![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnI'm trying to use my other account at least occasionally so I posted about my Yuletide gifts there, including the salon-relevant 12k fic that features Fritz, Heinrich, Voltaire, Fredersdorf, Saint Germain, Caroline Daum (Fredersdorf's wife), and Groundhog Day tropes! (Don't need to know canon.)
Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-22 02:03 pm (UTC)- Introduction, explanation about ages/eras
- overview state of France and Europe when Louis was born, and why
- linear chronological European history, France-centric, but European, from this point till the end of the War of the Spanish Succession
- collection of non-political anecdotes about Louis
- Louis' last three years and the French and European reactions to his death
Both volumes are of course immensely quotable, and I shall do so in short order. As a historian, Voltaire occasionally footnotes (thankfully in two cases where I really thought, hang on, WHAT?), but really only occasionally, and it amuses me that the most extensive footnotes show up in volume 2 for the purpose of making mincemeat of the competition, err, of the then recently published fake "Memoirs of Madame de Maintenon". (These were "discovered" and published when Voltaire had basically already finished his book and he had a minor heart attack.As you would if what if genuine would be a key source to your work of years and years show up and call a lot of your conclusions into question. Thankfully for Voltaire, those memoirs really were fake.) He didn't redraft his book, but he added various footnotes in the second volume basically all saying "here's what rubbish the fake Maintenon memoirs have to say to this event, and here's why it's rubbish". As opposed to his various pamphlets (anonymous or not) or his Memoirs (of which a large section could be titled "Me and Fritz: A Bitter Romance"), the Age of Louis XIV doesn't have a particular enemy to be trashed, or an injustice to be attacked. It does try to be a serious historical work, aiming at fairness and more dimensionality for most, if not all historical characters showing up, though you can tell Voltaire's faves.
So, Voltaire's four ages: That of Philip and Alexander, that of Caesar and Augustus, that of the Medici and the Renaissance, and that of Louis XIV. Why is the last one worth studying?
It is perhaps that which approaches the nearest to perfection of all hte four; enriched by the discoveries of the three former ones, it has done grataer things in certian kinds than those three together. All the arts indeed were not carried farther than under the Medici, Augusts and Alexander; but human reason in general was more improved. In this age we first became acquainted with sound philosophy; it may truly be said that from the last years of Cardinal Richelieu's administration till those which followed the death of Louis XIV. there has happened such a general revolution in our arts, our genius, our manners, and even in our government, as will serve as an immortal mark to the true glory of our country. This happy influence has not been confined to France; it has communicated itself to England, where it has stirred up an emulation, which that ingenious and deeply learned nation stood in need of at that time; it has introduced taste into Germany, and the sciences into Russia; it has even re-animated Italy, whch was languishing; and Europe is indebted fo rits politeness and spirit of society to the court of Louis XIV.
You can just imagine Fritz nodding along to "we imported taste into Germany", but in fairness: every German princeling desperately wanted to be Louis XIV, built mini Versailles palaces and gardens, dressed in French fashion, and even outside of Brandenburg where most of the French Huguenot refugees ended up, hiring French teachers and servants to educate your kids became indespensible. Voltaire isn't simply boasting here but stating something which in 1740 looks to be self evident not just to patriotic French folk. And he'll offer enough criticism of French inner and outer politics, and even some of French culture, later on to make his work more than just an elogy to French gloire. Case in point:
FRENCH music, especially the vocal , is disliked by all other nations . It cannot be otherwise, because the French prosody or versification differs from that of every other country of Europe . The climate denies us that flexibility of voice which it gives the Italians , and it is not custom among us , as at Rome and other Italian courts , to make eunuchs of men, in order to render their voices finer than those of women . All these things , joined to the slowness of our singing, which, by the bye , forms a strange contrast with our native vivacity , will always make the French music disagreeable to any but Frenchmen.
Some of the best quotes about various European people and institutions pre Louis XIV:
Charles I. of England and Cromwell: (Charles) was too headstrong to be diverted from his projects, and too weak to carry them into execution. He was a good husband, a good master, a good father and an honest man, but an ill advised prince; he engaged in a civil war which lost him his throne and made him end his life on a scaffold, by an unparalleled revolution. This civil war, which was begun in the minority of Louis XIV, prevented England for some time from taking part in her neighbor's concerns; she lost her credit in Europe, with her quiet at home; her trade was obstructed, and other nations looked upon her as bured beneath her own ruins, till the time that she at once became more formidable than ever, under the rule of Cromwell, who had enslaved her with the gospel in one hand, the sword in the other, and the mask of religion on his face; and who in his administration concealed, under the qualities of a great king, all the crimes of a ursurper.
(Like Mildred, Voltaire has a competence kink and therefore likes Cromwell better than all the Stuarts put together, and thinks William (III) of Orange is chronologically underestimated in France when he doesn't have Louis' grandeur or lofty soul but wow, what competence! Unfortunately competence isn't inheritable, hence Cromwell's son Richard:
He was possessed of all the meek virtues which make the good citizen, and had none of that brutal intrepidity which sacrifices everything to its own interests . (...) This Richard, however, lived contented, whereas his father had never known what happiness was.
Then there's the church. Richelieu about the Pope (as an institution, not one particular pope) in the age of the Baroque:
His spiritual authority, which is always mixed with something of the temporal, is slighted and abhorred by one-half of Christendom: and though he is considered as a father by the other half, yet he has some children who resist his will at times with reason and succcess. It is the maxim of the French government to look upon him as a sacred and enterprising person whose hands must sometimes be tied, though they kiss his feet.
(You can say that again, son of France. #Popenapping #Avignon)
One thing Voltaire is decidely unimpressed by in the pre Louis XIV era is dueling:
This Gothic barbarism, which was formerely authorized by kings themselves and had become the distinguishing character of the nation, contributed as much as the foreign and domestic wars to depopulate the country. It is not saying too much, to aver that in the course of twenty years, of which ten had been troubled by war, more French gentlemen died by the hands of Frenchmen than by those of the enemy.
Richelieu, who officially outlawed duels, would agree. Speaking of the Cardinal, while Voltaire grants Richelieu that he did something useful for France while indulging his ego (namely, humbling the Habsburgs, starting to build up French reputation and also starting to build up a fleet), he's very negative about Mazarin, stating that Mazarin had between the end of the Fronde (the war of the nobility vs Anne the Regent and Mazarin) and his death absolute power in France and yet didn't do anything for anyone but himself and his own family, not for the country. He also claims that a) Anne fell out of love with him, and b) Louis himself was glad when Mazarin died. There goes a story with each which were the occasions where I wanted and got sourcing, because I can't recall that any of the modern works on Anne, Mazarin or Louis mentioned any such thing. According to Voltaire, who says he has it from the memoirs of Anne's lady-in-waiting Madame de Motteville, Mazarin did want to marry his niece Marie to Louis, sounded Anne out and only upon her spirited and indignant reaction pretended to be against it, too, and that he really never forgave her for this, nor she him. This, like I said, goes against every other presentation of the young Louis XIV/Marie Mancini story which I've read. (
Anyway, as a sample, here's Voltaire comparing Cromwell and Mazarin:
Never had the trade of England been in so free and so flourishing a condition, nor the state so rich. Its victorious fleets made its name respected in every sea, while Mazarin, wholly employed in governing and heaping up riches, suffered justice, trade, navigation and even the revenue itself, to languish and decline in France. As much masteri n France as Cromwell was in England, afater a civil war, he might have procured the same advantages for the country which he governed as Cromwell had done for his; but Mazarin was a foreigner, and tho9ugh of a less cruel disposoition than Cromwelll, wanted his greatness of soul.
Another possibility is that Voltaire, who wants this book to be published in France, after all, is doing what many a writer did with histories, count on the fact his readers will see pointed parallels to the present, in which case Mazarin stands in for Louis XV's ministers. He exists the book with this Voltairian summary: Soon afterward he died, seemingly unregretted by anyone except the King, who had already learned the art of dissembling.
Voltaire is a fan of Queen Christina of Sweden, bisexual icon buried in the Vatican:
Everyone admired a young princess, so worthy of reigning, who had resigned the sovereign authority for the sake of leading a life of ease and freedom. It is shameful in the Protestant writers to assert, without the least shadow of proof, that she resigned the crown only because she could keep it no longer. She had formed this design from the timie she was twenty years of age, and had allowed seven years to bring it to maturity. A resolution so much above all vulgar conception, and which had been formed for such a length of time, should stop the mouths of those who reproach her with livity of disposition, and of having been compelled to this abdication. One of these accusations destroys the other; but everything great and noble is sure to be attacked by narrow minds. The extrarordinary turn onf mind of this princess is sufficiently shown by her letters. In that which she wrote to Chanut, who had formerly been ambassador from France at her court, she thus expresses herself: "I wore the crown without ostentation, and I resign it with readiness: after this you have nothing to fear for me, my happiness is out of the reach of fortune."
However, Voltaire's fave Christina is a problematic one. When she visits France:
She was admired at the French court, though she surpassed all the women there in understanding. Theking saw her, and did her the greatest honors; but he did not discourse much with her. He had been bred in ignorance, and his natural good sense made him bashful. The only extraordinary thing that hte ladies and courtiers remarked in this philosopohical queen was that she did not dress after the French fashion, and that she danced badly. T'he learned found nothing to condemm in her except the murder of Monaldeschi, her master of horse, whom she caused to be assassinated at Fontainebleau in the second journey she made to 'France, for some fault he had been guilty of toward her. As she had laid down the sovereign authority, she had no longer a right to impose a sentence. She could no longer be considered as a queen who punished a misdeameanor of state, but asd a private woman who ended a love affair by a murder. This infamous and cruel action sullied that philosophy which had made her quit a throne. Had she been in England, she would have been punished; but the court of France winked at this insult against the royal authority, the law of nations, and humanity.
(You may recall I mentioned this when we talked about Christina a while ago. Mazarin advised her to pretend Monaldeschi had died in a quarrel between courtiers; Christina said no, she owned it, she had him executed for his transgressions against her as was her right as Queen. Everyone else: *Gulp*)
After Mazarin's death, Louis takes the reign at age 22, and France becomes the 700 pounds gorilla of European politics. He wins one war after another, gets one concession after another. But:
In a word , Louis disturbed all Europe by his arms and negotiations ; but, after all , he could not prevent the emperor, the empire, and Spain from joining the Dutch , and publicly declaring war against him . He had so far changed the course of things that the Dutch , who were his natural allies , were becoming friends to Spain .
Which, as Voltaire repeatedly points out, given the Spain/Netherlands backstory, really took some doing.
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-22 07:49 pm (UTC)On a historiographical note, remind me how revolutionary this idea is? When did people start doing an about-face on the past being inherently better than the present? (Nostalgic coloring of the past is still a thing, obviously, but "progress" is more of a concept that's taken for granted than it used to be.)
FRENCH music, especially the vocal , is disliked by all other nations .
Fritz agrees! Per Blanning:
The Berlin opera house was...multinational: most of the singers were Italian, the dancers French and the musicians German. Although so often described as a Francophile, Frederick in fact had a generally low opinion of contemporary French culture. During the golden age of the mid-seventeenth century, he believed, French writers, led by Corneille and Racine, had produced dramatic works of unsurpassable quality, but since then their star had waned. Dismissing their music as “puerile,” he told Graun to stop composing overtures in the French style. Modern Italian music was mellifluous when sung properly but essentially “stupid.” What Frederick demanded was music in the Italian style but written by Germans. Ascribed to him was the dictum: “The French only know how to write drama and the Italians only know how to sing; the Germans alone understand how to write music.”
He also claims that a) Anne fell out of love with him, and b) Louis himself was glad when Mazarin died. There goes a story with each which were the occasions where I wanted and got sourcing
Interesting! Like you, I had definitely not encountered this before. Do you need me to track down those memoirs?
(You may recall I mentioned this when we talked about Christina a while ago. Mazarin advised her to pretend Monaldeschi had died in a quarrel between courtiers; Christina said no, she owned it, she had him executed for his transgressions against her as was her right as Queen. Everyone else: *Gulp*)
I do recall!
Which, as Voltaire repeatedly points out, given the Spain/Netherlands backstory, really took some doing.
I myself have always been impressed by this foreign policy development! Truly, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-23 07:08 am (UTC)Without looking it up, I think while the "golden age of the past/the present sucks" school of thought - usually as a way to chastize the present - never went away, the "we're now better off than in the past" idea is something that may have debuted once Christian monks started to write the chronicles, simply because the past is pagan, and of course Christianity is an improvement. However, once there were several centuries of solely Christianity to look back on, the "golden age" probably made a comeback with a vengeance.
Meanwhile, the idea of progress in the way Voltaire puts it strikes me as very much a product of the Enlightenment, i.e. 18th century. It's also worth noting that while he credits the Age of Louis XIV with making France the cultural beheemoth of Europe and making everyone quake in their boots for a while politically, not only does he have several criticisms that go with that, but he mentions philosophy only starting in that era. (BTW, clearly he doesn't ignore the existence of Greek and Roman philosophers here. Or Christian ones, for that matter. I blame the problem of translation. When Voltaire talks about philosophes, he doesn't mean the likes of Platon or Seneca, he means what we'd call intellectuals, though in our days the invention of the modern Intellectual is credited to the 18th, not the 17th century, and very much to Voltaire and friends. Anyway, what I'm getting at is that when you read the book, you're left with the impression that the author thinks that this sure as hell was a remarkable age, but we still have a lot to accomplish and improve, so get to it, people!
Meanwhile, as I recall in one of his later life letters to Voltaire Fritz describes the Age of Louis XIV as a lost golden age when giants walked the earth whereas the present sucks and compliments Voltaire as being the last survivor from that age (of Louis XIV). Though in a yet later letter, the one I used in my story about the two of them, he more accurately and more poignantly says something like "it's enough to have lived in the Age of Voltaire" (which is what the Enlightenment is often referred to in France in the 20th century at least, so go Fritz for predicting that). Now Voltaire's life time and that of Louis XIV barely overlap because Louis got to be so old, so it's not really a question as to in which era he belongs, but it's telling that Voltaire's book at no point gives you the impression its author would have wanted to live as a true contemporary of Louis, no matter how impressive he finds him, whereas Fritz' earlier reference is already applying the golden age concept again.
Like you, I had definitely not encountered this before. Do you need me to track down those memoirs?
Nope, unnecessary. I do have some biographies I can look up in this regard.
I do recall!
Incidentally, I think Voltaire may be overestimating the British adherence to law and willingness to arrest foreign dignitaries if he thinks Christina would have gotten arrested if she'd had the guy murdered, err, executed on English soil.
I finally had the chance to watch the most recent Christina biopic, The Girl King, which starts well but then devolves, alas, goes for the most simple black and white storyline imaginable - Christina, champion of progressive thought and same sex love, first gets robbed of her one true love Edda Sparre by homophobic Protestant bigots, then her fatherly mentor Descartes gets poisoned by a French priest who puts Arsenic on the host while handing it to Descartes so Christina is left without a friend and open to evil French-Catholic machinations, and then she abdicates, the end. Leaving aside Descartes' surviving letters gives one the impression he and she did not get along and he regretted having moved to Stockholm and having to get up in the middle of the night so he could teach her at 5:00 am in the morning, thereby catching the inevitable cold, what's missing here entirely is her inner autocrat, not to mention all the money spending on luxuries which lessened her popularity in Sweden. Christina does sound fascinating, but she's still waiting for a fictional treatment that lets her keep her edges as far as I can see.
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-24 10:51 pm (UTC)Interesting, I am not an expert on medieval chronicles, but I had the impression that the idea of the Fall, and of course the impending end of the world, governed Christian historiography a lot, and you get a strong negative "now is worse" slant. It's actually kind of interesting that Otto von Freising, a bishop, writes on his own initiative a book that's not primarily a history but a story of how everything on earth is so meaningless and terrible and ephemeral, and that's why you should not care about earthly things...and then he gets commissioned by his nephew the emperor (Barbarossa) to write a history of his reign, and suddenly Otto discovers "progress". ;)
I know the idea of progress being a natural state of affairs really took off with the Whigs, but the nuances of its development are not something I'm conversant with.
Anyway, what I'm getting at is that when you read the book, you're left with the impression that the author thinks that this sure as hell was a remarkable age, but we still have a lot to accomplish and improve, so get to it, people!
I mean, that's exactly how I feel about the present: it's a lot better than the past, but we've got a long way to go, people!
Meanwhile, as I recall in one of his later life letters to Voltaire Fritz describes the Age of Louis XIV as a lost golden age when giants walked the earth whereas the present sucks and compliments Voltaire as being the last survivor from that age (of Louis XIV). Though in a yet later letter, the one I used in my story about the two of them, he more accurately and more poignantly says something like "it's enough to have lived in the Age of Voltaire"
But in that letter Fritz also said the future was going to be better (at least for German culture), but he was old and knew he wasn't going to live to see it, so he was contenting himself with Voltaire:
Germany is now like France was in the time of Francis I. The taste for letters begins to spread; we must wait for nature to give birth to true geniuses, as under the ministries of Richelieu and Mazarin. The soil that produced one Leibniz can produce others.
I will not see these beautiful days of my homeland, but I foresee the possibility. You will tell me that this can be very indifferent to you, and that I play the prophet quite at my ease by extending, as much as I can, the term of my prediction. This is my way of prophesying, and the surest of all, since no one will give me the lie.
As for me, I console myself with having lived in the age of Voltaire; it's enough for me.
So he clearly has an idea of progress here. While he may reminisce about a 17th century golden age, he doesn't *just* think in terms of a lost golden age (maybe because he's enough of a product of the Enlightenment.)
Incidentally, I think Voltaire may be overestimating the British adherence to law and willingness to arrest foreign dignitaries if he thinks Christina would have gotten arrested if she'd had the guy murdered, err, executed on English soil.
Hmm. There are not a whole lot of parallels. The diplomatic reciprocity thing I mentioned was an envoy to Britain getting thrown in debtors' prison, but that was just an envoy, not a visiting ex-monarch. I guess the closest parallel would be this question (to which I don't know the answer): what's the worst thing Peter the Great got away with when he was visiting Britain? Trashing your residence with your wild parties isn't exactly comparable to execution/murder!
But it's an interesting question, I wouldn't feel certain saying either they would or wouldn't have arrested her.
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-25 07:06 am (UTC)Otto of Freising and other high medieval chroniclers fall under the category of "have centuries of Christianity to look back on" I indicated above. Whereas I was thinking of really early Christian chroniclers, like Einhard who was Charlemagne's contemporary and chronicler. I recently had to reread his entire Carolus Magnus, and he definitely is under the impression the Carolingian age is pretty fab and better than before when one had to put up with Merowingian kings, never mind the pagan past. It's just since Charles died - sob! - that things are starting to look just a teeeeeensy bit concerning... Oh, Einhard does have a bit of a chip on his shoulder regarding the general German ability to write in Latin, which he assures us has been getting better all the time due to all those schools now operating in the Francian Empire, and also, if his Latin isn't Ciceronian, well, whose is? Certainly not that of those Italian busybodies across the Alps.
I guess the closest parallel would be this question (to which I don't know the answer): what's the worst thing Peter the Great got away with when he was visiting Britain? Trashing your residence with your wild parties isn't exactly comparable to execution/murder!
Indeed, and Peter is a sitting monarch, with the corresponding armies to call on, not an ex monarch. I suppose another question is: who is going to do the arresting, i.e. which British goverment are we talking about? Obviously Oliver Cromwell would be just fine with arresting Christina for murder - biggest traitor in the Protestant world, Gustavus Adolphus' daughter who has become a Catholic! - but then Christina, while reckless, hardly would have visited England while he was still in charge. After the Restoration, I think Charles II. would be aware of the PR disaster (Catholic! Monarch! Killing People Autocratically On British Soil!) but would have tried to solve the situation by sending her off to France post haste. James II. would have stuck his heels in and said Christina - who has seen the light of the one true religion even before he dared to confess his own seeing the light to all and sunder - shall ever be God's annointed and thus of course is above the law!
But this is all speculation, because I can't think of a comparable case in English history, either.
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-28 04:31 pm (UTC)Ah, okay, I see what you mean. I was going back to the early writers, like Augustine, and thinking that they don't seem to be big believers in progress, and that by the high Middle Ages, the chroniclers are still taking their cue from him, but if you mean when Christianity started triumphing over paganism, then yes, I can see that.
Without being especially knowledgeable, I think in Christian historiographry, you get a variety of trends:
"The pagans are winning, everything is bad and getting worse": Gildas, who saw Christianity under attack by a resurgence of paganism.
"No, Christianity is not responsible for recent disasters, like the fall of Rome! Things sucked just as much, if not more so, under the pagan Romans, and everyone should become Christian so things get better!": Orosius, Augustine.
"Forget about this life, focus on the next life": Augustine, Otto von Freising.
"Christianity is triumphing, woo!": Einhard, Bede.
"I'm a fan of this monarch, who has made things better": Einhard, Otto when writing about his nephew.
"I'm not a fan of this monarch, who has made things worse": probably everyone who ever wrote about Henry IV? But also a lot of other monks about a lot of other emperors.
Also, leaving aside chroniclers, there was a very strong medieval attitude toward politics and law that consisted of resolving modern difficulties by returning to an alleged status quo, when things were better/right. I think what's really ground-breaking about the tradition Voltaire embodies is the idea that it is natural and right to focus human efforts on improving human life here on earth, and that if you're not doing that, something has gone terribly wrong.
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-23 05:44 am (UTC)it amuses me that the most extensive footnotes show up in volume 2 for the purpose of making mincemeat of the competition, err, of the then recently published fake "Memoirs of Madame de Maintenon".
Heeee! This amuses me too :)
As opposed to his various pamphlets (anonymous or not) or his Memoirs (of which a large section could be titled "Me and Fritz: A Bitter Romance"), the Age of Louis XIV doesn't have a particular enemy to be trashed, or an injustice to be attacked. It does try to be a serious historical work, aiming at fairness and more dimensionality for most, if not all historical characters showing up, though you can tell Voltaire's faves.
This is actually really cool. Go Voltaire!
till the time that she at once became more formidable than ever, under the rule of Cromwell, who had enslaved her with the gospel in one hand, the sword in the other, and the mask of religion on his face; and who in his administration concealed, under the qualities of a great king, all the crimes of a ursurper.
Okay, this is kind of amazing!
and thinks William (III) of Orange is chronologically underestimated in France when he doesn't have Louis' grandeur or lofty soul but wow, what competence!
:D I like him too! (Based on your and Jude Morgan's portrayal of him :) )
Which, as Voltaire repeatedly points out, given the Spain/Netherlands backstory, really took some doing.
Huh, yeah, when even I know it!
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1
Date: 2023-01-23 07:12 am (UTC)I loved that description of Oliver Cromwell, too, which is why I quoted it.
Huh, yeah, when even I know it!
What would Posa, Elisabeth and Carlos say about this development! Talk about a Diplomatic Revolution. But yeah, William was a pragmatist. Spain was on the decline, Louis was the one who kept invading. Why, hello there, amigos!