78 10 1079 Event A non-persistent, time-based occurrence. Metadata for an event provides descriptive information that is the basis for discovery of the purpose, location, duration, and responsible agents associated with an event. Examples include an exhibition, webcast, conference, workshop, open day, performance, battle, trial, wedding, tea party, conflagration. Sortable Date 1793-04-21 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 875 Title A name given to the resource Robespierre, at the Jacobin Club, proposes a new version of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/875/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource April 21, 1793 Timeline Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Citizens, I remind you of the vital importance of the nation's salvation. On what grounds do you feel obligated to deal with Louis? Punishing a tyrant is not the nation's disgraceful thirst for vengeance, it is the need to consolidate the state's liberty and peace of mind. Any way of judging him, any system of delays that compromises the state's serenity, is in direct opposition to your aims. And it would be better if you had totally forgotten about punishing him, rather than allow his trial to feed the unrest and start a civil war. Each moment we delay allows a new threat to emerge. Every delay stirs guilty hopes and encourages the audacity of the enemies of Liberty. These delays nurture an absolute distrust and terrible suspicions at the heart of this assembly. Citizens, it is the voice of an alarmed nation that urges you to reassure it by hastening your decision. What scruples still shackle your zeal? . . . To try to delay your judgment, you were told about the nation's honor and the dignity of the Assembly. The honor of nations consists of being free and virtuous, of striking down tyrants and avenging the people who have been debased. The glory of the National Convention consists of displaying strength of character and of sacrificing self-serving prejudices in the name of the sublime principles of reason and philosophy. It consists of saving the nation and ensuring liberty by setting an example for all the world. I can see its dignity slipping away as we forget the strength of republican maxims, instead becoming lost in a maze of useless and ridiculous bickering as our speakers in the galleries teach the nation another lesson in monarchy. Posterity will either admire or scorn you by the degree of vigor you demonstrate on this occasion, and that vigor will also be the measure of the daring or the grace which foreign despots will show you. It will be the promise of our servitude or our liberty, our prosperity or our destitution. Citizens, victory will decide if you are rebels or humanity's benefactors, and your strength of character will decide that victory. Citizens, to betray the cause of the people and our own conscience, to hand over the nation to the chaos that the slow pace of such a trial would cause, that is the only danger we have to fear. It is time to break through that deadly obstacle that for so long has stopped us at the very beginning of our path. Then we will march together toward our common goal of public bliss. Then the hateful passions that too often roar in this shrine of liberty will yield to the love of the public good and to the holy emulation of this nation's friends. Then all the plots of the enemies of public order will be confounded. But it is that strange conviction, which at first we could hardly have dared imagine, but which we then suspected, and which was finally openly suggested that shows how far we still are from this goal. For me, it was at that moment that I saw all my fears and suspicions confirmed. At first we seemed troubled by the consequences that a series of delays in the progress of this case might bring. Now we risk rendering it interminable. We feared the unrest that each moment of delay might bring, and here we are, guaranteeing the upheaval of the Republic. What does it matter to us that a dastardly plot is being hidden under a veil of caution, or even under the pretext of respect for the People's sovereignty? Such was the art of all tyrants who disguised themselves under the mask of patriotism, and who have, until now, destroyed liberty and caused of all our problems. These are not artificial rantings, but rather the results that must be weighed. Yes, I say openly that I no longer see the trial of the tyrant as anything other than a means for anarchy to bring us back to despotism. Citizens, I call on you to bear witness. Suppose that from the first moment when the question of judging the last Louis was raised, when the National Convention was convened expressly to judge him, when you left your departments enflamed with the love of liberty, filled with that noble enthusiasm which was inspired by the recent votes of confidence of a magnanimous people and which no foreign influence had changed . . . or even more, suppose that from the very first moment when the question of opening this case arose, someone had said to you: "Do you think that you will be finished with the trial of the tyrant in a week, in two weeks, in three months? You are mistaken. It will not even be you who will pronounce his sentence or who will finally judge him. I propose that you return this case to the twenty or thirty thousand sections that divide France so that they may each give their opinion on this matter. And suppose you adopted this proposal." You would have laughed at the self-confidence of the man who made such a motion. You would have rejected such a motion as incendiary, designed to kindle civil war. Dare I say it? We are assured that the mood has changed. For many among us, this has been due to the influence of a plague-ridden atmosphere, where the simplest and most natural of ideas are often stifled by the most dangerous of sophisms. . . . I admit that today it is no longer a question of absolving Louis for 10 August; the day when monarchy was abolished is still too close. It is a question of adjourning the end of his trial at a time when foreign powers threaten to descend upon us, and to deal with him carefully about the possibility of civil war. Today, we do not want to declare him inviolable, but only make sure that he remains unpunished. It is not a question of returning him to the throne, but rather wait to see what happens. Today, Louis still has the advantage over the defenders of liberty in that they are pursued with more vigor than is he. No one can doubt that greater attention is being paid to slandering the defenders of liberty, and at a greater cost, than in July 1791. And to be sure, the Jacobins were not more disparaged in the Constituent Assembly then than they are now. Then, we were seditious. Today, we are the agitators and the anarchists. Then, Lafayette and his accomplices neglected to have us murdered. We have to hope for the same clemency from his successors. These great friends of peace, these illustrious defenders of the law, have since been declared traitors. But we have gained nothing from that because their old friends, even several members of the then majority, are here to avenge them by persecuting us. But there is something that no one has mentioned and that will nevertheless arouse your curiosity. After a preliminary lampoon which was distributed to all members as usual, the speaker who proposed and elaborated the scheme of taking Louis's case to the court of primary assemblies with such eloquence and feeling, sprinkling his speech with the usual rantings against patriotism, is precisely the same man who, in the Constituent Assembly, lent his voice to the ruling cabal to defend the doctrine of absolute inviolability. It was also he who banished us for having dared to defend the principles of Liberty. . . . In a word, and it must be said, it is the same man who, two days after the massacre on the Champ de Mars, dared to propose a decree which would have established a commission to judge, as quickly as possible and without appeal, the patriots who had escaped the assassins' swords. Since then, I do not know if the ardent friends of Liberty, who are still pressing today for the condemnation of Louis, have become monarchists. But I strongly doubt that the men of whom I speak have changed their principles. It has been well-demonstrated that with only slightly different circumstances, the same passions and vices are driving us, almost irresistibly, toward the same end. Then, plotting gave us an ephemeral and perverted constitution. Today, plotting prevents us from writing a new one, and leads us toward the dissolution of the State. . . . What is sure is that whatever the result of this fatal measure, it has to be to the advantage of their own particular views. To result in civil war, the resolution need not even be totally completed. They are counting on the unrest that this stormy and endless deliberation will stir in us. Those who do not wish to see Louis fall beneath the sword of justice would perhaps not be upset to see him sacrificed to a popular uprising, and will do everything they can to bring it about. . . . Yes, there is no doubt a scheme to bring down the Convention and perhaps to use this interminable affair as an excuse to dissolve it. This scheme is not found among the people who energetically call for the principles of Liberty, nor among those who have sacrificed everything for it. It is not found among the majority of the National Convention who seek goodness and truth. It is not even found among those who are nothing more than the plotters' dupes, and the blind instruments of foreign passions. This scheme exists among twenty or so rascals who hold the reins, who remain silent about this nation's greatest concerns and who, above all, abstain from pronouncing on the question of the last king. It is their silent and pernicious activities which are the cause of all the ills that trouble us, and are readying all the evils that await us. How can we escape this abyss if not by returning to our principles and to the source of our problems? What kind of peace can exist between the oppressor and his oppressed? What kind of harmony can reign where not even the right to vote is respected? Any such violation of freedom is an attack on the nation. A representative of the people does not allow himself to be stripped of the right to defend the interests of the people, and only by taking his life can some force take this right from him. Already, to drag out the dissension and control the deliberations, some conceived the idea of dividing the assembly into majority and minority, a new way to insult and silence those who were designated as the latter. I recognize neither majority nor minority here. The majority is composed of good citizens, and is not permanent since it belongs to no party. It is renewed during every open deliberation since it belongs to the common cause and to eternal reason. And when the Assembly recognizes an error, the fruit of surprise, haste, and intrigue (which occasionally happens), then the minority becomes the majority. The general will is not formed in secret meetings or around ministerial tables. Everywhere and always, the minority has the right to make the voice of truth heard, or what it perceives as such. On this earth, virtue is always in the minority. Without virtue, would the earth not be peopled by tyrants and slaves? Hampden and Sidney were of the minority, for they died on the scaffold. Critiases, Anituses, Caesars, Claudiuses, were all of the majority, but Socrates belonged to the minority, for he swallowed the hemlock. Cato was of the minority, for he ripped out his bowels. I know many men here who, if need be, will serve liberty as Sidney did. . . . This thought alone must send shivers up the spine of the cowardly plotters who wish to mislead or corrupt the majority. Until then, I ask that at least the tyrant take priority. Let us unite to save the nation, and let our deliberations at last assume a character more worthy of us and of the cause which we defend. Let us at least banish the deplorable incidents which do us dishonor. Let us not spend more time in self-persecution than would be needed to judge Louis, and let us learn the source of our problems. Everything seems to conspire against public happiness. The nature of our debates stirs up and embitters public opinion, and that opinion has a terrible effect on us. The mistrust of the representatives seems to grow with the alarm of the citizens. A proposal which we ought to hear with more composure, irritates us. Daily malice exaggerates, imagines, or creates stories designed to strengthen prejudice, and the smallest of causes can lead us to the most terrible of results. The mere expression of the publics' feeling, although sometimes too animated and which should be easy to control, becomes the pretext for the most dangerous measures and for propositions which are the most prejudicial to our principles. People, spare us at least this kind of disgrace. Save your applause for the day when we have passed one law that is of use to humanity. Do you not see that you give them pretexts to slander the sacred cause which we defend? Rather than violate these strict rules, avoid the spectacle of our debates. Remember the ribbon which your hand recently held as an insurmountable barrier around the fatal dwelling of our tyrant, then still on the throne. Remember that order has been maintained thus far without bayonets, by the virtue of the people alone. Far from your view, we will not struggle any less for it. It is now up to us alone to defend your cause. When the last of your defenders has perished, avenge them if you wish, and see to liberty's victory. Citizens, whoever you are, watch over the Temple [where the King is being held]. If necessary; arrest treacherous malice, even patriotism that has been mislead, and confound the plots of our enemies. Fateful place! Was it not enough that the tyrant's despotism weighed so long on this immortal city? Must his very safekeeping be a new calamity for it? Is this trial to be eternal only to perpetuate the means of slandering those people who removed him from the throne? I have proven that the proposal to submit Louis's case to the primary assemblies aimed at civil war. If I am not allowed to help save my country, I would like at least to be acknowledged, at this moment, for the attempts I have made to warn of the calamities that threaten it. I ask that the National Convention declare Louis guilty and deserving of death. Sortable Date 1792-12-28 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived M. J. Mavidal and M. E. Laurent, eds., Archives parlementaires de 1787 à 1860, première série (1787 à 1799), 1st ed., 82 vols. (Paris: 1862–96), 56:17–23. Description An account of the resource As part of his defense, Louis’s lawyers had suggested the King should be judged not by the representatives of the people in the Convention but by the people themselves through a referendum. The Jacobins opposed this idea, fearing it would undermine the Convention’s position as embodying the will of the people. In his second speech of the trial, Robespierre attacks the idea of a referendum as a plot to save the King and thus undermine the Revolution. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 326 Title A name given to the resource Robespierre’s Second Speech (28 December 1792) Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/326/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 28, 1792 Monarchy Text Event A non-persistent, time-based occurrence. Metadata for an event provides descriptive information that is the basis for discovery of the purpose, location, duration, and responsible agents associated with an event. Examples include an exhibition, webcast, conference, workshop, open day, performance, battle, trial, wedding, tea party, conflagration. Sortable Date 1810-02-17 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 731 Title A name given to the resource Rome annexed to the French Empire. Napoleon’s heir shall bear the title King of Rome. Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/731/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource February 17, 1810 Timeline Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Roster of Membership in the Society of Friends of Blacks, 1789 Officers: The Marquis of Condorcet, President Mr. de Gramagnac, Secretary Mr. Dufossey de Bréban, Treasurer Members of the Committee Misters: Brissot de Warville E. Claviere Brack Duchesnay Dufossey de Bréban De Bourge De Montcloux De Blaire De Petitval The Duke of la Rochefoucault The Duke of Charost The Marquis of Condorcet De Gramagnac Cuchet De Pastoret GalloisRoster of Membership in the Society of Friends of Blacks, by order of their entry: Misters: Brissot de Warville, rue d'Amboise, nº. 10. E. Claviere, Administrator of the Royal Life Insurance Company, rue d'Amboise, nº. 10. The Marquis of Beaupoil Saint-Aulaire, at the Temple. Brack, General Director for Trade, rue de Grammont, nº. 2. Cerisier, Bourbonnois. Duchesnay, Royal Censor, rue des Bernardins, nº. 37. Nicholas Bergasse, rue de Carême-prenant. The Marquis of Valady, London. Dufossey de Bréban, Director of Government Oversight, rue de Grammont, nº. 19. De Bourge, rue des Filles du Calvaire, nº. 16. The Marquise of Baussans, Place Royale. The Marquis of la Fayette, rue de Bourbon, nº. 81. J. J. Clavière, Merchant, rue Coq-héron, Parliament of England. Roman, Merchant, rue Coq-héron, Parliament of England. De Montcloux, son, Farmer General, rue S. Honorée, nº. 341. De Montcloux de la Villeneuve, Councilor to the Cour des Aides, rue S. Honoré, nº. 341. De Blaire, Councilor to the Cour des Aides, rue Buffaut, near the Barrière Cadet. Madame Poivre, rue Feydeau, nº. 22. De Trudaine, Councilor to the Parlement of Paris, rue des Francs-Bourgeois, nº. 39. De Trudaine de la Sablière, Councilor to the Parlement of Paris, rue des France-Bourgeois, nº. 39. Malartic de Fonda, Petition Judge, Passage des Petits-Pères, nº. 7. Le Roi de Petitval, General Manager, Passage des Petits-Pères, nº. 7. The Abbot Colin, Presbetary of Saint-Eustache. Du Rouvray, Ireland. The Duke of la Rochefoucault, rue de Seine Faubourg Saint-Germain, nº. 42. The Duke of Charost, rue de Bourbon, nº. 70. Short, First Secretary of the Embassy of the United States, near the Grille de Chaillot. De Pilles, former Tax Collector, rue de Grammont, nº. 19. The Marquis of Condorcet, Permanent Secretary to the Academy of Science, Member of the Academie Française, Hôtel de la Monnoie. Charton de la Terrière, America. Kornman, rue Carême-prenant. Blot, Gold inspector, Lyon. Esmangard, son, Counselor to the Parlement of Paris, rue des Capucines, nº. 22. Dieres, Counselor to the Cour des Aides, rue Jacob. Des Faucherets, rue de Paradis. Gramagnac, M.D., Hôtel de Lussan, rue de Croix des Petits-Champs. Lanthenas, M.D., rue Thevenot, nº. 31. Bérand, rue Mêlée, nº. 12. The Count of Coustard Saint-Lô, rue Nôtre-Dame des Victoires, nº. 31. Du Vaucel, Farmer General, rue neuve des Mathurins, nº. 1. The Duke of Llavré, rue de Bourbon, nº. 72. The Bishop of Chartres, Chartres. Cuchet, Bookseller, rue Serpente. Gallois, Attorney to Parlement, rue des petits-Augustins, nº. 24. The Marquis of Mons, rue neuve des Petits-Champs, nº. 26. The Abbot Guyot, Provost of Saint Martin of Tours, rue Traversière, nº. 35. Pigot, Geneva. The Baron Dietrick, rue Poissonière. Lavoisier, Farmer General, at the Arsenal. Bergerot, Director of Farms, hôtel des Fermes. Biderman, Merchant, Brussels. De Pastoret, Petition Judge, rue des Capucines, nº. 74. Cottin son, Banker, Chaussée d'Antin, nº. 6. The Count of Avaux, rue S. Dominique, nº. 49. D'Audignac, Director of Public Services, rue de Choiseul. The Count of la Cépede, Jardin du Roi. Munier de Montengis, Hôtel Royal des Invalides. Madame Clavière, rue d'Amboise, nº. 10. The Chevalier of Boussiers, hôtel de Rohan, rue de Varenne. Gougenot, General Collector for Public Services, rue de Choiseul. Petry, Director of Fermes, hôtel de Longueville, rue S. Niçaise. De Saint-Alphonse, General Farmer, rue S. Honoré, nº. 423. Fortin, rue de Choiseul. Henry, Attorney to Parlement, rue S. Jean-de-Beauvais. The Count of Crillon, Place de Louis XV. The Prince Emmanuel de Salm, rue de Grenelle, faubourg S. Germain, nº. 231. The Duchess of la Rochefoucault, rue de Seine, faubourg S. Germain. Duport, Counselor to Parlement, rue du Grand-Chantier, nº. 2. Segretier. The Marquise of La Fayette, rue de Bourbon, nº. 81. Soufflot, Building Inspector of Sainte Géneviève, Saint Géneviève. Agasse de Cresne, rue Pavée S. André-des-Arts, nº. 12. Servat, Official of the City of Bordeaux, Boulevard Montmorency, across from the Pavilion. Croharé, rue de la Comédie Française, at the corner of the rue des Cordeliers. The Count of Valence, rue Chaussée d'Antin, nº. 70. Hocquart de Tremilly, Attorney General of the Cour des Aides, rue Neuve des Petits-Champs, nº. 71. The Count Charles de Lameth, cul-de-sac Nôtre-Dame-des-Champs. The Chevalier Alexandre de Lameth, same address. The Chevalier Théodore de Lameth, same address. The Marquis of le Chatelet, hôtel de Brissac, quai des Théatins. The Prince of Leon, hôtel de la Rochefoucault, rue de Seine. The Count of Rochechouart, rue de Grenelle, faubourg S. Germain, nº. 99. Molliens, First Assistant of Finance, rue de la Michaudière. Bergon, First Assistant of Finance, rue de la Michaudière. De Sannois, Farmer General, hôtel des Fermes. The Viscount of Ricey. The Count of Gouvernet, rue de Verneuil, nº. 50. Benoît de Lamothe, Deputy Chief of Accounting for Public Services, rue neuve Saint Eustache, nº. 21. The Chevalier of Léaumur, rue Thérèse, nº. 1. Leroy de Camilly, Paymaster of Annuities, rue S. Marc, nº. 23. Dupleix de Mezy, Attorney to Parlement, rue des petites Ecuries du Roi. Vallou de Villeneuve, Deputy Chief of Public Services, rue S. Joseph. The Marquis of la Feuillade, rue des Marais. De Meulan, General Collector of Finance, rue de Clichy.Associated Foreigners The Abbot Piatoli, boulevard de Richelieu, care of Princess Lubormiska. Sortable Date 1789-00-00 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Jacques-Pierre Brissot, Tableau des Membres de la Société des Amis des Noirs (Paris: 1789), 1–8. Description An account of the resource Jacques Brissot founded the Society of the Friends of Blacks in 1788 to agitate against the slave trade and slavery itself. Brissot modeled the Society on the London Committee for the Abolition of the Slave Trade established in 1787. He hoped that the groups might cooperate in an international effort to eliminate the slave trade. The French society, knowing that the colonial and commercial interests invested in slavery still exercised great power, cautiously advanced its proposals. This caution was well–founded, since some deputies faced personal attacks in the streets of Paris for their unpopular views. As the roster shows, the society included many leading intellectuals, politicians, and even aristocrats. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 339 Title A name given to the resource Roster of Membership in the Society of Friends of Blacks, 1789 Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/339/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1789 Clubs Text Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Since no man has any natural authority over his fellow men, and since force is not the source of right, conventions remain as the basis of all lawful authority among men. Now, as men cannot create any new forces, but only combine and direct those that exist, they have no other means of self-preservation than to form by aggregation a sum of forces which may overcome the resistance, to put them in action by a single motive power, and to make them work in concert. This sum of forces can be produced only by the combination of many; but the strength and freedom of each man being the chief instruments of his preservation, how can he pledge them without injuring himself, and without neglecting the cares which he owes to himself? This difficulty, applied to my subject, may be expressed in these terms. "To find a form of association which may defend and protect with the whole force of the community the person and property of every associate, and by means of which each, coalescing with all, may nevertheless obey only himself, and remain as free as before." Such is the fundamental problem of which the social contract furnishes the solution. If then we set aside what is not of the essence of the social contract, we shall find that it is reducible to the following terms: "Each of us puts in common his person and his whole power under the supreme direction of the general will, and in return we receive every member as an indivisible part of the whole." But the body politic or sovereign, deriving its existence only from the contract, can never bind itself, even to others, in anything that derogates from the original act, such as alienation of some portion of itself, or submission to another sovereign. To violate the act by which it exists would be to annihilate itself, and what is nothing produces nothing. It follows from what precedes, that the general will is always right and always tends to the public advantage; but it does not follow that the resolutions of the people have always the same rectitude. Men always desire their own good, but do not always discern it; the people are never corrupted, though often deceived, and it is only then that they seem to will what is evil. The public force, then, requires a suitable agent to concentrate it and put it in action according to the directions of the general will, to serve as a means of communication between the state and the sovereign, to effect in some manner in the public person what the union of soul and body effects in a man. This is, in the state, the function of government, improperly confounded with sovereign of which it is only the minister. What, then, is the government? An intermediate body established between the subjects and the sovereign for their mutual correspondence, charged with the execution of the laws and with the maintenance of liberty both civil and political. It is not sufficient that the assembled people should have once fixed the constitution of the state by giving their sanction to a body of laws; it is not sufficient that they should have established a perpetual government, or that they should have once [and] for all provided for the election of magistrates. Besides the extraordinary assemblies which unforeseen events may require, it is necessary that there should be fixed and periodical ones which nothing can abolish or prorogue; so that, on the appointed day, the people are rightfully convoked by the law, without needing for that purpose any formal summons. So soon as the people are lawfully assembled as a sovereign body, the whole jurisdiction of the government ceases, the executive power is suspended, and the person of the meanest citizen is as sacred and inviolable as that of the first magistrate, because where the represented are, there is no longer any representative. These assemblies, which have as their object the maintenance of the social treaty, ought always to be opened with two propositions, which no one should be able to suppress, and which should pass separately by vote. The first: "Whether it pleases the sovereign to maintain the present form of government." The second: "Whether it pleases the people to leave the administration to those at present entrusted with it." I presuppose here what I believe I have proved, viz., that there is in the State no fundamental law which cannot be revoked, not even this social compact; for if all the citizens assembled in order to break the compact by a solemn agreement, no one can doubt that it could be quite legitimately broken. Sortable Date 1762-00-00 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Merrick Whitcomb, ed., Translations and Reprints from the Original Sources of European History, vol. 6 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania History Department, 1899), 14–16. Description An account of the resource Jean–Jacques Rousseau was the maverick of the Enlightenment. Born a Protestant in Geneva in 1712 (d. 1778), he had to support himself as a music copyist. Unlike Voltaire and Montesquieu, both of whom came from rich families, Rousseau faced poverty nearly all his life. He wrote on an astounding variety of topics, including a best–selling novel (Julie or the New Heloïse, 1761), a major tract on education (Émile, 1762), and the work selected here, The Social Contract (1762). Rousseau believed that life in society was essentially corrupting, but that men (it is not clear whether women figured in the social contract) could achieve true morality by joining in the social contract and living under laws that they themselves made. Rousseau’s concept of the "general will" can be, and has been, interpreted as simultaneously providing the origins of democracy and of totalitarianism. This ambiguity emerges in the fact that the general will requires no support from history, tradition, or custom (such as monarchy), but it also "is always right"; that is, there are no checks on its power. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 275 Title A name given to the resource Rousseau’s The Social Contract Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/275/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1762 Enlightenment Laws Middle Classes – Bourgeoisie Monarchy Popular Politics Text Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document The court, maintaining the principles of the resolutions of last May 3 and 5, commands that the said decree [on the organization of the Estates General] be registered on the court rolls and implemented, according to its form and tenor, but with the following requirements: It may not be argued, based on the preamble or any articles of the said declaration, that the court must be restored to resume functions which violence alone has suspended. The court cannot be restricted by the silence imposed on the King’s procureur-général regarding issues connected to the execution of the Ordinances, Edicts, and Declarations of last May 8, and from giving consideration to matters which the court was obliged to take up. . . . Finally, the parlement, in conformity with its resolution of 3 May 1788, maintains its insistence that the Estates General, arranged for next January, be convoked regularly and composed according to the forms utilized in 1614. Sortable Date 1788-00-00 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived J. Mavidal and E. Laurent, eds., Archives parlementaires, 1st ser., 82 vols. (Paris, 1862Ð96), 1:389. Description An account of the resource By the fall of 1788, parlementary opposition to royal reforms had brought about a stalemate, with the Parlements refusing all reforms to the tax system. To gain the Parlement of Paris’s acceptance of new loans to keep the monarchy from going bankrupt, the new finance minister (Louis XVI’s fifth), Étienne–Charles Loménie de Brienne, decided to convoke an Estates–General for the first time since 1614. In his memoirs, he claims that he sought to keep conservative nobles from dominating the Estates–General and obstructing reforms by giving the Third Estate twice as many deputies as the other orders and by allowing all deputies’ votes to count equally. In this way, he hoped to build a working majority in favor of reform in the Estates–General. This decision was announced by a royal decree of 25 September 1788. The Parlement of Paris accepted this decree. However, it committed what became a major tactical error by demanding that the Estates–General follow the "forms of 1614," meaning that each order should have the same number of representatives rather than allow a "doubling of the Third" and that each estate should vote independently. When this resolution was published, it set off an outpouring of pamphlets and newspapers opposing the Parlements and calling for the Estates–General to vote "by head" rather than "by order." Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 364 Title A name given to the resource Royal Decree Convoking the Estates–General and the Parlementary Response (1788) Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/364/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1788 Laws Middle Classes – Bourgeoisie Nobility Text Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document It is above all in the interests of the Princes of your Blood to tell you the truth. By their rank, they are first among your subjects; by their status, they are your natural advisers; and by their rights, they are interested in defending yours. By the same token, they believe they owe you an explanation of their feelings and thoughts.Sire, the state is in peril. Your person is respected, the virtues of the monarch assure him of the nation's respect. But Sire, a revolution is brewing in the elements of government and is being brought about by rousing the people. Institutions thought to be sacred, through which the monarchy has flourished for so many centuries, are being questioned, seen as problems, or even disparaged as unjust.There is a deliberate plan of insubordination in progress that holds nothing but contempt for the laws of the state. This is evidenced by the subject matter and tone displayed in the writings published in the Assembly of Notables, in the memoranda sent to the princely signatories, and in the demands drawn up by various provinces, towns, or corporations. Every author sets himself up as legislator. Eloquence or a clever pen, even if these talents are devoid of education, knowledge, or experience, seem sufficient authorization to settle the empireÕs constitutional questions. Whoever puts forth a bold proposition or proposes to change the laws is sure to draw a readership or start a faction.Unfortunately, the rate with which this turmoil is developing is such that opinions, which not long ago would have seemed most reprehensible, today appear sensible and fair. They are making people indignant, and will soon allow them to accept these views as normal and legitimate. Who can say how far these audacious opinions will go? The rights of the throne have begun to be questioned. Opinion is divided over what is due the first two orders of the state. Property rights soon will be attacked and the unequal distribution of wealth will be represented as something in need of reform. It has been proposed that feudal dues be abolished as a barbarous remnant of an oppressive system.From these new theories, and from the design to change rights and laws, comes a claim advanced by several sections of the Third Estate that their order should have two votes in the Estates-General while each of the two leading orders continues to have only one. . . .Your Majesty has been shown the importance of maintaining the only constitutional method of convening the Estates-General, the method that is hallowed by law and custom and is the immutable foundation of the French monarchy: the distinction between the orders, the right to deliberate in separate chambers, and equality of votes.These principles have been developed and proven, and would seem to be irrefutable.For the princely signatories there remains only to express the feelings they have that are inspired by their loyalty to the state and to Your Majesty.The princes cannot hide the fact that they fear for the state should the claims of the Third Estate be successful, nor can they conceal the dire consequences the proposed revolution would incur for the constitution of the estates. They foresee a sad future where each king alters the nationÕs laws in accordance with his personal inclinations. They foresee a superstitious king giving extra votes to the clergy. They foresee a bellicose king doting on the nobles who follow him into battle. They see the Third Estate obtaining a majority of votes only to be punished for its success because of these changes. As time elapses, each order will either be the oppressor or the oppressed. The constitution will be corrupt or unstable and the nation will always be divided as well as weak and unhappy.Let the Third Estate, then, cease its attack upon the rights of the first two orders. . . . [These] rights are as ancient as the monarchy and should be as unalterable as its constitution. Let them limit themselves to seeking the reduction of taxes by which they are overburdened. Then, the first two orders, recognizing that the Third Estate has citizens who are important to them, will generously be able to renounce any prerogatives that may have a pecuniary value and agree to bear their full share of public taxation. Sortable Date 1788-00-00 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived M. J. Mavidal and M. E. Laurent, eds., Archives parlementaires de 1787 à 1860, première série (1787 à 1799), 2d ed., 82 vols. (Paris: Dupont, 1879–1913), 1:487–89. Description An account of the resource The "Princes of the Blood" were the King’s brothers and cousins, who traditionally served as both the King’s closest advisers and as his leading opponents in politics. In late 1788, on behalf of the second Assembly of Notables, they issued this statement. In it, they defend the prerogative of higher–ranking nobles to speak for the nation to the King through the Parlements and the Assembly of Notables, and they oppose the proliferation of reform proposals coming from commoners in anticipation of the Estates–General. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 302 Title A name given to the resource Royal Decree Convoking the Estates–General and the Parlementary Response (1788) Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/302/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1788 Counterrevolution Nobility Text Event A non-persistent, time-based occurrence. Metadata for an event provides descriptive information that is the basis for discovery of the purpose, location, duration, and responsible agents associated with an event. Examples include an exhibition, webcast, conference, workshop, open day, performance, battle, trial, wedding, tea party, conflagration. Sortable Date 1796-03-29 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 840 Title A name given to the resource Royal leader Charette executed. Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/840/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 29, 1796 Timeline Event A non-persistent, time-based occurrence. Metadata for an event provides descriptive information that is the basis for discovery of the purpose, location, duration, and responsible agents associated with an event. Examples include an exhibition, webcast, conference, workshop, open day, performance, battle, trial, wedding, tea party, conflagration. Sortable Date 1787-11-19 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 759 Title A name given to the resource Royal Session in the Parlement of Paris. Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/759/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource November 19, 1787 Timeline Event A non-persistent, time-based occurrence. Metadata for an event provides descriptive information that is the basis for discovery of the purpose, location, duration, and responsible agents associated with an event. Examples include an exhibition, webcast, conference, workshop, open day, performance, battle, trial, wedding, tea party, conflagration. Sortable Date 1793-03-00 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 873 Title A name given to the resource Royalist and Catholic revolt begins in the Vendée and elsewhere in western France. Relation A related resource https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/873/ Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1793 Timeline