#Napoleonic reforms

[empirearchives]

Paris Fire Brigade — The fire department of the city of Paris

The Paris Fire Brigade was created by Napoleon on 18 September 1811 after a devastating fire in Paris in 1810. The brigade remains the same firefighting service of Paris to this day.

Illustrations created by Aaron Martinet between 1807 and 1814. Top: Imperial Guard, Engineer Sapper. Bottom: Imperial Guard, Officer of Engineer Sappers. These were the military positions which were transitioned into the fire department.

The deadly fire at the Austrian embassy ball in July 1810, during the festivities for his marriage to Marie Louise, reminded the Emperor of the importance of a well-functioning fire service in the capital.

Despite the courage and dedication of the gardes pompes [firefighters of the old organization], who are sometimes falsely accused of numerous shortcomings, the firefighting service revealed its weaknesses: delays, insufficient and unreliable equipment, poorly trained personnel and incompetent managers. The staff present at the embassy on the day of the tragedy were cleared of all suspicion by an investigation led by the Count of Montalivet. On the other hand, the leaders of the old organization were dismissed, and the corps des gardes pompes was abolished.

After this catastrophe, the Emperor reorganized this public service by creating the first military corps of firefighters, made up of the engineers from the Imperial Guard who were dedicated to defending the imperial chateaux against fire.

At the behest of Emperor Napoleon I, the creation of the Paris fire department [bataillon de sapeurs pompiers de Paris] by imperial decree on 18 September 1811 was an original and innovative step, marking the transition from a civil and municipal organization to a military body. The choice of such an atypical status for a public service echoes the creation, eleven years earlier, of the Paris Police Prefecture, an equally singular legal administrative body.

From its creation, this military corps was placed under the authority of the Paris Police Prefecture, who was responsible for the security of the capital. After a long process, this military status and subordination to a prefect became the logical consequence of the spirit of the decree of 12 messidor year 8.

When the battalion was formed in 1811, the Paris fire department took on a new mission: fighting fires, the importance and development of which they were still unaware of.

Four companies were then created to respond to fires. Relying on a typically military functional triptych (extensive training of men, systematic technological research and implementation of efficient operational procedures), the battalion quickly made its new environment its own, and by the end of the second half of the 19th century, had become a model for the organization of public fire-fighting services and a national, even international reference.

Several fire chiefs succeeded one another until 1814. At that date, command was entrusted to battalion commander Plazanet. He provided the battalion with an instruction manual, made it compulsory for sappers to be stationed in barracks, and introduced gymnastics to train efficient and daring rescuers.

Source: Brigade de sapeurs-pompiers de Paris — Le Bataillon

Picture source: Napoleon's Army: 1807-1814 as Depicted in the Prints of Aaron Martinet, By Guy C. Dempsey, Jr., (Section: Support Troops)

[empirearchives]

I think comparatively wacky beliefs related to medicine was pretty common at the time. However, I don’t think Napoleon would be anti-vax. He was not anti-vax within his own lifetime. Napoleon actually instituted the first large-scale vaccination program, and he had his own son vaccinated. He created the Society for the Extinction of Small Pox (Société pour l'extinction de la petite vérole), and the Central Vaccine Committee (Le Comité central de la vaccine).

https://www.larecherche.fr/histoire-des-sciences-santé-vaccins/napoléon-lance-la-première-campagne-de-vaccination-contre-la-variole

always sad to find out your historical fav would be anti-vax in modern times

[lethe-the-shoggoth]

Charge of the Mexican Cavalry at the Battle of Puebla, Francisco P. Miranda

[burningcheese-merchant]

Ok fuck it. Fuck it I need to rant. I'm disappointed to the high heavens. This just looks like X and Y again. It just looks like they finally bothered to get off their asses and make Pokémon Z like everyone begged for 10+ years ago and they're trying to relabel it as a Legends game. You know what the word "legend" means? It means OLD!!! It's a fantastical tale of days long past! PAST! NOT FUTURE! Why are we in the future!!! There are no legends about the damn future, only the past!!!

How cool would it have been if we were in the Pokémon equivalent of Napoleonic France? If the protagonist was from a lower-middle-class family (maybe even lower, a genuinely struggling protagonist would be interesting, especially within this time period), who set out with their Pokémon to earn money to help out, only to end up caught in the middle of a nationwide shitstorm? What if you ventured throughout the region, through the beaches and mountains and beautiful French/Kalosian countryside, all the way to Paris/Lumiose, where the societal rot is at its most obvious and damning? What if the "evil team" wasn't evil at first, just a band of revolutionaries with their hearts in the right place, seeking change and justice for the broke and starving public against the laziness and corruption of the self-absorbed elite? What if the villain was the king at first, because he and the other royals really are as awful as they're stated to be? What if there were (optional, because not everyone was against the French monarchy) side quests to help spread revolutionary propaganda or help the rebels earn money, gather resources, toughen up their Pokémon in preparation for future battles against the royals? Hell, what if there was a rival group of royalists who acted as the rebels' foil, whom you can also help and hinder as much or as little as you liked?

What if there was an honest-to-God violent coup where people and Pokémon stormed the royal palace and destroy everything in sight (and you could be there, battling guards or something)? What if the king was challenged to a battle and lost miserably, proving once and for all how weak and pathetic he is, and thus overthrown and exiled (can't execute him, this franchise is too cowardly to evolve past being milquetoast kiddie shit)? What if the rebel leader, with his dear Empoleon beside him, took his place and crowned himself emperor right then and there, to the overwhelming joy of his followers and sympathizers, dismay of his opponents, and whatever it is the player chooses to feel, because there should be a genuine undercurrent of historical, political and philosophical discussion about all of this throughout the story that encourages us to form our own thoughts and opinions about the situation?

Only for the rebel leader, the Napoleon figure, to turn out worse than the king ever was, and his close subordinates immediately going mad with their newfound power and practically destroying the country. Then they really ARE the evil team for real this time, because they became the tyrants they sought to destroy, and depending on the player's past actions, it might partially be their fault that they succeeded. Imagine the Pokémon equivalent of the fucking Reign of Terror. People and Pokémon being attacked, imprisoned, exiled (again, they're too chickenshit to kill people. Tens of thousands died during the REAL Reign of Terror). Imagine your new mission going from trying to flee Lumiose and go home (only to fail, because they won't let anyone leave outside of being formally exiled out of fear/paranoia about uncontrolled dissidents) to taking an active role against the new regime, battling police to bust innocents out of jail, reuniting families and friends torn apart by fear and force? Imagine a heated battle against the stand-in for Maximilien Robespierre to help put an end to the madness!!! What if you went to libraries and picked up newspapers and listened to the telegraph and discovered everything has been censored in some way? What if you went into houses and found depressed wives and mothers and sisters and daughters, and opened letters from the men in their families (and their Pokémon, too) who were conscripted into the Kalosian army because the Emperor is trying to wage wars against neighboring regions to fulfill territorial ambitions (which actually did happen, Napoleon's France was constantly at war, which majorly tanked the economy because all the men were sent off to die or be horrifically injured. Remember when they tried to invade Russia? Over half a million troops went, barely 1/6 of them came back)? The climax of the story + defeat of the Emperor in battle can be a nod to the Battle of Waterloo!!! The post-game can have the player looking for runaway rebels like how you hunted for the Sages in post-game Black and White! What if there was a limited time mystery gift event where you could win a ferry ticket to the island the former Emperor is imprisoned on, JUST LIKE THE ACTUAL NAPOLEON, and there was a final cutscene between you and him where you discuss everything that happened and he asserts that he did what he had to and he still believes that he was acting in Kalos's best interest!!! Because many of the revolutionaries really did think that way, they believed they were doing right by France!!! Even when they jailed and murdered thousands of innocent people!!!

But no, we don't get cool shit like that, we get AZ running a fucking inn for whatever reason and an "urban redevelopment plan" that's literally just "let the Pokémon trash half the city with zero repercussions or any consideration for the homes and businesses in the areas they overrun". What the fuck man

[tmarshconnors]

The Napoleonic Code

The Napoleonic Code, also known as the Civil Code of 1804, is one of Napoleon Bonaparte's most significant and enduring legacies. It is a comprehensive system of laws that aimed to reform and standardize the legal framework of France. Before the Napoleonic Code, France's legal system was a patchwork of regional laws, feudal customs, and royal edicts, which created inconsistency and confusion. The code had a profound impact on not only France but also many other countries, serving as a model for modern legal systems around the world.

Key Features of the Napoleonic Code:

Equality Before the Law:

The Napoleonic Code ensured legal equality for all male citizens, meaning that laws would apply equally to everyone, regardless of their birth, class, or wealth. This abolished the feudal privileges that had been enjoyed by the aristocracy under the old regime.

It established the principle that nobles, clergy, and commoners were all subject to the same laws.

Abolition of Feudalism:

The code abolished feudal obligations and privileges, including serfdom and manorial dues, ensuring that people were free from feudal bonds and that property rights were more clearly defined.

Civil Rights and Liberties:

The code affirmed individual rights, such as the right to own property, the freedom of contract, and the right to be free from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment.

It supported the idea of religious freedom, although it retained certain restrictions on freedom of the press and political dissent.

Property Rights:

The code placed a strong emphasis on the protection of private property. Property ownership was seen as a fundamental right, and the code established clear guidelines for acquiring, transferring, and inheriting property.

The inheritance laws introduced by the code were particularly significant: they established that property must be divided equally among all heirs (children) upon the death of a property owner, rather than allowing for primogeniture (where the eldest son inherits everything). This was intended to prevent the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few families.

Secular Law:

The Napoleonic Code was secular, separating the legal system from the influence of the Catholic Church. It made civil marriage the only legally recognized form of marriage, and divorce was legalized, although with more restrictions than under earlier revolutionary laws.

Family Law and Patriarchy:

The code placed significant emphasis on the family, which Napoleon saw as the foundation of society. It gave fathers considerable authority over their children and wives.

Women were largely subordinate under the code. A wife was legally required to obey her husband, and her ability to manage property or engage in legal contracts was limited without her husband’s permission. Women also had fewer rights in divorce and child custody matters.

Codification and Clarity:

One of the Napoleonic Code’s most revolutionary aspects was its clarity and simplicity. Napoleon sought to replace the confusing and inconsistent legal systems of pre-revolutionary France with a single, coherent, and easily understandable legal framework.

The code is written in clear, accessible language, making it more understandable for the public, rather than being limited to legal professionals.

Merit-Based Society:

By ensuring equality before the law and abolishing hereditary privileges, the Napoleonic Code supported a merit-based society, where individuals could advance based on talent and achievement, rather than birth or status.

Influence of the Napoleonic Code:

The Napoleonic Code had a significant influence not only in France but also abroad. Napoleon implemented it in the territories he conquered, and its principles spread to parts of Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland, Germany, and Spain. Over time, many other countries, including those in Latin America and parts of Africa and the Middle East, adopted or adapted aspects of the code into their own legal systems.

Global Legacy:

The Napoleonic Code is widely regarded as one of the most influential legal documents in the world. It served as the basis for civil law systems in many countries, particularly in continental Europe and Latin America.

Its emphasis on equality before the law, property rights, and a secular legal framework has shaped modern legal traditions in many countries. It is still the foundation of civil law in France and has been a model for legal codes around the world, particularly in countries with civil law systems, as opposed to common law systems (like the UK or the US).

The Napoleonic Code was a transformative legal document that codified the principles of the French Revolution—equality before the law, meritocracy, and secular governance—while also promoting a strong, centralized state and patriarchal family structure. Its impact extended far beyond Napoleon's reign, influencing modern legal systems across Europe and beyond, and it remains a foundational element of civil law to this day.

[empirearchives]

Yep, another difference is that it was not hereditary.

From Napoleon: A Life, by Andrew Roberts. Pg. 465.

An unexpected revelation. In all honesty, not really that unexpected in itself, but I'm baffled by how easily wrong information can be spread. I've always wondered, indeed, how it was possible for him to be granted or have asked for the title of count given the feeling of "despise" between him and Napoléon.

The excerpt above comes from Gaffarel's biography (p. 349), Bouchard's one doesn't even mention such misunderstanding. According to the former, some of the earliest Prieur's biographers, whose work I happened to find here, stated that he was made comte de l'Empire without quoting a source and looking at the list of people receiving titles during the Napoleonic Era written by Campardon, Prieur's name is in fact missing.

[ciderbird]

“I have reconsidered my opinion of the first consul. Since becoming Consul for Life, the veil has fallen and things have gone from bad to worse. He began by depriving himself of the finest glory reserved for a human that it remained for him to gather: proving that he was working without any selfish interest, solely for the happiness and glory of his country and faithful to the constitution to which he himself swore, to relinquish after ten years the power he held in his hands. Instead of that, he has preferred to mimic royal courts while violating his country’s constitution. Now he is one of the most infamous tyrants that history has produced.”

- Alexander I on Napoleon in his letter to his former teacher, Laharpe (1803)

[in-sightpublishing]

Why is war on the decline?

Publisher: In-Sight Publishing Publisher Founding: March 1, 2014 Web Domain: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com Location: Fort Langley, Township of Langley, British Columbia, Canada Journal: In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal Journal Founding: August 2, 2012 Frequency: Three (3) Times Per Year Review Status: Non-Peer-Reviewed Access: Electronic/Digital & Open Access Fees: None…

[christa-syd]

The Portrait of Pope Innocent XIV and Cardinal Lawrence (2025)

An homage to Jacques-Louis David's 1808 portrait of Pope Pius VII and Cardinal Caprara during Napoleon's coronation that depicted the Pope's stressful moment as he was forced by Napoleon to travel to Paris.

In this piece I envision that Pope Innocent XIV’s papacy faces some resistance from the traditionalist faction and the weight of it is evident on both their faces.

He wears the Roman chasuble (I used elements of the design by Lisy Christl) and Lawrence wears his pectoral cross (by Riccardo Penko) pinned to his cassock in order to appease the opposition by superficially adopting traditional aesthetics while he implements Church reforms, inspired by the real life reception of Pope Leo XIV by online Trads despite very clearly continuing Pope Francis’s legacy. 

Vincent was also “forced” into the papal throne when he was elected Pope, leaving behind his flock in Kabul, adding to his melancholy.

This will be in my Comic Frontier 21 prints catalog, and is the first in a series of art history inspired Conclave fan art that I have planned for a future personal zine project. International sales and shipping for my other prints are still in the works, but I'll post an update once all is set!

Here's the BTS process with the original paintings by Jacques-Louis David and what the photobash recreation looks like underneath the painting layers.

[empirearchives]

Napoleon and Water

Excerpt from the book Aaron Burr in Exile: A Pariah in Paris, 1810-1811, by Jane Merrill and John Endicott

Aaron Burr lived in Paris for 15 months, and this book goes into detail about those years living under Napoleon’s rule. This part focuses on Napoleon’s water related reforms.

———

Napoleon’s fountains gave drinking water to the population, that is, children drank water, not beer. The water was free, not purchased. And the apartment would have had a separate water closet equipped with squat toilets (adopted from the Turks) and a bucket to wash it after use. Some restaurants and cafes had W.C.s, even one for ladies and one for gents. These were hooked into the sewer system that branched under each important street.

Napoleon merits points for delivering fresh water to Paris. If serving Paris with water from the d'Ourcq River by canals was not be a consummate success, Paris gained 40 new fountains, and the emperor commanded that fountains run all day (instead of a few limited hours) and that the water be free of charge.

Perhaps the most laudable of Napoleon’s policies were utilitarian city works, especially bringing clean water and sanitation to Paris. The improvements to infrastructure included new quays to prevent floods, new gutters and pavement, new aqueducts and fountains, and relocating cemeteries and slaughterhouses to the outskirts of the city. This was also a way of keeping up employment. An Austrian aristocrat in town during Napoleon’s wedding to Marie-Louise wrote his mother, in Vienna: “Nothing can give an idea of the immense projects undertaken simultaneously in Paris. The incoherence of it is incredible; one cannot imagine that the life of a single man would be enough to finish them.”

It was a tall order. Previous rulers had been aware of the problems and one big engineering initiative, a failed marvel, had been the waterworks at Marly, located on the banks of the Seine about seven miles from Paris. Louis XIV had it constructed to pump water from the river to his chateaux of Versailles and Marly. This was the machine marvel of its age, with 250 pumps that forced river water up a 500-foot rise to an aqueduct, and it was a sight Burr mentions going to see. By 1817 the “Marly machine” had deteriorated because it was made of wood, and the waterworks were abandoned.

Charles-Augustin Sainte-Beuve, the prominent 19th century literary critic, wrote that there had been “ten years of anarchy, sedition and laxity, during which no useful work had been undertaken, not a street had been cleaned, not a residence repaired nothing improved or cleansed.” Postrevolutionary Paris was at a nadir in terms of both the inadequate, disease-ridden water supply and the filthy streets, which were basically open sewers, deep with black mud and refuse.

“Napoleon,” writes Alistair Horne, “was obsessed by the water of Paris, and everything to do with it.”

Parisians had mostly been getting their water directly from the Seine or lining up at the scant pay fountains. In 1806, nineteen new wells for fountains were dug that flowed day and night and were free. Napoleon had a canal built 60 miles from the River Ourcq, ordering 500 men to dig it, while still a consul in 1801. It brought water to the Bassin de la Villette, opening in 1808. Some doubted the wisdom of having such an abundance of water—an oriental luxury that might incur moral decay. Now the supply of water for firefighting was also much improved. The canal had light boats, as Napoleon tried to make back some of the huge expenditure by licensing navigation, and a circular aqueduct from which underground conduits went to the central city. In 1810, there were still many water porters wheeling barrels through the city.

Now Napoleon attacked the problem of the Seine as a catchall for pollution. Parisians were so used to it that men swam naked in the river and a contemporary guidebook advised merely that the water of the Seine had no ill effects on foreigners so long as they drank it mixed with wine or a drop of vinegar. Thus houses on bridges were demolished and an immense push began to clean and modernize the city sewers.

As this book is about Aaron Burr, here is section about Burr taking inspiration by a new water related invention during his time in Paris:

Remarkably for someone who was very aware of his health, he never complained of the water. He did, however, take an interest in an invention to make it easier to dig a well. When the inventor of a process to make vinegar from the sap of any tree was not in his shop, Burr and a friend, “Crede”, went to see another invention: “We went then to see Mons. Cagniard, and his new invention of raising water and performing any mechanical operation. His apparatus is a screw of Archimedes turned the reverse, air, water, and quick silver. Cagniard was abroad; but we saw a model, and worked it, and got the report of a committee of the Institute on the subject. If the thing performs what is said I will apply it to give water to Charleston.”

[Bold italics for quotations by me]

[napoleonic-sexyman-tournament]

(limited to Europe because there are limited slots per poll)

*The Long 19th century is the period between the French Revolution and the The First World War.

The French Revolution: The original, the classic. It's got Robespierre and Marat and a Guillotine.

The Serbian Revolution: Resisting Ottoman Rule? Forming a new state? Creating a Constitution? Serbia kicked it off in the Balkans nevermind that it took three tries and three decades.

The Greek Revolution: Have you become hopelessly invested in the idea of Greece as the cradle of civilization? Do you want to die fighting for it in a way that is tragic and romantic? Then you might be Lord Byron.

The Carbonari Uprisings: Secret societies are more your speed? Here is one in Italy doing their best to try to make liberal reform happen.

The Decembrist Revolt: So, a bunch of officers came back from Napoleonic Europe wanting to see constitutional change and possibly the abolition of serfdom. Sounds reasonable, right? Right??

The July Revolution: Can you hear the people sing? You know the one, barricades and the most iconic painting in French history. Louis Philippe ends up on the throne and he is....sexy to someone.

The November Uprising: Congress Poland decides that they are sick of the tsar. Poland undertakes a tragically doomed struggle against Russia.

The Belgian Revolution: The Belgians decide to file for divorce from The United Netherlands. Leopold of Saxe-Coburg ends up on the throne and he's sexy.

The 1848 Revolutions: The Springtime of the People! Revolutions everywhere: France, Hungary, Poland, Austria, The Italian and German States.

The January Uprising: The third time is the charm on kicking out the tsar and making a Polish state, right?

The Paris Commune: Napoleon III abdicates and leaves after being thumped by the Prussians. For two months, a communist people's regime rules Paris.

The Russian Revolution of 1905: This is not the one with Lenin yet! This is the one that forces Nicky to create a Duma. Some consider it the dress rehearsal for what would come next.

[ripstefano]

Napoleon's Artillery

Napoleon Bonaparte played a key role in reforming the artillery of the Revolutionary French Army, transforming it into one of its most effective arms. Drawing on the innovations of earlier artillery theorists like Jean-Baptiste Gribeauval, Napoleon emphasized mobility, standardized calibers, and improved organization. He streamlined logistics by reducing the number of cannon types, allowing for faster production, easier maintenance, and more efficient resupply. Under his influence, artillery was no longer merely a support arm but became central to battlefield strategy—often massed and moved rapidly to break enemy lines or defend key positions. These reforms allowed French artillery to deliver devastating barrages with unprecedented speed and coordination, helping to secure many of Napoleon’s early victories.

From "Napoleon's Artillery"

[max1461]

I'm said this before but I feel very much about the Soviet Union how I feel about the United States pre-civil rights movement: admirable ideals, powerful aesthetics, a preponderance of philosopher-statesmen worth engaging with intellectually, crimes against humanity that absolutely cannot be overlooked born of rotten notions embedded in the national ideology from the very beginning.

The United States went through a century of domestic reform (not broadly peaceful!) from the 1860s to the 1960s which mostly resolved its abject atrocities internally; it has continued to commit and support atrocities abroad essentially with impunity until the present day, and should be viewed more or less as a malevolent actor on the world stage. The Soviet Union went through some moderate internal reform after Stalin, where the most heinous of its crimes were abated, but when it attempted more serious reform in the 1980s it simply fell apart.

Neither the historical legacy of Lenin & co. nor Washington & co. looks particularly praiseworthy in retrospect. But then again, who do we have to compare them to? The House of Windsor, the House of Saud, Napoleon, Hitler, Augustus. When you look at the company they're in, you start to think... ok, these guys built something rather evil. But that's the nature of being a statesmen, a national framer. Granting that what they build will one way or another be rather evil, what else can be found in what they have to say?

[steviebbboi]

Stevie BB 200 Followers Celebration Writing Challenge!

Howdy lads~ exciting news to share:

I just reached a 200 follower count on Tumblr 🎉🎉🎉

I kinda can't believe it? Writing is indeed good for my soul. Interacting with y'all on here has helped me with my mental and emotional wellness due to just finding such great community on here. Thank you for giving me the space to write and for following along/supporting in my writing journey 💖

With that spiel spoken, I wanted to host a writing challenge in celebration of this milestone! *squealing because i'm so excited to host*

Stevie BB 200 Followers Celebration Writing Challenge Masterlist

*you'll find all writing submissions and writing requests (answered) at the link above*

You could participate by sending in either:

✨ writing request via my Asks (💙)

and/or

✨ writing submissions (💥).

General Rules:

the challenge will start October 1st until the end of November (flexible on late entries for submissions only💥; let's say till mid-December or so).

I'll read/write for Chris Evans characters, Henry Cavill Characters, and Charlie Hunnam characters [and Bucky Barnes specifically lol] (these are my preferences but if there are other characters that you'd like to bring in, just ask me)!

for writing requests 💙, i will only be accepting requests (2 max/person; pls do not send more than 2 asks!) until the end of November.

for writing submissions 💥, go wild! submit as many as you like!

you can do both (send in a writing request 💙 AND send in a writing submission(s)💥) if you want to; rules still apply for the requests though.

use at least one prompt within your request 💙/submissions💥 from the lists below (but def. go crazy if you wanna use more than one! you don't have to claim any prompts).

works can be inclusive! poc, gender neutral, neurodivergencies, mid size/plus size/curvy readers are encouraged!

No word limits but please use a 'read more' after 200 words

Works can be part of an existing series but must be able to stand on their own

tag me @steviebbboi and use the tags #bbboi200celebration and #steviebbboiwritingchallenge in your entry so i can read/reblog your work! (If I somehow lose sight of your submission, please remind me and I'll take a look at it right away ☺️)

Most important one: Have fun!

How To Play:

✨ You must be 18+ to participate in this challenge!

✨ Choose one (or multiple 😏) BB's:

Chris Evans Characters

Steve Rogers/Captain America

Ransom Drysdale

Ari Levinson

Frank Adler

Curtis Everett

Andy Barber

Hayden/Harvard Hottie

Nick Gant

Jake Jensen

Johnny Storm

Lloyd Hansen

Henry Cavill Characters

Clark Kent

Napoleon Solo

Geralt of Rivia

August Walker

Charlie Hunnam Characters

Jax Teller

Raymond Smith *extra brownie pts if you write about him omg*

King Arthur

Sebastian Stan

Bucky Barnes [he's all by himself im so sorry lmfao 🥹]

✨ Choose one (or more) of the following prompts:

*if you don't want to write smut, you don't have to choose anything from the kinks prompt! feel free to only use the following two prompts :)

soft dom!BB

clothes/naked ratio

size kink

slow and deep 👀

breeding kink (non-pregnancy version)

somnophilia

free use

cockwarming

belly bulge

Squirting

consensual non-con

consensual dub-con

cumeating

creampie

anal/or dp

possessive/or protective manhandling!BB

oral sex

orgasm delay

dumbification

daddy/princess kink

overstimulation

sex pollen

prone bone

cockdrunk

threesome (BB/Reader/BB)

ass/pussy spanking

mild degradation

body worshipping

quickie/don't get caught (public sex, threats of exhibitionism, etc.) 😏

Grouchybb! who is only soft with you

Married and loyal!spouse

A/B/O

lumberjack!bb who is a teddy bear on the inside tho

mob AU

biker AU

soulmate AU

mutual pining/idiots in love

childhood besties to lovers

reformed playboy

professor AU

supernatural/mythical (gods, sirens, werewolves, witches, vampires, ghosts, oh my!)

frenemies to lovers

fwb to lovers

locked in AU/forced proximity

medieval AU

fake dating/relationship

sharing one bed

polar opposites attract

break up and make up

spy AU

meet cute

cowboy AU

gentle recluse!BB

brothers best friend!BB

"Are you fucking kidding me?"

"Yes, take it, slut"

"It's not that big of a deal."

"God, why do you always do this"

"You're impossible."

"Then I guess we gotta be quiet, huh?"

"We're trapped."

"Shh, you wouldn't want anyone to hear, or do you?"

"You're taking me so well, baby"

"Good girl" *for fem readers; adjust accordingly!*

"Tsk, uh-uh, c'mere, honey"

"You always feel so good around me, baby"

"What do you think you're doing?"

"Here, let me help you."

"Yeah, are you a cockhungry slut, now?"

"I hardly think that that's necessary."

"Don't be a brat, baby."

"Aw, does it feel good right there?"

"I'm sorry!"

"What do you want from me?!"

"I didn't mean to!"

"What do you think you're doing here?"

"Nope. Again."

"Don't worry, I got you."

"Just stay still, there you go."

"Just one more, I promise."

"C'mon, don't you wanna be good?"

"Stay over there!"

"You better hurry up, baby."

"Thaaaat's it, you're doing so well, honey."

"Uhm, I'm not sure that's going to work."

"Please, I'll beg, please!"

"Be honest."

"Be careful there, darlin'."

"Are you okay?"

"Are you sure you wanna go there?"

Scenarios? Any! Go. Wild.

✨ I love reading/writing angst w/HEA, soft dark (nothing too dark though), fluff and SMUT (as you can see w/the many many kinks).

no incest (stepcest is ok if tasteful lol), no infidelity, no watersports, no murder, no gore. if you're unsure if a trope is appropriate, ask me!

if im ever uncomfy with writing something, i will lyk and we can talk more about it to see if we could work with it!

feel free to ask any questions!

i think i got everything!

Have the best time, laddies~ thanks for celebrating with me!

All are welcome to join in the fun! ❣️

Tagging a few mutuals who may be interested but no pressure bbs:

@bigtreefest @mercurial-chuckles @stargazingfangirl18 @yenzys-lucky-charm

@sweater-daddiesdumbdork @buckets-and-trees @hotdamnhunnam @laurfilijames

@autumnrose40 @eloquentlytired @misscherry-26 @stellar-solar-flare

@darsynia @navybrat817

[obnoxiousprince]

The French Revolution: A Political Myth More Than a True Liberation

The French Revolution is often portrayed as the founding moment of modern liberty, equality, and democracy. In the collective imagination, it represents the victory of the people over the oppression of a monstrous Old Regime and the birth of a new, fairer, and purer world. Yet, when we take a closer look at the actual facts and consequences of this historic event, the glorified narrative starts to crumble, giving way to a far more nuanced, and even critical analysis.

A Moderate King Sacrificed, a Manipulated People

Louis XVI, the last king of France, is often caricatured as an absolute tyrant responsible for poverty and inequality. In reality, he was far from a rigid despot. On the contrary, he was a moderate, intelligent, and hesitant man, a victim of his own advisors and of a political and economic crisis beyond his control. The king had even agreed to summon the Estates-General and seemed open to the idea of a constitutional monarchy.

Moreover, the popular misery — particularly the shortage of bread — cannot be blamed solely on the sovereign. The context was complex, shaped by agricultural failures, economic instability, and social unrest. The people, often illiterate and fueled by anger, were manipulated and pushed toward violence.

Lofty Principles on Paper, Inequality in Practice

The Revolution mostly produced words, theories, and grand ideals: liberty, equality, fraternity, human rights. These declarations, while admirable on paper, were not followed by a real transformation of social relations.

The legal equality proclaimed as a universal right remained an illusion. In practice, the wealthy and powerful always had better access to justice, while the poor continued to be disadvantaged. Freedom of expression, though supposedly guaranteed, remained unequal: those at the top of society could say almost anything without consequence, while the vulnerable often faced repression.

Freedom of Thought: A Natural Evolution, Not a Violent Upheaval

Contrary to popular belief, freedom of speech and thought did not emerge from the French Revolution or from violent upheaval. Long before 1789, under the Ancien Régime, forms of public dissent already existed: pamphlets, caricatures, and open criticism circulated freely, showing a society already capable of debate.

History from other countries supports this idea:

In England, freedom of conscience, religious pluralism, and parliamentary monarchy developed gradually: Magna Carta (1215), Habeas Corpus (1679), Bill of Rights (1689).

In the Netherlands, a tolerant and modern state emerged through compromise and reforms over time.

Even the United States, despite its war of independence, relied on a structured constitution without unleashing mass terror or radically overturning its social order as happened in France.

These historical examples show that freedom of thought is a long, peaceful process of maturation, not the inevitable result of bloodshed and chaos.

After Louis XVI: Rulers More Authoritarian Than the King

The French Revolution removed a moderate king, only to usher in leaders far more authoritarian. Robespierre, through the Reign of Terror, established a dictatorial regime based on mass repression. Later, Napoleon Bonaparte crowned himself emperor, reimposed censorship, centralized power, and rolled back several revolutionary gains, especially women’s rights.

The 19th century in France was marked by a series of authoritarian regimes: the Bourbon Restoration, the July Monarchy, and the Second Empire under Napoleon III. All these governments concentrated power and practiced repression, sometimes more harshly than Louis XVI, who by comparison appears almost restrained.

A Revolution Turned Political Tool: Myth at the Service of the Republic

Since the Third Republic, the French Revolution has been transformed into a state myth, actively used by presidents to legitimize the current system. This instrumentalization operates through powerful, enduring mechanisms.

A State Myth Perpetuated by Presidents:

Each republican regime has presented itself as the direct heir of the Enlightenment and human rights to:

Legitimize itself: “We are the heirs of the free people, of the Republic born from the Revolution.”

Cover up ongoing inequalities: “Everyone is free and equal” (at least in theory…).

Discredit any critique of the system: “You’re criticizing the Republic? Then you’re against democracy, against the people, against liberty.”

Every president, from De Gaulle to Macron, has symbolically positioned himself in this revolutionary lineage.

Republican speeches about secularism, the homeland, values, and the Republic are always delivered with the tricolor flag and the Marseillaise playing in the background.

The unspoken message is clear:

“We are the Revolution. Don’t question it.”

An Idealized Version That Locks Down Debate

This myth serves to shut down debate or alternatives:

It creates the illusion that power lies in the hands of the people, while in reality decisions are made by a technocratic, political, or economic elite.

It narrows the scope of thought: if the Republic comes from the Revolution, then questioning it means attacking democracy itself.

It crushes any other political model: monarchy? = reactionary. direct democracy? = populist. social critique? = conspiracy theory.

This control is reinforced through ritual repetition of symbols: Bastille Day (14 July), the Panthéon, Marianne, so-called “Republican values”.

School as a Relay of the Myth:

From early childhood, school teaches a sacred, binary history:

The good people versus evil elites.

Louis XVI = incompetent.

Robespierre = a hero.

Napoleon = a tragic genius.

There is no room for debate on:

Revolutionary massacres

The Jacobin dictatorship

Ongoing social inequality after 1789

This simplified, glorified narrative lacks nuance and serves one key purpose: to build a collective identity and erase historical contradictions.

Like all founding myths, it artificially unifies a divided society and imposes symbolic legitimacy on the regime.

Conclusion:

The French Revolution did not liberate the people in the way we are led to believe. It mostly replaced one form of power with another, often more authoritarian, while building a beautiful ideological façade filled with principles that were never fully applied.

Freedom of speech, far from being born amid the chaos of the Terror, is the product of a long, often peaceful historical evolution. Social justice and equality still remain unrealized ideals. And today’s elites, like those of the past, are skilled at using revolutionary symbols to maintain their authority.

Even now, the Republic speaks in the name of the people, yet acts in the interest of those far removed from it.

The French Revolution is less a liberating event than a political symbol used to lock in the system.

[tiredmagicalwarrior]

I think one of the things I appreciated the most about Nocturne was the protagonism on the Haitian Revolution.

This was a revolution that didn't just change Haiti, it changed the world. This was the revolution that would make the first black state. The first slaveless state. That would make every slave nation tremble with fear, from Europe To America to Asia to Oceania to Africa. It was what was never meant to happen, but did.

It's the nation that would defeat Napoleon and the British marine. Nobody could take down Haiti. You know why Napoleon went to colonize Europe? Haiti. That's why. He couldn't take down Haiti. Couldn't make it french territory again. So, he turned towards Europe.

We are talking about an undefeated nation.

AND! AND! A largely Vodu nation!

I was SO happy to see Vodu be portrayed as the wonderful religion it is, sacred and divinely intertwined with the Haitian revolution. The revolution was noted to start with Vodu chants and ritual.

White people refused to understand the link between the two worlds that could bring ancestors to meet their descendants. They created zombies as a horror trope. They made vodu dolls as a horror gimmick. They took a sacred religion and reduced it and vilanized it.

And I'm so happy to see it being positively portrayed in such a famous media. Vodu practicioners have already made media of the like. But I was positively surprised with what Nocturne had to present to us.

Of course, the knowledge that the french revolution was incomplete, that it was NOT FOR EVERYONE, is then again, something I really appreciate as a history student and a person. The french revolution killed mostly peasent and established the bourgeoisie, but did it end the Noir Code? No. Did it establish women's and black people's suffrage? No. Did it make a agrarian reform? No. Was it for the people? It had it's importance. But it was, at the very least, not for all the people.

And let's not forget that the french revolution's main intellectual current would birth biological racism, an unscientific current that claimed evidence of "different sized skulls" for example to prove humans possessed different races based on phenotypes.

Last, but certainly not least: it is absurd to see people claim that "all indigenous people have been killed". Acknowledging multi-ethnic indigenous genocide HAS to go along with the respect that there STILL are indigenous people and they continue their fight for their lives and land.

You know who the show demonstrates as such? Olrox.

While I don't appreciate the show claiming "all of his people were slaughtered" as that is historically inaccurate, I was most happy to see an Aztec vampire present and very alive, connected to his culture, protagonizing the show. The Nahua are still very much alive and kicking and I appreciated that the show took that into account.

And Annette! Sweet Annette being one of the leads makes me most joyful. I can't stand idiots that claim her presence.on France was """historically innacurate""", check again, dumbasses, free black people were all over France (especially the children of black Caribbean elites, for example, from Haiti back then known as Saint-Domingue, which did not possess universities and would sent their children to study in Europe.)

Anyway. To see her star as one of the leads made me so incredibly happy. She's a wonderful character and I appreciate how they let Annette be unapologetic and direct, especially during a moment between revolutions were she was very aware the french revolution didn't mean shit to her people.

But she was so lovely and to see her afro-caribean religion present AND source of her power made me emotional more than a few times.

Castlevania Nocturne really did hit this nail on the head.

Anyways. To make sure I give people answers to "but where's the evidence to x thing you said?" Here are my sources:

THYLEFORS, Markel; “Our Government is in Bwa Kayiman:”A Vodou Ceremony in 1791 and its Contemporary Significations, 2009

DUBOIS, Laurent; Avengers of the New World : the story of the Haitian Revolution, 2004

BUCK-MORSS, Susan; Hegel, Haiti and universal history, 2009