[Napoleon] had destroyed only one thing: the Jacobin Revolution, the dream of equality, liberty and fraternity, and of the people rising in its majesty to shake off oppression. It was a more powerful myth than his, for after his fall it was this, and not his memory, which inspired the revolutions of the nineteenth century, even in his own country.
From the chapter "The French Revolution" in The Age of Revolution: 1789-1848 by Eric Hobsbawm, 1962.
Jacobin is a journal that mostly publishes the limericks tankies write on bathroom walls. Named after a terror group that specialized in kidnapping and drowning the children of their political opponents, it is no surprise that the participants in this roundtable have stunted and incomplete human decency. Around 5 words in 6 are lies.
And yet at times, even they get it:
Hamas is expected to trade the hostages upfront for Palestinian captives and prisoners and thus forego its only remaining leverage, making it reliant on external players under the auspices of the United States as the ultimate arbiter of the future of Palestinians in Gaza.
The fact that Hamas has agreed to this US ceasefire deal with a âYes, butâ and is seeking to amend some clauses â after Israel tried to assassinate its negotiators just the other day â shows the extent of Hamasâs political and military degradation. October 7 produced the exact opposite of what Hamas dreamily expected to achieve: more occupation, not less; the destruction rather than expansion of the Axis of Resistance; genocide [SIC] and the total obliteration of Gaza.
The reason Hamas is negotiating is because itâs severely weakened and trapped. Rejecting the deal guarantees destruction; accepting it formalizes degradation.
I imagine supporters of Hamas would argue that they partially achieved their goal of isolating Israel at a moment when it was normalizing itself in the Middle East... I fail to see how all this human cost can simply be framed as collateral damage for the sake of achieving Israelâs increased isolation, especially since Israel has succeeded in decimating Gaza for the foreseeable future, jeopardizing the lives of multiple generations.
I once received a question asking which historical female figure of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era suffered the most or had the most tragic fate (unfortunately, I lost the question).
Sorry for the poor organization of this text, which I will correct later. I preferred to publish it rather than risk losing it permanently due to my temperamental computer.
Content warning: this text contains descriptions of executions (including those involving children) and suicide, which may be distressing for sensitive readers.
Before giving my answer, I want to make it clear that this is not about minimizing the suffering of other women. Their suffering was very real, and this is not a competition.
The Duplay sisters also suffered after Thermidor: temporary imprisonment, the loss of loved ones to the guillotine, and the demonization of their name (the black legend surrounding people like Robespierre had already begun).
Albertine Marat and Simone Evrard endured imprisonment and poverty. Despite their efforts to preserve the legacy of Jean-Paul Marat, they saw him vilified and remained under police surveillance during the Directory, under Bonaparte, and even under the monarchy.
Henriette Simonin, widow of Chaumetteâwhom I discussed here:
https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/804044312295964672/the-information-i-have-been-able-to-find-about?source=share
âsurvived her husbandâs execution, likely witnessed the rise of his âblack legend,â lost their daughter, and was imprisoned after the attack on the Rue Saint-Nicaise during the repression of the Jacobins.
Ălisabeth Le Bon, whose life I discussed here:
https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/796013800067416064/elisabeth-le-bon-loyal-companion-in-the-struggle?source=share
was imprisoned with her two children.
Sophie Carnot also experienced tragic moments, as shown in this post of @aedislumen :
https://www.tumblr.com/aedislumen/782234046319280128/hello-do-you-know-anything-or-have-any-resources?source=share
She and her husband first had a stillborn child, then lost another son in 1795. When Carnot was proscribed during Fructidor, their property was seized. She initially refused to divorce him (which would have protected her), until both her father and husband persuaded her to do so. This allowed her to assist him more effectively while he was in exile, though she had to endure slander in the press and pamphlets. After Brumaire, when he was able to return to France, the divorce was annulledâyet this still illustrates the tragedies she endured.
After her release, she remarried one of her husbandâs friends, Turreau. However, in addition to losing a child, her husband proved to be a cruel man who beat her (with whips or a cane, in front of their crying children). Hardly anyone dared to help her, except for her friend Dolley Madison, Thornton, and a few americans. Out of revenge, Turreau left her in poverty with their children; even after the divorce, he lived comfortably while she and her children struggled to obtain even minimal financial support. Her plan to return to America during the Restoration and open a school also failed, and she died in poverty (as did her daughter Alexandrine).
Marie-Anne Babeuf lived in constant poverty, saw her husband executed, and lost many friends. She was imprisoned twice under harsh conditions and subjected to police surveillance and proceedings multiple times. She outlived at least four of her five children (possibly all) and lived under the stigma of the Babeuf name. She also witnessed her son Ămile gradually abandon revolutionary ideals and distort the truth as demonstrated here https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/797365648777953280/the-beginning-of-the-revolutionary-period?source=share .
Suzanne Le Peletier fought to marry the man she loved but suffered a disappointing marriage and the loss of children. She remarried, was later widowed again, and gradually turned toward religion and royalism under the weight of her personal tragedies as we can see here https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/795252246414819328/the-relationship-between-f%C3%A9lix-le-peletier-and?source=share .
Charlotte Robespierre lost both her brothers on the same day and was never able to reconcile with them.
Even if one may criticize Madame Royale for what she later becameâespecially after returning to France as the Duchess of AngoulĂȘme, as discussed here https://www.tumblr.com/mathildeaquisexta/778220050110922752/i-quite-agree-with-everything-written?source=share âshe endured imprisonment as a child alongside her younger brother and witnessed members of her family die one after another. (Louis XVI, Marie-Antoinette, and Madame Ălisabeth bear responsibility for their political fate, but Madame Royale and her brother were innocent and should never have suffered such a fate.)
Many women suffered at the hands of foreign troops, who showed little mercy during the sack of towns and villages during the frev revolution.
Others suffered during the famine of Year III or from violence by the Muscadins. Some mothers, driven to despair, committed suicide with their children by throwing themselves into the Seine.
Madame Dunel represents this extreme despair: persecuted and crushed by inequality and repression, she poisoned her entire family and herself. Only her husband, who was being pursued by the police, survived.
Women affiliated with the Jacobin movement suffered greatly after the repression ordered by Bonaparte, as you can see here:
https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/804861309236674560/the-role-of-women-supporting-the-jacobins-in-the?source=share
They fought in vain to prevent their husbands from being deported and risked insults and physical violence in the streets. Madame Dufour, a mother of six whose neo-Jacobin husband had been deported, gave public speeches in support of the Jacobinsâbut to no avail, as he had already died. Many of these women fell deeper into poverty, as their husbands had been their main source of income, which only added to their suffering. Furthermore, they were betrayed by a former comrade-in-arms, Parein du Mesnil, who had gained their trust during difficult times in order to better report their conversations to the government.
One could also mention the wife of General Maurepas, who died on September 19, 1802, in Haiti when Napoleon attempted to restore slavery. Here is how the Maurepas family died (the general had been suspected of participating in the Haitian revolt after surrendering to the French army in February 1802):
âHe is immediately seized by several sailors (he is then aboard the flagship off Tortuga), stripped in a frenzy, and tied to the mainmast. The French officers are astonished by the calm and resignation of this warrior, as well as by the superhuman courage of his wife, who urges him to die as a hero. Maurepas sees his wife and his children hanged from the yards. Insults fly from all sides, but his lips express only indignation at such crimes. â (Thomas Madiou)
Even though she showed great courage, it was a tragedy for this mother to be hanged alongside her two young children. Unfortunately, when Bonaparte restored slavery, such atrocities were all too common.
I think that, whether or not one agrees with what these women did, one can only admire how they faced their tragedies.
At least all the women mentioned above experienced, at some point, at least a measure of freedom, love, or human connectionâeven if fleeting.
Others never had that chance.
Women like her were born into bondage, deprived of legal protection, separated from their families (whether they will see each other again depends entirely on the will of their owners)and subjected to violence and exploitation. Even the small freedoms they had were merely survival strategies.
When Ămilie was accused of attempting to poison Rose Claire des Vergers de Sannois, one must remember that the slaveholding class imposed a regime of terror. At the slightest suspicion or rumor, Black peopleâincluding free people of colorâcould be executed without trial or tangible evidence. After slave revolts, suspicion weighed especially heavily on enslaved domestic workers like Ămilie. For many slave owners, every Black person was seen as a âpotential poisoner.â No proof or witnesses were required: mere suspicion could send someone to the stake. It was also a convenient pretext to eliminate enslaved individuals no longer trusted.
Ămilie only confessed to the accusations (which may well have been false) in an attempt to save her mother and sisters. She was not granted the âmercyâ of the guillotine but was executed by burning. No influential figure intervened on her behalf or that of her family, even though others under the Empire, far more âguiltyâ than she, sometimes benefited from such support.
This woman was simply trying to survive in an inhuman systemâand she was killed for it, a victim of paranoia and the slaveholdersâ thirst for vengeance.
At least women executed such as Marthe Rose Toto and Rosalie (known as Solitude) in Guadeloupe were able to fight alongside their companions against the restoration of slavery before being executed by hanging. Ămilie, by contrast, never took up arms nor attempted to oppose the Bonapartist regime, despite having every reason to do soâyet this did not spare her tragic fate.
Women like Ămilie, in my view, suffered the most tragic destinies of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era.