![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnNot only are these posts still going, there is now (more) original research going on in them deciphering and translating letters in archives that apparently no one has bothered to look at before?? (Which has now conclusively exonerated Fritz's valet/chamberlain Fredersdorf from the charge that he was dismissed because of financial irregularities and died shortly thereafter "ashamed of his lost honor," as Wikipedia would have it. I'M JUST SAYING.)
The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-26 03:37 pm (UTC)The
CountDuke de Broglie, author of The King's Secret, on Louis XV's secret diplomacy, is the grandfather of the famous physicist! He was also briefly diplomat to Britain, and prime minister of France in the 1870s.(For some reason I had it in my head that he was a count, but he was apparently a duke. This is good, as the subject of his book is a Count de Broglie, and it's already going to be confusing talking about the Broglie family in this write-up!)
According to his preface (which is short and well worth reading, you should be proud of me, Selena :D), everybody knew about Louis' secret diplomacy in the 1800s, but nobody knew the details. Once French scholar published a bunch of correspondence, and the 18th century Comte de Broglie (the hero of our narrative) is mentioned a lot, but this publication whetted the 19th century Duc de Broglie's appetite for more without satisfying it, for the author of the publication had more questions than answers.
"Wait!" thought our author, the Duc de Broglie, "I know where my grand-uncle's papers are! Some are in the ministry, and I bet I can ask all my relatives to hand over what they have, and then I can put together a publication of my own!"
He then closes his preface urging his peers to do the same:
Those who possess such documents, perhaps unknown to themselves, cannot be too strongly urged to undertake a voyage of discovery, which must redound to the honour of their ancestors, and would enrich our national annals. In any case, I can assure them, from my own experience, that they will find in such an exploration useful employment for their leisure, and most instructive pastime.
[Mildred: We're not related, but I got my hands on the Keith papers, does that count? :D]
And so it is that we have a publication from 1878, composed shortly before 1870, that is titled Le Secret du roi, Correspondance secrète de Louis XV avec ses agents diplomatiques, 1752–1774 (1878) and made me think it was going to be the actual letters a la the volume of H-W and Catherine correspondence our reader has just finished reading for us, but is actually a regular history by the author *based on* the correspondence. Which is good, because 1) I am much more likely to get something useful out of that, 2) any topic that involves getting contradictory orders from two bosses in the midst of intrigues is confuuuusing as it is.
Oh, the author doesn't make it less confusing by his habit of using titles instead of names, and his refusal to give dates except in occasional footnotes. It took me a long time of "We're talking about electing a new king in Poland, but are we in the 1730s? 1760s? We don't seem to be in either" to figure out we were in fact in the mid-1740s, just by dint of finding a rare footnote and going back to look at the table of contents.
And about 75 pages in, I realized I couldn't tell who "the Minister" and "the Resident" were, so I went back to start again, but this time taking who's who notes for my own reference. Whew!
But it is paying off. :D
So!
It's the early 1750s. This narrative is going to largely revolve around French meddling in Polish affairs. Remember that the Polish monarchy is elective, and Louis XV's father-in-law has twice attempted to be king of Poland in more than name and has failed, and is now living in Lorraine. August III, son of August the Strong, is king of Poland. Rumors are going around that he's "apoplectic" and going to die soon, and there will have to be another election.
France: Do we get involved this time? Poland is really far away, very expensive to bribe, and Austria and Prussia and Russia live right next door, and that makes it easier for them to win these wars.
"The Minister", aka the Marquis d'Argenson: I say no. Too risky, too little payoff.
"The Prince", aka the Prince de Conti: I say yes. My grandfather tried to be king of Poland in the 1690s, when August the Strong won, and the Poles have said they're annoyed at Saxony and would like me to make a bid for the throne.
Louis XV: I am intrigued, Prince de Conti. But I'm not sure I'm up to single-handedly planning and executing this project in the face of my ministers. To quote the author of this book,
If he were to broach the subject to his Ministers, if he were to use his authority to give effect to his opinion, he would have to lend his own hand to the execution of his project, to select and guide the instruments, to give himself the trouble to think and also to will, two things which were equally contrary to his habits.
Mildred note: I cannot give you all the entertaining quotes on Louis XV, or we'll be here all day, but let's just say the Duc de Broglie is not a fan.
Louis XV: Also, my daughter-in-law is August III's daughter, and my ministers say we're not supposed to be opposing the designs of Saxony to make the Polish monarchy basically inheritable in their family. Also, it will make her sad, and I like her. Let's do this secretly!
Okay, I can't resist quoting the author on "it will make her sad":
The Dauphiness, who possessed many virtues and accomplishments, was winning all hearts. She formed the centre of attraction at the Queen's receptions, and even beguiled the ennui of the King himself, every time that decency obliged him to quit his clandestine establishments and devote a few minutes to his lawful household. The gentle heart of the Dauphiness cherished only one passion — attachment to her family. To have allowed her to get a glimpse of the possibility that her adopted country could enter into a conflict with her native land, would have been to inflict the keenest anguish upon her.
Now it's 1752, and there's a new minister of foreign affairs, M. de Saint Contest. Remember his name, he's going to get an entertaining quote later. There's also a vacancy for the envoy post in Poland. Things are about to get interesting, because lo! the political scene is changing.
Since Fritz pissed off Saxony, they've been increasingly inclined to ally with Russia and Austria, as we've seen in my write-up on Brühl's foreign policy. But Poland has been doing its own thing and trying to remain neutral. France is a big fan of Polish neutrality, because not being able to march troops through Poland really hinders the Russians from being able to come to the aid of Austria.
So while Elizaveta and MT are trying to win over Poland to an alliance with them, France is going, "No, no, no!"
Specifically, this means forming a pro-French party among the Polish nobles.
Now it turns out that forming a pro-French party is only one step away from having a French candidate on the throne. So it's now possible to have the same envoy working to form a French party (which will satisfy the minister of foreign affairs) and working to promote a French candidate for king (which will satisfy Louis) without the contradiction being so blatant that the French minister figures out what Louis's up to.
So the Prince de Conti decides the man for the job is the Comte de Broglie! Some family genealogy: the Comte de Broglie is the son of the man who was involved in Fritz's incognito Strasbourg escapade and had to ask him nicely to leave town and please not enter the country with faked passports again, and the brother of the famous Marshal de Broglie. The Comte de Broglie is the guy who helped get France (esp. Lafayette) involved in the American Revolution and fantasized about being Stadtholder.
The Duc de Broglie who is writing this highly entertaining book is descended from the Comte's older brother, the Marshal (who was also a duke).
So now the Comte de Broglie, our envoy to Poland, has orders from his boss (Saint Contest, the minister of foreign affairs), to be cautious and vague about any candidates for the Polish throne, and orders from his king (Louis XV), to advocate for the Prince de Conti with zeal.
Furnished with these clear and satisfactory orders, the Count took the field towards the end of the summer of 1752
Now, when Fritz heard that the Comte de Broglie, son of the man he'd had the Strasbourg run-in with (not mentioned by our author) and who had provided what Fritz felt was insufficient military support in the War of the Austrian Succession, was being sent as French envoy to Poland, Fritz complained that he was being given a personal enemy for a neighbor. However, when Fritz met the Comte de Broglie as he passed through Silesia on his way to Poland, Fritz was in a good mood and they had a perfectly friendly dinner.
It was apparently September 17, 1752 (at least that's when Broglie wrote his report to the French minister, M. de Saint Contest, which means the dinner probably took place a day or two before). Checking salon's chronology, that means Fritz has recently married Heinrich off (June) and Voltaire had not yet published his first pamphlet trashing Maupertuis (September 18, 1752). Looks like Broglie got that dinner just in time, because Fritz was probably in a terrible mood on the 18th!
Ah, interesting, the H-W bio has Fritz's impressions of Broglie, from September 11:
“I am pleased to be able to inform you that I look upon him as extremely presumptuous, and vain beyond anything which I have ever found equalled, with no knowledge of business, but full of pride and liking flattery."
Ha. No wonder Fritz was in a good mood.
So then Broglie gets to Poland, where he meets Hanbury-Williams (renowned for his diplomatic skill, and too dissipated for serious business in England).
Now, Hanbury-Williams, currently envoy to Saxony, is trying to get Poland on the side of electing the Saxon candidate (August III's son) king of Poland, with the understanding that this will make it easy for Russian troops to march through Poland to interfere in German wars at need.
So H-W and Broglie are working at cross-purposes here. Here is Broglie's take on H-W as diplomat, quoted in both the book I'm reading and the bio of H-W Selena read a while back:
"My presence," he says, "kept him down a little at first, but this did not last long. He talks to everybody, has become more caressing than an Italian, and kisses the old and young nuncios all day long. I have often seen him talking in private to the young princes, whose influence is very trifling, and even to the Queen's waiting- women. He neglects nothing to captivate them, and publicly conversed for a whole hour before my eyes with the one who is at present in favour with her Majesty. All this hubbub gives me more amusement than uneasiness.
When one is quite sure of what one is about, and the cards are well sorted, one is really tranquil. I think he wants to appear so while really in the contrary case; but every one to his character, and that of this Minister is so impetuous that he cannot restrain himself. I hope to profit by his example. It seems to me that I become phlegmatic just in proportion as my adversary is fussy. I think I may say that I have maintained a very leisurely air during my sojourn at Bialystock; I flatter myself, however, that I have not lost time there."
Then there are intrigues in the Polish Diet! The upshot is that the French come out on top for the present: they manage to get a powerful noble to defect to the French side, and prevent an alliance with Austria and Russia. Then the Saxon court leaves (August III really really doesn't like Poland and wants to go back to Dresden asap), and with it H-W, but Broglie stays and intrigues some more.
There's this delightful part where Broglie's life is actually made more difficult by the defection and successful thwarting of the alliance, because the fear is that the French minister, M. de Saint Contest, might go, "Okay, problem solved, no more need for our intervention in Poland!" whereas Louis still very much wants intervention, because he's angling for the Prince de Conti to be elected king of Poland.
So Broglie writes a letter to the Prince de Conti going, "It's *really* hard for me to spin doctor this so that I neither let Saint Contest see what's really going on (or else he'll stop sending the subsidiesI need to do my work) nor arouse his suspicions that I'm hiding things from him, while simultaneously trying to carry out Your Majesty's orders. It's so difficult that I have to do things like this:
M. de Saint Contest, for example, informs me in his last letter that all the intelligence which he receives of the health of the King of Poland appears to announce his speedy decease, and desires me to report to him on this subject. If I had answered what I see and what I think, I should have written, 'the King is very well; he eats well and he looks well;' but, as it seems to me to suit the purpose of your Serene Highness that the death of this prince should just now be regarded as probable, I replied to the Minister, 'the King of Poland is not really ill at this moment, but he is so fat, and has such a short neck, that he appears to me to be threatened with apoplexy.' I have never been able to make out anything else to say, and on reflection I am afraid this may lead M. de Saint Contest, who has not a long neck, to think of his own conscience.
Conti: "My number one fear is that you will ask Saint Contest, who is after all your boss, for orders, which you would then have to follow, and those orders might contradict what the King and I want you to do. Whatever you do, don't say or ask anything that might lead to a direct order!"
Saint Contest: "I agree completely! That would lead to a lot of trouble, which I will try to avoid at all costs. However, you want me to adopt a stern tone to the Saxon minister [Mildred: Brühl?], which is completely contrary to what Saint Contest said to do, namely to be cautious and watchful. How do I do both?"
The amiable Prince, driven into his last entrenchment by good sense and plain evidence, accepted the situation with a good grace without replying. 'You scold me, monsieur,' wrote he, 'do as much as you like.'
This is as far as I've gotten, but more intrigues await!
Btw, apparently the 19th century author was not kidding about digging through your family papers being an excellent pastime; according to Wikipedia, he published a bunch more works after this:
De Broglie edited:
The Souvenirs of his father (1886, etc.)
The Mémoires de Talleyrand (1891, etc.)
Letters of the Duchess Albertine de Broglie (1896)
He published:
Le Secret du roi, Correspondance secrète de Louis XV avec ses agents diplomatiques, 1752–1774 (1878)
Frédéric II et Marie Thérèse (1883)
Frédéric II et Louis XV (1885)
Marie Thérèse Impératrice (1888)
Le Père Lacordaire (1889)
Maurice de Saxe et le marquis d'Argenson (1891)
La Paix d'Aix-la-Chapelle (1892)
L'Alliance autrichienne (1895)
La Mission de M. de Gontaut-Biron à Berlin (1896)
Voltaire avant et pendant la Guerre de Sept Ans (1898)
Saint Ambroise (trans., Margaret Maitland in the series, The Saints) (1899)
The experience must have gotten him addicted to writing history!
I suppose it's too much to hope that they were all translated into English for our entertainment. Especially the Fritz and MT ones, those have to be amazing in the same sense that Macaulay was amazing. ETA: and Voltaire, there must be some great passages in there.
Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-28 02:34 pm (UTC)Isn't the Comte de Broglie also the guy who wanted to get across the borders in late 1756/early 1757 after the war had already started and raised a great fuss? I dimly seem to recall Heinrich was told to deal with him and tried to do so diplomatically yet firmly. (I think that's in his AD's diaries?)
19th century Duc de Broglie the editor and writer: I think Orieux - who as you might recall doesn't list a single Fritz Only book in his bibliography, but several "Fritz and..." ones, among them "Frédéric et Louis XV", might have used Broglie's on Fritz and Louis. I'm intrigued that he wrote so much about MT as well, though, that is news to me! And yes, Voltaire before the 7 Years War. BTW, I would not be surprised if he shares or is even the origin of Orieux' "Fredersdorf was Fritz' secretary who hated Voltaire" description if that's the case. (Since Voltaire himself did list some of Fredersdorf's actual jobs in his pamphlets, of which "secretary" wasn't one.)
Working for Louis XV: what a headache with the contradictions. We should do a poll: which 18th century monarch is your worst boss to work for if you're an enterprising dipolomat?
Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-28 02:44 pm (UTC)I have no memory of this and didn't find it when searching for previous mentions of "Broglie" through salon before doing this write-up, but I haven't read Donnersmarck and have forgotten most of what I read of Ziebura, so you could be right!
ETA: Looking ahead in the table of contents in The King's Secret, I see "Count de Broglie wishes to visit the Camp at Pirna-The King of Prussia refuses him a Safe Conduct-He endeavours to pass the Prussian Lines, and is taken-"
So yes! You are remembering correctly!
Also, while Orieux doesn't record having used the 19th century Duc de Broglie as a source, the author(s) of the H-W bio record cite only the Comte de Broglie's dispatches in footnotes, but Le Secret du Roi as well.
I think Orieux - who as you might recall doesn't list a single Fritz Only book in his bibliography, but several "Fritz and..." ones, among them "Frédéric et Louis XV", might have used Broglie's on Fritz and Louis. I'm intrigued that he wrote so much about MT as well, though, that is news to me!
I was thinking the same thing! I was wondering if these were the "Fritz and..." books Orieux had used, but I didn't check.
...Okay, I just searched through the digitized file as well as checking the bibliography, and no mention of Broglie. Orieux still might have read them, though.
Working for Louis XV: what a headache with the contradictions.
Stay tuned: more contradictions coming! It gets better. (Part of the reason it's slow going is that I'm trying to read other works, like the H-W bio, treating the same topics, for a compare-and-contrast...and of course I'm trying to read 6 other works related to Polish and Saxon history, which is how I got sucked into the King's Secret in the first place.)
Also, something I meant to mention about our author the Duc de Broglie: he is the grandson of Madame de Staël, through his mother's side.
Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-28 09:18 pm (UTC)Saint Contest: "I agree completely! That would lead to a lot of trouble, which I will try to avoid at all costs. However, you want me to adopt a stern tone to the Saxon minister [Mildred: Brühl?], which is completely contrary to what Saint Contest said to do, namely to be cautious and watchful. How do I do both?"
That's the Comte de Broglie speaking, obviously.
Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-29 08:52 am (UTC)I feel like there could also be cases where it would not redound to the honour of those ancestors, depending on what those ancestors were up to.
Anyway, wow, the difficulties of having two bosses with opposing goals...
Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-29 02:56 pm (UTC)This is very true! When I was trying to get my hands on the Keith papers,
I wonder if Broglie would take the same stance toward that, though, as he does toward his constant trashing of Louis:
[Praise for the Comte de Broglie.] Unfortunately, I cannot say so much for the other personages who figure alongside of him, and especially for Louis XV., whose reputation (which had nothing to lose) will not gain, I fear, by the new light that is thrown upon it. I have not thought it right to suppress any of the miserable truths revealed by the documents, and I am under no apprehension lest a true picture should harm the great memories of the French monarchy. An institution such as that monarchy, which counts ten centuries of duration and of glory, is strong enough to bear the full light of history; and its discriminating admirers (I hope I am of the number) have no interest in disguising either the faults of the sorry monarch who precipitated its fall, or the evils of that arbitrary power which too often violated its principle and impaired its beneficence.
So maybe Broglie would find some way to spin doctor a less than glorious ancestry!
P.S. I was reading further along, and I find it absolutely hilarious that he devotes this entire section to "The Diplomatic Revolution was not Madame de Pompadour's fault, *unfortunately*."
Heaven forbid that I should plead the cause of Madame de Pompadour, or even that I should invoke extenuating circumstances on her behalf. If she was not on that one occasion so guilty as she was said to be, she was indisputably guilty on so many others, and her mere existence, the fact that her worthless and contemptible name has been mentioned in the annals of the French monarchy, is of itself so great a scandal, that no severity with respect to her can ever
appear excessive.
and
It is evident, therefore, that Frederick had made up his mind from the first: the Treaty of Westminster, with all its political consequences, was his own doing, and he alone is responsible for it before history. The truth tends also--and I am sorry for it, for the sake of morality--to the exculpation of Madame de Pompadour.
Tell us how you really feel, Duc de Broglie! (The guy is virtually incapable of getting through a paragraph without offering up his strongly worded opinion--a bit like your Lochiel bio's author.)
Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-29 05:04 pm (UTC)Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-29 05:07 pm (UTC)Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-30 10:27 am (UTC)Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-31 02:12 pm (UTC)Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-07-31 04:11 pm (UTC)Well, Louis is letting the (French) side down. Plus I think he never had much partisans. Even people who hate on Louis Quatorze for all the wars acknowledge that the Sun King made all other princes imitate him and managed to not just culturally but politically dominate Europe for most of his reign. And poor Louis XVI gets credit even among Republican minded later historians (if not his contemporaries) for having been without personal vices and dying nobly and bravely after surprising everyone with a spirited defense in his trial. Plus he very clearly inherited the mess his predecessors created and really would have had to be a genius to manage. But Louis XV neither had his great grandfather's tremendous energy, work willingness and charisma nor his grandson's personal virtues. Instead, he's the typical rich kid who fucks up with the inherited wealth without contributing anything of his own. (I mean, even culturally speaking - Madame de Pompadour gets the credit for the various styles she created and porcellain and silk manufacturers she supported, and of course Louis XV's time saw some of the superstars of French literature at their peak, but he had so absolutely nothing to do with the later that it's the Age of Voltaire in French, not the Age of Louis XV. So Broglie is just following well trodden footsteps when taking shots at him.
I'm also reminded of Orieux being frustrated that Voltaire had the love/hate relationship with Fritz and not Louis because in his French pov, it ought to have been Louis, except Louis never even hated Voltaire, he just was monumentally uninterested.
Never underestimate everyone catching sexual morals in the 19th century, though. When I read up on the 1848 revolutions, mistresses came up only to be booed and hissed at like there was no tomorrow. And remember the delusion about many chaste Prussians in Fritzian times that made Schmidt-Lötzen regretfully conclude in his Lehndorff preface that based on this diary, extramarital sex of all types didn't just start being practiced by the aristocracy when FW2 was King.
Re: The King's Secret
Date: 2023-08-01 01:50 am (UTC)(You *will* see it, once I'm ready to do my write-up on August III, but I'm still trying to get my hands on a copy of his most recent biography.)