_... Napoleon, who ordered the chief of police to take measures for
the history of France to be written in a manner favourable to his own
throne._
Here are some portions of a note on this subject dictated by Napoleon
at Bordeaux in 1808. It promulgates the conception of history as
practised, mutatis mutandis, by many of our historians of the past:--
‘I do not approve the principles laid down in his note by the Minister
of the Interior. They were true twenty years ago, they will be true
sixty years hence, but they are not true to-day. Velly is the one
fairly detailed author who has written on the history of France. The
abridged chronology of the President Hénault is a good classical book.
It is useful to have them both continued. _It is of the greatest
importance to make certain of the spirit in which these continuations
are written._ I ordered the Minister of Police to look after the
continuation of Millot, and I desire the two Ministers will consult
over the continuation of Velly and the President Hénault....
‘They are to be just to Henri IV, Louis XIII, Louis XIV and Louis XV,
but without adulation. The September Massacres and the horrors of the
Revolution must be painted in the same colours as the Inquisition
and the massacres of the Sixteen. They must take care to avoid all
reaction in speaking of the Revolution, no man could have opposed it
successfully. No blame attaches either to those who perished or to
those who survived. There was no individual power capable of changing
the elements and foreseeing the events which arose from the nature of
things and circumstances.
‘They are to point out the perpetual disorganization of the national
finances, the chaos of the provincial assemblies, the claims of the
Parlements, the lack of regulation and resort in the administration.
This checkered France, without unity of laws and administration, was
rather a union of twenty Kingdoms than a single State, so that one
breathes freely on coming to the period when the benefits of unity
of laws, administration and territory are enjoyed.... The opinion
expressed by the Minister, which, if followed, would result in
abandoning this task to private enterprise and the speculation of some
publisher, is wrong and could only produce regrettable results.’
Of course, the champions of authority are not the only persons who make
history serve their own interests. Condorcet (_Tableau historique_,
10^e Epoque) says that history should serve ‘to maintain an active
vigilance in recognizing and crushing under the weight of Reason the
first germs of superstition and tyranny, if they ever dare to appear
again.’