7.25最新朱學勤驚天抄襲證據（三）：第八章第一節
小女子
這是小女子考證的朱學勤先生的第三個章節，《道德理想國的覆滅》第八章第一節（共8頁，276頁至283頁）。結果與上兩次考證（分別為第八章第五節——共5頁，298-302頁；第七章第五節——共8頁，266-273頁）完全相同，這三節都來自Blum一書。本節除了兩段，所有內容出現在Blum一書。小女子本乃幽默之人（看本人的第一篇就知道了），可是，面對這樣嚴峻得不能再嚴峻的事實，已經幽默不起來鳥。
僅以小女子的這三篇考證，朱學勤抄襲一事，到此可以鐵板釘釘了。這還不包括Isaiah和邢玉思兩位大哥的指控。網上有朱粉這樣辯解：“像這類外國歷史的出處一般都不是原創，而是分別收集自各種不同的外文原文資料或者國內各種翻譯過來的有關資料。但又是根據各種資料結合個人的觀點進行取舍的，所以很難說誰抄誰，或者，因為作者將各種資料揉和得很好，因而有效地表達了自己的觀點，應該就不算抄襲。” 是的，是應該根據不同的資料結合自己的研究進行取舍和綜合，可是，朱學勤的這幾個章節又來自什么不同的資料呢？ 這里其實就只有一個資料，就是Blum一書，引用的文獻也都是從Blum一書的文獻搬過來的（這從他照搬跨頁腳注、抄錯腳注就看出來了），偶爾夾雜一點點王養沖、陳崇武一書的內容。要不，您這幾章節怎么有高達90%以上的內容都來自Blum一書??？哪怕是編中學歷史教科書，也不至于都從一本書抄過來吧啊？那樣的話，大家也會說編者沒有水平，只會抄呵抄。這個道理，是再清楚不過了滴。您90%以上都來自同一本書（加上王、陳一書，基本就是100%了），哪里去找您“自己的觀點”?。恐劣谑裁础昂茈y說誰抄誰”，Blum一書出版時間是1989年，朱學勤那年才開始讀博士呢，難道是Blum抄朱學勤先生不成？
朱的這幾個章節是原封不動按Blum的英文原文翻譯過來的，改動的只有少數幾個地方有縮簡，可以算是編譯集，呵呵。要核對，對照小女子在朱文的注解和后面的Blum英文原文，也是一目可以看見滴，即便是復旦調查，也不需要什么額外的舉證之類的多此一舉，調查人只要是合格的大學畢業生水平（即過了英語四級）就夠了。還有一點，網友的貼子也說鳥滴，就是朱學勤先生您既然從Carol Blum那里“拿來”了這么多看家寶，對大債主的名字應該是畢生難忘的的，咋在末尾的文獻把大債主的名字都搞成Carol Bloom鳥滴呢？這也太不夠哥們鳥吧？真是幾次出版都沒有意識到啊，還是故意讓別人看不到真正的作者英文名字啊啊?。?/p>
朱學勤的問題，比起汪暉的幾個不算什么嚴重的引文規范啊之類的問題，性質已經完全不同，因為朱學勤是整節整節的抄襲同一本書。除了這三節、邢玉思考證的第八章第四節、還有Isaiah大俠考證的，你要小女子再考證朱書十節來自Blum都不成任何問題（舉個例子朱書第八章第二節也是來自Blum第12章；小女子已經沒有興趣再浪費時間了），Isaiah說朱書100多頁抄襲自Blum，現在看來他當初的判斷一點都不夸張，牛！哪怕按90年代初的學術不咋規范來說，朱學勤的整節整節抄襲也是可以拿出來大打一千大板的。這剛好驗證了朱學勤說過滴“我不是第二個汪暉”，呵呵，確實不是。當然，小女子也不主張像那些卑鄙地想整倒汪暉的偽媒體偽學者那樣來打倒朱學勤。人也需要大度的心態適當寬恕他人。前段時間在汪暉一事中老當益壯的那些50年代問題老人或者更老的“老人頭”們，現在面對朱學勤一事是長吁短嘆全啞了，確實很搞笑的嗦。老人們還是該向小女子80年代的學兄學妹們學習學習。都快進土的人了，還不曉得以大度的心態來看別人的人，小女子同情中——
下面是考證朱書第八章第一節的結果，黑色為朱文，紅色為小女子注解，后面的英文為Blum原文。本節朱文共使用9個腳注（從第3到第11，第1到2的腳注出現在引言），其中兩處是Blum。小女子的注解共46處，都來自Blum 一書。
第八章第一節、霜月批判——百科全書派雪上加霜
盧梭的信徒與啟蒙遺老之間的論戰始終在進行。
革命初起時，孔多塞這樣的啟蒙運動后繼者尚在政治中心公開活動，（1. Blum：229頁最后一段第3行至230頁第1行）但其他百科全書派成員年事已高，亦因外界盧梭聲望日隆，大多隱居民間，深居簡出。（2. Blum：229頁最后一段第1行至第3行）８０歲高齡的修道院長雷諾爾，自１７８１年５月２５日逃避巴黎市議會的逮捕令，一直隱匿于馬賽，閉門著述。（3. Blum：230頁第6行至第7行,第8行至第10行）１７９０年８月，斐揚派傾慕其啟蒙思想家的聲名，宣布舊時代對他的逮捕令撤銷無效，邀其進入巴黎，登上議會講壇講演。（4. Blum: 230頁第14行至第16行） 不料這位白發老翁上臺后，向著底下正仰頭瞻仰他作為百科全書派化身之風采的眾議員輕蔑地掃了一眼，隨即就連珠炮般猛烈抨擊自１７８９年以來所發生的所有變化…… （5. Blum: 230頁第一段倒數第6行至倒數第3行）
羅伯斯庇爾站起發言：
你們看，（自由的）敵人是如何懦弱，他們不敢親臨前線甘冒矢石，卻在這里舉起他們的遁詞。用心險惡者把這個有名望的老人從墳墓邊拖了回來，以利用他的弱點。他們唆使他當眾背棄了本來是構成他威望基礎的那些教義和原則。（6. Blum: 230頁第二段全段; 注：朱文這里標注了Blum）
在羅伯斯庇爾建議下，議會把這個“昏瞆老人”轟了出去。（7. Blum: 230頁第三段第1行至第3行）從此，羅伯斯庇爾對百科全書派的厭惡公開化，與他們結下了怨恨。8. Blum: 230頁第三段第4行至第6行）
?。保罚梗材辏丛?，羅伯斯庇爾出版了《憲法保衛者》雜志。（9. Blum: 231頁第一段第1行至第2行）他攻擊的第一個靶子，就是米拉波曾在議會發言中多次提及的孔多塞與達朗貝爾的友誼。（10. Blum: 231頁第一段第8行至第10行；注：此處朱抄錯了，Blum原文中說提及他們友誼的是Brissot，不是米拉波Mirabeau，下面的Blum引文中也是Brissot先生）羅伯斯庇爾這一次公開數落百科全書派當年排斥迫害盧梭的惡跡：
米拉波先生，（朱抄錯了，應是Brissot先生）他對他的那幫朋友推崇倍至，提醒我們回憶孔多塞與達朗貝爾的友誼以及他的學術名望，譴責我們以輕率的語氣評論那些他稱之為愛國主義和自由主義導師的人們?？墒蔷臀叶?，我從來就認為，在那些方面，我們除了自然之外，別無導師可言。我愿意指出這一點，那就是革命已經砍掉了許多舊制度下大人物的腦袋。如果說這些院士、數學家遭到攻擊和恥笑，那是因為他們曾巴結過那些大人物，并對那么多的國王奉迎拍馬，以求飛黃騰達。誰都知道他們是多么的不可饒恕：他們迫害過讓·雅克·盧梭的美德和自由精神！盧梭那神圣的面容我曾親眼目睹，按我的判斷，唯有他才是那個時代眾多名人中唯一的、真正的哲學家。他才應該得到公認的榮譽，而這種榮譽恰恰就被那些政治上的雇傭文人和心懷忌恨的英雄們用種種陰謀手段肆加踐踏?。?1. 這段全段見Blum: 231頁第二段全段）
百科全書派當年與歐洲各王室之間的關系，確實不如盧梭的民粹主義道德實踐那么漂亮；⑤百科全書派當年不寬容盧梭，也是事實。但是，這種哲學家內部的理論紛爭是否到了迫害程度，未必如羅伯斯庇爾所言。羅伯斯庇爾令人不安處，是他的這種強烈暗示：“革命已經砍掉了許多舊制度下大人物的腦袋。”羅伯斯庇爾所使用的“砍掉”這一字眼——正是當時民間流傳的“斷頭臺”一詞俚語。這種獨尊盧梭罷黜百家的肅殺之氣，預示著后來的“焚書、坑儒”（前文已述）一連串極端行動，已難以避免。
孔多塞試圖起來反抗。他指斥羅伯斯庇爾：“當一個人在他的內心或內心情感中毫無思想可言時，當他毫無知識可以填補他智慧的空白時，當他連把單詞聯接起來的這點可憐能力都不具備的時候，盡管他盡其所能設想自己是一個偉人，還有什么事情可以留給他做呢？通過好勇斗狠的行為，他只能贏得土匪，強盜的喝采?！?（12. Blum: 234頁最后一段第5行至235頁第1行）
德穆蘭則主張在盧梭與伏爾泰之間應妥協調和。他提出，法國應該彌平它的英烈們之間曾經存在過的敵意。（13. Blum: 229頁第5行至第7行）他說：“伏爾泰和讓·雅克的遺骸都應該被保存為民族的財產?，F在，各民族分裂為成千個碎片，同一民族內，某種碎片被一部分人認為是圣靈遺跡，同時又被另一種人視為瀆神之物，可厭之物。然而，這本來是一座神殿（指先賢祠——本書作者）。人們瞻仰這一神殿和它所收納的各種遺物時，本不該爭吵。這是古羅馬的神殿，應該把所有的崇拜所有的宗教融合在一起”。（14. Blum: 229頁第9行至第14行；注：此處朱書標注引文來自Blum 227頁，但應該是229頁）
德穆蘭此言未免天真。當時對盧梭和伏爾泰、百科全書派的褒貶，正反映著現實政治生活中的嚴重對立，人們怎么會聽得進調和者的聲音？（15. Blum: 229頁第三段第1行至第5行）
１７９２年１２月５日，雅各賓俱樂部集會。羅伯斯庇爾在這次集會中發表重要講話，公開號召打倒百科全書派，（16. Blum: 233頁倒數第3行至倒數第1行）推倒雅各賓俱樂部中的愛爾維修胸像。當時雅各賓俱樂部中共有四座胸像：米拉波、布魯圖斯，盧梭和愛爾維修。（17. Blum: 233頁倒數第1行至234頁第2行）羅伯斯庇爾說：
我看只有兩個人值得敬仰：布魯圖斯和盧梭。愛爾維修是一個陰謀家，一個可憐的詭辯家，一個非道德行為的始作俑者，是正直的讓·雅克·盧梭的最無情的迫害者！只有盧梭才值得我們敬仰。如果愛爾維修還活著，決難想象，他會加入自由的事業。他只會加入那群所謂詭辯家的陰謀集團，那些人今天正在反對祖國！⑦。（18. Blum: 234頁第二段全段）
羅伯斯庇爾的建議獲得一致通過。（19. Blum: 234頁第三段第1行）在一片歡呼鼓噪聲中，米拉波和愛爾維修的胸像被推倒，踩得稀爛。（20. Blum: 234頁第三段第2行至第4行）
接下來的一個月，民間開始出現反百科全書派浪潮。一個主題被反復強調：只有投身于盧梭式美德的雅各賓派才是“人民”，而反對盧梭者，不是陰謀家，就是人民的敵人。（21. Blum: 234頁第四段第1行至第4行）圣鞠斯特宣稱，在人民的敵人里，他能辨別出這樣一類人：（22. Blum: 234頁第四段第5行至第6行）“他們曾忌恨并陰謀迫害過讓·雅克?！边B德國來的無政府主義革命家克勞茨也來湊趣，說那些百科全書派尚存者“抱著團來懲治我，就像他們懲治過讓·雅克一樣?！保?3. Blum: 234頁第四段最后五行）
?。保罚梗衬甏海R梭遺孀泰勒絲來到國民公會，要求給予盧梭以置身先賢祠的榮譽。（24. Blum: 227頁第三段第1行至第3行）而在此之前，在斐揚派時期，１７９１年７月１１日伏爾泰遺骸已移入先賢祠。盧梭與伏爾泰能否置于一堂，成了現實政治中如何對待盧梭及其思想的敏感問題。阿馬爾出面接待泰勒絲，慨然允諾：“民族的代表們將再也不會延期償還盧梭的恩典了。” （25. Blum: 227頁第三段第4行至第6行）國民公眾經過激烈辯論，議決把盧梭遺骸送入先賢祠。（26. Blum: 228頁第1行至第2行）
?。保罚梗衬辏翟?，吉倫特派垮臺，啟蒙遺老進入地下狀態。（27. Blum: 235頁第5行至第6行）孔多塞隱匿不出，格里姆逃亡哥特，波麥賽逃亡英格蘭，馬蒙特爾隱居于諾曼底，留在巴黎的人只能秘密聚會，不定期見面。（28. Blum: 235頁第6行至第9行）專門研究這一問題的史學家卡夫克羅列了當時３８個人的命運，得出結論：“百科全書派的合作者決不是恐怖政策的合作者。” （29. Blum: 229頁第三段第5行至第10行）當時最著名的百科全書派地下活動者有三個：孔多塞、雷諾爾和修道院院長摩萊勒。（30. Blum: 229頁最后三行）這群幸存者在愛爾維修遺孀家里，秘密活動。這些人有：都德特夫人（盧梭晚年曾與之交惡，見《懺悔錄》下卷——本書作者）、米拉波私人醫生彼埃爾·卡布尼，以及前文所述那個給科黛作詩悼亡的詩人舍尼埃。（31. Blum: 232頁第三段第6行至第11行）時人稱他們為“盧梭式民主的敵人”。（32. Blum: 232頁第三段第12行至第13行；注：原文并不是“時人”，而是一個叫Sergio Moravia的人這樣說）摩萊勒回憶說：１７９３年底的一個夜晚，他在杜伊勒里宮附近一家餐館里就餐，正好旁聽到鄰桌上的一場談話，談的是各區正在散發“愛國公民證書”，以甄別“正義者”與“邪惡者”。（33. Blum: 232頁最后一行至233頁第6行）一個人對另一個人說：“他們給了一個著名貴族一張愛國公民證！” （34. Blum: 233頁第6行至第7行）此人越說越憤怒：“那個貴族就是埃貝爾·摩萊勒！他寫過一本反對盧梭的書，我把他們從杜伊勒里區剛剛驅逐出來！” （35. Blum: 233頁第7行至第9行）摩萊勒一聽此言，趕緊拉下帽檐，悄悄溜走。⑨（36. Blum: 233頁第9行至第10行；此處朱的腳注標注為：參見卡夫克：“恐怖與百科全書派”，載法國近現代史，196年14期284-295頁，其實朱搞混了，這個腳注應該是Morellet, Memoires (Paris: Ladvocat, 1821), 2:97。朱抄的這個腳注內容也來自Blum，但Blum原文本用于上面的第29個標注，但朱文在第29處沒有給腳注，卻把它搬到這里來了，搞錯了；另外年份是1967年，不是196年，朱也抄錯了）
?。保罚梗衬辏保痹拢玻比眨此拢比?，羅伯斯庇爾在雅各賓俱樂部正式發動了反無神論運動。（37. Blum: 240頁第二段倒數第4行至倒數第3行）演說一開始，他就以黑白對分法，把“貴族式”的無神論和人民所廣泛接受的“偉大的主宰關心受壓迫的無辜者”的觀點對立起來，（38. Blum: 240頁第二段最后三行）頓時激起旁聽席上一陣掌聲。羅伯斯庇爾迅速把掌聲變為他的論據：“給我鼓掌的是人民，是不幸者。如果有人指責我的話，那一定是富人，是罪犯?！彼凳荆簢窆妼⒉扇』謴妥诮绦叛龅闹卮蟛襟E，并打擊那些瀆神者、非道德者。這就是著名的９３年霜月演說10。
“霜月演說”無異于發布對百科全書派的討伐令。（39. Blum: 243頁第3行至第4行）百科全書派雪上加霜，更難生存。繼此之后，羅伯斯庇爾又發表“花演說”，對百科全書派施以最后一擊。（40. Blum: 235頁第四段第1行至第3行）
?。保罚梗材暌詠砉埠蛧硟鹊姆腔浇袒\動，始終刺激羅伯斯庇爾的道德憂患與宗教情懷。在他看來，瀆神者是瀆德者，百科全書派的無神論抽空了共和國的道德基礎。（41. Blum: 243頁第7行至第9行）１７９４春丹東事件更使他把這筆帳記在百科全書派宣揚的世俗功利主義上。（42. Blum: 245頁第三段第7行至第8行）處死丹東的當天，巴雷爾曾宣布羅伯斯庇爾正在起草一項道德救國的宏偉計劃。１７９４年５月７日，羅伯斯庇爾代表救國委員會向國民公會提出了這一計劃，其中最富道德義憤的那一部分，就是對百科全書派排炮般的攻擊：（43. Blum：235頁第四段第1行至第5行）
這一派人在政治方面，一直輕視人民權利；在道德方面，遠遠不滿足于摧毀宗教偏見；……這一派人們以極大的熱情傳播唯物主義思想……。實用哲學的很大一部分就淵源于此，它把利己主義化成體系，把人類社會看作詭計的一場戰斗，把成功看作正義和非正義的尺度，把正直看作一種出于愛好或者出于禮貌的事情，把世界看作靈巧的騙子的家產?！藗円呀涀⒁獾?，他們中的好些人同奧爾良家族有密切的聯系，而英國憲法在他們看來，是政治的杰作和社會幸福的·最·高·點。
在我講到的那個時期里，……有一個人（指盧梭——本書作者）以其高尚的心靈和莊嚴的品格，顯得無愧于是克盡職責的人類導師?！膶W說的純正性來自自然和對邪惡的深刻的憎恨，同樣也來自他對那些盜用哲學家的名義搞陰謀的詭辯家的無法抑制的蔑視，而這，引起了他的敵人和假朋友對他的仇恨和迫害。啊！如果他曾是這場革命的見證人……，誰能懷疑他的高貴的心靈充滿激情地關注著正義和平等的事業呢！然而，他的卑怯的對手們為革命干了些什么呢？他們……與革命為敵，…… 腐蝕公共輿論，……把自己出賣給一些叛亂集團，尤其出賣給奧爾良派！11（44. 以上兩段朱注出了引文來自王養沖、陳崇武，沒有問題；后面這段也出現在Blum 235頁的最后一段最后四行和236頁的第二段；因為朱此節基本都來自Blum一書，說明朱在考慮使用這段引文時也是參考了Blum一書的）
這是法國革命期間，對百科全書派所作的一次最猛烈最全面的討伐。盧梭和啟蒙思想家的理論是非，已經上升到革命與反革命的高度，百科全書派再也生存不下去了。（45. Blum：233頁第二段第1行至第4行；此處朱文縮簡）愛爾維修遺孀的地下沙龍被迫解散，啟蒙遺老非逃即亡，他們中的大多數人后來還是走上了斷頭臺。（46. Blum：233頁第一段最后五行；此處朱文縮簡）啟蒙主流哲學留給法國大革命的最后一絲影響，只有花月廣場上那尊無神論模擬像，等著羅伯斯庇爾付之一炬了。
Blum原文（共46處）
1. Blum: 229-230: three of the best known intellectuals of the ancien regime, Condorcet, the Abbe Raynal, and the Abbe Morellet, overtly refused to accept the revisionist interpretation of the Enlightenment which some Jacobins were attempting to propagate.
2. Blum. P. 229: the majority of former Encyclopedists and other philosophes left letters and memoirs recounting efforts to make themselves inconspicuous during the Terror,
3. Blum. P. 230: He persuaded the Abbe Guillaume-Thomas Raynal, one of the fabled names of the philosophic group, to leave his retreat in Marseilles. The abbe, in August 1790, was still technically wanted under an arrest order from the parlement of Paris
4. Blum. P. 230: The Assembly, moved at the thought of the old warrior's long struggles on behalf of freedom, declared the decree against him void and invited him to speak before the deputies.
5. Blum. P. 230: Opposition incarnate in one human being, the elderly radical looked down on the adoring faces of the delegates and delivered a blast of venom against everything which had taken place since 1789.
6. Blum. P. 230: Robespierre handled the momentary ontological panic of the Assembly with great aplomb: "You see," Malouet quotes him as saying, "how the enemies [of liberty] dare not risk a frontal attack and are obliged to resort to subterfuge. The wretches drag forth a respectable old man from the edge of his tomb, and abusing his weakness, they make him abjure the doctrine and the principles which founded his*reputation."13
7. Blum. P. 230: Rather than parrying Raynal's attack, Robespierre's response simply dismissed him as a befuddled dotard and indeed the abbe's eighty years,
8. Blum. P. 230: Nonetheless, Robespierre subsequently expressed increasing rancor toward the entire group of philosophes,
9. Blum. P. 231: in April 1792, he began publishing a journal, Le Defenseur de la Constitution (a misnomer since it had no bearing on the constitution)
10. Blum. P. 231: In the first issue Robespierre took on Brissot, who had just made a speech in praise of Condorcet's long friendship with the Encyclopedist d'Alembert.
11. Blum. P. 231: M. Brissot, in the panegyric of his friend, while reminding us of Condorcet's liaisons with d'Alembert and his academic glory, has reproached us for the temerity with which we judge men whom he calls our masters in patriotism and liberty. For my part I would have thought that in those respects we had no other masters than nature. I could point out that the revolution has cut down many a great man of the old regime [here Robespierre used the sinister word 'rapetiss£' which was a colloquial term for guillotining] and if the academicians and mathematicians whom M. Brissot proposes to us as models attacked and ridiculed priests, they nevertheless courted the great and adored the kings in whose service they prospered; and who is unaware of how implacably they persecuted virtue and the spirit of liberty in the person of this Jean-Jacques Rousseau whose sacred image I see before me, of this true philosopher who alone, in my opinion, among all the famous men of those times, deserved the public honors which have been prostituted since by intriguers upon political hacks and contemptible heroes. [4: 35-37朱文腳注照搬Blum此引文出處
12. Blum. P. 234: Of Robespierre he charged: "When a man has no thoughts in his head or feelings in his heart, when no learning makes up for his lack of wits, when he is incapable, despite his best efforts, of rising to the petty talent of combining words, and nevertheless he aspires to be a great man, what is there for him to do? By outrageous acts he must earn the protection of brigands."19
13. Blum. P. 229: attempted to reconcile Rousseau with the philosophes in the tomb. Camille Desmoulins described the Republic's need to gloss over its heroes' antagonisms and to weld them into a posthumous united front.
14. Blum. P. 229: "the remains of Voltaire and of Jean-Jacques will be transferred there as national property. Nations are divided between a thousand sects, and in the same nation what is the holy of holies for one sect is for another a place of blasphemy and abomination. But there will be no dispute between men over the holiness of this temple and its relics. This basilica will reunite all in its cult and its religion" (Revolutions de France et de Brabant, 72: 321). 此處朱書標注引文來自Blum 227頁，但應該是229頁
15. Blum. P. 229: It is not always enough to bury a quarrel, however; one must first be certain it is dead. Such was not the case, despite the shared apotheosis of Voltaire and Rousseau, not only because of the profound vibrations of their fundamental discord, but because certain philosophes inconveniently lived on.
16. Blum. P. 233: In a speech at the Jacobin Club on December 5, 1792, Robespierre moved from verbal denunciation to symbolic act.
17. Blum. P. 233-234: He demanded that of the four busts decorat-ing the hall, those of Mirabeau, Brutus, Rousseau, and Helvetius, two be struck down.
18. Blum. P. 234: I see here only two men worthy of our homage: Brutus and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Mirabeau must fall. Helvetius must fall. Helvetius was a schemer, a miserable wit (bel esprit), an immoral creature, one of the crudest persecutors of the good Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who is the only one worthy of our homage. If Helvetius were alive today, don't go believing he would have embraced the cause of liberty: he would have joined the crowd of conniving so-called wits who today are devastating the fatherland.9：143-44朱文腳注照搬Blum此引文出處
19. Blum. P. 234: This speech touched off a wild display of approval at the club,
20. Blum. P. 234: In the midst of shouting and applause, ladders were brought in, the busts of Mirabeau and Helvetius were thrown down and smashed
21. Blum. P. 234： "Men of letters" and "wits" were, from this point on, in Jacobin texts, synonymous with traitors. In the months that followed, one theme was constantly reiterated: the Jacobins who embraced Rousseau's "virtue" were the people.
22. Blum. P. 234: Saint-Just declared that in his enemies he recognized the same people whose
23. Blum. P. 234: "envy and malice persecuted the good Jean-Jacques," and Anacharsis Clootz claimed, shortly before he himself was denounced by Robespierre as a foreigner and atheist, that "they want to punish me corporally as they did Jean-Jacques" (Jaures, 8: 74). 朱文腳注照搬Blum此引文出處
24. Blum. P.227: Therese appeared before the Convention, accompanied by a deputation of the Republican Society of the Commune of Franciade (formerly Saint Denis), demanding the honors of the Pantheon for Rousseau.
25. Blum. P. 227: The presiding officer, Amar, responded to the visitors by declaring that "the national representatives would not delay paying the debt they owed to the most intrepid defender of the rights of the people;
26. Blum. P. 228: the Convention decreed that Rousseau's remains be brought to the Pantheon
27. Blum. P. 235: When the Terror moved into its most active phase with the fall of the Gironde in May of 1793, Condorcet went into hiding.
28. Blum. P. 235: Condorcet went into hiding. A number of other intellectuals of the old regime were abroad, imprisoned, or dead. Grimm had fled to Gotha, Beaumarchais to England, Marmontel was hoping to escape notice in Normandy,
29. Blum. P. 229: Frank A. Kafker, in an effort to determine whether the Encyclopedists who had survived into the Terror were active supporters of it, examined the revolutionary fortunes of thirty-eight men who had contributed to the great dictionary and concluded:
30. Blum. P. 229: three of the best known intellectuals of the ancien regime, Condorcet, the Abbe Raynal, and the Abbe Morellet,
31. Blum. P. 232: Pierre Cabanis who had been Mirabeau's physician, Constantin de Volney, the Abbe Sieves, Andre Chenier, Condorcet for a time and Mme Condorcet after her husband went into hiding, Mme d'Houdetot, who had so inflamed Rousseau, M. d'Houdetot, and a handful of others banded together in Auteuil at the home of Mme Helvetius, the widow of the wellknown materialist philosopher.
32. Blum. P. 232: Sergio Moravia has characterized them as "adverseries of Rousseauvian democracy,"
33. Blum. P. 232-233: Abbe Morellet. He recounts how one evening while dining near the Tuileries he overheard one of Hebert's dinner companions telling the Pere Duchesne that the sections were dispensing certificates of "civisme" too casually. These certificates, awarded by neighborhood committees, were necessary for survival in revolutionary Paris, for without one a person was liable to arrest as a "suspect"
34. Blum. P. 233: "They gave one to a well-known aristocrat,"
35. Blum. P. 233: Pere Duchesne's friend announced indignantly, "the Abbe Morellet whom I had thrown out of the Tuileries section for having written against J.-J. Rousseau."17
36. Blum. P. 233: Morellet recounts scuttling from the restaurant only to risk his neck朱文此處的腳注抄錯
37. Blum. P. 240: On 1 frimaire, at the Jacobins, Robespierre began his crusade against "atheism."
38. Blum. P. 240: From the beginning he meant to oppose atheism, which was "aristocratic," to the idea of a "great Being who watches over oppressed innocence," an idea that was "completely plebeian."3
39. Blum. P. 243: Within this context Robespierre began to formulate the attack on the philosophes which was discussed in the previous chapter.
40. Blum. P. 235: At the meeting of the Jacobin Club on 18 floreal (1794), three months before Thermidor, Robespierre put the finishing touches on his indictment of the now defunct "coalition" formed by the philosophes
41. Blum. P. 243: To have denied the existence of God and the communion of believers in favor of some individualistic rational doctrines was to undermine the foundation of the republic of virtue.
42. Blum. P. 245: he came to Danton, with an accusation which defined the orator's corruption:
43. Blum. P. 235: At the meeting of the Jacobin Club on 18 floreal (1794), three
months before Thermidor,Robespierre put the finishing touches on his indictment of the now defunct "coalition" formed by the philosophes in anticipation of the Revolution, which, according to him, they had foreseen. Among the philosophes before the Revolution, he said:
44. Blum. P. 235: Among those who were outstanding in the world of letters there was one man who, by the loftiness of his soul and the grandeur of his character, showed himself worthy of the ministry of preceptor of the human race. [10: 454—55] depicted in strokes of flame the charms of virtue... The purity of his doctrine, imbibed from nature and from a profound hatred of vice, as well as his invincible contempt for the scheming intriguers who usurped the name of philosophes, called forth the hatred and persecution of his rivals and false friends. Ah! Had he been the witness of this revolution of which he was the precursor, who can doubt that his generous soul would have embraced the cause of justice and equality with transports of joy? But what did his cowardly adverseries do? They fought against the Revolution. [10: 455-56]
45. Blum. P. 233: The existence of this group with its lingering aura of political heroism, intellectual prestige, impeccable elegance and ironic snobisme drew fire from Robespierre as much as it had from Rousseau, and on much the same grounds.
46. Blum. P. 233: he escaped the fate which befell other members of the group in Auteuil, like the poet Andre Chenier, who was executed, and the luckless aphorist Sebastien-Roch Chamfort, who attempted suicide three different ways and yet managed to survive his last attempt for a few months.
相關文章
「 支持烏有之鄉！」
烏有之鄉 WYZXWK.COM
您的打賞將用于網站日常運行與維護。
幫助我們辦好網站，宣傳紅色文化！
歡迎掃描下方二維碼，訂閱烏有之鄉網刊微信公眾號
