#msrandonstuff

[cripplecharacters]

hii! I want to write a story focusing on a character who got blinded in one eye while fighting a dragon. I don't plan on writing that incident itself, however, I want to know what kind of accommodations he and his friends could've gotten him to help him in his day to day tasks to make the story feel more "realistic".

And since he is a soldier as well as a ruler, do you think it is impossible for him to relearn how to fight with a sword now that he has problems with depth perception (due to his blindness)?

tyvm!!

Hello!

I'd suggest taking a look through our #monocular vision tag, which includes some posts on accommodations for characters that are blind in one eye.

Because the biggest problem is usually depth perception, putting some sort of brightly coloured tape or another high contrast indicator on the edges of stairs can help them gauge the distance and prevent falls.

To my knowledge, their sword fighting wouldn't be a huge issue. There are fencers with monocular vision and/or poor depth perception that don't encounter any issues. Although there may be a bit of an adjustment period, they wouldn't have to relearn it entirely.

Another thing to keep in mind is that, if he's going to be in combat situations (or other situations that pose a high risk to his remaining eye) on the regular, it would be very important for him to protect his other eye.

I'm not entirely sure what kind of setting you have but there are a range of options available such as glasses, a visor, goggles, a helmet, etc.

With regards to the swordfighting question, Mod Sasza also suggested taking a look at blind para-fencing.

Cheers,

~ Mod Icarus

[nordleuchten]

okay so idk if it is true, but i just remembered i've read somewhere once that king Louis XVI issued a decree forbidding french officers from going to fight in the amrev, and that lafayette was specifically cited as someone to not get involved. is there any truth to it? and if so, do ya have any pictures of this thing?

thank you <3

Dear @msrandonstuff,

that is almost true. France, officially, was not at war with Britain at this time and that was the official line that the French court and King Louis XVI were pursuing. The French people, including the officers of the army and the navy, however, were mostly free to do as they wished, since they were regarded as private individuals and not as representatives of France. In truth, the government was quite happy when the French people got involved, since every setback for Britain was a victory for France. France, at this point in time, was reforming its army and many young officers sought to find adventure, glory and career advancement in America. So numerous were the applications by French officers, that the Americans became quickly fed up with the French. Still, the ranks of the Continental Army were populated by a large number of foreign, and especially French, officers, both before and after La Fayette’s arrival.

Now, the matter was different with La Fayette. Prior to his marriage to Adrienne, I doubt that the King would have taken notice of the young Marquis. But he was now part of the Noailles family – a family that was high ranking at the court and close with the Royal Family and La Fayette’s new uncle-in-law was the French ambassador to the court of St. James’. La Fayette’s actions (and those of his friends, cousins and brothers-in-law, they were in this as well) were less seen as the actions of a private individual who decided to take part in a conflict that could potentially harm Frances’s rival but more like the thinly veiled political expressions by the French King via one of the most prominent families of the Kingdom.

Harlow Giles Unger put it like this:

It was one thing for obscure soldiers of fortune such as Kalb to seek adventure across the sea, but quite another matter for three king’s musketeers—three noblemen from France’s oldest, most powerful families—to enlist in a rebellion against a fellow monarch with whom France was at peace. Although many young knights and their ladies applauded their daring, the British ambassador lodged a strong protest, threatening to break diplomatic relations and send the British fleet to blockade French ports.

Harlow Giles Unger, Lafayette, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, 2002, p. 22.

As to documents in relation to all that; Vergennes, the Kings Minister, acted in the King’s name. There are several documents by Vergennes, like letters, warrants for certain ships and arrest warrants for members of the circle around La Fayette, should they board the above-mentioned ships. I think I have seen one or two of the letters once, but I have nothing to show you right now and these letters were altogether not that special. As for the King, he had his opinion been known and there was little cause for him to make any public written declaration. I hope that answered you question, and I hope you have/had a great day!

[giftedkidburnout-culture-is]

Gifted kid burnout culture is having a great of failure so strong that you don't even start trying to do anything for fear that it won't turn out perfectly

.

[acrossthewavesoftime]

6, 11, 13, and 14 for the historical figures ask :)

Thanks for the ask! :)

6) Do you think that you and your favorite historical figure would be friends or enemies? Why?

Assuming I'd travel back in time and meet him in, say, the late 1770s or early 1780s, I think I would stand a chance at befriending him as I am not a fellow naval officer, or in any way, shape or form affiliated with the 4th Earl of Sandwich.

He appears to have been a very warm, approachable person outside of his profession.

11) What is your favorite portrayal of them in an artwork such as a painting or photograph?

Talking visual art, I really like the James Northcote-portrait that I analysed in this post.There are two other portraits of him, one of which shows him wearing his own hair instead of a wig, which I found quite interesting, but is otherwise quite dark as for the background, a burning enemy ship at night was chosen. Don't know if he was going for the "tough guy not looking at the explosion behind him"-mood or if he was aiming for a cozy (naval) campfire-vibe, but it just doesn't work either way for me. I prefer the Northcote-portrait as it seems to be a more genuine representation of him, by which I don't exclusively mean the fact that the artist managed to reproduce his face in a way that causes the portrait to recognisably depict the sitter, but particularly through the little, barely-there details such as the wig, sleeves and anchor that on a closer look may 'tell' us so much more about him.

13) Who is your favorite historical figure’s bestie? Who is their arch-nemesis?

For "bestie", the answer has to be his fellow naval captain John Simcoe, John Graves' dad. John very likely played cupid and introduced Samuel to his first wife, and later made him godfather of his baby son. When John died aboard his ship, Samuel took the business of being a godfather very seriously. That said, the argument could also be made that his wife was his closest friend as well, but since John died a decade before he met Margaret, I wanted to name both.

For "arch-nemesis", a couple of names come to mind: in Boston, he really, really did not get along with General Gage, and one of the latter's associates in the town, Benjamin Hallowell. The Gage-Graves rivalry was well-reported at the time, and also included their respective wives taking a stand to support their husbands.

The Earl of Sandwich was a former friend (or at least Samuel thought they had been friends) who washed his hands off Samuel very quickly when supporting the latter (if you can call not granting him any of the resources he routinely asked for call "support" at all) was no longer opportune. Samuel wasn't too pleased about the betrayal (naturally) and while Sandwich probably wasn't a super-villain-esque arch-nemesis, he felt that he had been let down by a person he had formerly trusted.

14) Did your favorite historical figure have any favorite past times or hobbies? If so, what were they?

Hands down the kids that weren't his, particularly when he had increasingly more time to do so following his recall from the North American Station in 1776. When the newly-wed Simcoes moved out, the empty nest was so strong, the Graves' invited the teenage daughter of a friend to stay with them for a 'holiday' only a couple of weeks later.

There are however also mentions of parties in Bath with his wife (the two apparently loved to host). He also appears to have been no stranger to the theatre, though given his wife preferred more serious topics, they probably didn't go to see comedies by Garrick or Sheridan (particularly not the latter, Margaret Graves hated his plays). While he doesn't seem to have been very musical, or musically interested, two of the three portraits of him were made by painters from the circle of Joshua Reynolds, so there's room to assume he had an opinion on contemporary visual art.

Thanks again for the asks, hope you have a nice day! :)

[nordleuchten]

also, you were talking about georges' feats in the military; could you share those stories if ya have 'em? i don't think I've ever read any of them before

thank youu :))

Dear @msrandonstuff,

of course I can!

Many of the sources I am going to rely upon are La Fayette’s letters to friends and family members. Because like every proud Papa, La Fayette liked to tell everybody what his son did and accomplished.

Georges was a good officer who took his role very serious and who not only freely choose this occupation for himself and enjoyed it, but who also understood how his military conduct was connected to his and his family’s honour. Here is a description of Georges’ military qualities from an undated letter La Fayette wrote his friend Amé Thérèse Joseph Masclet:

The fact is, that George, who is a republican patriot, -- and I have met with few such in my lifetime, -- has, besides a passion for the military profession, for which I think him adapted, as he possesses a sound and calm judgment, a just perception, a strong local memory, and will be equally beloved his superiors, his comrades, and his subordinates. I love him with too much tenderness to make any distinction between his desires and mine; and I am great an enemy to oppression of every description place a restraint on the wishes of a beloved son twenty years of age. I could joyfully see him with honourable scars, but beyond that supposition have not the courage to contemplate existence.

Jules Germain Cloquet, Recollections of the Private Life of General Lafayette, Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1835, p. 131.

While, as La Fayette wrote, he thought Georges very much suited for the military and although he liked the idea of Georges following in his steps, he was above forcing his son to follow a certain path. La Fayette believed children should make their way, independent of their parents’ wishes – although the parents should support and guide their child because a father for example knows his son differently than the child knows itself.

Georges joined the military and was made a sous-lieutenant around the time of the Battle of Marengo. He served in succession as an aide-de-camp to the Generals Canclaux, Dupont and Grouchy. Towards the end of Georges’ military career, Marshal Joachim Murat wanted to appoint Georges as his officier d’ordonnance but Napoléon was against it and the appointment never came to pass.

Georges was wounded in the Battle of Minico/Battle of Pozzolo on December 25, 1800. La Fayette wrote the following about his son’s injuries and conduct to Masclet on 28 Pluviôse [February 17] [1801]:

I have not this long while heard from you my dear Masclet: sure I am, nevertheless, that you do not forget your friend, and that you have been pleased with George’s good fortune on the Mincio. He was in the wing and under the general who fought and won the action. The eleventh regiment of hussars was the most distinguished. My son had for his share three bullets, but slight wounds. General Dupont tells me he had named him in the account of the battle. George insisted on the suppression of the mention made of him, unless the same was done in favour of his wounded comrades. His wounds would have been sooner cured, had he not remained with the regiment as long as there was something to do which caused an inflammation and a dépôt in his arm. But when the eleventh hussars made the blockade of the forts of Verona, which put them out of the way of danger, George got into the city, where he was very well taken care of. When General Dupont saw him last, he was in good train of recovery, although he yet wore a scarf. His side was still less damaged than the arm. So that the danger of the battle, which has been great, being over, we have had nothing to fear, and much to rejoice at. I give you those details as I know you will enjoy them. Here is a good honourable solid peace.

Jules Germain Cloquet, Recollections of the Private Life of General Lafayette, Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1835, pp. 229-230.

Georges wounds were without serious consequences, and he fully recovered. He next distinguished himself during the Battle of Eylau on February 7-8, 1807. La Fayette again wrote to Masclet:

George was on the eve being appointed to the rank of captain, and even the Emperor, before he went to Italy. had promised his promotion to Generals Grouchy and Canclaux and to M de Tracy [Georges’ father-in-law]. Since that period, my son has served as volunteer aide de camp at the embarkation at Helder, at Ulm, at Udine, and in the new war at Prenzlaw, at Lubeck, at Eylau, where he had the good fortune to save his general; and at Friedland, where Grouchy commanded the wing of the cavalry which routed the Russians only at the seventh charge. The promotion promised before all these events, and for which several applications had been made by the principal ministers and general officers, has been constantly refused, so that George, although the senior lieutenant of the division, has abandoned all idea of advancement. The peace will bring him back to us, as he is a volunteer: we expect him immediately.

Jules Germain Cloquet, Recollections of the Private Life of General Lafayette, Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1835, p. 106.

La Fayette also wrote to his friend Thomas Jefferson regarding Georges’ conduct at Eylau. The Marquis wrote on April 29, 1807:

My Son and Son in Law are in the Army of Poland under the Emperor’s Command, the one as a Volunteer Aid de Camp to General Grouchy, the other as an Aid de Camp to General Beker, Both my personal friends—George Had the Happiness at the Bloody Battle of Eylaw to save the Life of His General Whose Horse Had been killed and fell on His Bruised thigh, at a Moment when our troops were Overpowered and the Russians Giving No Quarter—My Son Lept down, disengaged Grouchy from Under His Horse, Gave Him His own, and so Both Got of. Since which time, and probably on that Account, there Has been a new Manifestation of a Sentiment already and I may say officially Expressed after the Affair of Prentzlaw when George Had the Good fortune to be Approved for His Conduct—it is that not only He Never Has Any promotion to Expect from the Emperor But that His Zeal in the Active Army is so far displeasing as to put Him in immediate danger to be sent, in His Rank of Lieutenant, to Some Remote Regimen—He Has Consequently determined to Return to Us, either to Serve in an interior Staff, or to Rest Himself at La Grange, as Soon as the Circumstances of the Army will permit His Leaving the division to which He is Attached, unless a proper Explanation Speedily takes place.

“To Thomas Jefferson from Marie-Joseph-Paul-Yves-Roch-Gilbert du Motier, marquis de Lafayette, 29 April 1807,” Founders Online, National Archives, [This is an Early Access document from The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. It is not an authoritative final version.] (05/24/2023)

To top the list off, La Fayette also wrote to James Madison on June 10, 1807:

My Son and Younger Son in Law are in the Grand Army, The later an aid de Camp to our friend Gnl. Becker Now Chef d’Etat Major to the Wing Under Mal. Massena, George a Volonteer aid de Camp to Gnl. Grouchy. In that Independant Situation He Has determined to Go on, Very Happy in the Esteem and Kindness of our Numerous friends at the Army and Among its Chiefs, But Having Had Strong Reasons Not to Expect Even the Usual and Common Course of promotion. It Has been His fortunate lot, at the Bloody Battle of Eylaw, to Save the life of His Beloved General, Brother in law to Mr. Cabanis.

“To James Madison from Marie-Adrienne-Françoise de Noailles, marquise de Lafayette, 10 June 1807,” Founders Online, National Archives, [This is an Early Access document from The Papers of James Madison. It is not an authoritative final version.] (05/24/2023)

Georges had put himself in great danger during the Battle of Eylau and his courage was noted. Even beside that, Georges had done very well in the past and was respected by his superiors – the only problem; he was a La Fayette and Napoléon was petty. He and his brother-in-law (the husband of his younger sister Virginie) therefore quitted the military after the end of the military season in 1807 – to the infinite joy of his mother Adrienne.

She [Adrienne] bore with gentle fortitude the anxieties of which my brother and my husband were the object during the campaigns of 1805 and 1806. She heard with joy of George’s good fortune when he saved his general’s life at the battle of Eylau. The peace which followed brought on for her a period of unmingled happiness. I [Virginie] shall not attempt to describe it to you. I have scarcely dwelt upon those peaceful years we passed at Lagrange, although, during that whole period, I was my mother's daily companion. But I could only repeat to you that we were happy. At the end of the spring of 1807, it seemed that God had accomplished all my mother’s desires in this world. As for myself I cannot fancy it possible to be happier than I was during the period which elapsed from the peace and my eldest daughter’s birth up to the beginning of the fatal malady.

Mme de Lasteyrie, Life of Madame de Lafayette, L. Techener, London, 1872, pp. 391-392.

This is pure speculation on my part, but I could imagine that Georges’ leave from the military could also have been influenced by family reasons. In the above quoted letter to Madison, La Fayette mentioned that Georges’ little daughter of four weeks had just died and I could imagine that, just like Henriette’s death was a waking-call for a Fayette, Georges’ wanted to be closer to his wife, children and family.

Adrienne also was not the only one who was frequently anxious for Georges and Louis (Virginie’s husband). La Fayette wrote on October 16, 1805 to James Madison:

My Son Serves in the Grand Army as an Aid de Camp to General Grouchy—My Son in Law Louïs Lasteyrie Serves there also as an officer of dragoons—two Young Wives, a Sister, and Mother Are With Me at La Grange—and While I Consider their Anxiety and My Own for the Sake of our Young Soldiers, I am inclined to feel Less Regret, and I know You Will find More Cause to Approve me for Having Yelded to the Opinion of the Ambassadors and Mine Respecting the present obstacles to An immediate Voyage (…).

“To James Madison from Lafayette, 16 October 1805,” Founders Online, National Archives, . [Original source: The Papers of James Madison, Secretary of State Series, vol. 10, 1 July 1805–31 December 1805, ed. Mary A. Hackett, J. C. A. Stagg, Mary Parke Johnson, Anne Mandeville Colony, and Katherine E. Harbury. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2014, pp. 434–436.] (05/24/2023)

I hope I could answer your question and I hope you have/had a wonderful day!

[nordleuchten]

btw I dom't know if I'm misremembering these things so 1. I've read somewhere that lafayette died holding that necklace of Adrienne, but I can't find it anymore, is that true? and 2. I don't know if I read here or not, but did lafayette used to they stories to the girls in Olmütz? and in another notez do we have records on what they did in Olmütz to like, pass some time and stuff?

Thank you <3

Dear @msrandonstuff,

let us tackle your questions one by one, shall we? :-)

First, yes, that is true. La Fayette’s physician and family friend Jules Cloquet Germain for example wrote in his book:

One day during his last illness, I surprised him kissing her portrait, which he always wore suspended to his neck in a small gold medallion. Around the portrait were the words, “Je suis à vous” and on the back was engraved this short and touching inscription, “Je vous fus donc une douce compagne: eh bien! benissez moi.” I have since been informed that regularly every morning Lafayette ordered Bastien to leave the room, in which he shut himself up, and taking the portrait in both hands, looked at it earnestly pressed, it to his lips, and remained silently contemplating it for about a quarter of an hour. Nothing was more disagreeable to him than to be disturbed during this daily homage to the memory of his virtuous partner.

Jules Germain Cloquet, Recollections of the Private Life of General Lafayette, Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1835, p. 35.

Second, again, yes, La Fayette used to read to his daughters in the afternoons during their shared imprisonment. Virginie described their life in her book the following:

This explains how save in the beginning of the illness we found pleasure in our quiet life My sister supplied the place of outdoor workmen she even made shoes for my father But her principal occupation was to write under his dictation on the margins of a book My mother attended to my education and used to read with me but the margins of a book the tooth picks and the bit of Indian ink were things too precious for my use In the evening my father used to read aloud to us I still remember the pleasure of those moments.

Mme de Lasteyrie, Life of Madame de Lafayette, L. Techener, London, 1872, p. 359-360.

Virginie mentions that they were not allowed to celebrate mass but mass was celebrated in a little church right by the prison and I think they were able to hear at least a little bit of that. Letter writing was generally permitted but only a few letters, written under supervision, to a selected of people. Adrienne busied herself with writing her mother biography in the margin of a book, letter writing (as far as it was permitted) and lobbying for the prisoners, overseeing the education of her daughters and practicing her religion. Anastasie and Virginie were crafty, made and mended cloths, were educated, both of them practiced their religion and Anastasie “painted” with what little they had available. La Fayette was only allowed to see his wife and children for a few hours in the evening and probably did nothing “more” with them than reading and talking. He himself had otherwise no company and even less to do, especially since privileges like letter writing, books and the likes were continuously granted to him and then again taken away from him.

When you look into their time in Olmütz (and La Fayette’s time in prison before that), you can not help but admire their inner strength and resilience. This is also true for Georges, he might have not been imprisoned, but the situation was not necessarily easier for him!

I hope this helps and I hope you have/had a great day!

[nordleuchten]

did lafayette evee got deathly ill during his time in the amrev? 'cause the only thing I can recall is him being shot, but that doesn't truly count as a dissease imo lmao

Dear @msrandonstuff,

I am so glad you asked this! Yes, La Fayette did indeed fell gravely ill during his time in America.

Generally speaking, there are three main events that mattered health-wise in La Fayette’s life during the War of Independence. The first was his gunshot wound to the leg during the Battle of Brandywine, on September 11, 1777. Later, during his engagements in the southern campaigns, he contracted a prolonged fever that weakened him and left him tired and irritated, but his life was never in any serious danger. La Fayette often suffered from fevers, during times of war as well as during peace times. They usually came on after stressful and work-intensive periods and lasted from half a day to maybe two days and were usually cured by a good night of sleep. This episode in the south however was different and it is today believed that he had contracted Malaria – not uncommon for the time and area. The next health related event was the most serious one. La Fayette was preparing to sail back to France for the first time since his initial engagement in the war and it was at this time in November of 1778 that he fell seriously ill at Fishkill. La Fayette himself retold the events in his Memoirs:

Heated by fatiguing journeys and over exertion, and still more by the grief he had experienced at Rhode Island; and having afterwards laboured hard, drank freely, and passed several sleepless nights at Philadelphia, M. de Lafayette proceeded on horse-back, in a high state of fever, and during a pelting autumnal rain. Fetes were given in compliment to him throughout his journey, and he endeavoured to strengthen himself with wine, tea, and rum: but at Fishkill, eight miles from head-quarters, he was obliged to yield to the violence of an inflammatory fever. He was soon reduced to the last extremity, and the report of his approaching death distressed the army, by whom he was called the soldier’s friend and the whole nation were unanimous in expressing their good wishes and regrets for the marquis, the name by which he was exclusively designated. From the first moment, Cockran, director of the hospitals, left all his other occupations to attend to him alone. General Washington came every day to inquire after his friend; but, fearing to agitate him, he only conversed with the physician, and returned home with tearful eyes, and a heart oppressed with grief. Suffering acutely from a raging fever and violent head-ache, M. de Lafayette felt convinced that he was dying, but did not lose for a moment the clear-ness of his understanding: having taken measures to be apprised of the approach of death, he regretted that he could not hope again to see his country and the dearest objects of his affection. Far from fore- seeing the happy fate that awaited him, he would willingly have exchanged his future chance of life, in spite of his one and twenty years, for the certainty of living but for three months, on the condition of again seeing his friends, and witnessing the happy termination of the American war. But to the assistance of medical art, and the assiduous care of Dr. Cockran, nature added the alarming though salutary remedy of an hemorrhage. At the expiration of three months, M. de Lafayette’s life was no longer in danger: he was at length allowed to see the general, and think of public affair. (…) In spite of his extreme debility, M. de Lafayette, accompanied by his physician, repaired, on horse-back, to Boston, where Madeira wine effectually restored his health.

Marquis de La Fayette, Memoirs, Correspondences and Manuscripts of General Lafayette, Vol. 1, Craighead and Allen, New York, 1837, pp. 63-65.

Although La Fayette could sometime be a bit dramatic about certain things, he tended to downplay serious health problems rather than to exaggerate them – we also have the accounts of other people, physicians, military personal and civilians alike that support his account. The situation seems to have indeed been quite dire at the beginning.

One thing though that most likely is not true; Washington would not have had the time to visit La Fayette every day. We know of one visit by the commander-in-chief that we can be sure of, but there were likely not too many more visits.

Something noteworthy about La Fayette’s illness and subsequent stay in Fishkill is the fact that the very room where he spend the majority of these three months still exists. La Fayette stayed in the house of the Brinckerhoff family (bedroom on the second floor.) The family was quite a prominent family and had many other distinguished guests during the Revolutionary War, such as Alexander Hamilton, Baron von Steuben and George Washington. The house of the family is still standing and is today a Bed and Breakfast. You can book La Fayette’s former room alfor 299 USD a night and on the webpage of the Brinckerhoff Inn you can also find pictures of the room. One of the tables in the room is not part of the original interior but was gifted to the family by La Fayette in 1824/25 as a thank you gift.

Hope I could help you with that I hope that you have/had a beautiful day!

[nordleuchten]

Hey! How are you doing? Hope you're having a lovely day whenever you read this!!

So, I have two different things to ask, but I'll make them both, sorry to be bothering and hope this doesnt get too long lol

1st. I know that Adrienne was a deeply Christian woman from birth to death, and I know that in some time in her life she helped out Protestants (?). So, my question here is basically, did she always helped people from other religions like that? or that was just something she used to do out of charity without caring too much about those people? Did she always sort of have it in her or did she only started it because of everything that was happening in the country? (dont know if i worded that in a understandable way, if i didnt let me know)

2nd. did the lafayette's (and their respective families) owned any sort of pets? (I've heard of that dog that Gilbert had and when he died, it went to live with his valet (?), but when did he got that dog too? did it simply appear in front of the house and it stayed? so many questions... so many questions... lmao)

Dear @msrandonstuff,

Don’t you worry, I am never bothered by asks! :-)

For the first question, Adrienne was a devout catholic. She was taught by her mother and the duchess d’Ayen always allowed Adrienne, her sisters and later La Fayette, when he moved in with the family, to question things. In my opinion that is not only a very healthy way to teach religion but also reduces prejudges. Adrienne's husband La Fayette was a great champignon of religious freedom. He wrote to George Washington on May 11, 1785:

102 ⟨Protestants⟩ in 12 ⟨France⟩ are under intolerable 80 ⟨Despotism⟩—altho’ oppen persecution does not now Exist, yet it depends upon the whim of 25 ⟨king⟩; 28 ⟨queen⟩, 29 ⟨parliament⟩, or any of 32 ⟨the Ministers⟩—marriages are not legal among them—their wills Have no force By law—their children are to Be Bastards—their parsons to Be Hanged—I Have put it into My Head to Be a 1400 ⟨Leader⟩ in that affair, and to Have their Situation changed—with that wiew I am Going, under other pretences to Visit their chief places of abode, With a Consent of 42 ⟨Castries⟩, and an other—(…) it is a Work of time, and of Some danger to me, Because none of them Would give me a Scrap of paper, or Countenance whatsoever—But I Run My chance—(…).

“To George Washington from Lafayette, 11 May 1785,” Founders Online, National Archives, [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Confederation Series, vol. 2, 18 July 1784 – 18 May 1785, ed. W. W. Abbot. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1992, pp. 550–551.] (10/01/2022)

La Fayette was not lying, when he said that the undertaking could be somewhat dangerous to him. He wrote his letter in ciphers, tasked John Quincy Adams with delivering the letter personally because Adams was just returning to the States and asked Washington not to reply to his portion of the letter. Washington urged La Fayette to be carful and to that La Fayette replied on February 11, 1786:

(…) I thank you most tenderly, my dear General, for the Caution You Give me, which I will improve, and find that Satisfaction in my prudence to think it is dictated By You—I Hope, Betwen us, that in the Course of Next winter the affair of the protestants Will take a Good turn (…)

“To George Washington from Lafayette, 6 February 1786,” Founders Online, National Archives, [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Confederation Series, vol. 3, 19 May 1785 – 31 March 1786, ed. W. W. Abbot. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1994, pp. 538–547.] (10/01/2022)

I got a bit distracted here so back to the question at hand. Adrienne was not opposed to Protestants gaining civil rights, but she was very opposed to every action that was directed against the Roman Catholic religion. She absolutely and staunchly refused to take mess from a priest who had sworn the civil oath and when La Fayette, himself more or less reluctantly, received the new Bishop of Paris for dinner, Adrienne made it a point to not partake. That was not just a private dispute about religious customs, but her absence at the dinner table made national headlines.

La Fayette was not happy about Adrienne’s behaviors during this time as he himself was between a rock and a hard place. He believed in religious freedom but was forced to carry out the politics of the assembly – politics that he often did not fully support. Adrienne was normally his strength and stay but in matters of religion she refused to bow even to her husband.

Adrienne had a firm stand on religious matters and she was willing to face serious repercussions for following her faith. I could not recall a specific event where Adrienne helped Protestants in particular and I also think that she did not knew a great many Protestants personally (simply because they were not in her private circles.) But Adrienne was also a gentle and carrying soul, a mother and someone who deeply believed in Christian charity, and I therefore can not imagine that she would have turned away someone needing or seeking her help, solely because of their religion.

As to the second question, yes, the La Fayette’s owned a number of animals but we have to differentiate here. After his release from prison and return to France, La Fayette started farming at La Grange. From Jules Germain Cloquet’s book we know that during the height of the farm, La Fayette owned 1000 – 1200 sheep, 30 – 40 cows and 100 – 150 pigs. Cloquet described the animal population of La Grange in great detail. How they came to the farm, how they were housed, how they were feed, how they smelled (the pigs emitted no “disagreeable smell”) and what not.

La Fayette also had a little ménagerie at La Grange for more exotic animals that he was gifted. Cloquet wrote:

One is a grated enclosure, a sort of ménagerie, in which Lafayette kept such foreign animals as were sent to him. After his return to France, he had received, from Governor Clarke, a young gray bear from the Missouri territory. Ever animated with the desire of being useful to his fellow-citizens, he refused to keep so rare an animal at Lagrange, and made a present of it to the professors of the Museum of Natural History, to be placed in their ménagerie.

Jules Germain Cloquet, Recollections of the Private Life of General Lafayette, Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1835, p. 213.

As to more domestic animals, you already mentioned La Fayette’s little white dog. Cloquet wrote:

During his malady, Lafayette was very fond of a small white bitch, which he had received, I believe, from Madame de Bourck, and which never quitted him. The animal, which was gifted with a remarkable degree of instinct, permitted nobody, except Bastien, to approach her master’s clothes when he was in bed, expressed joy or sorrow according as he felt better or worse, and might have served as a thermometer to indicate the state of his health. Since the General’s death, she has followed Bastien to Lagrange, but has never resumed her gaiety.

Jules Germain Cloquet, Recollections of the Private Life of General Lafayette, Baldwin and Cradock, London, 1835, p. 274.

La Fayette most likely owned more dogs during his lifetime, but I have neither numbers nor names for you. He was, however, quite knowledgeable about the different breeds and sometimes got his hands on dogs that his friends in America wanted to purchase. He was also a lover of horses and while he owned several horses during his lifetime, one is especially famous: Jean Le Blac – I wrote about him in a post on here but thanks to tumblr’s *exceptional* search-engine I can not even find my own post.

Hope that helped and I hope you day was/is just as lovely as mine was! :-)