Louis XIV

short biography

Louis XIV de Bourbon, who received the name Louis-Dieudonné at birth ("God-given", French Louis-Dieudonné), also known as "sun king"(fr. Louis XIV Le Roi Soleil), also Louis Great(fr. Louis le Grand), (September 5, 1638, Saint-Germain-en-Laye - September 1, 1715, Versailles) - King of France and Navarre from May 14, 1643. Reigned 72 years - longer than any other European king in history (of the monarchs of Europe, only some rulers of the small states of the Holy Roman Empire, for example, Bernard VII of Lippe or Karl Friedrich of Baden, were in power longer).

Louis, who survived the wars of the Fronde in childhood, became a staunch supporter of the principle of absolute monarchy and the divine right of kings (he is credited with the expression “The State is me!”), He combined the strengthening of his power with the successful selection of statesmen for key political posts. The reign of Louis - a time of significant consolidation of the unity of France, its military power, political weight and intellectual prestige, the flowering of culture, went down in history as the Great Age. At the same time, the long-term military conflicts in which France participated during the reign of Louis the Great led to an increase in taxes, which placed a heavy burden on the shoulders of the population and caused popular uprisings, and as a result of the adoption of the Edict of Fontainebleau, which canceled the Edict of Nantes on religious tolerance within the kingdom, about 200,000 Huguenots emigrated from France.

Childhood and early years

Louis XIV came to the throne in May 1643, when he was not yet five years old, so, according to his father's will, the regency was transferred to Anna of Austria, who ruled in close tandem with the first minister, Cardinal Mazarin. Even before the end of the war with Spain and the House of Austria, the princes and the highest aristocracy, supported by Spain and in alliance with the Parliament of Paris, began unrest, which received the general name of the Fronde (1648-1652) and ended only with the submission of the Prince de Condé and the signing of the Pyrenean Peace (7 November 1659).

In 1660, Louis married the Spanish Infanta Maria Theresa of Austria. At this time, the young king, who grew up without sufficient upbringing and education, did not yet show great promise. However, as soon as Cardinal Mazarin died (1661), the next day, Louis XIV convened a Council of State, at which he announced that he now intended to rule independently, without appointing a first minister.

So Louis began to independently manage the state, the king followed this course until his death. Louis XIV had a gift for choosing talented and capable employees (for example, Colbert, Vauban, Letelier, Lyonne, Louvois). It can even be said that Louis elevated the doctrine of royal rights to a semi-religious dogma. Thanks to the works of the talented economist and financier J. B. Colbert, much was done to strengthen state unity, the well-being of the representatives of the third estate, encourage trade, develop industry and the fleet. At the same time, the Marquis de Louvois reformed the army, unified its organization and increased its fighting strength.

After the death of King Philip IV of Spain (1665), Louis XIV announced France's claims to part of the Spanish Netherlands and kept it behind him in the so-called War of Devolution. The Treaty of Aachen, concluded on May 2, 1668, transferred French Flanders and a number of border areas into his hands.

War with the Netherlands

From that time on, the United Provinces had a passionate enemy in the person of Louis. Contrasts in foreign policy, state views, trade interests, religion led both states to constant clashes. Louis in 1668-1671 skillfully managed to isolate the republic. Through bribery, he managed to divert England and Sweden from the Triple Alliance, to attract Cologne and Munster to the side of France. Having brought his army to 120,000 people, Louis in 1670 occupied the possessions of an ally of the States General, Duke Charles IV of Lorraine, and in 1672 crossed the Rhine, conquered half of the provinces within six weeks and returned to Paris in triumph. The breakthrough of the dam, the rise of William III of Orange to power, the intervention of European powers stopped the success of French weapons. The States General entered into an alliance with Spain, Brandenburg and Austria; the Empire also joined them after the French army attacked the Archbishopric of Trier and occupied the 10 imperial cities of Alsace, already half-joined with France. In 1674, Louis opposed his enemies with 3 large armies: with one of them he personally occupied Franche-Comté; the other, under the command of Conde, fought in the Netherlands and won at Senef; the third, headed by Turenne, devastated the Palatinate and successfully fought the troops of the emperor and the great elector in Alsace. After a short break due to the death of Turenne and the removal of Condé, Louis at the beginning of 1676 came to the Netherlands with renewed vigor and conquered a number of cities, while Luxembourg devastated the Breisgau. The whole country between the Saar, the Moselle and the Rhine, by order of the king, was turned into a desert. In the Mediterranean, Duquesne defeated Reuter; Brandenburg's forces were distracted by an attack by the Swedes. Only as a result of hostile actions on the part of England, Louis in 1678 concluded the Treaty of Niemwegen, which gave him large gains from the Netherlands and the entire Franche-Comté from Spain. He gave Philippsburg to the emperor, but received Freiburg and kept all the conquests in Alsace.

Louis at the pinnacle of power

This moment marks the apogee of Louis' power. His army was the most numerous, best organized and led. His diplomacy dominated all European courts. The French nation, with its achievements in the arts and sciences, in industry and commerce, has reached unprecedented heights. The court of Versailles (Louis transferred the royal residence to Versailles) became the object of envy and surprise of almost all modern sovereigns, who tried to imitate the great king even in his weaknesses. Strict etiquette was introduced at the court, regulating all court life. Versailles became the center of all high society life, in which the tastes of Louis himself and his many favorites (Lavaliere, Montespan, Fontange) reigned. All the highest aristocracy coveted court positions, since living away from the court for a nobleman was a sign of sternness or royal disgrace. "Absolutely without objection, - according to Saint-Simon, - Louis destroyed and eradicated every other force or authority in France, except those that came from him: reference to the law, to the right was considered a crime." This cult of the Sun-King, in which capable people were increasingly pushed aside by courtesans and intriguers, was bound to lead inevitably to the gradual decline of the entire edifice of the monarchy.

The king held back his desires less and less. In Metz, Breisach and Besancon, he established chambers of reunification (chambres de réunions) to seek the rights of the French crown to certain localities (September 30, 1681). The imperial city of Strasbourg was suddenly occupied by French troops in peacetime. Louis did the same with respect to the Dutch borders. In 1681, his fleet bombarded Tripoli, in 1684 - Algiers and Genoa. Finally, an alliance was formed between Holland, Spain and the emperor, forcing Louis in 1684 to conclude a 20-year truce in Regensburg and abandon further "reunions".

Religious policy

The political dependence of the clergy on the Pope Louis XIV tried to destroy. He even intended to form a French patriarchate independent of Rome. But, thanks to the influence of Bossuet, the famous bishop of Moscow, the French bishops refrained from breaking with Rome, and the views of the French hierarchy received official expression in the so-called. declaration of the Gallican clergy (declaration du clarge gallicane) of 1682

In matters of faith, the confessors of Louis XIV (Jesuits) made him an obedient instrument of the most ardent Catholic reaction, which was reflected in the merciless persecution of all individualistic movements among the church.

A number of harsh measures were taken against the Huguenots: churches were taken away from them, priests were deprived of the opportunity to baptize children according to the rules of their church, perform marriages and burials, and conduct worship. Even mixed marriages between Catholics and Protestants were forbidden.

The Protestant aristocracy was forced to convert to Catholicism so as not to lose their social advantages, and restrictive decrees were launched against Protestants from among other classes, culminating in the dragonades of 1683 and the repeal of the Edict of Nantes in 1685. These measures, despite severe penalties for emigration, forced more than 200 thousand Protestants to move to England, Holland and Germany. An uprising even broke out in the Cévennes. The growing piety of the king was supported by Madame de Maintenon, who, after the death of the queen (1683), was united with him by secret marriage.

War for the Palatinate

In 1688, a new war broke out, the reason for which was the claims to the Palatinate, presented by Louis XIV on behalf of his daughter-in-law, Elisabeth-Charlotte, Duchess of Orleans, who was related to the Elector Charles-Ludwig, who had died shortly before that. Having entered into an alliance with the Elector of Cologne, Karl-Egon Furstemberg, Louis ordered his troops to occupy Bonn and attack the Palatinate, Baden, Württemberg and Trier.

At the beginning of 1689, French troops devastated the entire Lower Palatinate in the most terrible way. An alliance was formed against France from England (which had just overthrown the Stuarts), the Netherlands, Spain, Austria, and the German Protestant states.

The Marshal of France, the Duke of Luxembourg, defeated the Allies on July 1, 1690 at Fleurus; Marshal Catinat conquered Savoy, Vice-Admiral Tourville defeated the British-Dutch fleet at the Battle of Beachy Head, so that the French had an advantage even at sea for a short time.

In 1692, the French laid siege to Namur, Luxembourg gained the upper hand at the Battle of Steenkerken; on the other hand, on May 28, the French fleet was defeated at Cape La Hougue.

In 1693-1695, the preponderance began to lean towards the side of the allies; in 1695 the Duke de Luxembourg, a student of Turenne, died; in the same year a huge military tax was needed, and peace became a necessity for Louis. It took place at Ryswick in 1697, and for the first time Louis XIV had to confine himself to the status quo.

War of the Spanish Succession

France was completely exhausted when, a few years later, the death of Charles II of Spain brought Louis to war with the European coalition. The War of the Spanish Succession, in which Louis wanted to win back the entire Spanish monarchy for his grandson Philip of Anjou, inflicted incurable wounds on the power of Louis. The old king, who personally led the fight, held himself in the most difficult circumstances with dignity and firmness. According to the peace concluded in Utrecht and Rastatt in 1713 and 1714, he kept Spain proper for his grandson, but its Italian and Dutch possessions were lost, and England, by destroying the Franco-Spanish fleets and conquering a number of colonies, laid the foundation for her maritime dominion. The French monarchy did not have to recover until the very revolution from the defeats at Hochstadt and Turin, Ramilla and Malplaque. She languished under the weight of debts (up to 2 billion) and taxes, which caused local outbursts of discontent.

Last years. Family tragedy and the question of a successor

Thus, the result of the whole system of Louis was the economic ruin, the poverty of France. Another consequence was the growth of oppositional literature, especially developed under the successor of the "great Louis".

The family life of the elderly king at the end of his life was not at all a rosy picture. On April 13, 1711, his son, Grand Dauphin Louis (born in 1661), died; in February 1712 he was followed by the eldest son of the Dauphin, the Duke of Burgundy, and on March 8 of the same year, the eldest son of the latter, the infant Duke of Brittany. On March 4, 1714, the younger brother of the Duke of Burgundy, the Duke of Berry, died a few days later, so that, in addition to Philip V of Spain, the Bourbons had only one heir - the four-year-old great-grandson of the king, the third son of the Duke of Burgundy (later Louis XV).

Even earlier, Louis legitimized his two sons from Madame de Montespan - the Duke of Maine and the Count of Toulouse, and gave them the name Bourbon. Now, in his will, he appointed them members of the regency council and declared their eventual right to succession to the throne. Louis himself remained active until the end of his life, firmly maintaining court etiquette and the decor of his “great century” was already beginning to fade.

Louis XIV died on September 1, 1715 at 8:15 am, surrounded by courtiers. Death came after several days of agony, from gangrene of the leg, which the king injured when falling from a horse while hunting (he considered amputation unacceptable for royal dignity). The reign of Louis XIV lasted 72 years and 110 days.

The body of the king for 8 days was put up for parting in the Salon of Hercules in Versailles. On the night of the ninth day, the body was transported (taking the necessary measures so that the population did not arrange holidays along the funeral procession) to the basilica of the abbey of Saint-Denis, where Louis was buried in observance of all the rites of the Catholic Church laid down by the monarch.

In 1822, an equestrian statue (based on the model of Bosio) was erected to him in Paris, on the Place des Victories.

Marriages and children

• (from June 9, 1660, Saint-Jean de Lutz) Maria Theresa (1638-1683), Infanta of Spain, cousin of Louis XIV in two lines - both maternal and paternal:
  • Louis the Great Dauphin (1661-1711)
  • Anna Elizabeth (1662-1662)
  • Maria Anna (1664-1664)
  • Maria Theresa (1667-1672)
  • Philip (1668-1671)
  • Louis Francois (1672-1672).

Louis

Anna Elizabeth and Mary Anna

Philip

• (from June 12, 1684, Versailles) Francoise d'Aubigne (1635-1719), Marquise de Maintenon.
• Vnebr. connection Louise de La Baume Le Blanc (1644-1710), Duchess de La Vallière:
  • Charles de La Baume Le Blanc (1663-1665)
  • Philippe de La Baume Le Blanc (1665-1666)
  • Marie-Anne de Bourbon (1666-1739), Mademoiselle de Blois
  • Louis de Bourbon (1667-1683), Comte de Vermandois.
• Vnebr. connection Françoise-Athenais de Rochechouart de Mortemart (1641-1707), marquise de Montespan:
  • Louise-Francoise de Bourbon (1669-1672)
  • Louis-Auguste de Bourbon, Duke of Maine (1670-1736)
  • Louis Cesar de Bourbon (1672-1683)
  • Louise-Francoise de Bourbon (1673-1743), Mademoiselle de Nantes
  • Louise-Marie-Anne de Bourbon (1674-1681), Mademoiselle de Tours
  • Françoise-Marie de Bourbon (1677-1749), Mademoiselle de Blois
  • Louis-Alexandre de Bourbon, Count of Toulouse (1678-1737).
• Vnebr. connection(1678-1680) Marie-Angelique de Skoray de Roussil (1661-1681), Duchess de Fontanges:
  • N (1679-1679), the child was born dead.
• Vnebr. connection Claude de Ven (c.1638 - September 8, 1686), Mademoiselle des Hoye:
  • Louise de Maisonblanche (1676-1718).

The history of the nickname Sun King

In France, the sun acted as a symbol of royal power and the king personally even before Louis XIV. The luminary became the personification of the monarch in poetry, solemn odes and court ballets. The first mention of solar emblems dates back to the reign of Henry III, it was used by the grandfather and father of Louis XIV, but only under him did solar symbolism become truly widespread.

At the age of twelve (1651), Louis XIV made his debut in the so-called "ballets de cour" - court ballets, which were staged annually during the carnival.

The carnival of the Baroque era is not just a holiday and entertainment, but an opportunity to play in the “inverted world”. For example, the king for several hours became a jester, an artist or a buffoon, at the same time, the jester could well afford to appear in the form of a king. In one of the ballet performances (“Ballet of the Night” by Jean-Baptiste Lully), young Louis had the opportunity to appear for the first time before his subjects in the form of the Rising Sun (1653), and then Apollo, the Sun God (1654).

When Louis XIV began to rule independently (1661), the court ballet genre was put at the service of state interests, helping the king not only create his representative image, but also manage the court society (however, like other arts). The roles in these productions were distributed only by the king and his friend, the Comte de Saint-Aignan. Princes of the blood and courtiers, dancing next to their sovereign, depicted various elements, planets and other beings and phenomena subject to the Sun. Louis himself continues to appear before his subjects in the form of the Sun, Apollo and other gods and heroes of Antiquity. The king left the stage only in 1670.

But the emergence of the nickname of the Sun King was preceded by another important cultural event of the Baroque era - the Tuileries Carousel of 1662. This is a festive carnival cavalcade, which is a cross between a sports festival (in the Middle Ages, these were tournaments) and a masquerade. In the 17th century, the Carousel was called "equestrian ballet", since this action was more like a performance with music, rich costumes and a fairly consistent script. On the Carousel of 1662, given in honor of the birth of the first-born of the royal couple, Louis XIV pranced in front of the audience on a horse dressed as a Roman emperor. In the hand of the king was a golden shield with the image of the Sun. This symbolized that this luminary protects the king and, with him, all of France.

According to the historian of the French Baroque F. Bossan, “it was on the Great Carousel of 1662 that, in a way, the Sun King was born. He was given his name not by politics and not by the victories of his armies, but by equestrian ballet.

Image of Louis XIV in popular culture

Fiction

• Louis XIV is one of the main historical characters in the trilogy about the musketeers by Alexandre Dumas.
• Michael Bulgakov. The cabal of the saints.
• The hero of the cycle of novels "Angelica" by Anna and Serge Gallon.
• The hero of the novel by Francoise Chandernagor "Royal Avenue: Memoirs of Francoise d'Aubigne, Marquise de Maintenon, wife of the King of France"
• A.A. Gurshtein"Stars of Paris" 2016. (A novel-chronicle from the life of astronomers in the time of Louis XIV).

Movie

• The Iron Mask / The Iron Mask (USA; 1929) directed by Allan Dwan, in the role of Ludovic William Bakewell.
• The Man in the Iron Mask / The Man in the Iron Mask (USA; 1939) directed by James Weil, in the role of Ludovic Louis Hayward.
• The Iron Mask / Le masque de fer (Italy, France; 1962) directed by Henri Decoin, in the role of Ludovic Jean-Francois Poron.
• Seizure of power by Louis XIV / La prise de pouvoir par Louis XIV (France; 1966) directed by Roberto Rossellini, as Louis Jean-Marie Patte.
• The Man in the Iron Mask (UK, USA; 1977) directed by Mike Newell, as Ludovic Richard Chamberlain.
• The King's Way / L "allée du roi (France; 1996) directed by Nina Kompaneets, in the role of King Louis XIV Didier Sandre.
• In 1993, Roger Planchon directed the biographical film Louis the Child King about the childhood and youth of Louis XIV.
• In the 1998 film The Man in the Iron Mask, Louis XIV is portrayed as cruel, selfish, fun-loving, and a weak politician. According to the plot of the film, Louis has a twin brother, who later takes the place of the king and leads France to the "Golden Age". Leonardo DiCaprio played Louis XIV.
• A film directed by Gerard Corbier is also dedicated to him. "The King is Dancing", which reveals the theme of the relationship between power and art.
• Louis XIV is one of the main characters in Roland Joffé's drama Vatel. In the film, the Prince of Condé invites the king to his castle of Chantilly and tries to impress him in order to take over as commander-in-chief in the upcoming war with Holland. Louis XIV is played by Julian Sands.
• Louis XIV appears as a beautiful seducer in the film "Angelica and the King", where he was played by Jacques Toja (fr. Jacques Toja), also appears in the first two films of the epic film "Angelica - Marquis of Angels" and "Magnificent Angelica".
• In the film by Oleg Ryaskov "The Servant of the Sovereigns", the role of King Louis XIV was played by the artist of the Moscow New Drama Theater Dmitry Shilyaev.
• In the films by Georgy Yungvald-Khilkevich The Secret of Queen Anne, or The Musketeers Thirty Years Later (1993) and The Return of the Musketeers or The Treasures of Cardinal Mazarin (2008), Dmitry Kharatyan played Louis XIV.
• Alan Rickman played the role of King Louis XIV in Alan Rickman's The Romance of Versailles (2014).
• The series "Versailles" (France-Canada, 2015-). King Louis XIV is played by George Blagden.
• Death of Louis XIV / La mort de Louis XIV (Portugal, France, Spain; 2016) directed by Albert Serra, in the role of Louis Jean-Pierre Leo.

Musical

• The musical "The Sun King" was staged in France about Louis XIV.

Documentaries

• 2015 - Death of the Sun King / 1715. The Sun King is Dead! / La mort de Louis XIV (dir. Sylvie Faiveley)

The attention of any tourist who stepped under the arches of the royal residence near Paris, Versailles, in the very first minutes will be drawn to the numerous emblems on the walls, tapestries and other furnishings of this beautiful palace ensemble. The emblems represent a human face framed by the sun's rays illuminating the globe.

Source: Ivonin Yu. E., Ivonina L. I. Rulers of the destinies of Europe: emperors, kings, ministers of the 16th - 18th centuries. - Smolensk: Rusich, 2004. P. 404-426.

This face, executed in the best classical traditions, belongs to the most famous of all the French kings of the Bourbon dynasty, Louis XIV. The personal reign of this monarch, which had no precedents in Europe in its duration - 54 years (1661-1715) - went down in history as a classic example of absolute power, as an era of unprecedented prosperity in all areas of culture and spiritual life, which paved the way for the emergence of the French Enlightenment and, finally, as the era of French hegemony in Europe. Therefore, it is not surprising that the second half of the 17th - early 18th centuries. in France it was called the "Golden Age", the monarch himself was called the "Sun King".

A huge number of scientific and popular books have been written about Louis XIV and his time abroad.

The authors of a number of works of art known to the general public are still attracted by the personality of this king and his era, so full of a wide variety of events that left an indelible mark on the history of France and Europe. Domestic scientists and writers, in comparison with their foreign counterparts, paid relatively little attention to both Louis himself and his time. Nevertheless, everyone in our country has at least an approximate idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthis king. But the problem is how accurate this representation is to reality. Despite the wide range of the most controversial assessments of the life and work of Louis XIV, all of them can be reduced to the following: he was a great king, although he made many mistakes throughout his long reign, he elevated France to the rank of major European powers, although in the end he diplomacy and endless wars led to the elimination of French hegemony in Europe. Many historians note the inconsistency of the policy of this king, as well as the ambiguity of the results of his reign. As a rule, they look for the origins of contradictions in the previous development of France, the childhood and youth of the future absolute ruler. The psychological characteristics of Louis XIV are very popular, although they practically remain behind the scenes knowledge of the depth of the king's political thinking and his mental abilities. The latter, I think, is extremely important for assessing the life and activities of a person within the framework of her era, understanding her needs of her time, as well as her ability to foresee the future. Here we will immediately take revenge, so as not to refer to this in the future, that the versions about the “iron mask” as the twin brother of Louis XIV have long been swept aside by historical science.

"Louis, by the grace of God, King of France and Navarre" - such was the title of the French monarchs in the middle of the 17th century. It represented a certain contrast with the contemporary long titles of Spanish kings, Holy Roman Emperors or Russian tsars. But its apparent simplicity in fact meant the unity of the country and the presence of a strong central government. To a large extent, the strength of the French monarchy was based on the fact that the king simultaneously combined various roles in French politics. We will only mention the most important ones. The king was the first judge and, undoubtedly, the personification of justice for all the inhabitants of the kingdom. Being responsible (p. 406) before God for the well-being of his state, he directed its domestic and foreign policy and was the source of all legitimate political power in the country. As the first overlord, he had the largest lands in France. He was the first nobleman of the kingdom, protector and head of the Catholic Church in France. Thus, wide legally justified powers in the event of successful circumstances gave the king of France rich opportunities for effective management and the exercise of his power, of course, provided that he had certain qualities for this.

In practice, of course, no king of France could simultaneously combine all these functions on a full scale. The existing social order, the presence of government and local authorities, as well as the energy, talents, personal psychological characteristics of the monarchs limited the field of their activity. In addition, the king, in order to successfully rule, had to be a good actor. As for Louis XIV, in this case, the circumstances were for him in the most favorable way.

Actually, the reign of Louis XIV began much earlier than his immediate reign. In 1643, after the death of his father Louis XIII, he became king of France at the age of five. But only in 1661, after the death of the first minister, Cardinal Giulio Mazarin, Louis XIV took full power into his own hands, proclaiming the principle "The State is me." Realizing the comprehensive and unconditional significance of his power and power, the king repeated this phrase very often.

... For the deployment of the stormy activities of the new king, solid ground had already been prepared. He had to consolidate all the achievements and outline the further path for the development of French statehood. The outstanding ministers of France, Cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin, who had advanced political thinking for that era, were the creators of the theoretical foundations of French (p. 407) absolutism, laid its foundation and strengthened it in a successful struggle against opponents of absolute power. The crisis in the era of the Fronde was overcome, the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 ensured the hegemony of France on the continent and made it the guarantor of European balance. The Peace of the Pyrenees in 1659 consolidated this success. This magnificent political legacy was to be used by the young king.

If we try to give a psychological characterization of Louis XIV, then we can somewhat correct the widespread idea of ​​​​this king as a selfish and thoughtless person. According to his own explanations, he chose the emblem of the "sun king" for himself, since the sun is the giver of all blessings, a tireless worker and a source of justice, it is a symbol of a calm and balanced government. The late birth of the future monarch, which contemporaries called miraculous, the foundations of his upbringing laid by Anna of Austria and Giulio Mazarin, the horrors of the Fronde experienced - all this forced the young man to manage in this way and show himself to be a real, powerful sovereign. As a child, according to contemporaries, he was "serious ... prudent enough to remain silent, fearing to say something inappropriate", and, starting to rule, Louis tried to fill in the gaps in his education, since his curriculum was too general and avoided special knowledge. Undoubtedly, the king was a man of duty and, contrary to the famous phrase, considered the state incomparably higher than himself as an individual. He performed the “royal craft” conscientiously: in his view, it was associated with constant work, with the need for ceremonial discipline, restraint in the public manifestation of feelings, and strict self-control. Even his entertainment was largely a matter of state, their splendor supported the prestige of the French monarchy in Europe.

Could Louis XIV do without political mistakes? Was the time of his reign really calm and balanced? (p.408)

Continuing, as he believed, the work of Richelieu and Mazarin, Louis XIV was most of all occupied with the improvement of royal absolutism, which corresponded to his personal inclinations and concepts of the duty of the monarch. His Majesty persistently pursued the idea that the source of any statehood is only the king, who is placed by God himself above other people and therefore more perfectly than they evaluate the surrounding circumstances. “One head,” he said, “belongs to the right to consider and resolve issues, the functions of the remaining members are only in the execution of orders transmitted to them.” He considered the absolute power of the sovereign and the complete subordination of his subjects to him as one of the main divine commandments. “In all Christian teaching there is no more clearly established principle than the unquestioning obedience of subjects to those who are placed over them.”

Each of his ministers, advisers or close associates could retain his position, provided that he managed to pretend that he was learning everything from the king and considered him alone the reason for the success of any business. A very illustrative example in this respect was the case of Nicolas Fouquet, surintendent of finance, whose name during the reign of Mazarin was associated with the stabilization of the financial situation in France. This case was also the most striking manifestation of the royal vindictiveness and vindictiveness brought up by the Fronde and was associated with the desire to remove everyone who does not obey the sovereign in due measure, who can be compared with him. Despite the fact that Fouquet during the years of the Fronde showed absolute loyalty to the Mazarin government and had considerable merits before the supreme power, the king eliminated him. In his behavior, Louis, most likely, saw something "Fronde" - self-reliance, an independent mind. The Surintendant also fortified the island of Belle Île that belonged to him, attracted clients from the military, lawyers, representatives of culture, maintained a magnificent courtyard and a whole staff of informants. His castle Vaux-le-Viscount was not inferior in beauty and splendor to the royal palace. In addition, according to a document that has survived (p. 409), though only in a copy, Fouquet tried to establish relations with the king's mistress, Louise de Lavaliere. In September, 1661, the Surintendant was arrested at the feast of Vaux-le-Viscount by the well-known captain of the royal musketeers, d'Artagnan, and spent the rest of his life in prison.

Louis XIV could not put up with the existence of political rights that remained after the death of Richelieu and Mazarin for some state and public institutions, because these rights to some extent contradicted the concept of royal omnipotence. Therefore, he destroyed them and introduced bureaucratic centralization, brought to perfection. The king, of course, listened to the opinions of ministers, members of his family, favorites and favorites. But he stood firmly at the top of the pyramid of power. In accordance with the orders and instructions of the monarch, secretaries of state acted, each of which, in addition to the main field of activity - financial, military, etc. - had several large administrative-territorial regions under his command. These areas (there were 25 of them) were called "generalite". Louis XIV reformed the Royal Council, increased the number of its members, turning it into a real government in his own person. Under him, the States General were not convened, provincial and city self-government was everywhere destroyed and replaced by the administration of royal officials, of whom the intendants were endowed with the broadest powers. The latter carried out the policy and activities of the government and its head - the king. The bureaucracy was omnipotent.

But it cannot be said that Louis XIV was not surrounded by sensible officials or did not heed their advice. In the first half of the king's reign, the inspector general of finances Colbert, the minister of war Louvois, the military engineer Vauban, talented generals - Condé, Turenne, Tesse, Vendome and many others contributed to the splendor of his reign. (p. 410)

Jean-Baptiste Colbert came from the bourgeois strata and in his youth managed the private property of Mazarin, who was able to appreciate his outstanding mind, honesty and hard work, and recommended him to the king before his death. Louis was won over by Colbert's relative modesty compared to the rest of his employees, and he appointed him comptroller-general of the finances. All the measures taken by Colbert to raise French industry and trade received a special name in history - Colbertism. First of all, the Comptroller General of Finance streamlined the system of financial management. Strict accountability was introduced in the receipt and expenditure of state revenues, all those who illegally evaded it were brought to pay the land tax, taxes on luxury goods were increased, etc. True, in accordance with the policy of Louis XIV, the nobility of the sword (hereditary military nobility). Nevertheless, this reform of Colbert improved the financial situation of France, (p. 411), but not enough to satisfy all state needs (especially military ones) and the insatiable demands of the king.

Colbert also undertook a series of measures known as the policy of mercantilism, i.e., encouraging the productive forces of the state. In order to improve French agriculture, he reduced or completely abolished taxes for large peasants, gave benefits to those with shortfalls, and expanded the area of ​​cultivated land with the help of land reclamation measures. But most of all the minister was interested in the development of industry and trade. Colbert imposed a high tariff on all imported goods and encouraged their domestic production. He invited the best craftsmen from abroad, encouraged the bourgeoisie to invest in the development of manufactories, moreover, provided them with benefits and issued loans from the state treasury. Under him, several state manufactories were founded. As a result, the French market was filled with domestic goods, and a number of French products (Lyon velvet, Valenciennes lace, luxury items) were popular throughout Europe. Mercantilist measures of Colbert created a number of economic and political difficulties for neighboring states. In particular, angry speeches were often heard in the English Parliament against the policy of Colbertism and the penetration of French goods into the English market, and Colbert's brother Charles, who was the French ambassador in London, was not loved throughout the country.

In order to intensify French internal trade, Colbert ordered the construction of roads that stretched from Paris in all directions, destroyed internal customs between individual provinces. He contributed to the creation of a large merchant and navy that could compete with English and Dutch ships, founded the East India and West India trading companies, and encouraged the colonization of America and India. Under him, a French colony was founded in the lower reaches of the Mississippi, named Louisiana in honor of the king.

All these measures gave the state treasury huge revenues. But the maintenance of the most luxurious court in Europe and the continuous wars of Louis XIV (even in peacetime, 200 thousand people were constantly under arms) absorbed such colossal sums that they were not enough to cover all costs. At the request of the king, in order to find money, Colbert had to raise taxes even on basic necessities, which caused discontent against him throughout the kingdom. It should be noted that Colbert was by no means an opponent of French hegemony in Europe, but was against the military expansion of his overlord, preferring economic expansion to it. Finally, in 1683, the comptroller-general of the treasury fell out of favor with Louis XIV, which subsequently led to a gradual decline in the proportion of French industry and trade on the Continent compared with England. The factor holding the king back was eliminated.

The Minister of War Louvois, the reformer of the French army, contributed a lot to the prestige of the French kingdom in the international arena. With the approval (p. 413) of the king, he introduced recruiting kits for soldiers and thus created a standing army. In wartime, its number reached 500 thousand people - an unsurpassed figure for those times in Europe. Exemplary discipline was maintained in the army, recruits were systematically trained, and each regiment was given special uniforms. Luvois also improved weaponry; the pike was replaced by a bayonet screwed to a gun, barracks, food stores and hospitals were built. On the initiative of the Minister of War, a corps of engineers and several artillery schools were established. Louis highly valued Louvois and in frequent quarrels between him and Colbert, by virtue of his inclination, took the side of the Minister of War.

According to the projects of the talented engineer Vauban, more than 300 land and sea fortresses were erected, channels were broken through, dams were built. He also invented some weapons for the army. After reviewing the state of the French kingdom for 20 years of continuous work, Vauban submitted a memorandum to the king proposing reforms that could improve the situation of the lower strata of France. Louis, who did not issue any instructions and did not want to waste his royal time, and especially finances, on new reforms, disgraced the engineer.

The French commanders Prince Condé, Marshals Turenne, Tesse, who left valuable memoirs to the world, Vandom and a number of other capable military leaders greatly increased the military prestige and asserted the hegemony of France in Europe. They saved the day even when their king started and fought wars rashly and imprudently.

During the reign of Louis XIV, France was in a state of war almost continuously. The wars for the Spanish Netherlands (60s - early 80s of the XVII century), the war of the Augsburg League, or the Nine Years' War (1689-1697) and the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714), absorbing huge financial resources, eventually ultimately led to a significant decrease in French influence (p. 414) in Europe. Although France still remained among the states that determined European policy, a new alignment of forces took shape on the continent, and irreconcilable Anglo-French contradictions arose.

The religious measures of his reign were closely connected with the international policy of the French king. Louis XIV made many political mistakes that Cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin could not afford. But a miscalculation that became fatal for France and later called the “mistake of the century” was the repeal of the Edict of Nantes in October 1685. The king, who assessed his kingdom as the strongest in economic and political relations in Europe, laid claim not only to (p. - political, but also spiritual hegemony of France on the continent. Like the Habsburgs in the 16th and first half of the 17th centuries, he aspired to play the role of defender of the Catholic faith in Europe, in connection with which his disagreements with the See of St. Peter aggravated. Louis XIV banned the Calvinist religion in France, continued the persecution of French Protestants, which began in the 70s. and are now violent. Huguenots rushed abroad in masses, in connection with which the government banned emigration. But, despite severe punishments and cordons placed along the border, up to 400 thousand people moved to England, Holland, Prussia, Poland. The governments of these countries willingly received Huguenot emigrants, mostly of bourgeois origin, who noticeably revived the industry and trade of the host states. As a result, the economic development of France suffered considerable damage; the Huguenot nobles most often entered the service of officers in the army of states that were opponents of France.

It must be said that not everyone in the king's entourage supported the abolition of the Edict of Nantes. As Marshal Tesse very aptly remarked, "her results were quite consistent with this apolitical measure." The "mistake of the century" dramatically damaged the plans of Louis XIV in the field of foreign policy. The mass exodus of the Huguenots from France revolutionized Calvinist doctrine. In the Glorious Revolution of 1688-1689. more than 2,000 Huguenot officers participated in England. The outstanding Huguenot theologians and publicists of that time, Pierre Ury and Jean Le Clerc, created the basis of a new Huguenot political thinking, and the Glorious Revolution itself became for them a theoretical and practical model for the reorganization of society. The new revolutionary outlook was that France needed a "parallel revolution", the overthrow of the absolutist tyranny of Louis XIV. At the same time, the destruction of the Bourbon monarchy as such was not proposed, but only constitutional changes that turned it into a parliamentary monarchy. As a result, the religious policy of Louis XIV (p. 416) prepared the transformation of political ideas, which were finally developed and strengthened in the concepts of the French Enlightenment of the 18th century. The Catholic Bishop Bossuet, who enjoys influence at the court of the king, noted that "free-thinking people did not neglect the opportunity to criticize the policies of Louis XIV." The concept of a tyrant king was formed.

So, for France, the repeal of the Edict of Nantes was a truly disastrous act. Called to strengthen the royal power within the country and achieve not only the territorial and political, but also the spiritual hegemony of France in Europe, in fact, he put the cards in the hands of the future English King William III of Orange and contributed to the accomplishment of the Glorious Revolution, alienated almost all of her few allies from France. The violation of the principle of freedom of conscience, in parallel with the violation of the balance of power in Europe, turned into serious defeats for France, both in domestic and foreign policy. The second half of the reign of Louis XIV no longer looked so brilliant. And for Europe, in fact, his actions turned out to be quite favorable. In England, the Glorious Revolution was carried out, neighboring states rallied into an anti-French coalition, through the efforts of which, as a result of bloody wars, France lost its absolute primacy in Europe, retaining it only in the cultural field.

It was in this area that France's hegemony remained unshakable, and in some aspects it remains to this day. At the same time, the very personality of the king and his activities laid the foundation for the unprecedented cultural elevation of France. In general, there is an opinion among historians that it is possible to speak of the "golden age" of the reign of Louis XIV only in relation to the sphere of culture. This is where the "sun king" was really great. In the process of education, Ludovik did not receive the skills of independent work with books; he preferred questions and a lively conversation to the search for truth from authors who contradicted each other. Perhaps that is why the king paid great attention to the cultural framing of his reign (p. 417), and raised his son Louis, born in 1661, in a different way: the heir to the throne was introduced to jurisprudence, philosophy, taught Latin and mathematics.

Among the various measures that were supposed to contribute to the growth of royal prestige, Louis XIV attached particular importance to attracting attention to his own person. He devoted as much time to worrying about this as to the most important affairs of state. After all, the face of the kingdom was primarily the king himself. Louis, as it were, made his life a work of art of classicism. He did not have a "hobby", he could not be imagined as an enthusiastic business that did not coincide with the "profession" of the monarch. All his sports hobbies are purely royal pursuits that created the traditional image of the king-knight. Louis was too solid to be talented: a bright talent would have broken through at least somewhere the boundaries of the circle of interests assigned to him. However, this rationalistic focus on one's specialty was a phenomenon of the early modern period, which in the field of culture was characterized by encyclopedism, dispersion and disorganized curiosity.

By awarding ranks, awards, pensions, estates, profitable positions, and other signs of attention, for which Louis XIV was inventive to the point of virtuosity, he managed to attract representatives of the best families to his court and turn them into his obedient servants. The most well-born aristocrats considered it their greatest happiness and honor to serve the king when dressing and undressing, at the table, during walks, etc. The staff of courtiers and servants numbered 5-6 thousand people.

Strict etiquette was adopted at court. Everything was distributed with petty punctuality, each, even the most ordinary act of the life of the royal family, was arranged extremely solemnly. When dressing the king, the whole court was present, a large staff of employees was required to serve the king a dish or drink. During the royal dinner, all those admitted to it, including (p. 418) and members of the royal family, stood, it was possible to talk with the king only when he himself wished it. Louis XIV considered it necessary for himself to strictly observe all the details of complex etiquette and demanded the same from the courtiers.

The king gave an unprecedented splendor to the external life of the court. His favorite residence was Versailles, which turned under him into a large luxurious city. Especially magnificent was the grandiose palace in a strictly sustained style, richly decorated both outside and inside by the best French artists of that time. During the construction of the palace, an architectural innovation was introduced, which later became fashionable in Europe: not wanting to demolish his father’s hunting lodge, which became an element of the central part of the palace ensemble, the king forced the architects to come up with a mirror hall, when the windows of one wall were reflected in the mirrors on the other wall, creating there the illusion of the presence of window openings. The large palace was surrounded by several small ones, for members of the royal family, many royal services, rooms for the royal guard and courtiers. The palace buildings were surrounded by a vast garden, kept according to the laws of strict symmetry, with decoratively trimmed trees, many flower beds, fountains, and statues. It was Versailles that inspired Peter the Great, who visited there, to build Peterhof with its famous fountains. True, Peter spoke of Versailles as follows: the palace is beautiful, but there is little water in the fountains. In addition to Versailles, under Louis, other beautiful architectural structures were built - the Grand Trianon, Les Invalides, the Louvre colonnade, the gates of Saint-Denis and Saint-Martin. On all these creations, encouraged by the king, the architect Hardouin-Monsart, the artists and sculptors Lebrun, Girardon, Leclerc, Latour, Rigaud and others worked.

While Louis XIV was young, life in Versailles proceeded like a continuous holiday. Balls, masquerades, concerts, theatrical performances, and pleasure walks followed in a continuous succession. Only in his old age (p. 419) did the king, who was already continuously ill, begin to lead a more relaxed lifestyle, unlike the English king Charles II (1660–1685). He even on the day that turned out to be the last in his life, arranged a celebration in which he took an active part.

Louis XIV constantly attracted famous writers to his side, giving them monetary rewards and pensions, and for these favors he expected glorification of himself and his reign. The literary celebrities of that era were the playwrights Corneille, Racine and Moliere, the poet Boileau, the fabulist La Fontaine and others. Almost all of them, with the exception of Lafontaine, created a cult of the sovereign. For example, Corneille, in his tragedies from the history of the Greco-Roman world, emphasized the advantages of absolutism, extending benefits to its subjects. In the comedies of Molière, the weaknesses and shortcomings of modern society were skillfully ridiculed. However, their author tried to avoid everything that might not please Louis XIV. Boileau wrote laudatory odes in honor of the monarch, and in his satires he ridiculed medieval orders and opposition aristocrats.

Under Louis XIV, a number of academies arose - sciences, music, architecture, the French Academy in Rome. Of course, not only the high ideals of serving the beautiful inspired His Majesty. The political nature of the French monarch's concern for cultural figures is obvious. But did this work, created by the masters of his era, become less beautiful?

As we have already seen, Louis XIV made his private life the property of the entire kingdom. Let's note one more aspect. Under the influence of his mother, Louis grew up to be a very religious person, at least outwardly. But, as the researchers note, his faith was the faith of an ordinary person. Cardinal Fleury, in a conversation with Voltaire, recalled that the king "believed like a collier". Other contemporaries noted that "he never read the Bible in his life and believes everything that the priests and bigots tell him." But perhaps this was consistent with the religious policy of the king. Louis listened to Mass every day (p. 420), every year on Holy Thursday he washed the feet of 12 beggars, every day he read the simplest prayers, and on holidays he listened to long sermons. However, such ostentatious religiosity was not a hindrance to the luxurious life of the king, his wars and relationships with women.

Like his grandfather, Henry IV of Bourbon, Louis XIV was very amorous by temperament and did not consider it necessary to observe marital fidelity. As we already know, at the insistence of Mazarin and his mother, he had to give up his love for Maria Mancini. Marriage to Maria Theresa of Spain was a purely political affair. Not being faithful, the king nevertheless conscientiously fulfilled his marital duty: from 1661 to 1672, the queen gave birth to six children, of whom only the eldest son survived. Louis was always present at childbirth and, together with the queen, experienced her torment, as, indeed, other courtiers. Maria Theresa, of course, was jealous, but very unobtrusively. When the queen died in 1683, her husband honored her memory with the following words: "This is the only trouble she gave me."

In France, it was considered quite natural that the king, if he is a healthy and normal man, has mistresses, as long as decency is observed. It should also be noted here that Louis never confused love affairs with state affairs. He did not allow women to interfere in politics, prudently measuring the boundaries of the influence of his favorites. In the "Memoirs" addressed to his son, His Majesty wrote: "Let the beauty that gives us pleasure, do not dare to talk to us about our affairs, or about our ministers."

Among the numerous lovers of the king, three figures are usually distinguished. Former favorite in 1661-1667. the quiet and modest lady-in-waiting Louise de Lavalière, who gave birth four times to Louis, was perhaps the most devoted and most humiliated of all his mistresses. When she was no longer needed by the king, she retired to a monastery, where she spent the rest of her life.

In some way, the contrast in comparison with her was represented by Françoise-Athenais de Montespan, who "reigned" (p. 422) in 1667-1679. and bore the king six children. She was a beautiful and proud woman, already married. So that her husband could not take her away from the court, Louis gave her the high court rank of sirintendante of the queen's court. Unlike Lavaliere, Montespan was not loved by the king's entourage: one of the highest church authorities in France, Bishop Bossuet, even demanded the removal of the favorite from the court. Montespan adored luxury and liked to give orders, but she also knew her place. The king's beloved preferred to avoid asking Louis for private individuals, talking with him only about the needs of the monasteries she patronized.

Unlike Henry IV, who went crazy at the age of 56 for the 17-year-old Charlotte de Montmorency, widowed at 45, Louis XIV suddenly began to strive for quiet family happiness. In the person of his third favorite, Francoise de Maintenon, who was three years older than him, the king found what he was looking for. Despite the fact that in 1683 Louis entered into a secret marriage with Françoise, his love was already the calm feeling of a man who foresaw old age. The beautiful, intelligent and pious widow of the famous poet Paul Scarron was apparently the only woman capable of influencing him. The French enlighteners attributed the repeal of the Edict of Nantes in 1685 to its decisive influence. However, there is no doubt that this act was in the best possible way consistent with the aspirations of the king himself in the field of domestic and foreign policy, although it cannot be overlooked that the “Maintenon era” coincided with the second, worst half of his reign. In the secluded rooms of his secret wife, His Majesty "shed tears that he could not hold back." Nevertheless, the traditions of court etiquette were observed in relation to her before her subjects: two days before the death of the king, his 80-year-old wife left the palace and lived out her days in Saint-Cyr, an educational institution for noble maidens she founded.

Louis XIV died on September 1, 1715 at the age of 77. Judging by his physical data, the king could have lived much longer. Despite his small stature, which forced him to wear high heels, Louis was stately and proportionately complex, had a representative appearance. Natural grace was combined in him with a majestic posture, a calm look, unshakable self-confidence. The king had enviable health, rare in those difficult times. Ludovic's conspicuous tendency was bulimia - an insatiable feeling of hunger that caused an incredible appetite. The king ate mountains of food day and night, while eating food in large chunks. What body can handle it? The inability to cope with bulimia was the main cause of his many illnesses, combined with the dangerous experiments of the doctors of that era - endless bloodletting, laxatives, drugs with the most incredible ingredients. The court physician Vallo rightly wrote about the "heroic health" of the king. But it was gradually shattered, in addition to illnesses, also by countless entertainments, balls, hunting, wars and the nervous tension associated with the latter. No wonder therefore, on the eve of his death, Louis XIV uttered these words: "I loved the war too much." But this phrase, most likely, was uttered for a completely different reason: on his deathbed, the "sun king" may have realized what result his country's policy had led to.

So, now it remains for us to utter the sacramental phrase, so often repeated in studies about Louis XIV: did a man or a messenger of God on earth die? Undoubtedly, this king, like many others, was a man with all his weaknesses and contradictions. But to appreciate the personality and rule of this monarch is still not easy. The great emperor and unsurpassed commander Napoleon Bonaparte noted: “Louis XIV was a great king: it was he who elevated France to the rank of the first nations in Europe, it was he who for the first time had 400 thousand people under arms and 100 ships at sea, he annexed Franche-Comte to France, Roussillon, Flanders, he put one of his children on the throne of Spain ... What king since Charlemagne can compare with Louis in every respect? Napoleon is right - Louis XIV was indeed a great king. But was he a great man? It seems that here the assessment of the king by his contemporary Duke Saint-Simon suggests itself: "The king's mind was below average and did not have a great ability to improve." The statement is too categorical, but its author did not sin much against the truth.

Louis XIV was, without a doubt, a strong personality. It was he who contributed to bringing absolute power to its apogee: the system of rigid centralization of government, cultivated by him, was an example for many political regimes of both that era and the modern world. It was under him that the national and territorial integrity of the kingdom was strengthened, a single internal market functioned, and the quantity and quality of French industrial products increased. Under him, France dominated Europe, having the strongest and most efficient army on the continent. And, finally, he contributed to the creation of immortal creations that spiritually enriched the French nation and all of humanity.

But nevertheless, it was during the reign of this king that the “old order” in France cracked, absolutism began to decline, and the first prerequisites for the French revolution of the late 18th century arose. Why did it happen? Louis XIV was neither a great thinker, nor a significant commander, nor a capable diplomat. He did not have the broad outlook that his predecessors Henry IV, Cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin, could boast of. The latter created the foundation for the flourishing of the absolute monarchy and defeated its internal and external enemies. And Louis XIV, with his devastating wars, religious persecution and extremely rigid centralization, built obstacles to the further dynamic development of France. Indeed, in order to choose the right strategic course for his state, the monarch required extraordinary political thinking. But the "king-sun" did not possess such. Therefore, it is not surprising that on the day of the funeral of Louis XIV, Bishop Bossuet, in his funeral speech, summed up the results of a stormy and unheard of long reign with one phrase: “Only God is great!”

France did not mourn the monarch, who reigned for 72 years. Did the country already then foresee the destruction and horrors of the Great Revolution? And was it really impossible to avoid them during such a long reign?

The French king Louis XIV (1638-1715) has gone down in history as the author of the saying "The state is me." The system of state power, in which the monarch (king, king, emperor) can make decisions only of his own free will, without any representatives of the people or the nobility, is called absolutism. In France, absolutism took shape even under the father of Louis XIV, Louis XIII (his time is described in the famous novel by A. Dumas "The Three Musketeers"). But Pope Louis himself did not rule the country, he was more interested in hunting. All matters were decided by the first minister, Cardinal Richelieu. Little Louis was left without a father early, and until he came of age, the country was ruled by another first minister, also a cardinal, Mazarin. The queen mother, Anna of Austria, had a great influence on state affairs. The young king, it seemed, was only interested in dancing, balls and music.

But after the death of Mazarin, he matured dramatically, did not appoint the first minister, and he himself took care of business for a long time every day. His main concern was public finances. Together with the state controller of finances, J. Colbert, the king sought to increase state revenues. For this, the development of manufactories was encouraged, the history of the famous Lyon silk and tapestries began. It was in the era of Louis XIV that France began to rapidly turn into a trendsetter around the world. Even the British enemies tried to copy the Parisian styles of clothing and hairstyles (and this was the era of very bizarre fashion). Desiring to give splendor to his reign, Louis made his court dazzlingly luxurious and surrounded himself with all the arts, like the outstanding rulers of antiquity.

His court playwrights were Moliere, Racine and Corneille, his favorite composer was Lully, and artists, furniture makers, and jewelers created items of unprecedented elegance.

As a child, Louis suffered many unpleasant moments during the uprising of the Parisian citizens of the Fronde (“Slingshot”). Therefore, he decided to build for himself a new luxurious residence, Versailles, outside of Paris. All this required huge expenses. Louis XIV introduced several new taxes, which placed a heavy burden on the peasants.

The rapid industrial development of France came into clear conflict with its medieval way of life, but Louis did not touch the privileges of the nobility and left the class division of society. However, he made great efforts to organize overseas colonies, especially in America. The territories here were named Louisiana after the king.

The Sun King was the name given to the king by flattering courtiers. However, Louis overestimated his greatness. He canceled the decree on religious tolerance of his grandfather, Henry IV, so hundreds of thousands of Protestants left the country, many of whom were wonderful craftsmen. Having moved to England and Germany, they created a textile industry there, which subsequently successfully competed with the French. He even quarreled with the pope, making the French Church independent of Rome. And he fought with all his neighbors. And these wars ended unsuccessfully for France as a whole.

Some territorial acquisitions were too expensive. By the end of the reign of Louis, France entered a period of economic recession, only memories remained of the former prosperity of the peasants. The heir of Louis XIV was his great-grandson Louis XV, who became famous, in turn, with the phrase: "After us, even a flood." The magnificent façade of the Sun King's realm hid the rotten piers, but only the French Revolution showed how rotten they were. However, the cultural influence of the country approved its European superiority for many centuries.

In 1695 Madame de Maintenon triumphed. Thanks to an extremely fortunate combination of circumstances, the poor widow Scarron became the governess of the illegitimate children of Madame de Montespan and Louis XIV. Madame de Maintenon, modest, inconspicuous - and also cunning - managed to attract the attention of the Sun King 2, and he, having made her his mistress, finally secretly betrothed her! To which Saint-Simon 3 once remarked: "History will not believe this." Be that as it may, but Stories, albeit with great difficulty, still had to believe it.

Madame de Maintenon was a born educator. When she became queen in partibus, her penchant for education grew into a real passion. The Duke of Saint-Simon, already familiar to us, accused her of a morbid addiction to controlling others, arguing that "this craving deprived her of freedom, which she could fully enjoy." He reproached her for spending a lot of time in the care of a good thousand monasteries. “She took upon herself the burden of useless, illusory, difficult worries,” he wrote, “and then sent letters and received answers, compiled instructions for the elite — in a word, she was engaged in all sorts of nonsense, which, as a rule, leads to nothing, but if it does, then it leads to some out of the ordinary consequences, bitter oversights in decision-making, miscalculations in managing the course of events and the wrong choice. Not a very kind judgment about a noble lady, although, in general, a fair one.

So, on September 30, 1695, Madame Maintenon informed the Superior of Saint-Cyr - at that time it was a boarding school for noble maidens, and not a military school, as in our days - of the following:

“In the near future I intend to tonsure a Moorish woman as a nun, who expressed her desire that the whole Court be present at the ceremony; I suggested that the ceremony be held behind closed doors, but we were informed that in this case the solemn vow would be declared invalid - it is necessary to give the people the opportunity to amuse themselves.

Moorish? What else Mauritanian?

It should be noted that in those days, "Moors" and "Moorish" were called people with dark skin color. So Madame de Maintenon was writing about a young negro woman.

About the one who, on October 15, 1695, the king appointed a pension of 300 livres as a reward for her "good intention to devote her life to the service of the Lord in the Benedictine monastery in Moret." Now it remains for us to find out who she is, this Mauritanian from Moret.

On the road from Fontainebleau to Pont-sur-Yonne lies the small town of Moret - surrounded by ancient walls, a delightful architectural ensemble, consisting of old buildings and streets completely unsuitable for car traffic. Over time, the appearance of the town has changed a lot. At the end of the 17th century, there was a Benedictine monastery there, no different from hundreds of others scattered throughout the French kingdom. No one would have ever remembered this holy monastery if one fine day a black nun, whose existence so amazed contemporaries, had not been found among its inhabitants.

The most surprising, however, was not that some Moorish woman took root among the Benedictines, but the care and attention that high-ranking persons at the Court showed her. According to Saint-Simon, Madame de Maintenon, for example, "had been visiting her from Fontainebleau every now and then, and, in the end, they got used to her visits." True, she saw the Mauritanian infrequently, but not so very rarely. During such visits, she "compassionately inquired about her life, health, and how the abbess felt about her." When Princess Marie Adelaide of Savoy arrived in France to be engaged to the heir to the throne, the Duke of Burgundy, Madame de Maintenon took her to Moret so that she could see the Moor with her own eyes. The Dauphin, son of Louis XIV, saw her more than once, and the princes, his children, once or twice, "and they all treated her kindly."

In fact, the Mauritanian was treated like no one else. “She was treated with much more attention than any famous, outstanding person, and she was proud of the fact that she was shown so much care, as well as the mystery that surrounded her; although she lived modestly, it was felt that powerful patrons stood behind her.

Yes, what you can’t refuse Saint-Simon is the ability to capture the interest of readers. His skill is especially pronounced when, talking about a Moorish woman, he reports, for example, that “one day, having heard the sound of a hunting horn - Monseigneur (the son of Louis XIV) was hunting in the forest nearby - she, as if by the way, dropped: “This is my brother hunting ".

So the noble duke raised the question. But does he give an answer? Gives, though not entirely clear.

“It was rumored that she was the daughter of the king and queen ... they even wrote that the queen had a miscarriage, which many courtiers were sure of. But be that as it may, it remains a mystery.

Frankly speaking, Saint-Simon was ignorant of the basics of genetics - can not he be condemned for this? Today, any medical student will tell you that a husband and wife, if they are both white, simply cannot give birth to a black child.

For Voltaire, who wrote so much about the secret of the Iron Mask, everything was clear as daylight if he decided to write this: “She was extremely dark and, moreover, looked like him (the king). When the king sent her to a monastery, he gave her a gift, assigning a maintenance of twenty thousand crowns. There was an opinion that she was his daughter, which made her feel proud, but the abbesses expressed obvious dissatisfaction about this. During another trip to Fontainebleau, Madame de Maintenon visited the Moray monastery, she called on the black nun to be more restrained and did everything to rid the girl of the thought that flattered her pride.

“Madame,” the nun answered her, “the zeal with which such a noble person as you tries to convince me that I am not the daughter of a king convinces me of just the opposite.”

The authenticity of Voltaire's testimony is difficult to doubt, since he drew his information from a source that is trustworthy. Once he himself went to the Morea monastery and personally saw a Moorish woman. Voltaire's friend Comartin, who enjoyed the right to freely visit the monastery, obtained the same permission for the author of The Age of Louis XIV.

And here is another detail that deserves the attention of the reader. In the boarding letter that King Louis XIV handed over to the Mauritanian, her name appears. It was double and consisted of the names of the king and queen ... The Mauritanian was called Louis-Maria-Teresa!

If, thanks to his mania for erecting monumental structures, Louis XIV was similar to the Egyptian pharaohs, then his passion for love pleasures made him related to the Arab sultans. So, Saint-Germain, Fontainebleau and Versailles were turned into real seraglios. The Sun King used to casually drop his handkerchief - and every time there were a dozen ladies and maidens, moreover, from the most noble families of France, who immediately rushed to pick it up. In love, Louis was more of a "glutton" than a "gourmet". The most frank woman in Versailles, the Princess of the Palatinate, the king's daughter-in-law, said that “Louis XIV was gallant, but often his gallantry grew into sheer debauchery. He loved everyone indiscriminately: noble ladies, peasant women, gardener's daughters, maids - the main thing for a woman was to pretend that she was in love with him. The king began to show promiscuity in love from his very first heartfelt passion: the woman who introduced him to love pleasures was thirty years older than him, besides, she did not have an eye.

However, in the future, it must be admitted, he achieved more significant success: his mistresses were the charming Louise de La Vallière and Athenais de Montespan, a delightful beauty, although, judging by current concepts, and somewhat plump - nothing can be done, over time, fashion changes as to women as well as clothes.

What tricks did the court ladies resort to in order to "get the king"! For the sake of this, young girls were even ready for blasphemy: it was often possible to see how in the chapel, during mass, they turned their backs to the altar without any shame in order to better see the king, or rather, to make it easier for the king to see them. Well well! Meanwhile, "The Greatest of Kings" was just a short man - his height barely reached 1 meter 62 centimeters. So, since he always tried to look handsome, he had to wear shoes with a sole 11 centimeters thick and a wig high 15 centimeters. However, this is still nothing: you can be small, but beautiful. Louis XIV, on the other hand, underwent a severe operation on the jaw, after which a hole was left in the upper cavity of the mouth, and when he ate, food came out through his nose. Worse, the king always smelled bad. He knew this - and when he entered the room, he immediately opened the windows, even if it was frosty outside. To fight off the unpleasant smell, Madame de Montespan always clutched a handkerchief soaked in harsh perfume in her hand. However, in spite of everything, for most of the ladies of Versailles, the “moment” spent in the company of the king seemed truly heavenly. Perhaps the reason for this is female vanity?

Queen Maria Theresa loved Louis no less than other women who at various times shared his bed with the king. As soon as Maria Teresa, upon arrival from Spain, set foot on the island of Bidassoa, where the young Louis XIV was waiting for her, she fell in love with him at first sight. She admired him, for he seemed to her handsome, and every time she froze in delight before him and before his genius. Well, what about the king? And the king was much less blinded. He saw her as she was—fat, small, with ugly teeth, “spoiled and blackened.” “They say that her teeth became so because she ate a lot of chocolate,” explains the Princess of Palatinate and adds: “Besides, she ate garlic in exorbitant quantities.” Thus, it turned out that one unpleasant smell beat off another.

The Sun King was finally imbued with a sense of conjugal duty. Whenever he appeared before the queen, her mood became festive: “As soon as the king gave her a friendly look, she felt happy all day long. She rejoiced that the king shared her marriage bed, for she, a Spaniard by blood, brought real pleasure to love pleasures, and the courtiers could not help but notice her joy. She never got angry at those who made fun of her for this - she herself laughed, winked at the scoffers, and at the same time rubbed her little hands with pleasure.

Their union lasted twenty-three years and brought them six children - three sons and three daughters, but all the girls died in infancy.

The question related to the mystery of the Moorish woman from Moret is divided, in turn, into four sub-questions: could it be that the black nun was at the same time the daughter of the king and queen? — and we have already given a negative answer to this question; could she be the daughter of a king and a black mistress? - or, in other words, the daughter of a queen and a negro lover? And finally, could it be that the black nun, having nothing to do with the royal couple, was simply mistaken in calling the Dauphin “her brother”?

There are two figures in History whose love affairs have been the subject of careful study - Napoleon and Louis XIV. Other historians have spent their entire lives trying to figure out how many mistresses they had. So, with regard to Louis XIV, no one has been able to establish - although scientists have thoroughly studied all the documents, testimonies and memoirs of that time - that he at least once had a “colored” mistress. What is true is true, at that time in France, colored women were a curiosity, and if the king had accidentally looked after himself one, rumors of his passion would have spread throughout the kingdom in no time. Especially when you consider that every single day the sun king tried to stay in front of everyone. None of his gestures or words simply could not be missed by the curious courtiers: still, after all, the Court of Louis XIV was known as the most slanderous in the world. Can you imagine what would happen if there was a rumor that the king had a black passion?

However, there was nothing of the sort. In that case, how could a Moorish woman be the daughter of Louis XIV? However, not all historians adhered to this assumption. But many of them, including Voltaire, quite seriously believed that the black nun was the daughter of Marie-Therese.

Here the reader may wonder: how is this so? Such a chaste woman? The queen, who, as you know, literally adored her husband the king! What's right is right. However, for all that, one should not forget that this dearest woman was extremely stupid and extremely simple-hearted. Here is what, for example, the Princess of Palatinate, whom we know, writes about her: “She was too stupid and believed everything she was told, good and bad.”

The version put forward by such writers as Voltaire and Touchard-Lafosse, the author of the famous "Chronicles of the Bull's Eye", as well as the famous historian Gosselin Le Nôtre, boils down, with a slight difference, to something like this: the envoys of an African king gave Maria Theresa a little Moor of ten or twelve years of age not taller than twenty-seven inches. Touchar-Lafos allegedly even knew his name - Nabo.

And Le Nôtre claims that since that time it has become fashionable - the founders of which were Pierre Mignard and others like him - "to draw Negroes in all large portraits." In the Palace of Versailles, for example, there is a portrait of Mademoiselle de Blois and Mademoiselle de Nantes, the king's illegitimate daughters: just in the middle, the canvas is decorated with the image of a black child, an indispensable attribute of the era. However, soon after the “shameful story connected with the queen and the Moor” became known, this fashion gradually faded away.

So, after a while, Her Majesty discovered that they were soon to become a mother - the same was confirmed by the court doctors. The king rejoiced, waiting for the birth of an heir. What recklessness! The black man has grown. He was taught to speak French. It seemed to everyone that "the innocent amusements of the Moor came from his innocence and liveliness of nature." In the end, as they say, the queen fell in love with him with all her heart, so deeply that no chastity could protect her from weakness, which even the most exquisite handsome man from the Christian world could hardly inspire in her.

As for Nabo, he probably died, and "rather suddenly" - immediately after it was publicly announced that the Queen was on demolition.

Poor Marie-Therese was about to give birth. But the king could not understand why she was so nervous. And the queen, you know, sighed and, as if in bitter foreboding, said:
“I don’t recognize myself: why this nausea, disgust, whims, because nothing like this has ever happened to me before?” If I did not have to restrain myself, as decency requires, I would happily fiddle on the carpet, as we often did with my Mauritanian.

— Ah, madame! Ludovic was perplexed. “Your condition makes me tremble. You can’t think about the past all the time - otherwise, God forbid, you still give birth to a scarecrow, contrary to nature.

The king looked into the water! When the baby was born, the doctors saw that it was “a black girl, black as ink, from head to toe”, and were amazed.

The court physician Felix swore to Louis XIV that "one glance of the Moor was enough to turn the baby into a similar one even in the mother's womb." To which, according to Touchar-Lafos, His Majesty remarked:
- Hm, one look! So his gaze was too penetrating!

And Le Nôtre reports that only much later “the queen confessed that one day a young black slave, hiding somewhere behind a closet, suddenly rushed to her with a wild cry - apparently he wanted to frighten, and he succeeded.”

Thus, the pretentious words of the Moorish woman from Moret are confirmed by the following: since the queen gave birth to her, being at that time married to Louis XIV, she was legally entitled to call herself the daughter of the sun king, although in fact her father was a Moor who grew up from an unintelligent Negro slave!

But, frankly, this is only a legend, and it was put on paper much later. Watu wrote around 1840: Bull's Eye Chronicles appeared in 1829. And G. Lenotre's story, published in 1898 in the Monde Illustre magazine, ends on such a sad note: everyone was talking at the end of the last century.”

The authenticity of the portrait is indeed beyond doubt, which, however, cannot be said about the legend itself.

But still! The history of the Moorish woman from Moret, obviously, began with a completely reliable event. We have evidence, which is the written evidence of contemporaries, that the Queen of France really gave birth to a black girl. Let us now, following the chronological order, give the floor to the witnesses.

So, Mademoiselle de Montpensier, or Grand Mademoiselle, a close relative of the king, wrote:
“For three days in a row, the queen was tormented by severe attacks of fever, and she delivered prematurely - at eight months. After the birth, the fever did not stop, and the queen was already preparing for communion. Her condition plunged the courtiers into bitter sadness... By Christmas, I remember, the queen no longer saw or heard those who were talking in an undertone in her chambers...

His Majesty also told me what suffering the queen’s illness caused, how many people gathered at her place before communion, how at the sight of her the priest almost fainted from grief, how at the same time His Majesty the Prince laughed, and after him all the others, what an expression the queen had a face ... and that the newborn was like two drops of water like a charming Moorish child, which M. Beaufort brought with him and from whom the queen never parted; when everyone realized that the newborn could only look like him, the unfortunate Moor was taken away. The king also said that the girl was terrible, that she would not live, and that I should not tell the queen anything, because this could lead her to the grave ... And the queen shared with me the sadness that took possession of her after the courtiers laughed when her already gathered to take communion."

So in the year when this event happened - it was established that the birth took place on November 16, 1664 - the king's cousin mentions the resemblance of a black girl born to the queen with a Moor.

The fact of the birth of a black girl is also confirmed by Madame de Mottville, the maid of Anna of Austria. And in 1675, eleven years after the incident, Bussy-Rabutin told a story, in his opinion, quite reliable:
“Marie-Therese was talking with Madame de Montosier about the king’s favorite (Mademoiselle de Lavaliere), when His Majesty unexpectedly entered them - he overheard their conversation. His appearance so impressed the queen that she blushed all over and, lowering her eyes in shame, hurriedly left. And after three days, she gave birth to a black girl who, as she thought, would not survive. According to official reports, the newborn really soon died - more precisely, it happened on December 26, 1664, when she was a little over a month old, about which Louis XIV did not fail to inform his father-in-law, the Spanish king: “Last night my daughter died. .. Although we were ready for misfortune, I did not experience much grief.” And in the "Letters" of Guy Patin, one can read the following lines: "This morning the little lady had convulsions and she died, because she had neither strength nor health." Later, the Princess of Palatinate also wrote about the death of the “ugly baby”, although in 1664 she was not in France: “All the courtiers saw how she died.” But was it really like that? If the newborn really turned out to be black, it was quite logical to announce that she had died, but in fact to take and hide her somewhere in the wilderness. And if so, then a better place than a monastery cannot be found ...

In 1719, the Princess of the Palatinate wrote that "the people did not believe that the girl had died, for everyone knew that she was in a monastery in Moret, near Fontainebleau."

The last, later, evidence related to this event was the message of the Princess of Conti. In December 1756, the Duke de Luynes briefly outlined in his diary a conversation that he had with Queen Maria Leshchinskaya, wife of Louis XV, where it was just about a Moorish woman from Moret: “For a long time there was only talk that about some black a nun from a monastery in Moret, near Fontainebleau, who called herself the daughter of a French queen. Someone convinced her that she was the daughter of a queen, but because of the unusual color of her skin, she was hidden in a monastery. The Queen did me the honor of telling me that she had a conversation about this with the Princess of Conti, the legitimized illegitimate daughter of Louis XIV, and the Princess of Conti told her that Queen Marie-Thérèse had indeed given birth to a girl who had a purple, even black, face - apparently , because when she was born, she suffered greatly, but a little later the newborn died.

Thirty-one years later, in 1695, Madame de Maintenon intended to take the vows of a Moorish woman, who, a month later, Louis XIV appoints a boarding school. This Mauritanian is called Louis Maria Theresa.

When she enters the Morea monastery, she is surrounded by all sorts of worries. Madame de Maintenon often visits the Mauritanian - she demands to be treated with respect, and even introduces her to the Princess of Savoy, as soon as she has time to be engaged to the heir to the throne. The Mauritanian is firmly convinced that she herself is the daughter of the queen. In the same way, apparently, all the Morai nuns also think. Their opinion is shared by the people, because, as we already know, "the people did not believe that the girl had died, because everyone knew that she was in a monastery in Moret." Yes, as they say, there is something to think about here ...

It is possible, however, that there was a simple and at the same time amazing coincidence. Now is the time to cite one curious explanation that Queen Marie Leszczynska gave to the Duc de Luynes: “A certain Laroche, the porter in the Zoological Garden, at that time served a Moor and a Moorish woman. A daughter was born to a Moorish woman, and the father and mother, unable to raise the child, shared their grief with Madame de Maintenon, who took pity on them and promised to take care of their daughter. She provided her with weighty recommendations and escorted her to a monastery. This is how a legend appeared, which turned out to be a fiction from beginning to end.

But how, then, did the daughter of the Moors, the servants of the Zoo, imagine that royal blood flows in her veins? And why was she surrounded by such attention?

I think one should not rush to conclusions, decisively rejecting the hypothesis that the Mauritanian from Moret somehow has nothing to do with the royal family. I would very much like the reader to understand me correctly: I am not saying that this fact is indisputable, I just think that we have no right to categorically deny it without examining it from all sides. When we consider it comprehensively, we will certainly return to the conclusion of Saint-Simon: "Be that as it may, this remains a mystery."

And the last. In 1779, a portrait of a Moorish woman still adorned the office of the chief abbess of the Morea monastery. Later, he added to the collection of Sainte-Genevieve Abbey. Now the canvas is stored in the library of the same name. At one time, a whole “case” was attached to the portrait - correspondence concerning the Mauritanian. This file is in the archives of the Saint-Genevieve Library. However, now there is nothing in it. From him there was only one cover with an inscription that suggests: "Paper related to the Mauritanian, daughter of Louis XIV."

Alain Decaux, French historian
Translated from French by I. Alcheev

Part two

The time of Louis XIV in the West, the time of Peter the Great in the East of Europe

I. INTERNAL ACTIVITIES OF LOUIS XIV AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT

The era of Louis XIV

Portrait of Louis XIV as a young man. Artist Ch. Lebrun, 1661

Under the name of Louis XIV, we imagine a sovereign who crossed the border separating the European autocrat from the Asiatic despot, who, according to the teachings of Hobbes, wanted to be not the head of the state, but his soul, before whom, therefore, the subjects were impersonal, soulless beings, and the state , vitalized by the sovereign, imbued with him, like a body with a spirit, of course, constituted one being with him. "The state is me!" Louis XIV said. How, then, could one of the French kings achieve such an idea of ​​his significance and, most importantly, did not confine himself to one idea, but applied thought to the case, and applied it without hindrance?

Always some kind of popular movement, upheaval, upheaval, exhausting the state organism, spending a lot of people's strength, force society to demand calm, demand strong power, which would save them from confusion and give them rest, gather their strength, material and moral. During the infancy of Louis XIV, we see in France a strong and prolonged turmoil, which wearied society and made it want a strong government. This demand was all the stronger, the more fruitless the movement against the authorities turned out to be; people who wanted to limit the royal power in order, according to them, to lead the people out of an unbearably difficult situation - these people, having been worried, shouting and fighting, were unable to do anything to relieve the people. The movement, which at first assumed a very serious character, ended comically. Such an outcome of the movement, such disappointment with attempts at something new, at change, discouraged them for a long time and all the more raised the significance of the old order, which was now turned to as the only means of salvation. Thus, the twenty-two-year-old king accepted power from the cold hands of Mazarin under the most favorable circumstances for power and, by his nature, was quite capable of taking advantage of these circumstances.

Louis XIV did not at all belong to those brilliant historical figures who create for their people new means of historical life, who leave to posterity a rich inheritance in ideas, people and material forces, a legacy that the people live on for centuries after them. On the contrary, Louis received the richest inheritance; it consisted in a country blessed by nature, in an energetic, spiritually strong people, in an extremely conveniently located and rounded state region, surrounded by weak neighbors: half-dead Spain, fragmented and therefore powerless Italy and Germany, insignificant in its military means Holland; England was busy working out her forms of government and could not influence the continent; on the contrary, her king allowed himself to be subject to the influence of the powerful sovereign of France. In addition, the rich legacy of Louis XIV consisted of gifted people: military, administrative, literary celebrities, with which the reign of Louis XIV shines, were inherited, and not found by him. But, taking advantage of the rich funds inherited, Louis exhausted them, but did not create new ones and left behind France bankruptcy - bankruptcy is not only financial, money is an acquired thing - but, worst of all, bankruptcy in people. Louis did not have the main talent of sovereigns - to find and prepare people. Born power-hungry, he was brought up during the Fronde, when royal power endured such strong insults.

But the people who offended the royal power were unable to do anything themselves, and with irritation, hatred for popular movements, for demagogues, a deep contempt for them was combined in the young king - this is the feeling that the Fronde instilled in Louis. He was power-hungry, proud and energetic, he attributed popular movements to the fact that instead of the king, the first minister ruled, who could not inspire such respect, against which it was easy to arm himself in word and deed, and therefore wanted to rule himself; but the longer he ruled, the more he got used to looking at himself not as the head, but as the soul of a state body, a life-giving principle, like the sun, with which he liked to compare himself - the more unpleasant people became for him, who were also the sun , shone with their own, unborrowed light; Educated people were especially unpleasant to Louis, because he was aware of a great lack of education in himself, and the feeling of the superiority of others over himself was unbearable for him. But in a dislike for people who are strong, independent in character, position in society, talents and education, and the reason that Louis could not replace celebrities who left the field with others and bequeathed to France bankruptcy in people.

Meanwhile, the brilliance of the reign was such that it blinded contemporaries and descendants, and Louis knew how to appear for his people as a great king: how did he manage to do this? We see that of the French kings, two were distinguished by a particularly national character - Francis I and Henry IV, but Louis XIV excelled them in this respect. In the time being described, the main of the Western European peoples, by the nature of their activities, in relation to each other, could be personified in this way: one is a very smart, active and businesslike person; he is constantly busy, and is occupied exclusively with his immediate interests, he has done his business excellently, he has become terribly rich; but at the same time he is not sociable, keeps himself aloof, clumsy, not representative, does not arouse sympathy in others, takes part in common affairs only when his own interests are involved, and even in this case he does not like to act directly, but he makes others work for him by giving them money, just as a tradesman who has grown rich hires a recruit instead of himself: such is the Englishman, such is the English people. Another person is a very venerable, but one-sidedly developed, scientist, who works hard with his head, but still could not, due to circumstances, strengthen his body and therefore is incapable of strong physical activity, without the means to repel the attacks of powerful neighbors, without the means to maintain his importance, to force respect their inviolability in the struggle of the strong is the German people. The third man, like the second, could not, due to circumstances, strengthen his body; but the southern, lively, passionate nature, in addition to studying science and especially art, demanded practical activity. Having no way to satisfy these needs at home, he often goes to strangers, offers them his services, and often his name shines in a foreign land with glorious deeds, extensive, glorious activities - such is the Italian people. The fourth man looks exhausted, but, apparently, he is of a strong constitution, capable of strong activity, and, indeed, he waged a long, fierce struggle for certain interests, and no one at that time was considered more brave and skillful than him. The struggle, into which he passionately plunged all over, exhausted his physical strength, and meanwhile the interests for which he fought weakened, were replaced by others for the rest of the people; but he did not stock up on other interests, was not accustomed to any other occupation; exhausted and idle, he plunged into a long rest, at times convulsively revealing his existence, restlessly listening to the calls of the new and at the same time being drawn by deep-rooted habits to the old - this is the Spanish people.

But more than all these four members of our society, the fifth draws attention to himself, for none of them is gifted with such means and does not use such efforts to excite universal attention to himself, as he does. Energetic, passionate, quick-burning, capable of quick transitions from one extreme to another, he used all his energy to play a prominent role in society, to attract the eyes of everyone. No one speaks better than him; he developed for himself such an easy, such a convenient language that everyone began to assimilate it for himself, as a language more than any other public. He has such a representative appearance, he is so beautifully dressed, he has such excellent manners that everyone involuntarily looks at him, adopts from him both dress, and hairstyle, and address. He is all gone into appearance; he does not live at home; for a long time, he is not able to carefully attend to his household chores; he will begin to settle them - he will make many mistakes, he will seethe, he will rage like a released child, he will get tired, he will lose sight of the goal he began to strive for, and, like a child, he will let someone lead him. But on the other hand, no one listens so sensitively, so vigilantly looks at everything that is done in society, by others. There is a little noise, movement - he is already there; where some banner will be raised - he is the first to carry this banner; some idea will be expressed - he will be the first to assimilate it, generalize and carry it everywhere, inviting everyone to assimilate it; ahead of others in a common cause, in a common movement, leader, skirmisher both in a crusade and in a revolution, a pillar of Catholicism and unbelief, carried away and carried away, frivolous, fickle, often disgusting in his hobbies, capable of arousing strong love and strong hatred for himself - terrible French people!

Among the angular and constantly busy Englishman, the learned, the industrious, but not at all attractive German, the lively, but slovenly, scattered Italian, the silent, half-asleep Spaniard - the Frenchman moves indefatigably, speaks incessantly, speaks loudly and well, although he boasts a lot, pushes, wakes up, gives no rest to anyone; others will start the fight reluctantly, out of necessity - the Frenchman rushes into the fight for the love of the fight, for the love of fame; all the neighbors are afraid of him, everyone is watching with intense attention what he is doing. Sometimes it seems that he calmed down, exhausted by the external struggle, and went about his household chores; but these domestic studies are short-lived, and the restless people again appear in the foreground and again excite all of Europe. Playing the most prominent role everywhere, capturing everyone's attention, capturing the eyes of everyone, making the strongest impression is the main goal of the Frenchman: hence the desire for appearance, for elegance in manners, clothes, language, skill to show oneself and one's product in person, hence the theatrical skill - the skill to play the role appropriate to the position. And now Louis XIV, a true Frenchman, knows how to play the role of king with inimitable art. Seduced by this skillful game, other sovereigns try in vain to imitate the great king; but no one is able to enjoy a masterful game, a masterful production of a play, to applaud a great actor in such delight as the French themselves, connoisseurs and masters of the craft. Louis XIV, the full representative of his people, appeared in the eyes of the latter as a great king; there was much brilliance and glory, France was given the first place, and the most glorious, passionate for brilliance people could not remain ungrateful to Louis, just as a century later remained chained to the name of the man who covered France with glory, although the outcome of the activities of both matched the start.

Fouquet and Colbert

Having assumed the government with the firm resolve never to let it go out of hand, to force everything to be taken care of, Louis XIV had to first of all face the phenomenon from which, as he well should remember, the Fronde went - with a terrible financial disorder, with an extremely sad the state of the taxable estate. The farmers suffered from the burden of taxes, which in 1660 stretched up to 90 million, but not all of this money went to the treasury due to large arrears; everything was taken from a peasant who could not pay taxes, and, finally, he himself was thrown into prison, where hundreds of unfortunate people died from bad maintenance; merchants and industrialists complained about the high duties imposed on imported and exported goods. The chief financial officer was Nicholas Fouquet, a brilliant man who was able to deceive the inexperienced with his knowledge and abilities, but in essence he was not a serious person at all, whose attention was paid not to improving finances by improving the situation of taxable people, but to use income to keep his advantageous place. . Mazarin supported him as a man who knew how to get money at the first request of the minister, and how Fouquet got money, Mazarin had nothing to do with it. But in addition to the first minister, Fouquet tried with public money to buy himself the favor and support of all influential people: it was believed that he annually gave away up to four million. Fouquet thought to seduce the king with brilliant projects, but Mazarin bequeathed to Louis another person, more reliable than Fouquet: it was Jean Baptiste Colbert.

Colbert was the son of a Reims merchant (born in 1619) and received an initial education, which was then considered sufficient for merchant children; he learned Latin at the age of 50, when he was already a minister; not having time to study Latin at home, he took the teacher with him in the carriage and studied on the road. He soon gave up trading and became a lawyer, then took up finance and was introduced to Mazarin by Minister Letellier. Mazarin took him to his manager, entrusted him with all his private affairs, but often used him in public affairs. Relying on the trust of the cardinal, Colbert decided to start a fight with the terrible Fouquet, who, in order to crush the enemy and his patron, decided to set in motion all his enormous means, resort, if necessary, to the new Fronde, but at that very time Mazarin was dying. Fouquet breathed freely, but they say that Mazarin, dying, said to the king: “Sire! I owe everything to you, but I settle accounts with your majesty, leaving you Colbert.

Louis, apparently without depriving Fouquet of his confidence, brought Colbert closer to him, who every evening proved to him the inaccuracy of the reports submitted by Fouquet in the morning. The king decided to get rid of Fouquet, but he had to cunning, pretend, prepare for a long time: the chief financial officer was so terrible! Finally, during the journey of Louis to Brittany, Fouquet, who accompanied the king, was arrested in Nantes and taken to the castle of Angers. Louis announced that he was taking over the management of finances with the help of a council composed of honest and capable people; Marshal Villroy was appointed chairman of the council by name, Colbert did everything under the modest title of manager (intendant); only in 1669 did he receive the title of secretary of state with a department in which various departments were combined: maritime, trade and colonies, the administration of Paris, church affairs, etc. Famous figures usually have a historical meaning, they know how to connect the present with the past, connect their own activities with the activities of glorious predecessors: so Colbert studied the activities of Richelieu and had a deep respect for the famous cardinal. In advice, when discussing important matters, he always turned to the memory of Richelieu, and Louis laughed at this habit of Colbert: “Well, now Colbert will begin:“ Sovereign! This great Cardinal Richelieu, etc.

Shortly after Fouquet's arrest, the king set up a commission of inquiry to discover all the abuses that had crept into the financial administration since 1635. The decree on the establishment of the commission stated that financial disturbances, as the king made sure, were the cause of all the misfortunes of the people, while a small number of people illegally amassed huge fortunes quickly, so the king decided to severely punish predators who drained finances and ruined the provinces. The sixth part of fines is appointed to informers. The people who participated in the former financial administration offered 20 million so that they would not start investigations; contrary to the opinion of the new financial council, Louis did not agree to this deal and gained great popularity among the lower strata of the population. Exhortations were read in the churches: it was required of all the faithful that they, under pain of excommunication, report on financial abuses. Meanwhile, the Fouquet process began: in his papers, not only political and love correspondence was captured, which exposed so many noble men and women in an unfavorable light, but also a plan of open indignation, relating to 1657, when he was waiting for arrest from Mazarin.

Louis, who, thanks to the impressions of the Fronde, came into a painful state at the word "indignation", was terribly irritated and took too much part in the investigation for the king; moreover, the young forces for the first time dealt with in the struggle; Louis was pleased to show his power, his inexorable justice, and together show the people that what they could not do in revolt against the authorities, the authorities would do and free the people from the people who ate their property. Fouquet found numerous defenders: for him there was a judiciary, jealous of their independence and understanding the direction of the young king; for him were the courtiers, accustomed to Fouquet's generosity and fearful of Colbert's avarice; for him there were people who benefited him, because his generosity did not always have selfish motives; for him were writers, artists, women, starting with the queen mother; for him were Tyuraine and Condé; finally, many of those who at first admired the strict measures of the king felt sorry for Fouquet, the kind, sympathetic Fouquet, in whose character there were no traits that were especially offensive - stinginess, arrogance, whose virtues and shortcomings were so national. But this revolt for Fouquet could only force Louis to act more strongly against him.

Fouquet was transferred to the Bastille, before which one of his accomplices had already been hanged, and this was not the only victim of the terrible commission. Fouquet deftly defended himself before the court, putting all the blame on Mazarin. Finally, the matter was decided: the court sentenced Fouquet to eternal exile with confiscation of property, but the king, instead of mitigating the punishment, replaced the exile with eternal and heavy imprisonment in a fortress. The commission continued its work, and the price of penalties reached a huge figure - 135 million.

Politics of Louis XIV

The government did not limit itself to exposing and punishing financial abuses. In the provinces remote from the government center, the landowners, who lived on their estates, allowed themselves all kinds of violence against subjects their own (sujets), intimidated or bribed judges were on their side. Serfdom still existed in some countries. In 1665, a commission was appointed in Clermont with the right to decide in the last instance all civil and criminal cases, to punish abuses and misdemeanors, to destroy bad customs. Fear attacked the landowners: some fled from France, others hid in the mountains, some began to appease the peasants, humiliate themselves before them, and the peasants raised their heads and did not set limits to their claims and hopes; in one locality the peasants bought gloves for themselves and thought that they should no longer work and that the king had only them in mind. Since the landowners, especially distinguished by their violence, fled from France, 273 people were condemned in absentia to death, to exile or to galleys, their castles were destroyed, their estates were confiscated. One of them, Baron Senega, was convicted of collecting money from individuals and communities with an armed hand, obstructing the collection of royal income, demanding improper work from the peasants, breaking down a church in order to use the material for his house, and killing several people; the Marquis of Canillac kept 12 robbers, whom he called his twelve apostles, and collected ten taxes from the peasants instead of one. In the same year, according to Colbert's plan, a council of justice was established, at the opening of which Colbert turned to Louis XIV with an exhortation to introduce one law, one measure and one weight throughout the kingdom; but this measure was not carried out. With regard to justice under Louis XIV, the mitigation of punishments for sorcerers is remarkable: in 1670, the Rouen Parliament captured 34 sorcerers and condemned four to death; the royal council changed death to exile; after the death penalty was withheld only for sacrilege, sorcerers were ordered to be punished everywhere with exile, and the government threatened those people who deceived the ignorant and gullible with imaginary magical actions.

Having freed the people from the violence of the strong, they wanted to direct them to commercial and industrial activities, to raise the means and well-being of France to the level of the means and well-being of the most prosperous states of Europe, namely Holland and England. In 1669, the famous decree on forests and water communications was issued, which Colbert had been preparing for eight years in a commission of 22 members; the quality of the forests and the space occupied by them were indicated, measures were indicated for the preservation and multiplication of forests, rules for logging and sale: all these concerns had the main goal of preserving material for shipbuilding. The Languedoc Canal was dug to connect the Atlantic Ocean with the Mediterranean Sea, the Orleans Canal was dug to connect the Loire with the Seine. Colbert, like all statesmen of that time, started from the idea that peoples grow rich from trade and the manufacturing industry, and therefore set himself the task of restoring the fallen and declining industries, creating new, all kinds of factory industries; to form a strong phalanx of merchants and industrialists, submissive to a reasonable direction from above, to ensure France's industrial triumph through order and unity of activity, to obtain the most durable and most beautiful quality in goods, and they wanted to achieve this by prescribing the same methods to workers, which connoisseurs recognized as the best; to remove fiscal obstacles, to give France her proper share in maritime world trade, to enable her to transport her own works, while until now this transport was in the hands of neighbors, mainly the Dutch; increase and strengthen the colonies, force them to consume only the products of the mother country and sell their products only to the mother country; to maintain the commercial power of France to create a navy on the most extensive scale.

For these purposes, a West Indian a company to which the government ceded for forty years all French possessions in America and Africa, because the second supplied the first with black workers; was also established East Indian a company with permission to establish itself in Madagascar, with which they shared brilliant hopes, calling it African France; hopes were not realized, and the French colonies on the island soon disappeared, but the East India Company held on. New advantages were demanded from the Porte for the French, and through this the Levant trade was strengthened. In order to always have good sailors for warships, Colbert came up with the following means: all the sailors in the whole of France were taken and divided into three classes; one class served a year on royal ships, and the other two years on merchant ships, then the second and third classes did the same, and finally the line returned to the first class to serve on royal ships, etc .; under pain of severe punishment, the French were forbidden to enter the military service of other states. For the training of naval officers, a company of midshipmen (a kind of naval military school) was established. They hastened to take advantage of all the successes made in England and Holland regarding shipbuilding, and tried to surpass their neighbors in the gigantic size of ships; in 1671 the number of warships extended to 196. In 1664 France was divided into three great trading districts, and in each of them there were annual meetings of merchant deputies, chosen two from each seaside or commercial city: the meetings had the purpose of reviewing the state of trade and industry and report the results of their observations to the king.

In 1664, Louis announced his intention to destroy the dependence of his subjects on foreigners for manufactured goods, and in the following year factories spring up on all sides. The Tariff of 1664 increased the export duty on crude materials, and doubled the duty on manufactories imported from abroad, in order to give French manufacturers cheap raw products and free them from the rivalry of foreign works; the rules of the old workshops were revised, new workshops were established, the length, width and quality of cloth and other woolen, silk and linen fabrics were determined by decree. Industry flourished rapidly; The impetus given by an energetic government to an energetic and gifted people produced a strong and beneficial movement, despite its one-sidedness and superfluous regimentation. Contemporaries, the most averse to Louis XIV, could not but do justice to this first, Colbert's period of reign: "Everything prospered, everything was rich: Colbert raised finances, maritime affairs, trade, industry, literature itself" highly. The immediate descendants, for reasons which will be discussed later, were hostile to the activities of Colbert, but now, after a calm study of the matter, it is recognized that the goal of Colbert's administration was to create a working people; he said that for him there is nothing more precious in the state of human labor.

Colbert. Portrait by C. Lefebvre, 1666

“Sciences are one of the greatest ornaments for the state, and it is impossible to do without them,” said Richelieu; Colbert did not say anything without calling in advance the name of the famous cardinal; it is not surprising, therefore, that Louis XIV considered the sciences and literature in general one of the greatest ornaments for the throne. This decoration did not need to be created like factories or a fleet: talents were ready, as soon as they were brought closer to the throne, brought into direct dependence on it by pensions, and in 1663 the first list of literary pensions was compiled, in which 34 writers were included; Corneille is called the world's first dramatic poet, and Moliere an excellent comic poet. The king declared himself the patron of the academy and gave its members the right to greet him on solemn occasions "on a par with parliament and other higher institutions." The Academy of Inscriptions and Literature at that time got its start in the form of a court institution: Colbert formed a council of knowledgeable people near him, who were supposed to compose inscriptions for monuments, medals, set tasks for artists, compose plans for festivities and their descriptions, and finally, deal with compiling the history of the present reign. In 1666, the Academy of Sciences was founded, although England warned in this respect, because here, as early as 1662, a similar institution, the famous Royal Society, was founded. The Academy of Painting and Sculpture, founded under Mazaria, received a new charter; The Academy of Architecture was founded in 1671.

An observatory was built the following year. Royal favors were not limited to French writers alone; French envoys at foreign courts were supposed to deliver to their court information about the most honored writers, and some of them were attracted to France by an offer of profitable positions, like the famous astronomers the Dutchman Huygens, the Italian Cassini, the Dane Remer; others received pensions, some temporary gifts, others became secret agents of French diplomacy; the Danzig astronomer Hevelius lost his library from a fire: Louis XIV gave him a new one, and now laudatory hymns were heard throughout Europe in honor of the French king; twelve panegyrics were delivered to him in 12 Italian cities.

French Literature of the Age of Louis XIV

The development of the sources of French history, begun earlier under Richelieu, has now received a new revival. Stéphane Baluz, Colbert's librarian, publishes and explains many important historical acts; his most remarkable work is a collection of legislative monuments from the time of the Frankish kings (“Capitularia regum Francorum”, 1677); in 1667, the monk's enormous activity begins mabillon, famous for the publication of monuments and the establishment of rules on how to verify the reliability of historical sources. Charles Dufresne Ducange in 1678 published a "Dictionary of Medieval Latin", necessary for understanding the monuments of this time, then he published a dictionary of medieval Greek. There is no history yet; materials are only being prepared for it, but some questions that especially irritate curiosity are already beginning to be investigated, and here, of course, one can still hear only the babbling of infant science, which has no means of freeing itself from various extraneous influences, and above all from the falsely understood national feeling. We started with the question of the origin of the people. Just as in Russia, in the infantile state of historical science, the national feeling did not allow us to accept the clear testimony of the chronicler about the Scandinavian origin of the Varangians-Rus and forced us to interpret this evidence in favor of the Slavic origin by all falsehoods, so in France at the time described, researchers did not want to recognize the Franks. hostile Germans who conquered Gaul, but tried to prove that the Franks were a Gallic colony who settled in Germany and then returned to their former fatherland. The famous Herbelo also enjoyed the support of Colbert, who collected in lexicon form a lot of studies on the history and literature of the Mohammedan East (Oriental Library, Bybliotheque orintale).

But much more than pensions to foreign and domestic writers and scientists, much more than the aforementioned works, the education of the French language and the enrichment of its literary works contributed to the glory of Louis XIV and the spread of French influence in Europe. During the Renaissance, the still unformed French language and young popular French literature had to be subjected to a strong pressure of alien elements; under their influence, the language changed rapidly. Montaigne spoke of his experiences: “I am writing a book for a small number of people, for a small number of years: in order to make it more durable, it would be necessary to write it in a harder language. Considering the continuous change that our language has undergone so far, who can hope that in its present form it will last another 50 years? In my memory, he has changed by half. Such anarchy caused the need for rules: a lot of grammars appeared, arguments about spelling, pronunciation, the origin of the language. A strong struggle began between the adherents of one system or another: some argued that it was necessary to write as they say (tete, onete, oneur), others demanded that the old spelling be retained (teste, honneste, honneur); opponents did not spare abusive expressions, called each other donkeys and boars; some proposed to complete the language, to give it forms that, in their opinion, it lacked (for example, the comparative degree: belieur, grandieur, and the superlative: belissime, grandissime). On the one hand, scholars and students were subject to the influence of Latin; on the other hand, the Italian language showed a strong influence due to the richness of its literature, due to the primacy that Italy had in the Renaissance, and finally, due to the fashion that prevailed at the French court.

Young French literature sank under the weight of these two influences; the poor peasant woman, in the words of one writer, did not know where to go in the presence of noble, dressed-up ladies. But the pride of the people could not endure humiliation, the patriots rose up against alien influences that disarmed the language, a struggle began, and ridicule, satire acted as a skirmisher. Rabelais also laughed at a student who distorted his speech in Latin. “What is this fool talking about? says Pantagruel. “It seems to me that he is forging some kind of devilish tongue.” “Sir,” one of the ministers answers him, “this fellow considers himself a great orator precisely because he despises ordinary French.” It was more difficult for ridicule to cope with Italian influence, because it was supported by fashion, carried out by women, by the court; it was the influence of a living language, a living brilliant literature, a highly developed art. When the eighty-year-old Leonard da Vinci appeared at the court of Francis I, the enthusiasm of French society knew no bounds. With the arrival of Catherine de Medici, Italian influence became dominant at court and from there penetrated into other sections of society; French speech is most ridiculously full of Italian words introduced into it without any need. But soon satire began to castigate this absurdity, and especially strongly advocated by Henry Etienne ("Dialogue du francais italianise"). This struggle of French satire with Italian influence is also curious for us because it reminds us of the struggle of Russian satire, the struggle of our Sumarokovs, Fonvizins and Griboyedovs with French influence; the methods of French and Russian satirists are the same.

The French patriotic satirists triumphed over alien influence, defended their own language, which began to be formed, defined and, in turn, began to strive for dominance in Europe, thanks mainly to famous writers who gave it a special elegance in their works. The time was the most favorable: Europe strove for the final definition of its forms of life, strove to form a number of strong, independent nationalities, which, however, had to live a common life; the independence of the peoples, political and spiritual, required the development of separate folk languages ​​and literatures; but the common life of the European peoples also demanded a common language for international and scientific intercourse. Until now, Latin has been used for this; but the needs of the new society, new concepts and relations demanded a new, living language, especially since the people of the Renaissance laughed at medieval Latin, which was nevertheless the product of new, living needs. Having declared medieval Latin an ugly phenomenon, scholars turned to Ciceronian Latin; for a short time it was possible to enslave to it peoples still young, with newborn languages ​​and literatures; but these peoples began to grow by leaps and bounds, and soon the diapers of alien speech became narrow for them, the speech of an obsolete people who had their own special system of concepts, unsuitable for new peoples.

Thus, the Latin language could no longer serve as a language common to European peoples; a modern, living language was needed. The time for the languages ​​of Italian and Spanish is over; the literary activity of the peoples who spoke them ceased, the political significance weakened, and meanwhile France came to the fore; French was spoken by a representative of the most powerful state in Europe, this language was spoken at the most brilliant European court, which other courts sought to imitate, and most importantly, this language was finally formed, distinguished by ease, accessibility, clarity, accuracy, elegance, which gave it a whole a number of famous writers.

Molière

Of these writers, we will focus only on those whose writings elucidate the state of their contemporary society - first of all, we will focus on Molière. The Gauls, according to Cato, passionately loved to fight and make jokes; The French inherited these two passions from their ancestors, and not a single major event in their social life passed without them noticing in it such a side that would give food to their wit. Newborn French poetry, next to the love song (chanson), was satirical (sirvente). The clergy were subjected to strong attacks of satire: mockery finds plentiful food when people behave inappropriately for their age, gender, rank - therefore, in the Middle Ages, the writers of French folk songs found plentiful food in the behavior of the then clergy, which did not at all correspond to Christian teaching, for the clergy, according to the songs, "always wanted to take without giving anything, buy without selling anything." Satire defended among the people the cause of Philip the Handsome against the pope and the Templars; she smashed papal claims under Charles V; she laughed out loud at the great schism in the Western Church, when several popes quarreled over the throne of Saint Peter. "When will this dispute end?" - the satire asked and answered: "When there is no more money." She did not spare the armed force, noticing in it boasting and violence instead of courage; did not spare the new monetary power, which began to compete with the power of the sword. Satire found its widest field on the stage: it brought all classes, all classes of society here, and for its courage and cynicism it was often subjected to severe persecution; in addition, in the Renaissance, she was struck by the desire to imitate the ancient comedy: here the poor peasant woman had to yield to the noble lady. But the cold imitations of Latin and then Spanish comedy could not hold out for long on the stage; French society demanded a live folk comedy, and Molière appeared to satisfy this social need.

Moliere was a child of the people: the son of an upholsterer, a long itinerant actor, he became famous for the comedy Precieuses ridicules (1659), where he mocked artificiality, stiffness, quixoticism in feelings, attitudes and language; this comedy was of great importance as a protest against the false, the unnatural, the stilted, in the name of truth, simplicity, and life. Moliere acquired a patron in the famous Fouquet; but the fall of Fouquet did not harm him: he managed to acquire the favor of Louis XIV himself. It is clear that the position of the comic poet in the reign of Louis was very difficult: he had to confine himself to depicting universal human weaknesses, but he could touch on the weaknesses of modern French society very carefully, and only such weaknesses that the king was pleased to laugh at. Louis XIV allowed Molière to bring the marquises on stage in a funny way, because the king was not a fan of people who thought that they mattered besides him. But the danger for Moliere was not from the side of the king alone: ​​this was revealed when he put Tartuffe on stage, in which he presented a saint who allowed himself various vile things. A storm has risen: the Archbishop of Paris issues an epistle against comedy; the first President of Parliament forbids her representation in Paris; the famous preacher Burdalu smashes her from the pulpit; Ludovic is frightened, hesitates, allows, forbids, finally allows the comedy again.

“Here is a comedy,” says Molière himself about “Tartuffe,” “which made a lot of noise, which was persecuted for a long time, and the people represented in it proved that they are more powerful in France than all those whom I have represented so far. The marquises, precieuses, cuckolds and physicians calmly endured that they were brought on stage, and showed the appearance that, together with everyone else, they were amused by their image. But the hypocrites were angry and found it strange how I dared to present their grimaces and mock at the trade in which so many decent people are engaged. This is a crime which they could not forgive me, and armed themselves against my comedy with terrible fury. Following their laudable habit, they covered their interests with the interests of God, and "Tartuffe", according to them, offends piety; the play is from beginning to end filled with wickedness, and everything in it is worthy of fire. I would not pay attention to their words if they did not try to arm people whom I respect against me, to win over people who are really well-meaning. If they had taken the trouble to conscientiously examine my comedy, they would no doubt have found that my intentions are innocent and that there is no mockery of what is worthy of respect in it. These gentlemen inspire that it is impossible to talk about such things in the theater; but I ask them: on what do they base such a beautiful rule? If the purpose of comedy is to correct human vices, then I see no reason why there should be privileged among the vices; and the vice in question harms the state more than any other. I am reproached for putting pious words in the mouth of my hypocrite; but how could I correctly imagine the character of the hypocrite without this? “But, they say, in the fourth act he preaches a disastrous doctrine: but does this doctrine contain anything new?”

In the second appeal to the king about Tartuffe, Moliere speaks more frankly about the reasons that raised the storm: “In vain did I put on a comedy called The Hypocrite and dressed the character in the dress of a secular person, in vain did I put on him a small hat, a long wig, a sword and lace all over the dress; In vain did I diligently exclude everything that could give at least a shadow of a pretext for nit-picking the famous originals of the portrait I painted: all this did not serve anything. These words explain the whole matter: "Tartuffe" is a continuation of the old satirical songs and theatrical performances that ridiculed the clergy, whose unworthy members were necessarily hypocrites. Moliere was afraid of one thing - to offend "the delicacy of the royal soul regarding religious subjects," as he himself puts it, and therefore dressed his abbot in a secular dress; but the mask was not worn very tight: everyone guessed what was the matter, and those interested raised a fuss, all the more loud because Moliere was known as a pupil of Gassandi, as a member of a small society of new Epicureans, who combined the desire for pleasure with disbelief, knew, therefore that Moliere did not ridicule hypocrisy at all in the forms of morality and religion, did not at all want to expose an atheist who put on a mask of religiosity in Tartuffe, but simply wanted to laugh at his enemies, telling them: you are not better than us, you have the same passions and aspirations to satisfy them, you are even worse than us, but you do your bad deeds in secret, and shout against us in the name of the demands of your religion.

Molière won the fight because if his enemies, the originals of the portrait drawn by him in Tartuffe, used the delicacy of the royal soul regarding religious subjects, then he found an even more sensitive side in the royal soul in order to induce Louis XIV to lift the ban on comedy. At the end of it it says: "Calm down: we live under a sovereign - the enemy of injustice, under a sovereign whose eyes penetrate into the depths of hearts, who cannot be deceived by all the art of hypocrites."

Molière had every right to say that the vice he introduced in Tartuffe harmed the state more than any other. Indeed, a person in disguise is the most dangerous member of society, which, for the correctness of all its relations and functions, requires truth and openness. But a conscientious writer must deal with hypocrisy with great caution, for quite another thing is often mistaken for hypocrisy. There are people with higher aspirations, obedient to the call of religion, trying to conform their actions to its requirements, and these people, as people, do not always come out victorious in the fight against temptations, they fall; they are unhappy from the consciousness of their fall and, at the same time, they still have the weakness by all means to hide this fall from others; but when they cannot hide him, then shouts are heard from all sides: hypocrite! deceiver! Pharisee! The cries are all the louder because the crowd of small people is happy about the fall of a man who was walking out of the row; his moral superiority pricked her, and she now triumphantly declares that this man is the same as everyone else, but only pretended to be the best, a saint - for selfish purposes. In a person, pure motives are so intertwined with impure ones that he himself with great difficulty can distinguish them and determine the share of participation of one or another in a certain act; hence the frequent mistakes of poets and historians in the presentation of characters - mistakes consisting in the desire to give unity to motives, to paint the character with one color: this is much easier, simpler, but the truth suffers, and the high goal of art is to tell us the truth about a person - is not achieved.

But at a time when in France so many gifted people rushed to express the truth about a person in the most visual way, exposing a person acting before the eyes of the audience, and it became necessary to combine two arts: the art of the author and the art of the stage, at that very time there was a strong protest against this visual art. way of telling the truth about a person is against the theater. A protest followed in the name of religion both from the Catholic clergy and from the Jansenists. The Jansenist Nicol put it this way: “Comedy, its defenders say, is the presentation of actions and words - what's wrong with that? But there is a way to protect ourselves from any delusion on this point, and that is to consider the comedy not in chimerical theory, but in practice, in the performance of which we are witnesses. We must turn to what kind of life an actor leads, what is the content and purpose of our comedies, what influence they have on those who present them and on those who are present at their performance, and then examine whether all this has anything to do with it. to the life and feelings of a true Christian. The spectacle cannot do without an artist; feelings ordinary and moderate will not amaze; thus the senses are not only seduced by appearance, but the soul is attacked from all sensitive sides.”

Of course, we cannot agree with the stern Jansenist that a true depiction of a person with his passions can have a corrupting effect on a person; but, on the other hand, we cannot help but admit that there is a significant amount of truth in his words: thus, he had every right to point out the immoral life of actors who were together and writers of plays; could such people be expected to have moral aims in mind? Opponents of the theater could especially point out what the theater did to the women who devoted themselves to it - in what form did this example of female labor, female social activity appear? Opponents of the theater had the right to assert that the high significance of the theater is maintained only in theory, while in practice the theater serves as entertainment for the crowd, and often immoral entertainment, especially in comedy, where they tried to please the crowd with cynical antics, from which even Molière was not at all free.

The Jansenist Nicol, whose opinion we have quoted about the theater, belongs to the so-called moralists, shrewd observers of the phenomena of the inner and outer world, who set out the conclusions from their observations in the form of brief notes of thoughts or rules. Nicolas' conclusions, like those of Pascal, are imbued with a religious and moral view; he points to the imperfection of the phenomena of the inner and outer world, but at the same time calms and elevates the soul by pointing to a higher, religious aspiration. But among the French moralists of the time described there is one who is distinguished by subtlety in observations and often fidelity in conclusions, and at the same time leaves the reader’s soul with the most bleak impression, because he exposes only one dark side in a person, and for everything good, sublime, bad ones are sought out. , petty, selfish motives; you hear the demon's laughter over what a person used to love and respect; the author "does not want to bless anything in all of nature."

La Rochefoucauld

This author is the famous Duke of La Rochefoucauld, who took an active part in the movements of the Fronde. From these movements, which ended in nothing, from this irritation without satisfaction, La Rochefoucauld brought out an exhausted soul, filled with disbelief in the moral dignity of man; all people appeared to him in the form of heroes of the Fronde: “When great people fall under the burden of misfortunes, it is revealed to us that we endure these misfortunes only thanks to the strength of our pride, and not thanks to the strength of our spirit, and that, except for great vanity, heroes are made of such the same clay as the rest of the people. Philosophers' contempt for wealth was a secret desire to avenge their virtues on an unjust fate with contempt for the benefits that it deprived them of. Hatred of favorites is nothing else than love of favorites; people who have not achieved favor console themselves with contempt for those who have achieved it. The love of justice in the majority of people is nothing but the fear of suffering injustice; what people call friendship is respect for each other's interests, exchange of favors, communication, in which self-love always has in mind something to win. People would not live long in society if they did not deceive each other. Old people love to give good instructions to comfort themselves in the impossibility of giving bad examples. Persistence in love is an everlasting impermanence: the heart gradually becomes attached first to one, then to another quality of the person, and it turns out that constancy is impermanence, which revolves in one and the same object. Virtue would not go so far if vanity did not accompany it. Generosity despises everything in order to have everything. Why do lovers and mistresses not miss being together? Because they constantly talk about each other. Contempt for the moral dignity of a person led naturally to materialism, and La Rochefoucauld asserts, among other things, that “the strength and weakness of the spirit are an incorrect expression: in essence, this is a good or bad disposition of the organs of the body”; or: "all passions are nothing but different degrees of warmth of the blood."

Bossuet

Thus, the son of the Fronde La Rochefoucauld is the successor of that dark trend, to which Jansenism, with its Pascals and Nicols, was opposed. But Jansenism was a phenomenon disgraced from the Western Church, which at the time described presented in France a more orthodox representative in the famous Bossuet. In the midst of the Fronde, when loud cries against the supreme power were heard in the living rooms and on the streets, the young spiritual man delivered a strong sermon on the text "Fear God, honor the Tsar." This young spiritual man was Bossuet. The Fronde subsided, the society exhausted by it aroused strong power, and Bossuet appears next to Louis XIV with the same text, which he develops not in one sermon, but through a whole series of works bearing the stamp of strong talent and therefore having a strong influence on society. Louis XIV does not want to confine himself only to his time, does not want to take advantage of only the well-known disposition of society in order to actually strengthen his power, to remove various obstacles to it here and there: in his early youth he witnessed great excitement, he witnessed how power fluctuated, she bowed before the demands of the people, heard the ominous word "republic", and from the other side of the strait came terrible news that the throne had been overthrown and the king had died on the chopping block; Louis XIV in his youth lived through a terrible time, a terrible struggle, he lived through it as an attentive spectator, a strongly interested participant; his feeling and thought were tense; he saw the danger closely and knew that to fight it, one material force was dissatisfied, dissatisfied with the subsidies that he gave to the English kings to counter liberal aspirations on the other side of the strait - Louis was looking for other means, he wanted to draw up rules for himself and for his descendants , theory, science and to oppose this teaching to another one that came from a dangerous island.

The theory of Louis XIV, formed under the influence of the English Revolution and the French Fronde, echoes the English protective theories, which appeared as a result of the desire to counteract revolutionary movements. Here are the foundations of this theory: “France is a monarchical state in the full sense of the word. The king here represents the whole nation, and each private person represents only himself before the king, therefore, all power is in the hands of the king and there can be no other authorities than those established by him. The nation in France does not constitute a separate body: it resides entirely in the person of the king. Everything that is in our state belongs to us indisputably. The money that is in our treasury and that we leave in the trade of our subjects must be equally guarded by them. Kings are sovereign masters and dispose of unlimitedly all the property that is in the possession of both spiritual and secular people, according to need.

Bossuet supports this theory. “The law,” he says, “is at first a condition or a solemn contract in which people, by the permission of sovereigns, determined what was necessary for the formation of society. This does not mean that the power of laws depends on the consent of the peoples, but only that the wisest people of the people help the sovereign. The first power is paternal power in every family; then the families united in society under the rule of sovereigns, who replaced their fathers. In the beginning there were many small estates; the conquerors violated this consent of the peoples. Monarchy is the most common form of government, the most ancient and the most natural. Of all the monarchies, the best is hereditary. With regard to other forms of government, in general, the state should remain in the form to which it is accustomed. Whoever intends to destroy the legitimacy of forms of government, whatever they may be, is not only a public enemy, but also an enemy of God. The sovereign's power is unlimited. The sovereign in his orders should not give an account to anyone. Sovereigns are from God and participate, in a sense, in divine independence. Against the power of the sovereign there is no other remedy than the same power of the sovereign. Sovereigns, however, are not exempt from obedience to the laws (by right, in fact, no one can force them to obey the law). The power of the sovereign is subject to reason. A subject can disobey the sovereign in only one case: when the sovereign orders something against God (but in this case, too, the resistance must be passive). Citizens are obliged to pay tribute to the sovereign (i.e., the consent of the people is not necessary for the collection of taxes). The sovereign must use his power to exterminate false religions in his dominions. Those who deny the right of the sovereign to use coercive measures in the matter of religion are in an impious error, on the ground that religion should be free.

Portrait of Bossuet. Artist G. Rigaud, 1702

Louis XIV at first did not go as far in this respect as Bossuet; around 1670, he wrote: “It seems to me that people who wanted to use violent measures against Protestantism did not understand the nature of this evil, produced in part by mental fever, which must be allowed to pass insensibly, and not set on fire by strong counteraction, useless in the case when the ulcer not limited to a known number of people, but distributed throughout the state. The best way to reduce little by little the number of Huguenots in France is not to burden them with any new severity, to respect the rights given to them by my predecessors, but not to cede anything to them, and to limit the very observance of the granted rights to the narrowest possible limits that are prescribed by justice and decency. As for the favors that depend on me alone, I decided not to give them any: let it come to their mind from time to time whether it is according to reason to voluntarily forfeit benefits. I also decided to attract with rewards those who prove obedient, to inspire, if possible, the bishops, so that they would take care of their conversion; to appoint to spiritual places only people of proven piety, diligence, knowledge, capable of destroying by their behavior those disorders in the Church that occurred as a result of the unworthy behavior of their predecessors.

Louis tried at first to use strong measures against Protestantism, because this plague was widespread throughout the state; but there was another plague, limited to a small number of people, with which, therefore, it was not necessary to stand on ceremony, that was Jansenism. The Huguenot heresy was an old heresy; Louis was not to blame for the fact that his predecessors gave her rights; but Jansenism was heresy born, in the words of Louis; the duty of the king was to nip it in the bud; the pope and the king ordered the heretics to come to their senses, but they did not obey. But if the Jansenists had strong enemies, then there were also strong patrons who wished to keep gifted and energetic fighters under the Catholic Church through peace agreements. The Jansenist heretic Nicol zealously defended the dogma of transubstantiation against the Protestants.

The sad results of the movement along the sloping path of negation, the movement that began with the Lutheran reform, alarmed more and more Protestants who wanted to remain Christians, but did not feel solid ground under them, and here Bossuet comes forward with his Exposition of the Catholic Faith, written with great talent and moderation. “It is possible,” says Bossuet, “to maintain consistency, to establish unity in terms of doctrine, when either completely surrendering to the faith, like Catholics, or completely surrendering to human reason, like unbelievers; but when they want to confuse both, they come to opinions, the contradictions of which indicate the obvious falsity of the case. Protestants were struck by the moderation with which the Exposition of the Catholic Faith was written. “This is not papal teaching,” the pastors shouted, “the pope will not approve it.” But the Pope had the prudence to approve. Protestants began to convert to Catholicism; a strong impression was made by the conversion of Turenne, among the Huguenots there were almost no people from noble families.

In some parts of the Auvergne, the landowners still claimed jus primae noctis, and the newlyweds had to pay off

In memory of the Grands-Jours, a medal was struck with the inscription: Provinciae ab injuriis potentiorum vindicatae: Provinces liberated from the violence of the strong.