The trace left
in history be the most famous of the Convention’s committees is profound and
sometimes unexpected: it was, let us remember, the schemes of a rebellious Committee
of Public Safety which presided over the instauration of the Fifth French Republic.
One must not be
surprised by the late creation of the committee. While the notion of salut public was one of the founding
concepts of the Revolution, the Assembly could fear that the ascendancy of such
an institution would be too great, and, at the same time, that it would
infringe upon the remit of the Provisional Executive Council and that it would
tend towards an autonomy contrary to the principle of legislative centrality.
Thus, on 1 January 1793, the Girondin
deputy Kersaint only proposed the establishment of a Comité de défense générale which was to be composed of deputies
chosen among the members of the seven committees (War, Marine, Colonies,
Finances, Trade, Diplomatic Committee and Constitution Committee). This new committee
at first gathered thrice per week, later, from 21 January onwards, every day,
even two times per day, at noon and at seven o'clock in the evening. The defeat
of Neerwinden and the beginning of the Vendéan insurrection justified the
creation of an ephemeral Commission de
salut public on 25 March 1793: the term was therefore finally adopted. On 6
April 1793, the Convention decreed, at the end of a long debate, the creation
of a Comité de salut public and
immediately proceeded to the election of its members by roll-call. The first
nine elected members were Barère, Delmas, Bréard, Cambon, Danton, Jean de Bry
(who resigned, being replaced by R. Lindet), Guyton-Morveau, Treilhard and
Delacroix (d'Eure-et-Loire). They held two sessions per day (at nine o'clock in
the morning and seven o'clock in the evening) in the Pavillon de Flore (renamed
Pavillon de l'Egalité). On 30 May 1793, the Convention added five deputies
charged with presenting the articles of the constitution, Hérault de Séchelles,
Ramel, Saint-Just, Mathieu and Couthon. After the fall of the Gironde, the
Committee of Public Safety was reorganised: bureaus were created and the
affairs were divided into six sections. Enlarged by successive elections, it
counted eighteen members on the eve of the new reorganisation of 10 July 1793. On
this day, the Convention decided to re-elect nine members by roll-call: these
were, elected in this order, Barère, Jeanbon Saint-André, Gasparin, Couthon,
Hérault de Séchelles, Thuriot, Prieur (de la Marne), Saint-Just and Robert
Lindet. On 27 July, Robespierre replaced Gasparin, who had resigned, and on 14
August, Carnot and Prieur (de la Côte d'Or) were elected. On 6 September 1793,
at last, Billaud-Varenne and Collot d'Herbois made their entrance, whereas
Danton and Granet refused their election. After Thuriot, in turn, resigned on
20 September, the Committee of Public Safety was the composed of twelve
members, Twelve Who Ruled, to use Robert Palmer’s suggestive […] formula.
What one calls
the « great Committee of Public Safety » – composed, in fact, of eleven
deputies, as Hérault de Séchelles, sent on mission in Alsace, denounced in
Frimaire Year II and executed in Germinal, no longer sat there – has aroused
the attention of historians. Relying, sometimes uncritically, on
post-Thermidorian sources (particularly the Reports
of Le Cointre and of Saladin or the Defences
of Barère, Billaud and Collot), historiography has erected the committee as the
centrepiece of the « Jacobin dictatorship ». One has often paid particular
attention to the growing number of its employees (67 in Frimaire, 418 in
Prairial Year II), the sign of an undeniable « bureaucratisation », to its
agents (such as Eve Demaillot, Pottofeux or the young Jullien, called Jullien de
Paris) who had became an executive power independent of the Convention, and,
finally, to its Bureau de police générale,
whose activities, from Floréal to Thermidor Year II, had largely overflowed
onto the duties of the Committee of General Security. All of this demands to be
nuanced. First of all, because the law of 14 Frimaire Year II clearly defined
the area of competence of the Committee of Public Safety, which was obliged to
report to the Convention every month and was composed of deputies who were
elected and personally responsible. The decree of 27 Germinal Year II (16 April
1794), which clarified that the supervision of public servants was confided to
the Committee and which led to the creation of this bureau de surveillance administrative et de police générale, hardly
modified, in this regard, the Law of 14 Frimaire (2nd section, article 2). As
to the « rivalry » between the bureau and the Committee of General Security,
Arne Ording has demonstrated that it was necessary to moderate it, at least
until Messidor Year II, when a conflict undoubtedly broke out about the commissions populaires which had been
created in Floréal.
If the Committee
of Year II has aroused publications and polemics, it has also reasonably clouded
the history of the post-Thermidorian Committee. It has also been accepted that
the decree of 7 Fructidor Year II (24 August 1794) deprived it of its essential
prerogative, thereby bringing about the « dislocation » of the Revolutionary
Government. Yet, reading article I of title II, which defines the new duties of
the Committee of Public Safety, this affirmation does not seem to be totally
clear. Even if, indeed, it lost « the supervision of the civil administrations »,
henceforth entrusted to the Committee of Legislation, it retained functions
that were no less important, such as the « direction of foreign relations »,
the planning of campaigns, the levying and organisation of troops, the
supervision of the military agents and, together with the Committee of General
Security, the possibility to arrest the civil servants who were within its purview
and to send them before the Revolutionary Tribunal. Its twelve members were
renewable by a quarter every month (like the members of all committees), but
ineligible to the two committees of General Security and of Public Safety for
at least a month ; they were appointed by roll-call. The names of the deputies
who were elected in Year III seem to highlight the persistent and known importance
of the committee ; Merlin (de Douai), Boissy d'Anglas, Sieyès, Reubell or
Cambacérès, for example, cannot pass for obscure deputies. On 14 Germinal Year
III (3 April 1795), the number of its members was increased to sixteen, and on
21 Floréal (10 May 1795), on a proposal of Cambacérès, the Committee of Public
Safety recovered a kind of pre-eminence, being declared the only institution
capable of issuing legally binding decrees. From Floréal to Fructidor Year III,
it was dominated by the moderates and, particularly, by the Girondins who has
been reinstated (eight of them sat there on 15 Prairial: Aubry, Defermon,
Henry-Larivière, Rabaut-Pornier, Pontécoulant, Gamon, Blad and Vernier, i.e. half
of the committee’s members). The last vote, on 15 Vendémiaire Year IV (7
October 1795), was marked by a return of the « Montagnards réacteurs », the election of Chénier, Eschassériaux and
Thibaudeau, marking the « anti-royalist » line of the aftermath of the Parisian
Thus, until the
disbandment of the Convention, the Committee of Public Safety remained one of
the essential organs of the Revolutionary Government, and the concern to be
elected to it, clearly displayed by the post-Thermidorian leaders, undoubtedly reveals its leading political role.
literally though the count of monte cristo is such a good rebuttal to people defending shitty writing like
“look, killing off a female love interest is a totally legitimate backstory for a male antihero! it’s not believable that a woman who loves him would go along with his morally dubious actions!” oh yeah? because teresa vampa is totally set up as a tragic fridged girlfriend, and it turns out she’s actually alive and actively helping her husband as a fucking bandit queen and the story is objectively better for it so
“of course the characters are all white, it’s ~historically accurate~!” alexandre dumas was a multiracial black man, the grandson of a haitian slave, who was extremely famous and successful throughout the 19th century (also his dad was a frickin’ general in the french army and the highest-ranking half-black man in any european army, ever)
“how could queer characters in a historical drama ever end up happy and together? everyone knows all queer people before 1990 lived miserable closeted lives!” eugenie danglars is a blatant, canonical teenage lesbian who outsmarts basically everyone in the story and gets a happy ending with her girlfriend in a book not only set but also written and published in the 1840s
“*literally any bullshit defending a lack of female characters or female characters all being written the same way*” mercédès, haydée, hermine, héloïse, renée, the marquise de saint-méran, valentine, eugénie, louise, julie, countess g, teresa–tons of female characters with diverse personalities, moralities, motivations, and plotlines that are given as much weight and importance as those of male characters
“disabled characters can’t really be interesting or have very interesting storylines” lmao noirtier is literally totally nonverbal and paralyzed aside from his eyes and he’s still a badass anti-royalist and one of the cleverest players on the board
I’m about 80% sure that Vimes looks at Carrot, Angua, Cheery, and Detritus as the teenagers/young people he sort of accidentally adopted.
He cares about his officers, and these four in particular are so symbolic of positive change and growth; that has to mean so much to him as a copper who remembers the last ones that tried to stand up and do a good thing. These four who have grown, and changed so much under his leadership, and “care”.
He does have very paternal moments with each of them and it’s very sweet, in an “emotions are very anti-Vimes” way. He was proud of Angua for implementing dirty fighting that he taught her in the scrap with her brother, and was FURIOUS with William De Worde for “assaulting an officer” for the scent bomb he dropped when Angua was trailing him.
He supports Cheery’s transition even if he doesn’t understand her culture, and the way gender works among dwarves, and goes so far as to demand that what could easily be called “dwarven transphobic slurs” aren’t used in the presence of any of his staff, not just her because he refuses to foster an environment of hatred and prejudice.
He always makes sure to praise Detritus, defers to him on matters that cover a not inconsiderable amount of the population, and is privately very proud of and awed by the change he’s seen since Detritus’ recruitment; pleased to see that the troll now has a family of his own, and a cause he’s passionate about in the anti-drug crusades.
Carrot has affected the biggest change in Sam Vimes and even down on an anti-royalist molecular level, he loves and respects Carrot. He understands that Carrot does what’s right because it’s what’s right, not to gain power and influence, and doesn’t mistrust or deride him for it. He sees that idealism and empathises, even if it’s coming from someone so peculiar. When Carrot makes a “Not Royal” decree, Vimes obeys because Carrot is a good man, and a damn good copper.
These are his kids as surely as Young Sam is; his legacy lives on with them because he found a way to appeal to each of them in a way that stuck.
“There’s an unhealthy obsession in America with royalty and the class system,” says Harington, rolling his eyes. “‘Oh, my God, you’re the son of a duke!’ I’m not an anti-royalist, but who gives a shit?”
He comes from a posh British family. Legend has it that the Haringtons are direct descendants of King Charles II, and his uncle is a baronet. His family is also said to have invented the first flushing toilet for Queen Elizabeth I. […] While Harington was happy to mug about the royal loo on Kimmel, he dismisses the rest of it as crap. "There’s an unhealthy obsession in America with royalty and the class system,“ says Harington, rolling his eyes. ”‘Oh, my God, you’re the son of a duke!’ I’m not anti-royalist, but who gives a shit?“ (x)
- My Dad and I are watching BBC 1 as “breaking news” happens and we are told that some rich bitch’s baby is, in fact, a boy -
Dad: “Where the FUCK are the republicans?”
Next time I see or hear someone say “you have to find this important, this baby could be KING one day!” I will actually boot them in the face.
What the hell has the Queen ever done to our country to ever make it any better for any of us?
We are just paying for her entire family, including this sodding baby to live a life full of luxuries, hassle free.
And the fucking media soak it all up, practically brain washing the British public into thinking that this is actually anything of importance. They state that it is important that, as “British people” we must feel “proud” that poor old Kate has squeezed a tiny human out of her vadge.
…. Sorry, but have you not seen Jeremy Kyle? Any idiot with a vagina can have a baby, why the fuck should I feel proud and happy for someone I don’t even know?!
“There’s an unhealthy obsession in America with royalty and the class system,” says Harington, rolling his eyes. “‘Oh my god, you’re the son of a duke!’ I’m not an anti-royalist, but who gives a shit?”
The Kaiser and King has decided to renounce the throne.
The Imperial Chancellor will remain in office until the questions connected with the abdication of the Kaiser, the renouncing by the Crown Prince of the throne of the German Empire and of Prussia, and the setting up of a regency have been settled.
For the regency he intends to appoint Deputy Ebert as Imperial Chancellor, and he proposes that a bill shall be brought in for the establishment of a law providing for the immediate promulgation of general suffrage and for a constitutional German National Assembly, which will settle finally the future form of government of the German Nation and of those peoples which might be desirous of coming within the empire.
Prince Max von Baden’s Announcement of Kaiser Wilhelm II’s Abdication, 9 November 1918
With Germany actively seeking an armistice and revolution threatening, calls for Kaiser Wilhelm II to abdicate grew in intensity. Wilhelm was himself deeply reluctant to make such a sacrifice, instead expressing a preference to lead his armies back into Germany from the Western Front. Upon being informed by his military advisers that the army could not be relied upon not to harm him Wilhelm abandoned the notion.
Wilhelm’s abdication was announced by Chancellor Prince Max von Baden in a 9 November 1918 proclamation (reproduced below) - before Wilhelm had in fact consented to abdicate (but after Social Democrat Philipp Scheidemann had announced the Kaiser’s departure from the balcony of the Reichstag). Faced with a fait accompli Wilhelm formally abdicated and went into exile in Holland. His abdication proclamation was formally published in Berlin on 30 November 1918.
Faced with public criticism over the nature of Wilhelm’s abdication German Army Chief of Staff Paul von Hindenburg issued a statement on 20 March 1919 explaining the sequence of events and defending the Kaiser’s role. In the wake of the Kaiser’s abdication his eldest son - Crown Prince Wilhelm - expressed a desire on 11 November 1918 - the date of the armistice - to be allowed to lead his army back home to Germany. His wish was, given the anti-royalist fervour of the moment, rejected out of hand by the government. He too went into exile in Holland, despatching a letter to Hindenburg following his arrival in which he explained and justified his position.
Having instigated the Kaiser’s abdication Prince Max resigned, handing power to incoming Chancellor Friedrich Ebert who, in statements issued on 10 November and 17 November, appealed for public calm and reassured the German public that the incoming government would be “a government of the people”.