WARNINGS AND DISCLAIMERS (please read): The sources used have been meticulously cited. Some topics may appear biased to other readers and may even offend them. Please do not hesitate to express concerns on this and we will duly apologize, but please do best to respect our opinions. Thank you...enjoy!xD

A Descriptive Essay on Topics of the French Revolution by The JohhnyMckilt Productions

entitled

Pour Charles et les Enfant de l’Monde

(For Charles and the Children of the World)

Louis-Charles, Duc de Normandie or Louis XVII was the son of the executed Louis XVI. The French had the same hatred and fear for the boy as they did with his father during the Revolution, hence, they showed him no mercy. An innocent child cowered alone in his vermin-infested prison cell, suffered from ulcers and tormented by pests. He had called for his mother, but she was dead. Isn’t it a familiar war scene? Louis-Charles represents the sufferings of children around the world who have been caught up in wars and revolutions.

This essay emphasizes the experiences of children during wartime so that spear headers of wars and revolutions would resolve conflicts by more peaceful means. It will tackle Louis-Charles’ life and sufferings before and during the French Revolution and why he represents children suffering from wars at present. A comparison of Louis-Charles’ experiences and the experiences of children in World War II and in African and Middle Eastern wars shall be presented.

According to Deborah Cadbury’s The Lost King of France (2002), Louis-Charles had lived a luxurious life at Versailles. He was brought up in a royal nursery and was well endowed with servants. In Fielding and Soreen’s The French Revolution: A History (1989), women of every rank had gathered at Versailles where the Royal Family resided to personally appeal to the king about the country’s food crises on October 5, 1789. Unfortunately, a badly locked gate turned the riot into a massacre. By the force of the crowds, the Royal Family was driven to Paris and detained in the Tuileries. Hope came to the Royal family by June 20, 1791 in the form of Count Axel de Fersen, planning to smuggle the Royal Family out of France (Cronin 1974). Bad luck met them as they left Varennes. Louis-Charles saw the brutal killings of his friends and loved ones. The Tuileries was attacked on August 10, 1792 and the Royal Family was taken prisoner by the Assembly for two days (Roberts 1978). There was nothing to eat or drink. On August 13, 1792, the Royal Family was transferred to the Temple (Fielding, Soreen 1989). Louis-Charles’ room was a small one with a low ceiling and two folding beds. On August 19, 1792, all friends and attendants of the royal family were sent to the prison of La Force (Cadbury 2002).On September 2, 1792, Princess de Lamballe, one of the queen’s very good friends, was executed and her head was paraded to the Temple to show to Marie-Antoinette (Cobb 1998). Upon hearing the news, she was utterly devastated. Louis-Charles and his sister were sobbing hysterically.

By late October of 1792, the Royal Family was transferred to the Great Tower. Deeply set, iron-grilled windows reduced light and did not let air circulate freely (Dunlop 1995). Their security was tightened as the Commune made sure that the monarchy wouldn’t rise once more to power (Kuklick 2000). On December 11, 1792, Louis XVI was taken for interrogation. As if Louis-Charles’ nightmares had turned into an even worse reality, on January 17, 1793, the king was sentenced to death by the guillotine (Furneaux 1968).

According to Schama’s Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution (1989), a powerful member of the Commune named Jacques-René Herbert decided to use the dauphin as a political pawn in a plan to bring down the queen. July 3, 1793 marked the start of one of the worst chapters in Louis-Charles’ short life. He was to be separated from his mother and lodged in his father’s old room in the Tower (Cadbury 2002). The trauma of being shut up alone in the room that held so much painful memories for the boy made him cry for two straight days (Zweig 1993). The Commune proposed to “re-educate” Louis-Charles and make him a supporter of the republic. He was to grow up sympathetic to the high ideals of the revolutionary government (Delorme 1995). According to Hibbert’s The Days of the French Revolution (1999), in the first few weeks of Louis-Charles’ “re-education” he was made to look like a revolutionary and was made to sing revolutionary songs. He was taught to swear dreadful oaths against God and his family. Simon the shoemaker and his appointed tutor made him eat horribly and forced him to drink much wine and brandy. Coaxed by these, he was taught to refer to his aunt and sister as “common whores”; if he refused to play along, he was beaten. This treatment resulted in Louis-Charles becoming increasingly nervous around other adults (Cadbury 2002).

Hérbert’s plan was to brainwash the child to testify against his mother (Hibbert 1999). On October 6, 1793, Louis-Charles, drunk, was cross-examined and was presented a testimony to validate with his signature. He was made to swear that his mother had taken part in activities to thwart the revolution. He was made to affirm a made-up accusation that his self-abuse practice was taught to him by his mother and aunt. The next day, Marie-Thérèse and her aunt were interrogated and presented with Louis-Charles’ testimony. They could not dignify the question with an answer. Since the Commune heard no denial, Marie-Antoinette was taken to the Grande Chambre for her full trial on October 14, 1793 (Zweig 1993). When the queen was presented with Louis-Charles testimony she was shocked and was unable to defend herself. She was sentenced to death by guillotine two days later (Cadbury 2002).

On January 19, 1794, Antoine Simon quit his “tutoring” job. The next day, Louis-Charles was barricaded in one of the rooms on the second floor of the Great Tower (Franq 1970). The room was cold and had virtually no light. It had no sanitary facilities. His excrement accumulated on the floor and the cell became infested with rats. Charles sometimes left his meals uneaten to distract the vermin so he could sleep. On September 1, 1794, the conditions of the boy’s imprisonment leaked out to the public. Louis-Charles’ cell was cleaned out under supervision of Jean-Jacques Laurent. He removed the boy’s clothes and bathed his sores. His hair was cut and washed. A doctor came to dress his wounds. Laurent and the keepers referred to him politely as “Monsieur Charles”. Even under this improved regiment he was still isolated. Laurent was only permitted to enter his room at mealtimes, and under the close scrutiny of the guards. Up till then, Charles was not told about the fate of his mother. The boy thought that she still resided in one of the rooms of the Tower. According to Delorme’s Louis XVII: La verité sa mort au Temple confirmée par la science (2000), on February 26, 1795, Jean-Baptiste Harmand made a full report on Charles’s health found a completely mute child. He claimed that he tried to encourage the prince to talk, to no avail. On May 6, 1795, Dr. Pierre-Joseph Desault was authorized to give Charles an examination. Charles gradually responded to the physician and ended by placing his confidence in him. The kindly treatment restored his speech and he found the words to thank him (Delorme 2000). In an unexpected twist, Dr. Desault died on June 2, 1794, and Louis-Charles was devastated. By June 6, 1795, Philippe-Jean Pellatan, a new physician, was appointed to examine Charles and found a boy covered with scabies and ulcers. The child’s head drooped, his face and limbs were wasted, his stomach was enlarged and he was suffering from chronic diarrhea. The doctor gave instructions to muffle sound of bolts and locks and that he be taken outside to breathe fresh air. When Pellatan returned later that day, he found Louis-Charles a little better. He later reported that, “All assistance had been too late…no hope was to be entertained.” (Delorme 2000).

On June 7, 1795, Dr. Pellatan visited Louis-Charles again and found him with a weak pulse and a distended abdomen. He had several green and bilious evacuations. Come June 8, 1795, Louis-Charles begun to slip in an out of consciousness. He was given the medicine Pellatan had prescribed but it was no use. Around three, Charles was having difficulty breathing. He was lifted up to ease the problem but it soon ended in a long, drawn-out sigh (Delorme 2000) (Cadbury 2002).

Fates of such war-caught children remain the same even as the years have gone by. During the Holocaust, Auschwitz was the most notorious death camp where 3 to 4 million died (Perry, 1988, p.707). Polish and Soviet prisoners and that of other nationalities were incarcerated there. Beginning 1942, the camp became the site of the greatest mass murder in human history, committed against European Jews as a part of Hitler’s plan of complete annihilation of that race (Auschwitz-Birkenau, 1979). Majority of Jewish men, women and children deported to Auschwitz were sent to their deaths in the Birkenau gas chambers immediately after arrival. More than 6 million people were exterminated, around 1.5 million were children (Perry, 1988, p.706). Those who remained behind were liberated by Red Army soldiers on January 27, 1945 (Auschwitz-Birkenau, 1979). It was not hard to doubt whether children survived. They were killed for the self-interest of one outrageously ambitious man.

Child victims of war-torn African countries and elsewhere have become victims of violence and witness to various war-horrors. Children as young as 7 are forcibly recruited as soldiers and some are forced into sexual or other service. Globally, there are more than a million children separated from their parents due to war. Most of them have guessed their parents’ fates and remained orphans until they mature. Others come from severe trauma, having been first eye witnesses to their parents’ deaths. Some have no idea of their origins. Victims often exhibit symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder or PTSD. Symptoms include avoidance of stimuli that remind them of traumatic events, insomnia, inability to concentrate, recurring nightmares, lethargy, confusion, fear, aggressive behavior, social isolation, hopelessness with the future, hyper arousal and exaggerated startle responses (Green, Honwana, 1999).

Children, too, in Palestine are being used as human artillery and targets. During May 6, 2001, an Israeli school bus was bombed, killing 2 teachers and leaving 4 children wounded. Since the current attacks against Israel began, at least 6 Palestinian children aged 13 and under have died in the fighting (The Jerusalem Post, 2001). Official Palestinian television has saturated young children with hatred of Israel and glorification of warfare. Some parents proudly shared the hope that their children would die fighting Israel. The Palestinian terrorists train children to carry out suicide attacks, become front liners, hide snipers, plant explosives and deliver weapons. In February 2002, a 16-year old girl was killed while charging a group of Israeli soldiers at a military checkpoint with a knife in her hand. In March 2002, another 16-year old Palestinian girl walked into a Jerusalem supermarket and detonated a bomb. In April 2002, a 17-year old was recruited by a terror squad and sent to her death in a suicide attack. In the same month, 3 teenagers from Gaza attempted to crawl under a fence and attack the residents a Jewish community, only to be shot dead by guards. In May 2002, Palestinian children as young as 10 years old barricaded themselves in Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity, alongside Palestinian gunmen. In June of the same year, a 15-year old Palestinian girl, admitted that she had been previously recruited as a suicide terrorist (Children Under Fire, 2002).

Tactics of Palestinian Authority include the encouragement of children to seek heroic Shahada or martyrdom. Sheik Ikrimi Sabri, the Palestinian Authority-appointed mufti of Jerusalem declared “I feel the martyr is lucky because the angels usher him to his wedding in heaven. The younger the martyr, the greater I respect him.” Lessons being taught in Palestinian schools also encourage this behavior and outlook. Palestinian children at the Balata camp have thrown away their games in favor of pendants with pictures of Palestinian suicide bombers. The Arab Liberation Front, a Palestinian group loyal to Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein, pays generous rewards depending on how great the sacrifice was: $500 for a wound; $1,000 for disability; $10,000 to the family of each martyr and $25,000 to the family of martyr suicide bombers. Palestinian Authorities, too, furnish cash payment: $2,000 per child killed and $300 per child wounded (Children Under Fire, 2002).

Experiences of Louis-Charles and children suffering in wars at present show great similarities. Auschwitz victims were detained in death camps just as the Royal Family was detained in the Temple. On both occasions, the prisoners were innocent and had died to satisfy the intentions of a group of people who disliked their existence.

Just like victims of war in Africa, orphaned by their parents’ death, Charles too lost his. After his separation from his mother and imprisonment in his father’s old cell, the young dauphin showed symptoms of PTSD; confusion, fear, social isolation and exaggerated startle responses, same as the African children. Both then and now saw the perishing of either their parents, close friends, relatives and a number of people they had no relations but felt pity for.

Palestinian children, who grew up believing that sacrificing their lives and dedicating themselves for the freedom of their nation are no different from Louis-Charles, who was ‘re-educated’ to go against his family and bring his mother to the guillotine. Neither children of both eras held fault in their actions and its consequences. On both occasions, the children were used as political and military pawns to satisfy their respective governments’ self interests. Rising death tolls of Palestinian children were blamed on Israeli forces that were attacking children on front lines. Louis-Charles’ false testimonies gave Jacques-René Hérbert the advantage to proclaim Marie-Antoinette guilty under charges that were initially rumors turned gospel truth. Media, religious and parental influence along with many others served as visuals which slowly implanted their message of honor in dying for the country and hatred for Israel in the minds of Palestinian children. In the same light, abuse, Simon’s threats, influence and examples of his guards corrupted Louis-Charles so badly he was unable to provide good reason for his actions, or even distinguish what was right from wrong. This same ability was lost to children martyrs of Palestine. Having received no contradictions to their appalling influences, they did not know that what they were doing was not for their country’s freedom at all. No one really approves children’s involvement in political problems, especially in wars and revolutions.

Louis-Charles died from poor lodgings, inhumane treatment and neglect. Children all over the world who truly went through and experienced the hurt, pain, fear and tumult of war were weakened because of these same reasons. In death camps, help was far and these places served as homes for many during long periods of time. Since the number was large, medical attention was not possible for every individual. In the Holocaust, help and medical attention weren’t required at all. Enemies of prisoners did not care about the welfare of those they detained; such people were about to die and it was unnecessary to attend to them before execution.

The only difference that makes Louis XVII stand out among war-torn children is that he was once a prince who would’ve inherited the throne of the finest kingdom in Europe. This boy underwent perhaps the most traumas any child could endure. He was separated from his nearest and dearest and was forced into the company of some of the most inhumane men in history. He was beaten, maltreated, starved and brainwashed to condemn his own lineage and bring his mother death. All concern and help that came to him were too late. In the present age, most people of the world recognize the rights of children and give them all just to see them grow happy. Even in the most dangerous of warring countries, children are protected, if not from the worst, from further harm. Charles’ experience was very grave that it made him fit to represent all the sufferings of children caught up in wars and revolutions.

History tends to repeat itself. It is sad to know that some day in the future, a child caught up in a nonsensical war should suffer the same fate as Louis-Charles. Unless spear headers of wars and revolutions resolve their conflicts in more peaceful ways, experiences like these would be inevitable.

END

A/N: I’ll post my Reference List in the next chapter. If you’re interested...well be my guest, but...it’s just a list...enjoy!xD and ciAo...