The 12 men of the directory - How power changes us

I have a sort of fascination for the French Revolution. It truly was a unique event in history. Every time I learn more about it, I become only more and more speechless at just how extraordinary and unreproducible it is. Let me give you an example of that… with a warning.

1793: We are in the first year of the First Republic. After five years of the Revolution, many expected the most bloody moments of the Revolution to be behind them. They were wrong. The interim government was currently the Committee of Public Safety - an assembly of 12 persons - almost strangers to each other. In a room in the Tuileries, used before by Louis XVI (and after by Napoleon), they judged. In reality, they never sat all twelve at the same time. Yet, they would communicate daily by correspondence if not hourly. How the committee itself worked was largely a mystery at the time. Today, we have access to all their proclamations, commands, letters and instructions making it more clear than ever. One thing is certain: debates were lively, to say the least. Just think about their position. Their authority was not recognized in the West and South of France, where local authorities were acting on their own. Paris itself was in turmoil. The armies of England, Holland, Spain, Prussia and Austria were converging to France to try and re-estate monarchy. Chaos. Pure chaos. What could they do? What sort of man could do anything in such desperate times? You would be surprised to know that they were largely normal middle-class men (although many lawyers for what it‘s worth) pushed by chance into a position of absolute power. That power would break them. In a year, they would be dethroned and probably dead. In that time, they would become what R.S.S. Palmer would later call “terrorists“. Let me describe these men and let it be a warning that almost anyone can be brought down by power.

Bertrand Barère 'de Vieuzac': Lawyer almost by birth, with a mother of noble blood. He was known to be easygoing, hard-working and eloquent. He supposedly also had an excellent memory and no-nonsense approach to things. His hard work had made him a fabulous orator and, therefore, dangerous during the Revolution. Yet, he was no leader and definitely not an idealist. He preferred to follow with the winners and nod along. I Imagine seeing him nodding to Robespierre's dreams inattentively.

Jean-Nicolas Billaud-Varenne: Billaud was a radical “before it was cool“. To be sure, he was a lawyer by formation but, in the words of Palmer, "drifter" would be more accurate to define his occupation. One-time philosopher, playwright and teacher - not successful in any of these ventures. His views stood out as radical... and that was before the Revolution. The Revolution would only exacerbate his views. Again Palmer says it best: "When a man in his ordinary moments takes this attitude toward those who oppose his opinions, it is not surprising if he puts them to death a few years later, in a time of crisis and excitement."

Lazarre Carnot: An army officer and engineer known as the 'Organizer of Victory'. Austere and chill to strangers. Yet, very warm to friendly faces. He was often seen to be absorbed by mathematical problems - a field where he was probably a genius. Fantastic writer too. A famous story states that Lagrange once declared that Carnot anticipated one of his discoveries by a few years. He also had a hidden poetic side. Kind-hearted, he was known to help out his servants in times of trouble. Strangely, he was not really a politician and, in another world, probably a renowned scholar. But at that time, it was pretty hard to not get involved in politics. After all, his career was at an impasse. He was already of the highest rank he could get to as a commoner (captain). Through the military, he had seen and lived through some of the worst aspects and idiocities of the Ancient Regime. The Revolution would force its way and, in the end, he would control fourteen different armies for the Republic.

Georges Couthon: Another lawyer, but more atypical. Known as a humanitarian. He was mild, gentle and humble. The image of that guy everyone likes and trusts. Before the revolution, he had just a bit of political experience (less than the other lawyers in the group at least). I find it incredible that is reputation for benevolence stayed true during the Revolution. Not an easy feet. His patience probably came from his main predicament: a case of meningitis that slowly crippled him. In 1793, he was already completely unable to walk, but happy and married.

Marie-Jean Hérault de Séchelles: Marie-Jean was a strange leader for the Revolution as he was a nobleman and rich in a time where both could be punishable by death. Spoiled to the core too. Yet, he was good-looking and could get away with things. He paid much attention to appearances, which could explain how he could squirm his way to the committee. Even I guy like him had some traits to admire. He was a connoisseur. Palmer cites a few of his specialties: wine, women, speeches, books, philosophy and the new science of physiognomy (reading the character of someone by its face). He also had a hand in writing one of the many constitutions written during the revolution, probably a major reason why he was among the twelve.

Jean-Marie Collot D'Herbois: D‘Herbois stands out from the others. Not a lawyer, he was an actor since the age of seventeen. In a time where actors when not seen in the best of light, he craved recognition - a dangerous penchant. He would become a playwright, a theatre manager... and then one of the most powerful men in France.

André Jeanbon Saint-André: Protestant minister and one-time ship's captain, he was considered an ever-optimist by his colleagues. Saint-André was a fervent protestant when it was dangerous to be (during the Ancient Regime). Interestingly, he had much respect for the king's government before the revolution and how it treated protestants. How did he end within the committee? Well, just like the others: by chance. Nevertheless, his religious views seemed to have calmed down in the last years and his focus shifted to more practical concerns. In his mind, religion should not "interfere with the public order". A good government could even benefit religion with its supervision.

Let‘s follow with three figures among the twelve that we sadly know very little about. Robert Lindet was a middle-aged, steady and sensible man. From the twelve, he was the one who was a political figure from the start of his career. Claude-Antoine Prieur-Duvernois was a young army officer and engineer. Pretty much everything I could gather on him. I know even less about Pierre-Louis Prieur apart from the fact that he was also a lawyer.

Our last two figures were celebrities… probably for the wrong reasons. Their countrymen knew very little about their twelve dictators even their names. But these two were known.

Louis-Antoine Saint-Just: Called the 'Angel of Death' or the “Enfant Terrible“. This will be the only one of the twelve that I will not defend. He was the youngest. A law graduate known to be imperious, stubborn and radical. Undisciplined, playboy and impudent on all accounts. In a word: a bad boy. But also handsome and convincing. That was the source of his power. At nineteen, he ran from home with silver from his mother and sold it all... only to spend everything in a few days. This shows more than anything else his temperament. The Revolution would be HIS opportunity. He became a leader and a big player very very fast. He was a major factor in why many heads would fall.

Maximilien Robespierre: For this man, I need to reserve another post. I will try to summarize the main points here. But be warned that Robespierre was a VERY complex man. Robespierre was also a lawyer. Known to be introspective, self-righteous and, most of all, idealistic. Before the revolution, he was mainly known for defending those facing a clear injustice. He had ample opportunity to show that he was a man of integrity. Raised by two aunts, he developed a reserved character. According to his sister, he could smile but 'hardly laugh'. Dabbled very little with wine. Remained unmarried, chaste and a puritan. His downfall probably came from two things: his unilateral belief in moral progress and his VERY absent-minded mind. Supposedly, his mind wandered away if it came to small talk. He was probably a bit proud too. Sadly, he was quick to blame others of self-interest - interests that he himself professed being free of. Finally, he was an active and respected member of book clubs before the revolution... and many others more impactful clubs during it.

I want to end this (grim) survey with an invitation to explore the French Revolution further. I find this political crisis in particular an excellent warning for any governing entity. We have much to learn from it, even though we already learned a lot from it.

If that was too much for you, I am truly sorry. Take some time for yourself. In any case, see you next time.

References

Twelve Who Ruled - The Year of the Terror in the French Revolution, R.R. Palmer, 1968.