C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 1 7.21朱学勤惊天抄袭证据（一）：小女子点朱学勤的死穴
7.23朱学勤惊天抄袭证据（二）：第七章第五节
7.25最新朱学勤惊天抄袭证据（三）：第八章第一节
小女子
这是小女子考证的朱学勤先生的第三个章节，《道德理想国的覆灭》第八
章第一节（共8页，276页至283页）。结果与上两次考证（分别为第八章第五节——共5
页，298-302页；第七章第五节——共8页，266-273页）完全相同，这三节都来自Blum
一书。本节除了两段，所有内容出现在Blum一书。小女子本乃幽默之人（看本人的第一
篇就知道了），可是，面对这样严峻得不能再严峻的事实，已经幽默不起来鸟。
仅以小女子的这三篇考证，朱学勤抄袭一事，到此可以铁板钉钉了。这还不
包括Isaiah和邢玉思两位大哥的指控。网上有朱粉这样辩解：“像这类外国历史的出处
一般都不是原创，而是分别收集自各种不同的外文原文资料或者国内各种翻译过来的有
关资料。但又是根据各种资料结合个人的观点进行取舍的，所以很难说谁抄谁，或者，
因为作者将各种资料揉和得很好，因而有效地表达了自己的观点，应该就不算抄袭。”
是的，是应该根据不同的资料结合自己的研究进行取舍和综合，可是，朱学勤的这几
个章节又来自什么不同的资料呢？ 这里其实就只有一个资料，就是Blum一书，引用的
文献也都是从Blum一书的文献搬过来的（这从他照搬跨页脚注、抄错脚注就看出来了）
，偶尔夹杂一点点王养冲、陈崇武一书的内容。要不，您这几章节怎么有高达90%以上
的内容都来自Blum一书啊？哪怕是编中学历史教科书，也不至于都从一本书抄过来吧啊
？那样的话，大家也会说编者没有水平，只会抄呵抄。这个道理，是再清楚不过了滴。
您90%以上都来自同一本书（加上王、陈一书，基本就是100%了），哪里去找您“自己
的观点”啊？至于什么“很难说谁抄谁”，Blum一书出版时间是1989年，朱学勤那年才
开始读博士呢，难道是Blum抄朱学勤先生不成？
朱的这几个章节是原封不动按Blum的英文原文翻译过来的，改动的只有少数
几个地方有缩简，可以算是编译集，呵呵。要核对，对照小女子在朱文的注解和后面的
Blum英文原文，也是一目可以看见滴，即便是复旦调查，也不需要什么额外的举证之类
的多此一举，调查人只要是合格的大学毕业生水平（即过了英语四级）就够了。还有一
点，网友的贴子也说鸟滴，就是朱学勤先生您既然从Carol Blum那里“拿来”了这么多
看家宝，对大债主的名字应该是毕生难忘的的，咋在末尾的文献把大债主的名字都搞成
Carol Bloom鸟滴呢？这也太不够哥们鸟吧？真是几次出版都没有意识到啊，还是故意
让别人看不到真正的作者英文名字啊啊啊？
朱学勤的问题，比起汪晖的几个不算什么严重的引文规范啊之类的问题，性
质已经完全不同，因为朱学勤是整节整节的抄袭同一本书。除了这三节、邢玉思考证的
第八章第四节、还有Isaiah大侠考证的，你要小女子再考证朱书十节来自Blum都不成任
何问题（举个例子朱书第八章第二节也是来自Blum第12章；小女子已经没有兴趣再浪费
时间了），Isaiah说朱书100多页抄袭自Blum，现在看来他当初的判断一点都不夸张，
牛！哪怕按90年代初的学术不咋规范来说，朱学勤的整节整节抄袭也是可以拿出来大打
一千大板的。这刚好验证了朱学勤说过滴“我不是第二个汪晖”，呵呵，确实不是。当
然，小女子也不主张像那些卑鄙地想整倒汪晖的伪媒体伪学者那样来打倒朱学勤。人也
需要大度的心态适当宽恕他人。前段时间在汪晖一事中老当益壮的那些50年代问题老人
或者更老的“老人头”们，现在面对朱学勤一事是长吁短叹全哑了，确实很搞笑的嗦。
老人们还是该向小女子80年代的学兄学妹们学习学习。都快进土的人了，还不晓得以大
度的心态来看别人的人，小女子同情中——
下面是考证朱书第八章第一节的结果，黑色为朱文，红色为小女子注解，后
面的英文为Blum原文。本节朱文共使用9个脚注（从第3到第11，第1到2的脚注出现在引
言），其中两处是Blum。小女子的注解共46处，都来自Blum 一书。
第八章第一节、霜月批判——百科全书派雪上加霜
卢梭的信徒与启蒙遗老之间的论战始终在进行。
革命初起时，孔多塞这样的启蒙运动后继者尚在政治中心公开活动，（1. Blum：
229页最后一段第3行至230页第1行）但其他百科全书派成员年事已高，亦因外界卢梭声
望日隆，大多隐居民间，深居简出。（2. Blum：229页最后一段第1行至第3行）８０岁
高龄的修道院长雷诺尔，自１７８１年５月２５日逃避巴黎市议会的逮捕令，一直隐匿
于马赛，闭门著述。（3. Blum：230页第6行至第7行,第8行至第10行）１７９０年８月
，斐扬派倾慕其启蒙思想家的声名，宣布旧时代对他的逮捕令撤销无效，邀其进入巴黎
，登上议会讲坛讲演。（4. Blum: 230页第14行至第16行） 不料这位白发老翁上台后
，向着底下正仰头瞻仰他作为百科全书派化身之风采的众议员轻蔑地扫了一眼，随即就
连珠炮般猛烈抨击自１７８９年以来所发生的所有变化…… （5. Blum: 230页第一段
倒数第6行至倒数第3行）
罗伯斯庇尔站起发言：
你们看，（自由的）敌人是如何懦弱，他们不敢亲临前线甘冒矢石，却在这里举起
他们的遁词。用心险恶者把这个有名望的老人从坟墓边拖了回来，以利用他的弱点。他
们唆使他当众背弃了本来是构成他威望基础的那些教义和原则。（6. Blum: 230页第二
段全段; 注：朱文这里标注了Blum）
在罗伯斯庇尔建议下，议会把这个“昏瞆老人”轰了出去。（7. Blum: 230页第三
段第1行至第3行）从此，罗伯斯庇尔对百科全书派的厌恶公开化，与他们结下了怨恨。
8. Blum: 230页第三段第4行至第6行）
１７９２年４月，罗伯斯庇尔出版了《宪法保卫者》杂志。（9. Blum: 231页第一
段第1行至第2行）他攻击的第一个靶子，就是米拉波曾在议会发言中多次提及的孔多塞
与达朗贝尔的友谊。（10. Blum: 231页第一段第8行至第10行；注：此处朱抄错了，
Blum原文中说提及他们友谊的是Brissot，不是米拉波Mirabeau，下面的Blum引文中也
是Brissot先生）罗伯斯庇尔这一次公开数落百科全书派当年排斥迫害卢梭的恶迹：
米拉波先生，（朱抄错了，应是Brissot先生）他对他的那帮朋友推崇倍至，提醒
我们回忆孔多塞与达朗贝尔的友谊以及他的学术名望，谴责我们以轻率的语气评论那些
他称之为爱国主义和自由主义导师的人们。可是就我而言，我从来就认为，在那些方面
，我们除了自然之外，别无导师可言。我愿意指出这一点，那就是革命已经砍掉了许多
旧制度下大人物的脑袋。如果说这些院士、数学家遭到攻击和耻笑，那是因为他们曾巴
结过那些大人物，并对那么多的国王奉迎拍马，以求飞黄腾达。谁都知道他们是多么的
不可饶恕：他们迫害过让·雅克·卢梭的美德和自由精神！卢梭那神圣的面容我曾亲眼
目睹，按我的判断，唯有他才是那个时代众多名人中唯一的、真正的哲学家。他才应该
得到公认的荣誉，而这种荣誉恰恰就被那些政治上的雇佣文人和心怀忌恨的英雄们用种
种阴谋手段肆加践踏！（11. 这段全段见Blum: 231页第二段全段）
百科全书派当年与欧洲各王室之间的关系，确实不如卢梭的民粹主义道德实践那么
漂亮；⑤百科全书派当年不宽容卢梭，也是事实。但是，这种哲学家内部的理论纷争是
否到了迫害程度，未必如罗伯斯庇尔所言。罗伯斯庇尔令人不安处，是他的这种强烈暗
示：“革命已经砍掉了许多旧制度下大人物的脑袋。”罗伯斯庇尔所使用的“砍掉”这
一字眼——正是当时民间流传的“断头台”一词俚语。这种独尊卢梭罢黜百家的肃杀之
气，预示着后来的“焚书、坑儒”（前文已述）一连串极端行动，已难以避免。
孔多塞试图起来反抗。他指斥罗伯斯庇尔：“当一个人在他的内心或内心情感中毫
无思想可言时，当他毫无知识可以填补他智慧的空白时，当他连把单词联接起来的这点
可怜能力都不具备的时候，尽管他尽其所能设想自己是一个伟人，还有什么事情可以留
给他做呢？通过好勇斗狠的行为，他只能赢得土匪，强盗的喝采。” （12. Blum: 234
页最后一段第5行至235页第1行）
德穆兰则主张在卢梭与伏尔泰之间应妥协调和。他提出，法国应该弥平它的英烈们
之间曾经存在过的敌意。（13. Blum: 229页第5行至第7行）他说：“伏尔泰和让·雅
克的遗骸都应该被保存为民族的财产。现在，各民族分裂为成千个碎片，同一民族内，
某种碎片被一部分人认为是圣灵遗迹，同时又被另一种人视为渎神之物，可厌之物。然
而，这本来是一座神殿（指先贤祠——本书作者）。人们瞻仰这一神殿和它所收纳的各
种遗物时，本不该争吵。这是古罗马的神殿，应该把所有的崇拜所有的宗教融合在一起
”。（14. Blum: 229页第9行至第14行；注：此处朱书标注引文来自Blum 227页，但应
该是229页）
德穆兰此言未免天真。当时对卢梭和伏尔泰、百科全书派的褒贬，正反映着现实政
治生活中的严重对立，人们怎么会听得进调和者的声音？（15. Blum: 229页第三段第1
行至第5行）
１７９２年１２月５日，雅各宾俱乐部集会。罗伯斯庇尔在这次集会中发表重要讲
话，公开号召打倒百科全书派，（16. Blum: 233页倒数第3行至倒数第1行）推倒雅各
宾俱乐部中的爱尔维修胸像。当时雅各宾俱乐部中共有四座胸像：米拉波、布鲁图斯，
卢梭和爱尔维修。（17. Blum: 233页倒数第1行至234页第2行）罗伯斯庇尔说：
我看只有两个人值得敬仰：布鲁图斯和卢梭。爱尔维修是一个阴谋家，一个可怜的
诡辩家，一个非道德行为的始作俑者，是正直的让·雅克·卢梭的最无情的迫害者！只
有卢梭才值得我们敬仰。如果爱尔维修还活着，决难想象，他会加入自由的事业。他只
会加入那群所谓诡辩家的阴谋集团，那些人今天正在反对祖国！⑦。（18. Blum: 234
页第二段全段）
罗伯斯庇尔的建议获得一致通过。（19. Blum: 234页第三段第1行）在一片欢呼鼓
噪声中，米拉波和爱尔维修的胸像被推倒，踩得稀烂。（20. Blum: 234页第三段第2行
至第4行）
接下来的一个月，民间开始出现反百科全书派浪潮。一个主题被反复强调：只有投
身于卢梭式美德的雅各宾派才是“人民”，而反对卢梭者，不是阴谋家，就是人民的敌
人。（21. Blum: 234页第四段第1行至第4行）圣鞠斯特宣称，在人民的敌人里，他能
辨别出这样一类人：（22. Blum: 234页第四段第5行至第6行）“他们曾忌恨并阴谋迫
害过让·雅克。”连德国来的无政府主义革命家克劳茨也来凑趣，说那些百科全书派尚
存者“抱着团来惩治我，就像他们惩治过让·雅克一样。”（23. Blum: 234页第四段
最后五行）
１７９３年春，卢梭遗孀泰勒丝来到国民公会，要求给予卢梭以置身先贤祠的荣誉
。（24. Blum: 227页第三段第1行至第3行）而在此之前，在斐扬派时期，１７９１年
７月１１日伏尔泰遗骸已移入先贤祠。卢梭与伏尔泰能否置于一堂，成了现实政治中如
何对待卢梭及其思想的敏感问题。阿马尔出面接待泰勒丝，慨然允诺：“民族的代表们
将再也不会延期偿还卢梭的恩典了。” （25. Blum: 227页第三段第4行至第6行）国民
公众经过激烈辩论，议决把卢梭遗骸送入先贤祠。（26. Blum: 228页第1行至第2行）
１７９３年５月，吉伦特派垮台，启蒙遗老进入地下状态。（27. Blum: 235页第5
行至第6行）孔多塞隐匿不出，格里姆逃亡哥特，波麦赛逃亡英格兰，马蒙特尔隐居于
诺曼底，留在巴黎的人只能秘密聚会，不定期见面。（28. Blum: 235页第6行至第9行
）专门研究这一问题的史学家卡夫克罗列了当时３８个人的命运，得出结论：“百科全
书派的合作者决不是恐怖政策的合作者。” （29. Blum: 229页第三段第5行至第10行
）当时最著名的百科全书派地下活动者有三个：孔多塞、雷诺尔和修道院院长摩莱勒。
（30. Blum: 229页最后三行）这群幸存者在爱尔维修遗孀家里，秘密活动。这些人有
：都德特夫人（卢梭晚年曾与之交恶，见《忏悔录》下卷——本书作者）、米拉波私人
医生彼埃尔·卡布尼，以及前文所述那个给科黛作诗悼亡的诗人舍尼埃。（31. Blum:
232页第三段第6行至第11行）时人称他们为“卢梭式民主的敌人”。（32. Blum: 232
页第三段第12行至第13行；注：原文并不是“时人”，而是一个叫Sergio Moravia的人
这样说）摩莱勒回忆说：１７９３年底的一个夜晚，他在杜伊勒里宫附近一家餐馆里就
餐，正好旁听到邻桌上的一场谈话，谈的是各区正在散发“爱国公民证书”，以甄别“
正义者”与“邪恶者”。（33. Blum: 232页最后一行至233页第6行）一个人对另一个
人说：“他们给了一个著名贵族一张爱国公民证！” （34. Blum: 233页第6行至第7行
）此人越说越愤怒：“那个贵族就是埃贝尔·摩莱勒！他写过一本反对卢梭的书，我把
他们从杜伊勒里区刚刚驱逐出来！” （35. Blum: 233页第7行至第9行）摩莱勒一听此
言，赶紧拉下帽檐，悄悄溜走。⑨（36. Blum: 233页第9行至第10行；此处朱的脚注标
注为：参见卡夫克：“恐怖与百科全书派”，载法国近现代史，196年14期284-295页，
其实朱搞混了，这个脚注应该是Morellet, Memoires (Paris: Ladvocat, 1821), 2:97
。朱抄的这个脚注内容也来自Blum，但Blum原文本用于上面的第29个标注，但朱文在第
29处没有给脚注，却把它搬到这里来了，搞错了；另外年份是1967年，不是196年，朱
也抄错了）
１７９３年１１月２１日，即霜月１日，罗伯斯庇尔在雅各宾俱乐部正式发动了反
无神论运动。（37. Blum: 240页第二段倒数第4行至倒数第3行）演说一开始，他就以
黑白对分法，把“贵族式”的无神论和人民所广泛接受的“伟大的主宰关心受压迫的无
辜者”的观点对立起来，（38. Blum: 240页第二段最后三行）顿时激起旁听席上一阵
掌声。罗伯斯庇尔迅速把掌声变为他的论据：“给我鼓掌的是人民，是不幸者。如果有
人指责我的话，那一定是富人，是罪犯。”他暗示：国民公众将采取恢复宗教信仰的重
大步骤，并打击那些渎神者、非道德者。这就是著名的９３年霜月演说10。
“霜月演说”无异于发布对百科全书派的讨伐令。（39. Blum: 243页第3行至第4
行）百科全书派雪上加霜，更难生存。继此之后，罗伯斯庇尔又发表“花演说”，对百
科全书派施以最后一击。（40. Blum: 235页第四段第1行至第3行）
１７９２年以来共和国境内的非基督教化运动，始终刺激罗伯斯庇尔的道德忧患与
宗教情怀。在他看来，渎神者是渎德者，百科全书派的无神论抽空了共和国的道德基础
。（41. Blum: 243页第7行至第9行）１７９４春丹东事件更使他把这笔帐记在百科全
书派宣扬的世俗功利主义上。（42. Blum: 245页第三段第7行至第8行）处死丹东的当
天，巴雷尔曾宣布罗伯斯庇尔正在起草一项道德救国的宏伟计划。１７９４年５月７日
，罗伯斯庇尔代表救国委员会向国民公会提出了这一计划，其中最富道德义愤的那一部
分，就是对百科全书派排炮般的攻击：（43. Blum：235页第四段第1行至第5行）
这一派人在政治方面，一直轻视人民权利；在道德方面，远远不满足于摧毁宗教偏
见；……这一派人们以极大的热情传播唯物主义思想……。实用哲学的很大一部分就渊
源于此，它把利己主义化成体系，把人类社会看作诡计的一场战斗，把成功看作正义和
非正义的尺度，把正直看作一种出于爱好或者出于礼貌的事情，把世界看作灵巧的骗子
的家产。……人们已经注意到，他们中的好些人同奥尔良家族有密切的联系，而英国宪
法在他们看来，是政治的杰作和社会幸福的·最·高·点。
在我讲到的那个时期里，……有一个人（指卢梭——本书作者）以其高尚的心灵和
庄严的品格，显得无愧于是克尽职责的人类导师。……他的学说的纯正性来自自然和对
邪恶的深刻的憎恨，同样也来自他对那些盗用哲学家的名义搞阴谋的诡辩家的无法抑制
的蔑视，而这，引起了他的敌人和假朋友对他的仇恨和迫害。啊！如果他曾是这场革命
的见证人……，谁能怀疑他的高贵的心灵充满激情地关注着正义和平等的事业呢！然而
，他的卑怯的对手们为革命干了些什么呢？他们……与革命为敌，…… 腐蚀公共舆论
，……把自己出卖给一些叛乱集团，尤其出卖给奥尔良派！11（44. 以上两段朱注出了
引文来自王养冲、陈崇武，没有问题；后面这段也出现在Blum 235页的最后一段最后四
行和236页的第二段；因为朱此节基本都来自Blum一书，说明朱在考虑使用这段引文时
也是参考了Blum一书的）
这是法国革命期间，对百科全书派所作的一次最猛烈最全面的讨伐。卢梭和启蒙思
想家的理论是非，已经上升到革命与反革命的高度，百科全书派再也生存不下去了。（
45. Blum：233页第二段第1行至第4行；此处朱文缩简）爱尔维修遗孀的地下沙龙被迫
解散，启蒙遗老非逃即亡，他们中的大多数人后来还是走上了断头台。（46. Blum：
233页第一段最后五行；此处朱文缩简）启蒙主流哲学留给法国大革命的最后一丝影响
，只有花月广场上那尊无神论模拟像，等着罗伯斯庇尔付之一炬了。
Blum原文（共46处）
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朱文脚注照搬Blum此引文出处
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). 此处朱书标注引文来自Blum 227页，但应该是229页
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
朱文脚注照搬Blum此引文出处
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). 朱文脚注照搬Blum此引文
出处
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朱文此处的脚注抄错
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. |
|
