This essay builds on recent scholarship on Linnaeus to revise our understanding of how and why he became influential in France in the 1790s. It looks in particular at the nontaxonomic writings of Linnaeus (such as the Amoenitates Academicae) and the young men associated with two voluntary societies that emerged in Paris early in the Revolutionary decade—the Société d’Histoire Naturelle and the Société Philomatique—drawing on their minutes as well as the correspondence and other writings of their members. The essay focuses (...) on Alexandre Brongniart (1770–1847), who was an active member of both societies, and the younger men he mentored, including Ernest Coquebert de Montbret (1780–1801) and Augustin Pyramus de Candolle (1778–1841). It concludes that to be Linnaean in Revolutionary France was not simply to embrace Linnaean taxonomy and nomenclature; rather, it was to practice natural history as a form of citizenship validated by patriotic arguments for its utility to the nation that were based on Linnaeus’s theory of natural and political economy grounded in the land. (shrink)