Introduction
The brief twenty-year period French hyperactivity on the world stage that is the Napoleonic period makes life difficult for the historian. The resulting historiography is as multi-lingual as it is multi-cultural, ranging from the discovery of parts of Australia to the slave trade and the Louisiana purchase, of course centring on the old world in between. Worse still, the contemporary 'tit-for-tat' diplomacy and geo-politics were at the time and still are today a parlour game of 'for and against' France and Napoleon. Propaganda of the period still muddies the waters of history today.
We at the Fondation Napoléon are convinced however that there is much still to be read, to be understood. A clearer view and the cutting away the dead wood of earlier history writing is as necessary as it ever was. We offer at the Fondation Napoléon a view of contemporary writing on the First and Second Empires, both in French and other languages. Visitors to the library can sign up to receive the Library newsletter which details recent accessions, a handy list of Napoleonic titles in itself. Furthermore, the excellent Revue de l'Institut Napoléon comes out four times a year and a large part of the magazine is a bibliographical review of recent First Empire publications. There is also the Bulletin of the Fondation Napoléon's general public website which catalogues recent works, not to mention our online journal, Napoleonica la Revue, which devotes a large section to book reviews.
The aim of this paper then is talk about recent important books written in French on subjects related to Napoleon I. A significant feature of the role of the Fondation Napoléon is to encourage the cross-fertilisation of historiographical traditions. Napoleonic history has often been subject to bigoted and nationally-driven agendas. The tools available to today's historian ought to make it easier to approach the holy grail of the balanced, un-partisan history. Whilst the English-speaking historian of Napoleon may be interested in Prussia, Russia, Italy or Spain and so be forced to reach primary literature in those languages, they must also read French (not only the language of France but also that of international diplomacy). Whilst it is true that many of the works of history written in French in the nineteenth century and memoirs of Napoleon's contemporaries were translated at the time into English, many however were not. And only a selection of Napoleon's correspondence was translated. And it should not be forgotten that the selection of the original letters by the editorial commission of Napoleon III's edition of the correspondence was tendentious, to put it mildly: they stated explicitly that the letters were published with the aim of 'glorifying Napoleon I'. And this was even before the committee was replaced by a single, sole (family-related) editor, the Prince Napoleon, or Plon-Plon. In addition to the vast amount of literature in French up to, including and following the first century of the Napoleonic episode, a great amount has been written in France in the last thirty years. Since the career of Jean Tulard and his ground-breaking Napoleon, or the Myth of the Saviour book (first published in 1977 and added to twice, in 1980 and 1987) (and incidentally translated, though badly, into English), Napoleonic studies in France have been flourishing. This was partly because of the fact that we are living in the second centenary of the period, but not only. The last twenty years has seen the arrival of some gifted historians, a selection of which I will present to you today. I have chosen six themes, diplomatic and political history, biography, financial history, military history, music history, and history of religion.
The point of this paper is to serve as a 'heads up' to what's going on in France and to encourage Anglophone historians to keep up to date. You may perhaps feel that I am teaching you to suck eggs, but a recent (and otherwise excellent) book in English on Napoleonic history (whose author shall remain nameless) quoted Lefevre as one of his principle French sources. Lefevre was first published in the 1960s. It was as if nothing had been written in French on Napoleon since that time. One strongly suspects that the reason for this unique citation was that Lefevre was translated into English.
Thierry Lentz
The first author is Thierry Lentz. Thierry has been director of the Fondation since 2000. He has had an extremely prestigious career, including two literary prizes (Fondation Napoléon Grand Prix, and the Corsican literary prize, the Prix du Mémorial) and the award of Chevalier des Arts and Lettre, all at very young age. He is extraordinarily prolific and the author of more than fifteen books, not to mention articles and frequent media appearances. I propose to present here Thierry's most important recent publications.
In 1999, Thierry Lentz published the first of his four key volumes on the history of Napoleon I. Entitled Le Grand Consulat, the volume grew out Lentz's work on the coup d'état de Brumaire. It is revisionist in the sense that it attempts to set the Consulate on the same level as the empire by giving the title “Grand”. It differs from previous treatments of period by its emphasis on the collegial nature of Napoleonic power, Napoleon's close collaboration (and indeed dependence upon) Talleyrand. It reveals his dependence upon political alliances, some of which led him astray, as with the 'colonial party' which influenced the consul's reintroduction of slavery. Most English language treatments of the consulate (Holland Rose, Herold, Shom and Englund) come at the period through the prism of biography. Napoleon perforce becomes the figure alone at the masthead of state, making and unmaking, in a sort of proto-imperial role. Lentz's work is resolutely non-biographical. The resulting picture is more variegated. The institutions of the Consulate are given their true weight and their roles are developed. This concentration of internal French politics (including the sidelining of the Tribunat and the creation and development of the Council of State as the second organ of government) puts the historical figure of Napoleon in clear context. This detailed treatment of the Consulate is naturally followed by a history of the Empire (which Lentz contends is 'new'). In the originally three volume set, the aim was to recount the history of the empire (two 'chapters' on the rise and fall) followed by third 'chapter' centred on France. This massive project (which has already lasted seven years) is to include a fourth part dealing with the construction of Europe at the Congress of Vienna. One particular theme which runs through all the published parts is the emphasis on the history and understanding of the institutions of the Empire, the administrative structures created to run French suzerainty of continental Europe. This is particularly untrodden ground, and the change of emphasis from the person to the structures leads the reader to the direct experience of French rule whether at home or in other European lands, going beyond the emperor and national points of view. Volume 1 deals with Napoleon himself and the conquest of Europe – the creation of the hegemonic system – and runs up to 1810. Volume 2 deals with the fall of the same, ending with a final chapter reflecting upon the nature of the system, its historical roots (Diocletian and Charlemagne), the symbiotic relationship of the empire and the system, whether the system could ever have worked and indeed whether it was not a vicious circle. Volume 3 is perhaps the most revolutionary of the group so far in that takes the reader from the political summit of government during the Empire right to the very foundations, to the level of the citizen and civil society. Part one deals with power and legitimacy. In detail, this means chapters on the government, the nature of imperial power and the role of Napoleon himself as representative of the nation, the council of state, the ministers, the people and their status and rights as citizens and voters, the Tribunat, the lawmakers, and finally the senate. Part two is a lengthy discussion of the centrality of the state during the First Empire, with reflections on the nature of the Napoleonic regime, the army, local administration, etiquette and court, the Légion d'honneur, free masonry and finally religions (Catholic, Protestant and Jewish) within the state. Part 3 discusses order and authority, with separate chapters on justice, the police, press control, art censorship and financial structures such as the taxation, banking, and politics. Part 4 attempts to give a sketch of French society of the period, taking a close look at France outside Paris as much as within. This portrait of the people under Napoleon is particularly striking, particularly in the context of the preceding detailed treatment of the administrative structures governing them. Part 5 takes on the question of Europe's submission to, and rejection of, the Napoleonic system, including chapters on the geopolitical rivalry of the period, Napoleon's own genius in foreign policy, the potential alliances for the empire (with separate treatments of relations with Spain, Russia, Austria, Turkey, Germany, the Duchy of Warsaw and northern Europe), the failure of the “royaumes frères” and finally a meditation on the factors bringing Napoleonic Europe together and those tearing it apart, notably Gallocentric attitudes and the Continental System. In short, there is an enormous amount of food for thought here for all those working on the history of France in this period.
Emmanuel de Waresquiel
My next author is Emmanuel de Waresquiel and his biography of Talleyrand. Previously of the Ecole Normale Supérieure, de Waresquiel has a doctorate in history and is a researcher at the École Pratique des Hautes Etudes. He is a specialist on the Restoration period and is the author many books, notably a biography entitled Duc de Richelieu, un sentimental en politique (Perrin, 1991) and Histoire de la Restauration (in collaboration with Benoît Yvert; Perrin, 1996). The book which I intend to describe here, Talleyrand, le prince immobile (Fayard, 2003) was awarded the Fondation Napoléon Grand Prix in 2003 – the Fondation Grand Prix is adjudicated by academics from the Sorbonne and members of the Institut, including Professor Jacques-Olivier Boudon, Professor François Crouzet, Jean Favier, of the Institut, Jean-Marie Rouart, of the Académie française and Professor Jean Tulard, of the Institut.
His biography is the very definition of revisionism, and it tackles head-on the criticisms, the stock opinions and inconsistencies of almost all other treatments of Talleyrand. Indeed, using many previously unpublished sources (notably many letters by Talleyrand held in the family archives of the Talleyrand family), Emmanuel de Waresquiel here gives a careful view of the man, peeling back the layers of the 'black legend', but not denying that politician's skill at manipulation and extraordinary ability as a player of the stock market. Talleyrand was a man born into the Ancien Régime, and it was here that he learnt his life's most important lesson, namely the art of appearing in society (whilst at the same time developing a taste for secrecy and game playing). He was pugnaciously tenacious in his political and economic beliefs, whilst remaining pliant enough to be able to bend his action, rather than his ideas, to events. The subtitle of the book – le prince immobile – is provocative. Rather than being the most famous of all the girouettes, Talleyrand, de Waresquiel contends, remains true to himself throughout his remarkable career from bishop during the ancient regime, to minister and diplomat during the revolution and Consulate/Empire, to “politique” under Louis XVIII, and diplomat again under Charles X and Louis-Philippe. Whilst the treatment remains firmly biographical, nevertheless there is in this book a great deal of history with a capital 'H'.
Pierre Branda
My next important book on Napoleonic history written in French deals with the financial of history of Napoleon and the empire. It is by Pierre Branda. Branda studied economics and business management at the University of Montpellier (MA in economics) and at the I.A.E. in Nice (D.E.A. in Business Management). He then became a company manager in 1990. He has been a Membre correspondant at the Fondation Napoléon since 2002, and has published many articles on financial matters during the Empire, notably: “Les finances et le budget de la France napoléonienne” and “Le testament de Napoléon: une affaire d'argent avant tout”. In 2006, he wrote with Thierry Lentz, the book Napoléon, l'esclavage et les colonies also published by Fayard. He recently published (again with Fayard) Le prix de la gloire. Napoléon et l'argent (April 2007). In 2008 he was present at the Huntsville consortium and presented the paper “La guerre a-t-elle payé la guerre?”.
One of the most important (and novel) features of this book is its concentration on state finances and economic issues. Given that these issues constantly exercised Napoleon himself (a huge number of letter in the correspondence are dedicated to financial matters) a good understanding is crucial to an understanding of the regime. Money was not only the emperor's constant companion but also omnipresent in the political life of his times. The military expeditions planned or led by Bonaparte (Italy or Santo Domingo) were organised for economic reasons or failed for serious lack of funds (Egypt). Branda also goes into great detail telling the story of Napoleon's personal relationship to finance. One example given is the payment in May 1796 of the Armée d'Italie's wages in gold and silver pieces. The First Italian campaign had largely been undertaken for financial reasons – the Directory lacked money because paper money was no longer used, and the wealth of the Italian peninsula was tantalising. The initial results of the campaign were very encouraging, with Bonaparte soon sending several millions to Paris. However, counter to all expectations, Bonaparte in Milan paid his army in coins, despite the Directory's instructions to the opposite. This measure was “revolutionary” for the time in that the armies of the Republic had before only ever received depreciated paper money called assignats. By paying in coin, Bonaparte got loyalty from his army and ensured his position at its head. Branda also highlights the financial success of the Consulate, noting how the construction of the Boulogne camp or the naval improvements undertaken in the attempt to invade Britain would have been impossible to finance without the sale of Louisiana in 1803 and the Spanish subsidies. He also shows the methods by which Bonaparte and his team were able to put public interest at the top of the agenda, and how they built a financial system which could provide the State with “enough to live on”. Branda also comes to important conclusions regarding Napoleon's financial policy, namely that it was detached but formed part of a greater whole. Napoleon Bonaparte was a political animal, so tax measures, often potentially damaging to popularity, would be delayed in their application. Taxes on tobacco, salt and alcohol, for example, were not to be introduced until 1806, when the emperor's power was firmly grounded. By doing this, he was in fact letting State finances be dictated by circumstances, particularly in the early years.
Another important discussion is of the way Napoleon tried to control money wherever he could, both in his Empire and in the satellite countries such as Italy, Westphalia, Naples, and Holland. Branda shows how Napoleon created structures, notably the “Domaine extraordinaire”, which would manage the produce of foreign conquest. A large part of the book is devoted to Napoleon's attempt to channel all the money in Europe towards his own policies.
It is perhaps Branda's conclusion which is most interesting. By seeing the history of the period through the prism of finance, he can confidently state that the “second Hundred Years' War” ended with the victory of “money against Napoleon”. Britain invested in the right places, and with huge sums (two to three times the amount of gold in the world at that time). Whilst Napoleon controlled the financial markets of continental Europe, Britain still managed to attract investment because she had the confidence of international merchants, industrialists, property owners, colonists, princes hostile to Napoleon, major banks (such as Barings) and speculators (such as the Rothschilds).
Whilst Branda does not claim to be a precursor in this subject – the specialist financial and economic historians, François Crouzet, Michel Bruguière, Guy Thuillier and Pierre-François Pinaud have all written fundamental works – Branda provides however the missing overview of the question. In his book he eloquently describes the extraordinary feat performed by Napoleon whereby he managed to finance fifteen years of war without bankrupting the state. This is in stark contrast to twenty years earlier when French assistance in the American war of Independence, on a relatively modest military level, had brought a thousand-year-old French monarchy to its knees.
Jacques Garnier
In military history, the expert Jacques Garnier has worked tirelessly on the French army for many years now. All the entries for the major battles in the Dictionnaire Napoléon (Fayard 1999), the historian of Napoleon's vademecum, were written by Garnier and his work on Austerlitz won him the Fondation Napoléon Grand Prix for 2006. The book is a very interesting antidote to the Napoleon superman school of history. Quite the contrary of having planned the Austerlitz campaign in Boulogne, Garnier underlines that when the emperor arrived at Brünn, he had no idea as to how he was going to direct the battle which he so longed for. It has frequently been said that he drew the enemy on by weakening his right. Garnier counters this, noting that at the time, Napoleon was primarily bringing his army together, that is, concentrating it. Savary confirms this. Garnier then goes on to give the following fascinating re-vision of the events around Austerlitz. On 1 December, Napoleon was keeping himself ready for every eventuality, ready to fight an offensive or defensive battle, depending on the information he received. The Russians marched down the Olmütz road to Brünn in a straight line up until the evening of 28 November. Up until 29 November, that is three days before the battle, Napoleon thought that they would make a frontal attack. This was why he fortified the Santon hill, placing on it 18 artillery pieces and a whole regiment, whilst in the end this position was to prove irrelevant to the outcome of the battle. Not once did he consider weakening his right. Indeed at that time his army did not present an aligned front but was rather ranged in a triangle, each of whose sides was five kilometres long. Even Davout, whose corps was to form the right of the battle line on the morning of 2 December, had orders to come to Brünn as part of the concentration of the army. What is more, after the occupation of the Pratzen Heights by the allies, and despite after having said “the enemy will have to wait a long time up there if they're expecting me to come and dislodge them”, he organised an offensive battle, as can be seen in the 8.30pm general dispositions where we find orders to perform “a forward march by echelon, the right wing to the fore”. It seems clear then that at this moment he was thinking that all his psycho-diplomatic manoeuvres to give an impression of weakness and to incite the enemy to attack had (at least partially) failed. Where is the “weakening of the right” in all this? It was only in the night that he came back to a battle system which was much more flexible, his preferred way of going about things. It can never be said too many times, Napoleon's strategies and tactics were conducted in response to the situation developing at the time. As I hope I have communicated. Garnier's book is essential reading.
David Chaillou
David Chaillou's book on Napoleon and the Paris opera won a Fondation Napoléon Grand Prix in 2004. Chaillou is a young lecturer and this is his first book developed from his PhD thesis which he earned at the Université de Paris IV-Sorbonne. He is also a distinguished musician, holding a Diploma from the Paris Conservatoire national supérieur de musique. He is a member of the Centre de recherche en histoire de l'innovation (CRHI) of the Université de Paris IV-Sorbonne. He is also composer whose works have been published by Editions musicales Billandot.
Centring on the role of Napoleon in the musical output at the Opera, this book, entitled Napoleon and the Opera, politics on stage, studies the emperor's use of it as a propaganda tool for imperial glory during this period of great popularity for the Opera in Paris. The book discusses the operas and 'pièces de circonstance' selected and then performed there in the period 1810 to 1815. The book is divided into four parts. This first is a discussion of the institution, the Opéra de Paris, the men who ran it, the composers who wrote for it, the musicians who played and sang there and finally the librettists. The second deals in great detail with the way in which works were selected. Here Chaillou describes the 'Jury de lecture' and the way it worked, and the selection criteria for operas to be performed. Here Chaillou's notes the typical subject matter (usually Greek antiquity), the periods to be avoided (recent French history). The second part ends with a detailed treatment of the specific case of the 'pièces de circonstance'. The third part of the book is dedicated to the multiple guises of the work of the censor with respect to the opera. Chaillou discusses how the censors saw their own work as backing up the 'principles of government', as 'supporting the government' and as 'preserving public decency'. Opera was a part of social life in which the censors acted to defend public order, notably by removing any doubtful political elements in works to be performed, by limiting references to recent French history, and by preserving decorum even in terms of international relations. Chaillou talks of the removal of plays about Gusutavus Adolfuls and the madness of king George III because they 'besmirched' French monarchy. The censors also acted as guards of aesthetics, purifying language and preserving good theatrical practice. Naturally, moral themes were also the domain of the censors. The third section closes with a long discussion of the effectiveness of the censor and the use of themes in tune with imperial propaganda. The final section deals in detail with the operas themselves, their themes, their political content, and the emperor's personal relations with the opera, where the emperor himself is seen as the hero of the operatic ritual. This is a fascinating book which gives a clear picture of the music loving emperor using the medium not just for entertainment but also for political capital.
Jacques-Olivier Boudon
My final author is Jacques-Olivier Boudon. He is agrégé d'histoire, ex-pupil of the École Normale and Professor of Contemporary History at the Sorbonne (Paris IV). In addition to being president of the Institut Napoléon he is a member of the academic committees for the Musée de l'histoire de France and the Musée de l'Armée. He is the author of numerous articles and several books on the first and second empires, two of his most recent being Paris, capital religieuse sous le Second Empire, (Editions du Cerf, 2001) and Napoléon et les Lycées. Enseignement et société en Europe au début du XIXe siècle, conference proceedings (of which he was editor) for Nouveau Monde Edition/Fondation Napoléon, 2004.
The book which I propose to discuss here is his Les élites religieuses à l'époque de Napoléon. Dictionnaire des évêques et vicaires généraux du Premier Empire, Nouveau Monde Editions/Fondation Napoléon, 2002. Bishops and vicars general played important roles in society throughout the epoch, appearing notably at Napoleon's coronation and at the baptism of the Roi de Rome. This book is a dictionary of that ecclesiastical elite in France during the Napoleonic period. It begins with a short introduction in seven sections on the bishops and vicars general of the period. The first describes how Episcopal nominations worked, the second gives details on the composition of the new post-concordataire episcopacy. The third and fourth discuss the stability of the Episcopal corps and the situation regarding bishops not recognised by Rome. The last three sections are dedicated to the vicars general, their relationship to the Revolution and the selection process for these clerics. This essay is exceedingly useful, giving clear explanation of the complicated layers of the French church with its église constitutionnelle, its église réfractaire, église concordataire, petite église, etc. The dictionary proper (which follows) is arranged alphabetically and gives entries for the 92 bishops and 250 vicars general present in post-1802 France (and so including the Belgian and Rhenish departments). This is essential reading for all those interested in the history of the catholic church in the post-Revolutionary and Napoleonic periods.
Conclusion
The six authors chosen for this presentation reveal the healthy state of contemporary history writing in France. We at the Fondation occupy a privileged position between the two worlds of French and English language writing on Napoleon. It is our hope that this brief presentation will whet your appetite and lead to a thorough hybridisation of the two historical traditions. Bonne lecture…
Recent French books on Napoleon
Jacques-Olivier Boudon, Les élites religieuses à l'époque de Napoléon. Dictionnaire des évêques et vicaires généraux du Premier Empire, Paris: Nouveau Monde Editions/Fondation Napoléon, 2002
Pierre Branda, Le prix de la gloire. Napoléon et l'argent, Paris: Fayard, 2007
David Chaillou, Napoléon et l'Opéra, la politique sur la scène (1800-1815), Paris: Fayard, 2004
Jacques Garnier, Austerlitz, 2 décembre 1805, Paris: Fayard, 2005
Thierry Lentz, Nouvelle Histoire du Premier Empire: 1. Napoléon et la conquête de l'Europe 1804-1810 (2002), 2. L'effondrement du système napoléonien 1810-1814 (2004), 3. La France et l'Europe de Napoléon 1804-1810 (2007), Paris: Fayard
Emmanuel de Waresquiel, Talleyrand le prince immobile, Paris: Fayard, 2003