Stories of Anton Chekhov by Anton Chekhov, 1888

The Ambassadors by Henry James, 1903

In Search of Lost Time by Marcel Proust, 1913

Dubliners by James Joyce, 1914

The Mysterious Stranger by Mark Twain, 1916

Ulysses by James Joyce, 1922

The Magic Mountain by Thomas Mann, 1924

An American Tragedy by Theodore Dreiser, 1925

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald, 1925

To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf, 1927

Coming of Age in Samoa by Margaret Mead, 1928

All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Remarque, 1929

The Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner, 1929

The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas by Gertrude Stein, 1933

Tender is the Night by F. Scott Fitzgerald, 1934

Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell, 1936

Death on the Nile by Agatha Christie, 1937

Out of Africa by Isak Dinesen, 1937

Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston, 1937

The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck, 1939

Romola by George Eliot, 1940

Black Boy by Richard Wright, 1945

Hiroshima by John Hersey, 1946

Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe, 1946

A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams, 1947

Under the Volcano by Malcolm Lowry, 1947

The Sheltering Sky by Paul Bowles, 1949

The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger, 1951

Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison, 1952

Lord of the Flies by William Golding, 1954

The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway, 1954

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov, 1955

Notes of a Native Son by James Baldwin, 1955

Our Man in Havana by Graham Greene, 1958

The Civil War by Shelby Foote, 1958

Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction by JD Salinger, 1959

Rabbit, Run by John Updike, 1960

Where Angels Fear to Tread by E. M. Forster, 1960

The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs, 1961

The Making of the President by Theodore H. White, 1961

Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov, 1962

The Spy Who Came in from the Cold by John le Carre, 1963

A Moveable Feast by Ernest Hemingway, 1964

The Autobiography of Malcolm X by Malcolm X, 1965

Manchild in the Promised Land by Claude Brown, 1965

Against Interpretation, and Other Essays by Susan Sontag, 1966

In Cold Blood by Truman Capote, 1966

One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, 1967

The American Cinema by Andrew Sarris, 1968

The Double Helix by James Watson, 1968

The Electric Kool_Aid Acid Test by Tom Wolfe, 1968

I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou, 1969

Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut, 1969

The French Lieutenant’s Woman by John Fowles, 1969

Are You There God? It’s Me Margaret by Judy Blume, 1970

Ball Four by Jim Boutton, 1970

The Complete Stories of Flannery O’Connor, 1971

The Best and the Brightest by David Halberstam, 1972

The Politics of Nonviolent Action by Gene Sharp, 1973

All The President’s Men by Bob Woodwad and Carl Bernstein, 1974

The Power Broker by Robert A. Caro, 1974

Ragtime by E. L. Doctorow, 1975

Sociobiology by Edward O. Wilson, 1975

The Executioner’s Song by Norman Mailer, 1979

The Clan of the Cave Bear by Jean M. Auel, 1980

Follow The River by James Alexander Thom, 1981

Psychoanalysis: The Impossible Profession by Janet Malcolm, 1981

The Fractal Geometry of Nature by Benoit Mandelbrot, 1982

The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill by William Manchester, 1983

The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera, 1984

The Center of the Cyclone by John Lilly, 1985

Great and Desperate Cures by Elliott Valenstein, 1986

Maus by Art Spiegelman, 1986

The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes, 1986

And the Band Played On by Randy Shilts, 1987

Beloved by Toni Morrison, 1987

The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom, 1987

A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking, 1988

Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era by James M. McPerson, 1988

The Society of Mind by Marvin Minsky, 1988

Summer’s Lease by John Mortimer, 1989

A Prayer For Owen Meany by John Irving, 1989

A Soldier of the Great War by Mark Helprin, 1991

Mortal Questions by Thomas Nagel, 1991

PIHKAL by Alexander and Ann Shulgin, 1991

Lonely Hearts of the Cosmos by Dennis Overbye, 1991

The Six Wives of Henry VIII by Alison Weir, 1991

Band of Brothers by Stephen E. Ambrose, 1992

The Talented Mr Ripley by Patricia Highsmith, 1992

The English Patient by Michael Ondaatje, 1993

Dreams from My Father by Barack Obama, 1995

Montana Sky by Nora Roberts, 1996

Tuesdays with Morrie: An Old Man, a Young Man, and Life’s Greatest Lesson by Mitch Albom, 1997

War Before Civilization by Lawrence Keeley, 1997

How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker, 1997

A Walk in the Woods by Bill Bryson, 1998

In the Name of Eugenics by Daniel Kevles, 1998

Who Moved My Cheese? by Spencer Johnson, 1998

Interpreter of Maladies by Jhumpa Lahiri, 1999

A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers, 2000

Nonzero by Robert Wright, 2000

Chocolat by Joanne Harris, 2000

The Secret Life of Bees by Sue Monk Kidd, 2001

The Illusion of Conscious Will by Daniel Wegner, 2002

Atonement by Ian McEwan, 2003

The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini, 2003

The Known World by Edward P. Jones, 2003

Gilead by Marilynne Robinson, 2004

My Sister’s Keeper by Jodi Picoult, 2004

Portofino: A Novel (Calvin Becker Trilogy) by Frank Schaeffer, 2004

Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro, 2005

The Book Thief by Marcus Zusak, 2005

The Girl With a Dragon Tattoo by Stieg Larsson, 2008

Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke The World, 2009

Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience and Redemption by Laura Hillenbrand, 2010

Washington: A Life by Ron Chernow, 2010

Orientation: And Other Stories by Daniel Orozco, 2011

Books that inspired debate, activism, dissent, war and revolution

The Torah

Bhagavad Gita

I Ching (Classic of Changes) by Fu Xi

Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu

The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, 1266

The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri, 1321

Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes, 1605

Ethics by Baruch de Spinoza, 1677

Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan, 1678

Candide by Voltaire, 1759

Confessions by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1781

Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant, 1781

Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville, 1835

A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens, 1843

Moby-Dick by Herman Melville, 1851

Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe, 1852

Walden (Life in the Woods) by Henry David Thoreau, 1854

Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert, 1857

Experiments on Plant Hybridization by Gregor Mendel, 1866

War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy, 1869

Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche, 1883

Arabian Nights by Andrew Lang, 1898

The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists by Robert Tressell, 1914

Relativity: The Special and General Theory by Albert Einstein, 1916

Psychological Types by Carl Jung, 1921

Mein Kampf (My Struggle or My Battle) by Adolf Hitler, 1925

Der Process (The Trial) by Franz Kafka, 1925

The Tibetan Book of the Dead by Karma-glin-pa (Karma Lingpa), 1927

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, 1932

The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money by John Maynard Keynes, 1936

The Big Book by Alcoholics Anonymous, 1939

Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre, 1943

The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery, 1943

The Road To Serfdom by Friedrich von Hayek, 1944

Animal Farm by George Orwell, 1945

Survival in Auschwitz: The Nazi Assault on Humanity by Primo Levi, 1947

The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank, 1947

Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, 1949

The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir, 1949

The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt, 1951

Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe, 1958

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, 1960

Guerilla Warfare by Che Guevarra, 1961

Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman, 1962

Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, 1962

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn, 1962

Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung (The Little Red Book) by Mao Zedong, 1964

Unsafe at Any Speed by Ralph Nader, 1965

Catch 22 by Joseph Heller, 1969

The Female Eunuch by Germaine Greer, 1970

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert M. Pirsig, 1974

The Normal Heart by Larry Kramer, 1987

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho, 1988

The Vagina Monologues by Eve Ensler, 1995

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone by J. K. Rowling, 1997

Books that shook civilization, changed the world

The Holy Bible

The Qur’an

The Analects of Confucius

The Iliad and The Odyssey by Homer

The Histories by Herodotus, 440 BC

The Republic by Plato, 380 BC

The Kama Sutra (Aphorisms on Love) by Vatsyayana

On the Shortness of Life by Lucius Annaeus Seneca (The Younger), 62

Geographia by Ptolemy, 150

Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, 160

Confessions by St. Augustine, 397

The Canon of Medicine by Avicenna, 1025

Magna Carta, 1215

The Inner Life by Thomas a Kempis, 1400’s

The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, 1478

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, 1532

On Friendship by Michel de Montaigne, 1571

The King James Bible by William Tyndale et al, 1611

The First Folio by William Shakespeare, 1623

Principia Mathematica by Isaac Newton, 1687

A Tale of a Tub by Jonathan Swift, 1704

Encyclopaedia or a Systematic Dictionary of the Sciences, Arts and Crafts, 1751

A Dictionary of the English Language by Samuel Johnson, 1755

Patent Specification for Arkwright’s Spinning Machine by Richard Arkwright, 1769

Common Sense by Thomas Paine, 1776

The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon, 1776

The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith, 1776

The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1762

On the Abolition of the Slave Trade by William Wilberforce, 1789

Rights of Man by Thomas Paine, 1791

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft, 1792

On the Pleasure of Hating by William Hazlitt, 1826

Experimental Researches in Electricity by Michael Faraday, 1839, 1844, 1855

The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, 1848

On the Suffering of the World by Arthur Schopenhauer, 1851

Leaves of Grass by Walt Whitman, 1855

On Liberty by John Stewart Mill, 1859

On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin, 1859

The Rules of Association Football by Ebenezer Cobb Morley, 1863

Das Kapital (Capital: Critique of Political Economy) by Karl Marx, 1867

On Art and Life by John Ruskin, 1886

The War of the Worlds by H. G. Wells, 1898

The Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud, 1899

The Jungle by Upton Sinclair, 1906

Why Am I So Wise by Friedrich Nietzsche, 1908

Married Love by Marie Stopes, 1918

Lady Chatterly’s Lover by D. H. Lawrence, 1928

A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf, 1929

Civilization and its Discontents by Sigmund Freud, 1930

Why I Write by George Orwell, 1946

[cruger2984]

THE DESCRIPTION OF SAINT STANISŁAUS (Stanislaus) KOSTKA Feast Day: November 13

"What have I done for Christ? What am I doing for Christ? What ought I do for Christ?"

Even though he was a Jesuit for less than a year when he died, Stanislaus Kostka is known for his youthful holiness and iron determination to follow God's call despite family obstacles.

He was a Polish noble by birth (his father being castellan of Zakroczym and a senator of the realm) and was destined for public life.

In 1564, his parents sent Stanislaus and his older brother Paul to study at the newly opened Jesuit college in Vienna. Initially the two young nobles boarded in the Jesuit residence at the college, but moved to the house of Senator Kimberker after seven months. Kimberker was a staunch Lutheran who would not allow a priest to enter his home with the Blessed Eucharist. That became an issue when Stanislaus unexpectedly fell ill with an undiagnosed sickness in mid-December 1565. Stanislaus kept asking for Viaticum, but his brother put him off. Stanislaus prayed to the patron of the sodality to which he belonged, St. Barbara, to intercede with God so he could receive Viaticum before he died. He had a mystical experience of Mary visiting him and placing the Christ Child in Stanislaus' arms, which he interpreted as meaning that he was to enter the Society of Jesus.

After this extraordinary experience, the young nobleman recovered and then approached the Jesuit provincial in Vienna to ask entrance into the Society. The provincial was favorable but said that he could not accept Stanislaus without his parents' approval, which Stanislaus knew they would not give.

The determined student talked to another Jesuit who suggested he go to Augsburg, Germany to ask the provincial there, Father Peter Canisius, to accept him. Stanislaus decided to follow the suggestion and slipped out of Vienna on the morning of Aug. 10, 1567. He left behind his fine clothes and donned coarse pilgrim's robes, which hid him from his angry brother who had followed him on the road but did not recognize him dressed so poorly.

Stanislaus trudged 450 miles to Augusburg and then another day to Dillingen where Fr. Canisius had gone. He explained his desire and offered a letter of introduction from a Jesuit in Vienna. Canisius recognized his sincerity and spiritual qualities and decided to accept him. He also arranged for him to accompany two young Jesuits about to travel to Rome which was further from Poland than Germany, far enough to prevent the family from stopping Stanislaus. Kostka and the two Jesuits left Germany in late September and arrived in Rome on Oct. 25, making their way to the residence of the superior general, Father Francis Borgia.

Stanislaus gave Canisius' letter of recommendation to Borgia, who had the young man remain at the Gesú for three months before going briefly to the Roman College and then to the novitiate of Sant'Andrea.

Stanislaus's novitiate would only last 10 months. In early August 1568 he had a premonition he would soon die. He became sick with a fever. Since he did not seem to be gravely ill, the brother infirmarian discounted his premonition. On Aug. 14, Stanislaus told the infirmarian he would die the next day but the remark was not taken seriously.

Later that afternoon, he took a turn for the worse and lost all strength. He received viaticum and prayed with the novices and other Jesuits who were with him. About three in the morning of the feast of our Lady's Assumption on August 15, he announced that Mary was approaching with angels to take him to heaven and soon died.

He once said that he was able to 'find heaven among the broom and the saucepans.'

[taminoarticles]

— Tamino for Style Magazine Italia, June 2023 (x) (x)

Tamino returns to play in Italy: “The warmer the countries are, the warmer the audience"

The singer will perform at the Rocca Malatestiana in Cesena on July 4th and at the Spazio 211 in Turin on July 5th. "In Italy I always like to play," he says. But "in reality it scares me to meet too many people.” A true hero of introverts.

By Pier Andrea Canei June 15, 2023

The soundcheck is over, Alcatraz sold out, a thousand Milanese waiting to see the star of the evening: the Belgian-Egyptian singer Tamino. He relaxes behind the scenes, drinks green (tea) and wears black (Armani): like a 26-year-old prince of darkness. He has gentle manners, and a voice that vibrates on a broad spectrum. From the dark depths (the school is the one that goes from Leonard Cohen and Jacques Brel to Jeff Buckley and the alt-rock genre called “shoegaze”: emo tones, monochord guitars) to an angelic falsetto.

Soon, Tamino will go out there on stage and, without doing ballets or stepping on flowers, almost motionless except for when he holds his oud (a lute of the Arab tradition), he will attract attention. He is hieratic, with the charisma of a crusader of introverts, quiet people, and young romantic heroes; what allowed him to create a following that goes from [sic], (Colin Redwood [sic], former bassist of Radiohead, left Thom Yorke's group to follow him through studios and tours) up to the Arab world, from which it takes up sounds and instruments.

Tamino: Style's interview

Amir, the title of your first album and your middle name, means "prince" in Arabic. Were you raised as a little prince?

Well, I don't think so. Princes lead a very controlled life, lots of rules, discipline. I had a free childhood.

For the idea of calling you Tamino, like the young prince in Mozart's Magic Flute, we should thank your mother, Eva (de Pauw, anthropologist, hobby musician, passionate about cultures). What was it like growing up in Belgium?

Inspiring in many ways: lots of good art, music, art movements. From the Surrealism of René Magritte, to the music of Tom Barman's dEUS, a band that has opened many doors to the alternative scene. Then there are the negative sides in the social culture: in Belgium we tend not to value the potential of others... We are made like this, we like to see ourselves laying low, leveling ourselves up.

You realized this as soon as you finished compulsory school and left to study music in Holland.

It was an enlightening and difficult experience. From cool Antwerp designers to Amsterdam street style. Two hours by train and you land in another world. I wanted to shake off the provincial part of Belgium.

Habibi: I needed love

And your first hit song was born right in Amsterdam, in 2017: Habibi ... an Arabic and universal word of love.

You can say it to your loved one, to good friends, but also to a waiter: “Come here habibi, bring me a coffee”... Well, during the first days in Amsterdam I was depressed, very lonely, it was difficult to find human ties. I was looking for warmth, love: that piece came from there.

Of that vagueness that generates universality...

I think back to a title from the Talking Heads: Stop making sense. When you write lyrics for a song, you don't have to chase a precise meaning. Better ask yourself if your words convey the right feelings.

Typically Tamino: the yearning, the nostalgia. Songs like Indigo night: nocturnal, brooding, even melancholy. You recognise yourself in it?

I certainly tend to ruminate on things a lot. Too much...

An app to free yourself from the ego

And how do you free yourself from it?

Meditation helps. I also use a specific app, Waking Up: Beyond Meditation. Ten minutes a day is enough. It helps me to free myself from the ego, to feel myself a witness of thought, of consciousness. Simply necessary. More than diet or physical training.

Sahar, the title of the second and most recent album, means "at the crack of dawn."

For me it is already part of the past: the last words I sing are “before I step into darker days”...

That is: “Prima d'inoltrarmi in giorni più oscuri.”

I mean: before facing new torments, new struggles. What helps you grow is discomfort. That's the challenge. Never be afraid to step into the unknown.

Out of the comfort zone...

I like spending some time in New York. I stay out of my own comfort zone, it's not comfortable for me. And doing so inspires me.

Lone sailor

In the video for Sunflower, a duet with the singer Angèle, you have the air of a romantic hero. Do you want to act?

In that video I enjoyed interpreting, even without lines, this figure of the lonely sailor. This was an idea from the director. I've only done a little theater and at most a few sailing trips with friends.

Would you be a testimonial for a perfume?

Well, yes, under the right conditions... For example, a prestigious operation like the Bleu de Chanel campaign with Gaspard Ulliel, with that spot directed by Martin Scorsese.

A spot that stylises the clichés of a rock star life: glamorous places, flashes, meetings with crazy people...

In reality it scares me to meet too many people. I'm a very lonely guy. Even though I’m finding it easier and easier for me to make connections lately, I steer clear of glam dinners or events.

Then you spends the whole summer on the road

I have fun at festivals. My favourite is Into the Great Wide Open, on the island of Vlieland, Holland: 10,000 people, zero cars, music, love and kindness.

Your summer also includes two Italian stages.

I always like to play in Italy. The warmer the countries, the warmer the audience.

I live in Türkiye

Who knows in the Middle East, or in Africa.

We do the biggest lives in Turkey: crazy crowds. And Egypt is like coming home: you feel that for the people it is more than just a concert.

Your surname is famous in Egypt. Your grandfather Muharram Fouad was a musical star, your father started out as a performer.

It's like an Egyptian dynasty of music. A fun fact about me being a huge Lord of the Rings fan is that I've always felt like Aragorn, the legitimate heir to the Elven throne, who travels incognito. Nobody ever knows who he is. I felt like this growing up in Belgium. It was never talked about, nor was there much money, and that side of the family has only emerged now that I'm better known.

Who among the main names would you bring next to you at the festival of your dreams?

I don't even know if I would put myself among the top names... I'd like Anouar Brahem, Tunisian, master of the oud. And then something electronic, maybe the Aphex Twins. And I dream of working with Massive Attack.

Many festivals. But never a festive song?

I should write one first. But generally gloomy, tenebrous things come out to me.

Let's say you sing one happy song and save the world; which one do you choose?

I don't know if a happy song could save the world. Lou Reed's Walk on the Wild Side?

The height of happiness.A matter of feeling: a song can be sad in itself, but make you feel good. A glimmer of hope, an air of comfort. It can wrap you in emotions. Maybe you're sad, and that's okay: because you feel alive. A song full of life: well, for me it will always be a good song.

[ceasarslegion]

So ive been playing skyrim since it came out all the way back in 2011

Obviously, i was a bit younger 13 years ago. And a lot more naive. Didn't know a ton about how the world worked. I didn't even know that I wanted to go into federal work and I barely paid attention in social studies.

Since Skyrim's release day, I moved to 4 different places, most of those cities I also moved to different homes within. I graduated high school, took a few years to gain work and life experience, performed in multiple professional musicals, moved out on my own on the other side of the atlantic where I was the only one I knew on that entire coast, went to uni, started HRT, got involved in street-level activism, graduated uni with a double degree in political science and cinema (and a minor in history!), dealt with my childhood dog dying, nearly died myself of covid, moved again, got a shitty door to door salesman job, quit, got a shitty retail job, quit, got a job in federal security until I can climb the ladder higher, worked a provincial election for the NDP, and met my boyfriend. This is by no means an exhaustive list.

To say that a lot happens in 13 years is a bit of an understatement.

The first time I ever played Skyrim, I joined the stormcloaks. I was a naive kid who didn't know much about politics or the world. I didn't really know much about how all that jargon worked and only saw them as a rebellion against some kind of tyrant. Worked for me.

My recent run I picked up after all these years because I remembered how many hours and years I spent in elder scrolls games. It seemed that no matter how far away I moved or how different everything seemed, I always had either Oblivion or Skyrim to pick up and escape into. I feel a little lost and disoriented in my life now, and needed something familiar and comforting, so I booted it up again.

I got to the quest where you negotiate a ceasefire between the imperials and stormcloaks until the dragons return is dealt with. "Lets make sure we actually have a skyrim left to fight over, yeah?"

The first time I played, I gave the stormcloaks everything. Why wouldnt I? I joined them, after all.

This time was a little... different. I joined the Imperials, and was willing to seceed more territory to the side I wasn't on. Now I have a formal education in politics, and direct experience within it.

If you want Markarth, we need Riften. Winterhold's strategic position isn't a fair enough trade for Markarth's size and direct access to Skyrim's silver mines. No, we aren't sending the Thalmor ambassador away.

The White-Gold Concordant is too fragile and the Dominion's armies too strong to risk alienating them any further and playing with fire for another Great War. I don't like the Thalmor either, but we need to keep them docile enough to build the Empire's armies again to kick them back out, and for that we need time, so she stays.

You ask why the dragonborn has imperial sympathies? It's not sympathy for an imperialist power, it's recongition that this is the only legitimate possibility for a chance at peace again after all tge secessions and the incident at the Imperial City 30 years ago.

Sometimes you just gotta do dirty work to keep the wheels greased and the cart moving. I understand where you're coming from with a lot of things, Ulfric, but your blind fanaticism has both served the Thalmor's interests by diverting the precious resources of the army that can stand up to them fighting your stupid proxy war, and you have turned into a bigot chasing this traditionalist nord supremacy. You are part of the world, you're going to have to play ball with it. You can't have your secret third option and expect to have a Skyrim to come back to in 10 years.

"Even the dragonborn betrays Skyrim." Yeah, that's how a politician throws a tantrum when they don't get their way. But I won't speak up about the hypocrisy of implying that Skyrim's prophecized jesus-figure hero is somehow a traitor to it just because I didn't hand the victory to you on a silver platter. We got a ceasefire and didn't alienate the Thalmor while we need to buy time to regroup. That's the important part.

I don't know, man. When I was a kid I didn't think any of that through. And this time it came so naturally that it was like breathing for me.

It's a bit of a silly thing to draw comparisons through but I think it says something