#sieyes

[quercusfloreal]

L'histoire en manga vol.7 part 2

[aedesluminis]

okay, there's a party at the Luxembourg Palace and

Barras has called Fréron "the king of idiots".

Napoleon has just abruptly left Josephine alone to go talking with Carnot.

She is clearly displeased :(

And not only that, Napoleon even invites the latter to play chess with him. Splendid!

Aren't they cute?

They are currently gossiping about Sieyes and Talleyrand who are playing chess together at a table nearby lmao.

Napoleon is gonna lose all the matches. Of course.

[cadmusfly]

so for the RP blog shenanigans I was looking up a guy who @josefavomjaaga told me actually used to be Ney's ADC before tranferring to Soult's team, who has a really long name but let's call him Bory de Saint-Vincent because that's his last name

and this dude is fuckin wild, look at this description of him

Bory de Saint-Vincent's almost too colorful life story has sometimes overshadowed his reputation as one of the most thoughtful and productive naturalists of the early nineteenth century. A free spending extrovert who also dabbled in literary ventures, his career was complicated by involvement in a near-mutiny at sea, various political intrigues, and financial debts to the extent that he spent years at a time avoiding the authorities, or actually being incarcerated. Throughout it all, however, he managed to keep up a career as a natural history collector.

he's more known for being a naturalist than a military guy, but he's also just straight up nuts

even just looking at his wikipedia page

I dunno about you, but I feel like "precocious naturalist" should mean "discovered twenty new kinds of plants as a kid", not helping save a guy from prison (I initially read it as jailbreaking but it could have been more legal, not sure, but also apparently the ship the entomologist was meant to be on also sank so lil kid Bory saved this guy's life technically???)

Dude hopped on a expedition to Australia, got sick of the captain and decided to just go at it alone for a few years in the middle of the ocean

now my crack theory is that ney got sick of hearing about plants all the time and shoved him towards soult

and he had so many scientist friends, when he was exiled after waterloo, he was invited to stay in prussia by the king thanks to a scientist friend, got kicked out after 18 months, "offered a commission as General in Bolívar's new Republic of Colombia" by another scientist friend, declined that, and escaped to holland to meet the Sieyes guy who kinda was supposed to be a consul alongside this other dude called Bonaparte many years ago

dude got placed in debtor's prison for too many debts and these two fuckin notes attached to that

His scientist friends tried to cheer him up by parading a giraffe next to the debtor's prison so that he can climb onto the rooftop to look at it with a telescope

but he didnt want to leave prison because he could have his friends visit and had good food and good sleep, but his son in law against his wishes paid his debts so that he could actually go to the damn wedding

dude did have some weird racist ideas about human ethnicity but he was also anti-slavery and denounced the heritage peerage system while in a political position and ended up getting kicked out because of that so that's cool

this guy is like a french Stephen Maturin sort of, except he's real

and he is also contributing to the fact that none of soult's ADCs are normal people

i wish i'd learned about him earlier so i could submit him to the napoleonic sexyman tournament

[nesiacha]

Madame de Stael syndrome

A little tip if you want to provoke disrespectful, die-hard fans of Napoleon who insult you while bashing the government of Year II. You can say they have the Madame de Stael syndrome and suggest they read some history booksas a remedy for them to heal . This is sure to annoy them XD

Why do I mention the Madame de Stael syndrome? I am deliberately exaggerating, but here are the double standards of Madame de Stael: I don't like it when Sans Culottes, led by elected people, invade the Convention to demand measures they need, like the maximum price law; I find it arbitrary and critical. But I agree when Bonaparte carries out a coup d'état using armed force and expels all the deputies so that he, Sieyes, and Ducos can have almost all the power without being elected. For more information, check out the post I made earlier here.

P.S.: Use this argument only if it's truly a disrespectful person insulting you, not someone who is polite( after all we all have the right to like love or dislike a historical character), and especially if you feel you have the time to do so. Personally, I think it's better to ignore them unless they won't leave you alone.

[doriangray1789]

DEVLET BABA

Modern devlet teorisi, ilk olarak Niccolo Machiavelli’nin tanrısallıktan arınmış, laik/ dünyevi bir siyasal iktidar/devlet kurgusuyla başlamıştır.

Ardından Bodin egemenlik kavramını ortaya atmış ve onun niteliklerini ortaya koymuştur.

Hobbes ise toplum sözleşmesi kuramını geliştirerek modern devlet düşüncesini teorik bir temele kavuşturmuştur.

John Locke devlet iktidarının sınırlandırılmasını, Jean Jacques Rousseau halk egemenliği teorisini, Emmanuel Sieyes de ulus egemenliği teorisini savunmuştur…

Cicero, tüm staocular gibi mutlu yaşamı felsefe edinmiş, devlet üzerine yazdığı eserde, devleti yurttaşların içinde seyrettiği ve kaderini de kaptanının belirlediği bir gemiye benzetir. Hava güneşliyken seyir almak kolay olabilir ama asıl maharet devlet gemisini, fırtınalı havada alabora olmaktan kurtarmaktır. Halk, devletin iyi yönetilmesini istiyorsa iyi nitelikli adamları seçmelidir der.

Platon da devlet mutluluk felsefesi üzerine yazılmış bir metindir.

Bizim felsefemiz ise daha duygusal “DEVLET BABA” devlettir, sever de döver de

devlet, ataerkil toplumlarda, "baba"dır zaten...kısaca hem sever, hem dover...eve para getirir...bu paranın nasıl harcanacağına karar verir...sevdiği çocuklarına iyi davranır, onları ödüllendirir...kendisine karşı çıkanlara veya eleştirenlere, yani sevmediği çocuklarına karşı gaddardır...onları itina ile cezalandırır...

vatandaş aslında devlete derin bir aşkla bağlı. devletin başında kim olursa olsun onun biricik aşkı devlet. dolayısı ile devlet onun istediği gibi konuşsun/davransın istiyor. haksızlığa, hukuksuzluğa, soyulmaya, hatta işkenceye bile razı, o zaman daha katmerli seviyor. 'devlettir, sever de döver de'' diyor.

en küçük birimlerine bile aşkla bağlı. tapu kadastrodaki memurdan, kaymakama, nüfus memurundan, mal müdürüne kadar hepsine derin bir saygı sevgi besliyor. köy kahvesine jandarma geldiğinde ayağa kalkılıyor, polisin önünde esas duruşta duruyor, savcı, vali, kaymakam dedin miydi, zaten put. . selamsız bandosu gibi devletin şapkasını görse yetiyor.

yalnız aşkla sevdiği devlet hiç bunları görmüyor. hiç sevgi sözcükleri söylemiyor, söylerse de ortalığa söylüyor. tek bildiği hemen işini bitirip gitmek. vatandaş devletin arzularını tatmin etmekle yükümlü görüyor kendini ve zevk almasa da almış gibi yapıp bir sonrakine hazırlanmak. devletin ruh hali değişiyor bazen, daha derin, daha sığ, daha müslüman, daha tek adam, daha kapalı, daha açık, daha milliyetçi vs.. o zaman üzülüyor vatandaş. bu ruh hallerinde kendisini nasıl konumlandırıyorsa devleti,biricik aşkı da öyle yapsın istiyor. kalan herkesin üstüne yürüsün, ezsin, yok etsin istiyor. ihtirasla istiyor hem de. devlet düşündüğünden farklı davrandığında, küsüyor, arkasından gizli gizli konuşuyor ama sıra vazifesine gelince onu ihmal etmiyor. devletin zevk almasını sağlıyor.

çocuklarını da öyle yetiştiriyor. çok çocuk yapıyor ki, biri ölürse ötekini feda edebilsin. üzerine sadece o gün dönecek kameralara, ''devletimiz sağ olsun'' diyebilsin.

oysa başka yerlerde ilişki böyle olmuyor. devlet saygılı, vatandaşın ne dediğini dinliyor, kendini ona göre değiştirmeye yenilemeye çalışıyor. sonuç aynı olsa da, en azından bir mum ışığında yemek yiyor vatandaşıyla, bir iki tatlı söz, ne bileyim belki ön sevişme. gönlünü alıyor yani vatandaşın.

en sevmediği insanlar ise devlete karşı gelenler. bir vatandaşın devlete nasıl karşı gelebileceğine aklı almıyor. ''devlet vatandaş için var'' sözünü hazmedemiyor. koskoca devlet, itaat edilmesi, saygı duyulması, biat edilmesi, sorgulanmaması gereken devlet mi vatandaş için var? bu çok saçma. devlet ne derse o olur.

bu aşkı bozmak için bir sürü dedikodu çıkarıyorlar, yok orman, yok ağaç, yok, yolsuzluk ama vatandaşın aşkı hiç bitmiyor. hala devlet için her şeyi yapmaya hazır. seçme şansı verildiğinde, bu aşkın devam etmesini isteyecek..

[unproblematicbedding]

"Manifeste du tiers paysage" by Gilles Clément

FR

(résumé)

"Si l'on cesse de regarder le paysage comme l'objet d'une industrie on découvre subitement - est-ce un oubli du cartographe, une négligence du politique ? - une quantité d'espaces indécis, dépourvus de fonction, sur lesquels il est difficile de porter un nom. Cet ensemble n'appartient ni au territoire de l'ombre ni à celui de la lumière. Il se situe aux marges. En lisière des bois, le long des routes et des rivières, dans les recoins oubliés de la culture, là où les machines ne passent pas. Il couvre des surfaces de dimensions modestes, dispersées comme les angles perdus d'un champ ; unitaires et vastes comme les tourbières, les landes et certaines friches issues d'une déprise récente. Entre ces fragments de paysage aucune similitude de forme. Un seul point commun : tous constituent un territoire de refuge à la diversité. Partout ailleurs celle-ci est chassée. Cela justifie de les rassembler sous un terme unique. Je propose Tiers paysage, troisième terme d'une analyse ayant rangé les données principales apparentes sous l'ombre d'un côté, la lumière de l'autre. Le concept de Tiers paysage renvoie à Tiers état (et non à Tiers-monde). Espace n'exprimant ni le pouvoir ni la soumission au pouvoir. Il se réfère au pamphlet de Sieyès en 1789 : "Qu'est-ce que le Tiers état ? - Tout. - Qu'a-t-il fait jusqu'à présent ? - Rien. - Qu'aspire-t-il à devenir ? - Quelque chose".

ENG

(abstract)

"If we cease to think lands as objects of industries we find suddenly - is it an oversight from cartographs or politics carelessness ? - a quantity of undecided spaces, functionless places who are hard to name. This ensemble does not belongs to a decided land of shadow or light. It belongs to the margins. At the edges of woods, by the roadsides and rivers, in corners forgotten by culture, where machines don't go. It covers spaces of modest dimmensions, dispersed like lost angles of a field, united and vast as the bog, the moors or some wastes recently deserted. Between all this fragmented spaces, no ressemblance in their aspects but one similarity : all of them form a sanctuary for biodiversity when everywhere else it is driven out. It justifies a need to regroup them all under one designation. I propose "Thirds Landscapes" (Tiers Paysages), third party of an analysis of the wolrd dividing all in black and white. This concept of thirds landscapes calls back to Third Estate - (NdT: politic incarnation of people's will as athird party to power in place) not Third World. Those spaces does not express power nor submission to power. [Gilles Clément] refers himself to the essay of Sieyes in 1789 : "What does the Third Estate wants ? Everything. What has it done for now ? Nothing. What does it wants to become ? Something."

[classicalcanvas]

Title: Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes

Artist: Jacques-Louis David

Date: 1817

Style: Neoclassicism

Genre: Portrait

[kneehoming-knee]

SEISMIC K SWISS'S SENSE SIEYE SIETE 🕳️

[s-satanick]

" avete libri su Belial "

"cos'è "

MA IN CHE SENSO COS'È AL MASSIMO CHI È SIEYE INA LIBREARIA ESOYERICA

[quercusfloreal]

L'histoire en manga vol.7 part 1

[justessayhelp]

(Answered) Source Book Assignment for Foundation Modern World

(Answered) Source Book Assignment for Foundation Modern World

(Answered) Source Book Assignment for Foundation Modern World Read the following Readings and write reflections and summary for each ones. -Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen‖ (1789) -Abbé Sieyes – ―What is the Third Estate‖ (1789) -Maximilien Robespierre – ―Justification of the Use of Terror‖ (1794)

[thephantomofthelibrary]

Sieyes, of powerful mind, a student of constitutionalism, terse and logical in expression, has made a mark during the electoral period with his pamphlet, Qu'est-ce que le Tiers Etat? What is the Third Estate? His reply was: It is everything; it has been nothing; it should be something.

Robert Matteson Johnstone, The French Revolution: A Short History

[nordleuchten]

La Fayette and the National Guard

The day of his election, (15th July,) Lafayette was ignorant that at an early hour of that morning he had been unanimously proclaimed commander–in-chief of the Parisian militia, by the electors and a crowd of citizens, who filled the Hotel de Ville ; but when the deputies of the national assembly were preparing to separate, fresh acclamations apprized him of this event. Several towns of France had possessed citizen-guards before the revolution. The most celebrated of them was the Lyons guard. Mirabeau, in his motion of July the 8th, for sending away the troops , had demanded that the king should be entreated to order that , in the towns of Paris and Versailles, citizen-guards should be appointed to maintain peace under the king's command. This motion was warmly supported by Lafayette, MM. Chapelier, and Sieyes. M. de Biauzat demanded that the proposal of the citizen guards should be adjourned, (for it was owing to an error that, in the collection of the labours of Mirabeau, the words, until then unknown, of national guards were used.) It was agreed by a large majority, that no mention should be made of them in the address. However, an elector, M. Bonneville, on the 10th July, spoke of them at the Hotel de Ville of Paris. On the 12th, the day after the presentation of the declaration of rights to the national assembly, and of its publication in the capital, some brawls had arisen between the Parisians and the German troops. On the morning of the 13th, the deputation of the assembly to the king had represented to him, in addition to the danger of troops, whose presence irritated the people, the necessity of confiding the guard of the city to the militia. The king replied :- "I have already made known to you my intentions relating to the measures that the disorders of Paris have forced me to take. It is for me alone to judge of their necessity, and I can make no change in this respect. Some towns may be able to guard themselves, but the extent of this capital renders, a protection of this kind inadequate.” In consequence of this reply, and on a motion of Lafayette, the assembly, by an unanimous vote, immediately passed that celebrated decree, of which one article declares “That, alarmed by the dreadful results the king's speech may occasion, they will never cease to insist upon the removal of the troops, and the establishment of citizen-guards. That same day, July 13th, the permanent committee of Paris electors organized a citizen-guard. The clerks of the palace of justice, and of the Châtelet, the pupils of surgery, and the French guards, offered their services. The young men seized upon some arms that had been deposited at the Hotel des Invalides; the committee substituted a blue and red cockade, the town colours, to the green cockade that had been at first assumed. On the 14th, MM. Bancal and Ganilh, deputies of the electors, presented themselves to the assembly ; the citizen-guard, which was scarcely formed, had procured some degree of tranquillity during the night. The arrival of a squadron of hussars spread general alarm. A deputation was sent to the governor of the Bastille ; he fired upon the deputation, —which fact has been affirmed by the king's attorney, M. de Corny. A letter, ordering the governor of the Bastille to defend him self, increased the fury of the people, who, at the departure of the deputies, marched upon the fortress. Lafayette, who was presiding at the national assembly, replied to those deputies of the Hotel de Ville, that the assembly had just sent a numerous deputation to the king, and requested them to await its return. “Apprized of the formation of a citizen-guard,” said the king, “I have given orders to some general officers to place themselves at the head of that guard, to aid it by their experience, and second the zeal of good citizens. I have likewise ordered that the troops stationed in the Champ de Mars should quit Paris." On the morning of the 15th, it was, however, believed at the Hotel de Ville, that the king's troops were to make an attack. Letters of various officers had been intercepted, saying, “We are marching upon the enemy,” and advising their friends to sally forth immediately. The provost of merchants, Flesselles, had been assassinated ; commanders had been appointed during the confusion of the taking of the Bastille ; M. de La Salle offered his resignation. A M. de La Barthe had proposed himself, and was on the point of being accepted, when the people suddenly became displeased with him, and, upon a vague suspicion, pursued him with the intention of killing him. At that moment of tumult and alarm, Moreau de Saint Méry, president of the electors, pointed to the bust of Lafayette, given in 1784 by the State of Virginia to the town of Paris, and placed in the great hall of the Hotel de Ville. He had scarcely began to speak, when acclamations arose on every side, and Lafayette was unanimously proclaimed.

The above text is an excerpt from La Fayette’s autobiography detailing the days leading up to the storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789 and the formation of the National Guard on 15 July, 1789. La Fayette’s connection with the National Guard is for several reasons extremely interesting.

During the first years of said guard, La Fayette was basically the identity of the National Guard. He was its first commander-in-chief, designed the uniforms, implemented many of the structures and quite simply formed and moulded the duties and perception of the unit.

Paris was the epicentre of the French Revolution and La Fayette had with the National Guard more or less a private army at his disposal. More than once was he faced with the criticism that his usage of the guard was not what it should be. Indeed, there were several instances were La Fayette’s decisions as commander were rather questionable. The most famous example was probably the Champ de Mars massacre on July 17, 1791. I will post on the day of the anniversary about the actions on that day. It was arguably one of the most controversial and infamous episodes in La Fayette’s life and it had a deep, deep impact on his reputation and his future fairing during the French Revolution.

The National Guard was at times extremely loyal to La Fayette - the soldiers boasted in being commanded by the famed Marquis. At other times, his own guardsmen threatened to kill La Fayette. It was a continuous up and down and nevertheless one of the aspects of his life that helped to cement La Fayette’s place in western history.

After resigning his post as commander of the National Guard in October of 1791, La Fayette would return to command this unit again for a short time in 1830.

[artist-jacques-louis-david]

Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes, 1817, Jacques-Louis David

Medium: oil,canvas

[harvard-art-museums-photography]

X-radiograph(s) of "Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes", December 22, 2004, Harvard Art Museums: Photographs

X-Radiograph Description: X-Radiograph (6) , Kodak M-1; LORAD; (only canvas visible) X-Radiograph Settings: 55KV, 5mA,60 sec , 75" from tube, 6 sheets; Lorad, Kodak Burroughs Number: 4736 X-Radiograph(s) of: Artist: David, Jacques-Louis, Fr... Harvard Art Museums/Straus Center for Conservation and Technical Studies, Alan Burroughs Collection of X-Radiographs

https://www.harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/347842

[napoleondidthat]

Napoleon’s Coup d’etat; A Hot Mess

The following are excerpts from Napoleon, A Life by Adam Zamoyski. Napoleon’s heroic coup d’etat was in actuality a hot mess with comedy thrown in.

“Bonaparte took over one of the palace’s drawing rooms as his headquarters. Talleyrand had rented a house nearby in which he, Roederer, and others waited, ready to climb into a waiting carriage if things went wrong. Sieyes too had taken the precaution of parking his carriage in a discreet place nearby in case he had to make a quick getaway. It was said that some of the conspirators were carrying large sums in ready money for the same reason. Bonaparte himself seems to have had an attack of nerves shortly after his arrival and flew into a rage with an officer for no reason.

There was good reason to be nervous. As they waited for the chambers to be made ready, the deputies of the two assemblies, most of whom had been excluded from the previous day’s session, strolled about discussing the situation, joined by Parisians who had driven out to see what was going on. In the course of these discussions those hostile to any change grew firmer in their resistance, while supporters of the coup began to have second thoughts. Bonaparte had a total of about 6000 troops at hand, some sitting around their stacked weapons in the courtyard giving evil looks to the deputies, those hated ‘lawyers’ and ‘chatterboxes’, others deployed in the grounds and the surrounding streets.”

(Napoleon, A Life, Adam Zamoyski, pages 234-235)

“It was not until well after one o’clock that the Five Hundred were able to take their seats, in a flapping of scarlet Roman togas and plumed Polish caps. Lucien and his supporters were to persuade their assembly to nominate a commission to investigate the dangers threatening the Republic. But things got off to a bad start. Sensing what was afoot, the Jacobins among them began denouncing the incipient dictatorship, declaring that they would defend the constitution to the death. It was the kind of emotive language that swayed the majority in assemblies of the period, and a vot was carried to have every deputy renew their oath to it. That would take all day.

The Elders had already filed into the Gallery of Apollo in their blue togas, preceded by a band playing the Marseillaise. They were to take notice of the resignation of the three Directors, declare the government thereby dissolved, and appoint three consuls to prepare a new constitution. But the session had hardly opened when some of the deputies began questioning the legality of the previous day’s proceedings. One of the conspirators cleverly observed that the Elders could not debate anything until the Five Hundred had properly constituted themselves--which they had not, as they were still busy renewing their oaths.”

(Napoleon, A Life, Adam Zamoyski,  page 235)

“In the damp room, hardly warmed by a smoking fire, where Bonaparte, his brother Joseph, Sieyes, and the other leaders sat, ‘people looked at each other but did not speak’, according to one of those present. ‘It was if they did not dare to ask and feared to reply.’ People began making excuses and slipping away. Bonaparte tried to hide his nerves by giving unnecessary orders and moving troops about. Every so often Lavalette would come and report on what was going on in the chambers.

Outside, more and more people began to drift in from Paris. Jourdan and Augereau had also turned up, alert to the possibility of exploiting the situation for themselves....Just before four o’clock he (Bonaparte) announced that he wished to speak to the Elders and, followed bu a number of aides, entered their chamber. Their session had by then been suspended, but they gathered to hear what he had to say.

Bonaparte was not a good speaker, often having difficulty in finding the right words. He was flustered and did not have a specific case to put, only a series of slogans which had proved sufficient up until now. ‘Allow me to speak to you with the frankness of a soldier,’ he began. He had, he told them, been minding his own business in Paris when they had called on him to defend the Republic. He had flown to their aid, and now he was being denounced as a Caesar and a Cromwell, a dictator. He urged them to act quickly, as there was no government and liberty was in peril. He was there to carry out their will. ‘Let us save liberty, let us save equality!’ he pleaded. At that point he was interrupted by the shout, ‘And what about the constitution?’. After a stunned silence, Bonaparte pointed out that they themselves and the Directory they had named had violated the constitution on at least three occasions, which was not tactful, and did not lend conviction to his main theme, to which he returned, plaintively assuring them that he was only there to uphold their authority and did not nourish any personal ambitions, and exhorting them to emulate Brutus should he ever betray their trust. His friends tried to restrain him, but many of the member of the assembly had been angered, and not began asking awkward questions. He carried on, growing more and more aggressive in tone and grasping at any words and phrases that came to mind, conjuring up visions of ‘volcanoes’, of ‘silent conspiracies’, and at one point defiantly warning them: ‘Remember that I march accompanied by the god of victory and the god of war!’ He ranted on incoherently until Bourrienne dragged him away by his coat-tails.”

(Napoleon, A Life, Adam Zamoyski, pages 236-237)

“Hardly had he entered the orangery than shouts of ‘Down with the tyrant!’, ‘Down with the dictator!’, and ‘Outlaw!’ greeted him as the assembly rose to its feet in outrage at this military incursion. He was instantly assaulted by a multitude of deputies pressing in on him, shouting, shaking him by his lapels and pushing so hard that he momentarily lost consciousness. He was rescued by Murat, Lefebvre, and others, who kept the enraged deputies back with their fists, and by the grenadiers he had brought with him. The scuffle grew fierce, and a number of the members of the public in the spectators’ gallery fled through the windows. Bonaparte was eventually carried out, pale, struggling for breath, his head lolling to one side, barely conscious, pursued by cries of ‘Outlaw! Outlaw!’, which in the course of the Revolution had come to signify a condemnation to death.”

(Napoleon, A Life, Adam Zamoyski, page 237)

“Bonaparte had returned to his centre of operations. He seemed completely undone, making strange statements and at one point addressing Sieyes as ‘General’. He soon recovered himself, but for the rest of the day his words and actions remained disjointed and not entirely coherent.”

(Napoleon, A Life, Adam Zamoyski, page 238)

“Bonaparte came out of the palace followed by his suite and asked for his horse. The fiery beast lent by Bruix had been frightened by the shouting, with the result that when he mounted it began rearing and bucking. After some less than heroic tussles with it, he rode up to the bewildered grenadiers of the legislative guard, who failed to show much interest.....Riding up and down on his unruly mount he stuck a heroic pose, venting his fury at the way he had been treated by the Five Hundred, telling the troops that he had gone to them offering to save the Republic but had been attacked by these traitors, paid agents of Britain, who had brandished daggers and tried to murder him. His agitation had brought out a severe rash on his face, and while considering his next move he had scratched so hard that he had drawn blood, which now seemed to confirm the story of daggers raised against him--the rumor that he had been wounded flew through the ranks...”

(Napoleon, A Life, Adam Zamoyski, page 238)