Louis XVIII Research Articles

La Description de l'Égypte

Boussif Ouasti : The 'Description of Egypt'. The Description de l'Égypte is a monumental work resulting from Bonaparte's Egyptian campaign, which was published twice, once by Napoleon (1809 onwards) and once by Louis XVIII (1821 onwards) ; it was the work of scientists, writers, naturalists, artists, engineers etc. This article describes the content of the volumes, emphasizes its encyclopaedic spirit in the tradition of the Enlightenment, and judges its literary importance. Although this historical and geographical investigation on an unprecedented scale has been seen as an attempt by the West to appropriate the East, it is nevertheless an achievement whose scientific and literary importance has hitherto been insufficiently explored.

Wellington and the French Restoration

first third of the nineteenth century was one of the most cosmopolitan periods in the history of Europe. Napoleon's empire included Belgium, Holland, north-west Italy, and parts of Germany, as well as France; in addition, he was king of Italy, protector of the Confederation of the Rhine, and mediator of the Helvetic Confederation. His enemies were equally indifferent to frontiers and nationality: among the most devoted servants of Tsar Alexander I of Russia were two politicians whom Wellington would come to know extremely well, the Corsican Pozzo di Borgo and the French due de Richelieu. Richelieu was one of the French emigres who since 1789 had settled throughout Europe. The Wellesley family had known many such in London, including the great favourites of Louis XVI and MarieAntoinette, the Polignacs. A Polignac had married the due de Gramont (then due de Guiche), one of the most faithful courtiers of the exiled Bourbon pretender, Louis XVIII. Gramont was also head of the most important noble family of Bearn, the French province invaded by Wellington in late 1813. It was to Gramont's son, who was serving as an officer in the British army, that Wellington wrote, on 20 December 1 8 1 3 from his headquarters in SaintJean-de-Luz, that it was 'desirable5 that he should tell the Bourbon princes in England that they were needed in south-west France.1

Wellington and the Army of Occupation in France, 1815–1818

the victory of the duke of Wellington and Marshal Bliicher at Waterloo and the second abdication of Napoleon, Louis XVIII was again restored to the French throne. The Hundred Days had presented the allies with the problem of ensuring his position, for though Napoleon was now in exile under guard at St. Helena, the loyalty of the French army remained in question. The allies were not to be satisfied with battlefield victory as they had been in 1 8 14; it was now necessary for the stability of Europe that France be restricted to her own borders. Therefore, the allies again turned to Louis XVIII because they felt he alone could keep France from interfering in the internal affairs of other states, and, in return, agreed to establish a multinational army to occupy France and provide him with the time necessary to establish his rule. This essay will review the success of the military occupation of France by the European powers and the role of the duke of Wellington as commander of the allied forces.

Faits contemporains dans le vitrail du XIXe siècle

During the 19th Century, the iconography of stained-glass concerns sometimes a contemporary moment. So, in St-Denis's abbey, two Windows call up some events : Louis XVIII's fanerail, and, The king Louis-Philippe visiting the works executed by J.B. Debret, restaurator's brother on 1841. In Paris, two Windows recall Mgr Affre's heroic death on "barricades", on 1848 in St Roch's church and in the sacristy of Notre-Dame's cathedral, the one was made by "Manufacture de Sèvres" and the other by Maréchal de Metz in 1851. Through generosity of donators who remembered the bloody fights of the 1870's War in this country, Ladon 's church (Loiret) owns two stained- glass Windows made by Charles Lorin in 1894.

Further Letters of Blanco White to Robert Southey

Further Letters of Blanco White to Robert Southey

The Imperial Restoration: Continuity in Personnel and Policy under Napoleon I and Louis XVIII

(1982). The Imperial Restoration: Continuity in Personnel and Policy under Napoleon I and Louis XVIII. The Historian: Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 31-46.

The Growth of Liberalism and the Crisis of the Bourbon Restoration, 1827–1830

In 1830 the French Bourbon monarchy fell in the midst of a.political crisis that had developed rapidly between 1827 and 1830 after the Restoration settlement had operated, apparently harmoniously, for fifteen years. The two general elections of 1827 and 1830 resulted in the very swift growth of a liberal majority in parliament, and Charles X, unwilling to defer entirely to the majority in the choice of his ministers and unable, because of custom established since 1814, to defy that majority, attempted to alter the constitution by decree in 1830. The ‘three glorious revolutionary days’ led to the replacement of Charles by his cousin Louis-Philippe. In the last election of Louis XVIII's reign in 1824 only 40 liberals were elected in the whole of France. In 1827 about 180 were successful, making their representation roughly equal to that of the supporters of the Villèle government, with between 60 and 80 ultra-royalists to their right. In by-elections in 1828 and 1829 the liberals won 50 of the 75 seats fought. The election of 1830 confirmed the growth of support for the liberals with 202 of the 221 who voted the motion of no-confidence in the government being re-elected, and a total of 270 opponents, whereas the Polignac government had a mere 145 adherents. This dramatic swing in the elections of Charles X's reign was national in scale but was most complete in northern and eastern France. In 1829 four of the five most liberal departments in terms of parliamentary representation were in the east.

REVIEWS AND SHORT NOTICES

REVIEWS AND SHORT NOTICES

The Fortunes of Two Napoleonic Sculptural Projects

the new regime. Both give fascinating proof of the lengths to which Louis XVIII would go to eradicate Napoleonic motifs while preserving Empire designs. The first is a magnificent bronze group (Figure 1), which caused general puzzlement when it emerged on the art market about twelve years ago.' It is clearly a military allegory. A young woman-a girlish Minerva-extends a laurel wreath in front of a man who

La maison douaisienne de Louis XIV à Louis XVIII

Jacques Guillouet, "The Douai house from Louis XIV to Louis XVIII". Since Parent's study, quoted in reference, about 70 years have passed during which the architectural heritage of Douai has suffered from many destructions caused mostly by the two world wars. The author of this study tries to reckon what is left of the private houses of Douai and to underline what characterizes those which were built after the union of the town to France. From the year 1690, the general outlook of the Douai house evolves toward more simplicity with the disappearance of the Baroque adornments and the adoption of a sterner type of architecture with its harmonious blend of sandstone, limestone and brick. A regulation, issued in 1718 by the "Magistrate", imposes standards of height for the storeys and the cornices which still impart to the rows of houses a straightness of lines which has yet nothing to do with a strict architectural unity. The Louis XV adornments will only enrich a few private mansions and the neo-classical style will alter with but a few details the aspect of the house. One may say that the architectural type which has remodelled Douai between 1690 and 1820 is still the type which gives its particular character to the city.

Le général Compans

Dominique Compans was born at Salies-du-Salat on June 26 th, 1769, where his father worked in the Pyrenese forests. Aged 20 he enlisted in the army, and at once was elected captain. After serving in the Campaign of Italy and in the battles of Austerlitz, Iena, Eylau, Friedland, Eckmuhl and Wagram, he was promoted to the rank of brigadier. He was severely injured at the battle of the Moskowa, where his conduct was exceptionnally brilliant. Instituted as a pair de France by Louis XVIII, he took his final quarters at his manor of Blagnac, near Toulouse, where he died on November 10th., 1845.

The Bourbon Restoration's Commissaires-Extraordinaires du roi in 1814

From April to June 1814 the First Bourbon Restoration settled onto its precarious foundations. Between April 15 and Louis XVIII's return on May 3 the comte d'Artois acted as Lieutenant-General of the Realm. On April 22 he appointed twenty-two Commissaires-extraordinaires du Roi for emergency missions, with delegated sovereign powers, in as many military divisions throughout mainland France and in Corsica.1 These envoys' brief missions-from April 22 until late Junehave not received serious attention from historians or memorialists of

The Sacrilege Law of 1825 in France: A Study in Anticlericalism and Mythmaking

Mythmaking has always been a part of politics, and historians have often had to pay more attention to what people thought was happening than to what was actually happening. The Popish Plot, pacte defamine, Jewish Conspiracy, and Communist take-over of McCarthy era are no less significant for not having existed. Indeed, as myths they have a unique value, for they provide a kind of barometer for gauging tensions within a society. Restoration France was a society peculiarly susceptible to political mythmaking, particularly where religion was concerned. To some degree under Louis XVIII, but especially during reign of Charles X, all groups in French society were affected by a powerful myth. Variously labeled the priestly plot, the conspiracy of Congregation, or Jesuit threat, myth produced an immense outburst of anticlericalism. Beginning in 1825, anticlericals launched a frenetic campaign of political pamphlets, cartoons, songs, poetry, and ultimately violence-all to destroy widely dreaded but utterly imaginary clerical enemy. Anticlericalism, according to English historian Alfred Cobban, was the major current in a rising tide of hostility against Charles X and his government.1 Whether or not Cobban is correct, sources of this hostility remain to be explored. Historians have often been misled in interpreting anticlericalism during Restoration by associations imported from later nineteenth century. Since term anticlerical itself was not coined until after Restoration, it acquired meanings which are inappropriate for earlier period. Generally understood as opposition to influence of priests in governmental affairs, anticlericalism also came to be equated with antireligious sentiment and exclusively left-wing politics. None of these associations, however, is entirely valid for anticlericalism during reign of Charles X. Anticlericalism in Restoration meant opposition to ultramontanism, Jesuits, and theocracy, to priestly control in politics exercised via back stairs. There were anticlericals who were not opposed to a limited

IV. The Bourbon Army, 1815–1830

On 23 March 1815 Louis XVIII disbanded die French army. In June Napoleon lost Waterloo and abdicated, and the Bourbons returned to Paris to complete the destruction of the army. It had proved itself loyal only to Napoleon and over half of the 70,000 men of Davout's command preferred desertion to the white cockade. The country at large was hostile and in the royalist south returning officers were arrested and several were killed. In August the King published an ordinance ‘concerning the organization of a new army’. The army was ‘to be formed according to the principles which constitute a truly national army to form a military force in harmony with the liberal nature of our charter… avoiding the separation of die army from the interests of die country‘. It was not an easy task. Financial circumstances placed limitations on size, die Charter forbade conscription, the allies wanted reprisals and die royalists claimed rewards for their loyal service.

European Political Emigrations: A Lost Subject

Historians generally dislike lost causes. They seek to explain what happened, rather than what might have been, and have consequently neglected the story of political emigrations. Granted, the study of dmigres is full of methodological pitfalls for the unwary: biased accounts of past issues, outright forgeries of documentary evidence, personal recriminations that serve to distort political reality, and a pervasive mood of bitterness, acrimony, nostalgia, and endless hope. Yet it is an important story, not only because of its intrinsic merit as a political phenomenon worth studying, but also because of the effect that exiles have had both in their place of refuge and in their homeland when they have been able to return. He who would ignore the émigrés might do well to recall that the experience of exile helped fashion the political careers of Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky, as well as of Charles II and Louis XVIII.

Marshal Davout and the Second Bourbon Restoration

The second abdication of the Emperor Napoleon plunged the French nation into confusion. Its defeated army was retreating in disorder from the battlefields of Belgium, its government was undecided upon a choice for his successor,l and as the news of these eventful days spread over the stunned countryside the threat of civil war heightened. Louis XVIII had been biding his time in Belgium while waiting for his fate and that of the French people to be decided on the field of battle. Hardly had the news of Waterloo arrived at Ghent (June 19) when the exiled court began packing for its inglorious return to Paris. However, a second restoration of the House of Henry IV was neither automatic nor assured by the removal of Napoleon. The army was Bonapartist almost to the man; and if the nation shed few tears for the departed emperor, it was divided with respect to the return of the king. The principal architect of the Second Restoration may well have been Joseph Fouche, Duke of Otranto, but the man who made it virtually bloodless, who prevented civil war, and who made possible peace with the allies by controlling the military, was Louis Davout. Marshal Davout, Duke of Auerstadt, Prince of Eckmiihl,2 was a

The Bureaucrat as Proconsul: The Restoration Prefect and the Police Générale

On December 14, 1821 the rebelliously faithful partisans of Louis XVIII, quand meme, finally assumed the office to which their uncontaminated past and heavenly justice entitled them. The power that had at last been gathered into the hands of an ultra ministry resided most of all in the apparatus of the centralized administrative state so often criticized by its new masters. This paper will examine the role and functions of the prefect as the most important local police official and political agent of the ministry at a time when the national administrative machine was operated with authentic Napoleonic rigor by former advocates of decentralization and local autonomies.

Jacques-Louis David, Artist Member of the Committee of General Security

IN reporting to Prince Metternich on the activities of the Jacobins and other dangerous foreign revolutionaries who were then concentrated at Brussels, the Austrian ambassador to The Hague wrote on January 6, I826: reunion of honnetes gens has just suffered a great loss: the famous painter David, the regicide, the intimate friend of Marat and Robespierre is dead.' For almost ten years the Austrians had supported the efforts of the French, Prussians, English, and Russians to drive David and other French political refugees from their place of exile in Belgium. Yet David, as artist, had been honored as have few members of his profession. Metternich himself had -appointed him to the Fine Arts Academy of Vienna,2 the king of Prussia had offered to make David his minister of fine arts at Berlin, and Louis XVIII had continued to purchase the paintings of the exiled artist. But to the end of his life David was regarded as a dangerous revolutionary. The Bourbon government even refused to allow his body to be brought back for burial for fear that his interment on French soil might furnish an occasion for political demonstrations hostile to the monarchy! Despite all this, David today is regarded as the classic example of a political chameleon who placed his talents at the disposal of succeeding regimes. His contemporaries knew better: friends and foes agreed that David was a partisan of the Revolution from first to last.3 The painter himself remained implacably opposed to the restoration of the Old Regime in France. He never disavowed the principles of 1789, his regicidal vote, or the necessity of the so-called Reign of Terror. This is clear in the public defense of his own political acts during the Terror which he published during the Thermidorian reaction when silence or evasion might have been more expedient.4 In private,

Louis XVIII at Gosfield

Louis XVIII at Gosfield

Louis XVIII at Gosfield

Louis XVIII at Gosfield