En 1911, par un remarquable article publié dans les Annales révolutionnaires, puis largement diffusé sous forme de brochure, Hector Fleischmann croyait en finir avec la légende des masques mortuair...
A very good article on the problematic ‘death masks’ and the ‘facial reconstruction’ based on them. Tussaud’s narrative is highly dubious to say the least. Charlier’s claim that the portraits are all very flattering doesn’t stand up as an excuse in terms of the difference in features, and also we know some of the artists aren’t especially flattering (see Deseine’s Mirabeau and Gabrielle Danton portraits).
Politically, it was not in the Thermidorians’ interests to risk a martyr-cult, which creating an image of a physically mutilated young man would have done.
Practically, the remains were disposed of ASAP, and buried in quicklime (partly for political reasons, partly because it was the height of summer).
The so-called death-masks show no indication of the terrible bruising, facial œdema (bilateral, but more on the left, which was the injured side) and comminuted fracture of bone indicated by the surgeons who were poking about while the poor boy was still alive and pulled teeth and bits of bone out with their fingers.
Even if taken from a life-mask, it’s probably not him, because the facial proportions aren’t right, and what about the characteristic pointy little nose, which is consistent in all portraits? It looks to me like someone more middle-aged and of heavier build.
Tussaud makes things up. She’s a show-woman, an astute businesswoman, given her audience what they want. They want Robespierre? She’ll give them a Robespierre, even if it’s the life-mask of, say, one of her porters. She claims she took the mask from his head at the cemetery of the Madeleine: he was buried at Les Errancis. Her taste for post-Thermidorian myth-making is also clear in her claim that he had someone executed so he could give their house to his mistress…!