#brount

[citizentaleo]

When they meet again

[nietzsche813]

La liberté ou la mort, extrait

Robespierre jouait à lancer des branches à Brount avec Elisabeth, à quelques distances devant eux. Il courrait pour entraîner le molosse derrière lui, et jetait le bâton de toutes ses forces, ne se souciant pas de voir s'il risquait de tacher ses bas blancs de boue. Brount partait comme un fou avec ses grandes pattes désordonnées, la langue pendant sur le côté et la queue frétillante. Quand il revenait avec le morceau de bois, Elisabeth et Maximilien devaient s'escrimer à le lui récupérer et tiraient de toutes leurs forces pour le lui arracher de la gueule. Le jeu recommençait ensuite, pour la plus grande joie des trois participants.

Saint-Just marchait les bras croisés dans le dos, au rythme d'Eléonore.

-Eléonore, maintenant que nous sommes bons amis, puis-je me permettre une question?

La jeune fille lui sourit d'un air indulgent.

- Voyons la question.

Saint-Just se racla la gorge et fixa son regard sur la pointe de ses bottes.

- Eh bien... je ne comprends pas que tu ne sois pas amoureuse de lui.

Eléonore laissa échapper un petit rire. Elle ne paraissait pas particulièrement vexée ou embarrassée par cette question indiscrète.

-Et pourquoi cela ? demanda-t-elle.

Saint-Just redressa la tête et fit un geste de la main vague vers Brount qui s'était mis à aboyer joyeusement, et Elisabeth qui faisait semblant de jeter le bâton pour la troisième fois.

- Je ne sais pas, regarde le... Tout à l'heure il faisait un travail de géant pour la patrie, et maintenant il se contente d'une récompense si simple ! Jouer avec son chien, nourrir ses oiseaux, manger le potage de ta mère ce soir, lire quelques pages de Rousseau au coin du feu...

-... quelques oranges, une visite de son cher Saint-Just...

- Si nous parvenons à installer et à protéger notre république, il ne cherchera aucune récompense pour lui même. Il ne faudra pas davantage que ces quelques plaisirs que nous avons évoqués pour faire son bonheur. Quand on en vient à le connaitre, il est si doux, si sincère. Parfois, cela me noue le coeur quand j'y pense.

- Certainement, approuva Eléonore en venant prendre le bras d'Antoine, et c'est pour cela que mes parents le considèrent comme leur fils et moi comme mon frère. Le sang ne me le rendrait pas plus cher.

- Un frère, oui...Mais imagine le comme époux, ne serait-ce pas mieux encore ? La voix de Saint-Just s'était réduite à un murmure rêveur. Il est si loyal, si dévoué. Non vraiment, tu ne trouveras pas mieux que lui.

-Pour ce qui est du physique... commença Eléonore

- Du physique ! répéta-t-il, le cri qu'il ne réussit par à réprimer attirant un instant l'attention de Brount vers lui. Comment peux tu parler du physique face à une telle âme ! Et puis de toute façon la physionomie de Maximilien n'a rien de désagréable, regarde, il est petit certes, mais il a les mollets bien fait, une mine intelligente, des yeux verts, un joli nez...

- Tu ne trouves pas qu'il a un style un peu démodé?

- Maximilien s'en fiche des fariboles de la mode! Il prends soin de ses vêtement et il est toujours bien mis. On ne peut pas en dire autant des trois quarts des députés qui siègent à la Convention avec les cheveux gras et les bottes crottées. Son style est très respectable.

Eléonore se mit à rire de bon coeur devant l'air révolté de Saint-Just.

-Antoine... Si moi je ne suis pas amoureuse de lui, rien ne t'empêche de l'être, toi.

[leverontdemain]

Robespierre and Brount 🍀🐕

[quercusfloreal]

I wonder if Robespierre get Brount as a puppy, thinking "oh what a little cute puppy, I could take him with me, I'm sure he won't take a lot of space". Then he ends up with a huge ball of love months later.

[usergreenpixel]

Thank you, @taleon-arts ! They’re adorable!!!

[theravenclawrevolutionary]

Brount watching the Thermidor executions...

[robespapier]

There's someone selling dog couches in Arras' street market

A very Robespierre reference

Not the royal part though

[patientsisavertu]

Yes, nice to see the dog if nothing else.

I watched the documentary Les 76 derniers jours de Marie-Antoinette. It was not bad, I think. Although their Maxime looks like a random guy with a wig on, he has his Brount with him. 😌 Nice to see them together.

[insanedoritos]

a really cute Maximilien Robespierre from La Guerre des Sambres - Maxime & Constance by Yslaire drawned by Boidin

[citizentaleo]

Happy birthday to the man who saved me from death ✨🙏🏽❤️

[jeskerthefool]

Conversations with a dead man.

[monimarat]

Robespierre and Tallien

French, 1794

[robespapier]

I'm a citizeness of simple tastes, I see a Robespierre with pretty legs and I'm 😍

[picardy-third]

how long do you think Brount waited for Robespierre to return

[noura-addams]

Wel .. In the end ..

We love brount 🌌

Idk if you answered this before but how robespierre get his dog brount?

We don’t know for sure, however, we do have a sign of what could be Brount in a letter Robespierre adressed to ”a young girl” (that has been accepted as one Mademoiselle Dehay) on 6 June 1788: 

Is the puppy (petit chien) you are raising for my sister as pretty as the model you showed me when I passed through Bélhune? Whatever it is, we will always welcome it with distinction and pleasure. We can even say that, however ugly it may be, it will always be lovely.

So if the dog here actually is Brount, that means Robespierre got him from a friend somewhere in the summer of 1788. We know from a different letter that Mademoiselle Dehay had earlier also given him a cage of canaries as a gift, so maybe she kept many animals and sold/gave some away now and then?

[anotherhumaninthisworld]

I've recently heard about the book The Gods are Thirsty by Tanith Lee. Is it any good or accurate? Thank you.

I’d never actually read the book, but seeing as it could be found for free on Internet Archive I went ahead and read the first 100 pages (three chapters). I figured the historical accuracies and inaccuracies presented there might be able to serve as a sample for the whole 500+ pages book. My findings I think are best presented in a bullet list:

First off, there are things that are clearly made up but I suppose rather harmless at the same time. Here we can for example include Fréron being the one who introduced Camille to Lucile and her family, as well as Robespierre having a dog named Spartan that got run over by a carriage and died in late 1789. We have nothing concreate that stands against these things being possible, but at the same time there’s nothing suggesting they took place either. Someone who doesn’t know that will however be very prone to believe them, which could prove troublesome were they to forget from where they’ve learned it.

Then there are things that, like those listed above, are embellishments, but that I would argue are more problematic, since they actually change, make up or add onto actual people’s beliefs and/or actions. Here we for example have a part about Danton arguing that God doesn’t exist, when, IRL, there seems to be no hard evidence for Danton being either an atheist or a believer. On the eve of the storming of the Bastille, Camille leaves a note for Lucile’s father, telling him to keep his family safe, when no such note has actually been found. In another part, Camille remembers Lucile telling him that she would prefer to never marry, a sentiment that is hard to find when looking over her conserved texts.

There are some instances of the author injecting historical myths without having bothered to check how well backed up they actually are. For example, after Camille has called for the people to arm themselves on July 12, the onlookers go on to take leaves from the nearby trees in order to distinguish themselves as members of the insurrection. If we’re to believe Camille et Lucile Desmoulins: un rêve de république (2018) this is a detail that first appeared in a heavily embellished biography over Camille, written in 1834. Lee also borrows an anecdote right out of the memoirs of Madame Tussaud, where the artist goes to visit the stormed Bastille, trips on the staircase and is saved by Robespierre. Something which is very unlikely to have taken place seeing as Robespierre was still in Versailles when the Bastille was stormed… Still speaking of him, Lee has Camille remember the time when he held a speech to the king and queen in the rain, when the origin of this anecdote doesn’t mention any rain.

Then finally, there are blatant historical inaccuracies, like for example Hébert publishing his journalLe Père Duchesne, Robespierre removing the ”de” in his surname and Camille moving to Rue Thêatre Français already in 1789 (all these three things didn’t happen until a year later), Danton being the inventor of the slogan ”Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité” (it’s actually Camille and Robespierre that hold the shared responsibility for it), Charlotte Robespierre being in Paris in 1789 and finally, perhaps the straw that broke the camel’s back for me when it came to the author’s historical research, Saint-Just being there already in 1790.

So is it an accurate book? If the first 100 pages are representative for the entirety of it (and if the synopsis on wikipedia is to believed) then NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Is it a good book? That’s entirely up to everyone’s individual taste. I must admit that the author’s choice of switching between past and present tense, third person and first person narrator as well as referring to Camille as both ”Desmoulins” and ”Windmills,” together with SJ being called a unicorn and a scene where Danton feeds Camille grapes before they have a threesome with an OC, made me feel increasingly like I was reading a fever dream. So if you have a soft spot for crack fics (even though this isn’t actually supposed to be one) I’d say go for it, especially since the book can be read for free. I would however not advice you to try to learn actual history from it, but then I would probably say the same for most historical fiction.