Top Posts Tagged with #guffroy

The life of Emile Babeuf, son of Gracchus Babeuf, from Babouvist to Bonapartist then Royalist

Warning: for sensitive readers: at one point, there will be a slanderous accusation made by his political opponents against Gracchus regarding cannibalism involving his daughter (completely false).

I'm not infallible, so if I make a mistake, please feel free to correct me — just politely, if possible :) Also, my computer can be a bit temperamental and sometimes deletes files, so even if my post is a bit rough or hard to read, I'd rather share it here and come back to fix it later than risk losing it completely.

Émile Babeuf was born on September 29, 1785, in Roye in the Somme department. He was the son of François Noël Babeuf (who would later take the name Gracchus) and Marie-Anne Victoire Babeuf, née Langlet. He was initially named Robert, but his father renamed him Émile in homage to the philosopher Rousseau. He was the younger brother of a first daughter, Sophie Babeuf, born in 1783.

From the start, the Babeuf couple took great care of their children, and Gracchus expressed immense pride in being a father. During the time he was allied with Dubois de Fosseux, the permanent secretary of the Royal Academy of Sciences and Belles Lettres of Arras, and corresponded with him on topics such as inoculation, the condition of women, illegitimate children, certain social reforms, and the utility of dividing farms—taking advantage of Gracchus's profession at the time as a surveyor on the Academy's programs or his writings—he constantly expressed his paternal pride and attachment to his children. When Dubois de Fosseux told him he had gone to the countryside with his children, Babeuf replied that there was much "to be done" and that "How pleasantly that name sounds to my ear! That I have a weakness for all that is a child | This sensibility has long dominated me. Thus, I was not content for a very long time to indulge in it through mere speculation. The proof is very tangible. Barely of age, I find myself a father to these charming beings, one of whom is four years old, of the female sex, and the other, aged 14 months, is quite the opposite. Forgive me, Sir, if, yielding to the inclination of my heart, I enter into details that might seem meticulous; but no, I was mistaken, you are a father, that is enough, they will not be so for you. Nature, then, as if to reward my sentimental dispositions in advance, has been pleased to favor these little creatures with its most flattering gifts; a happy constitution, ravishing features, an animated physiognomy, an appearance of character that promises everything."

Unfortunately, the little girl was severely burned on her hips in an accident in July 1787 and died in November 1787, devastating her father to the point of losing his reason (and surely his mother as well, although no written record of it exists). Gracchus was allegedly slandered by his political opponents, according to Jean-Marc Schiappa, who falsely accused him of having eaten part of his deceased daughter's heart. Dubois de Fosseux sent him his condolences on December 11, 1787, saying, "I take all possible part in the loss you have just suffered, and I conceive the extent of your grief both by the feelings of my own heart and by the merit of the child you mourn; however, you must come to terms with this misfortune and try to resume the course of your occupations, which will be the way to heal the wound in your heart sooner, though it will still bleed for a long time." Nevertheless, this would not prevent their later personal and political break. Gracchus and Marie-Anne would later have another daughter who also bore the name Sophie, born on September 3, 1788, and a son named Camille, born on November 26, 1790.

The Beginning of the Revolutionary Period

It would therefore be Émile Babeuf, in place of his deceased older sister, who became his political heir, to whom he would speak about politics as an equal. When he was 4 years old, his father called him by several nicknames, including "my rascal, my little scoundrel, my comrade, my devilish rogue, my little darling, my friend," which were the same ones Émile gave him, as this letter from Sunday, October 4, 1789, attests: "I was very happy with my son's letter: he still remembers all the pretty names we gave each other: my rascal, my little scamp, my comrade, my devilish rogue, my little fellow, my friend. I speak of this as if I had left him ten years ago. Time seems so long when one is far from those one loves... I have become accustomed to the role of a father; I feel that today it is the primary need of my existence, and that I could not live otherwise."

Despite facing difficult financial situations and poverty, as the Babeuf couple was born into the lower social classes, Gracchus bought gifts for his family and children whenever he could, as another letter from May 7, 1790, shows: "Hello, my dear child, hello, my little comrade, my brother, my dear Robert, I write to you from St-Quentin, where I bought you a cane, a very nice one, you hear: oh yes, really a pretty little cane, it’s a St-Quentin cane, that one, you’ll lend it to me, won’t you? I bought it for both of us, you see. Oh! if you knew how beautiful it is, here, this is how it’s made, look: yes, that’s exactly how it is, just like that; isn’t it nice? Oh, ragamuffin, you will be so happy to walk with it, to play with it at home with your little sister, you’ll give her the cane, sometimes for a little while; oh! surely poor little one; and then always you will lend it to me too. I am well, you see [?] and you, don’t you have the smallpox? Goodbye, don’t be sick, tell your mom that I kiss her and your little sister too. I am your ragamuffin of a father."

Nevertheless, this would also mark the beginning of a long series of misfortunes that would strike Émile Babeuf. The first would be the arrest of his father at their home in Roye in 1791, before his son's eyes, who began to cry (this was not his first arrest or imprisonment; he had already been imprisoned in Paris from May 19 to July 10, 1790). It was during this period that he took his first steps into politics while meeting famous figures of the time. While it is true that Marie-Anne Babeuf played an important role as a collaborator for her husband, a kind of right-hand woman in politics and sometimes even his equal, as he often followed her political advice and they were in sync, as evidenced by a letter he gave to Thibaudeau, Émile was taking his first steps into politics. While ensuring his education, his parents, especially his father, spoke to him as an equal and involved him in some of their political actions.

Initially, Gracchus had to leave his family alone in Picardy while he was in Paris to better prepare for their arrival. He himself struggled to make ends meet, writing to his wife on February 24, 1793: "...My children are crying because they have no bread! My dear friend (Marie-Anne Babeuf), try to stop them from dying, at least for a few more days." Later, Marie-Anne Babeuf pawned her modest property. Nevertheless, he later reassured her, saying that he now counted people like Maréchal, Pache, Chaumette, and Garin as friends. Later, in May 1793, he became a member of the Paris Subsistence Commission, which allowed his family to live with him in Paris. However, he was arrested again from November 14, 1793, to December 7, 1793, after an error related to the auction of national property, a date on which he was granted provisional release. But on December 31, 1793, he voluntarily returned to prison to prove his innocence. He was first held at the Abbaye prison, then at Sainte-Pélagie. He would not be free until July 18, 1794.

Moreover, this did not prevent him from writing them many letters, one of which was intended for Émile on 8 Pluviôse, Year II. Émile had fallen ill with smallpox. To lift his spirits and with humor, his father wrote to him in the style of Père Duchesne.

"The great joy of Emile's dad.

To see that the damn smallpox is buggering off faster than it came, and leaving my child alone. His good advice to the little survivor so he doesn't bring (...) back by stuffing himself with food and so he doesn't stick his fingers in the damn sores so much (...)... Ah, damn it, I knew the (...)smallpox only had a few more days to torment you. That damned disease was planning to carry you off to the grave. What a bloody mess you would have been there. But we sure caught that goddamn disgusting aristocrat. We resisted her, we showed her we were strong enough to give a damn about her, we swallowed the elderberry and the other drugs we needed and the scum was forced to leave our body, where she wanted to suffocate us. Ah, you cursed villain, we don't give a damn about you now. You think you can still do something to us by imagining we're going to eat like gluttons before you're completely gone to hell (...) We'll do whatever it takes to make sure you don't play any dirty tricks on us and may the devil take you forever, damn it! Babeuf!""

He also sends him a letter on 12 Pluviôse: "Don't worry, my friend, we will try to arrange for you to come see me as soon as your sores are no longer crusted over. Your papa, G. Babeuf"

On 13 Pluviôse, Émile receives another letter from his father: "You are well. Long live the Republic. Kiss your little brothers for me. Babeuf"

Another letter to Émile on 14 Pluviôse, Year II: "...Do not do unto others what you would not have them do un to you. That is the most beautiful of all maxims. If men followed it exactly, they would all be happy. Everyone should be alike: I wish to enjoy all that is necessary for me, but I must also wish that each of my fellow men enjoys equally all that is necessary for them; thus, I must not have more than the share of enjoyments that can be provided to each individual in society, provided that each contributes, as he is able, to working for the benefit of that society. Thus, we can say that equality reigns, that all men are brothers. No more harsh rich people who insult the misery of the unfortunate, no more poor people who lack everything and who, to sustain a sad existence, are obliged to sell their services to the rich, to become their slaves, and to be entirely subject to their will. My friend, this precious equality, the sublimity of whose principle has struck you, is my morality, it is your father's religion, his constitution, his law; it is the object of all his affections, and he believes that as long as men have not adopted this system, there will be neither peace, nor happiness, nor justice among them.Many people, who have not reflected enough on the exclusive justice of this system and on the ease of its organization, raise objections against both; but it is infinitely easy to convince them of the lack of solidity in their reasoning and to reduce them to silence. This is what I hope to prove to you later in a very clear manner and to demonstrate at the same time that it is probable that the French people will lead their revolution to the happy conclusion of this system of perfect equality, which will ensure a felicity all the more delightful as it will be based on provisions that will make it unchangeable: this alone is the goal at which the efforts of our Republic must stop." At the moment Gracchus wrote this letter, his other son Camille was sick, and Émile had just recovered from smallpox.

On 16 Pluviôse, Year II, learning that it was his other son Camille who had fallen ill, Gracchus wrote to his eldest son: "I am very sad to learn that my little Camille is sick. Take good care of him, my friend, I beg you. The poor child had promised himself to save something for you of what he had; if the dear little one did not do it, it is because he forgot. Good day, my little comrade. Your papa. Babeuf P.S. — I would very much like to know if you have any complaints about your mother, and if she always took good care of you during your illness.

You always abbreviate your name Babeuf, signing like this: Emile B. This is neither customary nor in accordance with principles. One can rather abbreviate the first name, that is, you can put only the first letter of the word Emile and sign like this: E. Babeuf, just as I sign G. Babeuf. It is also always necessary to put the date at the head of the letters and not at the end; to make it easier to arrange them in order of date."

Nevertheless, after having taken care of her children who had all fallen ill while her husband was imprisoned, Marie-Anne fell ill, and according to Robert Barrie, she came close to death. On 20 Pluviôse, Year II, Gracchus wrote to him: "I am very sorry, my friend, to learn what happened to your mother; you did what you could to relieve her, you are a good little child. You did not answer what I wrote to you to encourage you to take a reading lesson every day; you did not tell me if you felt disposed to confirm it. I promised you yesterday to speak of my situation. I have been here for a long time now, and my affairs are not advancing much. The unfortunate printers are not finishing. During this time, my friend, your father suffers. But you know how great his constancy is in resisting misfortune. As long as his innocence is finally revealed, that is all he desires. Try to offer him, O my dear child, some consoling considerations to help him sustain his courage."

Nevertheless, there were sometimes understandable tensions for the child Émile, who found it difficult to bear the poverty imposed on them. "You tell me that the printing workers earn more than I do; I am sorry not to earn more; I earn what I can and I give it to you; you should not seem to be reproaching me for it. I kiss you, your papa Gracchus."

Indeed, during this period, there were new periods of misery. According to Robert Barrie, "the wretchedness of the Babeuf family had now reached new depths. Outside the Abbaye Marie-Anne struggled through the bitter January and February days (as the revolution entered one of its worst food crises), saved from starvation only through Daube’s constant help. Possibly through contact with the prison, the three children all contracted smallpox; and Marie-Anne was forced to spend her days nursing them before visiting the Abbaye in the evening with the meager supplies which made her husband’s prison diet tolerable." This surely explains the letter of complaint Émile had sent to his father, to which he replied. Robert Barrie's assertions can be corroborated by certain letters found from Marie-Anne Babeuf, in which she complains about the state of her children, whom she calls "poor little ones," and praises Daubeau, saying of him: "Daube has already given me a lot before I became ill, and for my illness, he gave me a lot, and our three children who also fell ill. This good Daubeau has not let us lack anything because his wife came several times to bring me butter and eggs. I believe these good people are very tired. For eight days, they haven’t given us anything. I went to tell him yesterday that it cost three livres, but he didn’t say anything. I didn’t dare ask for more."

Prison visits could sometimes go badly for Émile, as this excerpt from Robert Barrie attests: "Later, although still weak, the 8-year-old Emile was able to help with the visiting, but on 28 February Babeuf complained that his son had been refused entry to the prison and had been wandering the streets, cold and hungry, until ten in the evening."

Nevertheless, with his mother during this new period of his father's imprisonment, he went so far as to meet Gohier in person to plead for his father's release. During their meeting, Gohier assured them that he was going to put his father's case before the Committee of General Safety. Gohier's wife received Marie-Anne and Émile with kindness; Émile, having written a petition himself and then learned it by heart, for the minister’s benefit.

On July 18, 1794, Gracchus was finally released, surely to the great joy of his family. At that point, although he approved of the Thermidorian reaction, he still sought to defend the principles of the social revolution—placing him in line with other revolutionary figures such as Charles Gilbert Romme. Babeuf briefly alleviated his family’s poverty by returning to his position at the Paris Food Commission (a role he had also held in 1793), but this income was insufficient to sustain his revolutionary ambitions. Although he approved of Robespierre's fall and had a political relationship with Guffroy, who would become his printer, he still sought to defend the principles of the social revolution—placing him in line with other revolutionary figures such as Charles Gilbert Romme. Babeuf briefly alleviated his family’s poverty by returning to his position at the Paris Food Commission (a role he had also held in 1793), but this income was insufficient to sustain his revolutionary ambitions.

On September 3, 1794, he launched Le Journal de la Liberté de la Presse. His printer was none other than Guffroy, the proprietor of a large and well-known press located at 35 Rue Honoré, close to where Babeuf lived. Gracchus spent his time leading the electoral club with four of his Hébertist friends: Joseph Bodson (a staunch Hébertist, close to Chaumette and Hébert, and a fervent opponent of Robespierre), Legray (Bodson's brother-in-law), and the enragé Jean-François Varlet.

Meanwhile, while Babeuf led the Club Électoral, the Journal continued to be published every three days—thanks to the tireless work of his wife, Marie-Anne Babeuf, and their nine-year-old son, Émile, despite his young age. An August 1794 excerpt captures the family’s dedication: “My wife (Marie-Anne) and my son, aged 9 (Emile)—both as devoted and republican as their husband and father—assist me in every possible way. They make the same sacrifices. They spend day and night at Guffroy’s print shop, folding, distributing, and dispatching the newspaper. Our home is abandoned. Two younger children, one only three years old (likely Camille and Sophie ), are left alone, locked inside for a month. This neglect causes them to wither, yet they utter no complaints; they already seem filled with patriotic love and prepared to make all sacrifices. No meals are cooked anymore; during the publication period, we lived on bread, grapes, and nuts.”

However, tensions soon arose between the Babeufs and Guffroy. Gracchus accused the printer of theft, and Marie-Anne directly confronted him. In issue 27, Babeuf wrote: “Guffroy shamelessly steals from me. He reaps all the rewards of my labor. My earliest issues were printed in duplicate; he sold many copies, kept all the revenue, accepted all subscriptions—and I never saw a single penny.” Evidence of Guffroy’s guilt may lie in a letter Babeuf sent on the 21st of Vendémiaire, which included this postscript: “The previous issues are our joint property. However, your wife (Marie-Anne) took them against my wishes. They will all be yours if you pay me for the printing.”

Other sources of tension were that Babeuf attacked Fréron and Dumont because of their reactionary policies and their attacks and arrests against members of the Electoral Club. The political break would be violent, and Émile would be the first witness. According to Gracchus: “Guffroy, deputy and my printer, halted the printing of issue No. 26 yesterday. He also stopped its sale, seized around thirty thousand copies of my previous issues, expelled my wife and son, and told them he intended to denounce me to the Committee of General Safety.”

When Babeuf was indeed denounced to the Committee of General Safety by Guffroy, Legray was arrested. Nevertheless, Babeuf would obtain help from Simone Evrard and Albertine Marat, with whom he had good relations with the late Jean-Paul Marat. He would say that he “went to the refuge of the family of the Friend of the People. I felt the involuntary movement that pushed me in my distress towards the sanctuary of liberty. I told the widow and sister of Marat what had just happened to the one who had tried to follow in his footsteps.” Albertine Marat, a subscriber to Le Tribun du Peuple, would write a letter against Fréron to protest Legray's arrest, which also constituted an indirect attack on Guffroy. She gave it to Babeuf to publish in his newspaper, Le Tribun du Peuple, dated October 13, 1794.

"Citizen, Citizen Legray, president of the electoral club, was thrown into chains last night; having nothing to counter the great truths he announced from the tribune, in order to silence what he still had to say, he was thrown into a dungeon. This assault on the liberty of the best patriot is for us the signal that the system of oppression and tyranny will renew itself; but it is in vain that they believe they are preparing new chains for us. Worthy of the liberty whose fire circulates in our veins, we shall break them before they can be imposed upon us. Determined to perish rather than return to the shameful slavery they are preparing for us, and from which we have only just emerged, we reiterate the oath to annihilate ourselves rather than subscribe to any act of tyranny, oppression, or arbitrariness. We acknowledge, based on the Declaration of Rights, our compass and our shield, that there is oppression against the social body in the person of the patriot Legray, one of the most ardent defenders of these rights, and we will, in a manner worthy of us, fight against his enemies and ours. Our weapons are all ready, and we would all perish, but their sharpness would not be dulled. The crimes of our enemies, those are our weapons; the series is made; we have forgotten nothing, and I declare to you that I have fulfilled my task and provided the sharpest blows against them. I have done more, I have ensured that, whatever fate awaits me, they will not be broken. I have handed them over to be launched against them with a steady hand so that they cannot escape. You see from this that our resolve is unshakable. If one of our fighters perishes on the breach, the place will never be empty until the last of us is annihilated. Open your bastilles, create new ones to engulf us, but above all, do not forget a single one of us, for it would only take one to relight the torch of liberty that you are trying to extinguish. And you, who call yourself the apostle of Marat! and who have just promised to follow in his footsteps, remember that he was never silent when a patriot was oppressed, remember that he never allied with political brigands, with the oppressors of the people, remember also that he never denied the sacred name he took. There are only two roads, that of crime and that of virtue. However thorny and anxiety-ridden the latter may be, patriots will never deviate from it, even if our bloodied corpses fill the graves that have already been prepared for us: this is our final determination. Signed, Albertine Marat"

At that moment, one can wonder if Émile personally met Albertine Marat and Simone Evrard after he and his mother had their violent dispute with Guffroy and the two women of the Marat family helped Gracchus.

It was during this same period that Émile Babeuf met Joseph Fouché, as the Babeuf family and he would be "political allies" for a time before becoming enemies. Jean-Marc Schiappa explains that, while the hypothesis of a meeting before the Revolution in Arras, when Gracchus was a feudalist, is plausible, reservations remain. Why, then, did Babeuf not contact him in 1793, unlike Chaumette, Sylvain Maréchal, Daube, Thibaudeau, etc.? Waresquiel claims they were close before the break, due to the use of the informal "tu" ("tutoiement"), which suggests familiarity. Jean-Marc Schiappa rejects this hypothesis, pointing out that revolutionaries used the "tutoiement" as a sign of republican equality. On the other hand, Fouché helped him with what Gracchus wrote against Jean-Baptiste Carrier, "Du système de dépopulation ou La vie et les crimes de Carrier ; Son Procès, et celui du Comité révolutionnaire de Nantes." Since Babeuf did not have large sums of money and had broken with Guffroy, it was likely Fouché who helped finance his work. This allowed Fouché to hope to divert attention from the violence he had committed in Lyon.

These were again difficult times for the Babeuf family, which Émile subsequently witnessed. Several arrest warrants were issued against his father, who, either with the complicity of certain police officers, his growing popularity in Paris, or his ingenuity, always managed to escape the authorities while staying in contact with his political allies. This situation lasted for three months, since October 1794, even though the police officers in charge were in no hurry to find him, including police inspector Naftel. Here is an excerpt from the historian Jean-Marc Schiappa: "Naftel had gone to Babeuf's home on the Champs-Élysées, where he had found the journalist's wife and children; but his wife had told him she did not know where her husband was. At least, that is what Naftel reported, because a month later, his police colleagues insinuated that not only had he not searched for Babeuf, but he might have warned him of his upcoming visit to the Champs-Élysées, thus giving him time to hide." Indeed, there are some notes written by Naftel praising Babeuf.When the police questioned Marie-Anne, during which time she had been living on the proceeds of sewing work commissioned by the Champs-Elysées Section, apart from some money collected from Jean Robert Carin, owner of the Franklin press who had printed pamphlets for Gracchus, she said she had not seen her husband for 3 months. However, Carin, questioned by the police, admitted that Gracchus and Marie-Anne visited him for the printing of the pamphlets. Furthermore, the correspondence Gracchus received from Marie-Anne and his son Émile shows that he was in constant contact with his family.

But on February 7, 1795, he was finally caught and imprisoned. This was one of the hardest periods for them; famine, rising prices, and corruption brought them to the brink. Marie-Anne, the mother, tried to make financial arrangements for her children while surely trying to maintain her husband's clandestine activities and political networks. Sophie and Camille were left alone during this period. Unfortunately for them, Sophie agonized for two months due to malnutrition. Following their father's advice, Émile and Camille went to see Fouché, who told them "he was not rich" and gave them 10 livres.

Émile, furious, wrote to his father that they were not surviving on the "generosity of his friends" (he was clearly referring to Fouché in this letter). Sophie died—undoubtedly of starvation, for lack of money for food or medical care. It was Émile who had to announce her death to his father in prison.

It should be noted that during his imprisonment, Gracchus had learned the ways of prison and how to send letters without interception. He sent a letter to his ally Thibaudeau stating that he would try to manipulate Tallien, Fréron, and Guffroy, by feigning submission to get out of prison earlier to better resume his revolutionary fight. It was his wife who advised him to do this, but it is noteworthy that his son Émile, despite his young age, also approved of this idea, as you can see in this letter excerpt: "My wife and son’s advice is driven by conjugal, maternal, and filial love—by their circumstances. Naturally, they urge me to do what might restore hope of my return. So I am not unaware of one of the greatest challenges: appearing as a supplicant before men I despise. In my letter to Guffroy—after which I sent my wife to him—I pretended to be humble, even apostate. I strained my imagination to craft specious arguments justifying the current regime. You’ll see it, and no doubt you’ll laugh in private. But I ask myself: will these people allow themselves to be fooled? Haven’t I shown too austere a virtue to be believed corruptible? Rougiff’s* reception of my wife confirms my doubts, although he may have had his own motives…"

*Rougiff is Guffroy

Some indirect clues indicate that Gracchus did the same with Fouché when he sent him a letter in Year III from his prison, saying that he could not tell him, "prudence requires that nothing be entrusted to paper (...) the orders forbid me all communication with the outside (...) Until then, I could have compromised you by risking writing to you," when he knew perfectly well how to prevent his letters from being read from prison and had sent very important and secret information to trusted people. Not to mention that on August 9, 1795, when he learned that Fouché was under an arrest decree, he rejoiced with his trusted friend Charles Germain, also imprisoned, who would write to Gracchus: "Well! Fouché is arrested. Good! Good! That's how you teach this scoundrel a lesson. What an example for traitors!" which shows how insincere Gracchus's letter to Fouché was. Later, there would be a political break between these two figures, with Babeuf clearly exposing the corruption attempt Fouché made on him (Fouché was probably an emissary of Barras) by writing an article against him in issue 34 of the newspaper Le Tribun du peuple (having at least Antonelle and Mathurin Bouin as witnesses to this attempt), ruining Fouché's reputation. This article is here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/793069038153662464/here-is-an-excerpt-from-issue-no-34-of-le-tribun?source=share.

Did Émile approve of his father's strategy out of a desire to see his father again sooner, out of hatred for the people mentioned given what they had done to his family, or did he, despite being ten years old, reason politically like his parents, given that he already had a revolutionary background alongside them? We will probably never know for sure.

Émile during the period of the Babouvist conspiracy

Upon his release from prison on October 18, 1795, amnestied by the royalist insurrection of Vendémiaire, Gracchus had maintained allies and made new ones, including Buonarroti, Antonelle, Mathurin Bouin, Darthé, etc. His newspaper Le tribun du peuple was still respected, and Émile still handled the subscriptions. Indeed, a letter from Émile to his father said, "Someone came to the house to ask for a number of copies of your last issue; you must send 4 copies to citizen Bouin, 6 to Fieg., 5 to Guilh — an unspecified number to Paris, 3 to Menessier, 10 to Pierron, 2 to Bodman."

Nevertheless, in 1796, Gracchus was wanted again, and as usual, he escaped the police authorities, staying in contact with his allies through his son and especially his wife, who managed to deliver letters to him by hand while shaking off the police. She was the only known point of contact to her husband's whereabouts. One day, Babeuf was nearly arrested by Inspector Pernet. A fight broke out; he either beat or knocked out one of the officers and escaped again. The Directory decided to arrest Marie-Anne under the pretext that she was handling the newspaper subscriptions, in order to pressure her into revealing her husband’s whereabouts.

Here is an excerpt from the historian Jean-Marc Schiappa: "On the 16th of Pluviôse, Year IV (February 5, 1796), Marie-Anne Babeuf was brought before the justice of the peace in the Section of the Champs-Elysées. 'On the 16th, at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, Madame Babeuf was brought before me; her interrogation and the examination of her papers lasted until 8 o'clock in the evening (...) half a pound of bread, a piece of cheese, and half a setier of my wine' constituted her meal; 'the next day she wrote to her neighbor who had her child, asking her to bring food. The letter was communicated to me, and I had it delivered' (to have the child sent?). The policeman Lamoignière complained to his superiors: 'It seems that Madame Babeuf easily forgets the acts of kindness we show her.' An interrogation deemed unnecessary. The judge writes that she 'kept silent.' There’s more troubling: 'This arrest, suddenly carried out by the central bureau, contradicted the measures taken by it to discover Babeuf’s hiding place and arrest him, as Madame Babeuf was the only known point from which one could begin to follow her steps."

The arrest took place while she was caring for her sick son Camille; she asked a neighbor to take charge of the children. Émile had gone to alert his father of his mother's arrest. The police followed the child, but in vain, because according to their reports, "this measure was not followed with exactitude, as it appears from the information I gathered on the 17th that the child returned on the evening of the 16th and left the next day at six in the morning to find his father and has not returned since." If this police report is accurate, it would seem that Gracchus and Marie-Anne taught their son how to know when the police were following him and how to better lose them.

The Journal des Hommes libres condemns on February 21st the proceedings against Babeuf and calls for the release of Marie-Anne. At the meeting of the 4th of Ventôse (February 23, 1796), at the Panthéon Club, a collection is made to help Babeuf’s wife in prison, the women’s prison known as 'La Petite Force,' where she is released after three weeks. On February 25th, the meeting is chaired by Buonarroti. Darthé reads in the assembly the 40th issue of the Tribun du Peuple, which was published the previous day. Babeuf, among other things, comments on the acquittal of the journalist René-François Lebois. He speaks of the handful of scoundrels whom the Directory protects, and naturally, he returns to the imprisonment of his wife. He accused Lamoignière of starving his wife during the interrogation and claimed that she could neither read nor write (a lie, according to the historian Jean-Marc Schiappa, to better protect her). This reading is met with applause. The Directory orders the closure of the club on the 9th of Ventôse (February 28) by General Bonaparte, the victor of Vendémiaire, responsible for maintaining order in Paris as commander of the army of the interior – a closure he supervises personally.

During the Babouvist conspiracy, just like his parents, he would have a role in this episode. After all, Joseph Bodson, an important member of the conspiracy, reportedly proposed "to use women and children to break the ranks of the soldiers and draw them to mingle with the people." Émile, despite his young age, became a rather effective newspaper peddler and a courier to Jean-Baptiste Drouet, a participant in the conspiracy, while remaining in contact with his father, which shows that, like his parents, he had skills in clandestine activities. Nevertheless, the conspiracy would be suppressed by the directors of the Directory, such as Lazare Carnot (the main spearhead of the repression). Some plausible historical claims also point to Barras as a second person responsible, not to mention the more than obvious responsibility of Merlin de Douai (to the point that Carnot himself had to calm his zeal, according to the historian Claude Mazauric), as well as Minister Cochon.

When Gracchus, Buonarroti, and the other conspirators were put in the iron cage to be transferred to Vendôme where their trial would take place, his mother, then a few months pregnant, and he made the journey on foot to follow him, as did several women connected to the conspirators: Teresa Poggi (Buonarroti’s partner), Laignelot’s wife, Pottofeux's sister, and Vadier's wife. Only Camille Babeuf did not participate in this very trying journey.

One of the reasons for Marie-Anne and Émile's journey, despite Gracchus's wife being several months pregnant, was that it was very possible he wanted her to help him and his companions escape. Indeed, he had already used a coded letter that she could decipher for his escape attempt; perhaps Émile was also part of the plan. In any case, Gracchus's escape attempt would fail.

On September 5, 1796, Gracchus wrote to his wife and son these words: "How did you come, my good friends? Probably on foot, and you must be very tired. Are you not sick? Did you find decent lodging here? Satisfy me on all these things that worry me, while I wait for you to tell me everything, even the smallest details of your food, the day when I can enjoy the pleasure I’ve been deprived of for so long, that of embracing you, speaking to you, seeing you... That will be when we finish building a parlor... However, this indefinite delay still saddens me. It has been so long since I saw you! You deserve, on so many levels, my concern and love!... Good mother, good child, what should I not do to speed up, if possible, the moment I can hold you in my arms. I will write... to the Municipality to urge them to speed up our meeting... What could you have done with my Camille! The poor dear child! Is he the only one who could not follow his tender father... Surely he has cried for me, surely he will cry. His young soul, soaked with the sweetest sensitivity, has long known the nature of tender affections. Why is he so young, so weak? He would have accompanied me, and then you would have been in Gracchus’ terrible circumstances... I will tell you too much now... We were reasonably on the road. We spent only one night in prison, and it was in Rambouillet. We spent nothing of our own and were well treated everywhere. We are the same here. We had soup and boiled food at noon, a vegetable dish; in the evening, another good dish... a bottle of wine a day... Goodbye, my good friends."

Nevertheless, while the prisoners received favorable welcomes from the population in some places, Buonarroti would say that he and his fellow prisoners in the iron cage were mistreated by the gendarmerie. If Buonarroti is telling the truth, Gracchus lied to his wife and son about being well-treated to better reassure them.

Arriving in Vendôme, Émile and his mother settled with Pierre-Nicolas Hésine and his wife Marie-Agathe Hésine, née Hénault, with whom his family would have a deep friendship for their entire lives. Pierre-Nicolas Hésine was a former mathematics professor and politically engaged during the French Revolution. He founded the society of the Friends of the Constitution in Pontlevoy in 1791. Subsequently, he held various positions in the administration. However, in 1794 (9 Messidor, Year II), he was arrested by the Committee of Public Safety, then by the Committee of General Safety. He was accused after Thermidor of having been involved in several executions in Blois, but was eventually released. He would also be one of the greatest supporters of the Babouvists during the trial.

Hésine would publish a newspaper in their favor named "Journal de la Haute Cour" and declared, "it will appear daily and contain a half-sheet of printing, in the character and format of the Journal des Hommes libres. The subscription price for a fortnight will be three livres for Vendôme and three livres ten sols for other municipalities, postage free... The spirit of liberty will guide my pen. I will be the echo of truth; if to dare to speak it one must be proscribed, I would be ready to sit beside the accused and share their fate." There was even a possibility that he came clandestinely to Vendôme to inform the Babouvist prisoners despite the secrecy of the investigation surrounding him, but according to the historian Claude Mazauric, "his activity led him to prison on 18 Germinal, Year V (April 7, 1797); but his newspaper continued to appear until the end of the Babouvists' trial under the signature of his wife."

It was in the home of the Hésine couple that Marie-Anne gave birth to her last child, Caius Babeuf, on January 29, 1797. The two witnesses who registered the birth were Madame Jeanne Berger, wife of a tanner, and Charles Julien Barbereau, a schoolteacher and commissioner to the municipal administration of Vendôme, a fervent anti-royalist. It is possible, however, that Marie-Anne and Émile were able to communicate with Gracchus in secret despite the precautions taken in his prison. Indeed, Jeanne Berger had an eldest son.He was a "tanner-merchant, a close friend of Hésine, the former and ardent member of the surveillance committee of Vendôme and the citizen guard organized by Hésine and responsible for searches and arrests. He received mail from the accused Charles Germain, to whom he sent wine and letters for Babeuf, some of which were intercepted. Through this channel, as well as through the defenders and families of the accused, they were aware of what was happening outside" (according to Michel de Sachy de Fourdrinoy in his article l’implication des hommes du loir-et-cher dans le procès de Babeuf).

Émile's education was not neglected by his father, even in his worst moments. The eldest son of the family said he wanted no other tutor than his father, and his father agreed to his request: "I believe indeed, my friend, that the method that seems to suit you best for your instruction is better than the school where you would have been sent, and I ask for nothing better than to support your wishes in this regard."

Initially, Gracchus and Marie-Anne hoped that Émile could continue his education with his father, even considering arranging the prison cell for this purpose. But administrative complications eventually forced them to abandon this project. On September 24, 1796, Gracchus wrote to his son: "I am sending back your corrected paper and I await the next one as soon as possible. I am not very displeased with the part of this paper that is copied by you; you have not made too many mistakes and it is clear that with attention you can manage to achieve something." He also gave him advice on his lessons: "A first condition for learning is to have a strong desire for it. One usually succeeds in everything one strongly wants. It is therefore only a matter of wanting it well and not getting tired of it," and continued with advice on spelling: "It is very useful to copy. One thus gets used to seeing all the words written according to correct spelling. By copying, one is forced to read the words letter by letter, and they thus become engraved in the memory with the detail of their configuration. One becomes familiar with the true way of writing them and remembers them easily after having written them several times. However, it is not enough to copy a lot and to apply oneself to doing it accurately to achieve perfect knowledge of spelling. This means of instruction would be too slow and too uncertain if one did not add the study of principles and rules. Those who only copy to learn are like those who want to play the violin without knowing music. Both can never acquire more than a certain routine [...]. You would never become capable of spelling correctly if, to learn it, you confined yourself to copying, but that would have served to give you a foundation. The advantage of learning by principles instead of learning by routine is that principles shorten and facilitate study because they apply at once to a multitude of cases, so that often the rule established for one word applies to thousands of other words whose construction and use it determines, according to their role in the sentence where they are introduced. Principles serve to generalize and therefore to classify and limit what must be retained; routine generalizes nothing."

Nevertheless, Émile, at eleven years old, preferred amusement to study, which is normal for his age and even more so given what was happening, as his father was at risk of being executed and he had witnessed the repression of the Babouvists. He preferred to play on stilts. Learning this and receiving a brief letter from his son full of spelling mistakes, his father sent him a letter: “Why do you not tell me about your stilts, my dear friend? It is said they make you look very tall and that you cross the river with them. That is quite brave, but I am not, however,dazzled with admiration. I fear that, with all this height from the stilts, you remain a very small man in terms of intelligence, and your letter from yesterday does not dispel this fear. You accuse me of having insulted you (in French Émile wrote des ingures). I guessed that you meant des injures (insults). I saw with regret that you understood neither the meaning of the word nor how to spell it, and it is the stilts and other such distractions that are to blame. I told you never to speak like a parrot; that you should be sure of the meaning of expressions before using them; that even the simplest words should be well understood before you use them, because otherwise one risks babbling nonsense. Try to remember this lesson. It is one of the first and most important.”

When Émile later wrote a letter expressing his desire to improve, Gracchus wrote the following to Marie-Anne: “I was not too displeased with Émile’s work yesterday. The copy was done with some precision. From what you tell me, I can hope that he will do well. However, he must realize that it is not enough to be sensitive, to cry, and to behave well for a day—he must make a lasting decision.”

Nevertheless, Gracchus reminded Marie-Anne when he learned that, in his opinion, Émile was not practicing his violin enough

"One must resign oneself to everything, my dear friend. There is nothing left, I hope, to fear now; we must give those who torment us some time, at least, to allow some new refinement to present itself to their inventive genius. The first constantly happy man is truly me. At the slightest sign of internal turmoil, and regardless of the silence that almost always keeps my mouth shut, the oppression that strikes the inside never escapes me. How are you? Is the liberating moment, the moment of deliverance, approaching soon? After that, my little unfortunate one, what will become of you? My soul, every day, runs and wanders through a thousand worries for you; comfort it. In the morning, in the evening, write to me. As you say, we will manage to bear these sufferings along with so many others. Tomorrow noon, you must present yourself here. I don’t think they will turn you away, unless they truly have no more entrails. After the storm comes calm, and no more Aquilon will whistle... winning men to reason, to justice, or at least to seem to have reason, we find this difficult, we are reduced to this. Will we win in the end? Will we determine this victory? With perseverance, I am by no means completely desperate. By devoting ourselves to principles, to liberty, singing... out loud and persistently all the civic virtues that [Rome and modern Paris have seen blossom, in the first degree. Tell me, was there anything other than pure motives that guided us [last night]? Could it be possible, could it even be conceivable, I said upon receiving your letter and reading it, that in this moment... as in the time of Sylla, we were reduced to waiting for the moment desired, when despotism will drag, strike...

Liberator of men! ... Shall I finish? Yes... it will strike whole families, hurling, overturning, here and there... friends, wives and husbands, fathers and children. What a land. Courage, though. It is essential that you, me, and your son, all three, have it. People, your enemy can try once more, but this time it will perish. What have all its successive conquests been? It will have to, as the Picard says, fall into the ditch and its dog with it—how false is the path where its imagination strays. Pride swells it, ambition finishes blinding it. Emile plays croquet now and then, I was told; he has been seen more than six times. Why doesn't he stick to his little violin, which has such a beautiful sound? With this amusement, he can combine exercise with his little rifle; eight or ten days will make him tired of each toy. I say the opposite: if I were near him, he would work with me morning and evening, I would direct his activities. Instead, by... one flatters oneself in vain... Why think of the impossible? Let’s leave it at that. Would I depart from these ideas if I forgot my situation? This Citizen, by whom you are solicited, is undoubtedly still taking great care of you* As the description you made of it pleased me. Let us console ourselves... A friend's house is still open to us**; let us congratulate ourselves that there are even more unfortunate people to be pitied than we are. You will write to me and give me news often, as agreed. Don’t you know that nothing gives me more pleasure. “I embrace you. G. Babeuf."

*According to Bouis, the citizen in question is the wife of Hésine." **House of the Hésine.

From his prison, Gracchus saw his sons and wife when they walked on a nearby hill. During the trial, there was an attempt to turn Gracchus against his son Émile by the president of the tribunal, to the point that even the prosecutor Bailly, who had been merciless towards the conspirators, objected. Babeuf's lawyer, François Réal, protested against this. According to an excerpt from Victor Advielle, he reportedly said if the "President would allow a child to serve as a witness against his father. I do not think so; you would cover yourself in shame! Bailly observed that Real's protest was contrary to the truth and the measures. 'You are doing your duty for the first time!' several accused then shouted. But the High Court decided that the little Babeuf's letter would be read for information purposes."

This letter had been written by Émile, in which he had written the words "Gracchus I" to express the admiration he had for his father. The president of the tribunal had it read to falsely suggest that Gracchus Babeuf's goal was to restore the monarchy. Gracchus, angry at this kind of method, pointed out in court that it was Émile, 12 years old, who had written that, furious that the president of the tribunal was using his son in this way.

Apart from these episodes, one can wonder if Émile did not feel consoled that some inhabitants of Vendôme showed sympathy for his father and the accused. Indeed, according to Buonarotti's memoirs, a crowd of citizens from Vendôme and the surrounding areas attended the sessions of the High Court and joined in and applauded the republican songs of the accused.

But Gracchus understood that there was a strong chance he was doomed. Months before he even learned that his wife was pregnant with their last child, he wrote a first letter to Félix Le Peletier to entrust his family to him. The reason he did not ask Buonarroti and Darthé was that he knew their situations were as precarious as his own, whereas Le Peletier enjoyed protection from Carnot, as you can see here: https://www.tumblr.com/aedislumen/789539824989339648/nesiacha-here-some-interesting-excerpts-i-found?source=share.

Here is what Gracchus said about Émile and Camille in this letter of 26 Messidor, Year IV: "Of my two sons, the elder, as far as I can judge from the little that has been done for his education, will not have a great aptitude for the sciences; this initial disposition suggests that he will also not have the ambition to play a brilliant role on the political stage: he may be more peaceful for it, and he will avoid the difficult life and misfortunes of his father. This child nevertheless has excellent judgment and a spirit of independence consistent with all the ideas in which he was raised. I have sounded him out on what he would like to do. 'A worker,' he answered me, 'but a worker of the most independent class possible'; and he cited that of a printer. He is perhaps not so wrong; and I desire nothing more than that his taste be followed. I can say nothing in this regard about his younger brother; he is too young for one to yet discern what he promises; but if I have reason to hope that you will do for him as much as for his brother, I am content..."

He also asks him to ensure his wife has a business and also asks for help from Suzanne Le Peletier, niece of Félix Le Peletier and daughter of Michel Le Peletier: “I leave behind two children and a wife; and I leave them penniless, without the means to survive. For a man like Félix, it won’t be too great a burden to take on the task of helping these poor souls survive. Michel Le P…'s daughter will support this noble cause; the strength of her spirit, which I had the chance to observe, her undeniable compassion, already accustomed to helping the unfortunate made by this world, assures me of her willingness and resolve when you show her this letter.” (to learn more about Suzanne Le Peletier, the relationship she had with her uncle, and her political journey, see here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/795252246414819328/the-relationship-between-f%C3%A9lix-le-peletier-and?source=share).

It should be noted that Gracchus knew this letter could be intercepted by the authorities, so it is possible he downplayed his son's political ambitions, although he was sincere in his desire for him to avoid the same misfortunes as himself.

He wrote a second letter to Félix Le Peletier, which you can find here, shortly before his execution: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/767963454663442432/letter-from-babeuf-to-f%C3%A9lix-le-peletier-5?source=share. He sent a final letter to his wife and sons, which you can find there: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/765954409563897856/last-letter-of-babeuf-before-his-execution?source=share. It seems he was very worried about the Republic, and he was one of those who predicted the arrival of Bonaparte, as you can see there: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/767626191447392256/the-journey-of-the-forgotten-french-revolutionary?source=share. He also had a premonition that his family would be in turmoil after his death, and on this point, he would not be wrong.

When the death sentence was pronounced on Darthé and Babeuf, they tried to commit suicide with a knife but only managed to injure themselves. According to some historians, it was Émile who gave the dagger to his father. Charles Germain (who narrowly escaped the guillotine) and Buonarroti were sentenced to deportation. When they were granted permission to see Gracchus and Darthé one last time, both having refused medical care, Gracchus's last words were reportedly for his children, according to Buonarroti. Gracchus requested to see his family one last time, but this was refused.

After his father's execution

After his father's execution, Émile was adopted by Félix Le Peletier, who placed him in a boarding school so he could pursue his studies. Camille Babeuf was adopted by General Turreau, but Le Peletier would be the main protector of the Babeuf family, with whom he remained close throughout his life, considering them his own family. He helped Marie-Anne become a merchant.

Émile even told Félix, “I burn to know something so that one day I may make the name of Gracchus beautiful and great in history.” Nevertheless, he must have felt tensions in Year VII despite a certain victory for the neo-Jacobins in Floréal, as some political factions attacked his father's companions, including René Vatar, Topino-Lebrun, Antonelle, and his adoptive father Le Peletier, often slandering them. Some neo-Jacobins were associated with his father's name, Gracchus Babeuf, by these same presses to discredit them. Moreover, his mother was the victim of a police procedure in which she was denounced and monitored. But the persecutions were soon to increase to another level.

Under Bonaparte

Napoleon had long since broken with his friend Buonarroti, and the two men had become enemies. Bonaparte detested Gracchus Babeuf and used him as a political bogeyman and his name against his political advisors. Until the Battle of Marengo, however, it was difficult for Bonaparte to directly attack the Jacobins and Babouvists, as well as simple sympathizers. But after this battle, the persecutions could begin. Topino-Lebrun, Ceracchi (a friend of Topino-Lebrun, initially a supporter of Bonaparte before he took power), Demerville (former secretary of Barère), and Arena were arrested for a plot that was primarily fabricated by the police. Then, with the attack on Rue Saint-Nicaise, although caused by royalists, the Jacobins could be eliminated. Félix Le Peletier (a fervent opponent of Bonaparte under the Consulate), Mathurin Bouin, Charles Germain, Rossignol, Dufour, René Vatar, and René Lebois (whose wife and he had hidden Darthé during the Babouvist conspiracy) and others were deported (Rossignol, Dufour, and Mathurin Bouin would die there, while René Lebois and René Vatar would never return to France; Charles Germain would not be authorized. to return to France until 1814). And if Félix managed to escape in 1803, he was arrested again in 1804, then finally released but asked to leave Paris. As for Marie-Anne Babeuf, she was imprisoned at the Madelonettes in January 1801, temporarily leaving her three sons behind. Topino-Lebrun, Ceracchi, Arena, and Demerville were executed. One can deduce that Émile must have been devastated by the death of his father's companions with whom he had worked during the Babouvist conspiracy, by the fact that he almost lost his adoptive father, and that he feared for his mother and his two younger brothers.

We must not forget that following the assassination attempt on Rue Saint-Nicaise, the press—under Bonaparte’s influence—incited such hatred against the Jacobins in Paris that they could no longer appear in public without risking being assaulted. I wouldn’t be surprised if Émile also faced persecution among his peers, given the hostility toward Jacobins at the time.

Émile also had to face a difficulty. Since his adoptive father could no longer help his adoptive family due to his deportation and temporary imprisonment, he had to be the financial support, along with his mother, for his two younger brothers, Camille and Caius Babeuf, at the age of 16. He first worked in a Parisian bookstore on Rue de Seine, then became a traveling book salesman in 1808, while living for a long time at his mother's home on Rue Saint-Honoré in Paris.

Nevertheless, it seems that Émile Babeuf (and with his mother's blessing, or at least she was aware, as Émile wrote that his mother sent her regards) was in contact with Bonaparte's republican opponents since 1806, including Antonelle (one of Le Peletier's greatest friends, a companion in the Babouvist conspiracy as well, and an opponent of Bonaparte under the Consulate, and it seems, subtly under the Empire; he would harbor a great hatred for Bonaparte all his life). According to Pierre Serna, Émile was one of the clerks of the opposing booksellers who constantly contacted Antonelle. When the first Malet conspiracy was dismantled, one of the suspects was found in possession of a note written by Émile Babeuf asking for the address of "the reverend father Antonelle" (knowing that Antonelle had a reputation as a priest-eater). Moreover, if the Malet conspiracy had succeeded, Antonelle would have been a minister. But here we will never know the truth, as Antonelle destroyed a good number of documents, while we now know that Marie-Anne never had any qualms about lying to the police.

Émile also managed to meet Buonarroti (who had ambiguous links with the Society of Philadelphes, like Antonelle and Le Peletier, as well as with Malet) in 1806 in Geneva, despite the police surveillance to which they were both subjected.

Émile was also in contact with Pierre-Nicolas Hésine (who became a solicitor under the Empire, not a lawyer, although Émile addressed him as such), sending him a warm letter.

"M. Hésine, lawyer in Vendôme. Paris, July 10, 1807 To M. Hésine on the Mail in Vendôme. 'I arrived only yesterday, my dear Hésine, from my journey. I have taken note of the letter you sent me. I fear that having delayed so long in carrying out its purpose, you have entrusted someone else with this matter. I learned with the deepest sorrow of the illness of our friend (the learned man from Touraine), but it seems he is feeling better, and I feel a very real joy about it. It will be necessary, my dear friend, that you have the kindness to go to Soudry, the bookseller in your city, and try to persuade him to conclude the deal I am proposing to him in the enclosed. This will be another obligation I owe you. You will be so kind as to give me a prompt reply, as I have a direct interest in this. My friends, who are also yours, send their compliments, and you will also be so kind as to convey the same commission to M. Lenain on behalf of my neighbors. Embrace your lovely family for me. My mother joins me in wishing all our good friends in this city a good day. Receive the embraces of your devoted, E. Babeuf.'"

A letter of May 20, 1807, from Hésine sent to Émile Babeuf informs us that Émile had close ties with other people from Vendôme during his father's trial, namely Charles Henri Legrand, a cutler-merchant in Vendôme, and François Lebas, a caterer, a former member of the general council in Year II, and a fervent Jacobin to the point that, according to Robert Bouis, "He gave one of his children the first name of Chalier and signed, in the company of his compatriot Jean-Antoine Vorugères-Lambert, administrator of the department and former member of the central surveillance committee, Commissioner of the executive directory to the municipal administration of the canton of Drouet; under the Directory, the Empire, and the early Restoration, he remained linked to the Hésine family."

We know that Le Bas and Hésine were disappointed not to see Émile again when he returned to Paris via Limoges without them being able to see him: "He (Lebas) believed you would return through Vendôme as you had led me to hope." Moreover, it seems that Hésine asked Émile to deliver a sheet, though untraceable to this day, to Giraud, editor of the Journal du Citoyen français. According to Robert Bouis, who draws his information from the biographie universelle, Pierre-François-Félix Joseph Giraud was "employed in the offices of the Committee of General Safety, where he became friends with Scipion Duroure, Antonelle, and all the most exalted members of the Montagnard faction" and "that he worked with Antonelle and Vatar on the Journal des Hommes libres and was in 1799 one of the most zealous members of the Manège society, which opposed with all its power the revolution of 18 Brumaire."

Interestingly, Hésine often welcomed fervent Babouvists like Blondeau during the first Restoration, who passed through to get news of a locksmith named Méry, known as a fervent Jacobin. His correspondence would later be seized by the commander of the Prussian occupation forces in 1815, Hillaire, at Hésine's home, along with 14 other pieces and documents. This correspondence would be handed over to the sub-prefect of Vendôme, who transmitted it to his prefect, and then the latter to the minister of general police.

In any case, it seems that at this time, Émile Babeuf was far from the "Napoleonicism" that Buonarroti would later reproach him for.

Nevertheless, when the first Malet conspiracy was dismantled, neo-Jacobins like Rigomer Bazin and his mistress Marie-Joseph Sagnier were imprisoned, and Claude-Henri Saint-Simon went on the run, as you can see in this article here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/792318402747301888/the-revolutionary-journey-of-bazin-saint-simon?source=share. Also arrested were the ex-conventional Ricord and the Babouvist militant Baudement. The prefect of police asked Fouché if Antonelle should be arrested. Strangely, Fouché refused, although everything indicated that he and Antonelle were enemies (Antonelle having contributed to ruining his reputation in 1796), unless it was to protect himself, as he had attested in 1805 that Antonelle was no longer in a position to cause trouble for the Napoleonic regime. On the other hand, upon discovering Émile Babeuf's activities, he ordered his arrest. The police commissioner of the district where his mother Marie-Anne lived interrogated her and, apparently dissatisfied with her answers, had her taken to the police prefecture where she was interrogated again. They wanted to know where Émile was. Marie-Anne said he was traveling in Spain and Italy for the Parisian bookstore, and after verification, this turned out to be the truth. She received her papers under seal and was released after the interrogation, which, according to Claude Mazauric, demonstrated "a prudent reserve on politics."His absence from French territory saved Émile from prison. Strangely, he was allowed to return to France in 1809 (should we see a possible intervention by Réal in his favor, which is why Camille Babeuf would later contact him by letter, thinking he would help him find work?), but he was temporarily forbidden to return to Paris. He therefore settled in Lyon. He could not support his mother and younger brothers when Camille's madness reached such a point that he had to be interned at the Charenton asylum.

Nevertheless, in Lyon, Émile Babeuf found love with Catherine Finet, a bookseller 16 years his senior. He married her on December 27, 1809, and became a "licensed bookseller in Lyon in 1810." In 1811, he experienced what may have been the happiest year of his life: the birth of his daughter, Émilie. Her name, I believe, was a feminine homage to Rousseau—an echo of the name his father had once given him in tribute. In 1812, his publishing activity is attested, but the license was not issued to him until January 1, 1813.

However, not all seemed well in the Babeuf family, and the income earned by Émile, his wife Catherine, and his mother Marie-Anne was apparently not enough to help Camille Babeuf, who wrote a letter to François Réal to get a work.

“To Mr. Count Réal, State Councillor, in charge of the 1st District of the General Police You were the friend, the defender of my father, and his misfortunes deeply affected your heart. I therefore dare to ask for your support. I am married and soon to be a father; I also have sacred duties to fulfill toward the most tender and respectable of mothers, whose position is not fortunate due to the stagnation of commerce. As long as the product of my labor was enough, I made no requests. But now that the goldsmith profession I had chosen no longer provides enough resources to support myself and my family, may I, Mr. Count, recalling your closeness with my father and those words you spoke to him in his final moments, “I will watch over your children” — noble expressions (sic) from a beautiful soul! — may I ask you to extend the benefits of this old friendship to me, either by granting me a position in your office or helping me secure a job in some administration. The kindness of your heart is a sure guarantee that you will not refuse to help the son of your unfortunate friend. Please accept, Mr. Count, the expression of my respect and gratitude, and allow me to be your most humble and obedient servant, Camille Babeuf November 20, 1813, Rue de la Petite Tonellerie, number 85”

I have not yet found the name of Camille Babeuf's wife or the name of his future child; perhaps his wife had a miscarriage. It is remarkable to note that he did not ask for help from Turreau, his adoptive father, who was also well-placed in the Napoleonic regime. Is it because Turreau cut ties with the Babeuf family to preserve his career under Bonaparte, or did the Babeufs no longer want anything to do with him after he atrociously mistreated and reduced his ex-wife Marie-Angélique, widow of Ronsin, to poverty, as you can see here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/794437214869340160/marie-ang%C3%A9lique-lequesne-widow-of-ronsin-and-wife?source=share.

In any case, there is no trace of a response from Réal. Either Réal completely ignored the Babeuf children, or he could not take the risk of offering Camille a work since he had just come out of Charenton. A third hypothesis is that this letter, dated November 20, 1813, coincides with the beginning of the end of the French Empire. Perhaps Réal was simply too overwhelmed with work to address the request.

For his part, Émile Babeuf would once again turn to activism in the face of the threat from the Bourbons. He sold his Lyon business to the booksellers Milhon and Rivière in 1814 and did everything he could to prevent the Bourbons from returning to power. He would join the Hundred Days the side of Bonaparte, like Félix Le Peletier and Toulotte (another Babouvist).

Émile Babeuf would work for the man who, ironically, had a hand in the death of his father and some of his companions during the Babouvist conspiracy: Lazare Carnot. Regardless, he set aside any potential resentment and distributed Mémoire adressé au Roi, written by Carnot, and later wrote a letter for him, thus working for him, as you can see here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/755017284158980096/emile-babeuf-and-the-letter-send-lazare-carnot?source=share. This is ultimately not so surprising, because while some Babouvists hated Carnot for what he did, others like Le Peletier held him in high esteem, while another category, composed of people like Gracchus and Buonarroti, certainly had difficult moments with Carnot but on the whole treated him carefully, knowing the role he played, being more angry with Grisel and the police minister Cochon, as you can see here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/767944757763883008/babeuf-et-la-r%C3%A9publique-pers%C3%A9e?source=share. Moreover, it was Carnot who saved his adoptive father Félix Le Peletier under the Directory, gave him a position during the Hundred Days, and offered him a Legion of Honor, which Le Peletier refused because of Bonaparte. So, ultimately, this whole situation is not so improbable. Emile also worked alongside his father's former ally, Marc Antoine Jullien.

But Émile would see two tragedies: the first being the death of his younger brother Caius Babeuf, aged 17, during the "defense of Paris." One account suggests he may have been hit by a stray Prussian bullet, although this remains unconfirmed. Shortly thereafter, the Bourbons were restored, and his other brother, Camille, committed suicide in 1815—some say from madness, others from despair at the return of the monarchy.

It is unknown how he felt about the assassination attempt on Antonelle, despite his conditional rallying to Louis XVIII's regime, by ultra-royalists, or the exile of Félix Le Peletier.

The White Terror continued, and this time Émile Babeuf was a direct victim, suffering through the "Patriots Affair." The Maitron website explained the facts well: “Émile Babeuf was implicated in the Nain tricolore affair, a Bonapartist journal printed in Troyes in January 1816, artificially linked by the courts to the so-called ‘Patriots Affair,’ which was even more harshly repressed… He was charged with printing texts containing direct or indirect incitement to overthrow the government… and sentenced to deportation by the Seine assize court on June 11, 1816.” At the time of the events, he lived with his wife and daughter in Paris at 7 rue Servandoni and was incarcerated at the La Force prison on March 10. The printers, booksellers, and editors were accused of "having sent to press writings containing direct or indirect provocations to the overthrow of the government and to the change in the order of succession to the throne." The public prosecutor was hostile to any less severe penalty, arguing that Émile Babeuf was the author of an "infamous" libel, that he had behaved "audaciously," and that his opinions were "perverse." The severity of the sentence, in my opinion, testifies to the ultra-royalist cabal, the fact that Émile was the son of Gracchus Babeuf, and that he had played a role in the Hundred Days against the Bourbons by assisting Carnot, which also explains the harshness of the penalty.

His mother often visited him in prison, while his wife Catherine wrote a letter to Louis XVIII to implore his pardon, mentioning their daughter Émilie.

Émile's reactionary turn

In 1818, Émile was pardoned by the king, and his deportation sentence was annulled. This was due to the fact that, unlike his comrades, he refused to escape when the opportunity arose and instead turned himself in.

In 1819, he resumed his publishing activity, living at 108 rue Honoré in Paris, and was licensed on November 22, 1821, undertaking historical works. But he completely turned away from his ideas and those of his parents. In 1821, he declared himself attached to Louis XVII (although he later declared himself an admirer of Bonaparte to Buonarroti in 1828). In 1822, he wrote a work, Biographie nouvelle des contemporains, ou Dictionnaire historique et raisonné de tous les hommes qui, depuis la Révolution française, ont acquis de la célébrité par leurs actions, leurs écrits, leurs erreurs ou leurs crimes. Philippe Le Bas's son learned that this publication would include a biographical notice about his father. Philippe Le Bas was deeply disappointed to discover, in a letter of June 4, 1823, a not very flattering article about his grandfather. Not wanting a similar article about his father, he decided to try to intervene with Émile with the help of his father-in-law, Charles. Despite this, the latter seemed to ignore a text (perhaps written by Philippe himself) that Charles Le Bas had provided to help him with the writing. A letter from Philippe Le Bas's son would testify to the lack of accuracy of this article.

Here is an excerpt from the letter: "I have just seen with sorrow, my good father, that Babœuf (sic) has not kept his promise to you regarding your brother's biography. Not only was the article you gave him not inserted, but the one contained in the work in question is more malicious, more hostile than anything the Michauds wrote in their biographie universelle13. My heart is broken to see lies and slander perpetuated, and a noble and pure being reduced to the rank of the most infamous scoundrels. It is claimed, in this detestable libel, that our poor Philippe behaved in Strasbourg with such violence and cruelty that he forced all the inhabitants of the city and countryside to expatriate and flee to the Black Forest. His beautiful death is reported with as much perfidy and inaccuracy. Have our misfortunes not been enough for our enemies? There is truly much cowardice in insulting the dead, especially when one coddles and spares the living. I believe, truly, that we cannot suffer this coldly, and I am of the opinion that you should ask these gentlemen for a correction. It would not be the first example of a retraction they have given. If you are willing to take this step, here is, I think, the surest way to make it succeed. Go see M. Norvins, one of the editors; tell him with whom I am. He knows Mme la duchesse*. You can even add that she authorizes me to invoke her name in this circumstance. It will be easy for you to convince him of the falsity of the accusations advanced by his colleagues or by him. Give him the article you had given to Babœuf (sic); perhaps he will consent to insert it. Add, if you deem it necessary, that all those who knew your brother in the army, M. Lavalette** for example, are pleased to do him justice and agree that the gentleness of his character was equal to his ardent patriotism.

I cite M. Lavalette because it will undoubtedly be a testimony of some weight with these gentlemen and because he often spoke to the queen* of our Philippe and in the most honorable terms. Have you read Sénart's Révélations? Your poor brother is again very badly treated there. All this outrages me, and I am more than ever determined to take advantage of the first moments I enjoy my freedom to work to rehabilitate his memory. I will not be blamed for what has been made a virtue in M. Lally de Tollendal." *Hortense de Beauharnais **Antoine-Marie Chamans, comte de Lavalette

Despite no longer being considered politically reliable due to his reactionary turn and inaccurate writings on many points, Buonarroti and Le Peletier still retained all their affection for him, which he returned. Here is a letter from Buonarroti on July 30, 1828. It seems, however, that there was a deterioration in the relationship the Babeuf family had with Réal.

"My dear Friend, Your friendly letter of July 14 was delivered to me three days later; the date you put on it proves to me that our feelings and our desires are the same; as I approach my end, I rejoice that the son of the man I am honored to have been the brother and friend of is walking in the footsteps of his virtuous Father. I am deeply touched, my dear friend, by the marks of interest you show me, and I wish that the possibility for me to return to my adoptive homeland equaled the warmth of the wishes you form in this regard; but there are difficulties in this that I feel you cannot judge the extent of. If you could obtain for me even a verbal agreement from those whose consent is important, I would hasten to set out. Nothing is truer than what you say about the new men who call themselves liberals: none of them will certainly take any interest in my return; however, I am old, almost blind, without fortune, and without influence. What you tell me about Réal does not surprise me; he is still what he was after 9 Thermidor and what he showed himself to be at the High Court; he frankly scoffs at justice and regards virtue as a poetic being.

Laurent, whom you mention, taught me to esteem and love him through the pages full of truth and warmth he wrote about 9 Thermidor in his refutation of that miserable Montgaillard; I am grateful to him for the justice he rendered to your father's intentions and to mine, and I ardently wish that he finds many imitators. Since you name in your letter the two Lafayettes, Corcelle, Sebastiani, and Dumeillet, allow me to ask you to tell me exactly what each of them truly thinks about the Revolution and the current state of affairs. This will help clarify my ideas about their personal merit and the events in which they participated. Rey, whose work you find pale, has touched a very delicate chord, but what he said is entirely true; anyone who knows how to reason a little can deduce consequences of the highest importance from it. If the principles he dares to put forward found many defenders, it would be the end of the main support of all tyrannies.

My work should, if my publisher speaks true, appear on the first day of the month we are about to enter; I will do my best to send you a copy, but I foresee that it will not be easy. However, I will neglect no means, and I will not forget to address myself for this purpose to the person you indicate. If a new edition is made, I will ask you to communicate to me the writings you mention, particularly the "Tribuns du peuple," of which I was only able to report one very important issue incompletely; we will also ask you for your father's portrait.

Remind me to the defender of J. J.; his book on that great man charms all who read it with a pure heart and a sincere love of humanity. To avenge the memory of J. J. from the slanders vomited against him by the aristocracies of all colors is to plead energetically the cause of Liberty and Equality, for no one has put his finger on the wound as much as he, and no one has better indicated the means of healing. It is certain that I will be extremely flattered if you grant me some approval of my intentions. It would be very pleasant for me to have news of Didier, of the entire Duplay family, of Carreté, of Fontaine, of Solignac, Lionnais, and of Madame Lebas. Do you know what has become of Germain?

Do not speak to me of the great man*: he gave the revolution the coup de grâce and completed for his own benefit the work of iniquity that immorality and aristocracy had long begun. He could have repaired everything, he lost everything, that is his great crime.

I have seen our Félix** sometimes, who has always spoken of you with the keenest interest; he is full of [blank] for your father's memory, and he has given me testimonies [blank] of esteem and friendship.

May we, my dear friend, both seize a favorable opportunity to see each other again; that would considerably soften my situation; since I like to see in you a true friend, and permit me to say, a tender son.

All yours. B."

P.S. The first music of Goujon's hymn. *This is Napoleon Bonaparte

** Félix Le Peletier

Another letter from August 20, 1828, from Brussels: "My dear Emile. It would be impossible for me to express all the pleasure your news and greetings have given me, which I received from the good friend who will deliver this letter to you; he will tell you how much interest I take in your fate and how profound are the great memories your name awakens in me. I love you, my dear Emile, because you are the son of a virtuous man whose memory I cherish, and because you do not belie your origin. Since your visit to me in Geneva, I have never lost sight of you; I have often asked for news of you and have regretted that you have given me it so rarely. When you appeared before the Tribunal that condemned you, I applauded your courage and lamented the misfortunes that were its consequences. The subsequent sorrows you have experienced are not unknown to me; I have shared them and have only been consoled by thinking that amidst the vicissitudes of fortune you have always remained faithful to virtue and have preserved the esteem of good people.

Your Father, my dear Emile, has left us a great example and has opened a path where it will always be glorious to walk in his footsteps; it is especially up to you who received his first education, who learned from his lips to love and serve the Fatherland and equality, who heard his last words, to study well the doctrines he has bequeathed to us, to be imbued with his wise principles, and to apply them with prudence to the circumstances in which you may find yourself. Your illustrious Father had already perceived the true cause of public ills and had the good fortune to live in a time when it was still possible to apply a radical remedy promptly; he was virtuous and was not imprudent; let us always have before our eyes the goal at which he aimed so that, despite the corruption that surrounds us, our thoughts and actions always have the only tendency that can assure us the favorable testimony of our conscience.

Our friend will tell you how charmed I would be to see you and to converse with you, but strong reasons prevent me from going where you are; I can only hope for this pleasure from a trip you might make to this country, should I flatter myself with this? The same friend will be in charge of getting your letters to me. Receive, my dear friend, the assurance of my invariable attachment and my most affectionate embraces.

All yours."

In 1828, Buonarroti published la Conjuration des Egaux, whereas Babeuf's last wish was that Le Peletier would one day write what really happened. They had different narrative styles, and I have my theory on why these divergences exist. Buonarroti protects those who are alive, seeks reliable documents (I have a theory that Marie-Anne Babeuf, despite her silence, aligned herself more with Buonarroti's way of recounting the Conspiracy of Equals than Le Peletier, as she possessed documents in accordance with her late husband's will). But in 1829, Émile wrote completely imaginary memoirs about his parents, despite Buonarroti's objections. Among all his lies, he invented the fact that his paternal grandfather had held the rank of commander in the Habsburg army, that his father was well-off in 1789, and that his mother was a noblewoman (whereas she was a lady's maid before the revolution in the de Bracquemont family at the Château de Daméry-en-Santerre).

Nevertheless, he would not tolerate the slightest insult made to his late father and was ready to defend his honor in writing.

He outlived Buonarroti and Le Peletier (who were engaged in different networks against the Bourbons). He died before 1842. We do not know if his mother survived him or not. There is also no precise date for Catherine Babeuf's death. We only know that Victor Advielle found a shop in 1842 named "Veuve Babeuf." We will never know if it was Marie-Anne Babeuf or Catherine Babeuf...

Émilie Babeuf became a laundress . She never married. Perhaps to escape poverty or simply to feel better, she decided to live in Loir-et-Cher, where the Babeuf family had found refuge during Gracchus Babeuf's trial, hoping to find moral support from the population. She died at the age of 66 on April 27, 1878, in Blois.

My personal opinion:

I have already stated what I thought about it here https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/788885441253392384/my-theory-on-why-%C3%A9mile-babeuf-took-a-reactionary?source=share and my opinion has not changed. Just as Marie-Anne Babeuf's role has been greatly underestimated because she had to deal with the no less important, and at times more dangerous, but less visible, political side of clandestine life her whole life, Émile Babeuf has been underestimated. From a very young age, in addition to handling the press, he inherited his parents' ability to shake off the police, to be astute, to keep a cool head to deliver messages safely, and to be an effective newspaper peddler. His parents (especially his father) were quite self-taught on many points, despite coming from the lower classes and therefore having only a limited education (which did not prevent Gracchus from having a beautiful handwriting, economic notions, and holding a conversation with his former friend Dubois de Fosseux, who entrusted him with tasks, or Marie-Anne from knowing how to read and being interested in her husband's works, including that of the Cadastre, a mix of science, letters, etc...)and from being very cunning. Émile was able to receive a more advanced education, and we can see that he was sought after on certain points in his life for his writings, while also showing cunning (first, shaking off the police under the Directory to pass clandestine messages, then managing to be in contact with opponents of Bonaparte from 1806 to 1808 is no small feat).

I think there are two parts to Émile's life of activism. One until 1818, and the second part where he becomes reactionary and a liar for selfish reasons. In the first part of his life, he is seen as completely reliable, even in the worst moments. It is possible that he decided to fight Bonaparte with his own means at the beginning of the Empire, which also shows how determined he was, having seen the suffering of his Jacobin colleagues under the Empire and the trust people showed him (but as I said above, we will unfortunately not know much apart from indirect clues due to the mysteries surrounding Antonelle, Marie-Anne Babeuf, etc.). During the Hundred Days, he collaborated with Carnot and even Bonaparte—perhaps out of pragmatism or, eventually, belief—in service of the revolutionary ideals he had inherited from his father. He willingly ignored the suffering that these two men (albeit for different reasons) inflicted on him in an attempt to save France and the revolutionary ideas that consolidated it.

But after 1818—especially after 1820—Émile took a reactionary path. He failed to uphold the very ideals he had once embraced, and he deeply disappointed many who had believed in him. I think it was during his imprisonment and when he was almost deported that something broke in him, more precisely at the moment when, unlike his comrades, he refused to escape. I can’t help but wonder if his parents would have done the opposite—knowing them, they probably would have. I suspect something inside Émile broke at that moment. That may have been the beginning of his reactionary turn—a retreat into submission.

We must also consider the hypothesis that it was a series of misfortunes he endured since his childhood that led him to become what he was: he had practically no childhood, a ruined adolescence, a difficult start to adult life (the Malet conspiracy), the violent deaths of all his brothers and sisters, and this persecution by the ultra-royalists was finally the last straw that broke the camel's back.

He must have said to himself during his reactionary turn: "What did the ideals of the revolution bring my family? My father, guillotined. My mother, perpetually persecuted. My siblings, all dead in tragic, violent ways. I nearly died myself. Meanwhile, our enemies prospered (aka Guffroy, Barras, Fréron and Fouché). Even Tallien was treated better than us when the Bourbons returned. Enough. I’ll only honor my parents and their close allies like Buonarroti and Le Peletier. The rest? No longer my concern. This time I don't care about becoming a liar for personal reasons and being called unreliable.”

Ultimately, if people like Guffroy, Fouché, Napoleon, and even Carnot (although I do not put him in the same category as the others, as Carnot had a different reason for acting as he did and never acted directly against Émile, unlike the others) bear a heavy responsibility for what he became, there is nevertheless a certain responsibility on the part of his parents, Gracchus and Marie-Anne, as loving and protective as they were. Yes, they made sure to buy him toys whenever they could and cared about his education, but they were too demanding of him. When Émile began to neglect his studies in Vendôme, one must remember that he had witnessed the repression of the Babouvists and, even worse, had to prepare himself to accept the high probability that his father would be executed, so it is not surprising that he acted that way. Instead of gently explaining to him why he needed to refocus on his studies, Gracchus sent him the letter of reprimand about the stilts, just as he wanted him to spend several hours on the violin. Marie-Anne surely agreed with this because, with her personality (although they were always in agreement), if she had disapproved of Gracchus's behavior towards Émile, there would have been a written trace of it.

Ultimately, if people like Guffroy, Fouché, Napoleon,the ultra-royalists and even Carnot (although I do not put him in the same category as the others, as Carnot had a different reason for acting as he did and never acted directly against Émile, unlike the others) bear a heavy responsibility for what he became, there is nevertheless a certain responsibility on the part of his parents, Gracchus and Marie-Anne, as loving and protective as they were. Yes, they made sure to buy him toys whenever they could and cared about his education, but they were too demanding of him. When Émile began to neglect his studies in Vendôme, one must remember that he had witnessed the repression of the Babouvists and, even worse, had to prepare himself to accept the high probability that his father would be executed, so it is not surprising that he acted that way. Instead of gently explaining to him why he needed to refocus on his studies, Gracchus sent him the letter of reprimand about the stilts, just as he wanted him to spend several hours on the violin. Marie-Anne surely agreed with this because, with her personality (although they were always in agreement), if she had disapproved of Gracchus's behavior towards Émile, there would have been a written trace of it.

I get the impression that Gracchus, in some ways, reproduced the family dynamic he himself experienced as a child—particularly in his high expectations (although, unlike his own father, he never raised a hand against his children). I understand their fears. If Émile failed in his education, what future would he have? Both Gracchus and Marie-Anne had their childhoods stolen by poverty and were forced to work at a young age for just a few coins. They knew better than anyone—especially Gracchus—what it meant to have a childhood stripped away. But even with the best of intentions, there are better ways to guide a child than placing such a heavy burden on his shoulders. They were good parents, but they made mistakes.

In the end, when we look at the end of Émile Babeuf's journey, we are faced with a great waste, with someone who had great potential and who ultimately became what he did. His suffering doesn’t excuse him. He remains responsible for the damage his actions and lies caused. As a man attached to the memory of his father, whom he had long seen slandered, he should have taken into account the request of Philippe le Bas's son. He did not.

Ultimately, we must remember Émile Babeuf for his entire political journey, whether it was admirable (until 1818) or his less glorious moments (after 1818, the false memoirs, what happened with Philippe le Bas's son, his less reliable side).

Reddit:

I had fully translated the post, but due to fatigue and being sick, I forgot to include some excerpts — including letters mentioning Didier, Madame Le Bas, etc. My apologies — I’ve now updated the post and added the missing texts.Without it my post is incoherent at times.

I think we can be fairly certain that the Elisabeth Le Bas mentioned in the letter by Buonarroti is indeed the one we know. However, it’s also possible that he was referring to a potential wife of François Le Bas — a caterer who lived in Vendôme and became friends with Émile Babeuf during his father’s trial. Their friendship apparently lasted quite a long time.

This second possibility seems unlikely to me, but I wanted to mention it just in case.

Sources: Jean Dautry Victor Advielle Dommanget Maurice Jean-Marc Schiappa Robert Barrie Rose Pierre Serna Claude Mazauric Bouis Thanks to @aedislumen, without whom I would never have learned that Émile, who told me about the possible link between Carnot and Emile Babeuf on the "Mémoires au Roi". Thanks to @sieclesetcieux, who taught me about the existence of the conflict between Émile Babeuf and Philippe le Bas's son in the very good work Veuve de Thermidor:le rôle et l’influence d’Élisabeth Duplay‑Le Bas (1772‑1859) sur la mémoire et l’historiographie de la Révolution française.

P.S : About the posts on Marie-Anne Babeuf and her mysteries, here are several different ones: The first post here is more traditional — it focuses mainly on the official support she gave her husband.

The others, however, reveal a more cunning, clever, and at times even manipulative side of her — although always in pursuit of a goal. She was far more than just a collaborator: as you can see here, here, and here, she acted as a sharp political strategist and advisor to her husband.

As for Gracchus Babeuf’s personality traits, you can find them here.

To see the political relationship between Babeuf and Guffroy, click here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/780339711912869888/the-collaboration-and-eventual-break-between?source=share The relationship between Jean-Paul Marat and Gracchus Babeuf is here: https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/767708756031176704/i-am-so-exhausted-that-i-only-now-realize-that-i?source=share

To learn more about Antonelle, go here https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/761515728971202560/the-political-career-of-the-revolutionary?source=share and here https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/781747560324956160/antonelles-role-as-juror-during-the-revolution?source=share

Trending Tags

Last Seen Tags

#guffroy

Trending Tags

Last Seen Tags

#guffroy