Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 33,35 (click to see context) from:
** In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan openly hates Jean-Paul Marat and describes him as the PsychoPartyMember of the Revolution, which was indeed the common view of Marat's antics by 19th and early 20th Century historians. More recent historians and writers have emphasized Marat's instances of moderation, such as when he opposed the Anglophobia common among Revolutions, defending English culture and arguing against narrow nationalism[[note]]A view credited to him by Norman Hampson, no Marat-fan, in ''The Perfidy of Albion''[[/note]], the fact that he was the only Revolution who advocated colonial independence during the events[[note]]as noted by Aime Cesaire, the Mauritanian poet[[/note]] and that most of his wild accusations in his papers (about Mirabeau's corruption, Dumouriez's defection, the war being a mistake) [[TheExtremistWasRight turned out to be accurate]]. Duncan is also generally dismissive of Louis Antoine de Saint-Just who French leftists and other historians regard as the great prodigy of the revolution but [[YouthIsWastedOnTheDumb Duncan sees as a dilettante young man too arrogant for his own good]].
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism. Duncan does note that the violence escalated thanks to the Girondins unleashing war at a time when none of the Great Powers were threatening France, which escalated fears of internal and external threat, that finally led to the Terror.[[/note]]
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism. Duncan does note that the violence escalated thanks to the Girondins unleashing war at a time when none of the Great Powers were threatening France, which escalated fears of internal and external threat, that finally led to the Terror.[[/note]]
to:
** In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan openly hates Jean-Paul Marat and describes him as the PsychoPartyMember of the Revolution, which was indeed the common view of Marat's antics Marat by 19th and early 20th Century historians. He was and indeed remains more controversial than Robespierre. More recent historians and writers have emphasized Marat's instances of moderation, such as when he opposed the Anglophobia common among Revolutions, defending English culture and arguing against narrow nationalism[[note]]A view credited to him by Norman Hampson, no Marat-fan, in ''The Perfidy of Albion''[[/note]], the fact that he was the only Revolution who advocated colonial independence during the events[[note]]as noted by Aime Cesaire, the Mauritanian poet[[/note]] poet[[/note]], that he often intervened to save political opponents from attacks[[note]]such as when he rescued Theroigne de Mericourt, a Girondin, from attacks by Revolutionary Women's groups[[/note]] and that most of his wild accusations in his papers (about Mirabeau's corruption, Dumouriez's defection, the war being a mistake) [[TheExtremistWasRight turned out to be accurate]]. Duncan is also generally dismissive of Louis Antoine de Saint-Just who French leftists and other historians regard as [[ICouldaBeenAContender the great tragic prodigy of the revolution revolution]] but [[YouthIsWastedOnTheDumb Duncan sees as a dilettante young man too arrogant for his own good]].
good]], which was the view of Simon Schama, author of the widely divisive ''Citizens'' which Duncan cites in his Bibliography.
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on 5. In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan discusses the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before fact that later observers separated the "second" French Revolution (everything "so-called" good revolution of 1789-1791 from then on out to Thermidor) was more the bad revolutions of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized.1792-1794. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The Duncan points out that the violence and fear and factionalism was not so great in the early years of the events, and that the destabilization primarily came from the counter-revolution who opposed and triggered popular agitations, whereas the events that came after saw popular revolutionary violence, war and emergency measures with IconOfRebellion like Barnave, Mirabeau, Dumouriez, Brissot, Danton, Marat, Robespierre going overnight from heroes to villains[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for Furet being a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight liberal himself, used this as evidence to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism. Duncan does note argue that the violence escalated thanks to Revolution was fundamentally illiberal in-and-of-itself. Duncan, like Furet, also neglects the Girondins unleashing war at a time when none fact that the most radical achievements of the Great Powers were threatening France, Revolution, universal male suffrage, ending the final vestiges of feudalism, social mobility and meritocracy in administration and army, and the abolition of slavery came from the second revolution, which escalated fears of internal and external threat, that finally led to the Terror.[[/note]]
ultimately codified modern democracy[[/note]].
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 12 (click to see context) from:
* AlasPoorScrappy: In his "obituaries" [[note]]When the point in the narrative where a significant figure dies comes, he often does a short summary of their life and career often including an appraisal of their role, their virtues and their shortcomings as well as a glimpse what their death might mean given the circumstances of the time it happened in[[/note]] for Louis XVI and Charles I he ruthlessly lists all the reasons why they ended up executed by their (former) subjects, but also points out that they were neither tyrants nor evil people, did not murder their own population (let alone on purpose) and it is quite evident that he bemoans their fate, even though he clearly sees it as inevitable given their actions.
to:
* AlasPoorScrappy: [[invoked]] In his "obituaries" [[note]]When the point in the narrative where a significant figure dies comes, he often does a short summary of their life and career often including an appraisal of their role, their virtues and their shortcomings as well as a glimpse what their death might mean given the circumstances of the time it happened in[[/note]] for Louis XVI and Charles I he ruthlessly lists all the reasons why they ended up executed by their (former) subjects, but also points out that they were neither tyrants nor inherently evil people, did not murder their own population (let alone on purpose) and it is quite evident that he bemoans their fate, even though he clearly sees it as inevitable given their actions.
Changed line(s) 17,18 (click to see context) from:
* ForWantOfANail: The first three seasons are full of examples where military or political blunders turned what could have been a minor squabble or an easily suppressed revolt into the earth shattering revolutions they eventually turned out to be. In Season 3 there are several ''episodes'' that could all be titled "How and when did all this become inevitable" and Duncan's answer clearly lays some blame on less-than-inspired leadership and unwillingness and inability to reform
* FramingTheGuiltyParty: Duncan points out that many of the KangarooCourt s during the French Revolution actually ''had'' a case to make, but hurt their own credibility by making up ridiculous claims of supposed crimes that clearly did not exist.
* FramingTheGuiltyParty: Duncan points out that many of the KangarooCourt s during the French Revolution actually ''had'' a case to make, but hurt their own credibility by making up ridiculous claims of supposed crimes that clearly did not exist.
to:
* ForWantOfANail: ForWantOfANail:
** The first three seasons are full of examples where military or political blunders turned what could have been a minor squabble or an easily suppressed revolt into the earth shattering revolutions they eventually turned out to be. In Season 3 there are several ''episodes'' that could all be titled "How and when did all this become inevitable" and Duncan's answer clearly lays some blame on less-than-inspired leadership and unwillingness and inability toreform
reform.
** Duncan from time to time dwells on the consequences of a particular decision or stroke of luck and what would have happened, had things gone the other way. For instance, he wonders what Napoleon could have done allying with the army of Toussaint [=L'Ouverture=] instead of fighting him.
** He also points out that the French Revolution [[CouldHaveAvoidedThisPlot could have avoided going out of control]] entirely 1) Had they not put into effect the Civil Constitution of the Clergy which proved effective propaganda for the counter-revolution. He pointed out the Vendee uprising would not have occurred had this been cancelled, 2) Had the Girondins not fomented war in 1791-92, at a time when there was no threat to France from external powers. Without War, there would have been no ReignOfTerror and no Napoleon Bonaparte.
* FramingTheGuiltyParty: Duncan points out that many of the KangarooCourt s during the French Revolution actually ''had'' a case to make, but hurt their own credibility by making up ridiculous claims of supposed crimes that clearly did not exist. One irony, which Duncan doesn't deal is the fact that some of the revolutionaries openly argued that Jacques-Pierre Brissot was a police spy based on rumors and accusations by the likes of Marat and Desmoullins. The latter came to regret the effect of his anti-Brissotin pamphlet. But in the latter half of the 20th Century, the historian [[https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3403050/darnton_brissot.pdf?sequence=2 Robert Darnton]] and [[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/w/wsfh/0642292.0034.006/--uses-of-power-lafayette-and-brissot-in-1792?rgn=main;view=fulltext Sylvia Neely]] found evidence that Brissot was indeed a police spy]] and political saboteur.
** The first three seasons are full of examples where military or political blunders turned what could have been a minor squabble or an easily suppressed revolt into the earth shattering revolutions they eventually turned out to be. In Season 3 there are several ''episodes'' that could all be titled "How and when did all this become inevitable" and Duncan's answer clearly lays some blame on less-than-inspired leadership and unwillingness and inability to
** Duncan from time to time dwells on the consequences of a particular decision or stroke of luck and what would have happened, had things gone the other way. For instance, he wonders what Napoleon could have done allying with the army of Toussaint [=L'Ouverture=] instead of fighting him.
** He also points out that the French Revolution [[CouldHaveAvoidedThisPlot could have avoided going out of control]] entirely 1) Had they not put into effect the Civil Constitution of the Clergy which proved effective propaganda for the counter-revolution. He pointed out the Vendee uprising would not have occurred had this been cancelled, 2) Had the Girondins not fomented war in 1791-92, at a time when there was no threat to France from external powers. Without War, there would have been no ReignOfTerror and no Napoleon Bonaparte.
* FramingTheGuiltyParty: Duncan points out that many of the KangarooCourt s during the French Revolution actually ''had'' a case to make, but hurt their own credibility by making up ridiculous claims of supposed crimes that clearly did not exist. One irony, which Duncan doesn't deal is the fact that some of the revolutionaries openly argued that Jacques-Pierre Brissot was a police spy based on rumors and accusations by the likes of Marat and Desmoullins. The latter came to regret the effect of his anti-Brissotin pamphlet. But in the latter half of the 20th Century, the historian [[https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3403050/darnton_brissot.pdf?sequence=2 Robert Darnton]] and [[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/w/wsfh/0642292.0034.006/--uses-of-power-lafayette-and-brissot-in-1792?rgn=main;view=fulltext Sylvia Neely]] found evidence that Brissot was indeed a police spy]] and political saboteur.
Changed line(s) 21 (click to see context) from:
* HistoricalHeroUpgrade / HistoricalVillainUpgrade: Duncan does on occasion weigh in on the common portrayal and appraisal of the historical figures he talks about and he is particularly fascinated about the different judgment Lafayette receives in the US (where he is widely regarded as a hero and a military genius) and France (where he is widely regarded as an inept moderate who badly misjudged his own ability and popularity), Duncan tends towards the American view of Lafayette and is happy to see French opinions on him change.
to:
* HistoricalHeroUpgrade / HistoricalVillainUpgrade: Duncan does on occasion weigh in on the common portrayal and appraisal of the historical figures he talks about and he is particularly fascinated about the different judgment Lafayette receives in the US (where he is widely regarded as a hero and a military genius) and France (where he is widely regarded as an inept moderate who badly misjudged his own ability and popularity), Duncan tends towards the American view of Lafayette and is happy to see some French opinions on him change.shift[[note]]The general consensus of Lafayette in the French Revolution remains highly mixed, mostly due to debates on his culpability for the Champs de Mars massacre which Duncan excuses him off, but other historians hold him to task for.[[/note]]
Changed line(s) 23,24 (click to see context) from:
* MagnificentBastard: Duncan's opinion of Talleyrand (whom he considers highly fascinating), which he highlights both in the main narrative and in the supplemental episode dedicated to him. Duncan points out Talleyrand's rampant corruption and his willingness to sell out/betray almost any master he served as well and lists the number of different regimes Talleyrand thrived under.
* MajoredInWesternHypocrisy: Many leaders of the early phases of the Haitian Revolution (especially those belonging to the "free coloreds") were educated in France, which led to their indignation at the racist laws in Saint Domingue and (relatively) egalitarian views, as Duncan points out.
* MajoredInWesternHypocrisy: Many leaders of the early phases of the Haitian Revolution (especially those belonging to the "free coloreds") were educated in France, which led to their indignation at the racist laws in Saint Domingue and (relatively) egalitarian views, as Duncan points out.
to:
* MagnificentBastard: MagnificentBastard:[[invoked]] Duncan's opinion of Talleyrand (whom he considers highly fascinating), which he highlights both in the main narrative and in the supplemental episode dedicated to him. Duncan points out Talleyrand's rampant corruption and his willingness to sell out/betray almost any master he served as well and lists the number of different regimes Talleyrand thrived under.
under.[[note]]To some extent, he, like many Anglophone historians, oversell Talleyrand's talents and ignore his famous blunders. For all his talent in diplomacy, Talleyrand had a major role in fomenting the only active conflict between France and the United States of America, during the Quasi-War which is incredible considering that even the Jacobin government succeeded in keeping USA neutral and that it fell to Napoleon to finally make peace[[/note]]
* MajoredInWesternHypocrisy: Many leaders of the early phases of the Haitian Revolution (especially those belonging to the "free coloreds") were educated in France, which led to their indignation at the racist laws in Saint Domingue and (relatively) egalitarian views, as Duncan points out. Though the eventual leaders of the Haitian Revolution eventually all turned out to be former slaves.
* MajoredInWesternHypocrisy: Many leaders of the early phases of the Haitian Revolution (especially those belonging to the "free coloreds") were educated in France, which led to their indignation at the racist laws in Saint Domingue and (relatively) egalitarian views, as Duncan points out. Though the eventual leaders of the Haitian Revolution eventually all turned out to be former slaves.
* StrawmanPolitical: Generally averted but Duncan does have a very liberal perspective i.e. emphasis on reforms from within, focusing on InternalReformist rather than popular movements from below, which does lead him occasionally to not give some factions and figures within various revolutions their due:
** He is especially dismissive of [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levellers#Political_ambitions the Levellers]] during the English Civil War, arguing that their egalitarian political proposals failed because they couldn't compromise and that the leadership of the Civil War was right to marginalize them.
** In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan openly hates Jean-Paul Marat and describes him as the PsychoPartyMember of the Revolution, which was indeed the common view of Marat's antics by 19th and early 20th Century historians. More recent historians and writers have emphasized Marat's instances of moderation, such as when he opposed the Anglophobia common among Revolutions, defending English culture and arguing against narrow nationalism[[note]]A view credited to him by Norman Hampson, no Marat-fan, in ''The Perfidy of Albion''[[/note]], the fact that he was the only Revolution who advocated colonial independence during the events[[note]]as noted by Aime Cesaire, the Mauritanian poet[[/note]] and that most of his wild accusations in his papers (about Mirabeau's corruption, Dumouriez's defection, the war being a mistake) [[TheExtremistWasRight turned out to be accurate]]. Duncan is also generally dismissive of Louis Antoine de Saint-Just who French leftists and other historians regard as the great prodigy of the revolution but [[YouthIsWastedOnTheDumb Duncan sees as a dilettante young man too arrogant for his own good]].
** He is especially dismissive of [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levellers#Political_ambitions the Levellers]] during the English Civil War, arguing that their egalitarian political proposals failed because they couldn't compromise and that the leadership of the Civil War was right to marginalize them.
** In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan openly hates Jean-Paul Marat and describes him as the PsychoPartyMember of the Revolution, which was indeed the common view of Marat's antics by 19th and early 20th Century historians. More recent historians and writers have emphasized Marat's instances of moderation, such as when he opposed the Anglophobia common among Revolutions, defending English culture and arguing against narrow nationalism[[note]]A view credited to him by Norman Hampson, no Marat-fan, in ''The Perfidy of Albion''[[/note]], the fact that he was the only Revolution who advocated colonial independence during the events[[note]]as noted by Aime Cesaire, the Mauritanian poet[[/note]] and that most of his wild accusations in his papers (about Mirabeau's corruption, Dumouriez's defection, the war being a mistake) [[TheExtremistWasRight turned out to be accurate]]. Duncan is also generally dismissive of Louis Antoine de Saint-Just who French leftists and other historians regard as the great prodigy of the revolution but [[YouthIsWastedOnTheDumb Duncan sees as a dilettante young man too arrogant for his own good]].
Changed line(s) 29 (click to see context) from:
* WhatCouldHaveBeen Duncan from time to time dwells on the consequences of a particular decision or stroke of luck and what would have happened, had things gone the other way. For instance, he wonders what Napoleon could have done allying with the army of Toussaint [=L'Ouverture=] instead of fighting him.
to:
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Yes I heard the podcast...and seeing it as driven by a liberal perspective is a fair argument. The Liberals were the one who separated a "good" and "bad" revolution rather than seeing everything as linked. And as other historians Isser Woloch, Peter Mc Phee and Timothy Tackett argued, saying that the war and emergency ended at the time of the Great Terror is "presentism" since there was no way anybody in Paris could have accurately stated that. And saying Robespierre killed people ignores the fact that he was not in office, as even Duncan admits, for the last months of the Great Terror when the violence was at its height.
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism. Duncan does point out that the early phases of the Revolution were not free of violence but a) they resulted in a handful of dead maximum and b) the violence mostly originated with the counter-revolutionary forces not the revolutionaries. Duncan also points out that violence correlated with the war situation - when the war was going great for France the violence was dialed down, when France seemed to lose on all fronts the guillotine went into overdrive. When Robespierre started killing people during a time nobody could mistake for an emergency of any kind, Thermidor happened.[[/note]]
to:
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism. Duncan does point out note that the early phases of the Revolution were not free of violence but a) they resulted in a handful of dead maximum and b) the violence mostly originated with escalated thanks to the counter-revolutionary forces not the revolutionaries. Duncan also points out that violence correlated with the Girondins unleashing war situation - when the war was going great for France the violence was dialed down, when France seemed to lose on all fronts the guillotine went into overdrive. When Robespierre started killing people during at a time nobody could mistake for an emergency when none of any kind, Thermidor happened.the Great Powers were threatening France, which escalated fears of internal and external threat, that finally led to the Terror.[[/note]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Have you heard his podcast? Duncan is a bit more detailed then I made it out and does see the whole thing from 1780s to Thermidor linked
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism[[/note]]
to:
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism[[/note]]factionalism. Duncan does point out that the early phases of the Revolution were not free of violence but a) they resulted in a handful of dead maximum and b) the violence mostly originated with the counter-revolutionary forces not the revolutionaries. Duncan also points out that violence correlated with the war situation - when the war was going great for France the violence was dialed down, when France seemed to lose on all fronts the guillotine went into overdrive. When Robespierre started killing people during a time nobody could mistake for an emergency of any kind, Thermidor happened.[[/note]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized
to:
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilizedTheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified.[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Likewise, 1791 also saw the petition for a republic, in the wake of the disaster that was the Flight to Varennes, greeted by the Champs de Mars massacre, the event that truly polarized the Revolutionaries and led to factionalism[[/note]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5, but as Duncan points out in his retrospective on the French Revolution, the "first" French Revolution (roughly 1789 to 1792) had shades of this, before the "second" French Revolution (everything from then on out to Thermidor) was more of an example of TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9,10 (click to see context) from:
After Season 5, Duncan plans to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]]. However, according to the website itself, the next revolution Duncan will cover are the revolutions of 1848.
to:
After Season 5, Duncan plans to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]]. However, according to the website itself, the next revolution Duncan will cover are the revolutions Revolutions of 1848.
1848. (Duncan has gone back and forth on whether or not to do 1848, as on the one hand they are unquestionably worthy but on the other hand they happened in so many different countries for so many different reasons that it would be difficult to get a proper handle on them all).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 24 (click to see context) from:
* MajoredInWesternHipocrisy: Many leaders of the early phases of the Haitian Revolution (especially those belonging to the "free coloreds") were educated in France, which led to their indignation at the racist laws in Saint Domingue and (relatively) egalitarian views, as Duncan points out.
to:
* MajoredInWesternHipocrisy: MajoredInWesternHypocrisy: Many leaders of the early phases of the Haitian Revolution (especially those belonging to the "free coloreds") were educated in France, which led to their indignation at the racist laws in Saint Domingue and (relatively) egalitarian views, as Duncan points out.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9,10 (click to see context) from:
After Season 5, Duncan plans to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].
to:
After Season 5, Duncan plans to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]]. \n However, according to the website itself, the next revolution Duncan will cover are the revolutions of 1848.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* MajoredInWesternHipocrisy: Many leaders of the early phases of the Haitian Revolution (especially those belonging to the "free coloreds") were educated in France, which led to their indignation at the racist laws in Saint Domingue and (relatively) egalitarian views, as Duncan points out.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 26 (click to see context) from:
* SlaveryIsASpecialKindOfEvil: Duncan already made allusions to the hypocrisy of preaching liberty equality and justice while holding slaves, but he is particularly hard on slave-holders during season 4 when he talks about the Haitian Revolution. He even compares the founding fathers of the US to the Haitian "big whites", the slaveowners who profited most from the colonial class and race system.
to:
* SlaveryIsASpecialKindOfEvil: Duncan already made allusions to the hypocrisy of preaching liberty equality and justice while holding slaves, but he is particularly hard on slave-holders during season 4 when he talks about the Haitian Revolution. He even compares the founding fathers of the US to the Haitian "big whites", the slaveowners who profited most from the colonial class and race system.system.
* WhatCouldHaveBeen Duncan from time to time dwells on the consequences of a particular decision or stroke of luck and what would have happened, had things gone the other way. For instance, he wonders what Napoleon could have done allying with the army of Toussaint [=L'Ouverture=] instead of fighting him.
* WhatCouldHaveBeen Duncan from time to time dwells on the consequences of a particular decision or stroke of luck and what would have happened, had things gone the other way. For instance, he wonders what Napoleon could have done allying with the army of Toussaint [=L'Ouverture=] instead of fighting him.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 25 (click to see context) from:
* RunningGag: "Gentleman Johnny's Party Train" became standard reference for Gen. John Burgoyne's ill-fated Sarasota expedition in Season 2. They even made a T-shirt of it (illustrated by Creator/KateBeaton, no less!)
to:
* RunningGag: "Gentleman Johnny's Party Train" became standard reference for Gen. John Burgoyne's ill-fated Sarasota expedition in Season 2. They even made a T-shirt of it (illustrated by Creator/KateBeaton, no less!)less!)
* SlaveryIsASpecialKindOfEvil: Duncan already made allusions to the hypocrisy of preaching liberty equality and justice while holding slaves, but he is particularly hard on slave-holders during season 4 when he talks about the Haitian Revolution. He even compares the founding fathers of the US to the Haitian "big whites", the slaveowners who profited most from the colonial class and race system.
* SlaveryIsASpecialKindOfEvil: Duncan already made allusions to the hypocrisy of preaching liberty equality and justice while holding slaves, but he is particularly hard on slave-holders during season 4 when he talks about the Haitian Revolution. He even compares the founding fathers of the US to the Haitian "big whites", the slaveowners who profited most from the colonial class and race system.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* FillerEpisode: Due to Duncan's travels (he does Revolutions and Podcast/TheHistoryOfRome themed tours with fans) and the birth of his second child, he sometimes had to bridge a gap of several weeks. He decided to pre-record a number of supplementals (apparently they are easier to produce) on a range of subjects and release them during his absence to keep the wait time manageable.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 17 (click to see context) from:
* ForWantOfAnail: The first three seasons are full of examples where military or political blunders turned what could have been a minor squabble or an easily suppressed revolt into the earth shattering revolutions they eventually turned out to be. In Season 3 there are several ''episodes'' that could all be titled "How and when did all this become inevitable" and Duncan's answer clearly lays some blame on less-than-inspired leadership and unwillingness and inability to reform
to:
* ForWantOfAnail: ForWantOfANail: The first three seasons are full of examples where military or political blunders turned what could have been a minor squabble or an easily suppressed revolt into the earth shattering revolutions they eventually turned out to be. In Season 3 there are several ''episodes'' that could all be titled "How and when did all this become inevitable" and Duncan's answer clearly lays some blame on less-than-inspired leadership and unwillingness and inability to reform
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* ForWantOfAnail: The first three seasons are full of examples where military or political blunders turned what could have been a minor squabble or an easily suppressed revolt into the earth shattering revolutions they eventually turned out to be. In Season 3 there are several ''episodes'' that could all be titled "How and when did all this become inevitable" and Duncan's answer clearly lays some blame on less-than-inspired leadership and unwillingness and inability to reform
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* FramingTheGuiltyParty: Duncan points out that many of the KangarooCourt s during the French Revolution actually ''had'' a case to make, but hurt their own credibility by making up ridiculous claims of supposed crimes that clearly did not exist.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* DeadpanSnarker: Most of Duncan's humor is delivered this way. One example: "Their principled opposition to the terror turned out to have been a principled opposition to being on the wrong side of the terror" (about the Thermidorians who brought down Robespierre and the Committee of public safety)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* AlasPoorScrappy: In his "obituaries" [[note]]When the point in the narrative where a significant figure dies comes, he often does a short summary of their life and career often including an appraisal of their role, their virtues and their shortcomings as well as a glimpse what their death might mean given the circumstances of the time it happened in[[/note]] for Louis XVI and Charles I he ruthlessly lists all the reasons why they ended up executed by their (former) subjects, but also points out that they were neither tyrants nor evil people, did not murder their own population (let alone on purpose) and it is quite evident that he bemoans their fate, even though he clearly sees it as inevitable given their actions.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
* HistoricHeroUpgrade / HistoricVillainUpgrade: Duncan does on occasion weigh in on the common portrayal and appraisal of the historical figures he talks about and he is particularly fascinated about the different judgment Lafayette receives in the US (where he is widely regarded as a hero and a military genius) and France (where he is widely regarded as an inept moderate who badly misjudged his own ability and popularity), Duncan tends towards the American view of Lafayette and is happy to see French opinions on him change.
to:
* HistoricHeroUpgrade HistoricalHeroUpgrade / HistoricVillainUpgrade: HistoricalVillainUpgrade: Duncan does on occasion weigh in on the common portrayal and appraisal of the historical figures he talks about and he is particularly fascinated about the different judgment Lafayette receives in the US (where he is widely regarded as a hero and a military genius) and France (where he is widely regarded as an inept moderate who badly misjudged his own ability and popularity), Duncan tends towards the American view of Lafayette and is happy to see French opinions on him change.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it. He does a little better with the Spanish in Season 5, but he still managed to completely mangle to pronunciation of the major Colombian city of Cartagena in the first episode.
to:
* HistoricHeroUpgrade / HistoricVillainUpgrade: Duncan does on occasion weigh in on the common portrayal and appraisal of the historical figures he talks about and he is particularly fascinated about the different judgment Lafayette receives in the US (where he is widely regarded as a hero and a military genius) and France (where he is widely regarded as an inept moderate who badly misjudged his own ability and popularity), Duncan tends towards the American view of Lafayette and is happy to see French opinions on him change.
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it. He does a little better with the Spanish in Season 5, but he still managed to completely mangle to pronunciation of the major Colombian city of Cartagena in the first episode. Duncan has had a particularly hard time with the ''Vendée'' region of France, which was the epicenter of a royalist uprising during the French Revolution and which he mispronounced several different ways (as can be seen by comments suggesting he should indeed try saying it like this or like that).
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it. He does a little better with the Spanish in Season 5, but he still managed to completely mangle to pronunciation of the major Colombian city of Cartagena in the first episode. Duncan has had a particularly hard time with the ''Vendée'' region of France, which was the epicenter of a royalist uprising during the French Revolution and which he mispronounced several different ways (as can be seen by comments suggesting he should indeed try saying it like this or like that).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* MagnificentBastard: Duncan's opinion of Talleyrand (whom he considers highly fascinating), which he highlights both in the main narrative and in the supplemental episode dedicated to him. Duncan points out Talleyrand's rampant corruption and his willingness to sell out/betray almost any master he served as well and lists the number of different regimes Talleyrand thrived under.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* {{Determinator}}: How Duncan portrays Bolívar in Season 5. It's entirely accurate.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7,8 (click to see context) from:
* Season 5 (June 2016-present): The Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár
to:
* Season 5 (June 2016-present): The Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár
UsefulNotes/SimonBolivar
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 12 (click to see context) from:
* BourgeoisBohemian: One reason Duncan is skeptical of revolutions is that he notes that most revolutionaries whether English, American or French, exaggerate their "oppression" and invoke fears of "slavery" to justify their revolution. In most cases, he notes that they start out as functionaries in the old order, some of them even being nobles, who basically bite the hand that fed them. They also were mostly well-off, slept in comfortabled beds unlike the vast majority of the population. The one exception noted by Duncan, is the Haitian Revolution, where actual slaves and oppressed people revolt, against real and actual tyranny and are honest and free of exaggerations.
to:
* BourgeoisBohemian: One reason Duncan is skeptical of revolutions is that he notes that most revolutionaries whether English, American or French, exaggerate their "oppression" and invoke fears of "slavery" to justify their revolution. In most cases, he notes that they start out as functionaries in the old order, some of them even being nobles, who basically bite the hand that fed them. They also were mostly well-off, well-off and slept in comfortabled comfortable beds unlike the vast majority of the population. The one exception noted by Duncan, is the Haitian Revolution, where actual slaves and oppressed people revolt, against real and actual tyranny and are honest and free of exaggerations.
Changed line(s) 14,15 (click to see context) from:
* HeroicBSOD: Duncan speculates that this happened to Robespierre in his final months. This theory has been advocated by biographers such as [=Peter McPhee=] and Timothy Tackett. He noted that until Robespierre's final months, he was generally pragmatic and balanced as a politician, even sparing some Girondins from joining the purge, supported Desmoullins call for a Committee of Clemency, but he noted that at some point in 1794, after a period of absence where he collapsed from exhaustion, Robespierre became more erratic, fevered and paranoid, moving into a self-destructive spiral.
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it.
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it.
to:
* HeroicBSOD: Duncan speculates that this happened to Robespierre in his final months. This theory has been advocated by biographers such as [=Peter McPhee=] and Timothy Tackett. He noted that until Robespierre's final months, he was generally pragmatic and balanced as a politician, even sparing some Girondins from joining the purge, supported Desmoullins Desmoulins' call for a Committee of Clemency, but he noted that at some point in 1794, after a period of absence where he collapsed from exhaustion, Robespierre became more erratic, fevered and paranoid, moving into a self-destructive spiral.
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it. He does a little better with the Spanish in Season 5, but he still managed to completely mangle to pronunciation of the major Colombian city of Cartagena in the first episode.
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it. He does a little better with the Spanish in Season 5, but he still managed to completely mangle to pronunciation of the major Colombian city of Cartagena in the first episode.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7,8 (click to see context) from:
* Season 5 (begins June 2016): The Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár
to:
* Season 5 (begins June 2016): (June 2016-present): The Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 6,9 (click to see context) from:
* Season 4 (September 2015-present): The UsefulNotes/{{Haiti}}an Revolution
Season 5 is scheduled for late 2016 and will focus on the Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár. Duncan plans then to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].
Season 5 is scheduled for late 2016 and will focus on the Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár. Duncan plans then to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].
to:
* Season 4 (September 2015-present): 2015-April 2016): The UsefulNotes/{{Haiti}}an Revolution
Revolution
* Season 5is scheduled for late 2016 and will focus on the (begins June 2016): The Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár. Bolivár
After Season 5, Duncan plansthen to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].
* Season 5
After Season 5, Duncan plans
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
* RunningGag: "Gentleman Johnny's Party Train" became standard reference for Gen. John Burgoyne's ill-fated Sarasota expedition in Season 2. They even made a T-shirt of it (illustrated by Creator/KateBeaton, no less!)
to:
* RunningGag: "Gentleman Johnny's Party Train" became standard reference for Gen. John Burgoyne's ill-fated Sarasota expedition in Season 2. They even made a T-shirt of it (illustrated by Creator/KateBeaton, no less!)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
* Season 1 (September 2013-January 2014): The EnglishCivilWar
to:
* Season 1 (September 2013-January 2014): The EnglishCivilWarUsefulNotes/EnglishCivilWar
Changed line(s) 6,7 (click to see context) from:
* Season 4 (September 2015-present): The UsefulNotes{{Haiti}}an Revolution
to:
* Season 4 (September 2015-present): The UsefulNotes{{Haiti}}an UsefulNotes/{{Haiti}}an Revolution
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
* HeroicBSOD: Duncan speculates that this happened to Robespierre in his final months. This theory has been advocated by biographers such as [=Peter McPhee=] and Timothy Tackett. He noted that until Robespierre's final months, he was generally pragmatic and balanced as a politician, even sparing some Girondins from joining the purge, supported Desmoullins call for a Committee of Clemency, but he noted that at some point in 1794, after a period of absence where he collapsed from exhaustion, Robespierre became more erratic, fevered and paranoid, moving into a self-destructive spiral.
Deleted line(s) 16 (click to see context) :
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* BourgeoisBohemian: One reason Duncan is skeptical of revolutions is that he notes that most revolutionaries whether English, American or French, exaggerate their "oppression" and invoke fears of "slavery" to justify their revolution. In most cases, he notes that they start out as functionaries in the old order, some of them even being nobles, who basically bite the hand that fed them. They also were mostly well-off, slept in comfortabled beds unlike the vast majority of the population. The one exception noted by Duncan, is the Haitian Revolution, where actual slaves and oppressed people revolt, against real and actual tyranny and are honest and free of exaggerations.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
'''''Revolutions''''' (2013-present) is the second history podcast by Creator/MikeDuncan. Unlike [[Podcast/TheHistoryOfRome his previous podcast]], ''Revolutions'' is not the history of one society or polity but rather a thematic series focusing on particular revolutions in the history of the modern world. To effectuate this, it is divided into seasons, with each season focusing on a particular revolution. These are:
* Season 1 (September 2013-January 2014): The EnglishCivilWar
* Season 2 (February-May 2014): The UsefulNotes/AmericanRevolution
* Season 3 (July 2014-August 2015): The UsefulNotes/FrenchRevolution
* Season 4 (September 2015-present): The UsefulNotes{{Haiti}}an Revolution
Season 5 is scheduled for late 2016 and will focus on the Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár. Duncan plans then to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].
!! Tropes
* ADayInTheLimelight: Duncan will include "supplemental" episodes on people and groups who might appear in the main narrative but whose full stories can't be fully integrated into it without disrupting the flow. These include the Diggers and the Earl of Clarendon (in Season 1) and Talleyrand and Philippe of Orléans/Égalité (in Season 3).
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it.
* RidiculousFutureInflation: Seasons 2 and 3 both involved governments (the Continental Congress and the National Assembly/National Convention) who tried to print their way out of financial problems and ended up with this trope as a result. Also, at one point, Duncan auctioned off an actual French Revolutionary ''[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assignat assignat]]'', commenting on how worthless it had been as actual money.
* RunningGag: "Gentleman Johnny's Party Train" became standard reference for Gen. John Burgoyne's ill-fated Sarasota expedition in Season 2. They even made a T-shirt of it (illustrated by Creator/KateBeaton, no less!)
* Season 1 (September 2013-January 2014): The EnglishCivilWar
* Season 2 (February-May 2014): The UsefulNotes/AmericanRevolution
* Season 3 (July 2014-August 2015): The UsefulNotes/FrenchRevolution
* Season 4 (September 2015-present): The UsefulNotes{{Haiti}}an Revolution
Season 5 is scheduled for late 2016 and will focus on the Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on Simón Bolivár. Duncan plans then to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].
!! Tropes
* ADayInTheLimelight: Duncan will include "supplemental" episodes on people and groups who might appear in the main narrative but whose full stories can't be fully integrated into it without disrupting the flow. These include the Diggers and the Earl of Clarendon (in Season 1) and Talleyrand and Philippe of Orléans/Égalité (in Season 3).
* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it.
* RidiculousFutureInflation: Seasons 2 and 3 both involved governments (the Continental Congress and the National Assembly/National Convention) who tried to print their way out of financial problems and ended up with this trope as a result. Also, at one point, Duncan auctioned off an actual French Revolutionary ''[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assignat assignat]]'', commenting on how worthless it had been as actual money.
* RunningGag: "Gentleman Johnny's Party Train" became standard reference for Gen. John Burgoyne's ill-fated Sarasota expedition in Season 2. They even made a T-shirt of it (illustrated by Creator/KateBeaton, no less!)
