I
wouldn’t
say that images provide knowledge that is different
from textual sources but they can add something to
what the textual sources tell the historian. At least
they have done so for me. My comments here apply to
the two images I have discussed in my essay for the
project, illustrations by Jean-Louis
Prieur depicting
related events that took place on the same day (22
July 1789). Both Jack and Lynn
seem to have doubts about the case I tried to build
in my essay, so I will try to explain myself to them
and to the other members of the group as well.
First, a few words about Prieur,
the illustrator whose works I discuss in my essay.
He did 67 of the first
68 illustrations for the Tableaux historiques de
la Révolution française, deluxe prints depicting
principal events of the Revolution from 1789 to 1799.
All of Prieur’s illustrations for the Tableaux
historiques were engraved by Pierre-Gabriel Berthaut.
Two of his drawings were not engraved, “The Intendant
Bertier de Sauvigny” and his last illustration, a rendering of the September
Massacres. Prieur left the Tableaux historiques after
the completion of his last drawing and henceforth played
an active political role in the Revolution. He was
a Jacobin, a member of the Revolutionary committee
of the Poissonière section, and he was a member
of the Revolutionary Tribunal. He was arrested after
the uprising of 12 Germinal (April 1, 1795) and went
to the guillotine in the following month, on May 7.
Prieur was not a detached observer
who compiled an objective pictorial account of the
principal events
of the Revolution. He was a partisan; he scripted the
events he illustrated. This can be seen in his rendering
of two related events of July 22, “The Hanging
of Foulon at the Place de Grève” and “The
Intendant Bertier de Sauvigny, led to the Hôtel
de Ville, recognizing the Head of Foulon,” that
I discuss in my essay. Crowds had murdered two royal
officials in the Place de Grève on July 14 by
stabbing or shooting them, and eight days later, on
July 22, in the same place, they dispatched two other
officials by hanging them from lampposts, the first
time (as far as I have been able to determine) in which
revolutionary crowds dealt with their enemies in this
manner. Thus began one of the central problems of the
Revolution: Would justice be administered legally and
officially by the state, or spontaneously by the people
who lynched their enemies? Prieur’s “The
Hanging of Foulon” can be seen as part of a contemporary
discourse on the meaning of popular justice as rendered
in this form, stringing up enemies of the people from
lampposts. Desmoulins’ “Discours de la
lanterne aux Parisiens” is part of that discourse,
as were debates on the events of July 22 at Versailles
by members of the Assembly.
In his illustration of the
hanging of Foulon, Prieur gives central importance
to the lamppost, an object
used to dispense (and a symbol of) popular justice.
Someone sits on the lamppost from which Foulon hangs,
and below him there is a circle formed by the crowd,
with the figure of Foulon at its center. Just how conscious
Prieur was of the lamppost as an expression of popular
justice is shown by his inclusion of a lamppost in
his illustration of “The King and Royal Family
led to Paris by the People.” In this illustration
Prieur shows a lamppost at the far right-hand side
of the image, with someone sitting on top of it who
looks toward the royal carriage, as if to send a message
to the King and Queen: Enemies of the people were subject
to popular justice, and this, the lamppost, was where
it was carried out.
Prieur’s scripting of “The
Intendant Bertier de Sauvigny” brings out the
sardonic humor that was integral to popular culture.
Robert Darnton’s “Great
Cat Massacre” essay analyzes
that aspect of popular culture, as do Farge and Revel
in their
study of the 1750 Children’s Riot .
A crowd that believed a constable, Labbé, responsible
for the wrongful seizure of children in 1750, broke
into a room where he had been placed in custody, ran
him down after he briefly freed himself, and beat him
and stoned him to death. “His body, which ‘no
longer had a human face,’ was then dragged to
the house of Lieutenant General Berryer, the official
whose measures had been responsible for the riot. When
archers carried Labbé’s body to the morgue
on a ladder that night, a crowd followed behind in
mocking silence. The next night a crowd appeared outside
the house of Labbé’s mistress, where he
also had lived. They cut a cat’s throat and then
performed a travesty of a religious ceremony that included
blessing the cat with water from the gutter, singing
the de Profundis and Libera Nos, and throwing the cat
into a fire amid jeers and threats that police spies ‘could
end up like this cat.’” Discussing
bourgeois who were in the crowd during the rioting,
Farge and Revel explained that for the most part their
response was to withdraw from scenes of popular violence.
The “bourgeois were aware that during the heights
of the revolt they had rubbed shoulders with a profoundly
alien culture, which in the cold light of day they
found deeply threatening.”
Prieur’s “The Intendant Bertier de Sauvigny” can
be seen against the background of the 1750 Children’s
Riot. Once again, popular protest was accompanied by
sardonic humor. Hay has been stuffed in the mouth of
a hated official, as another official, also soon to
be decapitated, turns away in horror from the frightful
spectacle that confronts him. “Kiss Papa! Kiss
Papa!,” the crowd’s response to this strange
encounter, is an expression of the sardonic humor that
was part and parcel of popular culture.
|