La Réforme à Metz by Heinri Tribout de MorembertReview by: Robert M. KingdonThe American Historical Review, Vol. 77, No. 2 (Apr., 1972), pp. 525-526Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Historical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1868764 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 11:02

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press and American Historical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to The American Historical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.189 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 11:02:22 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Modern Europe 525 Modern Europe 525

died, and his mother, who had to go to work, put him out to be cared for. He was then shipped back to his grandmother in County Limerick to be brought up, and an aunt whom he had grown attached to, had to emigrate to America because of poverty. Might not these wounds to self-esteem, these frustrations of needs to depend, have evoked a fund of anger to be spent (not exclusively on England) and a determination on personal, and later national, independence? Longings to depend seem to have persisted, manifesting themselves in an in- tense and personal reliance on God. But he did not, perhaps could not, "inter-depend" with humail beings. No one seems to have been close to him or to have known what he was really like, including the authors of this official biography.

This book does not erase the sense that de Valera was often rigid, narrow, negative, and life-denying. We know what he was against- external domination. What was he for? Keep- ing faith with the past and the dead, the resto- ration of the Irish language, an unpartitioned republic. But beyond that did he want to make the Irish people more prosperous, healthier, better educated? Hardly. His policy of eco- nomic nationalism wasted, according to less flat- tering accounts than this one, the considerable assets with which the new state began. The ter- rible poverty of the Irish in the 193os, resulting from the economic war that he had provoked with Britain, and the continuing drain of emi- gration, which by the 1950s reached the highest rate since the agricultural depression of the i88os, are facts that the authors choose not to emphasize. Their hero, in any case, was beyond "materialism." "The frugal fare of the cottage" he believed to be Irish, Christian, and uplift- ing. The republic required sacrifice. If an Eng- lish government had been responsible for the hardship inflicted by his regime, the mind bog- gles at what the reaction in Ireland would have been. While he was leading his country toward economic disaster, he was denouncing parti- tion, imposed and maintained by "English force," as the cause of Ireland's ills. The moral ambiguities of this career do not receive the at- tention they deserve here.

De Valera's place in Irish history is hardly in question. He belongs with the immortals, O'Connell and Parnell. He survived many dan-

died, and his mother, who had to go to work, put him out to be cared for. He was then shipped back to his grandmother in County Limerick to be brought up, and an aunt whom he had grown attached to, had to emigrate to America because of poverty. Might not these wounds to self-esteem, these frustrations of needs to depend, have evoked a fund of anger to be spent (not exclusively on England) and a determination on personal, and later national, independence? Longings to depend seem to have persisted, manifesting themselves in an in- tense and personal reliance on God. But he did not, perhaps could not, "inter-depend" with humail beings. No one seems to have been close to him or to have known what he was really like, including the authors of this official biography.

This book does not erase the sense that de Valera was often rigid, narrow, negative, and life-denying. We know what he was against- external domination. What was he for? Keep- ing faith with the past and the dead, the resto- ration of the Irish language, an unpartitioned republic. But beyond that did he want to make the Irish people more prosperous, healthier, better educated? Hardly. His policy of eco- nomic nationalism wasted, according to less flat- tering accounts than this one, the considerable assets with which the new state began. The ter- rible poverty of the Irish in the 193os, resulting from the economic war that he had provoked with Britain, and the continuing drain of emi- gration, which by the 1950s reached the highest rate since the agricultural depression of the i88os, are facts that the authors choose not to emphasize. Their hero, in any case, was beyond "materialism." "The frugal fare of the cottage" he believed to be Irish, Christian, and uplift- ing. The republic required sacrifice. If an Eng- lish government had been responsible for the hardship inflicted by his regime, the mind bog- gles at what the reaction in Ireland would have been. While he was leading his country toward economic disaster, he was denouncing parti- tion, imposed and maintained by "English force," as the cause of Ireland's ills. The moral ambiguities of this career do not receive the at- tention they deserve here.

De Valera's place in Irish history is hardly in question. He belongs with the immortals, O'Connell and Parnell. He survived many dan-

gers and, most of all, he survived his own mis- takes. Until a biography gives him to us warts and all and places him in the context of Irish society and politics, we will not understand how he did it or why the Irish people needed, wanted, and admired a leader like him.

JOSEPH M. WOODS

Atkinson College, York University

gers and, most of all, he survived his own mis- takes. Until a biography gives him to us warts and all and places him in the context of Irish society and politics, we will not understand how he did it or why the Irish people needed, wanted, and admired a leader like him.

JOSEPH M. WOODS

Atkinson College, York University

HENRI TRIBOUT DE MOREMBERT. La Reforme a Metz. Volume 1, Le luthe'ranisme, 15I9-I552.

(Annales de l'Est, MWmoire, Number 36.) Nancy: FRcult6 des Lettres et des Sciences humaines de l'Universite de Nancy. 1969. Pp. 229.

This exasperating book provides a striking ex- ample of both the strengths and weaknesses of a certain type of local history. Its subject is most promising. Metz was a free city of the Holy Roman Empire from 1519 to 1552 and hence subject to the seductive attractions of Protestantism to which so many of the free cit- ies, notably its prosperous neighbor Stras- bourg, succumbed. Yet Metz -was also a French-speaking city in the province of Lor- raine and thus subject to the formidable pro- Catholic pressures of the powerful Guise family backed by the Crown of France. Its situa- tion on a linguistic, political, and religious frontier could make of its Reformation history a fascinating case study in the collision of rival cultural forces. M. Tribout de Morembert, director of the Metz Archives, is ideally placed to undertake such a study. Unfortunately he lacks, on this showing, the requisite analytical ability, the fund of general information, and a command of Reformation bibliography. He does present, to be sure, a good many fresh facts on the involvement of Metz in the Refor- mation, based on extensive research in manu- script repositories in Metz itself, in Strasbourg, and in Paris. Many of the manuscripts he uses are quoted in extenso with suitable precision. However, his fresh facts are sewed together with stale summary accounts of the contempo- rary history of the Protestant and Catholic Ref- ormations and of imperial religious policies. This general information is drawn from a cu- rious rag bag of scholarly essays, encyclopedia articles, and popular histories, many of them sadly out of date. It is often not related closely

HENRI TRIBOUT DE MOREMBERT. La Reforme a Metz. Volume 1, Le luthe'ranisme, 15I9-I552.

(Annales de l'Est, MWmoire, Number 36.) Nancy: FRcult6 des Lettres et des Sciences humaines de l'Universite de Nancy. 1969. Pp. 229.

This exasperating book provides a striking ex- ample of both the strengths and weaknesses of a certain type of local history. Its subject is most promising. Metz was a free city of the Holy Roman Empire from 1519 to 1552 and hence subject to the seductive attractions of Protestantism to which so many of the free cit- ies, notably its prosperous neighbor Stras- bourg, succumbed. Yet Metz -was also a French-speaking city in the province of Lor- raine and thus subject to the formidable pro- Catholic pressures of the powerful Guise family backed by the Crown of France. Its situa- tion on a linguistic, political, and religious frontier could make of its Reformation history a fascinating case study in the collision of rival cultural forces. M. Tribout de Morembert, director of the Metz Archives, is ideally placed to undertake such a study. Unfortunately he lacks, on this showing, the requisite analytical ability, the fund of general information, and a command of Reformation bibliography. He does present, to be sure, a good many fresh facts on the involvement of Metz in the Refor- mation, based on extensive research in manu- script repositories in Metz itself, in Strasbourg, and in Paris. Many of the manuscripts he uses are quoted in extenso with suitable precision. However, his fresh facts are sewed together with stale summary accounts of the contempo- rary history of the Protestant and Catholic Ref- ormations and of imperial religious policies. This general information is drawn from a cu- rious rag bag of scholarly essays, encyclopedia articles, and popular histories, many of them sadly out of date. It is often not related closely

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.189 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 11:02:22 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

526 Reviews of Books 526 Reviews of Books

to developments in Metz and, indeed, informa- tion on the operation of Metz's government, which is really needed for a full understanding of this story, is omitted. The resulting mixture may prove valuable to specialists, but it will have to be used with care.

ROBERT M. KINGDON

University of Wisconsin, Madison

to developments in Metz and, indeed, informa- tion on the operation of Metz's government, which is really needed for a full understanding of this story, is omitted. The resulting mixture may prove valuable to specialists, but it will have to be used with care.

ROBERT M. KINGDON

University of Wisconsin, Madison

JOHN C. RULE, editor. Louis XIV and the Craf t of Kingship. [Columbus:] Ohio State University Press. 1969. Pp. x, 478. $12.00.

Professor Rule proposes in this book to explore some historiographical problems of the reign of Louis XIV. He brings together a dozen essays by distinguished scholars in the field, four of whom had prepared their papers for a confer- ence at Ohio State University in 1964. Rule frames the essays with two of his own, one sur- veying the major events, the other the bibliog- raphy of Louis's reign.

Not all of the essays are true to the book's title. Only four consider the "craft of kingship" as such: Rule's one-hundred-page survey, which stresses the bureaucratic side of Louis's activities; both of John B. Wolf's essays, the first on Louis's preparations for kingship (the conclusions of which are similar to those of his fine biography of Louis), the second on Louis as a "soldier-king"; and A. Lloyd Moote's essay on Louis's concepts of law and justice as illus- trated by his actual practices. Another four es- says are more accurately discussions of the king's motives, and they are the most provoca- tive of the volume. They include a revisionist essay by R. M. Hatton on Louis's foreign pol- icy, an analysis of Louis's relations with the Church by H. G. Judge, a description by An- drew Lossky of the changing intellectual as- sumptions that lay behind Louis's actions, and a discussion by William F. Church of Louis's doctrine of reason of state. Four deal specifi- cally with historiographical questions: Herbert H. Rowen tries to untangle the various mean- ings given by historians to the term "absolut- ism"; Paul Sonnino discusses interpretations of the king's Me'moires; Nathan Whitman reveals the meaning of the fountain of Latona at Ver- sailles; and Orest Ranum provides a series of

JOHN C. RULE, editor. Louis XIV and the Craf t of Kingship. [Columbus:] Ohio State University Press. 1969. Pp. x, 478. $12.00.

Professor Rule proposes in this book to explore some historiographical problems of the reign of Louis XIV. He brings together a dozen essays by distinguished scholars in the field, four of whom had prepared their papers for a confer- ence at Ohio State University in 1964. Rule frames the essays with two of his own, one sur- veying the major events, the other the bibliog- raphy of Louis's reign.

Not all of the essays are true to the book's title. Only four consider the "craft of kingship" as such: Rule's one-hundred-page survey, which stresses the bureaucratic side of Louis's activities; both of John B. Wolf's essays, the first on Louis's preparations for kingship (the conclusions of which are similar to those of his fine biography of Louis), the second on Louis as a "soldier-king"; and A. Lloyd Moote's essay on Louis's concepts of law and justice as illus- trated by his actual practices. Another four es- says are more accurately discussions of the king's motives, and they are the most provoca- tive of the volume. They include a revisionist essay by R. M. Hatton on Louis's foreign pol- icy, an analysis of Louis's relations with the Church by H. G. Judge, a description by An- drew Lossky of the changing intellectual as- sumptions that lay behind Louis's actions, and a discussion by William F. Church of Louis's doctrine of reason of state. Four deal specifi- cally with historiographical questions: Herbert H. Rowen tries to untangle the various mean- ings given by historians to the term "absolut- ism"; Paul Sonnino discusses interpretations of the king's Me'moires; Nathan Whitman reveals the meaning of the fountain of Latona at Ver- sailles; and Orest Ranum provides a series of

reflections on the attitudes of Louis and his ad- ministrators toward the king's court and capi- tal. One paper, by C. D. O'Malley, expertly and amusingly traces the medical history of the king, but its exact place in this collection is not apparent.

Rule claims in his preface that there is a sur- prising consensus among the writers on some of the historiographical issues involved, and he says he will make no effort to reconcile what differences there are. But the differences, even the subtle ones, result in a confusing portrait of the Sun King. For Rule, Louis is the bu- reaucrat extraordinaire, "modern" in his meth- ods, aggressive in foreign affairs but willing to compromise in order to maintain stability, a great builder and patron. Wolf sees Louis as a "professional" in all his roles, plying his trade of kingship with self-awareness and a strong sense of security. In religious matters, Judge argues, Louis had a conscious aim: to maintain the purity of the faith; and he exploited every means to that end. From Church's essay we learn that Louis's concept of kingship, based on a widely accepted doctrine of reason of state, gave him great potential for despotism. Thus far we have a portrait of Louis as a confi- dent man and monarch, one who knew what he wanted and who set out diligently, and witl no mean ability, to get it.

But then turning to Hatton, Lossky, and Moote, we feel less sure. Hatton contends that Louis's foreign policy was defensive, that his goals for France were actually quite modest, and that he was "more frightened than has been realized." Lossky portrays Louis as a man with only a few consistently held ideas and traces a pattern of changing beliefs and motiva- tions that makes it hard, if not impossible, to draw a tidy picture of him. Moote considers Louis's attitudes toward the law rather disor- derly and inconsistent. Even Judge attests to the diversity of Louis's interests in religious matters. We are obviously dealing with a very different view of the Sun King. Louis appears here to be complex, changeable, and often in- fluenced by outsiders and events, in a word, more human. The image of Louis as single- mindedly devoted to any goal, such as the pur- suit of gloire, power, or territorial aggrandize- ment, not only contradicts the less "tidy" view

reflections on the attitudes of Louis and his ad- ministrators toward the king's court and capi- tal. One paper, by C. D. O'Malley, expertly and amusingly traces the medical history of the king, but its exact place in this collection is not apparent.

Rule claims in his preface that there is a sur- prising consensus among the writers on some of the historiographical issues involved, and he says he will make no effort to reconcile what differences there are. But the differences, even the subtle ones, result in a confusing portrait of the Sun King. For Rule, Louis is the bu- reaucrat extraordinaire, "modern" in his meth- ods, aggressive in foreign affairs but willing to compromise in order to maintain stability, a great builder and patron. Wolf sees Louis as a "professional" in all his roles, plying his trade of kingship with self-awareness and a strong sense of security. In religious matters, Judge argues, Louis had a conscious aim: to maintain the purity of the faith; and he exploited every means to that end. From Church's essay we learn that Louis's concept of kingship, based on a widely accepted doctrine of reason of state, gave him great potential for despotism. Thus far we have a portrait of Louis as a confi- dent man and monarch, one who knew what he wanted and who set out diligently, and witl no mean ability, to get it.

But then turning to Hatton, Lossky, and Moote, we feel less sure. Hatton contends that Louis's foreign policy was defensive, that his goals for France were actually quite modest, and that he was "more frightened than has been realized." Lossky portrays Louis as a man with only a few consistently held ideas and traces a pattern of changing beliefs and motiva- tions that makes it hard, if not impossible, to draw a tidy picture of him. Moote considers Louis's attitudes toward the law rather disor- derly and inconsistent. Even Judge attests to the diversity of Louis's interests in religious matters. We are obviously dealing with a very different view of the Sun King. Louis appears here to be complex, changeable, and often in- fluenced by outsiders and events, in a word, more human. The image of Louis as single- mindedly devoted to any goal, such as the pur- suit of gloire, power, or territorial aggrandize- ment, not only contradicts the less "tidy" view

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.189 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 11:02:22 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions