#babouvism

[nesiacha]

Charles Germain, Babouvist: A Letter to Napoleon and a Life in Exile

As a reminder, Charles Germain was one of the leading figures of the Babouvist movement who were condemned to deportation during the Vendôme trial.

Imprisoned in Cherbourg alongside men like Buonarroti, Cazin, Moroy, Blondeau, Vadier, he decided to write directly to Napoleon Bonaparte, then First Consul.

On 6 Frimaire Year VIII, he sent the following letter:

“I am one of those sentenced to deportation by the High Court of Vendôme. I was born in Narbonne in 1771. At the age of sixteen, I traded my Aristotle for a horse and a musket. In 1790, my good parents bought me a full discharge; two months later, I took up the helmet and saber again. In 1793, representatives on mission with the Army of the Western Pyrenees decorated me on the battlefield with an epaulette in the 12th Hussars. On 24 Prairial Year II, the representatives dismissed me. After coming to Paris following 9 Thermidor, a minor scuffle earned me a lettre de cachet. After nine months in detention, I was released and found myself, on 13 Vendémiaire, in the ranks of the patriots (I still have my certificate). The new government was established: Jean-Baptiste Annibal Aubert-Dubayet, Minister of War, promised me employment, while Philippe-Antoine Merlin de Douai (referred to here as Cochon), Minister of Police, had me arrested on 21 Floréal Year IV… I am 28 years old; I have spent five years in prison. I have only ever been a soldier, I have served in three active campaigns, and I have received wounds. I still have some blood left: do not let it calcify in the horror of dungeons; allow me to go and shed it at the frontier… provided I may serve liberty and, if necessary, die for it. My parents are poor, and I have always been poor myself. Long live the Republic. Respectful greetings.”

(French National Archives, BB³ 21)

According to Robert Legrand, Lucien Bonaparte intervened at one point to ease the conditions of Buonarroti, Blondeau Moroy, and Germain by granting them a small daily allowance of three francs while they were held on the island of Oléron awaiting deportation to Guyana.

On Oléron, a report mentions that Charles Germain and others “maintain incendiary rhetoric against the government and its officials; they publicly insulted the local justice of the peace and are corrupting the public spirit.”

Later, like many neo-Jacobins (especially Babouvists), he was deported following the Rue Saint-Nicaise assassination attempt.

In 1802, he reunited in Cayenne with former Babouvist companions, including René Vatar.

Here is what Robert Legrand writes about him:

“He remained there for several years. The governor, General Hugues, enlisted certain exiles on privateers maintained for the defense of the colony. Some deportees from Cayenne were wounded while fighting the English off the coast of Africa. Germain, one of the most indomitable republicans of his time, was captured in one of these engagements and taken aboard English prison hulks. He never ceased to preach to French sailors and soldiers, his companions in misfortune, a love of the Republic and hatred of Bonaparte.”

Meanwhile, in January 1809, a Portuguese fleet and an English corvette attacked Cayenne, forcing Governor Hugues to capitulate. A prisoner of the English, Germain was still held on prison hulks in 1810; he did not return to France until 1814.

Nothing is known about him after that date (although there are some hypotheses—but that will be for a future post).

P.S:Correct me if I am mistaken, but Lucien Bonaparte sometimes reminds me of his rival Joséphine de Beauharnais: both were great spenders with real political skills (although, in my opinion, Joséphine was far more adept at political intrigue). Both also intervened to request clemency or to ease the lives of Bonaparte’s political opponents. However, Lucien Bonaparte seems to have been mainly concerned with neo-Jacobins (such as Buonarroti and Charles Germain), whereas Joséphine focused more on securing clemency for royalists like Armand de Polignac. It would be worth checking whether Lucien also took an interest in the fate of royalists.

[max-de-robespierre]

“Il ne s'est jamais rien fait de grand dans le monde que par le courage et la fermeté d'un seul homme qui brave les préjugés de la multitude.”

“There has never been anything great in the world except through the courage and resolve of one man who defies the prejudices of the multitude.” -- François-Noël “Gracchus” Babeuf

[mostly-history]

The French Revolution of 1789 gave rise to a more radical mode of thought...concerned less with detached analysis of society than with changing it through direct action.  All subsequent revolutionaries, including Marx and Lenin, paid close attention to the French Revolution which from its beginning was seen as 'an epochal event [that] completely transformed the social and political identity of the civilized world.'  In its variant that bore the greatest family relationship to Communism, it was known as Babouvism, after its leader, Gracchus Babeuf.  For the Babouvists equality was the supreme value, and they were ready to embrace 'a period of dictatorship in the general interest for as long as might be necessary to destroy or disarm the enemies of equality.'

The Rise & Fall of Communism

[nesiacha]

Sophie Lapierre, Activist of the French Revolution and Celebrated Babouvist Singer

I am not infallible, so please feel free to correct me.

Militant Career

Sophie Lapierre was born on 29 October 1771. She was the niece of the Babouvist Joseph Monnard. She is described as a pretty woman with Venetian blond hair.

Having been settled in Myennes for three years, in the district of Cosne-sur-Loire, she was granted a certificate of civism on 12 Floréal, Year II, by the local commune, which emphasized her commitment to patriotic ideals. Another certificate of the same kind was later awarded to her while she was teaching there. She subsequently left the provinces for Paris, where she lived with her aunt Monnard and worked as an embroiderer( according to Robert Legrand, Babeuf et ses compagnons de route).

According to historian Claude Mazauric, she may have had political connections with Claire Lacombe. In his book Babeuf et la Conjuration pour l’Égalité, he describes Sophie Lapierre’s political involvement as follows: “the former activist among the revolutionary women of Claire Lacombe’s circle, Sophie Lapierre.”

Nevertheless, even if this claim regarding her ties with Claire Lacombe is accurate, it did not prevent her from singing songs in homage to Robespierre.

In Year IV, she was reportedly seen singing at the Café des Bains Chinois, a place where the Babouvists prepared their conspiracies and where subscriptions to the newspaper Le Tribun du Peuple were taken (according to Aulard).

She sings the song La complainte sur la mort de Robespierre: Ah! poor people, farewell to the golden age Expect only sorrow and misery It ended on the tenth of Thermidor The day Robespierre was sacrificed. When he was alive, he eased our sufferings, He had all our respect…

(Ah ! pauvre peuple, adieu le siècle d’or N’attends que peine et misère Il est passé dès le dix thermidor Jour qu’on immola Robespierre. Quand il vivait, il allégeait nos maux, Il avait toute notre estime…)

But she also sings Goujon’s hymn, la Caramagnole, and le Chant des Egaux.

Here are some lyrics from Goujon’s hymn: Rise, illustrious victims, Of the oppressors of humankind! … We lived for Equality, We will die for the fatherland…

(Levez-vous illustres victimes, Des oppresseurs du genre humain ! … Nous vivions pour l’Égalité, Nous périrons pour la patrie…)

The lyrics of la Caramagnole were: Frenchmen, let us all fly to Paris To embrace our good friends. Long live Liberty! Let us sing Equality!

(Français, volons tous à Paris Pour embrasser nos bons amis. Vive la Liberté ! Chantons l’Égalité !)

While some of the lyrics of le Chant des Egaux were: An infamous code has for too long Enslaved men to men.

Down with the reign of brigands! Let us finally know where we stand, Awaken to our voice, And emerge from the deep night, People, reclaim your rights, The sun shines for everyone.

(Un code infâme a trop longtemps Asservi les hommes aux hommes. Tombe le règne des brigands ! Sachons enfin où nous en sommes, Réveillez-vous à notre voix, Et sortez de la nuit profonde, Peuples, ressaisissez vos droits, Le soleil luit pour tout le monde).

Some unverified sources claim that she was Darthé’s mistress, but since I have not found any evidence or confirmation from historians so far, this information should be taken with caution.

Here is another excerpt from Robert Legrand’s text concerning her:

“The indictment tells us that at the Bains Chinois: ‘She was known as Sophie. She attended gatherings at Breton’s and at the tavern on Rue Denis with those who met at her uncle’s. She would bring food there. She knew the legionnaires who came to her uncle’s, and she ate with them. One day, Drouin, a legionnaire, slept in the said Sophie’s room, along with three other recruits. Whenever the enterprise was discussed, she would incite the members with the most violent and bloodthirsty remarks, and when any doubt was expressed about its success, she was affected to the point of feeling unwell.’

However, she claimed not to have had any knowledge of the plot” (National Archives, F7 4278, police note).

She would later be arrested and imprisoned.

During the Babouvist Repression But the worst was still to come with her. I have already discussed the repression at the Grenelle camp here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/761134322820448256/during-the-night-of-september-9-to-10-1796-the?source=share.

To summarize briefly, after Babeuf’s arrest, Babouvist conspirators tried to free their leaders. Here is a quick summary of what historian Jean-Marc Schiappa says in his book Gracchus Babeuf et les Égaux:

"On the night of September 9–10, 1796 (23–24 Fructidor, Year IV), the surviving Babouvists made their way to the Grenelle military camp. The group consisted of several hundred democrats. Carnot, informed by Colonel Malo, one of the camp’s commanders, preferred to wait and have as many democrats as possible arrested in the trap, even if it meant using it against all opponents. The insurgents, led by certain provocateurs such as Sandron Romainville—the same man who had had the Babouvists like Blondeau arrested—determined to free their leaders, were anticipated and charged by the cavalry. (...) The wounded from Grenelle fled into Paris, while a number drowned attempting to cross the Seine under cover of night. The repression was unimaginably savage. Paris was completely surrounded, and the Directory ordered house-to-house searches across all districts. Every wounded person they could find was arrested. Searches were conducted even in the Hôtel-Dieu wards, where the injured were apprehended. Three former deputies were arrested, though entirely unrelated to the affair, at least for the first two: Cusset, Huguet, and Javogues, who had been under surveillance since the popular uprisings of Year III.

According to the law, civilians could not be brought before military tribunals; yet it was indeed before a military commission that the accused appeared, which sentenced thirty-two democrats to death, including a number of Babouvists such as Bertrand from Lyon, Baby from Toulouse, or Joseph Monnard, Sophie Lapierre’s uncle, who would nevertheless be judged at Vendôme even posthumously. Among the wounded was Jean-Joseph Fyon, a military agent of the Conspiracy, who would be transferred to Vendôme. Some of the arrested militants had come from the provinces to join the plot, following the Jacobin tradition of August 10, 1792—such as Ollivier from Lorient, or others from Grenoble and Rouen. In 1792, thousands of fédérés had ensured victory; in 1796, the mere presence of a few isolated individuals sealed defeat: the Revolution was indeed over.

Immediately after the trials, the condemned lodged appeals in vain. They were executed on the spot. The Court of Cassation would later annul the judgments handed down by the military commission. Dozens of prisoners would be released, but it was impossible to bring the dead back to life, even by judicial decision"

Although Carnot save the life of Félix Le Peletier by warning him not to go, he still bears heavy responsibility for what happened. Nevertheless, Tissot and Buonarroti believe that Barras also shares some of the responsibility, and historian Jean-Marc Schiappa agrees.

Moreover, despite his significant powers, it seems difficult to believe that Carnot could have acted alone.

In any case, Sophie Lapierre had to face this loss as well as the judgment of her peers and of her aunt, the Widow Monnard. She became part of the group of ten Babouvists who refused to acknowledge the authority of the Vendôme Court (with Babeuf, Blondeau, Darthé, Moroy, Germain, Cochet, Marie-Adélaïde Lambert, Toulotte, and Cazin).

It appears she supported Babeuf's tactics, along with Blondeau and sometimes Germain, by acting out in prison to draw public attention to their incarceration. She suffered the consequences of this, as reported in a letter from 11 Nivôse (correspondence from Daude): "Blondeau, the perpetual voice of the troublemakers, tried to disregard the rules and laws by establishing himself with the women to share scandalous pleasures with a few other accused men, whom these women had invited to dinner in their hallways. We opposed this blatant violation. There were cries, disturbances, insults, threats, and even violence... Resolute to overcome all resistance, we called the gendarmerie and had Blondeau and the other guests escorted back to their rooms. Babeuf, moments later, struck the cook. We reported the incident to the municipal administration, which issued a decree sentencing Blondeau, Sophie Lapierre, Adélaïde Lambert, and Babeuf to three days in confinement in their rooms, while the others were sentenced to five days."

Apparently, she wanted to have dinner in prison with Babeuf, Blondeau, and Marie-Adélaïde Lambert, as well as other prisoners, but this was refused by the warden, who confined them for five days. In my opinion, they may have caused some disturbance in prison so that they could be punished for it.

"Indicted in Vendôme. She signed all the protests that the conspirators submitted to the court, and she also signed on behalf of her aunt, Citizen Monard.

During the interrogation, Sophie stated that she did not wish to answer, not recognizing the competence of the court. She persisted in her refusal. When asked if she had chosen a counsel, she replied that she had selected Citizen Toulotte. Since he was himself detained, Ballyer was appointed in his place as unofficial defender. As other defendants had done, she declared that she reserved her rights pending the judgment of the Court of Cassation and again denied having had any knowledge of the plot".(Robert Legrand Arch. Nat., F7 4278, police note. )

She remained silent, like Darthé, refusing to answer the tribunal’s questions throughout the trial, except when singing revolutionary songs such as l’Hymne de Goujon. These songs were even echoed by the audience attending the trial.

Nevertheless, she wrote to the president of the tribunal:

"If you had not opposed the writing of my declaration, I would have had no reproach to make against you, but you took advantage of my ignorance to substitute my signature. Yesterday, I declared that all your petty means could not intimidate me, that my soul is inaccessible to fear, that love for my country outweighs every other feeling in my heart, and that I reject the High Court and will reject it forever. This is what I intended to sign. Consequently, I protest against what I did yesterday, 3 Frimaire, Year V. It is fitting that the Republicans present here know that the High Court uses subterfuge to deceive the good faith of a woman who knows only frankness and republican loyalty." (Nat. Archives, W. 565, 4 Frimaire, Year V).

Despite these harsh trials, Robert Legrand says that she remained full of life throughout her imprisonment and trial. At the end of the Vendôme trial, she was acquitted, but like many of her co-accused, she faced significant financial difficulties. She was likely devastated by the executions of Gracchus Babeuf and Darthé, as well as by the deportation sentences handed down to Blondeau, Charles Germain, and others imprisoned in Cherbourg.

Together with her aunt, the widow Monard, she was among the detainees who requested compensation for the time spent in prison (some had been held for up to 13 months), a request initially refused by the Directory. They were eventually granted the compensation after the Coup of 18 Fructidor, Year V.

Interestingly, the widow Monard sent a note of encouragement to Blondeau, imprisoned in Cherbourg: “Republicans know how to suffer with courage; it is up to you to set the example.” I wonder if Sophie Lapierre also had a part in writing that note. In any case, sadly, she disappears from the political scene. We do not know what became of her or her date of death, even though she was one of the most famous women of that period.

P.S.: When police reports describe Sophie Lapierre as a woman with violent and bloodthirsty tendencies, it is important to remember that their aim was to falsely present her and the Babouvists as fanatics. Therefore, these sources are very unreliable.

Sources:

Claude Mazauric

Jean-Marc Schiappa

Robert Legrand, Babeuf et ses compagnons de route

On the fact that Carnot likely saved Félix Le Peletier’s life during the Babouvist conspiracy: Tumblr link

[nesiacha]

The information I have been able to find about Henriette Simonin, widow Chaumette, an overlooked woman of the French Revolution

I have already written a post explaining why Pierre-Gaspard Chaumette is, in my view, one of the most complex and paradoxical figures of the French Revolution, and therefore one of the most interesting: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/753092098599829504?source=share

Chaumette is unfortunately best known today for his misogyny toward women engaged in politics—a deeply regrettable aspect of his legacy—particularly because of his attacks on Olympe de Gouges and Manon Roland. He has been the victim of a negative legend that focuses only on his negative actions and ignores the more positive ones

Yet he had a wife, Henriette Simonin, who appears to have been herself politically engaged. From the limited information available, her life seems to have been profoundly tragic, or at least marked by extreme violence. She is generally described as having worked as a linen seamstress.

Marina Grey portrays her in the following terms in her book Hébert: le père Duchesne, agent royaliste:

“In 1792, forced to remain in Paris, where his salary barely allowed him to survive, Chaumette—who would soon thunder at the Commune against women of ill repute—seduced one of them. She divided her time between gallantry and home sewing. Dazzled by the vast culture of her new lover, Henriette Simonin declared herself ready to renounce her guilty activities and, from then on, to devote herself solely to needlework. Fearfully, she confessed her unexpected pregnancy. Contrary to all of Henriette’s pessimistic expectations, the announcement filled Chaumette, the future father, with joy and pride. He left his garret on rue Mazarine, rented a room for two at number 3 rue Serpente, then an apartment for three at 15 rue des Deux-Portes-Saint-André. And thus a daughter was born to him. He named her Laure and spoke of sending her, once she was weaned, to his father’s home in the Nièvre, where the air was purer than in Paris… Hébert therefore drinks to the health of little Laure while dreaming of the future birth of his own Scipion.”

In another passage, Grey writes:

“On October 29, the Convention, anxious to please the Club, issued a decree allowing the jurors of the Revolutionary Tribunal to consider themselves ‘sufficiently enlightened’ after only three days of hearings. That same evening, Chaumette invited Hébert to ‘eat a cutlet’ at his home. Jacques René did not much appreciate the family atmosphere of rue du Paon, nor the cooking of Henriette Simonin, the humble and rather careless companion of the prosecutor, and therefore suggested the inn known as the Suisse du Pont Tournant.”

The problem with Marina Grey’s account is that, while some elements of her book are accurate, others are demonstrably false. I have found no evidence whatsoever to support the claim that Henriette Simonin was a prostitute. Such an accusation would require solid, verifiable sources, which are entirely lacking.

More broadly, it is important to remember that at the time—as in many other historical periods—attacking a political figure often meant attacking the women around him. Defamatory writings targeted Marie-Françoise Goupil, Hébert’s wife; Sophie Momoro, in order to better discredit Antoine-François Momoro; Bonne-Jeanne Fouché, née Coiquaud (attacks largely derived from the highly unreliable memoirs of Paul Barras, who fabricated numerous falsehoods later repeated by some biographers); as well as Élisabeth Le Bon, wife of Joseph Le Bon; Sylvie Audouin, née Pache; and Marie-Joseph Sagnier, the companion of Rigomer Bazin, one of the most prominent Jacobins of his time and an opponent of Bonaparte. In all these cases—and in many others—the accusations directed at these women were later shown to be entirely unfounded.

It is therefore entirely plausible that the same mechanism is at work in the way Henriette Simonin is described as “careless” and “galant.”

Several questions remain unanswered. It would be important, for instance, to determine the exact date on which the Chaumette couple sent their daughter to live with her paternal grandfather in Nevers, as well as the reasons behind this decision. Was it truly because the air of Nevers was considered purer than that of Paris? Or was it, at a later stage, a way of protecting the child’s psychological well-being—first from her father’s execution, then from the inevitable confiscation of property, and from the violence of the White Terror and the persecutions her mother must have endured?

It is important to note that she cared for her husband so much that she visited him in prison when he was arrested, hoping that he would get out of trouble.

Based on information provided by @anotherhumaninthisworld, as posted here: Tumblr link, there is evidence that Henriette Simonin visited Chaumette during his trial, which ultimately resulted in a death sentence.

Indeed, during the proceedings, Chaumette stated that he had been visited in prison by his wife, who “had made me hope I wasn’t going to get implicated in the Hébert affair” (Histoire parlementaire de la Révolution française, vol. 32, p. 258).

It is interesting to note that she was one of the Hébertist women who were not imprisoned during this period, unlike Marie-Françoise Hébert, Sophie Momoro, and Marie-Angélique Momoro.

In any case, Henriette Simonin was clearly far removed from the image of a mere “groupie” that has sometimes been attributed to her. She was capable of genuine political reflection, firmly rooted in Montagnard ideas. She also formed relationships with political figures other than her husband, such as René Lebois and Gracchus Babeuf. Importantly, she also knew their wives—René Lebois’s wife and Marie-Anne Victoire Babeuf—and expressed concern for them, demonstrating a strong sense of solidarity and altruism.

In my view, Henriette Simonin was also capable of considerable courage. At a time when Montagnard politics were in retreat, when muscadins were violently persecuting women suspected of Jacobin sympathies, she not only remained in Paris but explicitly signed one of her letters “Madame Chaumette.” This gesture is all the more striking given that Chaumette, although executed in Year II, was never rehabilitated. Such an act reveals remarkable strength of character.

The following letter, written by Henriette Simonin to Babeuf while he was imprisoned in Arras shortly before the Prairial insurrection, is particularly revealing. According to Robert Legrand, it reflects the state of mind of Parisians who still sympathized with Montagnard politics at that time. Henriette even referred to Gracchus Babeuf as her “cousin”:

"My dear cousin, Is it possible for you to leave us in the anxious state we are in, receiving no news from you at all? Lebois wrote to his wife and told her that you had written to yours. Yet she has received no news; she has only been able to worry, and she is in a condition I cannot begin to describe… She thinks that, since you wrote directly to her, the letter may not have reached her. As for me, I think you have lacked confidence in me, since you did not write to my address. If that is the case, I urge you to write to her in whatever manner you think proper, so long as she has some news from you. Tell her whether you have received your linen as well as the money she sent you—25 livres enclosed in the message with the letter, and another 25 livres in your linen.

As for affairs here, they could not be going worse than they are. The Mountain is oppressed and can no longer speak. The faction entirely has the upper hand, and they are imprisoning those members of the Mountain who showed the most energy. Laurent Lecointre is among them; in short, we have no hope left except in that Constitution which is to be presented to us on the 14th of Floréal. Such, my dear cousin, is the state of the patriots of Paris. To describe to you the misery to which we are reduced would be only to increase your suffering. We have only half a pound of bread per person per day in Paris. But every possible means is being used to try to obtain your liberty. Do not leave us any longer in such anxiety—you owe it to your wife, who is in utter despair.

Write at once, then, to relieve her of her anxiety. Farewell, I remain most fraternally yours. Your fellow citizen, Madame Chaumette.”

Marie-Anne Babeuf also adds to Madame Chaumette’s letter:

“Ah, my God, my dear friend, you are not writing to me! Has something happened to you? Tell me at once! If you are well, how can you leave me so long in such anxiety? If I had had any money, I would have gone to you immediately. I would even have risked leaving without a passport, for one is required, as I told you in my last letter (…) Write to one of your friends so that I may receive some money at once (…) so that I may make this journey. Write to me immediately, I beg you. Your wife, Babeuf.”

One may wonder how Henriette Simonin reacted when Babeuf later became a supporter of Robespierre, given the role Robespierre played in her husband’s death and the harsh words Babeuf himself had previously used against Chaumette and Hébert. In a letter sent to one of his Hébertist friends, Joseph Bodson, Babeuf commented on Robespierre, Hébert, and Chaumette, despite the political relationship and correspondence he had maintained with Chaumette, whom he even referred to as a friend.

Henriette Simonin appears to have continued corresponding with others, possibly as late as Year VII, although I have so far found no trace of the complete letters themselves. One archival reference exists:

F 129, Archives départementales de la Somme: Letter from Madame Chaumette, Paris, 22 Germinal, Year VII (p. 102, copy). An excerpt is mentioned in a JSTOR article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41914626

These letters remain to be located.

Similarly, access to certain archival materials would be invaluable. I include the following link for those who might have greater success than I have had in consulting these documents: https://bibliotheques-specialisees.paris.fr/ark:/73873/FRCGMBPF-751045102-01B/D55B11773

Finally, one may ask whether Henriette Simonin was already politically active during her husband’s lifetime, or whether she only became politically engaged after the death of her male relative—much like Albertine Marat after the assassination of her brother, Jean-Paul Marat.

The Misfortunes of Henriette Simonin

According to research published on Geneanet (https://gw.geneanet.org/fse75?lang=fr&n=simonin&p=clotilde+henriette), Henriette Simonin tragically outlived her daughter Laure, who died in 1796. One can scarcely imagine her state of mind at that time, having lost her only child—on top of her husband, her social position, and any hope of rehabilitation for Chaumette’s memory. Her father-in-law, after losing his son, was also forced to witness the death of his granddaughter.

She may later have remarried a man named Joseph Guariche and had a son, Pierre-Joseph Jean Achille.

Henriette Simonin was among the women temporarily arrested under the Consulate in 1801, following the assassination attempt on the rue Saint-Nicaise, an act carried out by royalists but used as a pretext for neo-Jacobin repression. To my knowledge, at least four women were imprisoned in this context: Albertine Marat, Simone Evrard, Marie-Anne Babeuf, and Henriette Simonin. There may well have been others.

She died in 1810.

In my view, Henriette Simonin was a highly compelling figure who endured a remarkable accumulation of misfortune. Yet history—often shaped by popular culture, particularly television—has focused far more attention on reactionary female figures of the French Revolution, such as Marie-Antoinette, Madame Élisabeth, or the Princesse de Lamballe, as well as on monarchist or liberal figures like Olympe de Gouges and Germaine de Staël. This is not to suggest that these women should not be studied—they absolutely should—but other women, especially those who were well known in their own time, also deserve serious scholarly attention. Widow Chaumette is undoubtedly one of them.

It is particularly striking that Chaumette—a man so openly misogynistic—married a woman who was politically engaged and appears to have been psychologically strong.

I have previously written about a common trait shared by Buonarroti and Bonaparte here https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/800096493264683008/common-points-between-bonaparte-and?source=share : despite being surrounded by highly intelligent, politically active women who supported them extensively, both men opposed women’s political rights—Bonaparte most notably so. Chaumette may well belong to this same category, given the number of politically capable Hébertist women who assisted him despite his narrow views on the subject—probably including his wife, Sophie Momoro as the Goddess of Reason, and the women attending the Cordeliers Club, such as Vincent’s wife, Ronsin’s wife, Ancart’s wife, and others.

P.S.: Even if Henriette Simonin had truly been a prostitute, she should not be blamed for it. The responsibility lies with a society that placed women in such situations in order to survive. My skepticism concerns the sources themselves, since this would not be the first time that such a claim was fabricated to discredit a woman and then, unfortunately, repeated by biographers without proper verification.

Sources:

Dommanget, Robert Legrand, Babeuf et ses compagnons de route

Arch. Dép. Somme, F. 129, p. 102

Moscow, I.M.L., Letter from Mme Babeuf and Mme Chaumette to Babeuf in Arras, 27 Germinal Year III, 16 April 1795

Marina Grey

On the life of Sylvie Audouin, née Pache: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/776418727578189824/the-revolutionary-path-of-sylvie-audouin-daughter?source=share

On Sophie Momoro: it's here https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/758994396416016384/life-and-fate-of-sophie-momoro-n%C3%A9e-fournier-and?source=share she played the role of the Goddess of Reason during dechristianization ceremonies, managed her husband’s workshop and printing presses, and accompanied him to the Vendée. She also drafted appeals to the Convention.

On Marie-Angélique Lequesne, widow of Ronsin and wife of Turreau: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/794437214869340160/marie-ang%C3%A9lique-lequesne-widow-of-ronsin-and-wife?source=share

On critiques of Olympe de Gouges: https://www.tumblr.com/mathildeaquisexta/780925698140405760/i-agree-with-pretty-much-everything-that-has-been?source=share

On critiques of Germaine de Stael:https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/798948052816838656/germaine-de-sta%C3%ABl-an-essay-in-demythologization?source=share

[nesiacha]

Gracchus Babeuf's Opinion on Napoleon Bonaparte

Napoleon Bonaparte's rise immediately alarmed Gracchus Babeuf. In his newspaper Le Tribun du Peuple, in issue 41, he wrote: “Wasn't it foolish to believe that the revolution had been made for us? How fortunate for our leaders! Should we not have been flattered to see the Directory give our general Buonaparte 800,000 francs to establish his household?” Babeuf asserts that Jourdan was more deserving and reliable than Bonaparte: "It is said that the same means were tried with Jourdan... But it is said that Jourdan, very little moved by these flattery, remains the general of Liberty and continues to deserve the trust of the People and the soldiers" (Tribun du Peuple, no. 41, p. 276).

Reading the Ami des Lois newspaper, dated February 4, 1797, while imprisoned in Vendôme shortly before his execution, Babeuf wrote the following annotation: "Buonaparte, the victor of Lombardy, thought that this title authorized him to dictate the organization of the government of this country. He asked for a list of good citizens from all classes to form a general council provisionally representing the people of Milan while they could establish themselves. There is no doubt," adds the journalist, "that he will meet with the Cispadane peoples and form with them one indivisible republic.” Even in prison, Babeuf was not disconnected from reality. Like his friend Antonelle, he foresaw the ever-present danger of military dictatorship (and they were not alone). The Babouvist named Sylvain Maréchal clearly sensed that Bonaparte could be that military dictator. Maréchal addressed Bonaparte in these words: "Bonaparte! Your glory is a dictatorship... If you permit yourself this style in Italy, addressing the Cisalpine Directory, I see nothing that could prevent you from using the same style one day, addressing the French Directory. I see nothing that assures me that, in the next Germinal, during our primary assemblies, you won’t repeat from the depths of your rooms in the Luxembourg Palace: 'People of France! I will compose a legislative body and an executive Directory for you. I see nothing that could prevent the general, who drinks to the health of His Majesty the Emperor before drinking to the French Republic, from coming to the National Palace: I will give you a king in my own way, or tremble. Your disobedience will be punished.'"

It should be remembered that on the 9th of Ventôse in the year IV, one of Bonaparte’s acts as Commander-in-Chief of the Army of the Interior was to close the Pantheon club.

In any case, Bonaparte would not forget the Neo-Jacobins, whether they were Babouvists ( including arresting his wife Marie-Anne Victoire Babeuf , Albertine Marat who had some political ties with Gracchus Babeuf, etc...) , anti-Babouvists, or pro-liberal (like Bernard Metge, a staunch supporter of the Constitution of Year III, who calls the Babouvists' ideology lazy but is a fierce opponent of Sieyès), or the most neutrals like the Hébertist Audouin if I am not mistaken or Victor Bach whose name was removed from the list only when authorities learned of his death (who, originally on the list of those to be deported, was removed either by the intervention of Gaspard Monge, who was close to both Bonaparte and the Audouin, or because Bonaparte mistakenly hoped to rally Audouin's father-in-law, Jean Nicolas Pache an important revolutionary Hébertist who left the political scene and friend of Gaspard Monge). However, an interesting fact is that when Bonaparte, in 1800, called the jacobins Septembriseurs said they are guilty despite knowing they were innocent of the Rue de Nicaise assassination attempt (I am sure of this because even when he discovered that the royalists were the culprits, he refused to listen), he declared he wanted them shot or deported. Only two people among his advisors openly opposed him to the point that he did not dare say anything (although he would later carry out his threats, executing some Jacobins after forced confessions under fake torture, including Babeuf's friend Topino Lebrun and especially his friend Giuseppe Ceracchi). It was not Fouché, as commonly believed. It was Admiral Truguet who warned against this "Bonapartist Terror" as called Victor Daline in his article , as well as François Réal, an Hébertist and defender of the Babouvists to the point that Camille Babeuf had asked for his help while he was seized by madness. Ironically, Réal would become Count of the Empire. After a chilling silence, Bonaparte became even angrier at them (especially François Réal and Admiral Truguet, who had openly opposed him regarding the fate of the Jacobins) and had to suspend the session. Cambacérès found a way to bypass the issue by carrying out deportations without trial through the Senate, while Fouché and Prefect Dubois threatened the diligent police commissioner Gauthier-Biauzat when he saw that the evidence against the Jacobins, particularly Arena, Demerville, Cerrachi, and Topino Lebrun, was lacking. Biauzat even stated that it was a return to the Old Regime (where Louis XVI had abolished torture during interrogations).

P.S: I hesitated to include the opinion of Buonarroti, one of the fiercest opponents of Bonaparte, but it would require a separate article. I should also write a post one day on how Cambacérès, a jurist, carried out illegal acts, though it would be a brief post.

Sources: Bernard Gainot, Itinéraire démocratique post-thermidorien Victor Daline, Napoléon et les Babouvistes Antoine Resche

P.S: For the mysterious circumstances of Victor Bach's death, it's here All information is welcome

The Journey of the Forgotten French Revolutionary Victor Bach: His Opposition to the Directory and Bonaparte, and Questions Surrounding the

Le Cœur - La mort de Victor Bach, le 18 brumaire, au pied de la statue de la Liberté, place de la Concorde - P460 - Musée Carnavalet (portr

and here about the break between Fouché and Babeuf https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/767448240197140480/excerpts-from-letters-and-chapters-of-historians?source=share

about Bernard Metge https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/756533326215528448/the-jacobins-executed-by-bonaparte?source=share

About Topino-Lebrun:

Topino Lebrun, a revolutionary Jacobin close to Babeuf, executed under Bonaparte, is either forgotten or demonized

François Jean-Baptiste Topino-Lebrun, La Mort de Caius Gracchus (1798 Marseille, musée des Beaux-arts) Topino Lebrun is an interesting revo

[nesiacha]

The political career of the revolutionary Antonelle Pierre-Antoine, close to Felix Lepeletier

Presumed portrait of Pierre Antoine Antonelle

This revolutionary was born in Arles in 1747. As a marquis, he published between 1788 and 1789 "le Catéchisme du Tiers État, à l’usage de toutes les provinces de France, et spécialement de la Provence ." He did not succeed as an officer, due to a lack of both will and ability. Instead, he preferred reading philosophy and mathematics treatises, according to Pierre Serna. He managed to become the first mayor of Arles in 1790.

Antonelle founded a Jacobin society, affiliated with Paris, and opposed Monseigneur de Lau (who was killed during the September massacres). Antonelle supported the common people, while Monseigneur de Lau, despite being attracted to Enlightenment ideas, opposed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. Antonelle was elected to the Legislative Assembly in 1791 and became a legislative commissioner for the Army of the Center in 1792.

In the autumn of 1792, he gained further importance by being elected as a juror at the Revolutionary Tribunal. He was apparently an alternate who did not participate in Marie Antoinette's trial. Contrary to what Wikipedia claims, he was harsh with Marie Antoinette, although he did not believe the infamous rumors about her son. According to Pierre Serna, Antonelle acted this way because, in his view, one could not build a new world on the revolution without destroying the old roots of the Ancien Régime. However, he declared himself insufficiently informed during the trial of the Girondins. He was imprisoned in May 1794 but was released immediately after the 9th Thermidor.

The Directory was a great disappointment for Antonelle. While Robespierre was nicknamed "the Incorruptible," Antonelle was called "the Invariable," according to Pierre Serna. He maintained a lifelong friendship with Felix Lepeletier, despite a later divergence between them. Involved in the Conspiracy of Equals, he was tried during the Babouvist trial. Apparently, one of the reasons many were spared (except Darthé and Babeuf) was due to Antonelle's strategy. Here is an excerpt from Pierre Serna: "He participated in the Vendôme trial against Babeuf’s accomplices and played a key role in saving almost all of the defendants." According to Serna, for Antonelle, there should be no more martyrs, or at least no more forced uprisings of this kind. He believed in fighting the Directory from within, through elections.

He helped the majority of the Directory's directors on the eve of the coup d'état of 18 Fructidor, Year V, by publishing the newspaper Le Démocrate Constitutionnel to call on the suburbs to fight against the royalists. His election to the Council of Five Hundred in 1799 was annulled due to irregularities, namely his affiliation with the Jacobins.

He quickly sensed the danger of Bonaparte, as it matched the fears of a general too ambitious, who would definitively end the Revolution. The consequences of the Saint-Nicaise Street attack and the terrible repression of the Jacobins led to his expulsion from France. Later, when he returned to France, he was placed under surveillance, although he fared better than his friend Felix Lepeletier, who was temporarily deported. Other Jacobins were executed in what was, in Antonelle’s view, an even worse parody of justice than under the First Republic (particularly because of the use of torture). Many other Jacobins were deported, and half of them died in exile.

He lived in retirement in Arles, continuing his philanthropic activities, becoming beloved by the local population for his generous donations. Despite his reputation as a "priest-eater," he gave large sums of money to nuns in the Church so they could care for the poor. This reputation later saved his life. Antonelle had a political divergence with his friend Lepeletier. In fact, he rallied to the Restoration in 1814 in opposition to Bonaparte and published Le dernier rêve d’un vieillard . He accepted the restoration of Louis XVIII under one condition: that he respects civil equality, equal access to jobs for all, and civil liberties. This was criticized, but honestly, he had to choose between two monarchs (as the return of the monarchy was sealed the day Bonaparte crowned himself, let's not delude ourselves), one of whom had betrayed his entire political circle, executed many, caused a large number of deaths, and rolled back many achievements shortly after his coup d'état while proclaiming himself the savior of the Revolution. In comparison, one could criticize Louis XVIII, but he seemed more reasonable (we cannot say the same of Charles X, who had as much honor as he had intelligence, meaning none at all). I don't blame those who chose Bonaparte either, as they were desperate not to return under the Bourbons' yoke (it must have been a terrible dilemma for all honest republicans to choose between Bonaparte and Louis XVIII).

During the Second Restoration, he was hunted by royalists in Arles. However, being highly esteemed by the local population, especially the farmers , they hid him out of gratitude for his generosity toward them (according to Pierre Serna, the farmers owed a large debt to Antonelle, which he forget the debt after they saved his life).

Having inherited a significant fortune, he gave generously to the people of Arles, who only loved him more for it. When he died in 1817, a massive crowd reportedly attended his funeral. Here is another excerpt from Serna: "His burial led to a popular riot when the clergy refused to give him the last rites, provoking the anger of the common people of Arles. Even in death, Antonelle remained controversial."

In Arles, at 30 Rue de la Roquette, there is a hotel bearing his name, with a plaque in his honor.

Sources: Pierre Serna Jean Dautry

[nesiacha]

During the night of September 9 to 10, 1796: The Affair of the Grenelle Camp

Attaque du camp de Grenelle par des conspirateurs : le 24 Fructidor, An 4.eme de la République. Paris, BnF, département des estampes et de la photographie, 1802.

Hundreds of people, including a number of Babouvists, headed towards the Grenelle camp to try to incite the garrison to revolt. It didn’t work, and they were killed. The survivors and others identified as Babouvists would later be judged by a military commission, which, according to historian Jean-Marc Schiappa, appeared quite illegal, and whose judgments would eventually be overturned.

Here is a text excerpt from Schiappa: "Unlike the events of Prairial Year III, Vendémiaire Year IV, or the mutiny of the Police Legion, no real threat (in the military sense) existed here. Military means were used to crush a political opposition that had demonstrated it was disarmed. This is a form of coup d'état, the first in a long series under the Directory."

The most famous people executed were General Maximilien Henri Nicolas Jacob and three former convention members: Claude Javogues (apparently shot while singing the Marseillaise), Joseph-Marie Cusset (one of the last ‘Crêtois’), and Marc-Antoine Huguet. Among those sentenced to death were the former mayor Antoine-Marie Bertrand (despite several favorable testimonies on his behalf, apparently) and the painter Jean-Nicolas-Victor Gagnant. In total, around 30 people were executed by firing squad.

Here is an excerpt from historian Jean Tulard: "The Affair of the Grenelle Camp is the decisive episode of the Conspiracy of the Equals, led by Gracchus Babeuf. This former feudalist, who dreamed of an agrarian communism, was preparing a plot in collaboration with former Montagnards. After the failure of the Germinal and Prairial uprisings of Year III (April 1 and May 20, 1795), it was necessary to abandon the idea of a popular uprising because the suburbs were disarmed. The Babouvists, who had made contacts within a force responsible for maintaining order in Paris—the Police Legion—hoped for a military uprising in the Grenelle camp against the Directory. The denunciation by Grisel, an officer involved in the conspiracy, allowed the Minister of Police, Cochon de Lapparent, to orchestrate a massive crackdown on the 21st of Floréal Year IV (May 10, 1796). Babeuf and his key accomplices were arrested. The last supporters of the Equals tried, during the night of 23 to 24 Fructidor (September 9-10), to incite the soldiers of the Grenelle camp to revolt. Carnot, a member of the Directory at the time, and Cochon de Lapparent allowed the insurrection to develop before deploying the cavalry. Several people were killed on the spot, and thirty were executed. Babouvism was crushed. Its missteps, especially in the Grenelle affair where it was manipulated by provocateurs, were harshly criticized by Marx."

I will conclude with a quote from Jean-Marc Schiappa: "The coup at Grenelle is measurable: the Directory developed a taste for the army, and the sword that Sieyès would seek in Brumaire had already struck," and he adds, "the episode at Grenelle is also a turning point in the history of the Directory"

P.S: What I find in Gallica Trial of twenty-five individuals from the Grenelle Camp affair but it is in french sorry :( https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k41290c/f4.item