june rebellion of 1832

1832 Barricades in Newspaper Sources: A Masterpost

For convenience of reference, here’s a masterpost compiling my newspaper selections covering the funeral/barricades of June 5-6, 1832, which I’ve translated into English.  In chronological order:

1.)   Le National, 5 June 1832 (published 6 June).

2.)   Le National, 6 June 1832 (published 7 June).

3.)   Le Journal des Débats, 6 June 1832 (published 7 June).

4.)   Le National, 8 June 1832 (published 9 June).

5.)  La Tribune des Départements, 19 June 1832 (published 20 June).


❱❭ the coffin’s route across paris on tuesday, june 5, has been traced on the map. the procession departed at 10 am from the general’s house in the rue saint-honoré, not far from the place de la concorde. its intended trajectory would have followed the grands boulevards across the northern periphery of paris to the obligatory stop in the place de la bastille. soon after setting out, however, militants diverted the hearse to make a symbolic tour of the column in the place vendôme, in homage to lamarque’s close ties to napoléon. this was followed by a second unplanned stop, this time in the boulevard montmartre, where the horses were cut from the traces and replaced by students, military veterans, and decorated heroes of the july revolution, who vied for the honor of pulling the hearse. clearly the cloud — which, by some accounts, had swelled to more than 100,000 — was not allowing its enthusiasm to be dampened by the heavy rains that fell intermittently on this and the following day.

❱❭ once arrived on the place de la bastille, militants tried to convince the column of marchers that lamarque’s body should find its final resting place, not in his ancestral home in the landes near mont-de-marsan, but instead in the panthéon, in the heart of paris. others argued in favor of proceeding directly to the hôtel de ville to proclaim a new french republic. on the esplanade at the north end of the pont d’austerlitz, a series of speeches, delivered from a podium draped in black, further inflamed the crowd. after listening to the words of the marquis de lafayette, maréchal clausel, and representatives of the polish and italian expatriate communities, participants became aware of a spectral figure, towering above the crowd on a black stallion. tall and gaunt, with a long, cadaverous face and flowing mustache, he was dressed entirely in black. still as a ghost, he held aloft a red flag embroidered with a black border and the words “LIBERTY OR DEATH!“ this apparition had an electrifying effect on the crowd, almost as if "…the holy spirit had descended upon them prematurely; they began to utter the strangest prophecies as the sight of the red flag, acting like a magic charm, caused them to leave of their senses.”

➀ residence of general lamarque
➁ place de la concorde
➂ place vendôme
➃ boulevard montmartre
➄ place de la bastille
➅ pont d'austerlitz
➆ panthéon
➇ hôtel de ville
➈ porte saint-denis
➉ faubourg saint-antoine

Character: Grantaire

From: Les Miserables by Victor Hugo

Representation: LGBTQIA+, addiction, mental illness

Their Importance: Oh, Grantaire. Where to start with Grantaire? He’s a MLM, an addict, a sufferer of depression and in my heart the unquestionable winner of the Greatest Pre-20th Century Book Character (Who Appears In 20 Pages Or Less) Award.

So! A few paragraphs before we’re introduced to Grantaire we’re introduced to Enjolras, leader of the student revolutionaries and object of Grantaire’s affections. Hugo, god bless him, uses hundreds of words to tell us what the key deets are: Enjolras is HOT but SCARY and casts women aside with “astounding and terrible glance[s]”. Good to know!

Onto Grantaire. Take it away, Hugo:

However, this sceptic had one fanaticism. This fanaticism was neither a dogma, nor an idea, nor an art, nor a science; it was a man: Enjolras. Grantaire admired, loved, and venerated Enjolras.


There are men who seem to be born to be the reverse, the obverse, the wrong side. They are Pollux, Patrocles, Nisus, Eudamidas, Ephestion, Pechmeja. They only exist on condition that they are backed up with another man; their name is a sequel, and is only written preceded by the conjunction and; and their existence is not their own; it is the other side of an existence which is not theirs. Grantaire was one of these men. He was the obverse of Enjolras.

One might almost say that affinities begin with the letters of the alphabet. In the series O and P are inseparable. You can, at will, pronounce O and P or Orestes and Pylades.

Wondering who Orestes and Pylades are? These guys. Pay attention, that’ll be important later!

Anyway, for the next few chapters we get to know Grantaire even more. He’s very clearly an alcoholic (although the concept as we know it hadn’t really been invented back then) and also very clearly suffering from depression (ditto. Also, damn, does he talk about his depression the same way I think about mine.) Enjolras “disdains” him, largely because he can’t generally be trusted with simple tasks, and also because to be fair he can be a dick at times. But every time Grantaire looks at Enjolras it’s with “great gentleness” or something similar. IT’S SO SAD, BUT IT’S ABOUT TO GET SADDER.

Come the summer of 1832 the June Rebellion took place and seeing as Grantaire lives in a book literally called “the miserable” you can probably guess it doesn’t end well for him. BUT. Okay. As the student revolutionaries are taking their places at the barricades, Grantaire drinks so much he passes out, although not before Enjolras harshly tells him, “You are incapable of believing, of thinking, of willing, of living, and of dying.” (Woe.) So while Grantaire is out of it history takes its course and lovable revolutionary after lovable revolutionary is cut down until only Enjolras is left. BUT THEN:

The chapter where Enjolras and Grantaire die is called “Orestes Fasting [sober] and Pylades Drunk”. Enjolras is cornered in the room where Grantaire is waking up, about to be shot by a firing squad. Grantaire comes round and immediately realizes what’s happening. Let’s hear it, Hugo:

“Long live the Republic! I’m one of them.”

Grantaire had risen. The immense gleam of the whole combat which he had missed, and in which he had had no part, appeared in the brilliant glance of the transfigured drunken man.

He repeated: “Long live the Republic!” crossed the room with a firm stride and placed himself in front of the guns beside Enjolras.

“Finish both of us at one blow,” said he.

And turning gently to Enjolras, he said to him:

“Do you permit it?”

Enjolras pressed his hand with a smile.

This smile was not ended when the report resounded.

Anyway. Few things give me hope the same way Grantaire gives me hope.

I think he’s important largely because the force of his love for another man is what transforms him in the end, and gives him belief and power. It’s almost presented as something holy. Back in 1862! Well done, Victor Hugo. May you rest well in French Heaven.

Issues: Although many actors add their own longing looks etc to their Grantaires on stage (and George Blagden also did so in the 2012 movie) his story isn’t really included in the musical. Granted, this is probably because the average musical is only 165 minutes long.

Thank you to @sarah531 for the write up!


From Parisian newspaper Le Journal des Débats, written 6 June 1832, published 7 June 1832.

English translation:

A faction, small in number but blindly furious, recruited from among the most desperate of the mercenary adventurers of a large city, has just attempted, in the aftermath of a funeral, a bloody parody of the July Days.  A few hundred men, shooting guns, raising barricades, here and there stealing the weapons from some guardhouses taken by surprise, thought that they could substitute themselves for the voting, property-owning population of Paris and change the government in one blow.

This cruel attempt, reproduced in several places and prolonged for the past twenty-four hours in a few narrow streets, is everywhere overcome or surrounded by the public authorities.  It did not inspire the majority of citizens with anything other than indignation and horror; it did not find the slightest support among the people.  Never was an act of sedition more flagrant and less provoked.  And nevertheless some publish the apologia for it, even while the final gunshots of the factious still echo in the streets.  [These journalists] insult the population of Paris by comparing an ambush by anarchists, suppressed by force in the name of the law, to the legal protest against the overthrow of the Charter, the great national movement of July [1830].

A few men have raised the flag of pillage against the flag of the new royalty, the red cap against the tricolor standard; they have evoked the bloody memories and the examples of a day of the Terror against a constitutional and moderate power strictly enclosed within the limits of laws.  They began with violent insults to individuals, they continued with murders, and at last they attempted an open aggression against the military forces, against the National Guard, against the mayors’ offices, against the Bank; and because they proclaimed the Republic, people would like to defend them.  They place these criminal acts of violence under the protection of a funeral ceremony, and they think them justified by the presence of a few famous individuals (who were rather embarrassed, it is said, by the anarchists’ laurels they had been given and by the sinister figures who escorted their triumphal carriage).

We must speak more sincerely; we must confess that the Opposition has been flooded with sedition.  But no, they say, it is sedition that is innocent, glorious, legal.  It is sedition that they connect with the July Revolution, a revolution necessitated by an obvious violation of the social contract and accomplished by a popular push that was so unanimous.

These are the same circumstances, they say, the same preliminaries; except, they add, it was just that this time the National Guard took the side of the powers-that-be.

Yes, you are right, there is that big difference.  In July 1830, propertied men, men of commerce, all the citizens, National Guards and others, all fought either with their own person or with their will against the tyrannical ordinances and in favor of the success of a revolution that punished arbitrary power and prevented anarchy.  In June 1832, propertied men, men of commerce, and the National Guard are all together in solidarity with the government forces to push back seditious attacks and an attempt at political theft made in the middle of the streets.  Back then the nation had felt threatened in its liberty, in its rights; today it is again threatened, but by anarchy and not by the government.  Thus it is to the government, such as it emerged from the July Revolution, that the nation lends its adherence and its aid; it is for the government that the nation would rise if, by some impossibility, a band of anarchists, revolting for no reason, without popular grievances, had for a moment seized success.

But only revolutions succeed—conspiracies, never.  Revolutions succeed when they are provoked by long discontents or by some serious insult to individual and public rights, when they are a necessary and long-awaited response, a national vengeance.  Conspiracies, especially in a great country, no matter how combustible that country seems to be, are always found lacking in some way.  A bizarre coalition of opposing interests, of mad hopes, of burning desires, plus the example of how easily a necessary revolution was accomplished, all of this deceives the conspirators but does not give them more strength on the crucial day.  The events of July [1830] were accomplished so quickly precisely because they were not a conspiracy; the lamentable events of yesterday and today are likewise judged by their result.

We consider these events irrevocably ended by the powerful convergence of military and civilian forces, by the admirable courage shown by the army, the National Guards of Paris and of the suburbs, and by the imposing unanimity that joined them all today in arms.  Some partial crimes could still be attempted, but the conspiracy has been destroyed.  The appearance of Paris, though agitated, announces strength and confidence.  Everywhere in the most populous neighborhoods can be seen a crowd of men of the working class, peaceful and denouncing the disorders.  The regiments of the line and the National Guard are animated with the same zeal and everywhere they calmly increase in numbers.

Within the ranks of the National Guard, they are asking for strong measures to be taken against the anarchists.  The laws suffice.  The authorities, like the citizens, have done their duty; there was coordination and energy in the means of repression and defense.  Society defended herself against anarchy; and she was easily victorious, as she will always be.

The swift return of the King to the Tuileries was natural.  Apart from the danger that could have seemed greater from St-Cloud, there only had to be alarm in Paris for the King to return there right away.  His presence was a mark of appreciation for the good men of the National Guard and of the regiments of the line who were defending public order, and it reminded the citizens of Paris that the King will never separate his interests from theirs for even a moment and that his safety was only to be found among them.

Today the King, while going through the neighborhoods that had been troubled by the attempt of the factious and by the repression of the population that it had produced, everywhere received sincere and lively acclamations.  We knew, we felt that he was the primary guardian of public peace.  We laugh at those ridiculous calumnies that would cast the King of July as his own enemy, plotting against his own throne.  We are thankful to his government for suppressing armed revolt in Paris just as in the West.

The warning is useful for everyone: we saw how certain speeches turned out, certain direct calls for force, to conquer the republican institutions.  Theft and murder took on the task of carrying out this figure of speech (one that was, at the very least, imprudent), and blood has been spilled in Paris.

But it is still a fight for the benefit of a royal dynasty, says one paper.

No, there is more to it than that.  All property as a whole, the safety of private property and of individuals, today relies on the July Monarchy.  Let us realize this, let us understand it well in all the classes of society: anarchy victorious, the Republic, will not stop at the ruins of a throne: it would need something to sell off to support its flock of sheep; it would take it from your houses, from your coffers, from your stores.  Such is the powerful motive that must overcome all others right now, and that which raises so many defenders for public order.  The energetically constitutional spirit of Monsieur Périer has not been extinguished: there are still men of brains and heart to defend public peace after him.

We do not doubt that in these grave circumstances a part of the parliamentary Opposition, even the most excitable part, individually gave signs of support to the July Monarchy.  Speeches do not make common cause with insurrectional murders.  We know how the most eloquent organs of English democracy conducted themselves during a mutiny in the fleet stationed on the Thames, and what loyal support they offered to the government.  The anti-social republican conspiracy of the 5 June must certainly provoke even more indignation and zeal.

Whatever the case, constitutional France, that great majority who wants order and a monarchy with new priorities, awaits from the government a lively step and decisive acts for public peace.  The citizens of Paris did not fail the government, and the government will not fail either France or itself.    

*     *     *     *     *

The attempt—as mad as it was guilty—of a handful of men against the government that the people founded during the July Days, is finished.  Today, at five o’clock, all the posts occupied by the rebels were retaken through the courage and devotion of the National Guards of Paris and of the suburbs, and of the troops of the line.

In the midst of the most contradictory rumors that are everywhere circulating and coming to us from all sides, we are going to report those that seem to us to offer the most authenticity.

As we said yesterday, the disorder, or rather the attempt at civil war, began from the aggression of several young people against a regiment of dragoons that was blocking the Pont d’Austerlitz.  In this encounter, the dragoons, having seen three of their officers fall under gunfire, launched themselves forward; the aggressors were immediately pushed back into the little streets of the Saint-Antoine neighborhood, near the Arsenal, and then they retreated back into the interior of the city and threw themselves into the rue Saint-Denis, the rue de la Verrerie, the rue des Arcis, and the rue de la Planche-Mibraye.  That was the area they had chosen as being most favorable for attack and for defense.

At the same time, another column [of the insurgents] returned by way of the boulevards, which they barricaded with all the carriages they could find.  When they arrived at the Porte Saint-Martin, this column was rejoined by another group that had followed the rue Saint-Denis, armed with guns and provisioned with cartridges and ammunitions.  All together they raised a strong barricade there, ready to give combat.

And in fact soon the battle began.  A detachment of carabiniers, having arrived at this barricade and being received with gunfire, did not want to make their horses cross this obstacle and fell back behind a company of voltigeurs who immediately threw themselves forward in firing formations, overthrew the barricade in spite of vigorous resistance, and opened the street for the troops that followed.  From that moment, the boulevards were under the troops’ control.  The only exception being that, around nine-thirty in the evening, the commander having learned that a barricade was going up at the corner of the rue de Lancry, sent a detachment of National Guards and voltigeurs of the line to destroy it.  Several shots were fired there, and a National Guard and two voltigeurs were wounded, with another voltigeur killed.

While these events were taking place on the boulevards Saint-Denis and Saint-Martin, other insurrectionary movements were breaking out throughout Paris.  Isolated guardhouses, among others those of the Bank, of the place Maubert, and of the place Saint-Michel, were surrounded; but soon the National Guard and the troops retook them.  In the retaking of the guardhouse of the place Maubert, a brave captain of the Municipal Guard, Monsieur Amédée de Turpin, was killed.

However, the night had come, and the rebels still occupied two principal spots: the rue du Faubourg-Saint-Antoine and the rue Saint-Denis from the church of Saint-Merri to the place du Châtelet and the little adjoining streets.  In these two spots they were still raising barricades.  At first the troops sought to drive them out, but seeing in the course of these minor skirmishes that they were losing many men to no purpose, they resolved to wait for daybreak.

When the morning came, Paris presented the appearance of a vast military camp.  The King made the review of the National Guard and of the troops who had occupied the Tuileries since the previous day and those who had arrived during the night, and all swore to die for him and all were ready to keep their word.  National Guards, infantry of the line, and cavalry covered the boulevards and quays.  All were at their posts, and for those who could see what a selfless indignation animated them, the outcome of the combat was not in doubt.  At the same time, the National Guards of the suburbs were arriving by way of several barrières, and they were certainly no less resolved to defend order and true liberty.

We have been told that it was they who began the combat against the two principal spots, that is, in the Faubourg Saint-Antoine and in the place du Châtelet.  Even though they had not yet received supplies of cartridges, they launched themselves with their bayonets against the first barricades that the rebels had built during the night.  They dislodged those who defended these barricades, but they were assailed by vigorous gunfire to which they could not respond, and so they retreated.  But then the cartridges arrived, and the firing began from both sides.  

In the faubourg Saint-Antoine the combat lasted a rather long time, but, the barricades having been broken down by a few cannon rounds, citizens and soldiers swarmed into the faubourg, which was soon occupied.  They say (but we cannot believe it) that in the Faubourg Saint-Antoine, a captain of the National Guard fired on his fellow National Guards from his window and that he had already killed seven of them when they burst into his house.  After a vigorous resistance he was taken prisoner.

Now here are a few details on the combat in the rue Saint-Denis.

At four o’clock in the morning the firing began in the place du Châtelet.  A few of the houses that surround this square were occupied by the rebels; from there they fired almost point-blank, but they were soon either killed or taken in their positions.

From the Pont Notre-Dame to the middle of the rue Saint-Martin they had raised seven barricades built solidly.  A crossfire from the neighboring houses protected each entrenchment.  At the level of the rue Saint-Merri, seven or eight houses that faced each other seemed to have been inclined to the most obstinate resistance.  [Army] sharp-shooters had fought in the rue Saint-Martin with much courage but always without success.

Our troops felt the need for a more decisive attack.  A battalion of the brave 1st regiment of the line leapt forward in a charge in the rue Saint-Martin, coming up from the quay.  It was supported with vigor by a battalion of the 42nd, which marched in by following the adjoining streets.  Four times the first barricades were breached with as much bravery as tenacity, under the fire that was being kept up from the windows; but as soon as the troops came up to the houses situated near the rue Saint-Merri, the firing became so strong that for a long time it was impossible to overcome the obstacle that the troops encountered.

A hail of rocks, paving-stones, and broken furniture, falling from the highest stories, chased away or crushed everything in its way.  After [the soldiers] had breached this murderous entrenchment, they had to break down the doors of these houses to arrest those who were firing with such ferocity against their fellow citizens.  General Tiburce Sébastiani commanded the troop movements with that sang-froid and that intrepid bravery that characterize the French soldier.

Two officers of the command staff of the National Guard along with National Guards of all ranks continually took part in the action in the middle of the line [in the midst of the troops of the line?].  Each charge took place to the cries of Long live the King!  After two hours of fighting they were masters of all the barricades, and the people themselves rushed to destroy these barricades, while cursing those who did not hesitate to bring down so many evils upon their country.  General Leydet, for his part, commanded the battalion of the 42nd, the colonel of which received two wounds, one in the head and the other in the thigh.

In this war from barricade to barricade, from window to window, from house to house, in this war, the most difficult of all, where the enemy you are attacking is invisible and aims at you with a sure shot, never did our brave National Guards or our intrepid soldiers show a single moment of hesitation.  Once they had taken one position, they went a moment later to attack another with cries of Long live the King!  Down with the carlistes!  Down with the republicans!  You would have had to see what their courage and their ardor were like to have some idea of it.

Alas!  They bought victory at the price of cruel losses.  At each moment there passed stretchers carrying wounded citizens or soldiers.  Nevertheless, their deaths were well avenged, with an indignation of which it is easy to conceive.  In many houses taken by assault by the National Guard or by the regiments of the line, those who had begun this criminal war were killed by bayonet blows.  However, several owe their lives to the humanity of their conquerors.  When they were being brought through the city to be handed over to the authorities, popular vengeance was on the verge of taking justice into its own hands.  The cries of ‘death!’ rang out from all sides on their route; they were able to learn the true feelings of the population of Paris.

A little after the Faubourg Saint-Antoine was occupied, that is, at two o’clock, the King left the Tuileries accompanied by the Duc de Nemours and the Ministers of War and of Public Works, and escorted by the National Guard on horseback and by detachments of all the cavalry corps.  His Majesty first carried out a review of the regiments stationed at the place du Carrousel, then followed the quay along the edge of the Seine, then along the boulevards and through the Faubourg Saint-Antoine up to the barrière Saint-Antoine.  His Majesty then came back down through the faubourg, crossed the boulevard Bourdon, and returned by way of the quays to the Tuileries.

It would be difficult for us to express the enthusiasm with which the King was welcomed.  Every time he passed before detachments of the National Guard or of the regiments of the line, or in front of groups who had assembled on the boulevards and on the quays, the shouts of Long live the King!  No anarchy!  No carlistes!  No Republic! rang out from all sides.

When the King passed along the quai de la Grève, they were still fighting in that neighborhood.  And since they feared that some gunshot might be fired upon him from the narrow streets that adjoined that quay, before he arrived at each of those streets, the soldiers and the National Guards threw themselves there to protect him with their bodies.

Several times in his walk, the King encountered stretchers carrying the wounded.  The King then stopped, addressed words of consolation to them, and took down their names.

Yes, we repeat it again, there can’t be enough praise for the courage, zeal, and devotion of the National Guards of Paris and of the suburbs, and of the troops of the line.  There you surely have an energetic response to these madmen who used to tell us every day that the people marched with them, and that it would suffice to just take a stand in order to rally all the people to their cause.  But what also attests even more strongly to these men being in the minority was the appearance of Paris all throughout the day; doubtless they excited a few feelings in all the classes of the population, but it was the feeling of pity for their madness and hatred for their anarchical plots.  In the short period of time that has passed since the end of the fighting, we have not been able to gather all the names of those who served the country well.  We will hurry to report them for public recognition.

This is the third of a number of June 1832 newspaper articles that I used to form the core of the epilogue for Virago, and one of the few selections I used from a conservative (pro-government) paper.  This should give a good (if predictable) sense of what non-republicans thought about the June Rebellion.  For the epilogue of Virago I didn’t really want to directly reiterate anything Hugo had already written about, so I opted to use real documents to show the ending of the story.  Of course in Virago these articles were edited for repetition and length, and interpolated with details about the fictional barricade of the rue de la Chanvrerie, but here I’m giving them to you as “straight up” translations of the original articles.  ;)

[Also, just as an editor’s note, I have occasionally tried to clarify the punctuation, which in these papers can often be geared more towards a logic of spoken rhetoric than towards what we would consider modern grammatical rules.  Breaking up these long, semi-colon sentences can sometimes make for a slightly more readable translation.]

Find other 1832 barricade-related newspaper selections here:

Le National, 5 June 1832 (published 6 June).

Le National, 6 June 1832 (published 7 June).

Le National, 8 June 1832 (published 9 June).

La Tribune des Départements, 19 June 1832 (published 20 June).

Find Virago here!

…before anyone gets too happy about the everybody-lives!AU potential of Charles Jeanne’s improbable survival story, I feel duty-bound to note that the retreat into the Corinthe and ensuing massacre were also based on the actual events of June 1832. Jeanne and his ten-man suicide charge were a tiny minority of the combatants; several dozen insurgents thought it was a better plan to retreat into the apartment building they’d been using as headquarters, using the stairwells as a sheltered position to pick off the assailants as they tried to come up. It wasn’t a bad plan, necessarily. The success of Jeanne’s charge was a fluke that caught even him by surprise, and the rest of the insurgents managed to hold the building for over an hour, gradually being driven further and further up the stairs. A bunch of them made it to the roof and parkoured their way to safety, so for them it turned out to be a pretty good plan. But the ones who stayed and fought to the bitter end eventually surrendered to the army, who agreed to take them into custody if they’d come quietly.

What happened next was disputed during the trial; there were definitely summary executions, some of them insurgents who’d been hiding in the residents’ apartments trying to avoid arrest, some of them insurgents who’d already surrendered. It’s also almost certain that the army and the National Guard were at loggerheads: the professional soldiers were trying to take prisoners, but the National Guard was a citizens’ militia made up of property-holders whose animosity towards the rebels was personal, vicious, and class-based. Hugo was cleaning up and romanticizing historical events considerably by giving Enjolras and Grantaire anything so dignified as a firing squad; there were reports of captured insurgents being messily stabbed to death with bayonets, left to die of gut wounds, or pitched out of fourth-floor windows by guardsmen making “heads or tails?” jokes about whether they’d hit the ground face-up or face-down. It was gruesome as hell, and unlike the Rue Transnonain massacre in a revolt two years later, the brutality was largely ignored outside the radical press because it was directed at actual combatants rather than civilians suspected of sheltering them.

So yeah. Charles Jeanne and half a dozen other crazy bastards miraculously survived their suicide-by-soldiers stunt, and you could totally use that incident as the basis for an everybody-lives AU. But unfortunately, that is not a term that could be used to describe the actual history of Saint-Merry and June 1832.

anonymous asked:

Hi! Im writing some historical fiction about the 1832 June Rebellion (Paris Uprising of 1832) and I was wondering how gender was viewed in 1832 France? Also how age and sexuality was viewed. I have 3 female characters who are all interested in fighting and I would like to know whether or not they would have to wear male clothing. I also have 2 male characters pining after each other, and I was wondering how 1832 france would view this. Theres also an 11 year old fighter. Thanks ~

Hello anon! I apologise for taking so very long to answer your question! It’s within my field and a really interesting question but it took some research and thus some time.

Since war and going to war was long, and in a lot of societies, considered to be the “ultimate test of both individual and collective manhood.”, a woman that wanted to be a soldier would have to disguise herself.[1] There are records of this; a famous instance would be Hua Mulan. Granted, not every culture and every era demanded that women did not fight in any kind of battle; there are several examples of women defending their castle, their home, themselves in times of war and during sieges and attacks. [2]

Let´s focus on the uprising, though. After the French Revolution in 1789, women did get more political influence but this was taken away in 1804 with the Napoleon’s Civil Code of 1804; which made women completely subordinate to their husbands once married. (Women did dress themselves as soldier, still, though.)[3] This political reality meant that in 1832 France, women were not invited into the military fraternities from which the rebellion formed. They were, however, taking part in building barricades, sabotaging, springing prisoners and helping with supplies. One certain Catharine Delacroix both constructed a barricade and led rebels through the streets, shouting “Qui vivé!” as she wielded a pick-axe.[4] Women would join their husbands and try to acquire ammunition and weapons and women would store weapons in their homes.[5]

The reason we know these things is that the criminal records state the names of several women and what their crimes were. For instance; in april 1834 a group of rebels, including six women, tried to help a political prisoner escape. They were all later arrested (which is how we know they were involved). [6] So, my advice for your story would be to make three different female characters. One could be like Catharine, one could be a wife helping her husband and one could already be military and join the groups of men planing the uprising. Or a wife joining the rebellion in spite of her husband´s wishes, an unmarried woman or a widow picking up a weapon and shouting from the barricades and a trans man already within the military helping plan the rebellion. (Why a trans man, though? Well, representation. There is historical truth to women simply being disguised to be able to be in the military but history has largely, almost completely, overlooked the fact that the women dressed as soldiers may not be women at all, but trans men. Of course, our understanding of gender and sexuality in the contemporary so-called western world can not be directly transferred to historical people, but to assume that women who joined the army (some of who continued to live their entire lives “disguised” as men) were exclusively cisgendered women would be rather ignorant of us historians. (Not calling you or any writer ignorant! Women in military and/or political settings are sorely underrepresented as well. Your idea to write about three women, anon, is a good idea!))

When it comes to sexuality I have written about this before, though I have written about England. It´s a rather different story when it comes to France, as a matter of fact! In 1791, a new penal code was adopted that decriminalised sodomy. Thus France was the first West European country to make sodomy legal (between consenting adults). In april of 1832, the age of consent (for both men and women) was set to 11. This means that it is legal for your male characters to be in a sexual relationship.[7] However, this does not mean they could openly be together. Policemen continued to punish “sodomites” under laws such as “public indecency” and it was still considered a grave moral sin. The gay men would defend each other from being arrested, though, whenever they were gathered together (at Cafés or the like).[8] To summarise the police would harass them and people around would condemn them but they did have communities and their relationships were not illegal.

When it comes to your eleven-year-old fighter, I will have to say that I don’t know. There is fairly little on children until much later in history but I assume a child of that age could help build barricades and could try and defend said barricades.

Was this helpful, informative, fun? Why not buy Captain a coffee as thanks! Ko-fi uses PayPal for small, one-time donations.

[1] Merry Wiesner-Hanks, Gender in History: Global Perspectives, (UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2d ed. 2014), s.147.

[2] ibid., 148-149.

[3] Ibid., 154-155.

[4] D Barry Women and Political Insurgency: France in the Mid-Nineteenth Century, (Springer, 1996), 29.

[5] Ibid. 29-30.

[6] Ibid. 30.

[7] “Where is it illegal to be gay?” BBC News. Mars 24th 2017. & Scott Eric Gunther The Elastic Closet, A History of Homosexuality in France 1942-present, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009)

[8] Anne Clark, Desire: A History of European Sexuality, (2008) 137.

Reasons why George Blagden’s ‘Drink With Me’ video is heartbreaking
  1. It’s Grantaire’s solo that didn’t make it to the final cut of the 2012 movie. And George sang it completely in character. It was calm and peaceful, but with undertones of fear and sadness.
  2. It’s June 5th (or 6th in the east), the anniversary of the Paris Uprising of 1832, which the Les Amis de l'ABC could’ve been part of have they actually existed 184 years ago. GEORGE POSTED IT AT 1 A.M. A VERY APPROPRIATE TIME, PROBABLY THE TIME THE AMIS STARTED SINGING ‘DRINK WITH ME’.
  3. George took the video at the intersection of Rue Rambuteau and Rue Mondétour, THE SITE OF THE BARRICADE. THE SITE WHERE THE LES AMIS DE L'ABC SUPPOSEDLY FELL. Let that sink in for a moment. 
  4. For the reason above, “will the world remember you when you fall?” is very painful because the June Rebellion of 1832 is a very obscure piece of French history, and it is Hugo’s ‘Les Misérables’ that gave this event widespread renown, as Hugo himself witnessed the battles at the barricades. (Side note: Do you know why they call it 'Rebellion’? It’s because it failed. The republicans lost. If they didn’t, it would probably be called 'Revolution’.)

Happy(???) Barricade Day, indeed.
RIP, the fallen republicans of the 1832 Paris Uprising


in honor of barricade day here is the vine i made last year.

kazoomajor  asked:

Can you pls explain les amis I'm so confused

Okay so! In Victor Hugo’s novel Les Misérables, part of the story takes place during the June Rebellions of 1832, and in these rebellions, a bunch of students (and historically, lots of others) tried to revolt against oppressive power structures and really failed. So Les Amis are Hugo’s representation of those students! They’re sort of based on history, which is cool, and unfortunately, they all die :( here’s a summary of who they are bc I can’t control myself when talking about these dorks ✨

Enjolras: the leader. Really passionate and patriotic and loves his friends a lot. My favorite one ❤️
Courfeyrac: the one who has the biggest part in the novel (except Enjolras) because he’s friends with Marius. Super friendly and goofy and a lot of fun!
Combeferre: Enjolras’s best friend and the second in command of the rebellion. Giant nerd! Gets killed trying to save an enemy soldier :(
Joly: med student and hypochondriac like mood my dude. Really cheerful and cute! Canonically in a polyamorous relationship with Bossuet and Musichetta.
Bossuet: Joly’s best friend. Super unlucky. Gave up his place in a lecture for Marius.
Grantaire: the resident cynical asshole who doesn’t believe in anything except Enjolras and his friends. Really in love with Enjolras, and eventually dies holding hands with him.
Feuilly: the only one who’s not a student. Really patriotic, except about Poland. Enjolras loves him so much that he paused a stirring speech to talk about how great he is.
Bahorel: not in the musical :( law student who hates lawyers. Likes eggs and fancy clothes and punching things.
Jehan: shy, awkward little poet who plays flute and grows flowers. He’s really brave, though. Eventually, he gets shot by a firing squad.

Honorary les amis:
Marius: Victor Hugo’s self-insert OC LOL. I have a lot of opinions about him, but anyway, he’s the only one who survives.
Eponine: grew up with Cosette, and unfortunately, wasn’t nice to her :( but she’s actually a pretty good, cool person. She saves Marius’s life on the barricade (because she loves him), but dies in the process.
Gavroche: Eponine’s little brother. Adorable little munchkin. Takes care of random street children (who are actually his little brothers, but he doesn’t know that). Gets shot collecting bullets for the barricade :(

Thank you so much for asking this omg bless you and please have a beautiful day ❤️❤️❤️❤️

A Dream Within a Dream (2500 Follower Giveaway Fic #11)

For @chambergambit, who requested a fic set in her extraordinary Stranded Time Traveler Grantaire universe. Thank you so much for letting me play in your sandbox! I didn’t quite incorporate all the aspects of your specific prompt, but after reading your headcanons, this came to me and I couldn’t let it go. I hope I’ve done the concept justice!

Title comes from Edgar Allan Poe’s poem of the same name, which I felt captured the same beautifully painful futility I saw in chambergambit’s headcanons. 

Simultaneously canon-era and modern, ish. Time Travel AU, developing ExR (of sorts).

Grantaire’s fingers tapped a staccato rhythm against the wooden table, and it took a moment for him to place the song – “Stayin’ Alive”. He smiled slightly at his own dark humor, the last vestiges of the man he had been in the twenty-first century, back when the world made sense.

He missed music most, even battered old hits like the Bee Gees, missed putting his headphones on and tuning out the world or dancing the night away in some twink-filled club. The only way he could tune out the world now was through alcohol, and lots of it.

Alcohol also had the benefit of being one of the few drinks that wasn’t liable to kill Grantaire – at least, not immediately. He had never paid much attention in any relevant history class, but even he remembered that unsanitary drinking water had been a huge problem in the nineteenth century. Besides, alcohol was also a convenient excuse for the bizarre anachronisms he tended to utter at the wrong moment, like when he called Jehan’s outfit a hot mess or exclaimed that the bottle of wine he was drinking was the best thing since sliced bread. It explained why he doodled little Mickey Mouses in the corners of his parchment or absentmindedly folded paper airplanes before he remembered that it was some 30 years before the term aviation would even be coined.

And it even allowed Grantaire to temporarily forget that in the year 2015, he had been unceremoniously transported back in time to 1830 with no clue how, why, or more importantly, how he was ever supposed to return to his own time.

Keep reading