I’m like a witch and you can’t kill me

Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind by the Marquis de Condorcet (English)

“On the Admission of Women to the Rights of Citizenship” by the Marquis de Condorcet (English)

“Enjolras gave expression to its [the Revolution’s] divine right and Combeferre its natural right. The former aligned himself with Robespierre, the latter stood close to Condorcet.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

This comparison refers to the Marquis de Condorcet: a mathematician and politician who advocated for public education, a constitutional government, and equal rights for people of all races and genders. He was an active member and eventually the president of the Society of the Friends of the Blacks and apparently was known for being pretty radical in his advocacy for women to have full equal rights of citizenship to men. In his essay “On the Admission of Women to the Rights of Citizenship,” he actually said that anti-feminism and preventing women access to birth control or divorce was an act of tyranny. What a cool guy. Ultimately, though he wasn’t officially executed during the Reign of Terror, he did die in prison after being arrested by the Jacobin faction.

One of his most notable books is his Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind. It was published posthumously in 1795 and essentially claims the progress of science and human rights are interconnected throughout history. So by furthering access to education, we will further the fight for social justice. This is, in a nutshell, a really good summary of Combeferre’s basic worldview as well and a really good starting point to understanding his character.

I feel like it’s also worth pointing out that even though Combeferre does give a big speech about women at the barricade, it seems like Condorcet was WAY more feminist than Victor Hugo was capable of portraying. Which is unfortunate, because so many of the people Combeferre looks up to are super feminist. Feminist king, let’s gooo!

Popular Lectures on Astronomy by François Arago (English)

“Fresnel” Biographies of Distinguished Scientific Men by François Arago (English)

“He read everything, went to the theatre, attended public lectures, learned from Arago about the polarization of light, was fascinated by a talk in which Geoffroy Sainte-Hilaire explained the twin functions of the external carotid artery and the internal carotid artery, the one that leads into the face and the other that leads into the brain.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Dominique-François Arago was a director of the Paris Observatory, who was well known in Paris for conducting a very popular series of lectures to the general public explaining scientific developments. Arago amassed a pretty huge following over the 33 years he did these public lectures and had an entire amphitheater built at the Observatory to accommodate all the people who attended. (Which his successor destroyed to build himself a personal apartment smh.) Throughout his career, he supported Augustin-Jean Fresnel’s wave theory of light, and the two worked together conducting experiments on the polarization of light. He also dabbled in magnetism but put a pin in that for now. 

Arago was pretty busy with these lectures so he wasn’t publishing much during his (or Combeferre’s) lifetime, but his posthumous publications cover a lot of the same material he would have been talking about while Combeferre was alive. For example, Popular Lectures on Astronomy was published in 1845 but covered material from (you’ll never guess) popular lectures on astronomy that he gave at the Royal Observatory of Paris between 1812 and 1845. These included the public lectures he gave on the polarization of light, which Combeferre is referencing here. Likewise, Fresnel’s biography in Biographies was originally delivered as a lecture in 1830. Actually, it was read precisely on July 26, 1830, apparently literally right after Arago read the news about Charles X passing the July Ordinances which suspended the press that led to the July Revolution of 1830. Just a fun fact. 

It should surprise no one that the guy was also a pretty liberal republican who advocated for public education. After Combeferre would be dead, he also managed to abolish flogging in the military and succeeded in procuring the abolition of slavery in the French colonies. Cool!

Philosophie Anatomique by Geoffrey Sainte-Hilaire (French)

“He read everything, went to the theatre, attended public lectures, learned from Arago about the polarization of light, was fascinated by a talk in which Geoffroy Sainte-Hilaire explained the twin functions of the external carotid artery and the internal carotid artery, the one that leads into the face and the other that leads into the brain.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Saint-Hilaire was a naturalist who was part of the Academy of Sciences and worked as a professor of zoology at the University of Paris. During his time there, he did research in anatomy and wrote the Philosophie Anatomique and generally did a lot of work pushing forward the science of evolutionary biology. Presumably the talk he gave would have been a lecture while he was a part of the staff for the University of Paris after he released this book. Combeferre goes to a lot of public lectures on science!

The Political Thought of Saint-Simon selected texts by Saint-Simon (English)

The Utopian Vision of Charles Fourier selected texts by Charles Fourier (English)

He was well-informed, keeping pace with scientific developments, comparing Saint-Simon with Fourier, deciphering hieroglyphics, splitting the stones that he found and studying geology, drawing a silkworm moth from memory, pointing out the incorrect French in the Dictionnaire de l’Académie, reading Puységur and Deleuze, affirming nothing, not even miracles, denying nothing, not even ghosts, dipping into old issues of Le Moniteur, pondering.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier were both early utopian socialists and proto-feminists who had a huge impact on early international socialism. Basically, utopian socialists believed that, instead of achieving socialism through rebellion or class war, the masses would naturally adopt a socialist society if they were convinced well enough. Fourier and Saint-Simon started different schools of socialist thought, but they both pushed the idea of gender equality really strongly. Charles Fourier is actually credited with coining the term “feminism,” which is cool. (But the guy was also really, really antisemitic, which is not cool.) Yet again, Combeferre is reading up on his feminist theory. Good for him.

There was plenty of criticism about the elitism of Saint-Simonian socialism because it didn’t seem to abolish social classes, just invent new ones. Saint-Simon also says some wild shit about how his ideological opponents should be “treated like cattle” and at one point shot himself in the head SIX TIMES but didn’t die. Damn. He also tried to worship Isaac Newton. None of that’s important, but it’s all kind of weird so I wanted to mention it. 

Charles Fourier had some ideas that are thought of as really commonplace today (like feminism) but also some that just sound… odd. He had this whole theory about “passions” that didn’t stick around and he predicted that when the world reached its utopian ideal state the ocean would turn to lemonade and the polar ice caps would melt, which… y’know actually he might not be all wrong about the polar ice caps. He was also ardently pro-gay in his advocacy for free love, and even explicitly talked about lesbians and non-binary people! This guy was either really ahead of his time or completely off the wall and nothing in between.

Dictionnaire de l’Académie (French)

He was well-informed, keeping pace with scientific developments, comparing Saint-Simon with Fourier, deciphering hieroglyphics, splitting the stones that he found and studying geology, drawing a silkworm moth from memory, pointing out the incorrect French in the Dictionnaire de l’Académie, reading Puységur and Deleuze, affirming nothing, not even miracles, denying nothing, not even ghosts, dipping into old issues of Le Moniteur, pondering.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

This was the first official French dictionary, produced by the Académie Française as part of their mission to document and regulate the French language. The 5th edition was published in 1798 and would have been the most contemporary version for Combeferre. The Dictionnaire de l’Académie was always met with a certain amount of criticism. Its slow release meant it couldn’t keep up with the evolution of language and was always a little out of date. Also the Académie’s goal in developing the dictionary was less to capture a record of how French was used but instead to dictate how French should be used. As such, it excluded regional words or technical language and Victor Hugo has a lot of opinions about slang (cue war flashback to the slang chapter) so obviously he has opinions about this and so does Combeferre. As we’ll get into later, Combeferre always has a snide opinion to give on the Académie Française, he loves dissing these elitist guys. They’re actually still around to this day and, as far as I can tell, still subject to a lot of the same criticisms. Did you know their uniform costs $50,000? Wild.

Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire et à l'établissement du magnétisme animal by Marquis de Puységur (1784) (French)

Du magnétisme animal, considéré dans ses rapports avec diverses branches de la physique générale by Marquis de Puységur (1807) (French)

Histoire critique du magnétisme animal by Joseph-Philippe-Francois Deleuze (1813) (French)

Instruction pratique sur le magnétisme animal; suivie d’une lettre écrite a l’auteur par un médecin étranger by Joseph-Philippe-Francois Deleuze (1825) (French, English)

He was well-informed, keeping pace with scientific developments, comparing Saint-Simon with Fourier, deciphering hieroglyphics, splitting the stones that he found and studying geology, drawing a silkworm moth from memory, pointing out the incorrect French in the Dictionnaire de l’Académie, reading Puységur and Deleuze, affirming nothing, not even miracles, denying nothing, not even ghosts, dipping into old issues of Le Moniteur, pondering.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Alright, it’s time to dip briefly into a little ~animal magnetism~! We’re not really in the thick of it yet. Joly is a huge fan of this magnet pseudoscience so I’ll talk way more about it in his booklist. Basically, for now, what you need to know is that animal magnetism (or mesmerism) was an insanely popular medical fad in France around this time and literally almost everyone had very strong opinions on it. For his part, Combeferre likes the magnets. Puységur and Deleuze were major advocates for animal magnetism, key to its popularity in France, and published a lot of work about it that Combeferre apparently reads! I just pulled some of their most popular or seminal work here to keep it brief, but there is so much written material about this topic at the time, it’s overwhelming (link).

In short, the Marquis de Puységur was a disciple of Mesmer who made a school in Paris to teach people about magnetism. His research focused on the discovery of hypnotism (though he called it artificial somnambulism). In fact, he made a lot of discoveries about the subconscious mind, the benefits of building a rapport with your patient, and other concepts that would eventually become essential to the development of modern psychotherapy. His work was super popular and helped shift the focus of mesmerism from physical to psychological treatment. 

Deleuze was another French researcher, very inspired by the work of Puységur, who had a huge impact on the movement in France. He published one of the most important popular manuals for the practice of animal magnetism. It was super popular and went through at least 4 editions in thirty years in France, that’s a lot of printing! (It also claimed that magnetism could cure alcoholism, but I guess Combeferre didn’t pass that factoid on to Grantaire.) Anyway, in addition to his practical guide, he also wrote a pretty comprehensive history of animal magnetism that was apparently known for being a very balanced record that didn’t ignore legitimate criticism, but ultimately he was still very impressed by what he found. This is an extremely Combeferre attitude, I can see why he’d trust this kind of research.

Le Moniteur Universel (French)

He was well-informed, keeping pace with scientific developments, comparing Saint-Simon with Fourier, deciphering hieroglyphics, splitting the stones that he found and studying geology, drawing a silkworm moth from memory, pointing out the incorrect French in the Dictionnaire de l’Académie, reading Puységur and Deleuze, affirming nothing, not even miracles, denying nothing, not even ghosts, dipping into old issues of Le Moniteur, pondering.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Le Moniteur was the main newspaper that covered the French Revolution and the proceedings of the National Assembly. Later, starting under Napoleon, it served as a daily record of the French government and was frequently used for government propaganda. The paper is brought up several times by a few different characters throughout Les Mis in a way that creates a clear delineation between old copies of Le Moniteur and the newer copies. The old ones are revolutionary. The new ones are ye olde Fox News. Marius radicalizes himself by reading, among other things, old copies of Le Moniteur at his university’s library. Meanwhile, Marius’s evil classist grandpa reads the new copies and Marius’s himbo cousin Théodule tries to impress their grandpa by saying “There should be no other newspaper than the Moniteur, and no other book than the Annuaire Militaire.”

The link I found above is to an archive of old issues of Le Moniteur. There are YEARS of them, with a lot of the speeches from the National Convention that iconic people like Robespierre, Saint-Just, or Danton gave. In fact, many of the transcriptions we have today came from the reporting in Le Moniteur. It’s a hugely significant newspaper for historians to understand that entire period of history, and it seems like Combeferre has tapped into that significance early.

Poetics by Aristotle (English)

Pratique du théâtre by Abbé d’Aubignac (English)

L’Art Poétique by Nicolas Boileau (French, English)

“Preface to Cromwell” by Victor Hugo (English)

“At the sight of a theatre poster displaying the title of a tragedy from the old, so-called classical, repertoire, Bahorel cried, ‘Down with the bourgeoisie's beloved tragedy!’ And Marius heard Combeferre reply, ‘You’re mistaken, Bahorel. The bourgeoisie likes tragedy, and on that score the bourgeoisie should be left alone. Tragedy in wigs has its own justification, and I’m not one of those who in the name of Aeschylus dispute its right to exist. There are in nature some crude designs; there are in creation some ready-made parodies: a beak that’s not a beak, wings that aren’t wings, flippers that aren’t flippers, feet that aren’t feet, a plaintive cry that makes you want to laugh - and there you have the duck. Now, since poultry and birds co-exist, I don’t see why classic tragedy shouldn’t play opposite antique tragedy.’” (Les Mis 3.4.3)

I had this foolish hope that I’d be able to narrow down a specific list of plays this quote could conceivably be referencing by using the genre and year it was taking place in, but no such luck. However, there’s still something for the booklist because Combeferre is talking with some specificity about classic tragedy and the restrictive rules of French Neoclassical theater. These rules were largely imposed by The Académie Française, which Combeferre has already criticized earlier with their dictionary, so I feel pretty confident that he’s read up on this subject too.

In short, in the 1600’s a group of French playwrights decided that the plays of classic antiquity were the best and all new plays should follow the Three Unities described in Aristotle’s Poetics. That is the Unity of Action (a play should follow one action with minimal subplots), Unity of Time (a play should take place over a period of no more than 24 hours), and Unity of Place (a play should exist in a single location). These playwrights later founded The Académie Française, and made it compulsory for all published works to follow an even longer list of rules. I don’t have time to explain all of those here but if you’re interested in more details, PBS’s Crash Course on French Neoclassicism (link) is an amazing source! As you can imagine, there was a lot of elitism and strict adherence to a specific classic repertoire in French theater leading up to the point in time when Combeferre is having this conversation. Napoleon also released several decrees controlling which theaters were allowed to operate and what kind of plays they could show (link), which the Romantics viewed as state censorship (link). While Bahorel is straightforwardly indignant at elitist classic tragedy, Combeferre loves to play the devil’s advocate. Here, he makes a backhanded defense of the genre, implying that it’s a ridiculous version of the thing it’s trying so hard to be. Scathing.

Other than the Poetics, I picked a couple more major sources that helped to shape the Neoclassical movement and that Combeferre might have presumably read. The Pratique du théâtre was a handbook for aspiring writers, advising them on how to adhere to the classic rules of theater, which apparently had a huge impact on the development of the Neoclassical style (link). Boileau was also very inspired by the classic rules of theater when he wrote L’Art Poétique. The Literariness Journal describes it as a “formal statement of the principles of French classicism, and perhaps the most direct expression of neoclassical ideals anywhere” (link) and during Bossuet’s introduction to Marius, he rattles off a quote from L’Art Poétique verbatim, so I think it’s safe to assume that Combeferre might be familiar too. And, finally, there’s the preface to Cromwell, aka part of the reason I think we’re even getting this scene at all. 

This conversation that Combeferre is having with Bahorel would have taken place in roughly 1828, which is right after Victor Hugo published his famous preface to his play Cromwell in 1827. I mean the preface was famous, not the play. The play was a total flop that had a SEVEN HOUR runtime, but the introduction became a manifesto of the Romantic movement and a seminal work on the topic. Then, just a few years later in 1830, the royal commissioner allowed Victor Hugo to stage his Romantic play Hernani at the Théâtre-Français, the most premier official venue in Paris. And this became the boiling point between the classicists and the Romantics. It completely popped off. And Victor Hugo loves to bring it up. So let’s be real, this whole thing is a wink wink nudge nudge reference to the face that Hernani is about to drop on the scene. It’s always about Hernani. Victor Hugo, you can’t fool me. Marius’s evil grandpa even insults Hernani so Hugo can make fun of people who think Hernani is bad, it’s a whole thing. So I truly believe he’s setting up a little self-reference to his cool moment he got to stick it to the classical theater community.

The French Charter of 1814 (English)

“In the last corner they were talking politics. The 1814 Charter was coming under criticism. Combeferre was weakly defending it, Courfeyrac was energetically attacking it.” (Les Mis 3.4.4) 

Combeferre loves to play the devil’s advocate. The 1814 Charter was the basis for the constitutional monarchy under King Louis XVIII and then, briefly, King Charles X. The July Revolution of 1830 would be a direct response to King Charles X using it as an excuse to suspend the liberty of the press and other tyrannical changes. But that won’t be for a couple more years. Combeferre doesn’t actually believe in this Charter, but this is a group of friends that likes arguing for fun, so he’s always being contrary.

“The Cat That Turned Into a Woman” Fables by Jean de La Fontaine (English)

“Combeferre philosophically watched Louis XVIII’s masterpiece burn, and confined himself to the remark, ‘The charter that turned to ashes.’” (Les Mis 3.4.4)

This is a reference to La Fontaine’s fable “The Cat That Turned Into a Woman”. A lot of characters throughout Les Mis reference La Fontaine’s Fables, which is no surprise because they’re very popular. The moral of this one is that something’s true nature will always reveal itself no matter how its physical shape changes. Since he makes the allusion after Courfeyrac throws the charter into the fire for effect, he’s basically saying that the nature of the charter is unchanged despite Courfeyrac’s dramatic gesture.

Le Misanthrope by Molière (English, French song, French play recording)

“It was Combeferre, and this is what he was singing:  ‘If Caesar had offered me glory and war, But on pain of forsaking my mother’s love, I’d have told great Caesar his prizes to keep, I love my mother more, tra-la, I love my mother more.’” (Les Mis 3.4.5)

During the Revolution, it became extremely popular to recast, or make new lyrics for familiar tunes and publish or perform these new lyrics publicly, often for political reasons. This continued to be prevalent throughout the early 1800’s, so it’s a pretty normal thing for Combeferre to be doing here (link). Specifically, Combeferre is recasting a song the character Alceste sings in Molière’s Le Misanthrope (Act I scene ii), a comedy of manners that satirizes the hypocrisies of the French aristocracy. Combeferre loves Molière! I’ve included a link to a choir performing the song so you can get a sense of the tune, as well as a link to that part of the play, though the melody is less distinct in that one. For further reference, I found a university project uploaded on youtube that performs a skit of the act with Combeferre’s little song, though they cut off before that actual line (link). It does a good job conveying the vibe of this scene in English, and if you watch it just keep in mind that this is apparently peak comedy for Combeferre. He saw this and he memorized that song to use as a sick burn later. Like, “HA, Marius, you’re just as cringe as Oronte performing his sonnet in Le Misanthrope Act I scene ii!” Devastating. And honestly? …Accurate. Poor Marius will never recover. 

I’ve seen people say that Molière is the French equivalent of Shakespeare, and I think that’s pretty accurate. His plays are funny, accessible reads that mocked the society of his time and tbh a lot of it holds up today. Combeferre makes another reference to Molière later and calls him a genius, so I think it’s safe to assume he’s a big fan. In fact, Combeferre really loves comedy in general and I think that’s really cute. Much like Molière, Combeferre has a dry, sarcastic sense of humor and he’s always saying short little cutting remarks to his friends. He’s often characterized by fans as the serious one with glasses when he canonically loves comedy more than anyone else in his friend group. The boys are all seeing Oppenheimer and he’s at Barbie having the time of his life.

The Athenian Constitution by Aristotle (English)

“Surrounded by students and artisans, Combeferre was talking about the dead, Jean Prouvaire, Bahorel, Mabeuf, and even Cabuc, and about Enjolras’s stern sorrow. He said, ‘Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Brutus, Chaerea, Stephanus, Cromwell, Charlotte Corday, Sand, have all had their moment of anguish after the event.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

The Tyrranicides are back! Enjolras was previously compared to Harmodius and Aristogeiton during his introduction to emphasize his disinterest in dating women, and now Combeferre is referencing them for a very different reason. Whereas, for Enjolras, the emphasis was on their revolutionary violence, Combeferre is more interested in what comes after that act of violence.

Looking over this whole list of names, when Combeferre mentions the “moment of anguish after the event” he’s not talking about literal regret or sadness so much as he’s talking about the unexpected consequences of these people’s revolutionary actions. Their own executions, political retaliation, that sort of thing. All the primary ancient sources on the Tyrranicides are really celebratory of them, so there isn’t a lot of focus on their deaths after the assassination, but Aristotle talks a little bit more than others about Aristogeiton’s torture and eventual death. He’s mostly talking about how cool Aristogeiton is the whole time, but still. Combeferre is using these examples to ponder over the potential future consequences of their own revolution now that some of his friends have already died. Unlike Enjolras, he’s more interested in humanizing these people in order to understand how his friends might be remembered as well.

Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare (English)

Le Mort de César by Voltaire (French)

The Bible, Gospel of Matthew (English) 

“Surrounded by students and artisans, Combeferre was talking about the dead, Jean Prouvaire, Bahorel, Mabeuf, and even Cabuc, and about Enjolras’s stern sorrow. He said, ‘Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Brutus, Chaerea, Stephanus, Cromwell, Charlotte Corday, Sand, have all had their moment of anguish after the event.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2) “[Combeferre:] ‘Cicero metes out justice by the intellect just as Brutus metes out justice by the sword. For my own part, I condemn this latter form of justice, the blade, but antiquity allowed it.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2) “[Combeferre:] ‘Caesar, violator of the Rubicon, bestowing as it they derived from him the dignities that derived from the people, not rising for the Senate, acted, as Eutropius says, like a king and almost like a tyrant, regia ac poene tyrannica. He was a great man. Too bad. Or so much the better - the lesson is all the more edifying. His twenty-three wounds affect me less than the spitting in Jesus Christ’s face. Caesar is stabbed by senators. Christ is treated with contempt by lackeys. In the greater outrage you sense the deity.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Okay, we’ve got two allusions here. First off, we’ve got another reference to Brutus. In contrast to Enjolras’s whole-hearted celebration of Brutus as a revolutionary figure, Combeferre is more hesitant to praise political violence. This contrast between the two of them comes up a lot, so it’s no surprise here. Combeferre is a gentle guy so he’d prefer progress to be peaceful, but he also won’t outright condemn people who kill tyrants. As mentioned in the Enjolras book list, Shakespeare had a huge impact on the Romantic movement and Victor Hugo, so his play Julius Caesar is almost definitely a source for this Brutus reference. Voltaire’s version, La Mort de César, was the first translation of the play into French and the version most French-speakers in the early 19th century would be familiar with, so I’ve included it as well even though Voltaire’s play cuts out almost all the content after the assassination. Since Combeferre makes an explicit reference to the “anguish after the event,” aka Brutus’ slow decline and the failure of the Roman Republic, that would probably be a reference to the original Shakespeare version.

And, secondly, we have Combeferre’s Hugo-assigned Biblical reference! This one’s pretty simple, since Combeferre references the Gospel of Matthew, aka the Jesus part of the Bible. As opposed to Enjolras’s righteous fury, Combeferre is all about being nice to people, specifically women and the underprivileged.

“Caligula” and “Claudius” Lives of the Twelve Caesars by Suetonius (English, English)

“Surrounded by students and artisans, Combeferre was talking about the dead, Jean Prouvaire, Bahorel, Mabeuf, and even Cabuc, and about Enjolras’s stern sorrow. He said, ‘Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Brutus, Chaerea, Stephanus, Cromwell, Charlotte Corday, Sand, have all had their moment of anguish after the event.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

We’ll talk a little bit more about Emperor Caligula during Grantaire’s booklist, but if you’re not familiar with the name, basically he’s an infamous corrupt ruler of the Roman Empire. He did really weird things like trying to make his favorite horse a Consul so he tends to come up when people talk about comically evil Roman Emperors. Most of the information we know about Caligula comes from an account by the historian Suetonius, which includes a record of his eventual assassination. One of these assassins, and reportedly the one who struck the first blow, was Cassius Chaerea. He was later executed by the following emperor, Claudius, who was afraid the conspirators had also intended to assassinate him. The assassination itself is covered in the chapter “Caligula” and the ensuing execution is covered in the chapter “Claudius” so I included both of those here. Like the rest of this list, it’s another example of a guy who died as a consequence of his radical political action.

Roman History by Cassius Dio (English)

“Surrounded by students and artisans, Combeferre was talking about the dead, Jean Prouvaire, Bahorel, Mabeuf, and even Cabuc, and about Enjolras’s stern sorrow. He said, ‘Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Brutus, Chaerea, Stephanus, Cromwell, Charlotte Corday, Sand, have all had their moment of anguish after the event.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Stephanus was one of three assassins who plotted to kill the Roman Emperor Domitian, as recorded in the Epitome of Book LXVII of Dio’s Roman History. I wasn’t familiar with Domitian before this booklist, but this chapter on him was such a wild ride. The chapter opens with the line “Domitian was not only bold and quick to anger but also treacherous and secretive” and continues to somehow be even less flattering than that line prepared me for. Most of the account is just a list of comically evil things he did during his reign and how “there was no human being for whom he felt any genuine affection.” He’s paranoid, insecure, bloodthirsty, a sex menace to both women and men, and he won’t stop executing people for predicting his death. According to Dio, Domitian had an astrologer tell him all the people whose horoscopes indicated they’d try to usurp him and he just started going down the list having them all murdered. There’s actually a lot of astrologers and psychic visions that come into play in this story, but the important part is the assassination itself. 

During the assassination, Stephanus led the charge and threw Domitian to the ground, but apparently everyone was so eager for this guy to die that some people who weren’t part of the plan also rushed into the room all at once to kill Domitian and they killed Stephanus too. So, Stephanus’s misstep was just being caught in the crossfires while killing Domitian, though his assassination was ultimately successful.

Cromwell by Victor Hugo (English)

“Surrounded by students and artisans, Combeferre was talking about the dead, Jean Prouvaire, Bahorel, Mabeuf, and even Cabuc, and about Enjolras’s stern sorrow. He said, ‘Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Brutus, Chaerea, Stephanus, Cromwell, Charlotte Corday, Sand, have all had their moment of anguish after the event.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

We know this guy. Victor Hugo wrote a whole play about the aftermath of Cromwell’s revolution and the moral ambiguity of attaining power after toppling those in power, etc. etc. I cited this play in Enjolras’s booklist with the stipulation that, though the timeline checks out, I’m not sure the play would actually be to Enjolras’s taste. I don’t feel that way about Combeferre, I do think he would’ve checked this play out. I already mentioned the preface of this play when Combeferre was going off about classical theater, and I think Combeferre is actually very tapped into the discourse surrounding the rules of classical theater so he wouldn’t have missed this one.

“Adresse aux Français amis des lois et de la paix” by Charlotte Corday (French)

“Surrounded by students and artisans, Combeferre was talking about the dead, Jean Prouvaire, Bahorel, Mabeuf, and even Cabuc, and about Enjolras’s stern sorrow. He said, ‘Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Brutus, Chaerea, Stephanus, Cromwell, Charlotte Corday, Sand, have all had their moment of anguish after the event.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Charlotte Corday famously murdered the revolutionary journalist Jean-Paul Marat by stabbing him while he was in the bath. There’s an iconic painting done by Jacques-Louis David in the same year depicting the death that you might recognize, fittingly called The Death of Marat (link). Corday was also a revolutionary, but she was a Girondin and she didn’t like the Jacobins, so she thought that Marat was leading the people of France down a bad road. Yet again, we see a cheeky little example of how Combeferre is balancing out Enjolras’s more Jacobin sympathies by mentioning Corday as a revolutionary hero instead of Marat. Anyway, Charlotte Corday didn’t even try to get away with the assassination. She waited on site to be arrested and had a manifesto letter that she sent to the papers to be published afterwards explaining why she did it. By all accounts she had no regrets about the murder, but she was convicted by the Revolutionary Tribunal and guillotined within a few days, so that’s probably the anguish after the event Combeferre is referencing here.

Since this is such a small reference, I opted to just include the letter that Charlotte Corday had published in the papers. She makes a few literary references herself during all of this. Her letter evokes Brutus from Voltaire’s La Mort de César and she reportedly carried a copy of Plutarch’s Parallel Lives with her to the murder, both works that get referenced elsewhere by Les Amis as well. That’s cool! It’s also very Combeferre to stan a woman revolutionary, even if she is a little bit more violent than he would like. Apparently, a lot of the contemporary coverage about her centered largely around gender and violence, so I guess we can imagine that Combeferre was reading up on his feminist news per usual (link). Love that for him.

“Karl-Ludwig Sand” Celebrated Crimes by Alexandre Dumas (English)

“Surrounded by students and artisans, Combeferre was talking about the dead, Jean Prouvaire, Bahorel, Mabeuf, and even Cabuc, and about Enjolras’s stern sorrow. He said, ‘Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Brutus, Chaerea, Stephanus, Cromwell, Charlotte Corday, Sand, have all had their moment of anguish after the event.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Ohohoho, okay we’ve got a bit of a weird one here re: the timeline. Technically, German student Karl Ludwig Sand assassinated the conservative dramatist August von Kutzebue (an alleged Russian spy and German traitor) in 1819, leading to Sand’s execution in 1820. It’s not an anachronistic reference for Combeferre to make in that regard. The event was a big deal in Germany and led to a lot of government restrictions on liberal and German nationalist groups. However, none of this was really common knowledge in Paris until Alexandre Dumas published a version of the story in his collection Celebrated Crimes, which wouldn’t be published until 1839. This is almost definitely the source that Combeferre is supposed to be referencing. A lot of the information Dumas published was based on interviews he personally did, so it wouldn’t have been widely available before his book came out. Plus Dumas and Hugo were friends, and Hugo wrote an unfinished play on the subject of another one of the crimes Dumas covered here. So I feel like all signs point to this being an anachronistic reference to Celebrated Crimes, but I’ll allow that technically Combeferre could’ve just been super ahead of his time and done his own research to make this reference. 

Anyway, the point here is in line with all the other references Combeferre makes on this list. He was a man who, according to Dumas, “kings regarded as an assassin, judges as a fanatic, and the youth of Germany as a hero.” It is a good note to leave off on for Combeferre to punctuate his theme of what makes a martyr and how people will interpret the legacy of political violence after it’s done.

Georgics by Virgil (English)

Georgics translated by J.F. Raux, 1802 (French)

Georgics translated by Antoine de Cournand, 1804 (French)

Georgics translated by Abbé Delille, 1770 (French)

Georgics translated by Jacques-Charles-Louis Clinchamps de Malfilâtre, 1810 (French)

“And a moment later, such are the circuitous routes of conversational exchange, with Jean Prouvaire’s verses providing the transition, Combeferre was comparing the translators of the Georgics, Raux with Cournand, Cournand with Delille, referring to the few passages translated by Malfilâtre, particularly the portents at Caesar’s death.” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

The Georgics are a four-book Latin poem by Virgil about agriculture, our relationship with the land, and hard work. There were several French translations released during the turn of the century, and apparently Combeferre has opinions about a lot of them. I went ahead and included all the versions he listed here in French. We don’t get to hear his specific opinions on these, but you can check them out if you’re interested. 

Though most of the poem is instructional about agriculture, we are told that Combeferre is focusing specifically on the passages about Caesar’s death (in Book 1, lines 461-497). This is mostly covering the civil war following Caesar’s death, framing it as a cosmic upset that must be navigated carefully or Rome will suffer. This ties into the “anguish after the event” that he was discussing earlier; he remains focused on the consequences of these large political changes that must be survived.

De Officiis by Cicero (English)

“‘Caesar,’ said Combeferre, ‘was justly brought down. Cicero was harshly critical of Caesar, and he was right to be. That harshness is no diatribe. When Zoilus insults Homer, when Maevius insults Virgil, when Visé insults Molière, when Pope insults Shakespeare, when Fréron insults Voltaire, it is an old law of envy and hatred that is being observed. Genius attracts insult, great men are always more or less subject to carping. But Zoilus and Cicero are two different matters. Cicero metes out justice by the intellect just as Brutus metes out justice by the sword. For my own part, I condemn this latter form of justice, the blade, but antiquity allowed it.” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Cicero has a lot of written work that was hugely influential in ancient Rome, and Cicero’s impact on the Enlightenment and later the French Revolution was so huge that I really don’t have time to cover all of it here. Francesca Romana Berno wrote a whole essay on the relationship between Cicero’s work and the French Revolution (link) that’s super interesting if you want to know more about the topic, but in short he was an idol to the French republicans. Cicero also appeared as a minor character in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, where the conspirators consider inviting him to the assassination and then say never mind because “he will never follow any thing that other men begin.” Hysterical.

However, in the realm of actual historical documents, I think De Officiis is a good contender for the source of Combeferre’s little anecdote about Cicero criticizing Caesar here. It was one of his last publications, written at the end of his life during the fall of the Roman Republic, and considered one of his masterpieces. De Officiis literally means something like “On Duties” or “On Moral Obligations” and it was basically a practical guide to the moral duties of citizens. He criticized Caesar’s tyranny in large part because of the way that a lack of political rights negatively affects people’s moral virtues. All of this would be very topical to France at the turn of the century. Cicero also wrote letters that were critical of Caesar (I’m a big fan of the one where Caesar wishes he’d been invited to the Ides of March, that one’s really funny), but ultimately I think this treatise is more substantial and historically significant. Fun fact, it was the second book ever printed on a printing press!

Anyway, this whole anecdote is very utopian socialist of Combeferre, to say that publishing a particularly cutting critique of Caesar is as valid an execution as stabbing him to death and is an equally valid path to overthrowing a tyrant. I talked a little bit about Combeferre’s take on Caesar and Brutus earlier, but basically of course Combeferre idolizes this man who could rally an educated population with words instead of violence. This is Combeferre’s entire thing. However, even Cicero said “the ides of march was a fine deed, but half done” and Combeferre does admit that, despite his personal preferences, there was nothing unjust about killing Caesar. Just as we’re told that Enjolras has become a gentler version of himself by the time he gets to the barricade due to Combeferre’s influence, Combeferre is also at the barricade and ready to fight due to Enjolras’s influence. They’re a good balance to each other.

An Essay on Criticism by Alexander Pope (English)

The Iliad by Homer (English)

“‘Caesar,’ said Combeferre, ‘was justly brought down. Cicero was harshly critical of Caesar, and he was right to be. That harshness is no diatribe. When Zoilus insults Homer, when Maevius insults Virgil, when Visé insults Molière, when Pope insults Shakespeare, when Fréron insults Voltaire, it is an old law of envy and hatred that is being observed. Genius attracts insult, great men are always more or less subject to carping.” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Here, Combeferre rattles off a long list with examples of people who made a name for themselves by criticizing someone who was more talented than them out of envy. So we can assume that Combeferre has read both the criticism he’s referencing, and the works they’re criticizing. Let’s break those down!

First up we’ve got Zoilus insulting Homer. Zoilus was a scholar in the fourth century BC whose entire legacy is just how much he hated Homer. None of his works, including Against the Poetry of Homer, survived but we still know about this guy because of how much drama he was embroiled in. The ancient architect Vitruvius (of the Vitruvian Man fame) writes about him in On Architecture, mentioning a completely unverifiable account of Zoilus being such an insufferable Homer-anti that the king, a Homer stan, had him crucified or stoned to death by an angry mob (link). He even called him Homeromastix, or literally “Homer hater.” Wow. People truly never change, they are always getting pissed off about people’s bad takes and then writing fictionalized accounts of them publicly dying. Or maybe a mob really did kill Zoilus for being so insufferable, who can say. Anyway, a lot of authors have gone on to mention Zoilus as a catch-all term for a bitter and envious critic. So many that it has an entry in Merriam-Webster (link). Honestly I’ve gotta respect the legacy this man managed to garner. Miguel de Cervantes brought hating on Zoilus back into vogue in the Middle Ages when he called Zoilus a slanderer in his preface to Don Quixote. And then by the 18th century another hater from later in Combeferre’s list, Alexander Pope, ironically calls out Zoilus in his An Essay on Criticism: “Nay, should great Homer lift his awful head, Zoilus again would start up from the dead. Envy will Merit as its shade pursue, But like a shadow proves the substance true…” Victor Hugo has referenced both of these, but since Combeferre himself mentions Pope later in the same sentence and it’s more contemporary, I opted to go with that one as Combeferre’s source for this insult. But there’s a strong argument to be made for just the preface to Don Quixote as well. 

Oh yeah, and as for Homer, I could’ve gone with The Iliad or The Odyssey because apparently Zoilus hated them both, but I opted for The Iliad because the other boys mention it so much and I wanted Combeferre to match his friends.

Eclogue 3 by Virgil (English)

Epode 10 by Horace (English)

“‘Caesar,’ said Combeferre, ‘was justly brought down. Cicero was harshly critical of Caesar, and he was right to be. That harshness is no diatribe. When Zoilus insults Homer, when Maevius insults Virgil, when Visé insults Molière, when Pope insults Shakespeare, when Fréron insults Voltaire, it is an old law of envy and hatred that is being observed. Genius attracts insult, great men are always more or less subject to carping.” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Not much is known about Maevius since none of his works (if he even had them) or biographical information survived. The two main sources proving this guy even existed are Virgil’s Eclogue 3, which mockingly mentions a poet named Maevius, and Horace’s Epode 10, which is just a long prayer to manifest “that stinker Mevius” dying horribly at sea. These two are commonly thought to be the same guy, remembered just for being really hated by guys who are more talented than him, presumably.

Zélinde, Comédie, Ou La Véritable Critique de l'Escole Des Femmes Et La Critique de la Critique by Jean Donneau de Visé (French)

L'école des Femmes (School for Wives) by Molière (English)

“‘Caesar,’ said Combeferre, ‘was justly brought down. Cicero was harshly critical of Caesar, and he was right to be. That harshness is no diatribe. When Zoilus insults Homer, when Maevius insults Virgil, when Visé insults Molière, when Pope insults Shakespeare, when Fréron insults Voltaire, it is an old law of envy and hatred that is being observed. Genius attracts insult, great men are always more or less subject to carping.” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Discourse over the rules of classic theater is back! Okay, Molière has appeared on Combeferre’s booklist before with Le Misanthrope, which Combeferre loves. To recap: He’s one of the great classic French playwrights, and the one who played the most loose with the rules of French classical theater. School for Wives was one of Molière’s early plays, and it was both extremely popular and controversial at the time. It’s a comedy that follows a creepy old man who is so insecure about the idea of being cheated on that he tries to marry his young ward who he’s raised to be naive to men and relationships. But it doesn’t work. She falls in love with someone else and escapes him. Critics of School for Wives thought it violated multiple of the rules of classic theater and they were incensed. Morality was a big one, accusations of obscenity were lobbied at the play a lot, but there was also a surprising amount of controversy surrounding verisimilitude, aka nitpicking scenes that were implausible (link). In retaliation, Molière wrote a one-act play response to the criticisms titled La critique de l’École des femmes and had it performed at the end of his play. It’s very meta. Basically the characters pretend they’ve just seen the play and discuss their opinions on it so Molière can characterize his detractors as losers and his supporters as cool, even though they all think they’ve won the argument by the end of the play. As you can probably predict, this pissed off a lot of people. The Duke of La Feuillade even assaulted Molière over it and many more people published responses making fun of the play (link). Enter Jean Donneau de Visé.

Visé published Zélinde, and based on the subtitle alone you can probably guess that it’s a criticism of School for Wives and the follow-up La critique de l’École des femmes (that sassy one-act play). Although apparently later Visé and Molière buried the hatchet and ended up working together on several shows. Aw, a happy ending. Anyway, Zélinde didn’t really survive the test of time, but School of Wives absolutely did. There have been so many English retellings of this play that I was familiar with the name before I even did the research for this booklist. And omg look Phillipa Soo was Agnès in this 2014 version of the play in New Jersey a year before Hamilton (link), that’s fun.

The Works of Shakespear by Alexander Pope (1725) (English)

“‘Caesar,’ said Combeferre, ‘was justly brought down. Cicero was harshly critical of Caesar, and he was right to be. That harshness is no diatribe. When Zoilus insults Homer, when Maevius insults Virgil, when Visé insults Molière, when Pope insults Shakespeare, when Fréron insults Voltaire, it is an old law of envy and hatred that is being observed. Genius attracts insult, great men are always more or less subject to carping.” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Pope both loved and insulted Shakespeare throughout his career. He published a translation of the works of Shakespeare in 1725, but he edited the plays to make them “more appealing” to a contemporary reader. He explained this decision and some of his changes in the preface of the first edition (link) but the reception of this adaptation was contentious. One guy in particular, Lewis Theobold, really came for Pope and published a scathing pamphlet called Shakespeare Restored that catalogued all of the changes and perceived errors in Pope’s translation (link). You may hear “pamphlet” and think this is a short criticism, but it’s like 200 pages. Savage. It pissed off Pope so much he went on to make Theobald a major character in his The Dunciad, a poem about mediocre people who bring stupidity and tastelessness to Britain. He’s so messy!

L’Année Littéraire by Elie Fréron

Candide by Voltaire (English)

L’Ecossaise (The Scotch Woman) by Voltaire (French, English)

Le Pauvre Diable (The Poor Devils) by Voltaire (French)

“‘Caesar,’ said Combeferre, ‘was justly brought down. Cicero was harshly critical of Caesar, and he was right to be. That harshness is no diatribe. When Zoilus insults Homer, when Maevius insults Virgil, when Visé insults Molière, when Pope insults Shakespeare, when Fréron insults Voltaire, it is an old law of envy and hatred that is being observed. Genius attracts insult, great men are always more or less subject to carping.” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

Elie-Catherine Fréron used his popular review journal, L’Annee Litteraire, to publish anti-Enlightenment criticism, including many, many shots at Voltaire. Hating Voltaire has basically become Fréron’s entire legacy. He simply can’t shut up about the guy. For his part, Voltaire hated Fréron right back and wrote so much nasty stuff about him. Voltaire is notoriously a messy bitch, so there’s a lot of content that came out of this feud. Just to narrow it down, I opted to only include his actual book-length works that made fun of Fréron for the booklist, but Voltaire also published a bunch of mean poems too. I kept running into this one epigram, roughly translated as: “The other day, beside the lake / Jean Fréron got bit by a snake. / What do you think happened then? / It was the snake that met its end!” (link, link). Sometimes I see things from historical people and I just know they would’ve had the craziest twitter. Alas. Anyway, Fréron cameos in Voltaire’s most famous novel Candide. The theater critic in Chapter 22 (link) is referred to as a Fréron: “"He is a bad character," answered the Abbé, "who gains his livelihood by saying evil of all plays and of all books. He hates whatever succeeds, as the eunuchs hate those who enjoy; he is one of the serpents of literature who nourish themselves on dirt and spite; he is a folliculaire." / "What is a folliculaire?" said Candide. / "It is," said the Abbé, "a pamphleteer—a Fréron."” Brutal.

After this, Fréron wrote mean things about Candide (go figure), so Voltaire made him a character in his comedy play L’Ecossaise (French, English) or “The Scotch Woman,” a satire of Scottish and English aristocracy. Fréron (oh I’m sorry, Frélon, an obviously different man) is a rascally writer who intervenes and whose name has been changed to literally mean “wasp.” Get it? Because he buzzes around being annoying? In the opening of the play, a character straight up asks him if he deliberately tries to be so universally hated because Voltaire has no chill. He also appears in Le Pauvre Diable (French) or “The Poor Devils,” a satire about a struggling writer with an equally unflattering portrayal. There’s so much more, but I have to stop. These two guys just loathed each other.

Hugo himself described Voltaire as he “who must always be fought against and fought for” in his William Shakespeare, because Voltaire is such a hater and constantly picking fights with other writers. The literary infighting is a never-ending circle. I have to stop making this same joke over and over again, but RIP Combeferre, you would’ve loved booktok drama.

Summary of Roman History by Eutropius (English)

“[Combeferre:] ‘Caesar, violator of the Rubicon, bestowing as it they derived from him the dignities that derived from the people, not rising for the Senate, acted, as Eutropius says, like a king and almost like a tyrant, regia ac poene tyrannica. He was a great man. Too bad. Or so much the better - the lesson is all the more edifying.’” (Les Mis 5.1.2)

And, finally, we have Combeferre’s last allusion in the novel. This line he quotes is from the end of book 6 of Eutropius’s Brevarium Historiae Romanae, which covers the death of Caesar. The chapter is a condensed version of several books in Livy’s super long History of Rome and is, as the title suggests, a brief summary of the events covered. I’m not surprised that Combeferre is quoting the version that is more accessible. He’s true to his mission for equitable access to education until the very end.

As for the quote itself, the Latin is just a translation of the phrase Combeferre says immediately before comparing kings and tyrants. The original quote was specifically calling out Caesar, who Combeferre has mentioned before, and the conclusion Combeferre is making is that no matter if Caesar is a “good man,” his actions as a king are akin to a tyrant. Regency is inherently tyrannical. There are no good kings. Victor Hugo also talks at length in Les Mis about how Louis-Phillipe was a “good man,” and the parallel is hard to miss. As Combeferre says here, even if a “good man” is a king, it is still tyranny and the people should still oppose it. Much of what Combeferre talks about on the barricade deals with the legacy of revolutionary actions, and he continues to dwell on that here. Combeferre is aware of their doom, but he’s still looking forward and contemplating what truths about their current situation the people will learn from their sacrifice. It’s so fitting that the last thing Combeferre quotes is, he hopes, a lesson.

Confessions by Jean-Jacques Rousseau (English)

“Courfeyrac took his arm. ‘Take note. This is Rue Platreire, now called Rue Jean-Jacques-Rousseau, on account of an unusual couple that lived here sixty years ago. They were Jean-Jacques and Therese. From time to time there were little ones born here. Therese brought them into the world, Jean-Jacques brought them to the foundling hospital.’” (Les Mis 3.4.3)

Courfeyrac is one of the only members of Les Amis that doesn’t get a signature literary reference during his introduction. The first allusion he makes is actually a few scenes later, when he’s out walking with Marius and Enjolras and he decides to share some juicy gossip about Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Enjolras’s bias) with Marius, which pisses off Enjolras. It’s extremely messy and extremely funny. I love this scene.

The record of Jean-Jacques Rousseau abandoning all five of his children actually comes from Rousseau’s own autobiography. Honestly, the whole autobiography reads a lot like a Youtube apology video, idk how else to describe it. I really love this essay (link) by Paul De Man called “Excuses” that utterly rips into one particular passage in this autobiography as an example of how the whole thing is just full of performative guilt. For the record, it’s not even calling out the part about Rousseau abandoning his children, it’s laying into a totally different passage where Rousseau is confessing to a totally different problematic thing he did as a child. It’s truly a Youtube apology video through and through, and Enjolras is absolutely in the comments defending him.

Fun fact, the book is also the real origin of the phrase “let them eat cake.” Rousseau attributed the quote to some unspecified French princess but then, because Marie Antoinette was growing more and more unpopular at the time the book was published, it erroneously got credited to her. And now that’s how we all remember it. Fascinating! All this to say, this is a great first example of the kind of trendy stuff and messy gossip that Courfeyrac loves. He’s a social guy with a good sense of drama.

The French Charter of 1814 (English)

“The 1814 Charter was coming under criticism. Combeferre was weakly defending it, Courfeyrac was energetically attacking it. On the table was an offending copy of the famous Touqet Charter. Courfeyrac had seized it and was waving it, accompanying his arguments with the rustling of this sheet of paper.” (Les Mis 3.4.4)“‘No granting to the people by royal favour. In all such grants there is an Article 14. Alongside the hand that gives is the claw that takes back.’” (Les Mis 3.4.4)

The 1814 Charter was the basis for constitutional monarchy in France. Courfeyrac hates this thing, but he’s clearly read it so it makes the list! There’s not too much to say about it. Article 14 is specifically the part that gave the king executive power, and Courfeyrac calls it out in particular as evidence that the 1814 Charter is a bad deal for the people of France. This is incredibly prescient, because just a couple years later King Charles X would use Article 14 as his justification for suspending the liberty of the press and several other ordinances that resulted in the July Revolution of 1830. Then, at the end of his scathing review, Courfeyrac dramatically throws a copy into the fire for the vibes and everyone claps watches it burn.

The Age of Louis XIV by Voltaire (English)

“‘A king is a parasite. Kings don’t come free. Listen to this: the cost of kings. When Francois I died, France’s national debt was thirty thousand francs a year. By the time Louis XIV died, it was two thousand six hundred million at twenty-eight francs to the marc, which was equivalent in 1760, by Desmaret’s reckoning, to four thousand five hundred million, which today would be twelve thousand million.’” (Les Mis 3.4.4)

During his rant about the French Charter of 1814, Courfeyrac also makes some very specific claims about the national debt accrued by Louis XIV during his reign and the building of Versailles. This is apparently based on the figures found in Voltaire’s biography of Louis XIV, chapter 30. I love that Courfeyrac read this entire novel just to have receipts on Louis XIV, literally.

There’s actually an interesting podcast I listened to recently that also talks about Versailles and the economic impact of Louis XIV’s reign (Behind the Bastards, link, link). For the record, I fully believe that Courfeyrac would love podcasts. In my modern au, Courfeyrac would absolutely be the type of friend who’s always recommending you some new political podcast he’s found.

The French Civil Code of 1804 (English)

Penal Code of 1810 (English)

“While all this was going on [Marius] qualified as a lawyer. He was supposedly living in Courfeyrac’s room, which was respectable and where a certain number of law books, propped up and augmented by a few odd volumes of novels, represented the library required by the regulations.” (Les Mis 3.5.1)

Courfeyrac's bookshelf! So first things first, Victor Hugo is pissing me off telling me that Courfeyrac has a bookshelf but not telling me which “odd volumes of novels” are on it. He can tell me every excruciating detail about the Parisian sewer system but he can’t tell me what Courfeyrac’s favorite books are?? Sigh, whatever, I’ll just imagine the books on his shelf are the rest of the books on this booklist, I guess. Anyway, let’s talk about those law books.

We’re not told a lot of specifics about the “certain number of law books” on Courfeyrac’s shelf, but we can make a few educated guesses: 1, There are plural books. 2, There are not many of them. The books are propped up so they don't fill a shelf. 3, The books fulfilled the requirements to practice as a lawyer in Paris around the year 1831. And 4, Marius is not actually using these books to practice law. The books are just there to look aesthetically like a lawyer might read them while Marius is actually across town working his translation job that Courfeyrac also got him. Courfeyrac is such a good friend. So basically, for the several books in Courfeyrac’s fake law library, I’m looking for the absolute bare minimum: The Napoleonic Codes.

A bit of backstory. Before the French Revolution, the justice system in France was… bad. The law wasn’t consistent or properly written down and the legal process could be pretty inhumane. The revolutionary government knew it desperately needed an overhaul so in 1791 they created France’s very first written criminal code (link). Under the new code, you could only be accused of a written law, your trial had to be timely, you had the right to a lawyer, and several things that were previously considered crimes were no longer criminal, like homosexuality. Fun fact, France was actually the first European country to decriminalize homosexuality, due in large part to the changes pushed through by one cool guy: Louis-Michel le Peletier. He also advocated for women’s education and was one of the deciding votes to kill King Louis XVI, so of course he’s a villain you have to kill in Assassin’s Creed Unity. Don’t even get me started on that game smh, it consistently has the worst takes. Justice for the girls, the gays, and Louis-Michel.

Anyway, when Napoleon came back to power a few years after the Revolution, he commissioned a civil code, which would become the first of five codes known as the Napoleonic Codes: the Civil Code of 1804, the Code of Civil Procedure of 1806, the Commercial Code of 1807, the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1808, and the Penal Code of 1810. I’m not a law historian, but you can check out this webinar from the Library of Congress if you want more context (link).

Marius would have been going to law school during this era when the Napoleonic Codes were still relatively new and the curriculum apparently was mostly focused on covering the texts of the codes using rote memorization. This so-called Napoleonic method of teaching law, having students memorize the relevant codes instead of taking legal history or philosophy, would be criticized as early as 1819 but not changed until 1838 (link). And we even know one of his teachers, Hyacinthe Blondeau, aka the professor who almost marks Marius absent, was a real law professor at the Faculté de droit de Paris, teaching Roman Law. So, between the Napoleonic education with no focus on social context and Courfeyrac’s shelf including the bare minimum books required to constitute a library… I feel like I have a solid argument for just including the codes here and moving on with my life. The Civil Code is the biggest and most important text, so it definitely deserves a place on Courfeyrac’s shelf. And I threw in the Penal Code as well because whenever you’re looking for primary sources on how people felt about the Penal Code at the time, you almost invariably end up getting linked to Les Mis (see: the story of Jean Valjean’s entire life). The other codes are more specific, so even though they might be on the shelf I’m going to pull a Marius here and include only the absolute minimum.

So, uh, in conclusion… did Courfeyrac even read these books?? Who knows. But he does own them and they sit on a bookshelf in his apartment, so that’s good enough for me.

…I couldn’t find Audry de Puyraveau’s speech

“Over dessert [Marius] said to Courfeyrac. ‘Have you read the paper? What a fine speech Audry de Puyraveau gave!’” (Les Mis 3.6.6)

This is a reference that Marius makes to Courfeyrac after he makes eye contact with Cossette in the garden and starts a two-day manic episode where he talks really fast, spends a bunch of money, eats a surprising amount of food, and impulsively hugs a lot of people. Okay let’s be real, there’s no way that Victor Hugo, living in exile from France and with no internet, was accurately referencing one specific newspaper article about a speech that Audry de Puyraveau gave nearly 30 years prior in early July of 1831. I knew there was no way I’d ever find this specific speech in some particular paper... But I searched anyway. I really wanted to see if Marius was embarrassing himself with a bad take again, but I guess I’ll never know because I couldn’t find the speech. I honestly should have just cut this one from Courfeyrac’s list altogether since I couldn’t find it, it’s not really a book, and there’s no real proof Courfeyrac even read it — I’m just assuming he wouldn’t leave his bro hanging since Marius brought it up. But I had spent too much time researching and the sunk cost kicked in, so here you go.

For context, Audry de Puyraveau was a major figure in the July Revolution of 1830 and one of the people who put Louis-Phillipe on the throne as part of the Paris Municipal Commission (which he served on as a Constitutional Republican). Puyraveau was re-elected to a public office a year later, in July of 1831, which is exactly the right time frame for this Les Mis quote so I thought for sure I’d be able to find some kind of political speech relating to the elections… but no dice. I actually couldn’t find a transcript of any speech from this man’s entire life anywhere. I found a fair number of articles (and some art) about him and his role in the July Revolution, which were actually really funny because everyone on the left thinks he’s way too conservative for pussying out of the July Revolution by putting a king in charge again. And everyone on the right thinks he’s way too liberal for helping to instigate the July Revolution and suggesting that there should be any sort of elective government. So you get these wildly conflicting accounts of this guy who’s honestly just center left. Kind of a perfect guy for Marius to look up to. Like if a modern Marius was super obsessed with Joe Biden.

The best lead I found was in this book from 1844, The History of Ten Years 1830-1840, that says, on page 514, that Puyraveau is one of the people who gave a speech in opposition to hereditary peerage in 1831 (link). But the speech is from September, so it can’t be the one Marius is talking about. I also found another book from 1850, The History of Secret Societies and of the Republican Party of France From 1830 to 1848, that calls the man thoroughly mediocre, which I think is hysterical considering how excited Marius is about him (link).

Anyway, in conclusion, I do not know if this speech was as fine as Marius said or if Courfeyrac liked it. Oh well.

L’Auberge des Adrets by Benjamin Antier, Saint-Amand and Paulyanthe (English, French)

“They went to Porte-St-Martin to see Frédérick in L’Auberge des Adrets. Marius enjoyed himself enormously.” (Les Mis 3.6.6)

Frédérick Lemaître was an actor who made a name for himself while appearing in several plays in the early 1800’s (including Victor Hugo’s Ruy Blas in 1838). The play in question here, L’Auberge des Adrets, was one of his first break-out roles as the character Robert Macaire. As the story goes, apparently the play was supposed to be a serious melodrama, but Frédérick and his other leading co-star decided to play their characters as comic figures instead. This idea of making a criminal into a silly character was pretty scandalous at the time and ended up being massively popular. It inspired a bunch of spin-offs and an eventual sequel, but that all came later. 

Anyway, I have no idea what Courfeyrac thought of this play, Victor Hugo doesn’t tell us. He invited Marius to brunch after this and seemed amused, so signs point to him having at least a decent time. It’s also exactly the kind of new, daring, sort of scandalous thing that would usually appeal to Courfeyrac.

Héraclius by Pierre Corneille (English, French)

“Anyone entering the restaurant room would read the following line chalked on the door by Courfeyrac: ‘Enjoy if you can and eat if you dare.’” (Les Mis 4.12.1)

This quote that Courfeyrac has written on the door of the Corinthe is an allusion to Corneille’s historical tragedy Héraclius (act 4, sc iv). Corneille is one of the big three classic French dramatists, and we are told Jean Prouvaire also loves him. This play is considered one of Corneille’s masterpieces, though it’s not one of his most well-known or most-performed plays. Reportedly, it’s known as one of his most complex works (link), and deals largely with themes of identity and uncertainty. Basically, before the events of the play, the royal governess Léontine switched the emperor’s son Heraclius with Phocas’s son Martian, and has kept the secret of their true identities such a secret throughout the play that even they doubt who they really are. In act 4, she dares Phocas to pick which one of the two he thinks is his son by saying “Devine, si tu peux, et choisis, si tu l'oses.” or, in English: “Guess if you can, and choose if you dare.”So, basically, Courfeyrac is riffing off of this quote to jokingly emphasize the weighty choice you must make to dare eating at this bar. I think you can get the joke pretty readily without knowing the plot of Héraclius, but it does add a certain amount of wit and gravitas to the silly graffiti. Characteristically, it’s also a play and not a book. Courfeyrac likes things that are cerebral and relatively niche, but he still prefers going to the theater to reading!

Roman History by Cassius Dio (link)

“Enjolras was a charming young man, who was capable of being terrible. He was angelically handsome. He was a savage Antinous.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

This comparison to Antinous is one of the very first things we learn about Enjolras and it immediately implies several key things about him: Enjolras is young, beautiful, and the impact of his untimely death will eclipse all other details about his life. So, even before he appears on the page, we are being told that Enjolras is doomed to die (and, of course, he’s super hot). 

In short, Antinous was the Ancient Greek Emperor Hadrian’s lover who died pretty young and then was deified post-mortem. There’s not really that much contemporary writing about Antinous. I’ve chosen one of the longest descriptions of him written within a few decades of his death and it’s still only a single page. He’s way more famous for his looks because there were so many statues made of him. (Here’s one that was in the Louvre at the time!) Just statistically, if there’s talk about a Greek marble statue of a beautiful man, especially one with downcast eyes, there’s a decent chance it’s a reference to Antinous. And, not coincidentally, Enjolras is continuously compared to a Greek statue or marble throughout the book. It’s also worth noting that Antinous was a bit of a gay icon in the 19th century because of his relationship with Emperor Hadrian, see "The Most Famous Fairy in History" by Sarah Waters (link) for more info. And very soon after Victor Hugo makes this comparison, we’ll learn that Enjolras, like Antinous, is also uninterested in women and the subject of the cult-like fascination of another man. Hmmm. But more on that later.

On the Principles of Political Morality by Maximilien Robespierre (English)

Discours sur l’organisation des Gardes nationales by Maximilien Robespierre (French)

Virtue and Terror speeches by Maximilien Robespierre, translated by Slavoj Žižek (English, English)

“Enjolras gave expression to its [the Revolution’s] divine right and Combeferre its natural right. The former aligned himself with Robespierre, the latter stood close to Condorcet.” (Les Mis 3.4.1) “[Graintaire, trying to impress Enjolras:] ‘I’ll talk to them about Robespierre, of course! And about Danton. About principles.’" (Les Mis 4.1.6) “[Grantaire] had gone home to put on a Robespierre-style waistcoat. ‘Red,’ he said as he came in, gazing intently at Enjolras.” (Les Mis 4.1.6) “[Enjolras:] ‘This sovereignty of the self over the self is called Liberty. (...) This uniformity of the concession each individual makes to all is called Equality. (...) This protection of all over each individual is called Fraternity.’” (Les Mis 5.1.5) “As for the direct means to achieve it [progress], given a violent situation, [Enjolras] chose violence. In that, he never varied. And he was still of that epic and fearsome school encapsulated in this word: ‘ninety-three’.” (Les Mis 5.1.5)

Another one of the first things we learn about Enjolras, still before we’ve actually met the guy, is that he really, really likes Robespierre. Enjolras is frequently compared by Hugo and other characters to Robespierre. Enjolras also quotes Robespierre and describes himself as part of Robespierre’s school of thought. Grantaire tries to impress Enjolras twice by referencing Robespierre to him - he even runs home to dress up in his Robespierre-style waistcoat to look cool in front of Enjolras. (We’ll circle back to that.) Basically, Enjolras idolizes Robespierre and Victor Hugo wants to make absolutely sure you know it. 

This comparison gives us an early heads up about Enjolras’s character that we’ll see as time goes on. Both Enjolras and Robespierre have politics that are really radical and uncompromising. Robespierre is referenced by many other characters as being emblematic of The Reign of Terror and extreme devotion to the Republic, which is totally Enjolras’s vibe too. He is characterized by a willingness to do acts of violence out of love for his country and, much like Robespierre, he’s going to die for it.

Robespierre gave and wrote hundreds of speeches, many of which he transcribed and sent out to be published in the papers or distributed as pamphlets, so there’s a lot to choose from. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a proper oeuvre published until after Enjolras died and we’re not given too many specific references in Les Mis to help us narrow down which particular speeches Enjolras loved the most. In the end, I did my best and just picked two speeches that got sort of indirectly referenced during the barricade segment of the book. First, we’ve got On the Principles of Public Morality, Robespierre’s 1794 speech in defense of the Reign of Terror. We’re told pretty explicitly that Enjolras is “of that epic and fearsome school encapsulated in this word: ‘ninety-three’” (aka The Terror) and doesn’t hesitate to use violence as an answer to problems, so I think Robespierre’s speech about terror as a tool for revolutionary politics is pretty apt. This speech was officially published by the National Convention and distributed to societies to be read aloud, so it was a pretty big deal and wouldn’t be that hard to find. Second, there’s a reference that Enjolras makes to a phrase that was originally popularized by Robespierre. “Liberté, égalité, fraternité” is the official motto of France now, but it wasn’t technically adopted until after the revolution of 1848. In the years preceding, there were many different versions of the phrase floating around, most including liberty and equality but not necessarily fraternity. This final version, and the version that Enjolras quotes on the barricade in 1832, was supposedly popularized by our good friend Robespierre in a 1790 speech to the Convention, Discours sur l’organisation des Gardes nationales, though he admittedly wasn’t the first one to say it. Robespierre later had the phrase “Liberté, Equality, Fraternité ou la mort” inscribed on public buildings in the city during the Reign of Terror, but I guess the “or death” part didn’t really catch on. I’m actually surprised Enjolras doesn’t quote that version, but he shows some uncharacteristic restraint here re:bloodthirstiness. Good for him.

If you’re looking for a good English translation of more Robespierre speeches, I’d recommend checking out Slavoj Žižek’s collection in translation Virtue and Terror because it was really good and appropriately pro-Robespierre for Enjolras.

The French Constitution of 1793 (English)

Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen of 1793 (English)

Fragments sur les institutions républicaines (Republican Institutes) excerpts by Louis Antoine de Saint-Just (English)

Convention debate over the fate of Louis XVI in 1792 speeches by Louis Antoine de Saint-Just (English, English)

“in the Convention, he would have been Saint-Just.” (Les Mis 3.4.1) “Enjolras had within him the plenitude of the revolution. He was incomplete, however, in so far as the absolute can be. He was too much like Saint-Just, and not enough like Anacharsis Cloots.” (Les Mis 5.1.5)

Similar to Robespierre, comparing Enjolras to Saint-Just serves to emphasize the violent righteousness of Enjolras’s revolutionary ideals and his admiration of the politics behind The Terror. Louis Antoine de Saint-Just, known as the “Archangel of Terror,” was a radical leftist and one of Robespierre’s close friends. Known for being bold, ruthless, and young - he died in his 20’s for his uncompromising political beliefs, much like a certain someone else we know. Saint-Just has so many funny quotes about being cursed by his own youth during such a pivotal moment in French history, what a mood. He also wrote a lot before he got involved with the Revolution, including some poetry he published when he was 20 that got attention for its pornographic passages. The title of this 8,000 line poem is Organt and it’s so extremely self-indulgent and there’s a bunch of characters who are political allegories but also a bunch that are just his friends inserted into the plot. (RIP Saint-Just, you would have loved ao3.) His preface to it was literally “I'm twenty; I've done badly; I could do better.” Anyway, this isn’t relevant to Enjolras, but it’s honestly iconic so I wanted to mention it.

Both references to Saint-Just point to his time in the French National Convention, so I wanted to find some of his work from that era for the booklist. He gave so, so many speeches in the Convention and was one of the primary forces behind writing the French Constitution of 1793 and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen of 1793, so I’ve included a sample of those here! Unfortunately, no proper collections of Saint-Just’s speeches would be published until after the 1830’s, so most of what would have been available to Enjolras would be the transcripts of his speeches published in old editions of Le Moniteur or old pamphlets. Since that kind of ephemera is a little harder to track down, I did my best to just include some of the highlights here. I included some translated excerpts from his first big speech in the National Convention in 1792, where he encouraged the Convention to condemn Louis XVI. He argued that there’s no such thing as an innocent  monarch because their very existence compromises the rights of the people and compared the king to Julius Caesar from Voltaire’s version of that play. There’s another speech by Saint-Just that people make reference to a lot where he purportedly says that “the vessel of the Revolution can arrive in port only on a sea reddened with torrents of blood” but I’m going to be real I was having a really hard time hunting that speech down and the source that everyone keeps pointing to (Stanley Loomis) is highly sus to me because the author really, really hates Saint-Just and is obviously keen to paint him in the worst light possible. So if anyone has the origin of that quote, please let me know. 

And, like many other references, this one is working double-time because it’s also telling us (once again) that Enjolras is really hot in a really feminine way, just like Saint-Just. So, people who actually knew Saint-Just mostly described him as a young, moderately attractive guy with good fashion sense, but over time accounts of his effeminate, ethereal beauty started to gain popularity, which is mostly how he’s remembered now. Bernard Vinot’s biography has some pretty good stuff on this shift (French link) and there’s a really good tumblr post by @obscurehistoricalinterests that translates some excerpts on the subject (link). Several pretty big historians (including Victor Hugo’s friends) really go all out describing Saint-Just in very similar ways to how Victor Hugo describes Enjolras’s androgynous beauty, so I feel like this is an intentional comparison. The funny, meta thing to me about comparing Enjolras to Saint-Just is that, from his writing, Saint-Just seems like a guy who really wanted to be remembered for his politics and yet people keep writing about how pretty he was instead. That’s so Enjolras.

What is the Third Estate? by Emmanuel Sieyès (1789) (English)

Rights of Man by Thomas Paine (1791) (English)

Considerations on the French Revolution by Germaine de Staël (1818) (English)

History of the French Revolution by François Mignet (1824) (English)

The History of the French Revolution by Adolph Thiers (1823-27) (English)

“Seeing the pensiveness reflected in his gaze, you would have thought he had already lived through the revolutionary apocalypse in some previous existence. That tradition was part of him, as of someone who had experienced it. He knew every little detail about that great cataclysm.” (Les Mis 3.4.1) “‘Who goes there?’ (...) Enjolras replied in a haughty and vibrating tone:⁠— ‘The French Revolution!’” (Les Mis 4.14.1) “‘What men those regicides were!’ said Enjolras.” (Les Mis 4.14.2)

Enjolras loves the French Revolution! We are told he knows every little detail about it, he speaks very highly of the regicides, and he has that silly knock-knock joke in LM 4.14.1 about it. Since he wasn’t alive for it, he probably had to do a fair amount of reading on the subject to get this level of knowledge, so I figured it qualified for the booklist.

There’s no specific allusion made for this one, so I’ve just included a few significant documents from the Revolution and a handful of published accounts from just after the Revolution that were apparently popular in Paris during the 1820’s. Contemporary writings on the Revolution weren’t even trying to be impartial; they were very divided between conservative and liberal historians condemning or praising it. I picked the ones that were reportedly more trendy with young Parisian liberals (aka, Enjolras and the boys), but to be honest they’d probably also enjoy ripping apart more conservative takes like Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France too. These sources are also mostly narrative histories of people’s own experiences during the Revolution because it wasn't until the mid-1800’s that more comprehensive, scholarly histories began to appear. But, unfortunately, Enjolras wouldn’t be alive to read those.

“Gaius Gracchus” Parallel Lives by Plutarch (English)

History of the Roman Republic by Jules Michelet (English)

“On the Aventine Hill he would have been Gracchus” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Gaius Gracchus was a radical reformist Roman politician who made a stand against his political rivals at the Temple of Diana on Aventine Hill and was ultimately killed. He had a brother (Tiberius Gracchus) who also did political reform, but Victor Hugo has specifically compared Enjolras to the Gracchus who died in a violent political clash. Enjolras is all about violent, direct action, and Victor Hugo draws attention to that every chance he can get.

It seems like the Gracchus brothers were pretty topical in revolutionary France because there was a radical revolutionary journalist in the 1790’s, François-Noël Babeuf, who was popularly known as Gracchus Babeuf because of his proto-anarchist/communist/socialist politics (link). He was reportedly barred from the Jacobin Club for being too bloodthirsty about class war, which is saying something because the Jacobins are best known for their Reign of Terror. He’s not the Gracchus in question here, but I feel like Enjolras would absolutely love him too, tbh.

History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides (English)

“Evadne’s bare breast would have moved him no more than it would have moved Aristogeiton. For him, as for Harmodius, the only thing flowers were good for was to conceal the sword.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Harmodius and Aristogeiton were two lovers known as the Tyrannicides who assassinated the brother of the Athenian tyrant Hippias in one of the founding myths of Athenian democracy. They were subsequently killed because of this act of rebellion, much like Enjolras will be after his own attempt to free his country from an oppressive government, so the foreshadowing of death continues. But this tyrannicide is all just flavor, because Victor Hugo is primarily making this comparison to tell us that Enjolras is as interested in romancing women as these two famous gay icons - that is, not at all. It’s truly so Enjolras that every conjecture about his sexuality is also secretly about radical revolutionary politics.

The Bible, Book of Ezekiel (English)

“If any grisette from Place Cambrai or the Rue St-Jean-de-Beauvais, seeing that truant-schoolboy face, that pageboy neck, those long fair eyelashes, those blue eyes, that wind-tousled hair, those rosy cheeks, fresh lips, perfect teeth, had hankered after all this youthfulness in its prime and come to try her charms on Enjolras, a shocking, dreadful glance would have abruptly revealed the abyss to her and taught her not to confuse Ezekiel’s awesome cherub with Beaumarchais’s gallant Cherubino.” (Les Mis 3.4.1) “Enjolras was standing on the cobblestone staircase, with one of his elbows resting on the barrel of his gun. He was thinking. He shuddered, as if at passing emanations; places of death have these oracular effects. In that inward-turned gaze was smouldering fires. All at once he raised his head; with his blond hair swept back like that of the angel on the dark chariot of stars, it had the look of a lion’s mane fanned out in a flaming aureole.” (Les Mis 5.1.5)

Victor Hugo doubles down in the same paragraph as his joke about the Tyrranicides with a pun comparing the Marriage of Figaro to the Bible, emphasizing again just how little Enjolras cares about love or sex. Enjolras talks a fair amount about Satan and divinity throughout Les Mis, so it’s safe to assume he’s generally familiar with the Bible. However, Victor Hugo tends to be very intentional about which parts of the Bible he’s referencing. For Enjolras, that’s specifically the Book of Ezekiel. In fact, most of the members of Les Amis have one particular book from the Bible they always refer to that’s used to characterize them. A lot of the specific meaning of those references were lost on me, so I phoned a friend who went to Catholic school to give me a more detailed rundown of the Victor Hugo-assigned Bible passages. (Thanks Jared!) Basically, the Book of Ezekiel is a pretty violent Biblical passage. It’s all fire and brimstone, with God as the punisher and salvation being achieved through blood. This aligns pretty perfectly with everything else we’ve been told about Enjolras and his love of The Terror and political violence. Enjolras is angry and righteous above all other things.The Book of Ezekiel is also one of the main sources of what people refer to as “biblically accurate angels.” When they show up to Ezekiel in chapters 1 and 10, there is a lot of flame imagery, a chariot made of heavenly beings, and a description that one of the heads of the angels is that of a lion. Which is, coincidentally, the same exact way that Victor Hugo describes Enjolras in LM 5.1.5, as Enjolras is processing the failure of his revolution and his upcoming death. In the Book of Ezekiel, their appearance heralds Ezekiel getting a vision from God, and in Les Mis, this moment precedes Enjolras telling everyone about his utopian visions for the twentieth century. He is, like Ezekiel, relaying a divine vision. Even though the people of Paris didn’t show up to the barricade, he and his friends can still save/inspire them by dying here and heralding a happier future.

The Marriage of Figaro (La Folle Journée, ou Le Mariage de Figaro) by Pierre Beaumarchais (English)

“If any grisette from Place Cambrai or the Rue St-Jean-de-Beauvais, seeing that truant-schoolboy face, that pageboy neck, those long fair eyelashes, those blue eyes, that wind-tousled hair, those rosy cheeks, fresh lips, perfect teeth, had hankered after all this youthfulness in its prime and come to try her charms on Enjolras, a shocking, dreadful glance would have abruptly revealed the abyss to her and taught her not to confuse Ezekiel’s awesome cherub with Beaumarchais’s gallant Cherubino.” (Les Mis 3.4.1)

Here’s the other half of the pun! Specifically Victor Hugo is referring to the original French stage play, which is more political than Mozart’s opera of the same name. Usually I only include the references that Enjolras is likened to, not the ones he’s said to be unlike. But fun fact, The Marriage of Figaro was banned at Versailles in 1783 because it mocked the aristocracy. Reportedly, upon banning it, King Louis XVI said: “La représentation ne pourrait qu'être une inconséquence fâcheuse, sauf si la Bastille était détruite.” or “The performance can’t be more than a nuisance as long as the Bastille isn’t destroyed.” as a sick burn to call the play’s criticism unimportant because nothing would ever happen to the Bastille... But you’ll never guess what happened just a few years later, oops!

Enjolras definitely wouldn’t care at all about the romantic intrigue in this one, but I think it’s telling that even when Victor Hugo is just making a silly little reference to tell you how much Enjolras doesn’t care about something, he still chooses to reference a politically bent work that makes fun of the aristocracy and pisses off the king so bad he bans it. It’s basically impossible to separate Enjolras from his political ideals.

The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau (English)

"And Enjolras rebuked Courfeyrac. ‘Not a word against Jean-Jacques! He’s a man I admire. Even if he did disown his children, he adopted the people as his own.’" (Les Mis 3.4.3) “[Graintaire, trying to impress Enjolras:] ‘Yes, me. But I’m not being given the credit I deserve. When I put my mind to it, I’m terrific. I’ve read Prudhomme, I’m familiar with the Social Contract, I know by heart my constitution of the year II.’” (Les Mis 4.1.6) “[Enjolras:] ‘Hence what is called “the social bond”. Some say “social contract”, which is the same thing, the word “contract” being etymologically formed from the notion of binding.’” (Les Mis 5.1.5)

Rousseau is a huge influence on the politics of Les Amis and is referenced several times throughout their chapters. Mostly by Enjolras. Rousseau was the guy who coined the term “eat the rich” during the French Revolution, so it’s no surprise that Enjolras especially goes to bat for this guy and says a hilarious line defending him against the haters (Courfeyrac) in LM 3.4.3. He even talks as if he’s on first name basis with Jean-Jacques. This scene absolutely kills me. It’s no wonder Grantaire tries to impress him by referencing the Social Contract a few chapters later. Then, on the barricade, Enjolras literally stops everything and gives a spontaneous The Social Contract 101 lecture. So I think it’s safe to say he loves Rousseau. A lot.

Fables by Jean de La Fontaine (English)

“The Heifer, Goat, Sheep, and Lion” by Phaedrus (English)

“Enjolras, whose blue gaze was not fixed on anyone and who seemed to be staring into space, without glancing at Marius replied, ‘France needs no Corsica to be great. France is great by virtue of being France. Quia nominor leo.’” (Les Mis 3.4.5) “There’ll be no reason then to fear, as we do today, conquest, invasion, usurpation, rivalry between armed nations, civilization interrupted by a marriage of kings, a birth within the hereditary tyrannies, a partition of peoples by congress, dismemberment brought about by the collapse of a dynasty, a conflict between two religions coming up against each other like two goats of darkness on the bridge of infinity.” (Les Mis 5.1.5)

During Marius’s cringe Napoleon stan rant in LM 3.4.5, Enjolras makes a reference to the fable “The Heifer, Goat, Sheep, and Lion” by quoting a line in Latin that means “because my name is a lion.” While he’s literally using the quote to reiterate his point that France is great because it’s France, due to the subject matter of the fable he might also be sneaking in a sick burn about Marius’s problematic Napoleon beliefs by making a comparison to the lion in the story. Like, if you align yourself with strongmen they will betray you just because they can. At least, that’s how I interpret it.

Enjolras is quoting the original Roman version by Phaedrus, because of course he is, but La Fontaine’s Fables were (and continue to be) super prevalent in France, and likely where he would have first heard the story. Enjolras makes another reference to La Fontaine’s Fables later. Specifically, “The Two Goats,” a story about two goats that meet each other on a narrow bridge and neither will move, so they both get stuck there and eventually fall to their deaths. Tbh, there are probably more that I’m not as good at catching, but I think it’s safe to say Enjolras has read La Fontaine’s Fables.

Speeches of Georges Jacques Danton (English)

“[Graintaire, trying to impress Enjolras:] ‘I’ll talk to them about Robespierre, of course! And about Danton. About principles.’" (Les Mis 4.1.6)

Enjolras doesn’t reference Danton directly, but Grantaire thinks Enjolras likes him and I’m tempted to agree. In LM 4.1.6, Grantaire lists a bunch of politicians and publications to Enjolras that he claims to be familiar with in an attempt to impress Enjolras, and I’m opting to include those here on Enjolras’s booklist because I think it’s less informative about Grantaire’s own taste than what he thinks of Enjolras’s. Case in point, literally the first thing we learn about Grantaire is a list of philosophies and people that he thinks are stupid, and lots of those are ones he lists to Enjolras here! He’s absolutely trying to look cool to Enjolras by flexing his knowledge of things he thinks Enjolras likes. I fully believe he even bought that Robespierre-style waistcoat just to impress Enjolras because Grantaire is specifically described as thinking Robespierre (or at least his brother) is stupid. Then he runs home to put it on, runs back to the Cafe for no reason just to make intense eye contact with Enjolras while he tries to draw attention to the waistcoat, and then leaves again immediately?? There’s no other reason for him to do all that. How embarrassing. But I’m getting off topic.

Danton is another one of the main revolutionaries associated with Robespierre and The Terror. This is a bit of an easy guess for Grantaire, because everyone knows Enjolras likes The Terror. I do think it’s fun that when Enjolras mentions The Terror he talks about the scholarly, beautiful, bloodthirsty guy involved with Robespierre and when Grantaire mentions The Terror he talks about the brash, personable, kind of ugly guy involved with Robespierre. Unlike Robespierre and Saint-Just, Danton never gave manuscripts to journalists and most of his speeches were extemporaneous, so despite being very present for so much of history during this era, he doesn’t have as much published work to point to for this reference. Because of that and because this is such a minor reference, I decided not to look too hard and just included a collection of speeches compiled in 1910. Obviously that’s way after Enjolras and Grantaire would be dead, but the same speeches would’ve been available in their time, just printed in various other places like Le Moniteur or whatever. Speaking of anachronistic Danton references, there’s a whole Hark! A Vagrant episode (321) about Danton, and in the description Kate Beaton also laments how the guy didn’t write anything down. You and me both, queen.

Révolutions de Paris edited by Louis-Marie Prudhomme - Several articles in translation (English)

"On the Influence of the Revolution on Women" by Louis-Marie Prudhomme (English)

“[Graintaire, trying to impress Enjolras:] ‘Yes, me. But I’m not being given the credit I deserve. When I put my mind to it, I’m terrific. I’ve read Prudhomme, I’m familiar with the Social Contract, I know by heart my constitution of the year II.’” (Les Mis 4.1.6)

This is another one that Grantaire thinks Enjolras likes. Prudhomme ran one of the best-known revolutionary newspapers and a few books about the revolutionary period and The Terror. This is most likely the Prudhomme that Victor Hugo references several times throughout Les Mis. He’s got some good takes, but he’s notably really sexist. I feel like I need to call him out for this because Enjolras also doesn’t include women in his revolution. Love him, but he is not a feminist so he needs to be shamed a little.

Le Père Duchesne edited by Jacques René Hébert - Several articles in translation (English)

“The Père Duchesne Supports the Terror,” Le Père Duchesne, no. 234 (English)

“[Graintaire, trying to impress Enjolras:] ‘The rights of man, the sovereignty of the people, for God’s sake!  I am even a bit of a Hébertist. I can keep coming out with some wonderful things, watch in hand, for a whole six hours by the clock.’” (Les Mis 4.1.6)

This one is an absolute delight to read and hysterical if this is the kind of rhetoric that Grantaire thinks will impress Enjolras. Genuinely lmao. The Hébertists were a political group associated with journalist Jacques René Hébert, the founder and editor of the irreverent radical newspaper Le Père Duchesne. They were proponents of extreme revolutionary ideas during the Reign of Terror, but their leadership was ultimately executed in 1794. Yet again, we have no concrete proof that Enjolras actually read Hébertist literature, but Grantaire certainly thinks this is the kind of thing that would be impressive to Enjolras.

Histories by Herodotus (English)

Leonidas, A Poem by Richard Glover (English)

“The Isles of Greece” by Lord Byron (English)

Le Passage de Thermopyles by Pierre Villiers

Léonidas by Michel Pichat

Le Songe, ou les Thermopyles by Élisa Mercoeur (English)

“As we know, there was something of the Spartan and the Puritan in Enjolras. He would have perished at Thermopylae with Leonidas and burned down Drogheda with Cromwell.” (Les Mis 4.12.3) “[Enjolras:] ‘The amphictyons held two sittings a year, one at Delphi, site of the gods, the other at Thermopylae, site of heroes.’” (Les Mis 5.1.5) “Enjolras ruled over it [the barricade] gravely, in the attitude of a young Spartan dedicating his naked sword to the sombre spirit of Epidotes.” (Les Mis 5.1.17) “And if need be, they will die like the three hundred Spartans. They think not of Don Quixote, but of Leonidas. And they forge on, and once committed there is no going back, and they press forward, heads down, in hope of an unprecedented victory, the fulfilment of the revolution, progress once again set free, the advancement of the human race, universal deliverance, and if the worse comes to worst, Thermopylae.” (Les Mis 5.1.20)

There are lots of comparisons between the Spartan 300 and the students of the June Rebellion through the book. Enjolras, especially, is repeatedly described as Spartan in nature, and he references Thermopylae himself during a speech at the barricades, calling it a “site of heroes.” RIP Enjolras, you would have loved Zack Snyder’s 300. 

There are also lots of potential sources for this story that were popular at the time. One of the principal classical sources covering the battle is Herodotus’ Histories, which portrays the Greco-Persian War as a battle between slavery and freedom. That’s definitely the vibe that Victor Hugo is channeling as well. Centuries later, in Lord Byron’s Don Juan, he wrote a poem called “The Isles of Greece” which celebrates Thermopylae as a symbol of Greek resistance. Victor Hugo definitely loved it because he mentioned it specifically in his obituary for Lord Byron (link): “He has proved to Europe that the poets of the new school, although they no longer adore the gods of pagan Greece, always admire its heroes; and that, if they have deserted Olympus, they have at least never said adieu to Thermopylae.” Glover’s epic poem Leonidas was also massively popular throughout the 18th century, including its French translation, and would inspire a bunch of contemporary interest in the subject. 

Additionally, there was a whole wave of poetry and plays about Thermopylae in France during the Revolutionary era. There are truly an overwhelming number of them. It’s like the isekai genre of Revolutionary era France. Check out “Loyalty and Liberty: Thermopylae in the Western Imagination” by Emma Clough (link) for more info. Enjolras and his boys wouldn’t have been alive early enough to catch a lot of these shows, but don’t worry because after the release of Jacques Louis David’s painting Leonidas at Thermopylae in 1815 (link), there were was another wave of MORE PLAYS about these doomed Spartans. Pierre Villiers’ Le Passage de Thermopyles was inspired by the painting and released in 1823 and Michel Pichat’s Léonidas was released in 1825. Plus in 1827, Élisa Mercoeur released her poem: Le Songe, ou les Thermopyles. I could go on!

Lastly, this is not something that Enjolras would have been able to read himself, but the 25 April 1836 edition of the Gazette des Tribunaux compared the actual real republican insurrection of 1832 to the Spartan 300 at the Battle of Thermopylae as well! (French link, English translation of quote link) Just goes to show how topical Thermopylae was at the time. 

Cromwell by Victor Hugo (English)

“As we know, there was something of the Spartan and the Puritan in Enjolras. He would have perished at Thermopylae with Leonidas and burned down Drogheda with Cromwell.” (Les Mis 4.12.3)

Oliver Cromwell comes up several times in Les Mis. Victor Hugo is obviously fascinated with this guy and the English Civil War, but he specifically calls out one of Cromwell’s most extreme and controversial moments of violence as a parallel to Enjolras. This is definitely part of a pattern for his characterization of Enjolras. (I personally don’t think Enjolras would like killing thousands of innocent Irish civilians, but idk maybe that’s just me.) In general, Cromwell is characterized by his ruthlessness and his role in beheading King Charles I, which are very on brand for Enjolras comparisons. And as a Puritan leader, Cromwell banned many forms of private and public entertainment, kind of like how Enjolras bans the men at the barricade from drinking alcohol.

Victor Hugo himself wrote a play about Oliver Cromwell in 1827, so I had to include it here even though it wasn’t actually performed until the 1950’s (due in part to its SEVEN HOUR runtime, jfc) and there was little chance Enjolras would have actually read it. But technically he could have! And Victor Hugo definitely did since he wrote the thing, so this is informative as to what he thinks of Cromwell when he makes that comparison to Enjolras anyway.

Multiple Sources

“Pale and disheveled, his throat bared, Enjolras, with his womanly face, had at that moment something of the ancient Themis about him. His flaring nostrils, his downcast eyes, gave to his implacable Greek profile that expression of wrath and that expression of chastity that for the ancient world are appropriate to justice.” (Les Mis 4.12.8)

Not too much to say about this one. It’s another allusion highlighting Enjolras’s feminine appearance, asexuality/virginity, and strong sense of justice. Themis is the Greek goddess of divine justice and, in some Greek myths, the originator of human political assemblies. That’s cool! She’s the Greek equivalent to Lady Justice, so there’s certainly a lot of statues invoking her imagery (holding scales, often blindfolded, stoic), but not one particular piece of iconic art as far as I know. She also doesn’t have one major myth to point to as an obvious reference here. Themis is mentioned briefly in several plays, including both the Iliad and the Odyssey plus a few of Aeschylus’ plays where she appears as a goddess of assemblies and justice. Notably, she is Prometheus’ mother in Prometheus Bound which Enjolras has definitely read and references later. It’s apt that Victor Hugo is basically saying “he’s like Prometheus if Prometheus was a girl.” Anyway, this is mostly just invoking the imagery of Justice so just pretend this is a footnote later when Prometheus Bound comes up in more detail.

Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare (English)

Le Mort de César by Voltaire (French)

"'The face of an old buffer and the courage of Brutus,' replied Enjolras.” (Les Mis 4.14.2)

Lots of the members of Les Amis make reference to Brutus. Grantaire and Combeferre are more hesitant to fully celebrate Brutus, but Enjolras will always stan a violent revolution against a tyrant so obviously he uncritically loves this guy. Enjolras even uses a comparison to Brutus as a compliment on the barricade. Information about Brutus appears in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives (link) and Jules Michelet’s History of the Roman Republic (link) that were cited earlier, but I think the more significant source is the Shakespeare play. Shakespeare was a big influence on the Romantic movement, Victor Hugo makes a lot of references to Shakespeare throughout Les Mis, and Hugo even wrote a novella-length essay called William Shakespeare (which is kind of a misleading title because it’s only partially about Shakespeare). The very first translation of Shakespeare’s works into French was a version of Julius Caesar by Voltaire, La Mort de César, in 1731. This was not a direct translation, Voltaire takes some big liberties with the plot to make it fit the confines of French theater at the time and he openly thought that Shakespeare was kind of tasteless, which really influenced subsequent translations (link). In Voltaire’s version, he reveals a plot twist that Caesar is Brutus’s father to shift the focus of the story onto Brutus’s struggle between his patriotism as a republican and his loyalty to his family. The play also cuts almost everything after the assassination, so instead of showing Brutus’ slow decline he’s made into more of a martyr hero. I’ve seen a lot of articles say this wasn’t one of Voltaire’s more popular plays, but without even looking that hard I ran into multiple topical references to Voltaire’s version. In Charlotte Corday’s address explaining her assassination of Marat she likens herself to Brutus from La Mort de César (link) and Saint-Just references Brutus from La Mort de César as well. If nothing else, I think Enjolras would have more loyalty to the version from France so it’s worth putting on his book list.

Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus (English)

“[Enjolras:] ‘The day when this Promethean work is done and man has finally harnessed to his will the threefold chimera of antiquity — hydra, dragon, and griffin — he will be master of water, fire, and air, and he will be to the rest of living creation what the ancient gods once were to him.’” (Les Mis 5.1.5)

During the Romantic movement, Prometheus was widely adopted as a symbol of rebellion against institutional tyranny, so it’s no surprise he makes an appearance here. Victor Hugo references Prometheus as a revolutionary figure several times, and Enjolras himself describes their stand at the barricade as “Promethean” during one of his speeches. Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus is the best known classical source of the Prometheus myth, and it’s extremely popular with several of the characters in Les Mis as well. Aeschylus is one of Jean Prouvaire’s favorite poets and Marius also references Aeschylus’s Prometheus Bound explicitly during his pre-barricade existential political breakthrough so I think there’s a solid chance that’s the version that Enjolras is also referencing. I think it’s also fitting for Enjolras to reference because it ends tragically, with Prometheus bringing the mortals fire only at great personal cost. It was supposed to be part of a greater trilogy by Aeschylus which would cover the time when Prometheus became unbound, but there is a nice mirror to Enjolras’s sacrifice within just the surviving play.

There are a few other versions I want to give a quick honorable mention here as well. Goethe’s epic poem Prometheus (link) is one of the first appearances of the Prometheus myth in the literary Romantic movement. And Prometheus Unbound by Percy Shelley (link) was directly inspired by the French Revolution, imagining a way that a revolution might break free of the cycle of creating new tyrants and exist in an anarchist utopia. Since they were written in 1785 and 1820, respectively, Enjolras technically could’ve read either of these as well! He doesn’t read a lot of fiction, but he does love a politically-motivated tale about righteous rebellion, so who can say.

Encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers (French, French)

“[Enjolras:] ‘The amphictyons held two sittings a year, one at Delphi, site of the gods, the other at Thermopylae, site of heroes. Europe will have her amphictyons, the globe will have its amphictyons. France carries in its womb this sublime future. This is the gestation of the nineteenth century. What Greece began is worthy of being completed by France.’” (Les Mis 5.1.5)

Basically, an amphictyony was an association of neighboring tribes in Ancient Greece that would meet at common religious centers and vote on things. Enjolras loves the idea of people voting on things, so he makes a reference to the Delphic Amphictyony during a speech he gives at the barricade. Ancient sources with details about the Delphic Amphictyony are pretty limited, as far as I can tell. Herodotus’s Histories that I cited earlier mention the amphictyons in Thermopylae (link), and there is a tablet of the Amphictyonic Law of Delphi that’s now in the Louvre, though I’m unclear when it was added to the collection (link). Otherwise, the best source I could find that would’ve been widely accessible in Enjolras’s time was the Encyclopédie entry about amphictyons. It’s not the most riveting book on this list and it’s kind of a stretch, but the encyclopedia represented a big project to democratize information in France at the time, and it’s something Combeferre is noted to be passionate about, so Enjolras has probably referenced it at some point.

Iphigenia Among the Taurians by Euripides (English)

Iphigénie en Tauride by Christopher Willibald Gluck (English)

“You might just as well say O and P as Orestes and Pylades. A true satellite of Enjolras, Grantaire lived within this circle of young men. He dwelt among them, only with them was he happy, he followed them everywhere. His pleasure was to watch these figures come and go in a wine-induced haze. They put up with him because of his good humor. In his belief, Enjolras looked down on this sceptic; and in his sobriety, on this drunkard. He spared him a little lordly pity. Grantaire was an unwanted Pylades.” (Les Mis 3.4.1) "Chapter 23: Orestes Fasting and Pylades Drunk" (Les Mis 5.1.23)

So, in his introduction, Grantaire is compared to a list of guys known for being a counterpart to another, the “reverse of Enjolras,” though in his case this bond is unreciprocated. For the most part, these characterize Grantaire more than Enjolras, and Enjolras isn’t explicitly compared to any of them… except one. But it’s a big one!

Grantaire’s character and his role as a foil to Enjolras is bookended by comparisons to Orestes and Pylades. In his introduction, Grantaire is “an unwanted Pylades,” and Enjolras pointedly does not fill the role of Orestes out of disdain for Grantaire and his lack of belief. But the chapter where they both die is named “Orestes Fasting and Pylades Drunk,” finally making the comparison to the both of them together. At a glance there’s not much that Enjolras has in common with the myth of Orestes. He’s not a matricide, he’s not haunted by Furies or driven to madness, he’s not on trial, and he’s specifically an only child. However, his death scene is a mirror to a particular scene in Iphigenia Among the Taurians and Iphigénie en Tauride. Tldr, Orestes and Pylades get stranded and caught on an island that sacrifices all outsiders and are sentenced to die, but Iphigenia offers them a deal that one of them can live if they agree to deliver a letter to her brother for her. Orestes offers up Pylades as the messenger so that his friend won’t die for his crimes. But Pylades wants Orestes to be the messenger so that he won’t have to live without him — “It would be shameful for me to go on living while you do not. I sailed with you and I must die with you.” — and so the two keep offering to die for each other or die together, which is only averted by Iphigenia’s discovery that Orestes is the brother she was trying to contact so they all plot to escape together. In Les Mis, Grantaire is unnoticed by the firing squad that’s about to kill Enjolras, and he could escape if he stays quiet but he chooses instead to announce his presence to them and asks Enjolras for permission to die with him. Now that he finally is willing to die for something, Enjolras accepts him. Grantaire is no longer an “unwanted Pylades,” he’s welcomed to die together as a duo with a smile. 

I think it’s interesting that, of all the stories starring Orestes and Pylades, the reference here is not to the most famous version by Aeschylus. His Oresteia is one of the founding myths of democracy and fair public trials in Athens. It’s political, it glorifies democracy, it’s by an author Enjolras has already referenced, and Enjolras is friends with a bunch of lawyers. But in the end, as Enjolras is dying, the scene Hugo references is from the one play at the end of Orestes’ long tragic saga where he gets a surprise happy ending. One that focuses on companionship and healing over righteous violence at the end of the day. Even though our Orestes and Pylades die for real in the Les Mis version, there is a definite optimism in this send off. This story was so extremely popular in France at the time. You can’t dig through newspapers from the era for very long without finding some reference to these two, usually to imply some kind of epic friendship or partnership. And, honestly, if you’ve been on tumblr for any length of time, you too have probably heard of Orestes and Pylades. They’re the “it’s rotten work” guys from Anne Carson’s An Oresteia (link). Wow, Victor Hugo, truly a tumblrina before his time.

Eumenides by Aeschylus (English) 

Apollo Belvedere (link)

"His beauty, at that moment enhanced by pride, was resplendent, and as if it were no more possible for him to be tired than to be wounded after the dreadful twenty-four hours that had just elapsed, he was pink and rosy. It might have been of him that the witness was speaking who later told the court martial, ‘There was one insurgent I heard referred to as Apollo.’” (Les Mis 5.1.23)

Last but not least, we’ve got this line comparing Enjolras’s beauty to Apollo. Very literally this is probably just a reference to the Apollo Belvedere and therefore not a literary reference per se, but bear with me. 

First off, let’s cover the statue. The Apollo Belvedere was massively popular in the 18th/19th century, in large part due to the og art historian Johann Joachim Winckelmann really hyping up how “the highest conception of ideal male beauty is especially expressed in the Apollo” (link) which made a big impact on neoclassicists. I didn’t read Winckelmann’s whole book, but the chapters I read were a good time. This guy isn’t even pretending to be impartial, he is stating as a fact which statues are beautiful and which aren’t. He also breaks it down by things like best feet, best boobs, etc. And he’s really openly gay about it. What an icon. Anyway, the other reason the Apollo Belvedere was really popping off in 18th/19th century France is because Napoleon stole it and took it back to France for a while. Napoleon looted a lot of art, but apparently he was particularly proud of stealing the Apollo Belvedere. There’s etchings of him showing it off (link), it was a whole thing. Apollo in general had been a really popular aspirational figure in France for a long time (I mean, look at Louis the Sun King) but in Napoleonic France, especially within the Romantic movement, the most celebrated iconography of Apollo would be the Belvedere. So, yeah, this quote is probably evoking the statue because Apollo is, in appearance, very similar to Enjolras. So, on the surface, most of what we’re getting out of this quote is one last reminder that he’s hot, he’s blond, and he’s god-like. But, wait, there’s more!

Apollo is also a significant character in the Orestes myths, and this reference is made during the chapter “Orestes Fasting and Pylades Drunk” so I think that’s very relevant. It puts Apollo into the context of this myth about violence, duty, and political process specifically. In the Oresteia, Apollo is the god who tasks Orestes with killing his mom and then shows up as a deus ex machina at the end to save him. He actually sort of bookends the entire last play, Eumenides, and Orestes’ story ends with a question to Apollo (“O bright Apollo, what shall be the end?”) before they depart so Athena can close out the play with a lecture on public trials and democracy. In the Euripides version, Apollo still gives Orestes the prophecy that sets his quest into motion and bails him out at the end, even though the characters are generally more critical of their government and the gods. There’s this big conversation happening in the background of Orestes about dissatisfaction with a country in turmoil that feels very relevant to Enjolras and his failed revolution. Anyway, all this to say that the Orestes story almost always ends with a deus ex machina by Apollo. And the last thing we hear about Enjolras in his Orestes chapter is a reference to Apollo. Even if it’s not intentional, this little parallel to the structure of Greek tragedy always ending with a deus ex machina (an appearance of some god) is so juicy. By dying, Enjolras has literally become part of a mythic story. Except in this version, he’s kind of also in the role of Apollo. Which also ties together a couple references that have been made earlier. Enjolras was also compared to the divine prophet Ezekiel, and you know who’s the god of prophecy? Apollo. One of the very first sentences about Enjolras told us that he was an Antinous, a man who was deified after his death, and then immediately after Enjolras dies he is referred to as a god. @motions1ckn3ss makes a case in her dissertation about classical allusion in Les Mis (link) that this whole chapter, and the Apollo line in particular, also draws a neat parallel to the concept of the Apollonian and the Dionysian in Enjolras and Grantaire, which I don't have time to get into here. This throwaway quote doesn’t even happen while Enjolras is alive and technically doesn’t even confirm whether it’s really about Enjolras, but it ties together so much!

Plus, of course, Victor Hugo wants to spend one last moment telling the audience just how hot Enjolras was. RIP king.