Presidents of France, Louis Adolphe Thiers, horoscope. Louis Adolphe Thiers: biography Adolphe Thiers biography
Great Soviet Encyclopedia: Thiers Adolphe (14.4.1797, Marseille, - 3.9.1877, Saint-Germain-en-Laye), French statesman, historian, member of the French Academy (1833). In 1821 he moved from Aix, where he was a lawyer, to Paris. He collaborated in liberal-bourgeois newspapers. In 1830, T., with A. Carrel and F. Minier (his closest friend and political associate), founded the newspaper “National” (“Le National”). He contributed to the accession of Louis Philippe to the throne. In 1830 he became a member of the State Council. On the eve of the July Revolution of 1830, T. was one of the leaders of the liberal-bourgeois opposition; after the revolution he turned into a reactionary bourgeois politician. Being in 1832-36 (with a break) Minister of the Interior, in 1834 he organized the brutal suppression of republican uprisings in Lyon, Paris and other cities. In 1836 and 1840 he headed the government, simultaneously holding the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs. During the February Revolution of 1848, Louis Philippe tried to put T. at the head of the government. In June 1848 T. was elected to the Constituent Assembly. During the June Uprising of 1848 he advocated the dictatorship of General L.E. Cavaignac. After the uprising, he was one of the leaders of the monarchical “Party of Order”. In December 1848 he supported the candidacy of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte for the presidency. He spoke out in the press against the ideas of socialism; participated in 1850 in the development of laws on the transfer of public education to the control of the clergy and on the restriction of suffrage. In 1863 he was elected to the Legislative Corps; joined the moderate liberal opposition. After the September Revolution of 1870, he was sent by the “Government of National Defense” to Great Britain, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Italy in order to negotiate with them about supporting France in the war with Prussia and mediating in concluding peace, but was not successful. In February 1871, he was appointed by the National Assembly as head of the executive branch of the French Republic. Signed a preliminary peace treaty with Prussia, humiliating for France (February 1871). The Parisians rebelled against the reactionary policies of the T. government; The revolutionary uprising on March 18, 1871 led to the proclamation of the Paris Commune of 1871. T. fled to Versailles. Having secured the support of the German occupation forces, he suppressed the Commune with exceptional cruelty, gaining the shameful glory of the bloody executioner of the Communards. In August 1871, the National Assembly elected T. president of the French Republic. T. disbanded the National Guard, opposed universal secular primary education, and was an ardent opponent of any progressive reforms. However, given the political situation, he opposed the restoration of the monarchy, which is why in May 1873 an acute conflict arose between the Tunisian government and the monarchical majority of the National Assembly. In May 1873 T. resigned.
T. is one of the creators of a new direction in historiography, which recognizes the struggle of classes as “... the key to understanding the entire French history” (Lenin V.I., Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 26, p. 59 ), but who considers only the class struggle of the bourgeoisie with the nobility to be natural. In the 1820s. T. published “History of the French Revolution,” written from a liberal-bourgeois position. After the July Revolution, he revised this work in an openly reactionary spirit. T.’s second extensive work, “History of the Consulate and Empire,” is a panegyric to Napoleon I.
Beginning of the 19th century became an important stage in the development of liberalism in France. In the first years of the Restoration - the political regime that existed in France from 1814 to 1830 - liberalism finally took shape as a political movement and secured the very concept of “liberalism”.
A decisive role in the formation of liberalism in France at the beginning of the 19th century. played by the experience of the French Revolution of the late 18th century, as well as the First Empire. Colossal revolutionary upheavals, mass terror, civil war and dictatorship - all this ultimately gave rise to fear of revolution in French society. Revolutionary ideas of equality, fraternity and even, to some extent, freedom were discredited. Unlimited freedom leads to anarchy, equality and brotherhood are tantamount to mob rule, a republic cannot protect against dictatorship - for many at that time these were obvious truths. It seemed that only the monarchy was capable of ensuring personal freedom and the calm development of society.
The attitude of liberals to the French Revolution of the late 18th century. was quite controversial. On the one hand, liberals defended the idea of the progressiveness of the French Revolution, its historical consistency, and defended the classless social order established as a result of the Great French Revolution. On the other hand, French liberals strongly condemned the policy of terror and the Jacobin period and rejected methods of revolutionary change. The democratic character of the French Revolution, as well as the political experience of Jacobinism, caused real fear among liberal deputies during the Restoration1.
A generation of liberal-minded figures survived the years of revolution and dictatorships - Jacobin and Napoleonic. This is partly why French liberals turned to the idea of order and stability in society as a guarantee of the preservation of liberal values. According to many liberals, the Charter adopted in 1814 - the main document of the country - allowed hope for the calm development of France. In this constitutional document
________________________________________
Some liberal ideas of the constitutional-monarchical system were reflected: equality of all citizens before the law, equal access to positions, personal freedom, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, inviolability of private property. Religious freedom was valued by many liberals, sometimes even above all others.
During the Restoration, the attitude towards the Charter of 1814 was a watershed for political trends. Reactionary ultra-royalists, hoping for a return to the Old Order and absolutism, rejected the Charter because it contained liberal ideas. Republicans criticized the Charter for its excessive elitism, for the fact that it did not provide the right to insolvent citizens to participate in elections. Liberals, for the most part, approved of the Charter of 1814 as a guarantee of freedom and order.
Having survived the revolutionary experience, many liberals of the early 19th century. completely rejected general elections, arguing that only citizens who met the property and educational qualifications could participate in voting. French liberals believed that universal suffrage, democracy and a republic led to mob rule and despotism. They saw a guarantee of individual freedom in the division of power between the king and parliament, elected by wealthy property owners. Liberals considered the representative system of government to be the most perfect. The English one seemed to them to be the ideal political system. At the same time, some liberals believed that over time it was necessary to grant broader rights to parliament and expand the electoral qualifications.
The liberals' political activities included appearances in the press and participation in parliamentary debates, in which they spoke out against the ultra-royalists and defended political freedoms, primarily freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
A major figure in the liberal movement in France at that time was Adolphe Thiers (1797 - 1877). A historian and liberal journalist during the Restoration in France, he later became a major French politician. During the years of the July Monarchy in France (1830 - 1848), Thiers constantly held various ministerial posts and headed the government twice (in 1836 and 1840). He was also one of the founders and first president (1871–1873) of the Third Republic. He is also known for brutally suppressing the Paris Commune in 1871. In addition, Adolphe Thiers is the author of the famous historical studies “History of the French Revolution” and “History of the Consulate and Empire”.
At the same time, in Russia there are no studies devoted to the formation of A. Thiers’ political views in the 20s of the 19th century. Abroad, this period preceding the start of his political career also did not receive adequate coverage in the scientific literature. At the same time, studying the views of Thiers during the years of the Restoration in France brings to light the problem of the relationship of power, which in the 1820s. was represented predominantly by far-right monarchists, with a liberal opposition. This allows us to better understand the reasons for the July Revolution of 1830 in France, which destroyed the Restoration regime.
Louis Adolphe Thiers was born on April 16, 1797 in Marseille. On his father's side, he was a descendant of respectable and successful bourgeois. His paternal grandfather Louis Charles Thiers was a notable, a lawyer in Aix-en-Provence, then in Marseille. In addition, Louis Charles served as chief secretary and controller of finances in the commune of Marseille. But at the beginning of the revolution of 1789 he was deprived of all positions. A. Thiers's maternal grandfather Claude Amik managed the trading post of wealthy merchants Seymandi. Great-grandfather Thieu-
________________________________________
ra, Greek by birth, Antoine Lomaka was an antique dealer and subsequently became the official supplier of jewelry for the harem of the Turkish Sultan2. But during the first years of the French Revolution of 1789, both families, Thiers and Amick, lost all their wealth, so Adolphe Thiers spent his childhood in poverty.
After graduating from school during the First Empire, he entered the Marseille Lyceum, where he studied military affairs, but soon dropped out and in the fall of 1814 went with his mother to Aix-en-Provence, where he began to study law at the Faculty of Law.
In the second half of the 1810s. Thiers's political views were just beginning to take shape. Under the influence of his entourage in Aix - the city magistrate d'Arlatan de Lory, Dr. Arnaud (I met them thanks to the accompanying letters received by Thiers' mother before their departure from Marseille3) and Thiers's fellow law student F. Minier, who later became his close friend , - Adolphe Thiers gradually became a supporter of liberal views. It seems rather strange that Thiers joined the liberals, given two circumstances: firstly, his parents lost all their money as a result of the revolution and were hostile to the revolutionary past of their country, and secondly, Thiers spent his childhood in Marseille - the city where hated Napoleon I because, as a result of the continental blockade, the once rich, prosperous port city fell into decay. In addition, in Aix, where Thiers moved from Marseille, on the contrary, there were traditionally many royalists who had great influence on public life in the city4. In other words, the atmosphere of the cities in which Thiers lived should have developed in him an aversion to the French Revolution of the late 18th century. But this did not happen.
Without a sufficient number of sources for the period of the 1810s, it is difficult to judge the reasons explaining the formation of Thiers’ liberal views. These include both Thiers’s liberal circle in Aix and a coincidence of circumstances: the house of one of Thiers’ friends, Emile Thelon, a Protestant from Nîmes, was plundered during the period of the “White Terror.” In addition, marches of radical Catholics organized by the Catholic clergy in the south of France also caused Thiers a negative reaction: “It is today that we can confirm that France is even more unbelieving than liberal... The disgust is universal, you can meet crowds of people saying: “Why We are not Protestants? In the 20s XIX century Thiers wrote that “the yoke of the Church is the most hated of all in France”5. It is known that Thiers' family and he himself were not very religious people6. At the age of 20, Thiers wrote that he was a “materialist”, an “atheist” and a “skeptic”7.
American researcher John Ellison explained Thiers’ liberal views as “youthful frondery”8. According to British historians J. Bury and R. Tombs, the main reason lies elsewhere: becoming a liberal at that time was “practical”, since there was unemployment in France, and many talented young men could not count on administrative positions, despite the declared Charter of 1814 principle of equal access to positions. According to English researchers, places were provided mainly to “loyal royalists” who had proven their loyalty to the throne9. Although this statement explains little in terms of the reasons for the emergence of Thiers as a liberal figure, it can be concluded that British historians equate liberalism with the loyal royalism of that time.
________________________________________
In the second half of the 10s. XIX century A. Thiers tried himself in different capacities. To earn a living, he began to write and in 1816 he created the tragedy “Tiberius Gracchus,” in which he praised the Roman Republic and the liberal reforms initiated by this major ancient Roman statesman. In the same year, Thiers began preparing a work about the life and deeds of Tadeusz Kosciuszko, a Polish political and military leader who led the Polish liberation uprising of 179410. In 1817, Adolphe Thiers wrote the essay “On Judicial Eloquence.” For this essay he received the Ax11 Academy Prize. In the same year, the Aix Academy announced a competition for the best work on the study of the creative heritage of a local moralist of the early 18th century, whose name was Luc de Clapier Vauvenargues. He was one of the major writers in Provence. His book “Maxims” was in great demand in the pre-revolutionary period and stood out from the general background due to the fact that it contained less pessimism than many works of this genre12. Thiers decided to participate in this competition, wrote an essay about the work of Vauvenargues and eventually won the competition.
For some time, Thiers worked as a lawyer with Minier. But his lawyer's career did not succeed, and in September 1821 Adolphe Thiers left for Paris. Lack of money became a serious problem for the provincials who came to conquer the capital. But thanks to Dr. Arnault’s long-standing connections, Adolphe Thiers met the liberal Jacques Manuel, a former lawyer from Aix, a brilliant speaker who represented the Vendée department in the Chamber of Deputies. Manuel was an irreconcilable opponent of the Restoration regime and hated the Bourbons. He introduced Thiers to the famous French banker and liberal figure Jacques Laffite, and also recommended him to Charles Etienne, the owner of the liberal newspaper Constitucionel12.
At that time, Constitutionel was considered the most opposition newspaper in France, often criticizing the actions of the French government. It began publication in 1819 and quickly became popular in Paris. By 1826, the circulation of this newspaper was 20–21 thousand copies, that is, almost two-fifths of the circulation of all Parisian newspapers. “What café, what reading room in Paris and in all of France does not have at least one or more copies of Constitucionelle?” – wrote the author of one report he compiled for the Prime Minister of France14. Thiers noted on January 27, 1826: “The editors, headed by Messrs. Etienne and Jay, are firmly attached to constitutional doctrines. At the moment, “Constitucionel” is the leader in the number of subscribers, and it is the only newspaper that is read even in the villages”15.
The newspaper “Constitucionel” acted from liberal and sharply anti-clerical positions, but thanks to the skillful work of talented editors, the newspaper did not become the object of prosecution by the authorities. It published oppositionists of various views, including even former Bonapartists and Republicans16. J. Manuel also frequently published in this newspaper.
In November 1821, Thiers became a permanent employee of the Constitutionel. He was interested in everything and wrote about everything. His interests included finance, war, art and culture. Thiers attended salons, listened to speeches and participated in discussions. At the same time, Thiers' close friend François Minier began to publish regularly in another liberal newspaper, Courier Français.
Beginning in 1824, Adolphe Thiers began sending letters to the Augsburg newspaper - at that time one of the largest in Germany. Correspondence with the owner of the newspaper, Baron Johann Friedrich Kotta von Kottendorff from Leipzig, was anonymous (Thiers signed himself “French correspondent”) and
________________________________________
continued until 1830. For some time, Thiers also published in other liberal newspapers - “Glob” and “Tablet Universal”. At the same time, until the mid-20s. XIX century Thiers wrote almost no articles on political topics, limiting himself to notes on art and culture. This was due to the fact that at that time Adolphe Thiers was a little-known and not yet reputable journalist, and experienced, eminent authors wrote editorials about politics. Thiers refused to cooperate with the Monitor newspaper, the official press organ of the Restoration regime. During these years he chose to remain in the opposition.
In addition to active journalistic activity, in 1823 A. Thiers signed a contract with the publishers Lecoint and Duret to write “The History of the French Revolution.” The ten-volume edition appeared between 1823 and 1827. The publication of this multi-volume historical work brought Thiers fame and opened the doors to the French Academy of Sciences, where he was admitted already in 1833.
It should be noted that during the years of the Restoration, the theme of the French Revolution, the attitude towards it, and its results were the main debated issue in French society. The surge of interest in history was largely understandable. For a quarter of a century, Europe experienced turbulent events: thrones fell, borders were redrawn, states emerged and disappeared. Such a rapid change of events made us think about the meaning of history. It is no coincidence that during the years of the Restoration in France a whole galaxy of major historians was formed (A. Thierry, F. Guizot, F. Migne)17.
Adolphe Thiers was not the first who decided to turn to the events of 1789. In 1818, Germaine de Stael’s work “Reflections on the Main Events of the French Revolution” was published, in which she was one of the first to try to comprehend the nature and results of the French Revolution. The main idea of this work is to defend the revolution of 1789 and justify its legitimacy in a country where, in her opinion, absolutism reigned. The revolution of 1789 was not a random occurrence, it was prepared by the entire course of French history and gave France freedom, Madame de Stael believed18.
Already in one of his early articles in the newspaper Constitucionel, dating back to 1822, Thiers expressed his attitude towards the French Revolution of 1789: “No, no, we did not have before 1789 everything that we received after this year; for it is senseless to rebel without a cause, and a nation does not become insane in an instant... Consider that before 1789 we had no annual representation, no freedom of the press, no voting of taxes, no equality before the law, no access to office. You claim that all this was in the minds, but it took a revolution to implement it in laws”19.
In the “History of the French Revolution” this assessment of the revolution of 1789 was developed. The research was purely narrative in nature, detailing historical details and colorful details. Thiers viewed the revolution only as a political process: the inevitable collapse of an outdated political system and its replacement by another. Adolphe Thiers justified and defended the French Revolution, considering it inevitable and necessary. Thiers explained the inevitability of the French Revolution of 1789, as well as all political actions committed during this revolution, with “historical fatalism”, giving it a providentialist character (la force des choses)20. Thiers interpreted the revolution as a forced extreme caused by political necessity.
The material presented by Thiers was supposed to demonstrate not an arbitrary, random series of events, but a chain of cause-and-effect
________________________________________
connections that were revealed “with such clarity, certainty and logic that everyone, or almost everyone, who reads this work will consider these events inevitable. Next, the reader will begin to excuse, justify and even sometimes admire the people who took part in the Revolution...”21 – wrote Thiers’ contemporary, literary critic Charles Augustin de Sainte-Beuve.
Thiers approached the consideration of the period of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century. as a historian who sought to understand what happened, and not just evaluate certain figures. Perhaps this is why Thiers described events that opponents of the Revolution considered as horrific crimes (for example, the execution of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI) as minor, unimportant incidents in the political life of that time. The trial and execution of Louis XVI, retold by Thiers, were perceived not as a great drama or sacrilege, but only as political actions. The French king was not a hero or a martyr, but a minor political figure, significant only because his execution was the Revolution's declaration of war on the Old Order22.
However, Adolphe Thiers in “History of the French Revolution” was not hostile to the idea of monarchy. Thiers's study of the revolution of 1789 led him to the belief that a constitutional monarchy was the best form of government, since it was “a compromise between the throne, the aristocracy and the people”23. A constitutional monarchy should, in his opinion, be based on the principle: “the king rules, but does not govern.” In the book, this phrase sounded like this: “the nation wishes, and the king fulfills.” On the pages of “History of the French Revolution,” Thiers spoke out for the adoption of the English model of government. But he admitted that in the 1790s. it was impossible due to the difficult international and domestic political situation in France24. The establishment of a constitutional monarchy became possible in the 20s. XIX century thanks to a stable international and domestic political situation - this was Thiers’ political attitude.
Speaking in defense of the Revolution, Adolphe Thiers justified its excesses, explaining them by historical necessity: “The Convention left a formidable memory of itself, but one fact can be cited in its favor - only one, but so enormous that all reproaches before it fall by themselves: it saved France from foreign invasion.”25.
Moreover, Thiers showed the achievements of the Jacobins in creating a new state and in defending France from the forces of reaction. In the third volume, Thiers turned to the period of the Convention, which until that time had been described in pamphlet literature mainly in the darkest tones (with the exception of the work of J. de Staël). Thiers, even when he criticized individuals, was ready to see merit in the policies they pursued. The author described the members of the Convention as “inspiring the nation..., putting one million eight hundred thousand people under arms, conquered by the heroism of the Vendée, obstructing Pitt’s policies and breaking up the European coalition; at the same time creating a new social order, a new civil and military administration, a new economic and financial system; who invented new measures of time, weight and distance, who added to the boldness of their concepts the unshakable force of execution; …consistently using bazaar language with the highest degree of eloquence; who issued forty-four millions of paper money and dined on fourpence a day; communicating with Europe and going to the Tuileries on foot and in casual clothes; sometimes combining unprecedented political cruelty with the greatest individual kindness.”26
________________________________________
Thiers' book brought a liberal vision of revolution to French society. 1789, which was as follows: The French Revolution is an epoch-making event in history; the revolution was not a random phenomenon, it was necessary and inevitable; the excesses of the revolution were caused by internal resistance and external interference; the phase of violence and terror was completed by the restoration of order under the Directory and the Consulate, as the Revolution entered the final phase of the creation of the modern state.
Thiers' account of the events of the last years of the Republic had a clear political context: ultimately, the Revolution took France to heights that the Restoration regime did not match. “When was our country better and more magnificent? ... We, the French, watching how our freedom is stifled, how foreigners invade our country, and our heroes are killed or forgotten, let us never forget these immortal days of freedom, greatness and hope” - with these words Thiers addressed his reader27 .
However, Thiers' goal was not only polemics with ultra-royalists who wanted a return to pre-revolutionary orders. Believing that the revolution marked the birth of modern French statehood, Thiers wanted to study the functioning of the new political system. He conceived his “History of the French Revolution” as an attempt to comprehend the politics of state building himself. Thiers sought to understand and explain to his readers why politicians made certain difficult decisions and what guided them. Thiers paid great attention to the military history of the Revolution. He believed that the army and finance create the support of power28.
In his work, Adolphe Thiers did not explore social and economic issues or popular movements. Thiers's historical research has many shortcomings, and these have been noted by historians in both the 19th and 20th centuries. But this work is interesting as a source for understanding the formation of Thiers as a liberal and political figure in the future. Moreover, this book was not intended by the author as a research work, but was intended for the general public, for the mass reader.
Conservative and some liberal critics immediately responded to Thiers' work. The newspaper “Journal des Debs” expressed the point of view of many, criticizing Thiers for “putting politics in the place of compassion, and necessity in the place of morality.” Thiers was charged with the fact that he did not condemn the executions, but explained them by political considerations, that he distanced himself from giving moral assessments of certain actions (for example, the execution of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI). Indeed, A. Thiers and F. Mignet (who published his two-volume History of the French Revolution in 1824) avoided giving a moral assessment of the Revolution and the Terror. Many liberals chose to applaud the “great conquests of 1789” but condemned the Jacobin dictatorship. François Guizot, for example, previously argued that it is wrong to “take the past as a whole”30. On the contrary, Thiers and Minier did just that: the Revolution turned out to be “sublime and disgusting at the same time.” The liberal Benjamin Constant furiously criticized the position of Thiers and Mignet: “To justify the reign of 1793, to describe its crimes and follies as a necessity that weighs heavily on peoples when they seek freedom, is tantamount to harming a sacred cause; the damage from this is even greater than from recognized enemies”31.
The French public did not immediately react to Thiers' work. But starting from the third volume (published in 1824), dealing with the era of the Convention, in-
________________________________________
Interest in this work in society has increased sharply. Royalists criticized the book, while the majority of liberals, on the contrary, praised it. Thiers' work was regarded as a protest against reaction and a bold statement in defense of the Revolution.
The last volume appeared in 1827. By 1833, 150 thousand volumes were sold, and by 1845, 80 thousand sets of the book (10 volumes each), which is equivalent to one third of the electorate in France at that time (by 1848 there were already 20 reprints).
One of the central events in the political life of France in the early 20s. XIX century there was discussion of possible French intervention in Spain. In 1820, there were uprisings in Spain, Portugal and the Kingdom of Naples. In Spain, during the liberal revolution, the absolutist monarch Ferdinand VII was dethroned. At the request of the deposed Spanish king, the Austrian Chancellor Karl Metternich convened a congress in Verona in 1822, at which, despite violent protests from Great Britain, the countries of the Holy Alliance instructed France to return the Spanish crown to Ferdinand VII. The French king Louis XVIII agreed because such an intervention was beneficial for France as a state - it emphasized the foreign policy independence of the Restoration regime and allowed France to integrate into the Holy Alliance as an equal power.
However, parliamentary debate on this issue in France dragged on. The French ultra-royalists demanded immediate intervention, believing in its undoubted success, while the liberals, led in parliament by the Lafayette and Manuel factions, declared that a war aimed at suppressing freedom would necessarily end in complete failure.
The debate about intervention in Spain became a major topic of discussion throughout France. In the newspaper Constitucionel, Thiers was instructed to go to the regions bordering Spain and prepare articles for the newspaper about the situation there. For the general public, he was tasked with collecting entertaining material regarding the French army sent to defend absolutism in Europe.
The journey to the Pyrenees began at the end of November 1822 and ended in December of the same year. The result of this trip was the pamphlet “The Pyrenees and the South of France in November and December 1822.” In it, Adolphe Thiers described the landscapes of the south of France and talked about the condition and morale of the French troops sent to the Franco-Spanish border.
In this pamphlet, Thiers opposed the intervention in Spain, ridiculing the French army sent to restore absolutism there33. But unlike many French liberals, Thiers did not believe that a military expedition to Spain would face a sad ending. In a conversation with Sh. -M. Talleyrand, which took place immediately after Thiers’ trip to the Franco-Spanish border in 1823, the journalist noted: “we are not talking about national, but only about political independence, and definitely, the majority of Spaniards will consider the occupiers rather as liberators than oppressors...”34 .
However, Thiers' pamphlet was not limited only to Spanish topics and notes about the journey to the southern borders of France. In his work, Thiers paid attention to the morals and orders in France itself in the early 20s. XIX century. His remarks about the state of France were scattered throughout the text of the pamphlet. According to Thiers, there were not enough freedoms in Restoration France. In fact, Thiers obtained the passport with great difficulty, and his movements were closely monitored by the French secret police. From the very moment Thiers left Paris, the authorities of the French departments
________________________________________
the cops where he visited signaled the capital about his appearance, and the police additionally reported his actions in these departments. The French government suspected that Thiers was sent by the Parisian liberals to General Mina, the leader of the Spanish constitutionalists, but the French authorities could not prove this35. Therefore, officials in Paris and in the provinces were concerned about Thiers' movements. The prefects of the Bouches-du-Rhône departments of Ariège and Hautes-Pyrenees provided detailed information about Thiers' movements and named the names of those with whom he met. The prefect of the department of Bouches-du-Rhone reported: “His political views (Thiers - I.I.) are disgusting, and his behavior characterizes him as an ardent supporter of liberalism”36.
In every small town in the south of France, the mayors of these cities checked Thiers' passport and asked him many questions related to his movements. Thiers did not like this, because he believed that his personal freedom, the right to move freely around the country, was being violated.
Individual freedom was of enormous importance for Thiers. Subsequently, the insufficient degree of freedom will cause Thiers to sharply reject the entire political regime established in France in 1815. During this period, Thiers can be characterized as a monarchist constitutionalist, defending a representative form of government in France.
It must be said that the idea of a representative monarchy was central to all French liberals of that time. For them this is the ideal form of government. However, it should be noted that in the 20s. XIX century Thiers rarely wrote articles on political topics in French newspapers, which was due, firstly, to the presence of censorship in France (severe press laws of 1822 and 1827) and the inability to openly express his thoughts, and, secondly, to the fact that , that in those years Thiers devoted his main attention to writing the “History of the French Revolution”.
By the end of the 20s. XIX century The topic of representative government became of great interest to Thiers and was constantly raised in his newspaper articles. This was probably to a large extent due to the accession in 1824 of Charles X, the head of the ultra-royalists and one of the main inspirers of the “White Terror” of 1815–1816. - and the amendment of the entire Restoration regime (examples are the law on sacrilege adopted in the first two years of the reign of Charles X, which punished with death for offenses against objects of religious worship; the restoration of the Jesuit order; the law on the payment of monetary compensation to former emigrants in the amount of about one billion francs for lands confiscated from them during the French Revolution of 1789).
The reactionary nature of the Restoration regime became especially noticeable during the ministry of J. Polignac (August 1829 - July 1830), an ultra-royalist and former emigrant who refused to swear allegiance to the Charter of 1814. The possibility of restoring the Old Order in France became more and more obvious, and therefore Thiers’s position regarding the entire political regime in France manifested itself most clearly in his publications. “Mr. de Polignac is a bogeyman for those who adhere to constitutional views, and he has always been considered even more evil than M. de Villelle (Prime Minister of France from 1821 to 1827 - I.I.). For the king this is a friend. For courtiers and clergy this is God,”37 Thiers wrote in the Augsburg newspaper on January 21, 1829.
The events of August 1829, when Jules Polignac was appointed Prime Minister of France by decree of Charles X, stirred up many journalists, because, as Thiers later recalled, “this was the beginning of atrocities. There will have to be trials, verdicts, shed blood, guns -
________________________________________
ny shots, because all this is necessary for the nation to rise up, and Charles X would leave along the same route as James II (the English monarch who lost the throne as a result of the Glorious Revolution of 1688 - I.I.)”38.
Adolphe Thiers urged the editors of the newspaper Constitucionel to take a more decisive position in assessing the actions of the authorities, but, despite the support of some members of the editorial board and journalists of this publication, such as Charles Etienne and Evariste Desmoulins, he never managed to do this39. The owners of liberal newspapers did not want to confront the authorities. Thiers resigned from Constitutionel and decided to create a new newspaper.
Just at this time, liberal newspapers appeared, distinguished by more radicalism in their assessments of the policies of the French government than the newspaper Constitucionelle. Thus, in July–October 1829, with a capital of 500 thousand francs, the newspaper “Temps” appeared, which, as originally intended, was supposed to defend the freedoms guaranteed by the Charter of 1814. From mid-February 1830, after a change in leadership, the newspaper “Glob”40 began to defend liberal views.
On January 3, 1830, the newspaper “Nacional” appeared, which later became the most radical liberal printed publication, moving from criticism of the regime to calls, in fact, for a revolutionary coup. The name of the newspaper was not chosen by chance; it indicated that the journalists addressed the authorities on behalf of the entire French nation. Financial support for the new publication was provided by the banker Laffitte, the French Baron Louis and the German Baron Cotta von Kottendorff. The editorial board of the new newspaper was headed by A. Thiers, his close friend F. Minier and A. Carrel, who later switched to republican positions. A. Thiers became the first editor-in-chief of Nacional.
In one of the first articles in the National newspaper, Thiers wrote: “The hereditary, inviolable king... is obliged to entrust power also to responsible ministers who will declare peace and war, draw up the texts of bills and manage public funds... thus, the king will be placed above petty ambitions , over public hatred, when, when things go well, he enjoys the violent demonstration of the feelings of his people, and is punished only by his silence when things go badly”41. According to Thiers, the king was supposed to act as an arbiter.
“Below the king are the peers, independent of the ministers by the very fact of the hereditary nature of the transfer of their power, whose enlightenment makes them susceptible to public opinion. Wealthy peers...represent the most illustrious families; they are conservative both in their traditions and in their political maxims and resist the general fervor of the human mind”42. Thiers saw the Chamber of Peers as a balance between royal power and the elected Chamber of Deputies. Thiers considered it necessary for the stability of the political system to have a hereditary transfer of power among the peers, which he would insist on during the years of the July Monarchy in France. The importance of the Chamber of Peers, according to Thiers, was that it could restrain the democratic tendencies of the Chamber of Deputies and give stability to the French monarchy.
The role that Thiers assigned to the lower house of parliament was quite significant. The economic, military and intellectual elite of France - “people who distinguished themselves in industry, the army, science and art” - would be elected to the Chamber of Deputies. Parliament “represents the country and proclaims the will of the nation”43. He was supposed to have a significant influence on the monarch in the matter of forming ministerial cabinets. Parliament is not
________________________________________
could independently appoint ministers, but he could strongly propose his candidacies to the king. Such ministers would have the “confidence” of parliament.
Thus, a chamber of deputies, a chamber of peers and a monarch independent from each other would create a strong political system in France, Thiers believed by 1830: “Such a set of institutions creates the most stable and free, the most balanced and strong government. This is the kind of government we should want for France, and we are doing it.”44 The regime of representative monarchy described by Thiers seemed to him an ideal political system. This is exactly how Thiers wanted to see France. Thiers advocated that strong mechanisms of power be created to allow the state system not to depend on the whims of a single king.
On the pages of the newspaper National, Adolphe Thiers gradually compared the ideal king (as he seemed to Thiers) with the one who ruled France - that is, with Charles X: “Such a king is not helpless, as some like to say... Undoubtedly, someone influence on him. When were kings real rulers? Instead of being influenced by courtiers, women and confessors, such a king is influenced by public opinion, which influences him gently and regularly.”45 According to Thiers, the only representative of public opinion in the system of power could only be the Chamber of Deputies, since it was elected by citizens. Only a strong parliament could save France from sliding into the abyss, Thiers believed.
Already in the third issue of National, dated January 5, 1830, Thiers first mentioned the Polignac regime. He noted that the parliamentary majority entered into confrontation with the Polignac ministry and in France there was a threat of a coup d'etat from the Restoration government: “... the new ministry was faced with a choice: either dissolve the chamber or resign itself... It is advised to carry out a coup d'etat by dissolving parliament. One part of the ministry, the most energetic, agreed to this plan”46. Thiers emphasized that only with the help of a coup d'etat would the king be able to keep Polignac in power. Thiers' guess, made in early January, would be confirmed six months later.
The newspaper National, which attracted the attention of Parisians with the bold statements of its journalists, very quickly became popular in the French capital. As Thiers wrote, “a lot of subscribers come, the effect in Paris is exceptionally great”47. From the very beginning, the new newspaper made it clear what place it took in the opposition and what assessments it gives to the current government: Nacional journalists defended the Charter of 1814, advocated the observance of the freedoms formulated in this document, in other words, for the rule of law against the reaction of the king and his ministry.
Already on January 18, 1830, an article by Thiers appeared in the newspaper National, in which his famous maxim was expressed: “The king rules, but does not govern”48. This phrase, in fact, became the political credo of Adolphe Thiers. It determined the role of royal power in the political system of France. This article stated that the king did not have the sole discretion to appoint ministers. There are chambers that are involved in this important process and their views should be listened to. This was due to the fact that the king, without any consultation with the deputies, completely ignoring their position, appointed Jules Polignac as his chief minister.
If in January 1830 Adolphe Thiers called on the opposition only for legal, legal resistance, expressed in obstruction of adopted laws and refusal to pay taxes that were not spelled out in
________________________________________
Charter of 181449, then in February Thiers and the journalists of “Nacional”, seeing the growing popularity of their own newspaper, took a more radical position in relation to the regime of Charles X. In February 1830, Thiers began to publish articles in which he began to ask the question that worried many oppositionists: “if the current regime refuses to follow our system, then what? How can we establish a regime of representative monarchy and avoid a repetition of the difficult years of the Revolution?”50. It must be emphasized that for Thiers the reign of Charles X was not a representative, but a “consultative” monarchy, an “illusion” of representative government51. Thiers did not believe that a truly representative monarchy system had developed in France.
In February 1830, in his newspaper articles, Adolphe Thiers began to actively draw a historical parallel: the eventual change of the Bourbons to the Orleans would be similar, in Thiers's ideas, to the change of the Stuarts to the Orange dynasty in England in 168852 - that is, Thiers referred to experience bloodless revolution in England in 1688. “Here is an example of a king limited by constitutional boundaries,” Thiers wrote in one of the March issues of the newspaper “Nacional” about the English king George IV53. According to Thiers, a change of monarch in France will not entail the abolition of the Charter of 181454.
In one of his articles in the National newspaper, Thiers wrote: “France wants to govern itself, because it can. Can we call this the republican spirit? Nothing can be done about those who like to intimidate with words. This republican spirit, if you like, exists, manifests itself everywhere and can no longer be suppressed... Today in the world there are two forms of government to satisfy this republican spirit. One way: the country elects deputies who oblige the monarch to choose the ministers he prefers, and the monarch obliges the ministers to govern themselves. Another way: the country elects its commissioners, ministers and the head of government himself every four years. Here are two ways... some prefer the second way. But the masses experience an inexplicable fear of republican speeches. Prudent people... reject the republican form. Thus, the unreasonable (vague) fear of some, the thoughts of others, give preference to the monarchical form of government... There is only one way to help it - to prove that the monarchical form of government contains a sufficient degree of freedom, that it finally fulfills the desire, the need of the country to manage yourself..."55.
Adolphe Thiers advocated a constitutional representative monarchy on the English model with a parliamentary form of government. He did not reject the American experience, but believed that there was no need to copy it. According to Thiers, the English political system has proven its worth: “The polity of the United States is a newcomer among forms of government... Their neighbors are only savages from a dying race... To judge this system, to know how viable and self-sufficient it is, the United States The States would have to meet with the powerful armies of nations…”56. Since the United States had no serious opponents on the continent, it is difficult to judge the viability of the American political system, Thiers argued.
Adolphe Thiers did not believe that France was in a revolutionary situation: “A change of dynasty is not a revolution. England was so unrevolutionary in 1688 that it placed James II's closest relative on the throne.”57 Thiers insisted on the legality of such a political step, which, in his opinion, would help avoid the shedding of blood. Although objectively
________________________________________
an open call to his readers to change the dynasty should be regarded precisely as an attempt at a political coup. In the issue of February 9, Thiers, drawing a parallel with the English revolution, for the first time allowed the possibility of the Duke of Orleans' accession to the throne58.
Journalist of the liberal newspaper “Globe” Charles Remusat later wrote the following about the editors of the newspaper “National”: “Thiers and Minier presented the course of the French Revolution (1830 - I.I.) as a curve, all the points on which were predetermined by the course of the English Revolution. They calculated with almost mathematical precision the direction in which events were supposed to develop. They accepted without hesitation what seemed necessary and inevitable to them – a change of dynasty, and even desired it.”59
The confrontation between Charles X and the parliament, which disagreed with the king’s appointment of a new head of the cabinet, gradually grew. On March 16, the Chamber of Deputies adopted Address 221, so called because 221 deputies voted for its adoption, and 181 parliamentarians voted against it. In this address, written by Thiers’ friend, the owner of the liberal newspaper “Constitucionel”, C. Etienne and F. Guizot, the Polignac government was strongly recommended to resign. Only the formation of a new ministry could resolve the dispute between the people and the king, the address noted60. On May 22, 1830, Thiers wrote in one of his last letters to Baron Cotta about the difficult political situation in France: “The King says that he will not yield, that he would rather abdicate...”61.
New parliamentary elections were scheduled for late June - early July. A heated debate unfolded on the pages of newspapers over the rights of both chambers, the limits of royal power and the powers of ministers. Ultra-royalist publications propagated the theory of unlimited power of the monarch. The liberal press, on the contrary, demanded the resignation of the Polignac cabinet, the restoration of the National Guard (abolished by decree of Charles X back in 1827), the introduction of local self-government, greater freedom of the press, and finally, a reduction in the tax burden62.
The victory of these “elections of liberal politicians exacerbated the government crisis predicted by Thiers on January 5, 1830. On July 21, Thiers wrote: “Rumours portending misfortune are spreading everywhere in Paris today. Despite the general distrust that people have shown until today, we are all in fear at the thought that before the end of this month a coup d'etat will be launched by Charles X.”63 Five days later, Thiers's prediction came true.
On July 26, 1830, six royal orders were published in the official government publication Monitor. According to these decrees, freedom of the press was almost completely abolished, the elected parliament was dissolved and new elections were called. At the same time, the qualifications were increased, according to which only rich landowners received the right to participate in elections. The number of members of the Chamber of Deputies was reduced from 428 to 258 people, and the powers of parliament were further limited.
The newspaper Nacional immediately responded to the publication of the royal orders. Already on the evening of July 26, liberal journalists gathered in the editorial office. Unlike the deputies, who remained silent all this time and only on July 28, at the height of the revolution, they composed a very moderate protest against the actions of the authorities, the journalists were radical. At the suggestion of Leon Pilet, editor of the Journal de Paris newspaper, it was decided to protest in the press against the ordinances that threatened the very existence of freedoms. Thiers led the protest movement and undertook to write a “protest” on behalf of all journalists.
________________________________________
The “protest” stated that the king violated the Charter of 1814 and declared himself above any law and, thus, left the legal field. “Over the past six months, there have been repeated rumors that laws will be broken and that a coup d'etat is being carried out. Common sense refused to believe such rumors. The ministry denied them, calling them slander. And yet, these notorious ordinances finally appeared in the Monitor, representing the most outrageous violation of the laws. The flow of the legitimate order of things is interrupted; the reign of force has begun.” Journalists, having condemned the actions of the monarch and his cabinet, in the text of the “protest” called on parliament to take more active action in resisting royal power64.
The day after the issuance of the royal orders, July 27, the revolution began. Two days later, on July 29, 1830, Charles X agreed to cancel the ordinances and dismiss Polignac's ministry. The Duke of Mortemart, who had a reputation as a supporter of the Charter of 1814, was placed at the head of the new cabinet. The government included prominent liberals: banker Casimir Perrier, General Etienne Gerard and others. This option seemed reasonable to many. But this was no longer enough for Thiers, and from the pages of his newspaper he demanded a change of position with renewed energy. a ministry, but a sovereign, and even an entire dynasty. In his opinion, this was the last chance to save the monarchy: “the main difficulty had to be solved, that is, to preserve the monarchy, but change the dynasty. Those who dared to say it or even point it out were the bravest then.”65
Adolphe Thiers was convinced that a change of dynasty was necessary to establish a constitutional monarchy. He did not view the Restoration regime as a truly constitutional representative monarchy. Parliament was supposed to significantly limit the power of the monarch. A parliamentary majority was to be formed in parliament to determine state policy. All decisions of the parliament that formed the responsible ministry had to be strictly observed. That is why it was necessary to found a new dynasty that would agree with this66 - such was Thiers’ logic.
Adolphe Thiers saw the solution to the problem in the election of Louis-Philippe d'Orléans as king. It is necessary to make a reservation that the idea of inviting Louis-Philippe d'Orléans to reign did not belong to Thiers, but to Jacques Laffite. It was he who first proposed the candidacy of Louis Philippe as the French monarch, and Thiers immediately became an ardent supporter of this initiative67. Thiers believed that the new dynasty would owe the throne to the liberals and the French nation68.
But for this it was necessary to convince the Duke of Orleans himself to take the French throne and bring the Duke to Paris. This task was entrusted to Thiers. Banker J. Laffitte and General F. Sebastiani appointed Thiers authorized to negotiate with Louis Philippe on behalf of all French liberals, and Thiers coped with the task assigned to him69. Adolphe Thiers also managed to convince the wavering deputies that Louis Philippe was the only possible candidate. This was Thiers' success. Of course, not only Thiers advocated a change of dynasty, but it was he who showed the greatest activity in bringing Louis Philippe to the throne.
On August 2, 1830, Charles X abdicated the throne in favor of his young grandson, the future Count of Chambord. But already on August 7, the Chamber of Deputies, ignoring the decision of Charles X, declared the throne vacant and officially offered it to Duke Louis-Philippe of Orleans. Two days later, on August 9, the Duke of Orleans ascended the throne as “King of the French.” August 14
________________________________________
The Charter of 1830 was adopted, which was, in fact, the previous Charter of 1814, to which some changes were made. The preamble about the granting of the constitution by royal power was omitted. The Charter of 1830 acquired the character of a contract concluded between the monarch and the people. The introduction of censorship was prohibited, the king was deprived of the right to repeal laws and suspend their operation, in other words, the controversial fourteenth article of the Charter of 1814, which Charles X referred to in July 1830, was withdrawn. The age limit was lowered: for voters - to 25 years, for deputies - to 30 years. The Charter of 1830 also slightly reduced the property qualification (200 and 500 francs of direct tax, respectively).
Adolphe Thiers saw the reasons for the July Revolution of 1830 in the violation of the Charter of 1814 by King Charles X and the appearance of the “Ordinances of Polignac.” According to Thiers, it was the July Ordinances that caused the revolution of 1830: “Charles X dared to do whatever he wanted... He created the famous Ministry of August 8 (1829 - I.I.), which issued the Ordinances that led to the July Revolution and the monarchy " Trying to explain the actions of the rebels, Thiers placed all the blame for what happened on the king: “Charles X carried out a coup d’etat, and France made a revolution”70.
Thiers also noted that if the monarch had been smarter and more compliant, the revolution would not have happened. Even the smallest concessions could preserve the Restoration regime: “Everyone said that with fair elections, a parliamentary majority whose decisions were respected, a ministry elected by a parliamentary majority, and an independent press, everyone would be free, free enough. Nobody demanded more.”71. Thus, the position taken by Thiers in relation to the goals and objectives of the revolution of 1830 was fully consistent with the aspirations of the liberal camp and was shared by all liberals.
Refusal to follow the will of the parliamentary majority, ignoring the opinions of deputies of the French parliament were, according to Thiers, a fatal mistake of the Restoration regime: “What do these words mean: you don’t need to be like the Restoration regime? Nothing except avoiding all his mistakes. What are these mistakes, gentlemen? Before the Restoration regime was established, France experienced the experiences of Revolution and Empire. France had excellent laws, legislation - the creation of forty years of new life, the result of which was the birth of free people. France still had a clear administrative system. So what was missing? A real representative monarchy... which alone could ensure the well-being of a prosperous and calm state. The power that preceded the Restoration regime left a radical imprint on our legislation, which was to never give France the opportunity to have national representation... The Restoration regime neglected the parliamentary majority. In this one mistake lies all mistakes, and it was to punish this regime that the revolution took place. What, then, is a serious mistake that should have been avoided? Do not violate the principle of parliamentary majority - a majority that is nothing more than an expression of the principle of popular sovereignty. This principle should have been accepted…”72 – he noted on November 29, 1832.
In his speeches of that time, Adolphe Thiers more than once turned to the historical experience of France. He noted: “we have gained three experiences: the republican experience failed, the Empire was an accident, a return to it is impossible; representative monarchy based on divine
________________________________________
by law, by force from abroad, was exposed in hypocrisy and deception; she couldn't help herself. We are now experiencing a representative monarchy based on... the principle without which the Restoration regime fell. It is on the principle of mutual agreement (between the monarch and the nation - I.I.) that the new monarchy is based. Indeed, there is no one who thinks that the Charter could be taken away today, as was thought at the Restoration”73.
In his work “The Monarchy of 1830,” published in November 1831, Adolphe Thiers wrote that the actions of King Charles X “raised an important question: is the king independent or not from the parliamentary majority in the chambers? Can he appoint ministers against this majority? This was the question on August 8 and July 26 (on August 8, 1829, Charles X appointed Polignac as chairman of the cabinet of ministers, and on July 26, 1830, the famous “Polignac ordinances” were published - I.I.).” Thiers concluded that the Restoration regime “is not a representative, but a consultative monarchy. It all comes down to presenting remonstrations”74. Thus, the main requirement of the liberal Thiers is that the king must follow the will of the parliamentary majority.
Thiers saw the goal of the July Revolution of 1830 only as, while maintaining the monarchical structure of the state, to change the government, the head of state, who would recognize the demands of the liberal opposition: “a country where the land is completely distributed, public responsibilities are divided equally among everyone, in the civil code equality reigns; where the criminal laws are moderate and humane, where there is a Charter and a bicameral parliament with an annual vote of the budget, where the only difference is the difference between a voter, a deputy, a peer; ...so what is there to change? ...the only thing is to suppress the will of the king and preserve the monarchy,”75 Thiers emphasized.
Adolphe Thiers believed that nothing should have been changed in the Restoration regime, because by 1830 the political system of France had already been fully formed and therefore did not require significant changes: “And here are the gentlemen! One could say in 1789 when the feudal system should have been destroyed; one could say in 1800, when a new system had to be built on the ruins of the feudal system, one could then say: the system should be changed. But today, after so many upheavals, after the Revolution, after Napoleon, after fifteen years of representative government, to say that the system needs to be changed is not to recognize the efforts of so many generations, exhausted by the remaking of our constitution. No, gentlemen, the system must be improved, but done slowly,”76 he insisted on December 31, 1831.
According to Thiers, the revolution of 1830 was the logical conclusion of the French Revolution of 1789: “I am a convinced supporter of what is called the Revolution, and I found in this cabinet only people who share my conviction... For me, the Revolution began in 1789 and actually ended only in 1830; for it was only in 1830 that France finally received a representative monarchy, which was the goal of this revolution...”77.
Adolphe Thiers noted the special character of the July Revolution, its difference from the French Revolution of 1789. He believed that the tasks of the revolution of 1830 were completely different from those of the revolution of the late 18th century: “We said that we are not in 1789, that we do not think of destroying a bad administration, an erroneous government that is contrary to time and morals; that we only wished to perfect the administration which was the result of the Revolution and the Empire; that our goal was improvement, not upheaval, that a just social order
________________________________________
was established by the Civil Code; undoubtedly, some changes should have been made in it.”78.
Thiers noted the limited nature of the transformations, the absence of acute struggle between different social groups. Since the revolution was quite peaceful,79 there should not be a serious split in society, Thiers believed. This allowed us to hope for the further “progressive” development of France without violence and upheaval. “The promise of the July Revolution was not to start again the revolution of 1789 with its extremes,”80 said Thiers.
Adolphe Thiers defined the attitude of the new regime towards the opposition political forces of France in two words: “mercy and legality.” He explained: “The revolution of 1830 was merciful. That is, in Paris, as in the provinces, it must allow everyone to take advantage of the laws; speak, write, celebrate religious ceremonies. This means that throughout France the revolution will allow newspapers of any stripe to shower it with the grossest insults, to spread incorrect news and doctrines...” According to Thiers, the new state had to be based on liberal principles, which means that everyone should be able to freely express their opinions, “allow to criticize, lie, flaunt, hate, curse; allow everyone to practice their faith, even if it is inimical to your existence and prosperity”81.
Adolphe Thiers promised the observance of these rights to all political forces in the country, including legitimists and republicans. The government of the July Monarchy actually promised all political groups the opportunity to take advantage of their rights and political freedoms: “We left all parties the right to use laws, because only laws complete revolutions”82. According to Thiers, the establishment of order was inextricably linked with the adoption of laws.
In the book “The Monarchy of 1830,” Thiers used the expression “legitimate” and “legitimate revolution” and formulated an important question: can a revolution be legal at all. His answer is yes, some revolutions can be legitimate, and such was the July Revolution of 1830: “The legitimacy of the revolution of 1830 lies in the political necessity that caused it.”83 Responding to his political opponents who argued that the new monarch was not legitimate, Thiers argued that the legitimacy of the monarch lay in the will of the nation. And this will is confirmed by the fact that the population of France obediently pays taxes, enrolls in the National Guard and sends deputies to parliament.
In my opinion, A. Thiers failed to refute the fundamental thesis of his opponents in the “illegality” of the July Revolution - Thiers’s argument in favor of the legitimacy of the revolution of 1830 does not look convincing. In addition, Thiers did not mention that when the new Charter was adopted, out of 430 deputies, only 252 parliamentarians were present at the meeting, and only 219 deputies voted for the revision of the Charter of 181484.
A significant place in the book “The Monarchy of 1830” is occupied by Thiers’ reflections on the right of a nation to revolution. “When the electorate is governed in a spirit contrary to its interests, needs and expressed wishes, it has the right to throw out that government.”85 Thiers' use of the word "electorate" marks an important change in his political discourse compared to the period of the 1830 Revolution itself. At that time, the word “people” appeared in his newspaper articles in the overwhelming majority of cases. The electorate in France at that time was a small stratum
________________________________________
wealthy landowners and the industrial and financial bourgeoisie, which constituted a relatively small percentage in relation to the entire population of France. Thus, only a small group of large owners recognized the right of Thiers to overthrow the government (including through violent actions). Thiers denied the rest of the inhabitants of France the right to “overthrow this government,” the right to a “legitimate revolution.”
According to Thiers, an important result of the July Revolution of 1830 was that under Louis-Fugespe a representative monarchy became a reality, and not an illusion, as it was under Charles X86. Adolphe Thiers stated: “Gentlemen, we have long desired representative government as a guarantee of peace and freedom for our country. For a long time we had only the appearance of it; finally, we received real representative government.”87 He also noted that “under the last government we had an apparatus of representative government; there were chambers, they were listened to when they had the same opinion as the government. But when this servility ended in 1829, the Eighth of August followed (on August 8, 1829, Charles X appointed Polignac as Prime Minister of France - I.I.), and then the revolution”88.
According to Thiers, with the accession to the throne of the new monarch, Louis-Philippe d'Orléans, the situation changed. “The new King did not regard our Charter as a gift from him, but he regarded himself as a party bound by the treaty, who could not change it without the will of all the parties, that is, of the two Houses; considered it obligatory to appeal to the parliamentary majority in the chambers on all issues, and in order to get something he was obliged to negotiate with the parliamentary majority through a ministry formed in its ranks” 89, Thiers argued in 1831.
For the liberal Thiers, the importance of the chambers in the political system of France was an extremely important factor in the political life of the country. It is no coincidence that he wrote: “For the sake of the principle of parliamentary majority, it was worth making a revolution, throwing one person off the throne and putting another in prison”90. A. Thiers believed that under representative government, “no important political bill can be adopted if it is not discussed in the chambers”91.
Thiers considered the main achievement of the July Monarchy to be the final establishment of representative government in France. This, in his opinion, was the ideal form of government, which made it possible to hope for the peaceful and “progressive” development of France. According to Thiers, any violation of the principles of representative government is dangerous for the future of France. The government must not violate the Charter of 1814 and must not encroach on the foundations of representative government in France. The violation of the Charter of 1814 during the ministry of J. Polignac led to Thiers entering into irreconcilable opposition to the Restoration regime. This predetermined his active participation in the July Revolution of 1830.
Notes
1. FEDOSOVA E.I. Liberal thought during the Restoration. French liberalism past and present. M. 2001, p. 82.
2. ALLISON M. S. J. Thiers and the French monarchy. Boston. 1926, p. 6, 8.
4. KNIBIEHLER Y. Naissance des sciences humaines. Mignet et histoire philosophique au XIX siècle. P. 1973, p. 21.
5. MARQUANT R. Thiers et le baron Cotta. Etude sur la collaboration de Thiers a la Gazette d'Augsbourg. P. 1959, p. 225, 390.
________________________________________
7. Bibliotheque Thiers. Fonds Thiers. Premiere serie. Dossier 24. Lettres de M. Thiers adressees a divers (1824 a 1877), fol. 54.
8. ALLISON M. S. J. Op. cit, p. 13.
9. BURY J, P. T., TOMBS R. P. Thiers, 1797 – 1877. A political life. L. 1986, p. 4.
10. ALLISON M. S. J. Op. cit, p. 12.
11. ZEVORT E. Thiers. P. 1892, p. 19 – 21.
12. ALLISON M. S. J. Op. cit., p. 12.
13. THUREAU-DANGIN P. Le parti liberal sous la Restauration. P. 1876, p. 207.
14. LEDRECh. La presse a 1'assaut de lamonarchie, 1815 – 1848. P. 1960, p. 16, 242.
15. Quote. by: GUIRAL P. Adoiphe Thiers ou de la necessite enpolitiqme. P. 1986, p. 35.
16. THUREAU-DANGIN P. Op. cit., p. 208.
17. DALIN V. M. Historians of France of the XIX-XX centuries. M. 1981, p. 16.
18. FEDOSOVA E. I. Uk. cit., p. 86.
19. Quote. by: POMARET CH. Monsieur Thiers et son temps. P. 1948, p. 162.
20. KNIBIEHLER Y. Op. cit., p. 118, 129.
21. SAINTE-BEUVE S. A. Historiens modernes de la France. – Revue des Deux Mondes. 1845, vol. 9, p. 266 – 267.
22. THIERS A. Histoire de la Revolution francaise. P. 1824, vol. 3, p. 366 – 367.
23. Ibid., p. 121.
24. Ibid, vol. 2, p. 3, 4.
25. THIERS A. Histoire de la Revolution francaise. P. 1823, vol. 2, p. 3, 4.
26. Ibid., vol. 3, p. VIII-IX.
27. THIERS A. Histoire de la Revolution francaise. P. 1827, vol. 8, p. 329.
28. Ibid., vol. 3, p. II.
29. DALIN V. M. Historians of France of the XIX-XX centuries. M. 1981, p. 26.
30. Quote. by: BURY J.P.T., TOMBS R.P. Op. cit., p. 144.
31. KNIBIEHLER Y. Op. cit, p. 174.
32. Senior Nassau W. Conversations with Monsieur Thiers, Guizot and other distinguished persons during the Second Empire. L. 1878, vol. 1, p. 62 – 63.
33. THIERS A. Les Pyrenees et le Midi de la France pendant les mois de novembre et decembre 1822. P. 1823, p. 62.
34. Senior Nassau W. Conversations with, vol. 1, p. 62 – 63.
36. Archives Nationales de France (hereinafter A.N.), F7/6934/9994. Lettre de Prefet des Hautes-Pyrenees au Minister de l'Interieurde 19 December 1822; Prefet de l'Ariege au Ministere de l'Interieur de 23 December 1822; lettre de Prefet des Bouches-du-Rhone au Ministere de l’Interieur de 23 January 1823.
38. Quote. by: MALO H. Thiers. P. 1932, p. 113.
39. LAYA A. Etudes historiques sur la vie privee, politique et litteraire de M.A. Thiers: histoire de quinze ans: 1830 – 1846, P. 1846, vol. 1, p. 17.
40. BELLANGER C, GODECHOT J., GUIRAL P., TERROU F. Histoire generale de la presse francaise. P. 1970, v. 2, p. 93 – 94.
41. Le National. 3.I.1830.
46. Le National. 5.I.1830.
47. Quote. by: MALO H. Op. cit, p. 116 – 117.
48. Le National. 18.I.1830.
49. THUREAU-DANGIN P. Op. cit, p. 476.
50. Le National. 8.II.1830.
51. THIERS A. Discours parlementaires de m. Thiers. P. 1879, vol. 1, p. 46; EJUSD. La monarchie de 1830. P. 1831, p. 34.
52. Le National. 9.II.1830.
53. Ibid. 4 et 31.III.1830.
54. Ibid. 8 et 12.II.1830.
55. Ibid. 19.II.1830.
56. Ibid. 3.X.1830.
57. Quote. from: GUIRAL P. Op. cit, p. 62.
58. Le National. 9.II.1830.
59. REMUSAT de CH. Memoires de ma vie. P. 1957, vol. 2, p. 287.
60. Le Moniteur 19.III.1830.
________________________________________
62. Le National. 21.IV.1830.
63. Ibid. 21.VII.1830.
64. Quote. by: GREGOIRE L. History of France in the 19th century. T. 1. M. 1894, p. 331.
65. THIERS A. La monarchie de 1830, p. 14.
66. Ibid., p. 15.
67. Duvergier de Hauranne P.L. Histoire du gouvernement parlementaire. P. 1871, vol. 10, p. 586; REMUSAT de CH. Memoires de ma vie, vol. 2, p. 341; BORY J. -L. 29 juillet 1830. La revolution de juillet. P. 1972, p. 426 – 427; PINKNEY D. The French revolution of 1830. L. 1972, p. 146.
68. BARROT O. Memoires posthumes. P. 1875, vol. 1, p. 108 – 109; DUPIN A. Memoires de Dupin aine. Carriere politique, souvenirs parlementaires. P. 1855, vol. 2, p. 144 – 146; Duvergier de Hauranne P.L. Op. cit., vol. 10. p. 573 – 576; BORY J. -L. Op. cit., p. 445; PINKNEY D. Op. cit., p. 139.
69. Bibliotheque Nationale de France. Departement des manuscrits (hereinafter BNF). Papiers de Thiers. Nouvelles Acquisitions Franchises (hereinafter NAF), N20601, fol. 23. Recit de la visite de M. Thiers a Neuilly.
70. THIERS A. La monarchie de 1830, p. 14.
72. THIERS A. Discours parlementaires de m. Thiers, vol. 1, p. 479.
73. Ibid., vol. 2, p. 282.
74. THIERS A. La monarchie de 1830. P. 1831, p. 13, 14.
75. Ibid., p. 40.
76. THIERS A. Discours parlementaires de m. Thiers, vol. 1, p. 284.
77. Ibid., vol. 2, p. 398.
79. Although almost three thousand people died on the barricades in the July days, which Thiers kept silent about in his speeches and the book “The Monarchy of 1830”. See: TULARD J. Les revolutions 1789 – 1851. P. 1985, p. 328.
80. THIERS A. La monarchie de 1830, p. 48.
81. Ibid., p. 47, 50, 53.
82. THIERS A. Discours parlementaires de m. Thiers, vol. 1, p. 56.
83. THIERS A. La monarchie de 1830, p. 35 – 39.
84. THUREAU-DANGIN P. Histoire de la monarchie de Juillet. P. 1887, vol. 1, p. 28.
85. THIERS A. La monarchie de 1830, p. 35 – 39.
86. THIERS A. Discours parlementaires de m. Thiers, vol. 1, p. 46; EJUSD. La monarchie de 1830., p. 34.
87. THIERS A. Discours parlementaires de m. Thiers, vol. 1, p. 46.
88. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 124.
89. THIERS A. La monarchie de 1830, p. 33.
90. Ibid., p. 34.
91. THIERS A. Discours parlementaires de m. Thiers, vol. 1, p. 511.
Questions of history. – 2011. – No. 12. – P. 124-143
Ignatchenko Igor Vladislavovich – graduate student of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov.
short biography
Thiers Adolphe, French statesman, historian, member of the French Academy. In 1821 he moved from Aix, where he was a lawyer, to Paris. He collaborated in liberal-bourgeois newspapers. In 1830, T., with A. Carrel and F. Minier, founded the newspaper Nacional. He contributed to the accession of Louis Philippe to the throne. In 1830 he became a member of the State Councilshort biography
Thiers Adolphe, French statesman, historian, member of the French Academy. In 1821 he moved from Aix, where he was a lawyer, to Paris. He collaborated in liberal-bourgeois newspapers. In 1830, T., with A. Carrel and F. Minier, founded the newspaper Nacional. He contributed to the accession of Louis Philippe to the throne. In 1830 he became a member of the State Council. On the eve of the July Revolution of 1830, T. was one of the leaders of the liberal-bourgeois opposition; after the revolution he turned into a reactionary bourgeois politician. Being the Minister of the Interior in 1832-36, he organized the brutal suppression of republican uprisings in Lyon, Paris and other cities in 1834. In 1836 and 1840 he headed the government, simultaneously holding the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs. During the February Revolution of 1848, Louis Philippe tried to put Thiers at the head of the government. In June 1848 Thiers was elected to the Constituent Assembly. During the June Uprising of 1848 he advocated the dictatorship of General L.E. Cavaignac. After the uprising, he was one of the leaders of the monarchical “Party of Order”. In December 1848 he supported the candidacy of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte for the presidency. He spoke out in the press against the ideas of socialism; participated in 1850 in the development of laws on the transfer of public education to the control of the clergy and on the restriction of suffrage. In 1863 he was elected to the Legislative Corps; joined the moderate liberal opposition. After the September Revolution of 1870, he was sent by the “Government of National Defense” to Great Britain, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Italy in order to negotiate with them about supporting France in the war with Prussia and mediating in concluding peace, but was not successful. In February 1871, he was appointed by the National Assembly as head of the executive branch of the French Republic. Signed a preliminary peace treaty with Prussia, humiliating for France. The Parisians rebelled against the reactionary policies of Thiers' government; the revolutionary uprising on March 18, 1871 led to the proclamation of the Paris Commune of 1871; Thiers fled to Versailles. Having secured the support of the German occupation forces, he suppressed the Commune with exceptional cruelty, gaining the shameful glory of the bloody executioner of the Communards. In August 1871, the National Assembly elected T. president of the French Republic. Thiers disbanded the National Guard, opposed universal secular primary education, and was an ardent opponent of any progressive reforms. However, given the political situation, he opposed the restoration of the monarchy, which is why in May 1873 a sharp conflict arose between the Thiers government and the monarchical majority of the National Assembly. In May 1873 Thiers resigned.Thiers is one of the creators of a new direction in historiography, which recognizes the class struggle as “... the key to understanding the entire French history,” but considers only the class struggle of the bourgeoisie with the nobility to be natural. In the 1820s. Thiers published “History of the French Revolution,” written from a liberal-bourgeois position. After the July Revolution, he revised this work in an openly reactionary spirit. Thiers' second extensive work, “History of the Consulate and Empire,” is a panegyric to Napoleon I. On our book website you can download books by the author Thiers Adolphe in a variety of formats (epub, fb2, pdf, txt and many others). You can also read books online and for free on any device - iPad, iPhone, Android tablet, or on any specialized e-reader. The KnigoGid electronic library offers literature by Thiers Adolphe in the genres of history.
| Prime Minister of France | ||
|---|---|---|
| March 1, 1840 - October 29, 1840 | ||
| French Foreign Minister | ||
|---|---|---|
| February 22, 1836 - September 6, 1836 | ||
Marseille, France
Saint-Germain-en-Laye, France
- Orléanists
- Lycée Thiers[d]
- University of Aix-Marseille [d]
Marie Joseph Louis Adolphe Thiers(fr. Marie Joseph Louis Adolphe Thiers, 26 Germinal of the year V(April 15, 1797), Marseille, - September 3, 1877, Saint-Germain-en-Laye) - French politician and historian. Author of works on the history of the Great French Revolution. Under the July Monarchy - several times Prime Minister of France. The first president of the French Third Republic (temporary, until the adoption of the constitution -). Member of the French Academy (1833).
Youth
Journalist
Thiers in his youth
Thiers's "History of the Revolution" was of great political significance. The prevailing attitude towards the revolution in society at that time was purely negative. There were, of course, other trends, but for a long time they did not find sufficient expression in literature. Thiers's book was the best expression of these trends for its time; she was all breathing with sympathy for the cause of the revolution and love for freedom. It was immediately a huge success; over the course of half a century, it sold more than 150 thousand copies. In its subsequent editions, Thiers made significant amendments depending on changes in his political views. By ridding the book of some particular shortcomings, they deprived it of its strict consistency of tone and diminished the inspiration for freedom and revolution that permeated its first edition (15th ed. P., 1881; the number of editions does not include numerous cheap editions; the book is supplemented by the published Thiers "Atlas de l'histoire de la Révolution française").
Transition to political activity. July Revolution
The police seize the circulation of the National (July 1830)
In the interval between different volumes of “History”, Thiers managed to publish the book “Law et son système” (Paris,) about the financial scam of John Law. After finishing the history of the revolution, Thiers decided to write a general history and, in order to collect materials, decided to go on a trip around the world. He had already taken his passport and bought a ticket for the ship when, on August 5, 1829, a decree was issued on the appointment of the Polignac Ministry; With this decree, the royal power declared war on the nation. A person who wanted to play a political role could not leave the country at such a time, and Thiers remained in his homeland.
“made his debut on the platform as a revolutionary; with southern ardor he imitated Danton's eloquence and, moreover, very successfully; but he soon became convinced that loud phrases and majestic movements did not suit his thin, hoarse, weak voice, his small figure and - probably on the advice of Talleyrand - changed the tone of his speeches; they became colder, he apparently cared about the accuracy and clarity of expressions and resorted to pathos much less often... The character of good nature, gaiety, and playfulness became noticeable in his speeches.”
A few months after the death of Casimir Perrier, Thiers joined the so-called Ministry of October 11 (1832), which, during the 3 ½ years of its existence, experienced several crises, changed its presidents several times and redistributed portfolios, but essentially remained the same ; color was given to it by Thiers and Guizot, the first as a representative of the left center, the second as the head of the right center. First, Thiers was the Minister of the Interior, then of Trade, then again of the Interior. Very little remains of Thiers' former radicalism; the change in his beliefs occurred in parallel with the change in the beliefs of the big bourgeoisie, of which Thiers was a representative. The Ministry and Thiers himself in particular were subject to sharp attacks from the National, now led by Armand Carrel; Thiers responded with legal prosecutions against this body, as well as against other opposition bodies. Thiers dealt with the uprisings with extreme severity, especially those in Lyon and Paris (1834). After Fieschi's attempt on the life of Louis-Philippe, Thiers supported the so-called September laws (1835), which restricted freedom of the press (increasing the amount of bail from newspapers, the threat of a fine of up to 50,000 francs for inciting hatred of the government and inciting rebellion, prohibiting expressing sympathy for the republican regime, etc.), introducing secret voting for jurors, lowering from 8 to 7 the number of jury votes sufficient for prosecution, etc. Earlier (1834) a law was passed requiring prior permission for the right to street peddling newspapers and books; and laws against freedom of association.
As Minister of Trade, Thiers patronized the Bourse; under him, the stock exchange game especially developed in France. He did a lot to improve communications in France, in particular to build a railway network. Under his influence, the government not only did not oppose the revived cult of Napoleon, but patronized it; Thiers's work was to place a statue of Napoleon on the Vendôme Column.
Government 1836
The rivalry between Thiers and Guizot, which was more personal than political, led to the fall of the ministry on October 11 and to the formation of Thiers' ministry, in which, in addition to the presidency, he took over the portfolio of foreign affairs. The ministry lasted only 6 months, from February 22 to August 25, 1836, and resigned due to disagreements with the king. In the next four years, Thiers was engaged in scientific work and led the dynastic opposition in the chamber; participated in the coalition of 1838-1839 against the Ministry of Molay.
Government 1840
On March 1, 1840, Thiers composed his second cabinet, in which he took the portfolio of foreign affairs; the cabinet was homogeneous and consisted of members of the center left; its main members, besides Thiers himself, were Remusat and Cousin. In the Chamber of Deputies he was supported by Oddilon Barrot, in the Chamber of Peers Thiers secured the support of Broglie. Thiers kept his main rival Guizot at a distance, in the post of London ambassador. Managing this ministry, Thiers said in the chamber: “I am the son of the revolution, I was born in its depths, this is my strength.” In reality, these were just one words: Thiers made it his task to balance between different parties, protecting the existing order as much as possible. “I am not prejudiced towards any party,” he said in his program speech. “I don’t believe that there is one party devoted to order and another devoted to disorder.” I believe that all parties equally desire order... I have only good citizens before me.” Thiers's ministry made an attempt to carry out a conversion of state rents, but retreated before the opposition of the chamber of peers and the king. It gave permission for the construction of several important railway lines with a government guarantee; it instructed the Prince of Joinville (the king's son) to transport Napoleon's ashes to Paris. In the field of foreign policy, it decided to support Muhammad Ali of Egypt against Turkey and the Quadruple Alliance (England, Prussia, Austria and Russia). As a result, relations with these powers became so strained that Thiers began to bring the army and navy to a martial law. In the speech from the throne, which was supposed to open the autumn session of parliament in 1840, it was supposed to announce the upcoming new recruitment of 300 thousand recruits, the construction of fortifications around Paris and a number of other corresponding measures. The king, who did not sympathize with the military designs of his minister, refused to make this speech, and the ministry resigned; his place was taken by the Ministry of Soulta-Ghiso (October 29, 1840).
In opposition
Thiers was extremely irritated with the king and in his speech in the chamber placed responsibility on him, thus entering into a decisive contradiction with his constitutional theory; the king could never forgive him for this and after 1840 he had antipathy towards Thiers. Of the projects proposed by Thiers, his successors adopted only the project for fortifications around Paris. Thiers strongly supported him in the chamber, arguing that these fortifications would make Paris impregnable to any enemy, that the delivery of provisions to besieged Paris could not be cut off and, therefore, the capture of Paris by famine would also be impossible; in view of this, Thiers recommended that the chamber allocate a loan of 133 million. The opposition severely criticized Thiers' strategic considerations and argued that forts were not being built against foreigners, but in case of internal war. To the latter, Thiers objected that a government that would dare to bombard Paris would cover itself with indelible shame. Loans were allocated and forts erected. The War of 1871 proved Thiers's strategic considerations wrong, and during the pacification of the commune, Thiers' government bombed Paris. In the following years, Thiers appeared at the head of the dynastic opposition against the Guizot ministry; the tone of his speeches again rose significantly. He sharply criticized the entire activity of the ministry, which he reproached for betraying the revolution; he spoke against the Jesuits (May 2, 1845), insisted on the incompatibility of the title of deputy with public service. In the name of humanity, he protested against the killings in Galicia, against the bombing of Palermo, reproaching the government for indifference towards Italy, for supporting the Sonderbund. Thiers wrote his articles in the Constitutionnel in the same tone. His articles and speeches were read in cafes and at meetings with the same enthusiasm as his articles in the National in 1830; he regained popularity among radical elements. He traveled widely, especially in Germany and Italy, exploring places marked by the campaigns of Napoleon I.
"History of the Consulate and the Empire"
In 1845, the first volumes of his “Histoire du Consulat et de l'Empire” appeared, the 20th volume of which was published only in 1862 (the 21st, containing an index, in 1869. There are later, cheap editions of 5 t. “Atlas de l’histoire du Consulat et de l’Empire” was published for the book. Scientifically, this book, which is a direct continuation of the history of the revolution, stands above the latter; Thiers had enormous unpublished material for her, consisting of various archives to which he gained access during his ministry. The tone of this book is somewhat different from that of the History of the Revolution: it talks more about “order” than about “freedom.” Its main character is Napoleon, for whom Thiers has real reverence, although he admits the fallacy of many of his measures. Together with Bérenger and Victor Hugo, Thiers worked a lot in his literary works for the rehabilitation of Napoleon, which he contributed to as a minister; he was preparing, without knowing it, the creation of the Second Empire. Tarle E.V. noting Thiers' role in the creation of the “Napoleonic legend” he wrote: “ He (extremely, however, gently) blames Napoleon only for those wars that he lost. It is written in general in enthusiastic tones. This is an exclusively political, diplomatic and military history. Thiers does not know economics and does not even suspect that it is needed to understand history. His work had enormous influence and was read in great demand, helped by the brilliance of his presentation.» .
Revolution of 1848 and return to politics
Under the Second Empire
In the legislative assembly of 1849-1851 he was one of the leaders of the monarchists, equally hostile to both the President and the Republicans; he voted for the law on primary education, which placed the school in the hands of the clergy, for the law of May 31 (1850), which limited universal voting. On December 2, 1851, Thiers was arrested and expelled from France, but already in August he was allowed to return to his homeland, and Napoleon III even began to invite him to court balls, calling him “our national historian.” Thiers stood aloof from politics for a long time, finishing his historical work, but in 1863 he was elected to the legislative corps, where he became a major figure in the opposition. He defended freedom of the press, spoke against the government's police brutality; Most often he spoke on issues of foreign policy, reproaching the government for unforgivable mistakes. When France allowed the defeat of Austria, Thiers uttered the famous phrase: “There is no more mistake left that the government would not make.” In 1869, Thiers was re-elected to the legislative body. Even Olivier's ministry did not reconcile Thiers with the empire, and he still fought against it. In January 1870 he opposed her trade policy, advocating protectionism.
Head of the government
After the fall of Napoleon III, the Government of National Defense sent Thiers to
Adolphe Thiers
Thiers, Adolphe (1797-1877) - French politician, executioner Paris Commune. Before 1830, Thiers was known as an opposition journalist and historian. After accession to the throne Louis Philippe Thiers was appointed a member of the Council of State, and in 1832 - Minister of the Interior in Soult's government; While in this post, Thiers brutally suppressed the 1834 uprisings in Paris and Lyon.
In 1836 and in March-October 1840, Thiers was Chairman of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Foreign Affairs. In connection with the Egyptian crisis of 1839-1841 (...) under Thiers, relations between France and England, as well as with other European powers, sharply worsened. Thiers, who “loved to wave the sword of Napoleon I in the face of Europe” (K. Marx), led France to a state of isolation and a major foreign policy defeat in the eastern question (see London Convention of 1840). 20. X 1840 Thiers retired, giving up the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs to his old rival Guizot (...).
In 1848-1851, Thiers was the leader of the reactionary "party of order". After the Bonapartist coup on December 2, 1851 (see Napoleon III), Thiers was briefly expelled from France; He returned to active participation in political life in 1863, when he was elected to the legislative body and led the moderate monarchist opposition there. “Thiers,” wrote Marx, “took part in all the shameful affairs of the Second Empire - from the occupation of Rome by French troops to the war with Prussia.” When the Second Empire fell, Thiers was sent by the government of "national defense" to St. Petersburg, London, Vienna and Florence to gain diplomatic support from France. Thiers's trip to European capitals yielded almost no results.
After the truce with Prussia (January 1871), the National Assembly elected Thiers as head of the executive branch. 26. II 1871, the Thiers government concluded a preliminary peace treaty at Versailles. Prussia received Alsace, Eastern Lorraine and 5 billion francs. indemnities .
Immediately after the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, Thiers set about suppressing the revolutionary movement in the country. His attempt to disarm the working people of Paris caused a general uprising in the capital (18.3.1871) and the formation of the Paris Commune. Thiers immediately turned to the Prussians for help against his people, with whom the final peace had not yet been signed. Close cooperation between Thiers and Bismarck in the fight against the Commune. According to the Rouen Convention concluded with Prussia, Thiers received the right to increase the French army from 40 thousand people. up to 80 thousand people In addition, Bismarck agreed to release several tens of thousands of French soldiers from captivity. Having betrayed the interests of France, Thiers easily agreed to a significant deterioration in the terms of the Versailles preliminary treaty; in exchange for this, Bismarck subjected the rebel Paris to a blockade and freely allowed the Versaillese troops to pass through the Prussian lines. The Frankfurt Peace Treaty of 1871 (...), signed on 10. V, is characteristic of Thiers’ foreign policy activities, which, according to Marx, always “led to the extreme humiliation of France.”
Thiers was the organizer of the brutal reprisal of the French bourgeoisie against the defenders of the Paris Commune. In August 1871, Thiers was elected president of France. On May 24, 1873, he retired.
Diplomatic Dictionary. Ch. ed. A. Ya. Vyshinsky and S. A. Lozovsky. M., 1948.
Thiers, Adolphe (14.IV.1797 - 3.IX.1877) - French statesman, historian. Member of the French Academy (1833). In 1821, Thiers moved from Aix, where he was a lawyer, to Paris. He collaborated in liberal-bourgeois newspapers ("Constitutionnel" and others). Together with A. Carrel and F. Minier (his closest friend and political associate), Thiers founded the newspaper National in January 1830. Along with other opposition journalists, he edited and signed a declaration of protest against the July Ordinances of 1830. He contributed to the accession to the throne of Louis Philippe d'Orléans. In 1830, Thiers became a member of the State Council, from 1830 to the beginning of 1831 - Deputy Minister of Finance, in 1832-1836 (with a break) - Minister of the Interior, in February-August 1836 and March-October 1840, he headed the government, simultaneously holding the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs. Being one of the leaders of the liberal-bourgeois opposition during the Restoration, Thiers after the July Revolution turned into an extremely reactionary bourgeois politician: in April 1834 he organized the brutal suppression of republican uprisings in Lyon, Paris and other cities (the reprisal against the rebels in Paris was especially brutal - so called the Transnonen Massacre), supported the anti-democratic laws of 1835 against freedom of the press, against the republican movement. In 1840, Thiers was forced to resign as chairman of the Council of Ministers due to disagreements with the king over the issue of supporting the Egyptian Pasha Muhammad Ali, who opposed the Turkish Sultan (see Egyptian crises). In the February days of 1848, Louis Philippe tried to put Thiers at the head of the government. Thiers advised the king to withdraw troops from Paris to prevent them from going over to the side of the revolution. In June 1848, Thiers was elected to the Constituent Assembly. During the June Uprising of 1848, he advocated the dictatorship of the general L. E. Kavenyaka. Soon Thiers headed the monarchical “Party of Order”. In August 1848 he published a pamphlet “On the Right of Property” (“Du droit de propriété”), directed against socialist ideas, in December 1848 he supported the candidacy Louis Napoleon Bonaparte for the presidency. In 1850, he took part in the development of laws on the transfer of public education to the control of the clergy and on the limitation of suffrage. After the Bonapartist coup on December 2, 1851, Thiers was expelled from France (he lived in Belgium, England, Italy, Switzerland), and returned to his homeland in 1852. In 1863, Thiers was elected to the Legislative Corps, where he joined the moderate liberal opposition. In July 1870, he spoke out against the war with Prussia, citing France's military unpreparedness. After the fall of the Second Empire (September 4, 1870), Thiers was sent by the "Government of National Defense" to London, St. Petersburg, Vienna and Florence to negotiate the support of France by other powers in the war against Prussia and their mediation in concluding peace, but was unsuccessful. At the beginning of February 1871, he was elected to the National Assembly and in the same month appointed head of the executive branch. The Thiers government concluded a preliminary peace treaty with Prussia, humiliating for France (February 1871). The reactionary policy of the Thiers government led to a sharp aggravation of the political situation in Paris and some other cities of France. Thiers' attempt to disarm the working-class neighborhoods of the capital sparked a revolutionary uprising on March 18, 1871, leading to the proclamation of the Paris Commune of 1871. Thiers fled to Versailles. Having secured the support of the German government, Thiers suppressed the Paris Commune with exceptional cruelty, earning himself the shameful reputation of the bloody executioner of the Communards. K. Marx gave a devastating characterization of Thiers in “The Civil War in France” (see K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, 2nd ed., vol. 17, pp. 317-70). On August 31, 1871, the National Assembly elected Thiers President of the French Republic. Thiers concluded several external loans to pay the war indemnity to Germany. In domestic politics, he was an ardent opponent of any progressive reforms, disbanded the National Guard, opposed universal and compulsory secular primary education, and defended protectionist customs policies. In May 1873, an acute conflict arose between the Thiers government and the monarchist majority of the National Assembly (Thiers, taking into account the political situation and the commitment of the majority of the population to the republic, opposed the restoration of the monarchy). On May 23, 1873, Thiers submitted his resignation, which was accepted on May 24; he was replaced as president by an ardent monarchist McMahon. This effectively ended Thiers' political career. True, in 1876 he was elected to the Chamber of Deputies (in 1877 he joined the group of deputies who expressed no confidence in the Broglie cabinet).
In historiography, Thiers is one of the creators (along with O. Thierry, F. Guizot , F. Minier) a new direction that recognizes the struggle of classes as “... the key to understanding the entire French history” (Lenin V.I., Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 26, p. 59 (vol. 21, p. 42)), but who considers only the class struggle of the bourgeoisie with the nobility to be natural. In the 20s, Thiers published his main historical work - “History of the French Revolution” (“Histoire de la révolution française”, t. 1-10, P., 1823-27), written from the position of the liberal bourgeoisie. In this work, Thiers gave a detailed account of events based on a large amount of factual material. He sharply condemned the royal court, the feudal aristocracy, and counter-revolutionary emigrants, but at the same time he spoke extremely hostilely about the revolutionary uprisings of the masses. Thiers' philosophical and historical concept is characterized by admiration for success: he is always on the winning side. In his book, he expressed sympathy first with the Feuillants, then with the Girondins and, finally, with the Thermidorians. He had a negative attitude towards the Jacobins, but still justified their drastic measures against the Girondins (Thiers’ work was sharply criticized by E. Cabet). After the July Revolution, Thiers, who had turned from a moderate liberal into an ardent reactionary, began to revise his “History of the French Revolution” in an openly reactionary spirit (the last edition revised by Thiers, published during his lifetime, dates back to 1870-1872). Thiers’s second extensive work, “History of the Consulate and Empire” (“Histoire du Consulat et de l’Empire”, t. 1-21, P., 1845-69) is a panegyric to Napoleon I; the book contains a lot of factual material, but distorts many historical events.
A.I. Milk. Moscow.
Soviet historical encyclopedia. In 16 volumes. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1973-1982. Volume 14. TAANAKH - FELEO. 1971.
Read further:
May “Bloody Week”, the last battles of the defenders of the Paris Commune of 1871 with the troops of the Versailles government on May 21-28.
Historical figures of France (biographical reference book).
Essays:
Discours parliamentaires, v. 1-16, P., 1879-89; Notes et souvenirs. 1870-1873, P., 1903.
Literature:
Dobrer V.K., The Fall of Thiers (May 24, 1873), "Educational journal of the Leningrad State Pedagogical Institute", 1939, vol. 22; his, The Army and the Government in the First Years of the Third Republic, ibid., 1948, vol. 62; Reizov B. G., Franz. romantic historiography, (L.), 1956, ch. 7; Historiography of modern times in Europe and America, M., 1967 (see index); Küntzel G., Thiers und Bismarck, Bonn, 1905; Dreyfus R., M-r Thiers contre l "Empire..., P., (1928); Reclus M., M-r Thiers, P., (1929); Roux G., Thiers, P., 1948; Lucas-Dubreton J ., Aspects de Thiers, (20 ed.), P., (1948); Pomaret Ch., Thiers et son siècle, P., (1948); Charles-Roux F., Thiers et Méhémet-Ali, P., (1951); Descaves P., Mr. Thiers, (P., 1961).