The Marquis: Lafayette Reconsidered by Laura Auricchio

The Marquis: Lafayette Reconsidered by Laura Auricchio is the third biography of Lafayette that I have read. This is a really good history book that is well written and researched. It contains much insightful analysis of its subject. Though the book falls a little short due to its brevity, I would recommend this as a first read over other the other works that I have read on the Marquis.

Auricchio’s book is less biased in favor its subject than Unger’s work. Though perhaps unfair to compare with Gaines’s work, not pairing Lafayette’s life with the more famous Washington has obvious advantages in a biography.

Having played an important role in the American Revolution and a key role in the French Revolution, Lafayette is a unique figure in history. He is a fascinating character for me. I summarized his life as part of my commentary on Unger’s book here.

One thing that distinguishes this as a very good history book is a combination of astute analysis and really good writing of the type not always found in works like this. This book could have been  longer. While certain aspects of Lafayette’s life are closely examined, other parts are presented in a way that seem a little rushed. Fortunately, as the book begins to describe the early days of the French Revolution, the pace slows down and the narrative begins to focus more tightly upon specific details. This is the period of the Marquis’s life that the author spends the greatest number of words exploring. Auricchio is at her best when describing and analyzing this period of Lafayette’s life.  In fact, the explanation of the early French Revolution’s events may be presented here in a clearer way than in any other history book that I have read.

Lafayette fascinates me, and I could talk about many points that are addressed in this book.  One of Auricchio’s main themes is an issue that is particularly interesting to me. It is based on a stereotype, but I think that this is a stereotype that is somewhat true. The issue centers on the opinion that Lafayette has remained so popular in the United States, both in the eyes of the public and by historians, yet at best, the French are lukewarm to him.

 The author writes,

In America, we remember his triumphs; in France, few outside of his native Auvergne see him as a hero. So little does France love Lafayette that the monumental Critical Dictionary of the French Revolution, published by a leading team of French historians in 1988, states flatly that “the man has drawn few eulogies.”  

Auricchio tries to answer why this is so. She writes,

Part of the answer is that Lafayette succeeded so completely in cultivating an American identity that, even in France, he remains a distinctly American hero. 

Elsewhere the author comments,

Although Lafayette was an indefatigable champion of righteous causes, he did not always meet with success. During the French Revolution, he failed spectacularly.

Lafayette’s popularity in America dates back to his lifetime. When he returned to America in 1820 for a Grand Tour he was met by enormous and adoring crowds. Based on other readings that I have done, it might be argued that at that moment, he may have been the most popular person in an America.

Auricchio writes,

Why did the celebrations in honor of Lafayette loom so large in people’s minds? In part, the phenomenon reflected a genuine outpouring of affection and appreciation for a man who had come to our nation’s aid at a moment of need and whose dramatic life story had unfolded in the pages of American newspapers, books, magazines, and prints for the better part of fifty years. Words of gratitude and admiration for the French hero of the American Revolution filled the songs and poems written in his honor.

I can attest to Lafayette’s popularity with Americans, at least those who are interested in the American and French Revolutions. I have been reading and discussing the American Revolutionary era since I was a teenager. We Americans tend to gush over Lafayette. Personally, though I recognize his flaws, I admire him more than I do most historical figures. The reasons for such esteem are numerous. He relentlessly strived, despite severe obstacles, for liberty in both America and France, he was an unwavering moderate, he was a never-say-die optimist, even under terribly adverse conditions, by all accounts he had a sunny, optimistic personality and, contrary to many of his cotemporaries, he was anti-slavery, to name some of his virtues.

There is a lot more on the subject of Lafayette’s dichotomy of popularity in America and France contained in this work. It is one of many reasons that this book is well worth reading.

Despite its relative brevity, this is a very good biography of an intriguing historical figure. The writing is well crafted and the book is engaging. Auricchio has a knack for explaining complex historical occurrences in an understandable way while not straying into the simplistic. This book will work for those who initially know little of Lafayette and his era as well as those who are already well versed on the subject and are looking for more.

I previously posted about Lafayette by Harlow Giles Unger here, and For Liberty and Glory: Washington, Lafayette, and Their Revolutions by James R. Gaines here .

For Liberty and Glory: Washington, Lafayette, and Their Revolutions by James R. Gaines

For Liberty and Glory: Washington, Lafayette, and Their Revolutions by James R. Gaines is a parallel biography of both George Washington and the Marquis de Lafayette with an emphasis on the relationship between the two men. The book also presents the author’s take on both the American and French Revolutions. At times, Gaines’s viewpoint is original and insightful. His writing is also very good. Where this work falls a bit short is in the relative scarcity of in-depth analysis on the relationship between both men as well as on both revolutions. While these connections are explored, I hungered for more. If the book had devoted fewer words to details that are generally known already and spent more words examining and discussing these facts, this would have been a stronger work.

For those unfamiliar with the details of Lafayette’s life, my summary is included along with my commentary on Lafayette by Harlow Giles Unger. For those unfamiliar with the details of Washington’s earlier life, before becoming the first President of the United States, he led the Continental Army for year after year in arduous battles against both the British and the natural elements. It was during the war years of the American Revolution that the teenage Marquis de Lafayette, having volunteered for service in the American Army, distinguished himself as one of America’s most capable generals as he engaged in vitally important diplomacy between the United States and France and established an extremely close, lifelong friendship with Washington.

On some of the incongruities of the relationship between the two men, Gaines writes,

“The friendship of Washington and Lafayette seems in some ways as implausible as the French-American one, almost like the setup to a joke: What does a Virginia frontiersman and grade-school dropout have in common with a moneyed French aristocrat who learned his horsemanship in the company of three future kings? Or what do you call a bumptious optimist whose best friend is a moody loner? Lafayette threw his arms around people and kissed them on both cheeks. Washington did not. “

Later, Lafayette became a pivotal player in the French Revolution. Though he was an early leader, he was later forced to flee its excesses and was later imprisoned in Prussia and then Austria, having been accused of being a dangerous revolutionary, for a period of five years. During most of this time, he and Washington engaged in a steady stream of correspondence.

As for the connections between the revolutions, Gaines touches upon numerous points. The American Founders and French Revolutionaries drew upon similar intellectual roots. Debt, incurred by France in its support of the American cause, was likely the primary spark that ignited the French Revolution. The ideals of the American Revolution spread to France and encouraged revolution there. French officers who served in the American Revolution helped bring revolutionary ideology to France. As the French Revolution raged, the two primary American political factions each took sides. At least in the early years, Thomas Jefferson’s Republicans strongly supported the French Revolution and its ideals as Alexander Hamilton’s Federalists vehemently opposed it.

When Gaines does dig deep, his analysis is very well thought out and perceptive. One of just several really interesting tracks he takes is a look into the motivations that drove both men. The author concludes that the lifelong inspiration for both of these figures can be boiled down to regard for their own reputations.

Gaines argues that both men were obsessed with what the public and what history thought about them. Of particular importance was to act in away as to be remembered as honorable and virtuous.

In the 18th century—in America, France and Britain alike—the ultimate test of personal success was called "fame," "glory" or "character," words that signified neither celebrity nor moral courage but referred to a person's reputation, which was also called his "honor." This sort of acclaim was not a cheap popularity divorced from achievement, as it would be in an age when people could become famous for being well known. Fame and its synonyms meant an illustrious eminence, a stature accrued from having led a consequential life.”

Later Gains goes on,

Washington and Lafayette started out by striving to create for themselves the image of the people that they wished to be, a lifelong endeavor to act well. If their motives for doing so were mixed, their commitment for doing so were not, and somewhere along the way, in a kind of political and moral alchemy, their urgings for fame and glory were transmuted into finer stuff, their lives became enactments of high principle. They lived such a life, did such deeds, even remained friends, in part, to stake their claim on immortality, which meant to have their story told; and the audience they cared must to hear it was posterity….”

I have read somewhat extensively about Washington. At least in terms of America’s first President, Gaines is right on the money (as is Washington). His argument that Lafayette’s motives were similar is also very convincing. The argument that certain men of this era were obsessively preoccupied with reputation and virtue is very much in line with the thinking and writings of Gordon Wood, who has written extensively on the American Revolutionary generation’s belief system concerning self-image. My commentary on Wood’s Radicalism and the American Revolution is here and his Revolutionary Characters is here.

It is fascinating to examine how Lafayette took this belief system into his later years when he was immersed in the tumultuous and, at times, morally ambiguous setting of the French Revolution. Lafayette consistently took a moderate position and advocated for a constitutional monarchy in France. As Harlow Giles Unger does, Gains concludes that had Lafayette acted more decisively against radicals when he had the chance, his popularity and control of military forces would have been enough to prevent the French Revolution from descending into chaos and mass executions (I do not have a thorough enough grasp of the French Revolution to have a serious opinion on the validity of this theory). Gaines actually points out that Napoleon Bonaparte also reached the same conclusion when writing about the events of the French Revolution. The Marquis’ hesitance to do so resulted from his revulsion against the use of military force as a means to reach political ends. Such action would have destroyed his reputation as a lover of liberty and revolution in a moderate form.

There are other very astute and worthwhile points made in this book. It is also a very engaging read. However, there are more complete biographies of both Washington and Lafayette and more complete histories of both Revolutions. Thus, this book is recommended, but only for those who are already interested in the subjects covered and are just hungry for more. Readers who fit this bill will, however, find this book very engaging.

Lafayette by Harlow Giles Unger

Lafayette by Harlow Giles Unger is a fascinating and detailed exposition of the life of Marie-Joseph Paul Yves Roch Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de La Fayette. I highly recommend this work; however, it is not without its flaws. This is mostly a serious, informative and thoughtful book. It is highly readable and it is a page - turner. This is also an intricately researched biography that is heavy with the actual writings and correspondence of Lafayette and his contemporaries. With all that said, like many biographers I found that Unger is a little too enamored with his subject. At times the author reminds us a bit too much about the French nobleman’s bravery and virtue. In addition, Unger sometimes goes a little overboard in excoriating historical figures to the point of near name calling; at one point he refers to Jean – Paul Marat as “ a foul, ill kempt Swiss dwarf” and repeatedly and unnecessarily refers to Louis XVIII as “obese.”   These are unfortunate exceptions, however, as more often the author creates relatively accurate and fair representations of his subjects. For all his admiration for Lafayette, Unger openly confronts the man’s flaws. Unger is also honest about his intentions; in his introduction he declares that the purpose of him writing the book is to dispel some of the attacks upon Lafayette’s character and actions that have been leveled by certain historians over the past few years.

SUMMERY OF LAFAYETTE'S LIFE

My summery of Lafayette’s life is more detailed then I am usually inclined to present. This is because I think that the particulars of the connections that he established with other persons are vitally important to understanding the man and his times, as well as with some points that I would like to touch upon.

In 1757, Lafayette was born into French nobility and privilege. Orphaned at a young age, he began his military career in French army while in his teens. In 1774, he married Marie Adrienne Françoise de Noailles, the daughter of another powerful French noble family. Though the marriage was arraigned and initially emotionless, in time the couple developed a deep love for one another and Adrienne became an important partner in Lafayette’s endeavors and pursuits. 

When the American Revolution broke out, like many young French nobleman, Lafayette traveled to America to join the fight. The motivations of these men included the chance at fame, glory and adventure, as well as the opportunity to take on their historical enemy, Great Britain. Joining the continental army, Lafayette quickly proved his bravery under fire as well as his military acumen. The Marquis soon rose to a top leadership position on the continental army, became one of George Washington’s most trusted advisers and conducted several brilliant military campaigns.

It was at this time that Lafayette and Washington established an extremely close bond; Unger and many other historians describe it as a farther-son relationship.  Lafayette even named his son Georges Washington de La Fayette. He also built enduring lifelong friendships with other personages as Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Monroe, as well as numerous other Americans. These friendships would come into play time and again over the course of Lafayette’s life. Significantly, during this period he became a true believer in republicanism and what I would describe as a reasonable and measured revolutionary ideology. It was during this stage that Lafayette and the nation of America developed what can only be described a lifelong love for each other.

Lafayette was not just a military leader. During the American Revolution, he played an instrumental political and diplomatic role, first, in helping to convince the various reluctant American States to support the war effort, and later in helping to convince his native France into supporting the American War for Independence. Eventually traveling back and forth across the Atlantic, he helped to persuade both France and Spain to come into the War on America’s side ensuring British defeat. Shortly after the conflict’s end, he joined John Madison’s expedition into the deep wilderness of New York State to establish a treaty between the Iroquois Nation and the United States. Lafayette turned out to be instrumental in the successful negotiations.

Returning to France, the Marquis was hailed a hero. He and Adrienne become ingrained in the business and society of Louis XVI, Marie Antoinette and the Court of Versailles. As the French Revolution developed, Lafayette was a key player. He advocated for a major reform of French society and the establishment of a constitutional monarchy that had characteristics of a republic. He also was a champion of individual rights. He became the leader of a moderate wing of the revolutionaries.

 As the Revolution developed Lafayette was appointed commander of the Garde nationale, which was essentially the Revolutionary Militia. In terms of popularity, power and influence, he was for a time the most powerful man in France. As the revolution became more violent and fell under the control of radicals and extremists, Lafayette attempted to maintain a balancing act. He endeavored to erode but not completely destroy the power of the monarchy. At the same time, he was protecting Louis XVI and the royal court from mob violence, as they were essentially surrounded and unable to leave the Tuileries Palace in Paris. Thus, he was also in a way the monarchy’s jailor. 

With time, radicals such as Maximilien de Robespierre began to seriously erode Lafayette’s popularity and power. At this time, France began to become engaged in war with various European powers. Lafayette was placed in command of a French army. Eventually, the Marquis finally decided to move against the radicals but it was it was too late. As he was preparing to March in Paris, his troops mutinied and he was forced to flee into the Netherlands. He was subsequently imprisoned by Prussia for being the catalyst of a dangerous revolution.

In the meantime Adrienne and much of Lafayette’s family were imprisoned as The Reign of Terror descended upon France. They all barley escaped the guillotine, thanks largely to the efforts of James Monroe, Lafayette’s old comrade in arms, who was now the American Ambassador to France. As time passed, more moderate forces took control in France. Adrienne and family were eventually released and were allowed to leave France.

In a seemingly bizarre decision after sending her son, Georges Washington de La Fayette, to safety in the care of his namesake in America, Adrienne took her two daughters to live with Lafayette in Olomouc prison. The family was finally released after several years. Eventually resettling in France, Lafayette mostly avoided public life but maintained a somewhat hostile relationship first to Napoleon Bonaparte’s regime, as well as the subsequently restored Bourbon monarchy. These were not the republics that Lafayette envisioned. In 1815, the Marquis did step into the spotlight again when he helped to arrange the exile of Napoleon.

In 1825-1826, Lafayette returned to America for a sentimental thirteen-month tour. At this time, he was reunited with his surviving American Revolutionary friends. Historically, Lafayette had enjoyed enormous popularity on America. The adulation that the American public poured upon Lafayette was astounding as crowds of tens of thousands greeted him from coast to coast. 

This could easily have been the final act of a monumental life, but Lafayette was not yet finished. Seemingly reenergized upon his return to France, Lafayette became an even more outspoken critic of the French King Charles X, whom he saw as more oppressive than his predecessors. The seasoned revolutionary attracted a host of young followers. When revolution broke out once again in Paris, Lafayette was propelled to lead it. In short order, Charles X was overthrown. A constitutional monarchy with the seemingly liberal and pro revolutionary King Louis Philippe I was instituted with Lafayette’s blessing. 

In the next several years Louis Philippe I becomes more and more autocratic and used massive force to quell street demonstrations. As a result he fell out with Lafayette, who once again became the leader of a vocal opposition. Relatively active until the end, Lafayette died peacefully in 1834.

SOME THOUGHTS ON LAFAYETTE

There is so much both of this book as well as of the French nobleman’s life worth exploring. I want to devote a few words concerning just one of many intriguing issues. As the French Revolution became more and more radicalized and chaos and killing erupted in the streets of Paris, Lafayette made major efforts to damp down on the violence and keep order. Yet, while he possessed enormous power and influence, he hesitated to move, politically or militarily, against radicals who were sowing violence, undermining order and attacking and slandering him personally. 

As Unger puts it,

“In rejecting political and military power, Lafayette's political ineptitude was matched only by that of the king, who was a past master of the art" 

What was the cause of this unwillingness to take decisive action? On the surface it seems like a puzzle. Up until this point, Lafayette had shown that he possessed both physical and moral courage. Furthermore, he was a bold man of action who did not shy away from what he believed to be right. According to Unger, the answer lies in his formative years and involves a terrible misreading of the situation in Revolutionary France. 

Lafayette was perhaps the most important member of Washington’s inner circle during the American Revolution. During this time, Continental forces were perpetually short of material, funds and manpower. These shortfalls almost cost America the war. They led to lost battles, the starvation, freezing and death of troops and left soldiers without pay for years at a time. These depredations were partially the result of greed, profiteering and incompetence in both the American Congress and the state governments. On numerous occasions, Washington was urged to use his power and popularity to take over the American government to put an end to these outrages. Again and again he refused, arguing that virtuous republican ideals dictated that he not intervene in government militarily or even through demagoguery. Later, when the war was over, Washington could have simply declared himself King of America. There would likely have been little opposition to such a power grab and several military officers urged him to do so. Once again he demurred, citing republican idealism. Lafayette was present for all of this. Washington was his mentor. When he saw terrible outrages occurring in France during that revolution, he judged the situations to be similar and that, like in America, republicanism itself would sort things out. 

Unger writes,

“Lafayette, of course, was simply following the chivalric example of his "beloved general" in America by ceding military control of the nation to civil governance. "I hope our work will finish at the end of the year," he wrote to Washington, "and your friend ... will rejoice in abandoning all power and political duties to become a simple citizen in a free constitutional monarchy. On July 20, he gathered the fourteen thousand citizen soldiers together to send them home to their provinces. Still clinging to his fantasy of an American Utopia in France”

While I do not feel that I know enough to unabashedly embrace Unger’s analysis, it does seem plausible and his take on Washington, his motivations and his impact on Lafayette during the American Revolution seem to be mostly on target.

Lafayette fascinates me. The man’s life story epitomizes the connection between the American Revolution and the French Revolutions. If ever a famous person was of both France and America, it was the Marquis.  The American Revolutionary era has been a great interest of mine since childhood. The French Revolution and its aftermath is one of the most momentous events in the history of the West and at times for me presents something of an enigma in its complexities and contradictions. As a bridge between these two events, Lafayette will likely always intrigue me.