#anti-Napoleon propaganda

[empirearchives]

Madame de Staël:

Source: The Origins of Contemporary France, Volume 5

[wickedlittlecritta]

after that last reblog i’m tempted to write an extremely self-indulgent au where my wizard devin is a weird little mage-diplomat from tyra and they all have to deal with him.

he’s white girl wasted on red wine and speaking fantasy italian at 100 mph. alanna is crying.

[microcosme11]

Illustration to the book, "Secret preparations to the elimination of Napoleon's army by means of aeronautics", 1812.

wikimedia commons

[orsuliya]

Oh, I'd say Ekaterina had a very good reason to hate her marriage. A very good reason indeed, thanks to Emperor Paul being Emperor Paul.

See, if you are a young beauty, just seventeen, raised in a court-adjacent family, with your mother a Potiomkin niece, you'd expect that it wouldn't be a big deal if you decide to fairly innocently flirt. And indeed it was not a big deal, with Ekaterina approaching Bagration mostly out of curiosity and maybe a bit out of pride, then showing pretty much immediately after catching his interest, that she wouldn't reciprocate. A short, silly, easily forgotten episode, right?

Except then, not that long after, your mother gets a message from the Emperor himself, in which she's told to come to the Gatchina palace the very next day, with you in tow, already dressed in a wedding gown. So that's what you both do and once you're there the Emperor says that his wish is to witness your wedding with this man you flirted with. Like, right now, in the palace church.

The groom is eighteen years older than you and pretty much the opposite of your type. He's a soldier with a soldier's nature, the furthest possible thing from a brilliant courtier. Dashing? Perhaps. But not in any way you might appreciate right here and now. You also share very little when it comes to ambitions, temperament and life experience.

But Emperor Paul is Emperor Paul, so your hair gets adorned with diamond pins by the Empress herself and you are swiftly married among people who aren't necessarily your friends. There is much fun and merriment for everyone. Except for you, that is. And the groom, who is no less shocked, because this is a suprise for him as well.

And while the Emperor doesn't say so out loud, this marriage isn't just about making your new husband happy. It's also about using your fortune (which, by the way, isn't as big as people think) as a reward for his loyalty.

Need I mention that you're in love with another man, who will marry your sister within a year?

That is one hell of an inauspicious start. And, as if that wasn't enough, it seems like everybody and their dog, excepting Paul, knew pretty much the moment this marriage happened that the groom and the bride were very badly matched in temperament, preferences and even manners.

Yes, as far as we know, Ekaterina rejected Bagration's overtures and so they settled in pretty much separate lives before she left Petersburg. But, my God, it's not hard to understand why!

A curious addendum to the horrible wife bit. Yeah, she was a distant, not very dutiful, then wholy absent wife. And yet, though this is more to Bagration's credit than to hers, he gets genuinely, personally offended in 1809 when she doesn't receive the honours that other wives receive. And soon before his death he orders her portrait.

She cannot even be wholly blamed for Bagration's money trouble - he started the habit of selling his reward villages back to the treasury before they even met and was as bad as she was at managing finances, in addition to being a stupidly generous man.

Horribly neglectful mother? Is this about her daughter with Metternich being raised by Metternich's wife with her other kids? True, but they kept in contact and she was a tender grandmother to that daughter's son.

Faithfulness or lack thereof has little to do with overall sexiness as far as this poll is concerned. Otherwise, we'd have relatively few candidates left, I fear!

That being said, Trobriand is pretty swoonworthy, especially in that uniform! It's just that Ekaterina is nowhere as horrible or simple as it might seem.

my ANTI PROPAGANDA for Ekaterina Pavlona Bagration is that she is a TERRIBLE FUCKING PERSON, she was a HORRIBLE wife to Pyotr Bagration straight up hated on him for no fucking reason whatsoever and was EXTREMELY unfaithful, not to mention she was a HORRIBLY NEGLECTFUL MOTHER, only ever cared about herself, she was HORRIBLY SELFISH

VOTE TROBRIAND!!!

.

[trashpoppaea]

Review of Napoleon (2023)

So I saw Napoleon (2023).

eyes glaze over

collapses and melts into a puddle

This is possibly the most soporifically boring, relentlessly mediocre so-called "epic" I have had the misfortune to see.

Plotless, pointless, and devoid of anything approaching characterization, the movie can be best described as reenacted scenes from a wikipedia article about Napoleon as written by the Anti-Jacobin.

The whole thing is suffused with British reactionary propaganda circa 1815. The characterizations are all courtesy of the Anti-Jacobin and Rowlandson’s cartoons. Robespierre is a tyrant, Napoleon is a buffoonish loutish thug, and Josephine is a slut. There’s nothing there. There’s no character arcs, no development. Sure, it’s pretty enough, but it's boring. So, so, so boring.

While watching it, I was frequently in a fugue state, floating over my body, wondering, "what is a movie? is this what they're like now? with no drama, no characters, no arcs, no interest?"

In fact, I didn't watch it: I endured it.

Joaquin Phoenix is awful. He is completely miscast on every conceivable level. Mumbling, monotone, and charmless-- I never for one moment thought I was watching Napoleon-- it only felt like Phoenix's cosplay. He and Vanessa Kirby have so little chemistry they might as well be appearing in different movies. They supposedly have this grand obsession/love story, but this amounts to sitting in the same room staring off in boredom. There's the occasional ridiculous sex scene which is always doggie style with clothes on. But for the most part, Josephine just stands in the rain or stares off into the mist.

Oh yeah there's the occasional battle. Eh…

Napoleon’s life was filled with colorful characters like the foppish, extravagant and brave Murat, the bold and foul-mouthed Lannes, the scheming, irrepressible Fouche, and the bubbly nymphomaniac Pauline, none of whom are here, and you have a bunch of interchangeable extras standing around rooms or battlefields. The only character who makes any impression whatsoever is Edouard Philipponnat as Czar Alexander, and I would have rather had a movie starring this actor. Alas, that's not what we got.

A lot of money was spent on this movie. A lot of choices were made. The result was a bland, forgettable dud that immediately fell into a memory hole as soon I departed the theatre.

As Napoleon himself would say, BAH!

PS. @microcosme11 and I didn't watch the entire thing, because it is 2 hours and 40 minutes long. As all the restaurants in the neighborhood were closing at 10, we left half an hour early, right before Waterloo and after Josephine died of pneumonia, so we could have burgers and a richly deserved beer.

PPS. Feel free to ask me for specifics!

@thiswaycomessomethingwicked @lordansketil @joachimnapoleon @usergreenpixel @twice-told-tales @josefavomjaaga @bunniesandbeheadings @jefflion

[mandatorycommunistbrunchhour]

I tried to make some sexy propaganda for the @napoleonic-sexyman-tournament but . . . This seems a bit more like anti-propaganda 👉👈😅

[armagnac-army]

I DEMAND YOU CREATE ANOTHER POLL !! And do not call it a “pity poll” unless you want your house flooded with my vikings

-Bernadotte

MARSHALATE PITY BALLOT

VOTE FOR ONE OF THE LESS POPULAR LES GRANDE CHAPEAUX!!! SOMEHOW BERTHIER THE NERD WON THE FIRST POLLE WITH ME IN SECOND PLACE SO LETS DO THIS SHIT AGAIN

IN CASE YOU DONT KNOW WHO WE ARE WE HAVE A "OUIKIPEDIA PAGE" ALL ABOUT US AND OUR BIG HATS BUT LONG STORY SHORT WERE NAPOLEONS TOP COMMANDERS WHO FUCK SHIT UP FOR HIM

SO ONCE AGAIN VOTE FOR WHOEEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT WHETHER THATS THE BEST OR THE SEXIEST OR THE MOST PATHETIC

YOU CAN EVEN STUFF THE BALLOTS IF YOU WANT THE EMPEROR DID IT SO WHY NOT YOU

This is a public service announcement. Do not engage in vote manipulation. -Maréchal Soult

IVE DEFINITELY NOT FORGOTTEN ANYONE THIS TIME AND THERES NOBODY SNEAKING ONTO THE BALLOT!!!!

FEEL FREE TO POST PROPAGANDA OR ANTI PROPAGANDA WE WILL SHARE IT IF ITS FUNNY

ALSO DO SHARE THIS SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHO WINS THE PITY VOTE AND MAYBE PIT THEM AGAINST BERTHIER IN A CAGE FIGHT

WHERES GROUCHY

[aranov]

Free my boy he did all that but he's literally neurodivergent and a minor

This is @transthadymacdermot 's Donal, who just recently escaped the Torment Nexus! Anti-war propaganda from 200 years ago is my favorite genre. Put that Napoleonic era soldier in a Situation!

[twinkpoll]

I hate that I'm contractually obligated to reblog propaganda.

Twink Poll Preliminary Round #7

Nagito Komaeda (Danganronpa) vs Billy Kaplan (Marvel)

[whencyclopedia]

Battle of Marengo

The Battle of Marengo (14 June 1800) was one of the most important battles in the career of Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821). It not only helped bring the French Revolutionary Wars to an end but also did much to consolidate Bonaparte's new position as First Consul of the French Republic. The battle became a major piece of propaganda for the Bonapartist regime.

Background

In the months after he seized power in the Coup of 18 Brumaire, First Consul Napoleon Bonaparte was far from secure in his new position. He was still considered by many to be an up-jumped Corsican opportunist, and he had no shortage of rivals – such as generals Jean Bernadotte and Jean Victor Moreau – who would be glad to see his fall from grace. Further, the French Republic was still embroiled in the unpopular War of the Second Coalition (1798-1802) against an alliance of anti-French powers including Austria, Russia, Britain, the Ottoman Empire, and Naples. This conflict was part of the broader French Revolutionary Wars (1792-1802), meaning that by January 1800, France had been perpetually at war for the better part of a decade. With much of the general populace war-weary, Bonaparte knew he had to deliver a swift, decisive victory if he wanted to win the support of his people.

His first step was to order the formation of a 30,000-man army based at Dijon, primarily consisting of soldiers who had been on garrison duty in the provinces. Though Bonaparte fully intended to lead this army over the Alps to fight the Austrians in northern Italy, its true purpose had to be concealed; it was named the Army of the Reserve and was placed under the command of Bonaparte's trusted chief of staff Louis-Alexandre Berthier.

While onlookers believed the ruse that this was merely a reserve force, Bonaparte secretly prepared the army for campaigning. Soldiers were trained using the 'canteen' system, whereby eight veterans and eight recruits would march, eat, and camp together, fostering a sense of camaraderie and allowing the recruits to learn quicker. Meanwhile, Bonaparte worked with war minister Lazare Carnot to procure 100,000 pairs of boots, 40,000 uniforms, and 2 million rations of biscuits for the army at Dijon. The First Consul also ordered all major field forces to adopt the corps d'armée system, breaking each army down into mobile and semi-independent corps; this would become a staple of Napoleonic warfare.

As his army was being prepared, Bonaparte poured over maps to decide where he would cross the Alps. He decided to take the main part of his army across the 2469-meter (8,100-foot) Great St Bernard Pass, while a division under General Adrien Moncey would take the St Gothard Pass. During one strategy meeting, Bonaparte purportedly asked his secretary, Bourrienne, where he thought the decisive battle would be fought once the French had gotten over the Alps. "How the devil should I know?" asked Bourrienne, as the First Consul drove a pin into a map on the plains of the Scrivia River. "I shall fight him here," said Bonaparte. It was the exact spot where he would fight the Battle of Marengo three months later, a demonstration of Bonaparte's quick and perceptive mind (Roberts, 252; Chandler, 275).

Continue reading...

[sensitiveuser]

André Léo during the Paris Commune

During the Paris Commune, André Léo wrote for the newspaper La Sociale. She published an article in which she criticized the isolation of Paris and the abandonment of the province. She defends the need not to abandon the peasants of the provincial countryside, necessary to fight to the death against the legitimists so that the Revolution is victorious. It highlights the common interests of the worker and the peasant, equally victims of oppression and capitalist exploitation, in the hope that the provinces and the countryside will follow the example of Paris.

This is the “Appeal to Country Workers” of April 10, 1871:

"Brother, you are being deceived. Our interests are the same. What I ask, you want too; the emancipation I demand is yours (…) To you as to me, freedom, leisure, the life of the mind and the heart are lacking. We are still and always, you and I, the vassals of misery. For nearly a century, peasant, poor day laborer, you have been told that property is the fruit of work, and you believe it. But open your eyes and look around you. Here you are old; you have always worked; all your days have passed, spade or sickle in hand, from dawn to night, and yet you are not rich, and you do not even have a piece of bread for your old age"; "No, brother, work does not give property. It is transmitted by chance, or earned by trickery." She concludes with this slogan: “Land to the farmer, tools to the worker, work for all.” (La Sociale, April 10, 1871).

In La Sociale, André Léo proposes forming committees for propaganda in the provinces, the abolition of taxes (to be replaced by a common contribution), and the opening of credits. In an article published on May 3, she makes these proposals: bring to the office of La Sociale the addresses of provincial socialists, who could make the "Appeal to Rural Workers" known to the peasants; then, I quote, "To send them themselves to their parents and friends in the provinces, immediately if they can; later when postal communications are reestablished, if they have no other means. Today it is necessary. Later, it will always be useful" (La Sociale, May 3, 1871).

Let us note a subject of disagreement between André Léo and the other editors of La Sociale: André Léo opposed the banning of reactionary newspapers. According to her, she justifies herself by the fact that freedom of conscience and expression must be inviolable; moreover, she does not want to reproduce what the kings, the Napoleons, and the conservative republicans have inflicted on the People.

She joined the Montmartre Vigilance Committee and the Union of Women for the Defense of Paris and Care of the Wounded (with Elisabeth Dmitrieff, Thérèse Collin, Nathalie Le Mel, Aline Jacquier, Aglaé Jarry, Blanche Lefebre, Marceline Leloup). On April 21, she signed the Appeal of the Citizens of Montmartre with Anna Jaclard and Sophie Poirier, declaring the foundation of ambulance companies.

As a good socialist activist and in favor of the education of women in order to ensure their emancipation, André Léo joined the Committee for the organization of Education in girls' schools, with Anna Jaclard, Elisée Reclus, Théodore Sapia and Périer. It was a question of putting an end to the ineptitudes of Catholic education in schools. The child must no longer be the property and slave of the authority of the master, and the school must transmit to him knowledge and democratic principles. Obviously, it rejects any distinction of sex in the methods of education !

When the Committee of Public Safety was created, she supported the anti-authoritarian minority of the Council of the Commune.

In an article that she titles "The Revolution without Women", she criticizes the misogyny demonstrated by Dombrowski, who refuses to integrate the ambulance drivers of Montmartre into the army: "Do you know, General Dombrowski, how the Revolution of March 18 was made? By Women. Early in the morning, regular troops had been directed to Montmartre. The small number of national guards who guarded the cannons of the Place Saint-Pierre had been surprised and the cannons removed (...) A few more turns of the wheel, and you would never have been a general of the Commune, citizen Dombrowski!" (La Sociale, May 8, 1871). She adds that republican and revolutionary men, since the period of the Convention, "have demanded that women no longer be under the yoke of priests, and they are displeased to see them as freethinkers. They are happy for them not to work against them, but they reject their help as soon as they want to act." Louis Rossel (who appreciates her or at least respects her) says in a letter that he understands her anger against the invisibility of women within the Commune. It is a question of finding a solution, and André Léo and Victor Jaclard (doctor, Blanquist) agree to found ambulances run by surgeons who have no sexist prejudices! Faced with the attacks against Rossel accused of treason by the Central Committee, André Léo defends him. In an article in La Sociale, she raises these two questions: "Is there therefore a bias to lose what can save the revolution? And to keep what must lose it? » (La Sociale, May 15, 1871). She even had the impression that there was a monarchist plot in the Central Committee, an idea that she would defend at the Congress of Peace and Liberty. She thus demanded an investigation into the activities of the Central Committee, which according to her only sowed disorder. Nevertheless, the Versailles massacre was fast approaching…

During Bloody Week (May 21 to 28), she fought at the barricades of Batignolles, with Louise Michel.

In June 1871, she was the victim of an arrest warrant. She found help from Benoît Malon, with whom she took refuge in Switzerland. In September, she participated in the fifth congress of the League of Peace and Liberty (a liberal organization) in Lausanne. She wrote La Guerre Sociale, which was a virulent critique of Versailles barbarity. Addressing the issue of violence, she criticized Raoul Rigault and Théophile Ferré (both members of the security commission and police delegates), "More than anyone, I have deplored, I have cursed the blindness of these men - I am speaking of the majority - whose stupid incapacity has lost the most beautiful cause". She explained that, as we know, the monarchists had allied themselves with the conservative republicans, out of fear of the proletariat, and of a democratic and social people's republic. André Léo did not have time to finish his speech. This assembly of liberals, who have been fighting against wars in the world since 1867, has no intention of hearing about class struggle. Nevertheless, this congress will have served as a platform for the exiles, and, according to an article in the Belgian newspaper Liberté, "André Léo, with his courageous speech, has made the authorized leaders of the French Republican Party (including Louis Blanc) drink the last of the shame (…) who are happily mourning Paris."

[anarchistin]

After self-professed anarchist Leon Czolgosz killed U.S. President William McKinley, incoming President Theodore Roosevelt launched a domestic campaign against anarchism and tapped Charles Bonaparte (the grandnephew of Napoleon) to develop the policing organization that would ultimately become the FBI.

Roosevelt stated explicitly to Congress that the state needed to “war with relentless efficiency not only against anarchists, but against all active and passive sympathizers with anarchists,�� whom he labeled a “body of criminals who object to all governments, good and bad alike.”

The war against anarchists would later shape much of the First Red Scare and be marked by anti-immigrant legislation, such as the 1903 Anarchist Exclusion Act.

The 1919-20 Palmer Raids conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice led to the arrest and deportation of thousands of labor organizers; Italian, Eastern European, and Jewish immigrants; and prominent anarchists like Emma Goldman.

Herein lies the era that illustrates the origins of the policy, policing, and strategic persecution used against anti-fascist organizers and radicals today.

[kira-does-art-sometimes]

So for a history project I had to make an intentionally biased anti-Napoleon newspaper with a group. And I made this propaganda comic.

@whump-queen @whump-in-the-closet @shydragonrider @imnotamurdereripromise @eric-the-bmo

[napoleonic-sexyman-tournament]

Hello sillies! I'm back with more fun facts about Bagration (and also an anti-propaganda for his wife Catherine Bagration)

It makes me very sad to see the two in this confrontation! I love them both very much and I think that in another context they would get along well because they are also curly fellas, but let me tell you something curious, Bagration and Murat got to know each other! In a very curious way, let's say that it was a form of flirtation, a flirtation that was done by Bagration himself, who, the very clever one, praised Murat in a meeting before Austerlitz so that he would accept a false armistice (Murat was also easy to influence. through praise, so Bagration knew how to take advantage of the situation).

Unfortunately, I would like to give more information about what happened between the two, but in my book it only mentions that, that Murat, under the influence of Bagration's flirtation, willingly accepted the armistice (did you know that, @joachimnapoleon ? Hehehe)

These are details that I said in my previous blurb, he is also with Lannes, who days ago I found his book written by Margaret that gave me more details of their meeting. Jean was not in a good mood because he did not like being under Murat's command because he considered him mediocre and when the Russian officers were invited to the barracks for dinner, Lannes chose, of all people, Bagration to form a conversation with him and Jean's opinion of Bagration was that he was someone who was an expert at what he did, not like some buffoonish soldiers present.

(Bagration was terrible at speaking and understanding French! I wonder what language they communicated in)

Here i left you a fragment extracted from both topics:

“Prince Bagration was a most agreeable man; he knew so well how to flatter Murat that the latter, taken in in his turn by the Russian general, eagerly accepted the armistice in spite of remarks of Lannes, who wished to fight.” The armistice was concluded on conditions that the Russians would leave Austrian territory, while the French would remain in Moravia. Both sides agreed to give four-hour notice before resuming hostilities. The armistice was to sent to Napoleon and Kutuzov for ratification. In the meantime, the French invited the Russian officers to their headquarters for a dinner. Bagration met Marshal Lannes there and the two spoke for some time. Lannes told him, if he had been commanding the troops, they would have been fighting by now." —The Lion of the Russian army, Alexander Mikaberidze.

«Bagration's rear-guard was not the only weapon in Kutuzov's arsenal. He decided to rum the armistice mse against its original perpetrators. While Bagration's men dug in at Schongrabern, Kutuzov sent General Ferdinand Wintzingerode under a flag of tmce to meet with the French advance-guard. The Austrian told Murat that because negotiations were underway in Vienna, they should both hold their present positions. If the negotiations failed, he added, then whoever broke the tmce would give a six-hour warning before resuming hostilities. Murat agreed, mostly because he mistook Bagration's rear-guard for the leading elements of Kutuzov's main force and knew he and Lannes needed reinforcements before they could engage the Russians. He sent an aide-de-camp to notify Napoleon of the cease-fire and invited Wintzingerode, Bagration, and other Russian officers to his headquarters for wine and polite conversation.

Lannes never believed Wintzingerode for a minute. Instead, he had a pretty good idea where Kutuzov was, thought Bagration was on his own, and knew Napoleon meant to fight the Russians, not negotiate with them. Already annoyed that his corps was at half strength and Murat was still telling him what to do, he stood on the edge of the gathering, holding a glass of wine and glaring at friends and enemies alike. He spoke only to Bagration, whom he recognized as a professional soldier, not a buffoon like some in the present company. "If I was on my own and didn't have to put up with Murat's orders," he told the Russian general, "we'd be fighting, not standing around drinking and talking about the goddamned weather." Bagration probably agreed with him.41 While Kutuzov marched farther away, Bagration returned to Schongrabern.

Napoleon sent an aide to Murat with another blistering reprimand. "It is impossible for me to find words to express my displeasure with you," he wrote.

"Break that truce immediately and attack the enemy. . . . The Austrians allowed themselves to be fooled over the Vienna bridge, but you have been fooled by one of [Alexander I's] aides-de-camp!" A chastened Murat gave orders for an offensive while Lannes, enjoying Murat's humiliation, rode off to tell Bagration they would be fighting after all.» —The emperor's friend: Jean Lannes, Margaret Scott.

Very curious and charming, right? Now let's move on to different points!

★ I know that there is a certain image of Alexander I and people love him, for my part I hate him because he was unfair to Bagration, Alex never trusted and liked the presence of Prince Georgian, he even excluded him from certain inaugurations and it is said that when Catherine, Bagration's wife, had an illegitimate daughter, Alex forced Bagration to acknowledge paternity and perhaps take financial responsibility for her, but there are no details of the latter. The truth is that Alex was visibly hostile to Bagration and Bagration knew it, he knew that the emperor did not want him and he even fantasized about commanding both Russian armies, but due to his strategic lack and tense relationship with Alex, he clearly never achieved it.

"Although Bagration's secret ambition was to command the Russian armies, he was hesitant to go that far. The proud descendant of the Bagration kings, he was a worthy man, too high and noble a figure to condescend to open intrigue and deliberate insubordination.

Bagration rejected all appeals to write to the tsar. He wrote to Yermolov: "I will not write to the tsar asking for command, because this would be attributed to my ambition and vanity, not to my merits and abilities." Perhaps Bagration realized that Alexander would never give him supreme command of the Russian Army. He was well aware of Alexander's feelings towards him, especially in light of his conflict during the 1809 campaign in the Danube Valley, current disagreements over strategy, and his previous relationship with Alexander's sister Catherine. However, Bagration still hoped to be appointed commander-in-chief and often commented in letters to Rostopchin: "if I commanded both armies..."

I really hate Alexander's attitude towards Pyotr because Pyotr never did anything bad to him, he was very good to him and obeyed him. When Pavel "adopted" Pyotr as a trusted general, that also meant that Bagration became closer to the imperial family and on one occasion, in the Palace, a prince along with Alexander saw Bagration approaching, to which the prince says that " Here comes the best general!" or something like that, but Pyotr responds that flattery/attention is more important "I am not worthy of praise, but the sun/star of Russia" referring and pointing to the tsarevich himself, Alexander.

★ This is related to the previous (anti-propaganda and Alexander) and pay attention to what I say, Bagration's wife started this whole nightmare because she was a very beautiful countess, yes, but as a person she was terrible, she was capricious and cruel (I understand that when she found out about Bagration's death, she had no mixed feelings, she simply didn't care about the death of the man she manipulated so much).

And since she was capricious, she was also a flirt, she fell in love with men to satisfy her ego and then abandoned them, the most notable victim of her was Bagration.

She began to pursue him, to attract him with her charms, but since Bagration did not know how to act in the face of coquetry and was very shy with female affection, he was stoic and she even complained to him about it, some time later Pyotr "falls in love" with her. Catherine (I think he was not in love, he was simply attracted by the enormous beauty of the countess to the point of being a toy for her, because I had read in a fragment that he sometimes wanted to burn the mini portrait that he had of her, but when he saw her beauty, his hand retreated and he found himself unable to do so, besides there was no reason to fall in love with someone like Catherine, in this era marriages were a horrible failure!) and when she saw his success, she immediately left him and things could have ended like this, with Bagration "in love" and her with her wasteful life, Pyotr would never have suffered, but here comes Pavel and his unfortunate habit of marrying two people, I know an anecdote that a marriage did not end well thanks to him, and Catherine and Pyotr are another example.

One day, the two are told to go somewhere, dressed formally for something they didn't know about. When they arrived they were going to be consecrated in marriage, I can already imagine the surprise on both their faces.

The wedding was without consent and the family was close to the emperor, but you know, Pavel had a difficult and severe temperament, so telling him anything about it would end very badly.

It was already known that the Union was going to be unhappy, Pyotr tried to win Catherine's affection by satisfying her whims but this never happened and she looked for any excuse to avoid it, so it was a horrible suffering for Pyotr.

Everything was like that, until the Napoleonic wars broke out and she took the opportunity to go to Vienna, they never met again.

She was traveling through Europe, she was known as "the wandering princess" because she had her own carriage for several trips and she explained to Bagration that she could not return to Russia because "I am sick and I need medication." This lie was quite obvious and he The only thing she did was waste money, and when she began to run out of it, she began to ask Bagration, also in a guilty way, that Pyotr should take care of it because it was his duty as her husband (he also said so). ).

And since Bagration loved her very much and was detached with money, he took care of her and sent her all the money she needed, while she was unfaithful with the whore Metternich (excuse the word, but this man also slept with the wife of Murat, so here is another similarity between Murat and Bagration) and from there they had a daughter whom Bagration had to recognize as his own. I repeat, he never met the girl.

Obviously there are gossips everywhere, so the news of Catherine dishonoring Bagration spread like an epidemic, but despite that, he always defended her first and foremost because it was his duty as a husband, he was really too good for her.

Due to his wife's infidelities, his aristocratic position due to being of noble lineage (he was a prince, but a prince of nothing because his family was exiled, so that title was for decoration) and his poor education due to his youthful poverty, Pyotr's life was the object of gossip, ridicule and humiliation that he had to endure. I remember that he had tense relations with the St. Petersburg Court (he had courtier skills but he did not like the Court that much, from what I read in a book of his written by Gribanov) and there were two options there, speak wonders of Bagration or speak miseries of him.

To be specific in a humiliation towards Bagration, it happened when he once publicly announced with another man that he would take care of Catherine's assets while Pyotr would not, which earned him humiliation.

It also happens that Catherine's family hated Bagration because he "ruined" their daughter's life and he was trying to get closer to them but it wasn't working. On one occasion he gave a gift to his mother-in-law in Naples and she abruptly rejected it.

Bagration was faithful to him until Catherine arrived, the tsar's sister who felt great love for him and used to deify him, so they had a special approach both physically and in letters, they walked hand in hand through the parks and Catherine was younger. than him, but she was a very cunning woman, in a source I had read that during the Court balls, she flirted with Bagration saying that she would love to be queen of Georgia, which makes me sad because they didn't end up together.

The imperial family did not agree with that, partly because he was "ugly" (that same portrait you are seeing in the voting publication was from 1812, when Bagration was 47 years old, and he does not look like it!) and also because of Alex's dislike towards Pyotr, so they were immediately separated, Alex sent Bagration elsewhere while Catherine entered into a marriage.

What do you want me to tell you more? Oh, true! Alexander also had an affair with Catherine Bagration, what do you think?

★ Bagration was modest in the way he dressed and wore the same uniform almost all the time, but still he was like a fashion icon because of the popularity of him! Here is a fragment that explains it better.

While in St. Petersburg, Bagration became a symbol of Russian victory for the younger generation. Young women wore Bagration-style hats while young officers idolized him. Paul Grabbe, one of these officers, recalled that “Bagration's heroic deeds at Amstetten [and Schongrabern] were discussed in our spare time and remained the best reminiscences of that period.” Another contemporary, Denis Davidov wrote: “Bagration's soul echoed the bold thoughts of the younger generation, who always thirsted for military adventures and glory.” In late February, the St. Petersburg Vedomosti Decree published Emperor Alexander's decree praising Bagration for “remarkable courage and presence of mind… resisting the attacks of the superior enemy and marching his troops in order from the battlefield to Austerlitz and then covering the withdrawal of the army.”

★ When he recently moved to the capital, an aunt of his helped him have an interview with Potemkin and it was faster than expected, so a carriage went to pick up Pyotr but he didn't have the look/clothes to introduce himself , but a butler helped him by giving him his caftan with which he could attend the interview. Some time later, when Bagration was already a recognized general, he met the butler, whom he hugged and thanked him saying "without him, I would not have been who I am!", thus demonstrating that Bagration was a pleasant person.

★ Bagration didn't even know him at home before, but when he started as a general and was promoted (he was the most popular of all at that time), the Flattery and special invitations to him increased more, many people wanted to meet him and here's another fragment because it best describes the situation:

As his fame spread throughout the Empire, Bagration made public appearances with the Emperor and served as a guest of honor at numerous events. In early February 1806, Prince Peter accompanied Alexander to the Academy of Medical Surgery and then attended the opening of the first Russian Therapy Clinic. At the end of February, he traveled to Moscow, where the English Club, one of the Empire's most prestigious societies, hosted a special dinner “in honor of his last brave conduct with the armies.” He exceeded all expectations. The English traveler Ker Porter recalled: “The suites of splendid halls, and the great marble hall in which dinner was served, were furnished with the most implacable magnificence.”178 One reception housed 350 guests; One participant described: “he searched for and bought all the rarest meat, fish, vegetables, wines and fried foods for dinner; Everyone wanted to participate in this reception.”179 at 2:00 p.m. Bagration appeared and “was immediately surrounded by everyone in the room, eager to express his joy at his presence, and congratulations to his country for having been blessed with the preservation of such a man.”

Soon a splendid dinner was served and the emperor and Bagration “marred with the greatest enthusiasm” were toasted. “As long as we have baggage, the enemies will always be at our feet.”183 Ker Porter was perplexed by the fervor of the guests and noted: “I have never seen such a lively society of Russians; and more than once it reminded me of similar gatherings in honor of our glorious friend and hero Sir Sidney Smith.” In addition, a band of garrison singers sang a specially written song praising Prince Bagration. Hall, where he was declared an honorary member of the English Club.186 During the celebration, Sir Ker Porter was introduced to Bagration, who greatly impressed him. He characterized Prince Pyotr as “not only one of the first military heroes, but in his character as a man, an honor to human nature.”

The celebration in honor of Bagration did not end in the English Club. Over the next two weeks, he was invited to several dinners, dances, or other gatherings. On March 19, Prince Khovansky hosted another lavish dinner for Bagration. One of the witnesses wrote: “I cannot describe this event to you because there are no words for it. The dining room was adorned with various trophies and there was a portrait of Bagration in the middle of the main wall. There were bundles of weapons, flags, and other souvenirs beneath the portrait, and several young women, dressed in the color of his uniform and wearing Bagration-style hats, the latest fashion in the city, surrounded him.” When Bagration entered, the band played the music and the ladies' song the dedications. Then several ladies presented him with a laurel wreath and led him to a curtain-covered wall. While the curtains were drawn, “a theatrical stage was built depicting a forest and an ancient temple of glory with a statue of Suvorov. [Suddenly], a guardian angel [genius] came out of the temple and gave letters to Bagration, who read them aloud and placed a laurel wreath at the feet of the statue of Suvorov. "Then we started the dance."

★ just as Alexander has a nickname which is Sasha, Bagration clearly had too, and that was Petya, very cute indeed.

★ Bagration was easy to embarrass/blush! I'm just reading his historical novel in Russian and on several occasions Bagration blushes and gets embarrassed, imagine if you were flirting with him, he'd be more ahhh cutie patootie. 😭

★ he was not interested in politics, but if he did get involved in Georgian politics, again, I will leave another fragment to explain it better:

In the summer of 1806, Bagration also participated in Georgian politics. The Georgian nobility was dissatisfied with the Russian administration and anti-Russian sentiment spread rapidly among the population. The Russians introduced the Russian legislature and language which were rejected by the Georgians. The harsh Russian occupation had greatly changed the attitude of a people, who once welcomed the Russians as liberators from the Persians and Turks. Considered by their new masters as mere serfs, the Georgian peasantry looked back with nostalgia on the bad old days. The nobility also felt neglected. Under the Georgian kings, they enjoyed privileges and power, ruling according to their traditions and customs. Now they found themselves living in a province of the vast empire, whose rules were foreign to them and seemed to lack sympathy for their nation. In the spring of 1806, the Georgian nobility asked for help from Peter Bagration, who was one of the most influential Georgians in the Russian Empire. Instead, Prince Pyotr sent his brother Roman to Georgia with letters to the Georgian nobles urging them to comply with the Russian government. However, the Russian administration became alarmed by Bagration's involvement in Georgian affairs and made reports of disapproval to St. Petersburg.

★ That's right, Bagration had a sense of humor, he even told jokes in tense/dangerous moments before a battle.

★ there is a mischaracterization of Bagration in the novel War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy, he is represented as someone stoic, flat, inexpressive, things like that, but Bagration was very warm, pleasant and sociable with people, typical of expressive people, with Just saying that he blushed easily is enough!

★ Bagration was so sociable and the typical extrovert who adopts an introvert to such a degree that he was a close friend of Arakcheyev, a man with a horrible temperament (like killing kittens and being in favor of corporal punishment, according to what a friend who knows him told me well) that he received disdain and his friendships were almost non-existent, but with Bagration it was different, from what I read in the few letters from Petya to Arakcheyev, he handled both professional and personal things, and one of them is that Bagration was aware of the criticism towards him and told Arakcheyev that it hurt his soul to receive such criticism.

★ As he had said, Bagration was close to Emperor Pavel, who was approaching his peak of paranoid and found it difficult to trust anyone, so he "adopted" Bagration as his trusted general since he was a first-timer at the site and did not He knew nothing about the Court, which gave him an advantage. Pavel appreciated him and got along very well with Pyotr, even recommending him for promotion and Arakcheyev too since he was very devoted to Pavel and all that. I'm going to go to the old reliable, fragments hehehe

Suvorov was already on his way to St. Petersburg, when unexpected news devastated him. Although Paul praised Suvorov and arranged a reception for him, he still regarded him with suspicion and resentment. He knew that Suvorov's return to Russia meant that the field marshal would continue to oppose the new military system established by Paul. The emperor could not allow this to happen. They told him that Suvorov had violated his rules and appointed the generals of the time, 4 and banned the Prussian pigtails, reintroduced by Paul into the army.5 The emperor canceled the reception and sent a brusque letter to Suvorov. “I have learned that while you were in command of my forces abroad you had on your staff a general, known as an orderly, despite my instructions…. Surprised by this, I order you to tell me what prompted you to do it.” 6 Furthermore, Paul forbade Suvorov to come to St. Petersburg during the day;

It was said that he even wanted to deprive the field marshal of his title of “Italiiskii”. The old field marshal was shocked by this misfortune. He was already in poor health and this humiliation further sapped his strength. He arrived in St. Petersburg late at night, unannounced and unwelcome. An imperial courier informed him that he was forbidden to visit the imperial palace.7 Peter Bagration was one of the few who visited the disgraced Suvorov during his illness. On one occasion, several days before Suvorov's death, Paul sent Bagration to inquire after his health.8 Prince Peter described finding [Suvorov] very weak...he fell into a coma. His assistants rubbed spirits on his temples and gave him smelling salts, which brought him back to his senses. He looked at me, but the old fire no longer burned in his eyes.

He continued to look at me as if trying to recognize me and then shouted, “Ah! It's you, Peter. It's good to see you!" He remained silent and then looked at me again and I informed him of my errand from the Emperor. Alexander Vasilievich came to life, but his speech was broken. “Convey my respects… my deepest respects… to the Emperor …please do it…Peter…Ah…so much pain!” He said no more and fell into a delirium.”9 Death was rapidly approaching and, on May 18, 1800, Suvorov whispered his last words. Large crowds followed Suvorov's remains during the funeral. It seemed that the entire population of Suvorov was present. However, Pablo pursued Suvorov even to death. At his insistence, the funeral date was moved one day later; newspapers were not allowed to publish obituaries and the military honors awarded to Suvorov were listed one rank lower. of his rank.10 The emperor did not attend the funeral of his best commander and instead reviewed the Guard regiments.11 Suvorov's death was an important date in Bagration's career. command of Suvorov and rose to his rank and positions thanks to the support of the field marshal.12 Upon returning to St. Petersburg, Bagration became famous and accepted in higher social circles. He was often invited to the palace and met with members of the. Royal family. On one occasion, he was introduced to the future Emperor Alexander and a group of aristocrats. One of them, Prince Eugene of Wuttemberg, greeted him: “Here comes the famous Prince Bagration.” Prince Peter shrewdly replied to the courtier: “My Prince, if you want to see someone distinguished, here is the rising sun of Russia” and pointed to Alexander. (here is what I said a few moments ago, but better)

However, Bagration was also in a dangerous position. His close relationship with Suvorov, whom Paul hated so much, could have led to his disgrace. However, cordial relations existed between the emperor and the young general. Paul met Bagration on many occasions and contacted the sick Suvorov through him. In addition, Bagration had no connections with the court and did not participate in judicial machinations. Paul was already suspicious of the conspiracy against him and with each passing day he became more and more cautious. He needed trustworthy people around him, so he focused on Bagration.

Prince Peter was new at court. He had spent most of his life on the periphery of the empire and had visited St. Petersburg only once in 1782, when he joined the service. For the next eighteen years he fought in the Caucasus, Crimea, Poland, Italy and Switzerland and was unable to travel to the capital. He was not familiar with the imperial court and did not participate in various intrigues. In addition, the emperor was well aware of Bagration's military achievements. Suvorov had periodically reported on Bagration's successes at Brescia, Tidone, Trebbia and Novi. The Swiss campaign brought him new laurels, so Paul appreciated his talent. On March 20, 1800, he was appointed commander of the 6th Jager Regiment, and in April, Paul gave him a large estate in Lithuania to replace the one Bagration received for his actions in Trebbia.14 However, Bagration was not frugal. .

To lead a life befitting his status, he began an extravagant lifestyle in the capital that naturally resulted in increasing debts. Over the years, Bagration sold two properties to cover debts.

With the onset of spring, Bagration was ordered to Pavlovsk, where his Jagers protected the imperial family.15 In May, Bagration attended the launching ceremony of three new ships at the Admiralty. Then, in June, Bagration accompanied the emperor to Peterhof in St. Petersburg, where he attended naval maneuvers and enjoyed the social life of the court. In July 1800, Paul again rewarded young Bagration and appointed him chef of the Jager Lifeguard Battalion.16 This appointment indicated the great respect Paul had for Bagration. The position of chef of the lifeguard regiments was usually filled by the emperor and members of his family.17 Paul created the Prussian-style chefs in August 1798 and this position practically replaced the commanders. The chefs were all-powerful within the regiment, supervising the management of the troops, their training and determining logistical needs.

Unlike other chefs, Peter Bagration was also appointed commander of the Jager Lifeguard Battalion and thus combined both positions.18 However, considering Paul's meticulous attention to the Prussian military organization, this appointment could also compromise Bagration. . Paul held daily parades and reviews in the capital and any poor performance by officers led to disgrace and banishment. 19 In June 1800, Paul reviewed Bagration's battalion on Semeyonovsky Square in the capital. Prince Peter deployed his battalion into three companies of 100 men each and his orderly formation and neat appearance pleased the emperor. Paul asked Bagration to show him several Jagers that he found in perfect order. In 1800 Bagration's life soon became routine. Every morning he attended the Wachtparade, which Paul modeled after the daily exercises of Frederick the Great. Paul personally supervised the deployment of troops and anxiously watched the parade for any imperfections. After the parade was over, Bagration led the troops to the barracks and continued the exercise there. The emperor often made unannounced visits and Prince Peter had to be ready at any time.

At the end of July 1800, Paul moved to Tsarskoe Selo. Bagration with his battalion was in charge of security there. He stayed in the town of Sofia, which the Empress Catherine founded for her entourage. However, Paul did not like staying in Tsarskoe Selo, which reminded him of his mother, so he spent the rest of the summer and early autumn of 1800 in Gatchina, where Bagration continued to protect the imperial family. Paul often ordered Prince Peter to prepare his battalion for maneuvers and exercises.

In one of them, in September 1800, Paul gathered forces from all branches of the army to reenact the battle. The troops were divided into two opposing corps and Bagration “fought” under the command of General Mikhail Kutuzov, who won the battle and earned Paul's praise. Kutuzov, who was later appointed military governor of the capital, had a high opinion of Bagration. In September 1800, when Major General Ivan Ivelich accused Bagration of embezzling regiment funds, Kutuzov personally investigated the matter and determined that Bagration committed no crime.

★ He had a mini portrait of Alexander's wife (she was good to him, as I remember), Catherine (Alexander's sister), Catherine Bagration (his wife) and Suvorov, who was like a father figure to he. There was someone else but I don't remember well.

★ On one occasion he fell from his horse and suffered a concussion that was not serious, but that meant that he had to leave his position to recover, which happened, but he was replaced by a man not so nice and very different from him , that at the time this man announced that he would replace Bagration, he did so arrogantly and praising his own achievements, earning the contempt of the soldiers who preferred Bagration, who had given a very emotional and sweet farewell speech that even Langeron praised the speech.

Here's another extract from the topic:

Bagration then praised his generals and officers for their services in this campaign, concluding: As I leave this army, I consider it my sacred responsibility to express my deep gratitude and respect to the commanders of the corps, detachments, senior and junior officers, as well as the rank and archive, who, serving under my command, had to fulfill his duties for the Emperor and the Fatherland, and trusted me unconditionally in doing so…. I want to thank my generals and the entire army for the love they always showed me and that I enjoyed every moment of the campaign, in the middle of battle or in March. This love will forever be imprinted on my heart and I will always remember it as the greatest and sweetest reward that will comfort me for the rest of my life. I will pray to the Lord to bless my comrades in arms and help them in all their endeavors. I began my command of this army with victories and with victories I say goodbye to you.”154 The army was moved by these words. Langeron declared that “Bagration's farewell order was one of the most moving and well-written speeches he had ever read in Russia. He was very successful in reaching the hearts of the troops, while Kamensky's order only generated discontent among the rank and file.

★ now some descriptions about Bagration:

• In the spring of 1802, Bagration planned to travel to Naples, but was unable to due to financial strain. Denis Davidov recalled: “[Bagration] liked to live luxuriously, he always had a lot of everything, but not for himself, for others. He was satisfied with some necessary things and was always sober. I never saw him drinking vodka or wine, except for two small glasses of Madeira at lunch.”40 However, Catherine Bagration's extravagant spending was out of control and the family's debts increased. Furthermore, Bagration liked his troops and often spent his own money on them. As the chef of the lifeguard battalion, he had to live lavishly to maintain the status of himself and his acquaintances. His new acquaintances in high society only helped him to spend lavishly. A contemporary noted: “The extravagance of his friends…let him forget moderation.”41 His annual salary was an impressive 2,200 rubles, but his debts slowly accumulated. Bagration had to sell his estate and other property that he received from the government to pay the debtors. In early 1802, the state treasurer informed Emperor Alexander that Bagration had to sell his estate to the treasury. “[Bagration] did not determine any price, but he informed me that he had 28,000 rubles in debt to the Treasury, plus another 52,000 rubles in debts, for a total of 80,000 rubles.” In February 1802, Alexander gave his consent for the Treasury to purchase Bagration's.

In general, the Russian army was in better condition than Napoleon's troops. The artillery not only had numerical superiority over the French (640 to 587), but also the advantage in Caliber. Bagration spent September 6 resting his troops and preparing for battle. He demonstrated deep concern for his troops. General Mayevsky recalled: “The next day [after Shevardino] I was asleep in the courtyard. The prince [Bagration], passing me with his retinue, moved as silently and silently as we usually do while approaching the room of a sleeping loved one. Such attention to his troops… only strengthened his sense of loyalty to this commander.”

•Langeron also noted Bagration’s “invaluable talent, as he was admired [obozhaem] by all who served under him. His remarkable but taciturn bravery, his manners, easy conversation, familiarity with the soldiers, sincere joy animated troops and fueled universal admiration [for him]. No other commander of our armies was loved as much as [Bagracion]; Even the generals, whom he outpromoted, served with pleasure under him.” Langeron highlighted Bagration's achievements by referring to his humble beginnings. He observed: “I saw him in St. Petersburg in 1790 dressed in the uniform of a common Cossack, unknown to many and without invitation to any salon.” However, almost two decades later, “[Bagration] was commanding an army!” Furthermore, Langeron stated: “Russia has no better commander of the Advanced Guard, or of the main forces [Glavnikh Sil] than Bagration.”

••The soldiers loved him and believed in his invincibility. But now he was wounded and with him, “the soul [of valor] had departed from the entire left wing.” When he let himself be carried away, his aide-de-camp, Adrianov, ran to the stretcher and said: “Your Excellency, they are taking him away, I am no longer useful to you!” Then, as Witnesses recalled: “Adrianov, in the sight of thousands, moved like an arrow, broke through the blows of the enemies and fell dead.” Total confusion. ”97 General Mayevsky recalled: “The Prince [Bagration] was taken behind the line and his entourage accompanied him. The fight was now fought in such confusion that I did not know who and how I should join.” (It happened in Borodino)

And that's all for today! I know that many love Murat, it is difficult not to get attached to a tremendously beautiful and loving man, but I would like you to please vote for Bagration, his life was not as beautiful as Murat's and it is not unusual for someone to call him ugly when you and I know it's the complete opposite, so I would really appreciate it if you voted for Bagration, I'm going crazy 😭.

Thank you for reading, silly!

(I'm supporting you, @yaggy031910 hehehe)

.

[mediaevalmusereads]

Anti-Christ: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil. By Bernard McGinn. Columbia University Press, 1994.

Rating: 4.5/5 stars

Genre: religious history, theology

Part of a Series? No.

Summary:  McGinn demonstrates how Antichrist has often reflected the human need to comprehend the persistence of evil in the world, and examines how it has haunted popular imagination in both the form of individuals--such as Nero, Napoleon, and Saddam Hussein--and groups--Jews, heretics, Muslims.

***Full review below.***

Content Warnings: discussions of antisemitism and anti-Islamic belief

Since this book is non-fiction, my review is going to be structured a little differently than usual.

McGinn’s book is a historical survey, tracing the origins and evolution of the antichrist legend from ancient history to the modern day. Using a number or primary sources ranging from Biblical commentaries, political propaganda, letters, histories, plays, and poems, McGinn argues that antichrist has, over time, been used to embody various anxieties and theological views about evil and the end of the world. Though this book does not cite every appearance of the antichrist in literature, it selects a good representative body of work that shows how different historical eras contributed to the evolution of the antichrist legend.

I very much appreciated the wide scope of this book and was delighted by the way McGinn could cover such a broad historical scope yet still make each chapter feel incredibly detailed. It's very clear that McGinn has done a lot of research and has methodically presented what he feels best represents each era he writes about; as a reader, it's hard not to be incredibly impressed.

I think McGinn's strongest chapters are the early ones in which he covers Jewish literature and developing Christianity before the Middle Ages. This isn't to say his later chapters are bad, but I did get the sense the McGinn was writing in his wheelhouse early on, as those chapters felt much richer and varied in the way they approach history and literature. Later chapters also tend to focus almost exclusively on (Western) Europe, and while I understand that Europe is kind of a hotbed of Christian development and conflict, I was still a bit curious as to how non-European Christianity was handling the legend of the antichrist. Maybe Europe is a special case in that it took a particular interest, so I don't know how valid this critique is.

All that being said, I don't think I'd recommend this book to casual readers. Though the scope is large, McGinn doesn't waste time explaining much historical context, so you have to go in with at least a basic understanding of Christian history. This isn't to say this is a failing for McGinn; rather, I don't want to give the impression that this academic book is "pop history."

TL;DR: Anti-Christ is a fascinating survey of the history of the anti-Christ legend from about 50 BC to the late 20th centuries. Readers with a scholarly interest in the history of Christianity and theology will surely appreciate this book, and I can't recommend it enough for anyone wanting to do work on apocalypticism.

[hanban371213]

welcome to the next book in hannah's history lessons, context in the first post, find it through the first tag

Book 5 - Liberalism - ideology and revolution, models and practices in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Part 1 - The French and American revolutions, new paradigm of the liberal revolutions.

The French and American liberal revolutions showed signs of a new paradigm in place, where society slowly turns away from the Old Regime and Absolutism in favour of Enlightened ideals and Liberalism, and throughout the 19th century many more liberal revolutions take place all over.

Part 2 - The implantation of Liberalism in Portugal

With the three French invasions of Portugal during the Napoleonic Wars, the King and the Royal Court fled the country to Brazil, and the British marshall Beresford became in charge of the Portuguese troops in the continent, and also acting with much repression towards the Portuguese people. Alongside this the country was in a very bad economic state, with Brazil losing it's colonial status and opening it's ports to the exterior, and with the Comercial Treaty of 1810(identical to the Meuthen Treaty).

Because of all of this, with marshall Beresford being absent(went to Brazil to ask the King for more money), and with liberal propaganda coming in from Spain(had a liberal revolution), a Revolution takes place.

The newly elected Constitutional Courts, dominated by a more radical liberal faction known as Vintistas, elaborated the Constitution of 1822, that's later sworn in by the King Dom João VI after returning from Brazil. This Constitution however ends up causing a lot of problems. It's contradictory(very liberal politicaly, but still protectionist economicaly), contains anti-brazilian policies(wants to return Brazil to colonial status, which just ends up leading to Brazil declaring Independence), and was way too progressive for it's time(the nobility and the clergy were not very happy with their lost privileges).

This led to a counterrevolution known as Vila-Francada, which is stopped by King Dom João VI, who afterwards defends a constitutional revision. The Constitutional Courts say "nuh uh" and ANOTHER counterrevolution takes place, known as Abrilada, that's once again stopped by King Dom João VI.

After his death the Kingdom is inherited by Brazilian Emperor Dom Pedro, who creates the Constitutional Letter of 1826, much more moderate and conservative than the Constitution of 1822, and afterwards abdicates the throne for his daughter, Queen Dona Maria da Glória, with his brother, Dom Miguel, as regent, who sworns to the Constitutional Letter. However, immediatetly after doing that, Dom Miguel proclaims himself an Absolute King. Emperor Dom Pedro abdicates from the Brazilian throne and returns to Portugal to kick his ass and return the throne to his daughter. After the civil war, Liberalism is definitively implanted in Portugal.

Portuguese politician Mouzinho da Silveira introduced a series of measures in his legislation to consolidate Liberalism in the country, abolishing Crown property, opening our economy, reorganizing and centralizing the Administrative System, centralizing the taxes system and reorganizing the judicial system.

The country remained very unstable(when is it not?) and in 1836 there's a Revolution in September. The new Constitution of 1838 serves as a compromise between the Constitution of 1822 and the Constitutional Letter of 1836. The new government introduced protectionist measures, attempts at valorizing the African colonies as means to replace the Independence of Brazil, and many reforms in education. These measures became known as Setembrismo. They didn't show much results though, and soon enough there was another Revolution(peaceful coup this time), that reinstated the Constitutional Letter of 1826.

The new government started industrializing the country, made many centralizing administrative and fiscal reforms, financed many public work such as roads and bridges, and made health reforms. These measures became known as Cabralismo, and they ended up NOT being popular with the people. The government falls and the country falls into a civil war, known as "Patuleia", between Cabralistas, Setembristas, Cartistas(pure suporters of the Constitutional Letter) and even Miguelistas(Absolutists in favour of Dom Miguel). With the intervention of Spain and England the civil war ends with the Gramido Convention, with a victory from the Cartistas and Queen Dona Maria II.

Part 3 - Legacy of Liberalism in the first half of the 19th century.

Liberal ideals were spread all over Europe, with citizens taking strong political initiatives, and old mercantilist and protectionist policies are abolished in favour of liberalism.

On the issue of slavery, the liberal ideal of freedom was largely compromised with the continuation of the slave trade and slavery, but abolitionist ideas slowly started spreading. The United Kingdom was the first to definitively abolish slavery. In Portugal, during the legislation of Marquês de Pombal slavery was outlawed in Continental Portugal, but remained in the colonies. During the Setembrista government the slave trade was banned, and finaly only in 1869, King Dom Luís definitively bans slavery in all Portuguese territory.