Search This Blog

Saturday, September 20, 2025

Give me liberty or give me death!


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Patrick Henry's 1775 "Give me liberty, or give me death!" speech, depicted in an 1876 lithograph by Currier and Ives now housed in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.

"Give me liberty or give me death!" is a quotation attributed to American politician and orator Patrick Henry from a speech he made to the Second Virginia Convention on March 23, 1775, at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia. Henry is credited with having swung the balance in convincing the convention to pass a resolution delivering Virginian troops for the Revolutionary War. Among the delegates to the convention were future United States presidents Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.

Over forty years after Patrick Henry delivered his speech and eighteen years after his death, biographer William Wirt published a posthumous reconstruction of the speech in his 1817 work Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry. This is the version of the speech as it is widely known today and was reconstructed based on the recollections of elderly witnesses many decades later. A scholarly debate persists among colonial historians as to what extent Wirt or others invented parts of the speech including its famous closing words.

Background and speech

Portrait by George Bagby Matthews after Thomas Sully, c. 1891

The Second Virginia Convention met at St. John's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia, on March 20, 1775. Delegates selected a presiding officer, and they elected delegates to the Continental Congress. At the convention, Patrick Henry—a delegate from Hanover County—offered amendments to raise a militia independent of royal authority in terms that explicitly recognized that war with the British Empire was inevitable, sparking the opposition of convention moderates. On March 23, Henry defended his amendments and purportedly concluded with the following statement:

If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come. It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

As he concluded, Henry plunged a bone paper knife towards his chest in imitation of the Roman patriot Cato the Younger.

A nineteenth-century engraving of Patrick Henry's speech includes another except of it, with the reaction if those hearing it: "Caesar had His Brutus, Charles the First, His Cromwell — And George the Third" — ("Treason!" cried the Speaker — "Treason, treason!" echoed from every part of the house). Henry faltered not for an instant, but rising to a loftier attitude, concluded thus - "may profit by their example. If this be treason, make the most of it."

Reception and aftermath

St. John's Church, Richmond, where Patrick Henry delivered the speech.

According to Edmund Randolph, the convention sat in profound silence for several minutes after Henry's speech ended. George Mason, who later drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights, said that the audience's passions were not their own after Henry had addressed them. Thomas Marshall told his son John Marshall, who later became Chief Justice of the United States, that the speech was "one of the boldest, vehement, and animated pieces of eloquence that had ever been delivered." Edward Carrington, listening by a window, was so affected by the speech that he requested to be buried there, and in "1810, he got his wish."

Henry's speech ultimately swayed the convention, and it was resolved that the colony be "put into a posture of defence: and that Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, Robert Carter Nicholas, Benjamin Harrison, Lemuel Riddick, George Washington, Adam Stephen, Andrew Lewis, William Christian, Edmund Pendleton, Thomas Jefferson and Isaac Zane, Esquires, be a committee to prepare a plan for the embodying arming and disciplining such a number of men as may be sufficient for that purpose." Despite this resolution, many moderate delegates remained uncertain where the resistance urged by Henry and other radicals would lead, and few counties formed independent militia companies at the urging of the convention. Nevertheless, Henry was named as chairman of the committee assigned to build a militia.

A month later, Lord Dunmore, the governor of Virginia, ordered Royal Navy sailors to remove all stocks of gunpowder from the powder magazine at Williamsburg, Virginia. This flashpoint—later known as the Gunpowder Incident—became Virginia's equivalent of the Battle of Lexington. Upon learning of Dunmore's decision, Patrick Henry led his militia toward Williamsburg to force return of the gunpowder to the colony. The stand-off was resolved without conflict when a payment of £330 (equal to £53,178 today) was made to Henry. Fearing for his safety, Dunmore retreated to a naval vessel, ending royal control of the colony. Henry became the independent state's first governor in July 1776.

Publication and controversy

William Wirt, c. 1832

Over 40 years after Patrick Henry delivered his speech and 18 years after Henry's death, a reconstruction of the speech was printed in Wirt's 1817 biography Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry. Wirt corresponded with elderly men who had heard the speech in their youth as well as others who were acquainted with people who were there at the time. All concurred that Henry's speech had produced a profound effect upon its audience, but only one surviving witness attempted to reconstruct the actual speech.

St. George Tucker attempted a two-paragraph reconstruction of the speech in a letter to Wirt, but Tucker noted that it was "in vain... to give any idea of his speech". Using Tucker's two paragraphs, Wirt "filled in the blanks" and created a speech that was far longer in length. The original letter with Tucker's remembrances has been lost.

For 160 years, Wirt's reconstruction of Henry's speech was accepted as fact. In the 1970s, historians began to question the authenticity of Wirt's rendition. According to the only written first-hand account of the speech, Henry's 1775 speech used graphic name-calling that does not appear in Wirt's 1817 rendition. Furthermore, Wirt's reconstruction is devoid of Henry's rhetorical custom of invoking fear of Indian attacks in promoting independence from Britain. Given Wirt's artistic liberties in reconstructing the speech, it is possible that Henry never uttered the quotation, "Give me liberty or give me death," and scholars question to what extent the speech we know is the work of Wirt or Tucker.

According to historian Bernard Mayo, most scholars are skeptical of the accuracy of Wirt's rendition of Henry's speech. Nevertheless, "its expressions... seemed to have burned themselves into men's memories. Certainly, its spirit is that of the fiery orator who in 1775 so powerfully influenced Virginians and events leading to American independence."

Precursors

The hand of fate is over us, and Heav'n
Exacts severity from all our thoughts.
It is not now a time to talk of aught
But chains or conquest, liberty or death.

Cato, a Tragedy (1713), Act II, Scene 4

There had been similar phrases used preceding Henry's speech. The 1320 Declaration of Arbroath made in the context of Scottish independence was a letter to Pope John XXII that contained the line: "It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom—for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself". It is commonly cited as an inspiration for the Declaration of Independence by many, including Trent Lott in a speech before the United States Senate.

The 1713 play, Cato, a Tragedy, was popular in the American Colonies and well known by the Founding Fathers who frequently quoted from the play. George Washington had the play performed for the Continental Army at Valley Forge. It contains the line, "It is not now time to talk of aught/But chains or conquest, liberty or death" (Act II, Scene 4). The phrase "Liberty or Death" also appears on the Culpeper Minutemen flag of 1775.

In Handel's 1746 oratorio Judas Maccabeus, the hero sings, "Resolve, my sons, on liberty or death."

Additional usage and other context

The phrase appearing as graffiti in Hong Kong during the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests

Phrases equivalent to liberty or death have appeared in a variety of other places. In the summer of 1787, the armed citizens' militia of the Dutch Republic paraded and drilled beneath banners extolling "Liberty or Death". Soon after, amid the French Revolution, the sentence that would become the national motto of France "Liberté égalité fraternité" ("Liberty, equality, fraternity") was sometimes written as "Liberté, égalité, fraternité ou la mort" ("Liberty, equality, fraternity or death").

The Society of United Irishmen in the 1790s and 1800s adopted 'Liberty or Death' as a slogan. During the 1798 rebellion appeals to the population were printed out featuring the heading "Liberty or Death!". It was also a rallying cry of the 1804 Castle Hill convict rebellion in Australia staged by United Irishmen convicts.[30][31][32]

During the Greek War of Independence in the 1820s, "Liberty or Death" (Eleftheria i thanatos) became a rallying cry for Greeks who rebelled against Ottoman rule. During this same period, Emperor Pedro I of Brazil purportedly uttered the famous "Cry from [the river] Ipiranga", "Independence or Death" (Independência ou Morte) in 1821, when Brazil was still a colony of Portugal.

The 1833 national anthem of Uruguay, "Orientales, la Patria o la Tumba", contains the line ¡Libertad o con gloria morir! ("Liberty or with glory to die!").

Serbian Chetnik Organization, formed in early 20th Century, had "Sloboda ili smrt/Freedom or Death" as one of its mottos.

During the Russian Civil War, the flag used by Nestor Makhno's anarchist Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine had the dual slogans "Liberty or Death" and "The Land to the Peasants, the Factories to the Workers" embroidered in silver on its two sides.

In March 1941, the motto of the public demonstrations in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia against the signing of a treaty with Nazi Germany was "Better grave than slave" (Bolje grob nego rob).

During the Indonesian National Revolution, the Pemuda ("Youth") used the phrase Merdeka atau Mati ("Freedom or Death").

In the 1964 speech "The Ballot or the Bullet" in Cleveland, Malcolm X said, "It'll be ballots, or it'll be bullets. It'll be liberty, or it will be death. The only difference about this kind of death—it'll be reciprocal."

In 2012, Ren Jianyu, a Chinese 25-year-old former college student village official, was given a two-year re-education through labor sentence for an online speech against the Chinese Communist Party. A T-shirt of Ren saying "Give me liberty or give me death!" (in Chinese) was presented as evidence of his guilt.

In the 2022 COVID-19 protests in China, a man in Chongqing was filmed giving a speech criticizing harsh lockdown measures, shouting "Give me liberty or give me death!" in Chinese repeatedly to the cheers of onlookers.

Liberté, égalité, fraternité

 

The official logo of the French Republic used on government documents with the slogan "Liberté, égalité, fraternité"
A propaganda poster from 1793 representing the French First Republic with the slogan "Unity and Indivisibility of the Republic. Liberty, Equality, Fraternity or Death", together with symbols such as tricolour flags, phrygian cap and gallic rooster

Liberté, égalité, fraternité (French pronunciation: [libɛʁte eɡalite fʁatɛʁnite]; French for 'liberty, equality, fraternity', Latin: Libertas, aequalitas, fraternitas), is the national motto of France and the Republic of Haiti, and is an example of a tripartite motto. Although its origins can be traced to the French Revolution, it was then only one motto among several popularized by revolutionaries and was not institutionalized until the Third Republic at the end of the 19th century. Debates concerning the compatibility and order of the three terms began at the same time as the Revolution. It is also the motto of the Grand Orient and the Grande Loge de France.

Origins during the French Revolution

Text displayed on a 1793 placard announcing the sale of expropriated property. Soon after the Revolution, the motto was often written as "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, or Death." "Death" was later dropped for being too strongly associated with the excesses of the revolution.
The French Tricolour has been seen as embodying all the principles of the Revolution—Liberté, égalité, fraternité.

Some claim that Camille Desmoulins invented the phrase, in number 35 of Révolutions de France et de Brabant, published on 26 July 1790. However, it is not confirmed as this is only the first official mention of the phrase. Speaking of the July 1790 Fête de la Fédération festival, he described "the citizen-soldiers rushing into each other's arms, promising each other liberty, equality, fraternity." (French: les soldats-citoyens se précipiter dans les bras l’un de l’autre, en se promettant liberté, égalité, fraternité.)

Several months later, Maximilien Robespierre popularized the phrase in his speech "On the organization of the National Guard" (French: Discours sur l'organisation des gardes nationales), on 5 December 1790, article XVI, which was disseminated widely throughout France by the popular Societies.

Discours sur l'organisation des gardes nationales
Article XVI.
They will wear these words engraved on their uniforms: THE FRENCH PEOPLE, & below: LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY. The same words will be inscribed on flags which bear the three colors of the nation.
(French: XVI. Elles porteront sur leur poitrine ces mots gravés : LE PEUPLE FRANÇAIS, & au-dessous : LIBERTÉ, ÉGALITÉ, FRATERNITÉ. Les mêmes mots seront inscrits sur leurs drapeaux, qui porteront les trois couleurs de la nation.)

— Maximilien Robespierre, 1790

Credit for the motto has been given also to Antoine-François Momoro (1756–1794), a Parisian printer and Hébertist organizer. During the Federalist revolts in 1793, it was altered to "Unity, indivisibility of the Republic; liberty, equality, brotherhood or death" (French: Unité, Indivisibilité de la République; Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité ou la mort).

In 1839, the philosopher Pierre Leroux claimed it had been an anonymous and popular creation. The historian Mona Ozouf underlines that, although Liberté and Égalité were associated as a motto during the 18th century, Fraternité wasn't always included in it, and other terms, such as Amitié (Friendship), Charité (Charity) or Union were often added in its place.

In 1791, the emphasis upon Fraternité during the French Revolution, led Olympe de Gouges, a female journalist, to write the Declaration of the Rights of Woman and of the Female Citizen as a response. The tripartite motto was neither a creative collection, nor really institutionalized by the Revolution. As soon as 1789, other terms were used, such as "la Nation, la Loi, le Roi" (The Nation, The Law, The King), or "Union, Force, Vertu" (Union, Strength, Virtue), a slogan used beforehand by masonic lodges, or "Force, Égalité, Justice" (Strength, Equality, Justice), "Liberté, Sûreté, Propriété" (Liberty, Security, Property), etc.

In other words, liberté, égalité, fraternité was one slogan among many others. During the Jacobin revolutionary period, various mottos were used, such as liberté, unité, égalité (liberty, unity, equality); liberté, égalité, justice (liberty, equality, justice); liberté, raison, égalité (liberty, reason, equality), etc. The only solid association was that of liberté and égalité, with fraternité being ignored by the Cahiers de doléances as well as by the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

Fraternité was only alluded to in the 1791 Constitution, as well as in Robespierre's draft Declaration of 1793, placed under the invocation of (in that order) égalité, liberté, sûreté and propriété (equality, liberty, safety, property)—though it was used not as a motto, but as articles of declaration, as the possibility of a universal extension of the Declaration of Rights: "Men of all countries are brothers, he who oppresses one nation declares himself the enemy of all." Fraternité did not figure in the August 1793 Declaration.

The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 defined liberty in Article 4 as follows:

Liberty consists of being able to do anything that does not harm others: thus, the exercise of the natural rights of every man or woman has no bounds other than those that guarantee other members of society the enjoyment of these same rights.

Equality was defined by the Declaration in terms of judicial equality and merit-based entry to government (art. 6):

[The law] must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. All citizens, being equal in its eyes, shall be equally eligible to all high offices, public positions and employments, according to their ability, and without other distinction than that of their virtues and talents.

Liberté, égalité, fraternité actually finds its origins in a May 1791 proposition by the Club des Cordeliers, following a speech on the Army by the Marquis de Guichardin. A British marine held prisoner on the French ship Le Marat in 1794, wrote home in letters published in 1796:

The republican spirit is inculcated not in songs only, for in every part of the ship I find emblems purposely displayed to awaken it. All the orders relating to the discipline of the crew are hung up, and prefaced by the words Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, ou la Mort, written in capital letters.

The compatibility of liberté and égalité was not in doubt in the first days of the Revolution, and the problem of the antecedence of one term on the other not lifted. Abbé Sieyès considered that only liberty ensured equality, unless equality was to be the equality of all, dominated by a despot, while liberty followed equality ensured by the rule of law. The abstract generality of law, theorized by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his 1762 book The Social Contract, thus ensured the identification of liberty to equality, liberty being negatively defined as an independence from arbitrary rule, and equality considered abstractly in its judicial form.

This identification of liberty and equality became problematic during the Jacobin period, when equality was redefined, for instance, by François-Noël Babeuf, as equality of results, and not only a judicial equality of rights. Thus, Marc Antoine Baudot considered that the French temperament was inclined towards equality than liberty, a theme which was re-used by Pierre Louis Roederer and Alexis de Tocqueville. Jacques Necker considered that an equal society could only be found on coercion.

An Alsatian sign, 1792:
Freiheit Gleichheit Brüderlichk. od. Tod (Liberty Equality Fraternity or Death)
Tod den Tyranen (Death to Tyrants)
Heil den Völkern (Long live the Peoples)

The third term, fraternité, was the most problematic to insert in the triad, as it belonged to another sphere, that of moral obligations rather than rights, links rather than statutes, harmony rather than contract, and community rather than individual liberty. Various interpretations of fraternité existed. The first one, according to Mona Ozouf, was one of "fraternité de rébellion" (Fraternity of Rebellion), that is the union of the deputies in the Jeu de Paume Oath of June 1789, refusing the dissolution ordered by the King Louis XVI: "We swear never to separate ourselves from the National Assembly, and to reassemble wherever circumstances require, until the constitution of the realm is drawn up and fixed upon solid foundations." Fraternity was thus issued from Liberty, and oriented by a common cause.

Another form of fraternité was that of the patriotic Church, which identified social links with religious links and based fraternity on Christian brotherhood. In this second sense, fraternité preceded both liberté and égalité, instead of following them as in the first sense. Thus, two senses of Fraternity: "one, that followed liberty and equality, was the object of a free pact; the other preceded liberty and equality as the mark on its work of the divine craftsman."

Another hesitation concerning the compatibility of the three terms arose from the opposition between liberty and equality as individualistic values, and fraternity as the realization of a happy community, devoid of any conflicts and opposed to any form of egotism. This fusional interpretation of Fraternity opposed it to the project of individual autonomy and manifested the precedence of Fraternity on individual will.

In this sense, it was sometimes associated with death, as in Fraternité, ou la Mort! (Fraternity or Death!), excluding liberty and even equality, by establishing a strong dichotomy between those who were brothers and those who were not, in the sense of "you are with me or against me", brother or foe. Louis de Saint-Just thus stigmatized Anarchasis Cloots' cosmopolitanism, declaring "Cloots liked the universe, except France."

With the Thermidor and the execution of Robespierre, fraternité disappeared from the slogan, reduced to the two terms of liberty and equality, re-defined again as simple judicial equality and not as the equality upheld by the sentiment of fraternity. In 1799, the First Consul (Napoleon Bonaparte) established the motto liberté, ordre public (liberty, public order).

19th century

Following Napoleon's rule, the triptych dissolved itself, as none believed it possible to conciliate individual liberty and equality of rights with equality of results and fraternity. The idea of individual sovereignty and of natural rights possessed by man before being united in the collectivity, contradicted the possibility of establishing a transparent and fraternal community. Liberals accepted liberty and equality, defining the latter as equality of rights and ignoring fraternity.

Early socialists rejected an independent conception of liberty, opposed to the social, and also despised equality, as they considered, as Fourier, that one had only to orchestrate individual discordances, to harmonize them, or they believed, as Saint-Simon, that equality contradicted equity, by a brutal levelling of individualities. Utopian socialism thus only valued fraternity, which was, in Cabet's Icarie, the sole commandment.

This opposition between liberals and socialists was mirrored in rival historical interpretations of the Revolution, with liberals admiring 1789, and socialists admiring 1793. The July Revolution of 1830, establishing a constitutional monarchy headed by Louis-Philippe, substituted ordre et liberté (order and liberty) to the Napoleonic motto Liberté, Ordre public.

Despite this apparent disappearance of the triptych, the latter was still being thought in some underground circles, in Republican secret societies, masonic lodges such as the "Indivisible Trinity," far-left booklets or during the Canuts Revolt in Lyon. In 1834, the lawyer of the Society of the Rights of Man (Société des droits de l'homme), Dupont, a liberal sitting in the far-left during the July Monarchy, associated the three terms together in the Revue Républicaine, which he edited:

Any man aspires to liberty, to equality, but he can not achieve it without the assistance of other men, without fraternity

In 1847, the triptych resurfaced during the Campagne des Banquets, upheld for example in Lille by Ledru-Rollin.

Two interpretations had attempted to conciliate the three terms, beyond the antagonism between liberals and socialists. One was upheld by Catholic traditionalists, such as Chateaubriand or Ballanche, the other by socialist and republican such as Pierre Leroux. Chateaubriand gave a Christian interpretation of the revolutionary motto, stating in the 1841 conclusion to his Mémoires d'outre-tombe:

Far from being at its term, the religion of the Liberator is now only just entering its third phase, the political period, liberty, equality, fraternity

Neither Chateaubriand nor Ballanche considered the three terms to be antagonistic. Rather, they took them for being the achievement of Christianity. On the other hand, Pierre Leroux did not disguise the difficulties of associating the three terms, but superated it by considering liberty as the aim, equality as the principle and fraternity as the means. Leroux ordered the motto as Liberty, Fraternity, Equality, an order supported by Christian socialists, such as Buchez.

Against this new order of the triptych, Michelet supported the traditional order, maintaining the primordial importance of an original individualistic right. Michelet attempted to conciliate a rational communication with a fraternal communication, "right beyond right", and thus the rival traditions of socialism and liberalism. The republican tradition would strongly inspire itself from Michelet's synchretism.

1848 Revolution

Liberté, égalité, fraternité on French coins
5-franc piece, 1849
 
20-franc piece, 1851

With the 1848 February Revolution, the motto was officially adopted, mainly under the pressure of the people who had attempted to impose the red flag over the tricolor flag. The 1791 red flag was the symbol of martial law and of order, not of insurrection. Lamartine opposed popular aspirations, and in exchange of the maintaining of the tricolor flag, conceded the Republican motto of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, written on the flag, on which a red rosette was added. It also appeared for the first time on coins.

Fraternity was then considered to resume, and to contain both Liberty and Equality, being a form of civil religion, which, far from opposing itself to Christianity, was associated with it in 1848 establishing social links, as called for by Rousseau in the conclusion of the Social Contract.

Fraternity was not devoid of its previous sense of opposition between brothers and foes, with images of blood haunting revolutionary Christian publications, taking in Lamennais' themes. Thus, the newspaper Le Christ républicain (The Republican Christ) developed the idea of the Christ bringing forth peace to the poor and war to the rich.

On 6 January 1852, the future Napoleon III, first President of the Republic, ordered all prefects to erase the triptych from all official documents and buildings, conflating the words with insurrection and disorder. Auguste Comte applauded Napoleon, claiming equality to be the "symbol of metaphysical anarchism", and preferring to it his diptych "ordre et progrès", "order and progress", which became the motto of Brazil, Ordem e ProgressoProudhon criticized fraternity as an empty word, which he associated with idealistic dreams of Romanticism. He preferred to it the sole term of liberty.

Paris Commune and Third Republic

Pache, mayor of the Paris Commune, painted the formula "Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, ou la mort" on the walls of the commune. It was under the Third Republic that the motto was made official. It was then not dissociated with insurrection and revolutionary ardours, Opportunist Republicans such as Jules Ferry or Gambetta adapting it to the new political conditions. Larousse's Dictionnaire universel deprived fraternity of its "evangelistic halo" (Mona Ozouf), conflating it with solidarity and the welfare role of the state.

Some still opposed the Republican motto, such as the nationalist Charles Maurras in his Dictionnaire politique et critique, who claimed liberty to be an empty dream, equality an insanity, and only kept fraternity. Charles Péguy, renewing with Lamennais' thought, kept fraternity and liberty, excluding equality, seen as an abstract repartition between individuals reduced to homogeneity, opposing "fraternity" as a sentiment put in motion by "misery", while equality only interested itself, according to him, to the mathematical solution of the problem of "poverty."

Péguy identified Christian charity and socialist solidarity in this conception of fraternity. On the other hand, Georges Vacher de Lapouge, the most important French author of pseudo-scientific racism and supporter of eugenism, completely rejected the republican triptych, adopting another motto, "déterminisme, inégalité, sélection" (determinism, inequality, selection). According to Ozouf, the sole use of a triptych was the sign of the influence of the republican motto, despite it being corrupted in its opposite.

20th century

The Coat of arms of France (1905–present) depicts a ribbon with the motto "Liberté, égalité, fraternité".

During the German occupation of France in World War II, this motto was replaced by the reactionary phrase "travail, famille, patrie" (work, family, fatherland) by Marshal Pétain, who became the leader of the new Vichy French government in 1940. Pétain had taken this motto from the colonel de la Rocque's Parti social français (PSF), although the latter considered it more appropriate for a movement than for a regime.

Following the Liberation, the Provisional Government of the French Republic (GPRF) re-established the Republican motto Liberté, égalité, fraternité, which was incorporated into the 1946 and the 1958 French constitutions.

In 1956, the Algerian woman militant Zohra Drif, who during the Algerian War planted a bomb in the Milk Bar Cafe in which three French women were killed, justified this and other violent acts by the FLN, by asserting that the French Authorities did not see their dedication to the principles of Equality and Liberty as relevant in Algeria.

Other nations

Many other nations have adopted the French slogan of "liberty, equality, and fraternity" as an ideal.

Since its founding, "Liberty, Equality and Brotherhood" has been the lemma of the Social Democratic Party of Denmark. In the United Kingdom the political party the Liberal Democrats refer to "the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community" in the preamble of the party's Federal Constitution, and this is printed on party membership cards.

The Czech slogan "Rovnost, volnost, bratrství" was a motto of the Czech national gymnastics organization Sokol at the end of the 19th century. Liberal values of the fraternal organization manifested themselves in the Czech independence movement during World War I, when many Sokol members joined armies of the Allies and formed the Czechoslovak Legion to form independent Czechoslovakia in 1918.

The Philippine National Flag has a rectangular design that consists of a white equilateral triangle, symbolizing liberty, equality, and fraternity; a horizontal blue stripe for peace, truth, and justice; and a horizontal red stripe for patriotism and valor. In the center of the white triangle is an eight- rayed golden sun symbolizing unity, freedom, people's democracy, and sovereignty.

Some former colonies of the French Republic, such as Chad, Niger, and Gabon, have adopted similar three-word national mottos. Haiti has used it on its coins since 1872, having used "Liberte Egalite" on earlier coinage since 1828.

The idea of the slogan "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" has influenced as natural law, the First Article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Since 1848, the motto has been present on the throne of the Grand masters of Latin Freemasonry. Freedom also alludes to the inner freedom from spiritual chains that are broken with the initiatory work. Lodovico Frapolliit, former Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy, suggested to substitute "fraternity" with "solidarity".

Culture

The term is referred to in the 1993-94 film trilogy Three Colours by Krzysztof Kieślowski.

"Libertad! Igualdad! Fraternidad!" is the title of an English-language poem by William Carlos Williams.

Friday, September 19, 2025

Curvilinear coordinates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Curvilinear (top), affine (right), and Cartesian (left) coordinates in two-dimensional space

In geometry, curvilinear coordinates are a coordinate system for Euclidean space in which the coordinate lines may be curved. These coordinates may be derived from a set of Cartesian coordinates by using a transformation that is locally invertible (a one-to-one map) at each point. This means that one can convert a point given in a Cartesian coordinate system to its curvilinear coordinates and back. The name curvilinear coordinates, coined by the French mathematician Lamé, derives from the fact that the coordinate surfaces of the curvilinear systems are curved.

Well-known examples of curvilinear coordinate systems in three-dimensional Euclidean space (R3) are cylindrical and spherical coordinates. A Cartesian coordinate surface in this space is a coordinate plane; for example z = 0 defines the x-y plane. In the same space, the coordinate surface r = 1 in spherical coordinates is the surface of a unit sphere, which is curved. The formalism of curvilinear coordinates provides a unified and general description of the standard coordinate systems.

Curvilinear coordinates are often used to define the location or distribution of physical quantities which may be, for example, scalars, vectors, or tensors. Mathematical expressions involving these quantities in vector calculus and tensor analysis (such as the gradient, divergence, curl, and Laplacian) can be transformed from one coordinate system to another, according to transformation rules for scalars, vectors, and tensors. Such expressions then become valid for any curvilinear coordinate system.

A curvilinear coordinate system may be simpler to use than the Cartesian coordinate system for some applications. The motion of particles under the influence of central forces is usually easier to solve in spherical coordinates than in Cartesian coordinates; this is true of many physical problems with spherical symmetry defined in R3. Equations with boundary conditions that follow coordinate surfaces for a particular curvilinear coordinate system may be easier to solve in that system. While one might describe the motion of a particle in a rectangular box using Cartesian coordinates, it is easier to describe the motion in a sphere with spherical coordinates. Spherical coordinates are the most common curvilinear coordinate systems and are used in Earth sciences, cartography, quantum mechanics, relativity, and engineering.

Orthogonal curvilinear coordinates in 3 dimensions

Coordinates, basis, and vectors

Fig. 1 - Coordinate surfaces, coordinate lines, and coordinate axes of general curvilinear coordinates.
Fig. 2 - Coordinate surfaces, coordinate lines, and coordinate axes of spherical coordinates. Surfaces: r - spheres, θ - cones, Φ - half-planes; Lines: r - straight beams, θ - vertical semicircles, Φ - horizontal circles; Axes: r - straight beams, θ - tangents to vertical semicircles, Φ - tangents to horizontal circles

For now, consider 3-D space. A point P in 3-D space (or its position vector r) can be defined using Cartesian coordinates (x, y, z) [equivalently written (x1, x2, x3)], by , where ex, ey, ez are the standard basis vectors.

It can also be defined by its curvilinear coordinates (q1, q2, q3) if this triplet of numbers defines a single point in an unambiguous way. The relation between the coordinates is then given by the invertible transformation functions:

The surfaces q1 = constant, q2 = constant, q3 = constant are called the coordinate surfaces; and the space curves formed by their intersection in pairs are called the coordinate curves. The coordinate axes are determined by the tangents to the coordinate curves at the intersection of three surfaces. They are not in general fixed directions in space, which happens to be the case for simple Cartesian coordinates, and thus there is generally no natural global basis for curvilinear coordinates.

In the Cartesian system, the standard basis vectors can be derived from the derivative of the location of point P with respect to the local coordinate

Applying the same derivatives to the curvilinear system locally at point P defines the natural basis vectors:

Such a basis, whose vectors change their direction and/or magnitude from point to point is called a local basis. All bases associated with curvilinear coordinates are necessarily local. Basis vectors that are the same at all points are global bases, and can be associated only with linear or affine coordinate systems.

For this article e is reserved for the standard basis (Cartesian) and h or b is for the curvilinear basis.

These may not have unit length, and may also not be orthogonal. In the case that they are orthogonal at all points where the derivatives are well-defined, we define the Lamé coefficients (after Gabriel Lamé) by

and the curvilinear orthonormal basis vectors by

These basis vectors may well depend upon the position of P; it is therefore necessary that they are not assumed to be constant over a region. (They technically form a basis for the tangent bundle of at P, and so are local to P.)

In general, curvilinear coordinates allow the natural basis vectors hi not all mutually perpendicular to each other, and not required to be of unit length: they can be of arbitrary magnitude and direction. The use of an orthogonal basis makes vector manipulations simpler than for non-orthogonal. However, some areas of physics and engineering, particularly fluid mechanics and continuum mechanics, require non-orthogonal bases to describe deformations and fluid transport to account for complicated directional dependences of physical quantities. A discussion of the general case appears later on this page.

Vector calculus

Differential elements

In orthogonal curvilinear coordinates, since the total differential change in r is

so scale factors are

In non-orthogonal coordinates the length of is the positive square root of (with Einstein summation convention). The six independent scalar products gij=hi.hj of the natural basis vectors generalize the three scale factors defined above for orthogonal coordinates. The nine gij are the components of the metric tensor, which has only three non zero components in orthogonal coordinates: g11=h1h1, g22=h2h2, g33=h3h3.

Covariant and contravariant bases

A vector v (red) represented by • a vector basis (yellow, left: e1, e2, e3), tangent vectors to coordinate curves (black) and • a covector basis or cobasis (blue, right: e1, e2, e3), normal vectors to coordinate surfaces (grey) in general (not necessarily orthogonal) curvilinear coordinates (q1, q2, q3). The basis and cobasis do not coincide unless the coordinate system is orthogonal.

Spatial gradients, distances, time derivatives and scale factors are interrelated within a coordinate system by two groups of basis vectors:

  1. basis vectors that are locally tangent to their associated coordinate pathline: are contravariant vectors (denoted by lowered indices), and
  2. basis vectors that are locally normal to the isosurface created by the other coordinates: are covariant vectors (denoted by raised indices), ∇ is the del operator.

Note that, because of Einstein's summation convention, the position of the indices of the vectors is the opposite of that of the coordinates.

Consequently, a general curvilinear coordinate system has two sets of basis vectors for every point: {b1, b2, b3} is the contravariant basis, and {b1, b2, b3} is the covariant (a.k.a. reciprocal) basis. The covariant and contravariant basis vectors types have identical direction for orthogonal curvilinear coordinate systems, but as usual have inverted units with respect to each other.

Note the following important equality: wherein denotes the generalized Kronecker delta.

Proof

In the Cartesian coordinate system , we can write the dot product as:

Consider an infinitesimal displacement . Let dq1, dq2 and dq3 denote the corresponding infinitesimal changes in curvilinear coordinates q1, q2 and q3 respectively.

By the chain rule, dq1 can be expressed as:

If the displacement dr is such that dq2 = dq3 = 0, i.e. the position vector r moves by an infinitesimal amount along the coordinate axis q2=const and q3=const, then:

Dividing by dq1, and taking the limit dq1 → 0:

or equivalently:

Now if the displacement dr is such that dq1=dq3=0, i.e. the position vector r moves by an infinitesimal amount along the coordinate axis q1=const and q3=const, then:

Dividing by dq2, and taking the limit dq2 → 0:

or equivalently:

And so forth for the other dot products.

Alternative Proof:

and the Einstein summation convention is implied.

A vector v can be specified in terms of either basis, i.e.,

Using the Einstein summation convention, the basis vectors relate to the components by[2]: 30–32 

and

where g is the metric tensor (see below).

A vector can be specified with covariant coordinates (lowered indices, written vk) or contravariant coordinates (raised indices, written vk). From the above vector sums, it can be seen that contravariant coordinates are associated with covariant basis vectors, and covariant coordinates are associated with contravariant basis vectors.

A key feature of the representation of vectors and tensors in terms of indexed components and basis vectors is invariance in the sense that vector components which transform in a covariant manner (or contravariant manner) are paired with basis vectors that transform in a contravariant manner (or covariant manner).

Integration

Constructing a covariant basis in one dimension

Fig. 3 – Transformation of local covariant basis in the case of general curvilinear coordinates

Consider the one-dimensional curve shown in Fig. 3. At point P, taken as an origin, x is one of the Cartesian coordinates, and q1 is one of the curvilinear coordinates. The local (non-unit) basis vector is b1 (notated h1 above, with b reserved for unit vectors) and it is built on the q1 axis which is a tangent to that coordinate line at the point P. The axis q1 and thus the vector b1 form an angle with the Cartesian x axis and the Cartesian basis vector e1.

It can be seen from triangle PAB that

where |e1|, |b1| are the magnitudes of the two basis vectors, i.e., the scalar intercepts PB and PA. PA is also the projection of b1 on the x axis.

However, this method for basis vector transformations using directional cosines is inapplicable to curvilinear coordinates for the following reasons:

  1. By increasing the distance from P, the angle between the curved line q1 and Cartesian axis x increasingly deviates from .
  2. At the distance PB the true angle is that which the tangent at point C forms with the x axis and the latter angle is clearly different from .

The angles that the q1 line and that axis form with the x axis become closer in value the closer one moves towards point P and become exactly equal at P.

Let point E be located very close to P, so close that the distance PE is infinitesimally small. Then PE measured on the q1 axis almost coincides with PE measured on the q1 line. At the same time, the ratio PD/PE (PD being the projection of PE on the x axis) becomes almost exactly equal to .

Let the infinitesimally small intercepts PD and PE be labelled, respectively, as dx and dq1. Then

.

Thus, the directional cosines can be substituted in transformations with the more exact ratios between infinitesimally small coordinate intercepts. It follows that the component (projection) of b1 on the x axis is

.

If qi = qi(x1, x2, x3) and xi = xi(q1, q2, q3) are smooth (continuously differentiable) functions the transformation ratios can be written as and . That is, those ratios are partial derivatives of coordinates belonging to one system with respect to coordinates belonging to the other system.

Constructing a covariant basis in three dimensions

Doing the same for the coordinates in the other 2 dimensions, b1 can be expressed as:

Similar equations hold for b2 and b3 so that the standard basis {e1, e2, e3} is transformed to a local (ordered and normalised) basis {b1, b2, b3} by the following system of equations:

By analogous reasoning, one can obtain the inverse transformation from local basis to standard basis:

Jacobian of the transformation

The above systems of linear equations can be written in matrix form using the Einstein summation convention as

.

This coefficient matrix of the linear system is the Jacobian matrix (and its inverse) of the transformation. These are the equations that can be used to transform a Cartesian basis into a curvilinear basis, and vice versa.

In three dimensions, the expanded forms of these matrices are

In the inverse transformation (second equation system), the unknowns are the curvilinear basis vectors. For any specific location there can only exist one and only one set of basis vectors (else the basis is not well defined at that point). This condition is satisfied if and only if the equation system has a single solution. In linear algebra, a linear equation system has a single solution (non-trivial) only if the determinant of its system matrix is non-zero:

which shows the rationale behind the above requirement concerning the inverse Jacobian determinant.

Generalization to n dimensions

The formalism extends to any finite dimension as follows.

Consider the real Euclidean n-dimensional space, that is Rn = R × R × ... × R (n times) where R is the set of real numbers and × denotes the Cartesian product, which is a vector space.

The coordinates of this space can be denoted by: x = (x1, x2,...,xn). Since this is a vector (an element of the vector space), it can be written as:

where e1 = (1,0,0...,0), e2 = (0,1,0...,0), e3 = (0,0,1...,0),...,en = (0,0,0...,1) is the standard basis set of vectors for the space Rn, and i = 1, 2,...n is an index labelling components. Each vector has exactly one component in each dimension (or "axis") and they are mutually orthogonal (perpendicular) and normalized (has unit magnitude).

More generally, we can define basis vectors bi so that they depend on q = (q1, q2,...,qn), i.e. they change from point to point: bi = bi(q). In which case to define the same point x in terms of this alternative basis: the coordinates with respect to this basis vi also necessarily depend on x also, that is vi = vi(x). Then a vector v in this space, with respect to these alternative coordinates and basis vectors, can be expanded as a linear combination in this basis (which simply means to multiply each basis vector ei by a number viscalar multiplication):

The vector sum that describes v in the new basis is composed of different vectors, although the sum itself remains the same.

Transformation of coordinates

From a more general and abstract perspective, a curvilinear coordinate system is simply a coordinate patch on the differentiable manifold En (n-dimensional Euclidean space) that is diffeomorphic to the Cartesian coordinate patch on the manifold. Two diffeomorphic coordinate patches on a differential manifold need not overlap differentiably. With this simple definition of a curvilinear coordinate system, all the results that follow below are simply applications of standard theorems in differential topology.

The transformation functions are such that there's a one-to-one relationship between points in the "old" and "new" coordinates, that is, those functions are bijections, and fulfil the following requirements within their domains:

  1. They are smooth functions: qi = qi(x)
  2. The inverse Jacobian determinant
    is not zero; meaning the transformation is invertible: xi(q) according to the inverse function theorem. The condition that the Jacobian determinant is not zero reflects the fact that three surfaces from different families intersect in one and only one point and thus determine the position of this point in a unique way.

Vector and tensor algebra in three-dimensional curvilinear coordinates

Elementary vector and tensor algebra in curvilinear coordinates is used in some of the older scientific literature in mechanics and physics and can be indispensable to understanding work from the early and mid-1900s, for example the text by Green and Zerna. Some useful relations in the algebra of vectors and second-order tensors in curvilinear coordinates are given in this section. The notation and contents are primarily from Ogden, Naghdi, Simmonds, Green and Zerna, Basar and Weichert, and Ciarlet.

Tensors in curvilinear coordinates

A second-order tensor can be expressed as

where denotes the tensor product. The components Sij are called the contravariant components, Si j the mixed right-covariant components, Si j the mixed left-covariant components, and Sij the covariant components of the second-order tensor. The components of the second-order tensor are related by

The metric tensor in orthogonal curvilinear coordinates

At each point, one can construct a small line element dx, so the square of the length of the line element is the scalar product dx • dx and is called the metric of the space, given by:

.

The following portion of the above equation

is a symmetric tensor called the fundamental (or metric) tensor of the Euclidean space in curvilinear coordinates.

Indices can be raised and lowered by the metric:

Relation to Lamé coefficients

Defining the scale factors hi by

gives a relation between the metric tensor and the Lamé coefficients, and

where hij are the Lamé coefficients. For an orthogonal basis we also have:

Example: Polar coordinates

If we consider polar coordinates for R2,

(r, θ) are the curvilinear coordinates, and the Jacobian determinant of the transformation (r,θ) → (r cos θ, r sin θ) is r.

The orthogonal basis vectors are br = (cos θ, sin θ), bθ = (−r sin θ, r cos θ). The scale factors are hr = 1 and hθ= r. The fundamental tensor is g11 =1, g22 =r2, g12 = g21 =0.

The alternating tensor

In an orthonormal right-handed basis, the third-order alternating tensor is defined as

In a general curvilinear basis the same tensor may be expressed as

It can also be shown that

Christoffel symbols

Christoffel symbols of the first kind

where the comma denotes a partial derivative (see Ricci calculus). To express Γkij in terms of gij,

Since

using these to rearrange the above relations gives

Christoffel symbols of the second kind

This implies that

since .

Other relations that follow are

Vector operations

  1. Dot product:

    The scalar product of two vectors in curvilinear coordinates is

  2. Cross product:

    The cross product of two vectors is given by

    where is the permutation symbol and is a Cartesian basis vector. In curvilinear coordinates, the equivalent expression is

    where is the third-order alternating tensor.

Vector and tensor calculus in three-dimensional curvilinear coordinates

Adjustments need to be made in the calculation of line, surface and volume integrals. For simplicity, the following restricts to three dimensions and orthogonal curvilinear coordinates. However, the same arguments apply for n-dimensional spaces. When the coordinate system is not orthogonal, there are some additional terms in the expressions.

Simmonds, in his book on tensor analysis, quotes Albert Einstein saying

The magic of this theory will hardly fail to impose itself on anybody who has truly understood it; it represents a genuine triumph of the method of absolute differential calculus, founded by Gauss, Riemann, Ricci, and Levi-Civita.

Vector and tensor calculus in general curvilinear coordinates is used in tensor analysis on four-dimensional curvilinear manifolds in general relativity, in the mechanics of curved shells, in examining the invariance properties of Maxwell's equations which has been of interest in metamaterials and in many other fields.

Some useful relations in the calculus of vectors and second-order tensors in curvilinear coordinates are given in this section. The notation and contents are primarily from Ogden, Simmonds, Green and Zerna, Basar and Weichert, and Ciarlet.

Let φ = φ(x) be a well defined scalar field and v = v(x) a well-defined vector field, and λ1, λ2... be parameters of the coordinates

Geometric elements

  1. Tangent vector: If x(λ) parametrizes a curve C in Cartesian coordinates, then

    is a tangent vector to C in curvilinear coordinates (using the chain rule). Using the definition of the Lamé coefficients, and that for the metric gij = 0 when ij, the magnitude is:

  2. Tangent plane element: If x(λ1, λ2) parametrizes a surface S in Cartesian coordinates, then the following cross product of tangent vectors is a normal vector to S with the magnitude of infinitesimal plane element, in curvilinear coordinates. Using the above result,

    where is the permutation symbol. In determinant form:

Integration

Operator Scalar field Vector field
Line integral
Surface integral
Volume integral

Differentiation

The expressions for the gradient, divergence, and Laplacian can be directly extended to n-dimensions, however the curl is only defined in 3D.

The vector field bi is tangent to the qi coordinate curve and forms a natural basis at each point on the curve. This basis, as discussed at the beginning of this article, is also called the covariant curvilinear basis. We can also define a reciprocal basis, or contravariant curvilinear basis, bi. All the algebraic relations between the basis vectors, as discussed in the section on tensor algebra, apply for the natural basis and its reciprocal at each point x.

Operator Scalar field Vector field 2nd order tensor field
Gradient
Divergence N/A

where a is an arbitrary constant vector. In curvilinear coordinates,

Laplacian

(First equality in 3D only; second equality in Cartesian components only)


Curl N/A For vector fields in 3D only,

where is the Levi-Civita symbol.

See Curl of a tensor field

Fictitious forces in general curvilinear coordinates

By definition, if a particle with no forces acting on it has its position expressed in an inertial coordinate system, (x1x2x3t), then there it will have no acceleration (d2xj/dt2 = 0). In this context, a coordinate system can fail to be "inertial" either due to non-straight time axis or non-straight space axes (or both). In other words, the basis vectors of the coordinates may vary in time at fixed positions, or they may vary with position at fixed times, or both. When equations of motion are expressed in terms of any non-inertial coordinate system (in this sense), extra terms appear, called Christoffel symbols. Strictly speaking, these terms represent components of the absolute acceleration (in classical mechanics), but we may also choose to continue to regard d2xj/dt2 as the acceleration (as if the coordinates were inertial) and treat the extra terms as if they were forces, in which case they are called fictitious forces. The component of any such fictitious force normal to the path of the particle and in the plane of the path's curvature is then called centrifugal force.

This more general context makes clear the correspondence between the concepts of centrifugal force in rotating coordinate systems and in stationary curvilinear coordinate systems. (Both of these concepts appear frequently in the literature.) For a simple example, consider a particle of mass m moving in a circle of radius r with angular speed w relative to a system of polar coordinates rotating with angular speed W. The radial equation of motion is mr” = Fr + mr(w + W)2. Thus the centrifugal force is mr times the square of the absolute rotational speed A = w + W of the particle. If we choose a coordinate system rotating at the speed of the particle, then W = A and w = 0, in which case the centrifugal force is mrA2, whereas if we choose a stationary coordinate system we have W = 0 and w = A, in which case the centrifugal force is again mrA2. The reason for this equality of results is that in both cases the basis vectors at the particle's location are changing in time in exactly the same way. Hence these are really just two different ways of describing exactly the same thing, one description being in terms of rotating coordinates and the other being in terms of stationary curvilinear coordinates, both of which are non-inertial according to the more abstract meaning of that term.

When describing general motion, the actual forces acting on a particle are often referred to the instantaneous osculating circle tangent to the path of motion, and this circle in the general case is not centered at a fixed location, and so the decomposition into centrifugal and Coriolis components is constantly changing. This is true regardless of whether the motion is described in terms of stationary or rotating coordinates.

Greed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greed 1909 painting The Worship o...