#collot d’herbois
Note
What caused the conflict between Robespierre and his supporters and Thermidorians that led to the events of 27/28th July? Everyone keeps saying different things
If we’re talking about a specific event that lead directly to July 27, the answer to me is pretty simple — it was the speech Robespierre held the day right before it, in which he called for new proscriptions against deputies in the Convention, the Committee of Public Safety (CPS) and the Committee of General Security (CGS), without being clear about exactly which ones he was targeting (even after explicately having been asked to to do so right after the speech was finished). If dissent between the robespierrists and other deputies, as well as more longgoing plans to undermine the former, had existed already before this speech was held, what ultimately happened on July 27 was not a result of these as much as something improvised in less than 24 hours in response to the sudden crisis it had caused by making everyone fear they might be on Robespierre’s list.
If we’re talking more about the underlying motives which made the situation on July 26-28 happen in the first place, for Robespierre’s part, he had grown convinced that the Convention and the two government committees contained conspirators within their midst. Exactly which people he suspected to be part of this conspiracy is hard to know for sure, seeing as he, as already stated, didn’t make himself clear enough in the speech (I’ve speculated a bit on which people I think it’s most likely he had in mind in this post). It is equally dubious whether Robespierre’s collegues at the CPS to some extent had supported his views or how much this new conspiracy was his own hobby horse. Regardless, Robespierre believed the conspirators had to be unveiled and crushed at any price, and, after openly having expressed his fears about them a couple of times at the Jacobin club, he finally decided to openly ask the Convention to take action.
When it comes to the people who overthrew Robespierre, once it was over and done, they would almost all give the same answer as to why they had acted the way they had acted — Robespierre was either acting like or aspiring to become a tyrant/dictator, and they killed him in order to put a stop to this authoritarian project. While I wouldn’t dismiss a fear like this to be nothing but a post construction, it can nevertheless also be established that, when looking closer at these guys’ activities shortly before thermidor, many can be revealed to have had motives grounded in personal dissatisfactions and/or fears of Robespierre as much as any eventual noble intentions. Some examples can be seen below:
Tallien (spoke against Robespierre during the session of 9 thermidor, was one of ten deputies to have signed the pampleth Conjuration formée dès le 5 préréal [sic] par neuf représentants du peuple contre Maximilien Robespierre, pour le poignarder en plein senat released shortly after thermidor) — Openly denounced by Robespierre on June 12 on the grounds of being ”one of those who speak incessantly with terror, and publicly of the guillotine, as something that concerns them, to debase and disturb the National Convention.” His mistress has been imprisoned since May 22 (the warrant for her arrest was actually written by Robespierre himself, but idk if Tallien was aware of that) and he is in dire need to get her out of jail. In his memoirs, Fouché claims that Tallien was one of several deputies he in the weeks leading up to thermidor would tell: ”you are on the list, you are on the list as well as myself, I am certain of it!” no doubt alarming the latter.
Fouché (Pointed to by several contemporaries as the leader of/important for the conspiracy. Did however not play an active role during July 27-28) — was recalled from his mission in Lyon on March 27by a rather frosty decree written by Robespierre. After returning, Fouché possibly had a private meeting with him where he would have been scolded for his conduct (though interestingly, on April 8, Robespierre is recorded to have ”praised” Fouché after the latter had read a report regarding his activities in Lyon…) He has also come under suspicion for his alleged atheism and ties to certain hébertists (most importantly Ronsin who had been his collegue in Lyon before getting executed alongside the hébertists in March 1794). On July 14, Fouché was openly attacked by Robespierre, who called him ”the leader of the conspiracy which we have to thwart" and got him expelled from the jacobins. If Fouché wasn’t already plotting Robespierre’s downfall at that point he surely must have started doing so after this incident.
Billaud-Varennes (spoke against Robespierre during the session of 9 thermidor) — Indirectly denounced by Robespierre in his final speech, both through the phrase ”why do those who told you once that we are walking on a volcano think that we walk on only roses today?” and the suggestion to purge members of the CPS. Booed down and driven out of the Jacobin Club under shouts of ”the conspirators to the guillotine” when Robespierre rerread said speech there on the evening of July 26, which probably gave him a very strong feeling that he was on the menu and would be executed if Robespierre was not. Claimed after thermidor to during a CPS meeting loudly have accused Robespierre and Couthon of pushing through the law of 22 prairial without anyone else in the committee having been involved, leading to the session becoming so stormy that the windows had to be closed.
Collot d’Herbois (spoke against Robespierre during the session of 9 thermidor, was also chairholder during this session) — Driven out of the Jacobin Club under shouts of ”to the guillotine” at the same time as Billaud-Varennes. According to one report, this was not before he had thrown himself before Robespierre’s feet and begged him to reunite with the CPS. Had been tipped off by Fouché on April 20 that Robespierre was investigating the latter for his actions in Lyon, which would make him guilty by association. Claimed in his defence (March 1 1795) to once have been declared ”traitor and conspirator” by Robespierre, ”because I had strongly supported the useful and wise proposal that Lindet made, to require horses and carriages in each section of Paris, in order to provide for the supplies of the armies.” According to Michel Biard’s Collot d’Herbois: légendes noires et révolutions(1995) Collot and Billaud’s abandonment of Robespierre is best understood through their perception of his political role than it is by any eventual differences in political or religious matters.
Vadier, Élie Lacoste (spoke against Robespierre during the session of 9 thermidor, Lacoste being the one to demand an arrest warrant against Augustin Robespierre) — these were both members of the CGS. Robespierre had explicately denounced said committee, and particulary its agents, in his July 26 speech, ending by demanding it lose its autonomy to instead become subserviant to the CPS. The CGS had however already earlier that year been robbed of some of its special attributes, when, on April 20, a CPS driven police bureau, mainly directed by Robespierre, Couthon and Saint-Just, had been introduced, something we might imagiene also became an object of irritation. Two months later, Robespierre had also personally taken care one of the committee’s cases (the Catherine Théot affair, which I wrote about more at length here) was taken away from them to instead be run by robespierrists. The handling of said affair was also something Robespierre explicately denounced the CGS for in his July 26 speech. It is also commonly stated that Vadier disagreed with Robespierre’s religious ideas, he himself being a militant atheist, but I’m not sure for what the source for that is.
Fréron (spoke against Robespierre during the session of 9 thermidor, was one of ten deputies to have signed the pampleth Conjuration formée dès le 5 préréal…) — was never openly denounced by Robespierre as far as I’m aware, nor was the decree recalling him from his mission in Marseille, on the grounds of having gone to far when wanting to rename the city, been neither authored nor signed by him. We do however know Fréron had been close to the dantonists executed in April, thereby making revenge and/or fear of being seen as ”guilty by association” a possible motive. The same thing can be said for other men traditionally described as dantonists that we know worked against Robespierre, such as Bourdon de l’Oise, Thuriot, Guffroy etc.
Guffroy (was one of ten deputies to have signed the pampleth Conjuration formée dès le 5 préréal…) — disillusioned by the fact Robespierre and the rest of the CPS have failed/chosen not to act on the representative on mission Joseph Lebon after Guffroy multiple times had denounced him to them.
Bourdon d’Oise (spoke against Robespierre during the session of 9 thermidor) — Had spoken against the law of 22 prairial both June 10, 11 and 12, earning himself a reprimand from Robespierre on the latter of these dates. According to the memoirs of Pierre Nicolas Berryer, it was after this session Bourdon started plotting for Robespierre’s downfall, seeing in it ”a struggle to the death” between the two, and planning to on his own stab him to death with a cutlass.
Lecointre (author behind the pampleth Conjuration formée dès le 5 préréal [sic] par neuf représentants du peuple contre Maximilien Robespierre, pour le poignarder en plein senat released shortly after thermidor) — Openly spoke against the law of 22 prairial when it was introduced on June 10, asking for an adjournment and applauding the deputy Ruamps when he said he would blow his brains out was the law to pass. In the above mentioned pampleth, he wrote that it was when he heard rumors Robespierre was the only person behind the law he decided to start working to undermine him.
So as can be seen, there’s not really a single motive for the conspirators, but a whole bunch of them. To understand them better, it is also important to remember just how the political climate looked like by the summer of 1794. I think it’s safe to assume the trials and executions of the hébertists and dantonists in March and April had unnerved several of the Convention deputies, the death of Danton in particular being seen as evidence that anyone could be declared a counter-revolutionary. Then just two months later, the law of 22 prairial gets introduced by Couthon and Robespierre, a law which strips the Convention of its exclusive rights to bring its own members to trial. This just two days after Robespierre has presided over the Festival of the Supreme Being, an event which had put several members a bit off. With all these things combined, I don’t think it’s fully unreasonable people would be willing to believe Robespierre was up to no good/planning to make himself a dictator, especially if someone was actively spreading/confirming that fear. It’s also important to keep in mind that on both sides of the conflict, the deputies were overworked, tired, irrational and suffering from the summer heat. I think thermidor is therefore best understood if we assume none of the men involved in it were necessarily on their most rational behaviour when things went down.
#sorry this took forever to get published#robespierre#fouché#tallien#billaud-varennes#collot d’herbois#frev#laurent lecointre#ask
26 notes
·
View notes
Note
how could one make the ideal football team using only frev figures?
Thank you so much for this ask, @citizen-card! I'm sorry it has taken me a little while to answer. Your question was sent to me during the anti-truth hour but tbh, creating a football team of FRev figures has been on my agenda for some time.
I present… MONTAGNE F.C.
Montagne F.C., est. 1793, are an exciting team with an attacking ethos but also strong in defence (of the patrie). They tend to play in the popular modern 4-3-3 formation, which morphs into a 4-3-2-1 in the final stages of attack with Fabre as the lone striker up front.
Goalkeeper: Hérault de Séchelles. Team heart-throb. At over 6' tall, has the reach to make saves across the width and height of the net. Tends to leave the field as soon as the final whistle has blown so that he has time to sign hundreds of portraits before heading off to some highly exclusive nightclub. Fabre always tries to tag along.
Left Fullback: Saint-Just. The youngest team member, just as well given the amount of running he has to do on the overlap. Wishes Robespierre would allow him to trust his own instincts more rather than constantly shouting, “Forward, forward – no, come back! Come back!” Has a good understanding with his right fullback counterpart Le Bas. Desmoulins lives rent-free in his head.
Centre Back: Desmoulins. Only plays here because he thinks he can leave most of the defensive work to Danton, which is interesting because Danton thinks he can leave most of the work to Desmoulins. Writes the official fan newsletter, gets annoyed that Robespierre keeps sending back articles covered in red ink. Sings “You’re shit, and you know you are” at Saint-Just, then pretends it was someone in the crowd. Robespierre often has to separate them in the tunnel at half-time.
Centre Back: Danton. Undoubted talent, but lazy a.f. Stands by one of the goalposts chatting with Hérault, only springing into action if there’s an imminent danger of the opponents scoring a goal. When he does decide to put in a tackle, he goes in studs up. Loudest voice on the pitch, constantly shouting at the lads up front to show more audacity in counterattack.
Right Fullback: Le Bas. Lovely clean player, never booked, never carded. Not flashy, but he runs his heart out for the team every game. Sometimes wishes he’d get as much attention in match reports as Saint-Just, but then pushes the idea out of his head and keeps smiling through. His Instagram account is basically pictures of his wife, their baby, and Saint-Just.
Left Midfielder: Marat. Pushing 50 and still an absolute demon on the attack. Nips around defenders easily, puts this down to his low centre of gravity. Runs an edgy underground fanzine. Team physio and doctor, takes a no-nonsense approach to injuries, believes everything can be cured by sponging off with cold water and vinegar. Gives Fabre a kick when he dives, claiming “it’ll do him good”.
Central Midfielder: Billaud-Varenne. Always turns up for training and matches with Collot d’Herbois. In rondos, has to be reminded to pass the ball to someone else once in a while. Does allegedly unscripted fun fan-meet videos with Collot.
Right Midfielder: Collot d’Herbois. Devises the scripts for the fun fan-meet videos he films with Billaud. Threatened to shoot a fan who tried to improvise. The archetypal loose cannon, as much of a menace to his team-mates as to the opposition. Once tried to throw Robespierre over an advertising hoarding for windows.
Left Winger: Maximilien Robespierre. Self-appointed player-manager. Did all his coaching certificates, attended at least one course twice “to make sure I’ve taken it all in”. Obsessive in preparation for matches, likes to have a week analysing the opposition before he presents his tactics to the team. Doesn’t like overly physical play, says 99% of the game is won by character. Often booked for arguing with the referee for so long, it gets dark. Cult icon with the female fans, nobody – least of all him – is quite sure why.
Right Winger: Augustin 'Bonbon' Robespierre. His brother’s biggest fan and cheerleader, but a gifted player in his own right. More physically courageous in attack than Maximilien, also has something of a reputation as a talent-spotter. Reckons he saw a player who might be “the next big thing” down in Toulon.
Striker: Fabre d’Églantine. Fancies himself as much as he wishes everyone else fancied him. Posts daily (but suspiciously short) topless workout videos on his Instagram. Hérault always puts three laugh emojis in the comments. Feigns injury to try and win penalties, a nightmare for Robespierre who’s convinced he’ll be red carded for fakery one of these days. Dives, rolls and wails shamelessly. Should spend longer in the shower after matches.
----
At some point I might get round to drawing the team, team kit and badge, etc... But yep, that's my FRev starting 11!
35 notes
·
View notes
Text
In defense
Hello everyone,
Here are the defenses that will appear in order (you will need to count from two weeks):
Manon Roland
Billaud Varennes
Fouquier Tinville
Collot d’Herbois
Jacques René Hébert
I warn you that after my defense for Collot and Hébert, my mental health will take a hit, so I'm not sure if I'll repeat the experience XD
15 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hey there! :) Do you happen to know what was Lafayette's opinion on Robespierre as a person and/or as a member of the National Assembly? Did he left any declaration in his memoirs? As far as I know, their different political views led them sometimes into arguments and slanders.
Have a nice day!
Dear @faxelange,
in short, they were not on the best of terms – not at all. The disfavour was mutual as neither Robespierre liked La Fayette nor did La Fayette liked Robespierre.
Despite this, there is not nearly as much commentary on Robespierre in La Fayette’s letters and Memoirs as one might expect. The references that are made are mostly general statements about Robespierre and not specific about their relationship. Generally speaking, La Fayette wrote in his Memoirs about what he thought valuable for his readers and important to mention. I think he judged his disagreements with Robespierre and Robespierre in general, at the point of him writing his Memoirs (1830s), as simply no longer important. It would be easier to give a detailed description of Robespierre’s opinion of La Fayette than the other way around since we have many statements by Robespierre.
The relationship between Robespierre and La Fayette was during the first years of the Revolution civil, or better, nonexistent. Things changed when La Fayette wrote on June 16, 1791 a lengthy letter to the Legislative Assembly, criticizing political groups as a potential thread to the constitution and the stability of France – the jacobins were here his primary target.
Although he railed against factionalism of all varieties, the Jacobins were his primary target. “Organized like a separate empire … blindly controlled by a few ambitious leaders,” the Jacobins were, as he put it, a “sect,” a “distinct corporation in the middle of the French people, whose powers they usurp by subjugating their representatives.” Read into the record two days later and republished in newspapers of every political stripe, the letter generated heated debate.
Laura Auricchio, The Marquis – Lafayette Reconsidered, Vintage Books, New York, 2015, p. 258.
Two days later during a meeting of the jacobins, Robespierre stated:
Strike down Lafayette and the nation is saved.
Laura Auricchio, The Marquis – Lafayette Reconsidered, Vintage Books, New York, 2015, p. 259.
Things went downhill rather quickly after that.
In La Fayette memoirs there are two mentioning’s of Robespierre, both are rather indirect, as they detail public attacks of La Fayette’s character that Robespierre had some connection with.
It would occupy too much space to detail all the hostilities of the anarchists against Lafayette; their defamations in the Patriot and the Chronicle were pushed to the most insane excess. Robespierre attacked him at the jacobins, first requiring that he should not be called upon to prove what he advanced. The club itself formally denounced him at the bar of the assembly, by the mouth of Collot d’Herbois. Some members of this faction alleged as proofs of his criminality certain letters, which, when read, were received with patriotic applause.
Marquis de La Fayette, Memoirs, Correspondences and Manuscripts of General Lafayette, Vol. 3, Craighead and Allen, New York, 1837, pp. 336-337.
We can see very clearly in this passage that La Fayette’s problem was not with Robespierre alone and while this excerpt gives seemingly more insight into Robespierre’s opinion of La Fayette, the way the event is retold also tells us a lot about La Fayette’s opinion.
The second part is from a letter that La Fayette wrote his wife Adrienne on April 18, 1792:
Parties are at present divided in this manner [the question of war]. Robespierre, Danton, Desmoulins, &c., &c., form the jacobin sink. These puppets are moved behind the scene, and serve the court by disorganizing all things, by exclaiming that we are beaten without resource and by attacking Lafayette, “who has deceived, they say, the people and the court, guided the conduct of the far less culpable M. de Bouillé, and who is more dangerous himself than the aristocracy.” (…) The other party, called the high jacobins, and which supports the present ministry, is composed of Bordelais, the abbé Sièyes, Condorcet, Roederer, &c. These men hate and fear Robespierre, but dare not render themselves unpopular.
Marquis de La Fayette, Memoirs, Correspondences and Manuscripts of General Lafayette, Vol. 3, Craighead and Allen, New York, 1837, pp. 411-412.
Again, La Fayette was not only in disagreement with Robespierre. Today Robespierre is often presented as the one and only embodiment of the Jacobins but there were many more and yes, Robespierre was certainly even back then a prominent and influential member, but La Fayette’s disagreements were with the jacobins as a whole as much as with Robespierre personally.
Perhaps it is easier to dissect La Fayette’s opinion based on what he did not thought about Robespierre. In the letter to his wife that is already quoted above, La Fayette also wrote:
Such is my situation: I belong, as I wrote before to you, to no party except to that of the French nation; but my friends and I will serve whoever will do good, defend liberty and equality, and maintain the constitution by repulsing everything tending to render it aristocratic or republican; and when the national will, expressed by the representatives chosen by nation and by the king, shall tell us that war is inevitable, I will do all that lies in my power to promote its success.
Marquis de La Fayette, Memoirs, Correspondences and Manuscripts of General Lafayette, Vol. 3, Craighead and Allen, New York, 1837, p. 413.
These were the things that La Fayette supported and believed in, this was his agenda. In not agreeing with Robespierre, we can assume that La Fayette felt as if Robespierre did not meet his principles. Another point is raised in this statement:
(…) by repulsing everything tending to render it aristocratic or republican (…).
Robespierre was without a question on the republican side.
This was all quite political but since La Fayette saw political opinions as the expression of underlaying principles, a political disagreement was often, not always though, also a personal disagreement, although things did not usually escalate like they did with Robespierre.
I hope this cleared things up a bit and I hope you have/had a lovely day!
#ask me anything#marquis de lafayette#la fayette#maximilien robespierre#french history#american history#letter#french revolution#history#1792#faxelange#adrienne de lafayette#adrienne de noailles#1791
34 notes
·
View notes
Photo
Ornaments from Lucie, ou les Parents imprudents by Collot d’Herbois (c. 1771) x
35 notes
·
View notes
Text
the committee is sending representatives to your city! like and reblog this post so they will send saint-just and le bas, ignore and they’ll send fouche and collot d’herbois
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
Hot Collot d’Herbois existed. It’s time to wake up from this nightmare.
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
I am sure that this is a work of top-notch history, given the charged title and also how the cover in no way depicts Robespierre but rather Collot d’Herbois who was a separate human being
#robespierre#collot d’herbois#thp#french revolution#when i said people tend to lump the pair together i was being facetious but—
162 notes
·
View notes
Text
had a dream about a frev musical like h*milton but it was all from the perspective of collot d’herbois, fouche, and billaud-varenne after 9 thermidor. like the whole thing was them making up the most absurd stories possible and everyone believing them
17 notes
·
View notes
Text
Awkward hugs compilation
M. Dusaulx: It isn’t envy that rises to this tribune, it is gratitude. I am very attached to M. Petion: he is my fellow patriot. Without ever having spoken to him, I believe I am his interpreter on this tribune. No premature praise: love is the reward of living men, statues and crowns the price of the dead. I regard M. Petion as my son; it is very bold, no doubt!
He steps down from the tribune, and M. Petion throws himself into his arms. This triumph of sentiment made all hearts feel the sweetest sensation.
Session at the Jacobins November 19 1791
M. Dusaulx: All the patriots of this club have long been suspended in the course of a discussion which seemed to compromise two good patriots who must love and esteem each other; something would be missing after what M. Brissot said before leaving this assembly, it is the duty of these two generous men to embrace each other.
No sooner had he finished than MM. Robespierre and Brissot were in each other's arms, amid the unanimous applause of the Society, moved by this touching spectacle.
M. Robespierre: By yielding to M. Dusaulx's invitation, I only gave myself up to the impulse of my heart, I gave what I owed to the confession and to the fraternity and to the feeling depth that I have of a man who enjoys the greatest consideration and who must render the greatest services to the fatherland; I will prove to M. Brissot how much I am attached to him. This should in no way change the opinion that every man should have of the public good; it is to do all that will be in me, and what I believe necessary for the public safety, that I will ask to answer in another session to the speech of M. Brissot.
Brissot and Robespierre at the Jacobins, January 20 1792
M. Dumouriez rushes into M. Robespierre's arms. The Society and the tribunes, regarding these embraces as a presage of the agreement of the ministry with the love of the people, accompany this spectacle with the liveliest applause.
The Jacobin Club, March 19 1792
A few days later Danton came to find me. He showed me a letter that Marat wrote to him; this letter was very insolent; reproaches were mixed with insults; he threatened Danton. Danton seemed angry to me; Marat was on the surveillance committee, we went down there together. The debate was very lively; Danton treated Marat harshly; Marat maintained what he had put forward, ended up saying that it was necessary to forget everything, tore up the letter, embraced Danton, and Danton embraced him back. I attest to these facts which played out before me.
Discours de Jérôme Pétion sur l’accusation intentée contre Maximilien Robespierre (November 5 1792)
Dumouriez enters the hall together with Santerre; the general embraces Robespierre, everyone applauds.
The Jacobin Club, October 14 1792
Rousillon: I was accused of partiality, because I did not want to call into question whether Legendre would be expelled; Momero was said to be an aristocrat; I was forced to embrace Jacques Roux, but never did a kiss seem so bitter to me.
The Jacobin Club, June 28 1793
The reconciliation, however, appeared to be complete; the two embraced: Danton put frankness in it; he was touched; we were all moved: well! How could you not? We only think, we only see the patrie, liberty, the republic; Only Robespierre remained cold like marble!....
Principaux évènemens, pour et contre la Révolution, dont les détails ont été ignorés jusqu’à présent: et prédiction de Danton au Tribunal révolutionnaire, accomplie (1794) by Jean-Lambert Tallien and Jean-Louis-Marie Villain d’Aubigny, page 49-50.
Goupilleau de Fontenay: I challenge David to declare if, at the moment when Robespierre descended from the tribune of the Jacobins, after having delivered his speech, or rather his indictment, he, David, did not go and embrace him saying: "If you drink hemlock, I shall drink it with you."
David: It was not to come and greet Robespierre that I went down to his side; it was to go up to the tribune and ask that the feast of the 10th should take place. I didn't embrace Robespierre, I didn't even touch him, because he repelled everyone.
The Jacobin Club, July 31 1794
On exiting the hall, Tallien doubled his pace, grabbed hold of Fréron, pressed him into his arms and embraced him. This unexpected scene caused great disorder within the club. On one side, people applauded, saying: ”Look! Look! They don’t care!” On the other, one cried: ”This is how the conspirators get along!”
Jacobin Club, September 3 1794, just after both Tallien and Fréron had been struck from the club’s list of members.
Chatillon-Sur-Marne, which I am only mentioning here because Joly, its priest, a former college comrade of Robespierre, got it into his head to come and say hello to him at the time of the terror. Robespierre drew back when he tried to embrace him; and whenever, while talking, the priest of Chatillon-sur-Marne approached the tyrant, the latter huddled in a corner, still afraid of being assassinated.
Dictionnaire néologique des hommes et des choses… (1799) by Beffroy de Reigny, volume 3, page 223
The next day Saint-Just came to my room: I was occupied with my mail and I begged him to let me finish a letter. While I was writing he saw my rifle, seized it and amused himself by examining the battery: it was unfortunately loaded, the shot went off, the bullet passed close to me and went to pierce my coat rack which was on a chair, five or six steps away. I got up immediately, the gun had fallen from the hands of Saint-Just, he turned pale, staggered and threw himself into my arms. He then said to me in a deepened tone: “Ah! Levasseur, if I had killed you? - You would have played me a nasty trick; if I must die from a gunshot, let it at least come from an enemy’s hand. Hearing the report, several officers who were near my door rushed into my room and found Saint-Just, pale as death, in my arms.
Mémoires de R. Levasseur (de la Sarthe) ex-conventionnel, ornés du portrait de l’auteur (1829), volume 2, page 242
The session became so stormy that Collot used acts of violence against Robespierre. He threw himself at him and seized him by the flanks. He was about to throw Robespierre through the window when the latter's friends rescued him. Robespierre then declared that he was leaving the committee, that he could not honorably sit with executioners, that he would report this to the Convention. One saw the danger of publicizing this scene, blamed Collot's patriotic anger, and begged Robespierre, after having torn up the disastrous list, not to give the enemies of the Republic new means of attacking it. Robespierre seemed to calm down, but when Collot approached him to embrace him he refused and despite being urged not to he left.
Mémoires de Barras, membre du Directoire, page 349-350
#frev#robespierre#danton#pétion#brissot#collot d’herbois#dumouriez#fréron#tallien#great occasions for huggning someone:#1 After just having had a political disagreement with the person in question#2 After just having been threatened and insulted by the person in question#3 After just having decided to execute the person in question#4 After just having tried to murder the person in question#frev compilation#also sure david totally believe your version of the story
50 notes
·
View notes
Text
Frev Zodiacs
(because i’m bored and didn’t see anyone else do this)
(Also, please ignore the inconsistency with names & people. I also apologize for the Aries people out there. )
Aries
Bernard René Jourdan, marquis de Launay
Taurus
Jean Pierre André Amar
Lazare Carnot
Olypme de Gouges
Maximilien Robespierre
Emmanuel Joseph Sieyés
Gemini
Jacques-Nicolas Billaud-Varenne
Pierre Gaspard Chaumette
Jean-Marie Collot d’Herbois
Joseph Fouché
Jean-Paul Marat
Marquis de Sade
Cancer
Paul Barras
Joséphine Bonaparte
Leo
Madame du Barry
Napoleon Bonaparte
Charlotte Corday
Fabre d’Eglantine
Therogine de Mericourt
Virgo
Jean Sylvain Bailly
Jacques-Louis David
Marie-Jean Hérault de Séchelles
Marie Thérèse Louise of Savoy
Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de Lafayette
Antoine Lavoisier
Louis XVI
Louis Antoine de Saint-Just
Libra
Pierre Aurgeru
Jacques Necker
Scorpio
Jean Chouan
Georges Danton
Jacques René Hébert
Philippe Le Bas
Marie Antoinette
Sagittarius
Françoise-Nöel Babeuf
Antoine Barnave
Capricorn
Jacques Pierre Brissot
Georges Couthon
Lucile Desmoulins
Jérôme Pétion de Villenevue
Aquarius
Thomas Paine
Jean-Marie Roland
Jean-Lambert Tallien
Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord
Pisces
Camille Desmoulins
Honoré Gabriel Riqueti, comte de Mirabeau
Madame Roland
30 notes
·
View notes
Note
14 for Danton, Collot d’Herbois and Carrier :)
No. NO.
...
"Building sand castles" and "Carrier" brings images of the drowning of Nantes. But I guess I can do something horrible to him and nobody would know.
There is no way I am staying sick and vulnerable with Danton in the room, so I guess I'd have Collot care for me? He can do some acting to cheer me up or something.
So I guess book club with Danton? But under the condition that I get to choose what we'll read (No, Georges, Playboy doesn't count).
11 notes
·
View notes
Photo
happy thermidor! heres to collot d’herbois, talented playwright and actor, author of l’almanach de père gérard, member of the paris commune, passionate member of the cps, and handsome robespierre lookalike <3
25 notes
·
View notes
Text
Pouvoir de Rome,
Vous êtes au néant ;
Les droits de l’homme
En un rapide instant,
Vous ont réduit comme
Vous étiez en naissant.
—Collot d’Herbois Paris, 1792 x
Translation
Power of Rome / You’re back to nothing / The rights of man / In a quick instant / Have reduced you as / You were at birth
12 notes
·
View notes
Text
doing a jacques-louis david and drawing la mort de collot d’herbois
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
I dreamt about Collot d’Herbois. That was my punishment for yesterday.
2 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
alsyaad
Untitled
xosodaknong
Xổ số Đắk Nông
rahbalaseman
آژانس هواپیمایی ره بال آسمان
czowwlart
aahhhhhhhhh
mister-supernova
howdy besties