Academic literature on the topic 'Reign of Louis XIV of France, 1643-1715'

Throughout its centuries-old history, France has taken part in many wars. Its expansion was especially active in the XVII-XIX centuries. In the modern era, namely during the reign of King Louis XIV (1643-1715), France pursued an aggressive foreign policy, trying to annex not only the territories of neighboring states, but also to extend its influence throughout Europe. The consequence was the need to improve the system of state awards for the Royal Army officer corps. Based on the analysis of previously published documents, biographical reference books, scientific monographs and articles, this article examines the prerequisites for the creation, statute and pages of biographies of the first cavaliers of the Military Order of St. Louis (1693–1715).

An analysis of Swiss, German and French biographical directories and previously published studies made it possible to summarize in the article the information about the Swiss units of the Military House of the King of France in the era of Louis XIV (1643–1715). This work may be useful to researchers, teachers, post graduates students, and students of humanitarian educational institutions studying such subjects as "General History", "Military History", "History of International Relations".

Although the european eighteenth century was long called the “age of Voltaire” (at least in textbooks), it was also an age of war. Courts and cities were undergoing a progressive pacification, as Norbert Elias has argued, but elsewhere the “civilizing process” was more bellicose. To finance the expansionist wars of Louis XIV, whose reign ended in 1715, and those of Louis XV, including the War of Austrian Succession (1740–48) and the Seven Years' War (1756–63), the French state expended two-thirds of its revenues on war (Meyer 57). Despite the Anglomania that marked progressive intellectual and literary circles in France around mid-century, between 1689 and 1815 France and England were officially at war for sixty-two years, not including minor conflicts. Against this backdrop, the image of Voltaire is that of an unflagging pacifist. Standing for all wars, the fictional war between the Abares and the Bulgares in which the naive hero of Voltaire's Candide finds himself caught up is described by the text's narrator, in a bitingly ironic oxymoron, as “a heroic slaughter” (114). War for Voltaire represented yet another instance of infamous unreason, odious intolerance, and despicable evil. It was the collective, generalized form of the l'infâme (“the despicable”), against which he publicly and tirelessly railed. The phrase écrasez l'infâme (“crush the despicable”), appended to his letters beginning in the early 1760s, signified the Enlightenment project of rooting out error, superstition, and intolerance by means of reasoned argument, common sense, and often a healthy dose of sharp irony. Quickly becoming a battle cry, penned in condensed, symbolic form as “ÉCRLINF,” the phrase had preserved all its caustic energy when, a century later, Friedrich Nietzsche inserted it throughout his Ecco Homo. Voltaire's attempts to stamp out this evil took local forms, such as the highly public letter-writing campaigns he mounted to spark indignation and obtain justice for the victims of intolerance, as in the causes célèbres involving the protestant Calas and Sirven families, the young chevalier de La Barre, and Lally-Tollendal.

RésuméAu contraire d’autres mouvements équivalents, lemouvement scientifique né dans l’Europe du xviie siècle s’inscrivit dans la durée au lieu de s'essouffler au bout de quelques générations. Afin de comprendre cette persistance, cet article s’appuie sur le cas de la France au temps de Louis XIV (r. 1643-1715). Il soutient que les hommes de lettres ont joué un rôle crucial dans la légitimation du mouvement scientifique naissant. Ces hommes de lettres, qui jouissaient d’une affinité sociale, intellectuelle et esthétique avec la « nouvelle science », tissèrent le récit du progrès scientifique en mettant en avant l’idée d’une rupture radicale avec le passé. Défenseurs des idées modernes ou des modèles classiques, ils diffusèrent ce récit au sein de l'élite culturelle, mobilisant penseurs, découvertes et instruments scientifiques de leur époque à travers des débats variés. Ce faisant, ils forgèrent le récit d'une « révolution scientifique », qui exerça une profonde influence sur l’histoire sociale et culturelle de la science moderne.

In contrast to other scientific renaissances, the culture forged in seventeenth-century Europe became an enduring phenomenon rather than dissipating within a few generations. In an effort to understand the persistence of European science, this article uses the case study of France under Louis XIV (r. 1643–1715) to argue that men of letters played a crucial role in the legitimation of the nascent scientific movement. These men of letters enjoyed a social, intellectual, and aesthetic affinity with the “new science” and developed a narrative of scientific change that foregrounded the idea of a radical break with the past. They diffused this narrative among the cultural elite, mobilizing recent thinkers, discoveries, and scientific instruments as they participated in wide-ranging debates, regardless of whether they supported modern innovations or classical models. In so doing, they invented the narrative of a “scientific revolution,” a construction that has wielded a profound influence over the social and cultural history of European science.

There is a disparity between expectations that the members of a community will work together for the common good — and the stark reality that human beings form into groups, or parties, to engage in conflict with each other. This is particularly the case in so-called popular governments that include some wider political involvement by the people. In ancient Greece stasis, or endemic conflict between the democratic and oligarchic elements of a city was very common. Likewise, the late Roman Republic maintained a division between the populares and the optimates. In both cases there was violence as both sides battled for dominance. For example, in late republican Rome street gangs formed that employed intimidation and violence for political ends.In seventeenth century England there was conflict between those who favoured royal authority and those who wished to see more power devolved to parliament, which led to Civil War in the 1640s. Yet the English ideal, as expressed by The Book of Common Prayer (1549; and other editions) was that the country be quietly governed. It seemed perverse that the members of the body politic should be in conflict with each other. By the late seventeenth century England was still riven by conflict between two groups which became designated as the Whigs and the Tories. The divisions were both political and religious. Most importantly, these divisions were expressed at the local level, in such things as the struggle for the control of local corporations. They were not just political but could also be personal and often turned nasty as families contended for local control. The mid seventeenth century had been a time of considerable violence and warfare, not only in Europe and England but across Eurasia, including the fall of the Ming dynasty in China (Parker). This violence occurred in the wake of a cooler climate change, bringing in its wake crop failure followed by scarcity, hunger, disease and vicious warfare. Millions of people died.Conditions improved in the second half of the seventeenth century and countries slowly found their way to a new relative stability. The Qing created a new imperial order in China. In France, Louis XIV survived the Fronde and his answer to the rage and divisions of that time was the imposition of an autocratic and despotic state that simply prohibited the existence of divisions. Censorship and the inquisition flourished in Catholic Europe ensuring that dissidence would not evolve into violence fuelled by rage. In 1685, Louis expelled large numbers of Protestants from France.Divisions did not disappear in England at the end of the Civil War and the Restoration of Charles II. Initially, it appears that Charles sought to go down the French route. There was a regulation of ideas as new laws meant that the state licensed all printed works. There was an attempt to impose a bureaucratic authoritarian state, culminating in the short reign of James II (Pincus, Ertman). But its major effect, since the heightened fear of James’ Catholicism in Protestant England, was to stoke the ‘rage of party’ between those who supported this hierarchical model of social order and those who wanted political power less concentrated (Knights Representation, Plumb).The issue was presumed to be settled in 1688 when James was chased from the throne, and replaced by the Dutchman William and his wife Mary. In the official language of the day, liberty had triumphed over despotism and the ‘ancient constitution’ of the English had been restored to guarantee that liberty.However, three major developments were going on in England by the late seventeenth century: The first is the creation of a more bureaucratic centralised state along the lines of the France of Louis XIV. This state apparatus was needed to collect the taxes required to finance and administer the English war machine (Pincus). The second is the creation of a genuinely popular form of government in the wake of the expulsion of James and his replacement by William of Orange (Ertman). This means regular parliaments that are elected every three years, and also a free press to scrutinise political activities. The third is the development of financial institutions to enable the war to be conducted against France, which only comes to an end in 1713 (Pincus). Here, England followed the example of the Netherlands. There is the establishment of the bank of England in 1694 and the creation of a national debt. This meant that those involved in finance could make big profits out of financing a war, so a new moneyed class developed. England's TransformationIn the 1690s as England is transformed politically, religiously and economically, this develops a new type of society that unifies strong government with new financial institutions and arrangements. In this new political configuration, the big winners are the new financial elites and the large (usually Whig) aristocratic landlords, who had the financial resources to benefit from it. The losers were the smaller landed gentry who were taxed to pay for the war. They increasingly support the Tories (Plumb) who opposed both the war and the new financial elites it helped to create; leading to the 1710 election that overwhelmingly elected a Tory government led by Harley and Bolingbroke. This government then negotiated the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713, with the Whigs retaining a small minority.History indicates that the post-1688 developments do not so much quell the ‘rage of party’ as encourage it and fan the fires of conflict and discontent. Parliamentary elections were held every three years and could involve costly, and potentially financially ruinous, contests between families competing for parliamentary representation. As these elections involved open voting and attempts to buy votes through such means as wining and dining, they could be occasions for riotous behaviour. Regular electoral contests, held in an electorate that was much larger than it would be one hundred years later, greatly heightened the conflicts and kept the political temperature at a high.Fig. 1: "To Him Pudel, Bite Him Peper"Moreover, there was much to fuel this conflict and to ‘maintain the rage’: First, the remodelling of the English financial system combined with the high level of taxation imposed largely on the gentry fuelled a rage amongst this group. This new world of financial investments was not part of their world. They were extremely suspicious of wealth not derived from landed property and sought to limit the power of those who held such wealth. Secondly, the events of 1688 split the Anglican Church in two (Pincus). The opponents of the new finance regimes tended also to be traditional High Church Anglicans who feared the newer, more tolerant government policy towards religion. Finally, the lapsing of the Licensing Act in 1695 meant that the English state was no longer willing to control the flow of information to the public (Kemp). The end result was that England in the 1690s became something akin to a modern public culture in which there was a relatively free flow of political information, constant elections held with a limited, but often substantial franchise, that was operating out of a very new commercial and financial environment. These political divisions were now deeply entrenched and very real passion animated each side of the political divide (Knights Devil).Under these circumstances, it was not possible simply to stamp out ‘the rage’ by the government repressing the voices of dissent. The authoritarian model for creating public conformity was not an option. A mechanism for lowering the political and religious temperature needed to arise in this new society where power and knowledge were diffused rather than centrally concentrated. Also, the English were aided by the return to a more benign physical environment. In economic terms it led to what Fischer terms the equilibrium of the Enlightenment. The wars of Louis XIV were a hangover from the earlier more desperate age; they prolonged the crisis of that age. Nevertheless, the misery of the earlier seventeenth century had passed. The grim visions of Calvinism (and Jansenism) had lost their plausibility. So the excessive violence of the 1640s was replaced by a more tepid form of political resistance, developing into the first modern expression of populism. So, the English achieved what Plumb calls ‘political stability’ were complex (1976), but relied on two things. The first was limiting the opportunity for political activity and the second was labelling political passion as a form of irrational behaviour – as an unsatisfactory or improper way of conducting oneself in the world. Emotions became an indulgence of the ignorant, the superstitious and the fanatical. This new species of humanity was the gentleman, who behaved in a reasonable and measured way, would express a person commensurate with the Enlightenment.This view would find its classic expression over a century later in Macaulay’s History of England, where the pre-1688 English squires are now portrayed in all their semi-civilised glory, “his ignorance and uncouthness, his low tastes and gross phrases, would, in our time, be considered as indicating a nature and a breeding thoroughly plebeian” (Macaulay 244). While the Revolution of 1688 is usually portrayed as a triumph of liberty, as stated, recent scholarship (Pincus, Ertman) emphasises how the attempts by both Charles and James to build a more bureaucratic state were crucial to the development of eighteenth century England. England was not really a land of liberty that kept state growth in check, but the English state development took a different path to statehood from countries such as France, because it involved popular institutions and managed to eliminate many of the corrupt practices endemic to a patrimonial regime.The English were as interested in ‘good police’, meaning the regulation of moral behaviour, as any state on the European continent, but their method of achievement was different. In the place of bureaucratic regulation, the English followed another route, later be termed in the 1760s as ‘civilisation’ (Melleuish). So, the Whigs became the party of rationality and reasonableness, and the Whig regime was Low Church, which was latitudinarian and amenable to rationalist Christianity. Also, the addition of the virtue and value of politeness and gentlemanly behaviour became the antidote to the “rage of party’”(Knights Devil 163—4) . The Whigs were also the party of science and therefore, followed Lockean philosophy. They viewed themselves as ‘reasonable men’ in opposition to their more fanatically inclined opponents. It is noted that any oligarchy, can attempt to justify itself as an ‘aristocracy’, in the sense of representing the ‘morally’ best people. The Whig aristocracy was more cosmopolitan, because its aristocrats had often served the rulers of countries other than England. In fact, the values of the Whig elite were the first expression of the liberal cosmopolitan values which are now central to the ideology of contemporary elites. One dimension of the Whig/Tory split is that while the Whig aristocracy had a cosmopolitan outlook as more proto-globalist, the Tories remained proto-nationalists. The Whigs became simultaneously the party of liberty, Enlightenment, cosmopolitanism, commerce and civilised behaviour. This is why liberty, the desire for peace and ‘sweet commerce’ came to be identified together. The Tories, on the other hand, were the party of real property (that is to say land) so their national interest could easily be construed by their opponents as the party of obscurantism and rage. One major incident illustrates how this evolved.The Trial of the High Church Divine Henry Sacheverell In 1709, the High Church Divine Henry Sacheverell preached a fiery sermon attacking the Whig revolutionary principles of resistance, and advocated obedience and unlimited submission to authority. Afterwards, for his trouble he was impeached before the House of Lords by the Whigs for high crimes and misdemeanours (Tryal 1710). As Mark Knights (6) has put it, one of his major failings was his breaching of the “Whig culture of politeness and moderation”. The Whigs also disliked Sacheverell for his charismatic appeal to women (Nicholson). He was found guilty and his sermons ordered to be burned by the hangman. But Sacheverell became simultaneously a martyr and a political celebrity leading to a mass outpouring of printed material (Knights Devil 166—186). Riots broke out in London in the wake of the trial’s verdict. For the Whigs, this stood as proof of the ‘rage’ that lurked in the irrational world of Toryism. However, as Geoffrey Holmes has demonstrated, these riots were not aimless acts of mob violence but were directed towards specific targets, in particular the meeting houses of Dissenters. History reveals that the Sacheverell riots were the last major riots in England for almost seventy years until the Lord Gordon anti-Catholic riots of 1780. In the short term they led to an overwhelming Tory victory at the 1710 elections, but that victory was pyrrhic. With the death of Queen Anne, followed by the accession of the Hanoverians to the throne, the Whigs became the party of government. Some Tories, such as Bolingbroke, panicked, and fled to France and the Court of the Pretender. The other key factor was the Treaty of Utrecht, brokered on England’s behalf by the Tory government of Harley and Bolingbroke that brought the Civil war to an end in 1713. England now entered an era of peace; there remained no longer the need to raise funds to conduct a war. The war had forced the English state to both to consolidate and to innovate.This can be viewed as the victory of the party of ‘politeness and moderation’ and the Enlightenment and hence the effective end of the ‘rage of party’. Threats did remain by the Pretender’s (James III) attempt to retake the English throne, as happened in 1715 and 1745, when was backed by the barbaric Scots.The Whig ascendancy, the ascendancy of a minority, was to last for decades but remnants of the Tory Party remained, and England became a “one-and one-half” party regime (Ertman 222). Once in power, however, the Whigs utilised a number of mechanisms to ensure that the age of the ‘rage of party’ had come to an end and would be replaced by one of politeness and moderation. As Plumb states, they gained control of the “means of patronage” (Plumb 161—88), while maintaining the ongoing trend, from the 1680s of restricting those eligible to vote in local corporations, and the Whigs supported the “narrowing of the franchise” (Plumb 102—3). Finally, the Septennial Act of 1717 changed the time between elections from three years to seven years.This lowered the political temperature but it did not eliminate the Tories or complaints about the political, social and economic path that England had taken. Rage may have declined but there was still a lot of dissent in the newspapers, in particular in the late 1720s in the Craftsman paper controlled by Viscount Bolingbroke. The Craftsman denounced the corrupt practices of the government of Sir Robert Walpole, the ‘robinocracy’, and played to the prejudices of the landed gentry. Further, the Bolingbroke circle contained some major literary figures of the age; but not a group of violent revolutionaries (Kramnick). It was true populism, from ideals of the Enlightenment and a more benign environment.The new ideal of ‘politeness and moderation’ had conquered English political culture in an era of Whig dominance. This is exemplified in the philosophy of David Hume and his disparagement of enthusiasm and superstition, and the English elite were also not fond of emotional Methodists, and Charles Wesley’s father had been a Sacheverell supporter (Cowan 43). A moderate man is rational and measured; the hoi polloi is emotional, faintly disgusting, and prone to rage.In the End: A Reduction of Rage Nevertheless, one of the great achievements of this new ideal of civility was to tame the conflict between political parties by recognising political division as a natural part of the political process, one that did not involve ‘rage’. This was the great achievement of Edmund Burke who, arguing against Bolingbroke’s position that 1688 had restored a unified political order, and hence abolished political divisions, legitimated such party divisions as an element of a civilised political process involving gentlemen (Mansfield 3). The lower orders, lacking the capacity to live up to this ideal, were prone to accede to forces other than reason, and needed to be kept in their place. This was achieved through a draconian legal code that punished crimes against property very severely (Hoppit). If ‘progress’ as later described by Macaulay leads to a polite and cultivated elite who are capable of conquering their rage – so the lower orders need to be repressed because they are still essentially barbarians. This was echoed in Macaulay’s contemporary, John Stuart Mill (192) who promulgated Orientals similarly “lacked the virtues” of an educated Briton.In contrast, the French attempt to impose order and stability through an authoritarian state fared no better in the long run. After 1789 it was the ‘rage’ of the ‘mob’ that helped to bring down the French Monarchy. At least, that is how the new cadre of the ‘polite and moderate’ came to view things.ReferencesBolingbroke, Lord. Contributions to the Craftsman. Ed. Simon Varney. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1982.Cowan, Brian. “The Spin Doctor: Sacheverell’s Trial Speech and Political Performance in the Divided Society.” Faction Displayed: Reconsidering the Impeachment of Dr Henry Sacheverell. Ed. Mark Knights. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. 28-46.Ertman, Thomas. Birth of the Leviathan: Building States and Regimes in Medieval and Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1997.Fischer, David Hackett. The Great Wave: Price Revolutions and the Rhythm of History, New York: Oxford UP, 1996.Holmes, Geoffrey. “The Sacheverell Riots: The Crowd and the Church in Early Eighteenth-Century London.” Past and Present 72 (Aug. 1976): 55-85.Hume, David. “Of Superstition and Enthusiasm.” Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1985. 73-9. Hoppit, Julian. A Land of Liberty? England 1689—1727, Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000.Kemp, Geoff. “The ‘End of Censorship’ and the Politics of Toleration, from Locke to Sacheverell.” Faction Displayed: Reconsidering the Impeachment of Dr Henry Sacheverell. Ed. Mark Knights. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. 47-68.Knights, Mark. Representation and Misrepresentation in Later Stuart Britain. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2005.———. The Devil in Disguise: Deception, Delusion, and Fanaticism in the Early English Enlightenment. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2011.———. “Introduction: The View from 1710.” Faction Displayed: Reconsidering the Impeachment of Dr Henry Sacheverell. Ed. Mark Knights. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. 1-15.Kramnick, Isaac. Bolingbroke & His Circle: The Politics of Nostalgia in the Age of Walpole. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1992.Macaulay, Thomas Babington. The History of England from the Accession of James II. London: Folio Society, 2009.Mansfield, Harvey. Statesmanship and Party Government: A Study of Burke and Bolingbroke. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1965.Melleuish, Greg. “Civilisation, Culture and Police.” Arts 20 (1998): 7-25.Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty, Representative Government, the Subjection of Women. London: Oxford UP, 1971.Nicholson, Eirwen. “Sacheverell’s Harlot’s: Non-Resistance on Paper and in Practice.” Faction Displayed: Reconsidering the Impeachment of Dr Henry Sacheverell. Ed. Mark Knights. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. 69-79.Parker, Geoffrey. Global Crisis: War, Climate Change & Catastrophe in the Seventeenth Century. New Haven: Yale UP, 2013.Pincus, Steve. 1688: The First Modern Revolution. New Haven: Yale UP, 2009.Plumb, John H. The Growth of Political Stability in England 1675–1725. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973.The Tryal of Dr Henry Sacheverell before the House of Peers, 1st edition. London: Jacob Tonson, 1710.

La integración de Cataluña en la monarquía francesa en 1641 abrió un período de convivencia entre dos mundos políticos. Para Francia, la incorporación de la nueva provincia tiene lugar en una sociedad enamorada del heroísmo. El reinado de Luis XIII parece ser la culminación de un proceso de reformulación del paradigma heroico: un modelo político y un referente ético nobiliario. La Guerra de España llevó la cultura heroica a su clímax. En particular, la proclamación del rey como soberano de Cataluña abre nuevos horizontes a este mundo imaginario, que moviliza también a los antiguos referentes mesiánicos. La historia de la compañía catalana producida por el séquito real ofrece una nueva perspectiva sobre la construcción de la imagen de Luis XIII. El horizonte catalán "completa" la construcción de su perfil heroico, y sirve de apoteosis, valorando el hecho de una muerte "sacrificial" como consecuencia de la presencia real en la sede de Perpiñán. Los virreyes se convertirán también en el centro de una narrativa heroica, protagonistas de una verdadera "epopeya catalana". Las luces y sombras de esta heroica experiencia política aparecen en el destino a veces trágico de estos representantes del rey, que deben hacer frente, además de a los retos militares y políticos de su cargo, a los equilibrios de poder en la corte. Por el lado catalán, la llegada de Luis XIII forma parte de la dinámica "revolucionaria" que se inició en 1640, cuando los líderes de la revuelta, que querían ser fieles al rey Felipe IV, formularon una historia capaz de domar acontecimientos que a veces se les escapaban. El horizonte de una providencial "restauración" de Cataluña está cerca. El "momento" republicano parece imposible de encontrar aquí, entre la interrupción formal de la jurisdicción de un rey y la aclamación del otro. A partir de entonces, un discurso providencial de restauración de la provincia se desarrolló a través de la realeza encarnada por un nuevo príncipe "mesías". La imagen del rey se convierte en un ideal sobre el que se proyectan expectativas políticas y por el que los propios líderes de la "revuelta" buscan justificarse. El rey se perdió la visita a Barcelona, justo antes de su muerte. El funeral real servirá para cristalizar esta historia y ofrecerá, a través de la imagen del rey "sacrificado" y "canonizado", un emblema del régimen francés en Cataluña.
L’intégration de la Catalogne dans la monarchie française, en 1641, ouvre une période de coexistence de deux univers politiques. Pour la France l’incorporation de la nouvelle province intervient dans une société éprise d’héroïsme. Le règne de Louis XIII apparaît comme la culmination d’un processus de reformulation du paradigme héroïque: modèle politique et référent étique nobiliaire. La guerre espagnole porte la culture héroïque à son paroxysme. Singulièrement la proclamation du roi comme souverain de Catalogne ouvre des nouveaux horizons à cet imaginaire mobilisant aussi des référents messianiques anciens. Le récit de l’entreprise catalane produit par l’entourage royal offre un nouveau regard sur la construction de l’image de Louis XIII. L’horizon catalan «achève» la construction de son profil héroïque, et lui sert d’apothéose, valorisant le fait d’une mort «sacrificielle» conséquence de la présence royale au siège de Perpignan. Les vice-rois deviendront aussi le centre d’un récit héroïque, protagonistes d’une vraie «épopée catalane». Les lumières et les ombres de cette expérience héroïque du politique apparaissent dans le destin, parfois tragique, de ces représentants du roi, qui doivent faire face, outre aux défis militaires et politiques relevant de sa charge, aux equilibres de pouvoir à la cour. Du côté catalan l’avénement de Louis XIII s’inscrit dans la dynamique «révolutionnaire» entamée en 1640. Le meneurs de la révolte, qui se veulent fidèles au roi, Philippe IV, formuleront un récit capable d’apprivoiser des événements parfois leur échappant. L’horizon d’une «restauration» providentielle de Catalogne intervient. Le «moment» républicain semble ici introuvable, entre l’interruption formelle de la juridiction d’un roi et l’acclamation de l’autre. Des lors se développe un discours providentiel de restauration de la province à travers la royauté incarnée par un nouveau prince «messie». L’image du roi devient un idéal sur lequel l’on projette les attentes politiques et par lequel les propres dirigeants de la «révolte» cherchent à se justifier. La visite manquée du roi à Barcelone, précédée de peu à sa mort. Les funérailles royales serviront à la cristallisation de ce récit, et offriront par l’image du roi «sacrifié» et «canonisé», un emblème pour le régime français en Catalogne.
The integration of Catalonia into the French Monarchy, in 1641, opens a period of coexistence of two political universes. In France, The incorporation of the new province arrives in a social context under the influence of an strong culture of heroism. Under Louis XIII’s reign culmines a processus of reformulation of the heroic paradigm: a political model of gouvernement and an ethical referent for the French nobility. The heroic culture is taken to its paroxysm when the Spanish war begins. Specially the proclamation of the king as sovereign of Catalonia opens new horizons for this imaginary, mobilizing also old messianic referents. The narrative of the catalan entreprise developed by the royal entourage offers a new perspective of the Louis XIII’s image making processus. The catalan completes the built of the king’s heroical profile, and serves to make his apotheosis, emphasizing the fact of a sacrificial death as a consequence of the royal presence in the Perpignan’s siege. Vice-rois become the center of an heroical narrative also. They are protagonists of a true «catalan epic». The lights and darkness of this heroical experience of Politics, appear throw the destiny, sometimes tragic, of these king’s agents (and images). They have to face, besides the military and political challenges, to the power’s struggles at court. By the catalan side, the accession of king Louis XIII has to be considered in the «revolutionary» context of 1640. The leaders of the revolt, who revendique to be loyal to their king, Philip IV, build a narrative able to tame serious adverse events, that sometimes escape to their control. The horizon of a providential «restauration» of Catalonia appears in this narrative. Republican time seems here «introuvable», between the broken of one king’s jurisdiction and the other king proclamation. Since then a providential propaganda speech about the restauration of the Principality throw a royalty incarnated by a new prince «messiah». The new king’s figure becomes one idealized image where Catalans look to project their political expectatives. Also a way for the catalan leaders to justify himself. The failed royal visit to Barcelone precedes for little the king’s death. The royal funerals serves to the crystallization of these narratives: they offer the image of an «sacrificed» king, who is also a saint. He becomes the real emblem of the franco-catalan regime.

Cette thèse a pour objet la mise en série d'une dizaine de récits de conjuration (Sarasin, Retz, Saint-Réal, Vertot, Le Noble…) publiés sous Louis XIV en dépit de l'interdit pesant sur ce sujet. Bien que disparates génériquement, ces ouvrages partagent une esthétique paradoxale fondée sur une distribution ambivalente de l'éloge et du blâme, qui rend leur sens politique difficile à établir. Pour ce faire, une première partie reconstitue les contextes historique, théorique et esthétique de l'évocation des conjurations, faisant surgir diverses facettes d'un même paradoxe : si le corpus voit le jour au moment où les conjurations disparaissent des pratiques, si la portée critique des conjurations pointe jusque dans les doctrines politiques de l'absolutisme, du point de vue esthétique, la topique en question n'est pas moins pourvoyeuse de paradoxes puisqu'elle permet de juxtaposer éloge du roi et éloge des conjurés afin de délivrer un double enseignement moral destiné aux sujets comme au prince. C'est donc sur le plan esthétique qu'il faut chercher la clef de lecture du corpus. Pour ce faire, après avoir souligné, dans une seconde partie, l'idiosyncrasie des textes et montré que, malgré les influences de l'historiographie (notamment Salluste) et de la nouvelle historique, on ne saurait parler d'un (sous-)genre du récit de conjuration, l'enquête suggère que la cohérence du corpus tient, d'une part, à une esthétique de l'éloge paradoxal en faveur de la concorde civile et, d'autre part, aux vertus apaisantes d'un récit à suspens qui exploite chez le lecteur la hantise de la chute des monarchies et le plaisir de jouer à se faire peur, pour louer la stabilité d'un grand règne
In my thesis, I analyse a series of conspiracy narratives published in the reign of Louis XIV by such authors as Sarasin, Retz, Saint-Réal, Vertot, Le Noble, etc. Though pertaining to a variety of literary genres, the corpus texts share a paradoxical aesthetics alternating between praise and condemnation, rendering their political significance difficult to decipher. To this end, the first part of my thesis reconstitutes the historical, theoretical and aesthetical context in which conspiracies occurred. This approach highlights various aspects of the same paradox : from historical point of view, the corpus texts appeared when the nobility tended to disregard conspiracy as a means of action ; in the history of ideas, philosophers could not always keep the theory of absolutism clear of the compromising topic of conspiracy and, in literature, praise for the king and praise for conspirators were often intertwined to convey a dual message of virtue and obedience. Thus it is at the level of aesthetics that an answer to the political ambiguity of the corpus texts should be sought. With this in mind, in the second part of my thesis, I analyse firstly the specificity of each text and show that despite their link to history or the historical novel, they do not form a genre apart. Instead, the coherence of the corpus texts is to be found in the aesthetics of paradoxical praise for peace and in the reassuring virtues of narratives which, to the readers’ delight, use the threat of the fall of empires as a means of showing the benefits of a stable and glorious monarchy

Le seul fils légitime de Louis XIV fut appelé Grand Dauphin pour le différencier de son fils Bourgogne, devenu dauphin à la mort de son père, en 1711. Le roi l'appelait Monseigneur. De son vivant déjà, on chantonnait " fils de roi, père de roi, jamais roi lui-même ". Fils de roi : né le 1. XI. 1661, le pape fut son parrain, la reine d'Angleterre sa marraine. Il eut le duc de Montausier comme gouverneur, Bossuet comme précepteur. En tant que Dauphin il assistait aux conseils et représentait le roi à Paris qui l'adorait. Il apprit la danse, l'équitation et le maniement des armes. En 1688 il prit Philippsbourg ce qui lui valut une grande popularité. Père de roi : en 1680, il épousa Marie-Anne de Bavière qui lui donna trois fils : Louis, duc de Bourgogne, père du futur Louis XV, Philippe, duc d'Anjou, futur Philippe V d'Espagne et Charles, duc de Berry. En 1700 Charles II d'Espagne choisit le duc d'Anjou pour lui succéder : Monseigneur œuvra pour l'acceptation du testament au mépris de ses propres droits. Jamais roi : le Dauphin aimait la chasse, les fêtes, la musique et les opéras. A Meudon il édifia un Château Neuf dans lequel fut créé un couloir central qui rendaient les pièces indépendantes les unes des autres. Ses collections sont au Louvre et au Prado
The historians call the son of Louis XIV Grand Dauphin to differentiate him from his son Louis, duc de Bourgogne became dauphin in 1711. The king called him Monseigneur. He was sung of as son of the king, father of the king, never the king himself. Son of the king : he was born in 1. XI. 1661 : the Pope was his godfather and the Queen of England his godmother. His guardian was the duc de Montausier and his tutor, Bossuet. He attended the Royal Councils and represented the king in Paris. He acquired the skills of dancing, horse riding and the handling of weapons. In 1688, the king having entrusted him with the commandant of the Army of the Rhine, he forced Phillipsburg to surrender, which geatly enhanced his reputation. Father of the king : in 1700 Charles II of Spain selected as his successor Philippe the second son of the Dauphin who manipulated the system to enable the will to be accepted depite his own rights since, legally speaking only he, as Dauphin, was entitled to the throne of Spain. Louis XIV loved his son who met all his wishes as a father. In 1680 he married Marie-Anne of Bavaria who bore him three sons. Louis duc de Bourgogne, father of the future Louis XV, Philippe duc d'Anjou, future king Philipp V of Spain and Charles duc de Berry. Never the king : the Dauphin devoted himself to his favourite pursuits; hunting, festivities, music and operas. He constructed a new castle at Meudon, the Château Neuf, where the apartments were arranged in a novel manner with a central corridor making the various rooms independent from one another

Gilbert Colbert de Saint-Pouange (1642-1706), Colbert par son père, et le Tellier par sa mère, succède en 1663 à son père comme premier commis du département de la Guerre. Il est surtout chargé de la logistique aux armées, mais il représente aussi son cousin Louvois et parfois le roi. Il leur rapporte systématiquement ce qu’il y voit et entend. Il tient cette fonction jusqu’en 1701. En même temps il devient secrétaire ordinaire de la chambre et du cabinet du roi. En 1701, Louis XIV le fait grand trésorier et commandeur des Ordres du roi. De 1670 à 1701, il entretient une correspondance quasi quotidienne avec Louvois, puis avec Barbezieux. De ces échanges épistolaires, il reste environ un milliers de lettres et notes diverses au Service Historique de la Défense. Leur étude donne un éclairage très intéressant sur les nombreuses procédures et pratiques du gouvernement de Louis XIV. L’examen porte d’abord sur la gestion des armées, avec la création d’une administration de la Guerre qui cherche à se rationaliser. Celle-ci va devenir le modèle de toutes les autres administrations du royaume. Dans ces courriers, la logistique apparaît comme une nécessité stratégique de premier ordre. Ces lettres permettent également de comprendre l’intérêt des frontières du Nord et de l’Est pour le roi, et d’observer l’émergence des idées de pré carré et de frontières naturelles, selon les critères de Vauban. Ces lettres montrent la prise en compte de l’administration, même celle de la Guerre, par des civils, issus de la petites noblesse récente. Enfin, les écrits de ces hommes qui travaillent avec le roi, font apparaître la naissance de la notion d’État
Gilbert Colbert de Saint-Pouange (1642-1706) who was a Colbert on his father’s and Le Tellier on his mother’s side, succeeded his father in 1663 as a head clerck of the War Department. He was essentially in charge of logistics to the army, but sometimes also represented his cousin Louvois and even the king. Up to 1701 he gave them a systematic account on everything he had noticed. At the same time he was appointed « secrétaire ordinaire » of the King’s Chamber and Cabinet. In 1701, Louis the XIV made him a « Grand Trésorier et Commandeur » in the King’s Orders. From 1670 to 1701, he had an almost daily mail exchange with Louvois, and later with Barbezieux. Aboiut 1000 mails and bills are preserved until now in the Historical Department of Defense. Their detailed studies give a very interesting information on the various rules and proceedings of Louis XIV’s government. The survey first concerns the proceedings of war management which involved the creation of défense administration tending to rationalise itself. It became the pattern of all other administrative services of the kingdom. This correspondence further reveals logistic as a primordial stratégic necessity. The mails allow to understand the king’s primordial interest in the Northern and Eastern borders and further to notice the upcoming idea of « pré carré » and « frontières naturelles » , according to Vauban’s theory, clearly appear into those mails. They also show in which way general administration and even war one could be in charge of recently enobled civilians. Finally, these mails exchanged between the king’s cooperators reveal the progressive birth of the notion of State (notion d’État)

La thèse porte sur l'influence culturelle de Paris sur les campagnes avoisinantes. L'ambition est d'apporter des réponses à des questions concernant l'univers matériel et culturel des habitants de Montreuil-sous-Bois, sous Louis XIV. L'étude de la population permet de déterminer dans quelle mesure les villageois avaient adopté un mode de vie proche de celui des populations urbaines. L'analyse des différents groupes sociaux est au cœur de la méthode de recherche utilisée. Les sources sont principalement des inventaires après décès, les registres paroissiaux, les brevets de taille et les minutes des notaires de Montreuil
This dissertation describes the cultural influence of Paris on the surrounding countryside. Its purpose is to give answers to questions regarding the material and cultural environment of Montreuil-sous-Bois inhabitants under the reign of king Louis XIV. The study of the population helps determine to what extend the inhabitants of the village had adopted a way of life close to that of the urban population. The analysis of the different social groups is at the core of the research method used. The sources consist essentially of inventories after death, parish registries and solicitor's records of Montreuil

De par leur abondance, les sources concernant la santé de Louis XIV permettent d'étudier ce corps royal dans une triple perspective médicale, politique et culturelle. Au-delà d'une reconstitution de la chronologie des maladies du souverain, il s'agit d'articuler les épisodes pathologiques aux pratiques médicales et aux dispositifs de pouvoir qu'ils ont induits de façon plus ou moins discrète. Cette « santé si précieuse » constituait une affaire d'État aussi bien pour les premiers médecins (Vallot, Daquin, Fagon) que pour les courtisans. Il importait par conséquent de célébrer les guérisons (la fièvre thyphoïde de 1658, la fistule de 1686) par les médias habituels de la glorification monarchique. De cette étude attentive aux articulations entre corps, pouvoir et représentations, il ressort l'ébauche d'une bio-histoire priviligiant le vivant par rapport au vécu
Using the numberless documents about the health of Louis XIV, it's possible to study the king's body from a triple point of view (medical, political and cultural). The purpose of such a work is not to reconstitute the chronology of the king illnesses, is rather to articulate sickness, medical knowledge and many strategies of power. "So precious health" was really an affaire d'État both for the medical household (Vallot, Daquin, Fagon) and the courtiers. It was necessary to celebrate every great recovery (typhoidal fever in 1658, fistula in 1686) using the usual means of the monarchic glorification. From this study attentive to the links between body, power and representations, it appears a bio-history in gestation

La pensée militaire évolue progressivement sous le règne de Louis XIV. Les grands principes de la guerre sont bien pris en compte par les officiers, l’importance de la surprise et la sûreté est parfaitement comprise. Les grands capitaines exploitent aussi très habilement leur liberté d’action et leur vision des combats pour profiter au mieux des avantages acquis, dont l’impact psychologique n’est pas le moindre. La logistique au sens large reste cependant une faiblesse des armées du second XVIIe siècle, malgré les progrès effectués dans ce domaine grâce d’une part aux soins accrus de l’officier pour ses hommes et grâce, d’autre part, à la mise en place d’une administration efficace. La logistique, plus que tout autre raison, fait la force des armées de Louis XIV dans les débuts de son règne. Mais face à l’Europe entière dont les armées connaissent les mêmes améliorations, la France s’épuise. Le problème religieux interne et externe, le manque d’efficacité de la Marine, le recul des armées terrestres, la percée de la ceinture de fer et les difficultés financières de la France, amènent Louis XIV à renoncer à sa politique agressive ; il comprend alors la nécessité d’un équilibre européen. Avant cette paix, les officiers livrent de nombreux combats, entreprennent de nombreux sièges, et l’étude de leurs récits révèle un fort degré d’assimilation de l’art de la guerre
The way of thinking the war in France changes during the second half of the 17th century under the reign of Louis Le Grand. The main precepts of the war are well understood by the great officers: the importance of the surprise and the safety of the army are perfectly applied. All the officers are used to exploit their reactivity in order to benefit of any advantages, especially the psychological one. But their actions are often limited by logistic constraints, which remain the great weakness of the 17th century’s army in spite of the progress in this field. The administration created by Colbert and Louvois, and the progress that it carried out in men’s care, give the advantage to the French army at the beginning of the second half of the century. But all the nations in Europe make the same progress and the French resources decrease. The lack of money modifies the aggressive policy, but the religious considerations lead to strategic misjudgement. In the army, the poor efficiency of the Marine leads to a change of its main objective and consequently to its decline. Even on the battlefield, the French army give it away. The enemies bore the Vauban’s “ceinture de fer” and threat Paris but Villars‘s great victory show that the army and its officers can’t be totally defeated according to their high level of military reflexion. Soon the other nations accept the new vision of the Louis XIV: the European equilibrium

La carrière de ce grand marin, huguenot et roturier, s'inscrit dans le règne de louis XIV. Ecrivain sur un navire de la Compagnie des Indes Occidentales, il devient capitaine marchand et se livre à la traite négrière aux Antilles. Il est à l'origine du premier empire colonial français au Sénégal. Entré dans la marine du roi (1686), il s'illustre lors de la prise de Saint-Christophe (1689) et libère la Guadeloupe (1691). Gouverneur de Saint-Dominique, il entraîne ses flibustiers contre la Jamaïque (1694) puis contre Carthagène des Indes (1697). Il permet à la partie française de s'attacher au cycle sucrier, à l'origine de sa fortune, tout comme le commerce interlope mené avec les espagnols. En 1700, il regagne la France, négocie l'année suivante l'asiento auprès de Philippe V. Durant la guerre de succession, il assure par trois fois la défense des colonies américaines du roi catholique et ramène à Madrid l'argent indispensable pour soutenir l'effort de guerre. Il commande encore les forces navales franco-espagnoles au siège de Barcelone. Epuisé, il meurt à Bourbon l'Archambault le 25 juillet 1715. Cas unique sous l'ancien régime, à cette extraordinaire élévation : lieutenant général et commandeur de l'ordre de Saint-Louis, capitaine général des armées navales du roi d'Espagne qui lui remet la toison d'or, s'ajoute une remarquable alliance avec les Pontchartrain et les La Rochefoucauld, qui coiffe une magnifique réussite sociale
The career of this great huguenot sailor, born into the common people, is in keeping with the reign of Louis XIV. A book keeper on a ship of the west indies company, he becomes a merchant captain, getting involved in the slave trade in the Antilles. He is the founder of the first colonial French empire in Senegal. In 1686 he joins the king's navy and wins renown during the taking of St Christopher in 1689 and the liberation of Guadeloupe in 1691. As the governor of santo domingo, he leads his buccaneers against Jamaica in 1694, then against Cartagena of Indies in 1697. He allows the french side to have a hand in the sugar cycle which just like the illegal trade with the spaniards, is the origin of his fortune. He gets back to france in 1700 and negotiates the asiento with philippe v the following year. During the succession war in Spain, he defends the catholic king's american colonies three times, bringing back to Madrid the necessary amount of silver for supporting the effort of war. At the siege of Barcelona, he was still to be in command of the franco-spanish naval forces. He died, exhausted, in Bourbon l'Archambault on the 25th of july, 1715. Admiral du casse's case is unique under the old regime: besides his extraordinary elevation to the rank of lieutenant general and commander of Saint-Louis's order as well as captain general of the naval armies of the king of Spain (who awarded him the golden fleece), he gained

Abstract Although Louis XIV had been on the throne since 1643, come of age in 1651, and been crowned in 1654, in 1660 he was still a figurehead. No king had both reigned and ruled in France for half a century. Government under Louis XIII, and then his widow Anne of Austria, had been in the hands of energetic and insinuating cardinal-ministers. Mazarin, inseparable from the regent-queen, was even the young king’s godfather, and proved a genuine substitute for the royal parent he could scarcely remember. But the cardinal, though assiduous in initiating him into affairs of state, still took all the important decisions. And so it was this wily, acquisitive Italian adventurer who bequeathed to Louis XIV the issue that would dominate his entire reign: the Spanish Succession. Mazarin regarded the peace of the Pyrenees of 1659, which brought an end to twenty-four years of war against Spain, as the crowning achievement of his career. The peace was sealed the next year by the marriage of the king to the infanta Maria Theresa, thereby giving him and his heirs potential claims on the throne of Spain.

The diplomatic visits from Ottoman, Muscovite, Siamese, and Moroccan ambassadors were handled differently than the frequent diplomatic visits from European countries. The “Oriental” visits produced many ceremonial challenges but also generated tremendous curiosity in the East, which Louis XIV used to his advantage. The crown took special care to turn the audiences with Oriental ambassadors into spectacular events to promote the Bourbon monarchy but had to be careful to adhere to French protocol and ensure that the diplomatic exchanges enhanced the image of French grandeur. The last magnificent display of Louis XIV’s reign, the visit of Mohammad Reza Beg in 1715, reveals the difficulties the French court encountered when dealing with foreign embassies. Louis XIV’s introducteur des ambassadors, the Baron de Breteuil, proved a culturally sensitive host, but he could not prevent conflict over French protocol that arose out of conceptions in common between France and Persia.

Abstract What propelled the fusion of Roman fasces with Aesop’s moralizing tale of sticks was the Nova Iconologia of Cesare Ripa (1555–1622), a compilation of emblems first published in an illustrated edition in 1603. There both Justice and Concord suggestively receive as their attributes a fascio di verghe (“bundle of sticks”). Later editors of Ripa completed the conflation. In France, the powerful cardinal and statesman Jules Mazarin (1602–1661, chief minister to the crown from 1642) shamelessly exploited the fasces, ostensibly as a family heraldic emblem but with the effect of creating a personal brand. Mazarin attracted many encomiasts, who did much to promote the emphatically non-Roman idea that the fasces represented unity, and good government in general. This whole understanding of the fasces culminates in a bronze full-length portrait statue of Louis XIV (reigned 1643–1715), dedicated in 1689 at Musée Carnavalet in Paris. Here the sculptor Antoine Coysevox (1640–1720) portrayed the king in a Roman cuirass, resting his left arm on an axe-less fasces topped by a helmet. In its context, the fasces conveys a balanced message of strength, dominion, moderation, and unity through reconciliation, while also rekindling memories of Mazarin’s own policies as advisor to the king. Yet in this period no nation shows much interest in putting the fasces on civic coats of arms, flags, coins, and the like. Even in the 1760s, when the antiquarian obsessions of the Neoclassical movement were at their peak, the fasces seemed fated to find itself just one derivative antique decorative element among many.