![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Historical Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 47
We haven't had a new post since before December 25, so obligatory Yuletide link to this hilarious story of Frederick the Great babysitting his bratty little brother, with bonus Fritz/Fredersdorf!
1764-1772 Foreign policy: France: Chaos at Home and Abroad
Then in 1770, Choiseul is dismissed. The Duc de Broglie would like to blame du Barry, but much like he wants to blame Pompadour for the Treaty of Westminster and Diplomatic Revolution, he can't. But he wants you to know he's not happy about it:
In the same way as Madame de Pompadour passes for the sole author of the change in foreign policy which took place in 1756, so on Madame du Barry, in her turn, is laid all the responsibility of the ministerial revolution of 1771. I have proved that the former notion was, if not altogether false, at least exaggerated. It is very distasteful to me to have to take up twice the cause of clients of this order, and I do not wish to clear Madame du Berry in the eyes of posterity any more than Madame de Pompadour, or, above all, the King of France, for having on two occasions yielded to such base influences. But besides that the truth is always good to know, and that the greatest criminals have a right to justice, it is also important for the sake of the morality of history to recognise that, while Divine Providence, for the chastisement of nations, sometimes abandons power to unworthy hands, such vile instruments are not suffered to become the primary and real cause of great political revolutions.
Yep. That's the Duc de Broglie, all right.
He goes on to enumerate all of Choiseul's many enemies, and Louis XV's disapproval of Choiseul's support of the Confederation of Bar, as the real cause for Choiseul's fall. Du Barry played only a small role:
The unexpected assistance afforded by Madame du Barry to the opposing faction, was rendered to them against the will of that ignoble ally, and in spite of herself. It is as certain as anything can be that it was Choiseul who provoked Madame du Barry. When that base and insignificant creature was taken out of obscurity by a caprice, she was only too happy to escape from poverty and nothingness; she did not dream of playing a political part. If she had been left to enjoy the unhoped - for reward of her beauty in peace, if they had let the King satiate his passion to the point of disgust, this incident of vulgar debauchery would not have brought about a ministerial revolution. lt was Choiseul and his followers who declared themselves her enemies, who raised an outcry, and proclaimed to France and even to Europe, that the King had picked the object of his new passion out of the gutter. Indignation was legitimate, and the scandal was only too patent. But was it for Choiseul, the favourite of Madame de Pompadour, to talk so loud? No doubt there was not an exact parity between the cases, and in passing from the daughter of Lenormant the farmer-general, to Lange the prostitute, the King made several steps downward in the scale of immorality and indecency. But are not these gradual descents in the very nature of such shameful propensities? Did not Choiseul, who was neither strict nor simple, know very well that age degrades those whom in this respect it does not correct, and that of all the forms of vice, senile debauchery seeks the most repulsive? This is a sad truth, of which Madame de Pompadour was not ignorant, since it was she herself who had carefully trained the purveyors of the King's pleasures, and had set them on that line of search which had led them to Madame du Barry. After having studied with so much docility in such a school, Choiseul had no right to be scrupulous. I am quite sure that he did not at all expect to become so himself, and that if it had been predicted to him some years previously that he should resign power from sheer modesty and by an excess of scruple concerning morals, he would have laughed at such a horoscope.
Sorry, I know that whenever it comes to the Duc de Broglie, I start quoting entire pages. But I just can't help enjoying his prose whilst mocking his opinions.
Shortly after Choiseul's dismissal, Gustav shows up from Sweden:
I have described the perilous position of the little kingdom of Sweden at this time – rent, like Poland, by internal dissensions, and already coveted by Frederick and by Catherine.
I have already said that the brave Ulrica, the worthy sister of Frederick, had been unable to rouse up her indolent husband to the point of resisting the ambition of her brother; but she was at least desirous of securing a better future for her son. At Choiseul's invitation, she had sent the young prince to Paris, in order to concert measures for bringing his subjects to reason, to be taken on his accession. Gustavus arrived just in time to find the Minister in exile, and the Ministry in abeyance. He looked about in vain for somebody to speak to. As he was not deficient in intelligence, and had the best of guides in Count de Creutz, his Ambassador, he did not allow himself to be disheartened at first, and he turned his time to advantage. In default of political authority, which was in eclipse, he paid his court to intellectual authority. He visited the scientific or literary establishments, the theatres and cafés, and went to the Assembly to receive the compliments of D'Alembert. In a word, following the example of his uncle until he could fight him, he established friendly relations with the dispensers of fame. These tactics succeeded as well with him as with Frederick, although he employed them for a diametrically opposite purpose. Gustavus wanted to try a coup d'état at Stockholm in order to rescue his subjects from anarchy. Frederick kept up disturbances at Warsaw in order to prepare for conquest. The philosophers, who were little scrupulous about the quality of the incense burned in their honour, were ready to applaud both the one and the other operation, provided an equal amount of compliments, or, in some cases, more substantial presents, in exchange for their approbation, were bestowed on themselves.
Ouch.
Diderot: I hated Fritz! I hated Fritz so much I provoked him into writing an anonymous pamphlet against me just 3 years later!
The Duc de Broglie criticizes the French court for paying so much attention to Gustav at the expense of Poland, where the First Polish Partition was playing out. Broglie says that the Comte was trying and trying to bring everyone's attention to the imminent crisis, but Choiseul's dismissal and the ensuing political paralysis were partly responsible for France's inability to do anything about it.
Choiseul's eventual successor, d'Aiguillon, sees what's going on in Poland and even tries to break up the Austria-Prussia-Russia Mafia by mending fences with Fritz, but to no avail. The Duc de Broglie relentlessly mocks d'Aiguillon's fruitless efforts. The Polish Partition proceeds without any challenge from France.
Much like FW2's invasion of the Netherlands a decade later, France's inability to prevent a hostile takeover of a country they have a vested interest in protecting highlights their weakness and drives down their reputation, further weakening the monarchy and contributing to the French Revolution. The French monarchy in the second half of the 18th century reminds me of a Jenga tower, where one block after another is pulled out, until the whole thing comes crashing down.
Re: 1764-1772 Foreign policy: France: Chaos at Home and Abroad
What fascinates me here is the snobbery allied to the late 19th century very different to the 18th century morality. Because evidently Louis XV had more than just these two as mistresses, it's in the nickname. Even discounting the teenage girls who never made it to official Maitresse en titre status, or to any kind of official mistress, just not en titre status. Louis XV had official mistresses pre Pompadour. But I am assuming the reason why these ladies are not considered as "base" is.... drumroll...they were of impeccably noble descent. Reinette was, shock horror, of non-noble middle class origin, and Du Barry started out even lower on the social scale, in addition the the prostitution.
I mean, good on the Duc to insist despite his biases that neither Pompadour nor Dubarry are the primary culprits here, which is more than one can say for other historians of the era, but good grief.
The philosophers, who were little scrupulous about the quality of the incense burned in their honour, were ready to applaud both the one and the other operation, provided an equal amount of compliments, or, in some cases, more substantial presents, in exchange for their approbation, were bestowed on themselves.
Valid zinger (except for Diderot). Mind you, it is also very French to only count the French philosophers as philosophers...