THE FLASSAN MEMOIR.

This Memoir (see pp. 116-18 and note 312) is noticed by M. de Broglie,

who rejects it as--

(i.) Probably unauthentic; as it has not been discovered by him or by

M. Zevort among the ordinary sources; and

(ii.) Certainly unimportant; since it is nowhere referred to, as it

assuredly would have been, in d'Argenson's Memoirs.

Now (i.) unless there existed, not merely this Memoir, but the whole

policy of which it may have been a part, a considerable portion of

the "Mémoires du Ministère" becomes unintelligible. That policy is

constantly referred to throughout Book I., Art. 4 (Rathery, IV. pp.

239-66); and it is mentioned occasionally in the "Mémoires" of 1746,

and in d'Argenson's Journal after he had ceased to be minister. Such a

document, therefore, may naturally exist.

(ii.) This Memoir is given in Flassan, "Histoire de la Diplomatie

Française," V. pp. 242-45 (published [second edition] in 1811).

It deals with facts and not with ideas, and so cannot at once be

recognised as d'Argenson's.

(iii.) On turning to the pages which precede the Memoir, we feel we are

strangely familiar with M. Flassan's text. The fact is explained by a

comparison with Rathery, Vol. IV. We find, for instance, that Flassan,

V. pp. 236-41, is positively little else than a verbal transcription

from d'Argenson, "Mémoires du Ministère," I. Art. 4 (Rathery, IV. pp.

239-66). It is not a question of the use of an authority, but simply

of the wholesale appropriation of his text. It is generally given in

inverted commas, though the source does not appear to be mentioned;

but in Flassan, V. p. 239, we find a paragraph, beginning "Quoique

véritablement" (Rathery, IV. pp. 256-57), and two entire pages, "La

Savoie," &c., pp. 240-42 (cf. Rathery, IV. pp. 257, 259-60), bodily

transferred without acknowledgment, M. Flassan securing his interest

in the whole by occasionally changing a word or an expression. An

example of the process is a sentence, taken haphazard, on Flassan, V.

p. 240; in four lines of letter-press the only alterations are "dans"

(for d'Argenson's "sur"), and "domaine de l'Autriche" (for d'Argenson's

"domaine autrichienne"; see Rathery, IV. p. 259, line 21). In fact,

the whole account of the early part of d'Argenson's ministry is a

conscientious copy of d'Argenson's text, M. Flassan confining himself

to the transposition, or occasional omission, of paragraphs, and the

changing of unimportant words. The transcription is from the original

manuscripts then in possession of the d'Argenson family, and afterwards

in the Library of the Louvre; and it was executed about fifty years

before the editions either of Jannet or Rathery were issued from the

press.

(iv.) The question suggested by the preceding is, how far is M.

Flassan's account, and therefore presumably the Memoir in question,

derived, borrowed, or taken from the manuscript of d'Argenson's

"Mémoires du Ministère." The answer is that M. Flassan's obligations

are nearly as great throughout the year 1746 as at the close of 1744;

and the only other source of original information a brief examination

has been able to disclose, are the letters and papers of Marshal de

Noailles.

The inference is that the memoir ascribed to d'Argenson by a historian

who had ransacked his papers, coinciding with d'Argenson's stated views

(_cf._ Rathery, IV. p. 257), and found among copious extracts from

what Rathery reproduces as d'Argenson's text, is authentic.

There is scarcely need to fall back upon a second line of proof, if

possible even more convincing.

(v.) In his Introduction to the "Mémoires," M. Rathery states (IV. pp.

127-28) that of the four volumes of Memoirs designed by d'Argenson,

each containing twelve articles, only Arts. I-4 of Vol. I. have been

finally written. Arts. 5-12 of Vol. I. and the whole of Vol. II. were

never edited, but remained in the form of notes and memoranda (IV. p.

125). The whole of Vol. III. exists, but imperfectly; and also Vol.

IV., with the exception of the last few articles. In brief, the memoirs

of the first six weeks of d'Argenson's ministry (Nov. 18-Dec. 31, 1744;

"Mémoires," I. Arts. I-4) are edited completely; _those of the year

1745_ ("Mémoires," I., Arts. 5-12, and II.) _are not edited at all_,

but were left as notes and memoranda; and those of 1746 are edited, but

imperfectly.

Now (vi.) we find that the second half of Flassan, Vol. V. book 4, is

occupied with a careful and copious account of _the first six weeks_

of d'Argenson's ministry (mostly in d'Argenson's own words); but no

sooner are those first six weeks over than d'Argenson's manuscript and

Flassan's fulness come to a sudden and simultaneous end; and the events

of the whole year 1745 are disposed of in eight pages, of which the

relations between France and Prussia occupy the four following lines:--

"En conséquence de cette communication [Frederick's proposal for peace,

December, 1744, _see_ this essay, p. 103], le roi de Prusse fit, le 25

décembre 1745, sa paix à Dresde, afin de s'assurer la Silésie, qu'il se

fit garantir par l'Angleterre."

In the year 1746 (when the "Mémoires" are edited, but imperfectly)

d'Argenson and M. Flassan are again intimately associated.

(vii.) The appearance of fulness given to the account of 1745 is

produced by the insertion of three long memoirs: (_a_) this disputed

memoir to Louis XV.; and (_b_) a couple more designed by d'Argenson for

the king of Poland. The manner of their appearance is peculiar.

On p. 241 (Vol. V.), without any clear connection with the preceding,

M. Flassan writes an original twenty lines of introduction, and

suddenly reproduces the Flassan Memoir (V. pp. 242-45). The Memoir is

followed, not by any consecutive argument, or even by any original

writing, but is simply wedged in its place with a couple of paragraphs

taken word for word from d'Argenson's "Mémoires," I. Art. 4 (one of the

articles perfectly edited, and referring to a period some time before).

Comp. Flassan, V. p. 245, and Rathery, IV. p. 261.

Then follow the eight pages referred to above. They bring Book IV. to a

close.

(viii.) Book V. opens with three pages of introduction (pp.

257-60),--certainly borrowed, we believe from d'Argenson's Journal

(which was in manuscript along with the "Mémoires")--and these are

followed (pp. 260-72) by the two long memoirs for the king of Poland.

Now _these memoirs are written by d'Argenson_. Unlike the former, they

deal with ideas and not with facts; and we recognise them at once.

This is not a matter of argument; to question any one's opinion upon

such a matter would be simply to impeach his knowledge of the man. The

inference is clear. If these are d'Argenson's, so presumably is the

other.

Having dealt with these memoirs, M. Flassan (V. p. 273) proceeds at a

bound to the help given by France to the Chevalier St. George, or, in

other words, to the end of 1745. In 1746 his task is easy.

In brief, we have a copious account of the wholly uneventful first six

weeks; the eventful year 1745 is represented by eight pages of original

writing, and three memoirs attributed to d'Argenson and wedged in their

places with pieces of d'Argenson's text. We submit that the inference

is as follows:--

That for his account of the year 1745, and of the last six weeks of

1744, M. Flassan relied entirely upon d'Argenson's manuscript; that

he made copious use of the perfectly edited articles so long as they

held out; and that, finding the year 1745 represented solely by notes

and memoranda, he selected three documents as of peculiar importance,

and one of them the Flassan Memoir. That consequently the Memoir is

authentic, and was one of the documents designed by d'Argenson as the

basis of the unedited "Mémoires du Ministère," Vol. I. Arts. 5-12, or

Vol. II. It was turned over, but not published, by M. Rathery, who

could not, of course, have realised its critical importance.

The last piece of evidence remains.

(ix.) This Memoir, with the rest of d'Argenson's manuscripts, perished

in the burning of the Library of the Louvre in 1871. It follows that

neither M. de Broglie (who wrote in 1888 "Marie Thérèse") nor M. Zevort

(in 1879) would have expected to find it if they had known where it

might have been found.

M. de Broglie protests that, even if authentic, it is at least

unimportant, as it is not mentioned by d'Argenson in his published

memoirs. To this we reply--

(i.) That it could not have been, as the memoirs during the period into

which it would have fallen ("au mois de février"--Flassan) have been

neither edited nor published.

(ii.) That a memoir of an exactly similar character is categorically

mentioned by d'Argenson as having been presented by him to the king a

few weeks before (_cf._ "Mémoires du Ministère" [Rathery], IV. p. 257,

and this essay, p. 104).

(iii.) That unless the policy set forth in this memoir had a very real

existence, much of the "Mémoires du Ministère," I. Art. 4, and many

scattered references to be found elsewhere, are simply unintelligible.

The question is important; for if this memoir is authentic, it follows

that the history of d'Argenson's ministry during the year 1745 has yet

to be written.

The Marquis D'Argenson: A Study in Criticism Being the Stanhope Essay: Oxford, 1893 · 第 65 / 84 题