Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
On 23 March 1815 Louis XVIII disbanded die French army. In June Napoleon lost Waterloo and abdicated, and the Bourbons returned to Paris to complete the destruction of the army. It had proved itself loyal only to Napoleon and over half of the 70,000 men of Davout's command preferred desertion to the white cockade. The country at large was hostile and in the royalist south returning officers were arrested and several were killed. In August the King published an ordinance ‘concerning the organization of a new army’. The army was ‘to be formed according to the principles which constitute a truly national army to form a military force in harmony with the liberal nature of our charter… avoiding the separation of die army from the interests of die country‘. It was not an easy task. Financial circumstances placed limitations on size, die Charter forbade conscription, the allies wanted reprisals and die royalists claimed rewards for their loyal service.
1 Resnick, D., The White Terror and the Political Reaction after Waterloo (Massachusetts, 1966).Google Scholar
2 Ordonnance du Roi relative à I'organisation d'une nouvelle armée, 16 Aug. 1815. Ail quotations are my own translation.
3 Chamans, A., Mémoires (Paris, 1896), pp. 303–23.Google Scholar
4 La commission chargée d'examiner la conduite des officiers qui ont servi pendant I'usurpation, 6 Nov. 1815.
5 Barrès, J., Memoirs of a Napoleonic Officer (London, 1923), pp. 220–4.Google Scholar
6 Ex-Napoleonic — used throughout to describe men or officers who fought in the Italian cam- paigns, and under the Consulate, or Empire.
7 Castellane, B., Son Journal, 1 (Paris, 1895–1897), 310–13, 327–8Google Scholar
8 Monteilhet, J., Les Institutions militaires de la France (Paris, 1932), ch. 1. This is essential reading if the legislative aspects of the Bourbon army are to be understood. To avoid repetition I have merely summarized the more important changes, and readers are referred either to Monteilhet or to the documents themselves. In particular: Loi sur le recrutement de l'armée, 10 Mar. 1818; Ordon-nance sur la hiérarchie et l'avancement, 2 Aug. 1818.Google Scholar
9 Schnapper, B., Le Remplacement militaire en France (Paris, 1968).Google Scholar
10 Under-officers (sous-officiers) — French army junior rank comparable to the modern English grades of staff sergeant, warrant officer and officer cadet.
11 In May 1828 an article appeared in the Revue française ‘De la Guerre en Espagne’. It is a fascinating critical examination of the army in 1823 written by the editor, Armand Carrel. Carrel, a notable liberal, was educated at St Cyr.
12 de Hauranne, Duvergier, L'Histoire du gouvernement parlementaire, IV, 289.Google Scholar
13 Guillon, E., Les Complots militaircs sous la Restauration (Paris, 1895).Google Scholar No attempt is made here to provide a resume of the details of the various plots. Guillon provides an excellent account both of the events and personalities. The subject is also covered by a recent article: see Savigneur, P., ‘Carbonarism and the French Army’, History (June, 1969).Google Scholar
14 Fantin, L. des Odoards, Journal (Paris, 1895), pp. 460–1.Google Scholar
15 St Chamans, , Mémoires, pp. 354–5.Google Scholar
16 Bapst, G., Canrobert, Souvenirs d'un siècle (Paris, 1898), pp. 46, 50.Google Scholar
17 Castellane, , Journal, 1, 334–45.Google Scholar
18 Pelleport, P., Souvenirs militaires et intimes (Paris, 1857), 11, 142.Google Scholar
19 Marmont, A., Mémoires, VII (Paris, 1857), 271–2. Guillon, Complots militaires, gives details of this plot which involved several regiments of the line stationed in Paris but was frustrated by Marmont's prompt action.Google Scholar
20 General officers (officiers-général) denotes all officers above the rank of colonel.
21 The details of the conspiracies can be read in Guillon, Complots militaires. Monteilhet, Institu– tions militaires, gives the particulars of the legislative changes in 1820.
22 Quoted by Lavisse, , Histoire de France contentporaine, IV, bk. 2 (Paris, 1921), 178.Google Scholar
23 de Grandmaison, Geoffrey, L'Expédition francaise d'Espagne en 1823 (Paris, 1928). The best account of both the preparations and the campaign.Google Scholar
24 The Duke of Bellune was Minister of War from December 1821 to October 1823.
25 Revue française (May 1828), p. 143 (see above, note 11).
26 Pelleport, , Souvenirs, 11, 153. The details of the conspiracies can be found in Guillon, Complots militaires.Google Scholar
27 Les Archives historiques du Ministère de la Guerre (A.H.M.G.) D171 (Angoulême's corres– pondence and orders in the period immediately before the campaign).
28 St Chamans, , Mémoires, p. 422.Google Scholar
29 Odoards, Fantin des, Journal, pp. 484–7. The action took place on 17 July 1823; in Auguit Fantin was promoted and in November he was given a brigade.Google Scholar
30 Revue française (May 1828), pp. 151, 155.
31 Grandmaison, Expédition d'Espagne, provides the details.
32 Schnapper, , Le Remplacement militaire en France, p. 290.Google Scholar
33 The veterans were the reserve army referred to above, p. 531. When summoned to join the army in the Pyrenees in March 1823 only about 10 per cent actually came forward. The liberals maintained that the reserve could only be used in time of national emergency to defend France.
34 Pelleport, , Souvenirs, 11, 172.Google Scholar
35 Marmont, , Mémoires, VII, 293.Google Scholar
36 Monteilhet, , Institutions militaires, for details of the legislative changes of 1820 and 1824. In theory the mass of eligible candidates who were not selected formed a reserve for use in a national emergency, but the plans to organize this reserve were never implemented.Google Scholar
37 The debates can be read in full in the Archives parlementaires.
38 de Vigny, A., Servitude et grandeur militaires (Paris, 1835), bk. II, ch. 13. This explosion in the arsenal at Vincennes in August 1819 may have been connected with anti–Bourbon conspirators; Guillon, Complots militaires, p. 120.Google Scholar
39 Belhomme, V., Histoire de I'infanterie en France (Paris, 1892–1902), vol. v. A collection of all such changes within the army, to be referred to but not read.Google Scholar
40 Castellane, , Journal, 1, 415–22.Google Scholar
41 Castellane, , Journal, 11, 2–6.Google Scholar
42 For an example of this ceremony see Castellane, , Journal, 1, 316–18.Google Scholar
43 Barrès, , Memoirs, p. 206Google Scholar. Sève, L'abbé, Souvenirs d'un aumônier militaire (Lyons, 1851), pro– vides an excellent example of the extreme royalist attitude to the role of religion in the Bourbon Army.Google Scholar
44 Marmont, , Mémoires, VIII, 3.Google Scholar
45 Castellane, , Journal, 11, 173–5.Google Scholar
46 Pelleport, , Souvenirs, 11, 177.Google Scholar
47 d'Hautpoul, A., Souvenirs (Paris, 1906), III, 400.Google Scholar
48 St Chamans, , Mémoires, p. 349.Google Scholar
49 J. La Motte Rouge (la Motte de), Souvenirs el campagnes (Nantes, 1895), ch. III.
50 Bapst, , Canrobert Souvenirs, p. 35.Google Scholar
51 Casse, A. du, Scènes de la vie militaire, du soir au matin (Paris, 1852).Google Scholar
52 In civilian dress, trans., ‘en bourgeois’.
53 Castellane, , Journal, 11, 41.Google Scholar The problem of when and where uniform was worn during this period has not been solved but Girardet's assertion that the wearing of uniform ‘in society’ became less common remains unproven. Girardet, R., La Société militaire dans la France contemporatne (Paris, 1953) is the best known work on the French Army betwen Napoleon and the Second World War.Google Scholar
54 Stendhal, H., Lucien Leuwen (first draft, 1834–1835), an important novel describing the existence of a young officer in a provincial garrison town.Google Scholar
55 Bapst, , Canrobert Souvenirs, pp. 121–2. I have not found any military journal written in this period that gives any indication of interest in the arts or politics excepting Castellane's fashionable involvement in Parisian entertainments and various attempts of senior officers to stand as deputies.Google Scholar
56 Chalmin, P., L'Officier français, 1815–1870 (Paris, 1959). The most satisfactory analysis of the French officer corps, especially its social background and position in society.Google Scholar
57 General Lamarque wrote several articles on the French army of which the most important was ‘L'Esprit militaire en France 1826’.
58 Chalmin, L'Officier français, provides more detail on this problem and limited but revealing statistics can be found on p. 101 and also in annexe 7.
58 La Motte, , Souvenirs et campagnes, pp. 337–8.Google Scholar
60 D'Hautpoul, , Souvenirs, III, 428.Google Scholar
61 Azan, P., L'Exptdition d'Alger (Paris, 1930).Google Scholar
62 The problems of comparative military theory in the early nineteenth century have yet to be satisfactorily considered. However, it would appear that Napoleon's defeat was not seen in terms of the ‘new’ Prussian army by any non-Prussian military analyst.
63 Journal des sciences militaires (1825), the Spectateur militaire (1826), and the Journal du gé militaire (1828).
64 Marmont, , Mémoires (1826), vol. VII.Google Scholar
65 Spectateur militaire, 1826. General Friron, ‘Observation sur 1'etlucation militaire’ with the various replies in correspondence pages. Also Arifat, Villeneuve, Discours à I'ouverture de I'Ecole Régimentaire de Sous-Officiers (Paris, 1828).Google Scholar
66 For more details on weapons and equipment: Margerand, J., Armemcnt et équipement de l'infanterie française des XVle–XXe siècles (Paris, 1945)Google Scholar, and Hicks, Major J., French Military Weapons (1717–1938) (New York, 1964).Google Scholar
67 La Motte, , Souvenirs el Campagnes, pp. 320–1.Google Scholar
68 For examples of inspections: Castellane, Journal; see also Canrobert, , Souvenirs, pp. 144–5 for description of inspection by Castellane. The instructions issued to inspector–generals (A.H.M.G. Xem) show how these inspections should have been carried out. The detailed returns by the inspector– generals to the Ministry of War (A.H.M.G. Xd 367, 368) are evidence that the system of inspections was rigorously enforced, and suggest that it was an effective way of maintaining standards throughout the army.Google Scholar
69 La Motte, , Souvenirs et campagnes, pp. 321–7. Details of the training camps, with a series of monthly progress reports, can be found in A.H.M.G. X1 2, 3.Google Scholar
70 Morand, , L'Arméc selon la charte; also Lamarque, ‘Esprit militaire’ and Marmont, Mémoires.Google Scholar
71 Pelleport, , Souvenirs, 11, 174–90, provides the best account of this council. Marmont, Mémoires, VIII, 199, over–emphasizes his own importance in the proceedings. The reports of the council (A.H.M.G. Xs140) provide the details of the recommendations.Google Scholar
72 Julien, Ch.-A., Histoire de L'Algérie (Paris, 1964), pp. 521–4, provides an excellent bibliography. The best account of the expedition is Azan's L'Expédition d'Alger. There are many less satisfactory alternatives.Google Scholar
73 St Chamans, , Mémoires, pp. 485–6.Google Scholar
74 Julien, , Histoire de L'Algérie, p. 23, for an account of how Napoleon sent engineers to plan the campaign.Google Scholar
75 Bourmont was Minister of War in the Polignac administration.
76 Azan, , L'Expédition d'Alger, provides almost all the material necessary for an understanding of the campaign.Google Scholar
77 Berthèzene, P., Dix–huit 14 juin 1830–diccmbrc 1831 (1834). A good account which emphasizes the fact that the army that sailed to Algiers was a specially picked force, leaving many line regiments sadly depleted at home; pp. 43–5.Google Scholar
78 Marmont gives the best general outline of the military aspects of the ‘Glorious Days’ while St Chamans, Barrès and d'Hautpoul all described their own roles.
79 Barrès, , Mémoires, pp. 247–74.Google Scholar
80 Vigny, , Grandeur et servitude militaires, bk. m, chs. 1–2.Google Scholar
81 Marmont, , Mémoires, VIII, 237–317.Google Scholar
82 St Chamans, , Mémoires, pp. 485–529.Google Scholar
83 The evidence falls into three main categories: the unpublished military sources, A.H.M.G. D3131–132; the civilian reports, Archives nationaUs F9 399–411; and the published accounts, of which those by Castellane, Canrobert, Fantin des Odoards, Changarnier (in Algeria) and la Motte are particularly important.
84 Unfortunately the material referred to in this section (mainly A.H.M.G. D3131–132) is not classified.
85 The Revue historique (1931) contains a series of articles assessing the reaction of the provinces to the news of the events in Paris.
86 Girard, L., La Garde Nationate 1814–1871 (Paris, 1964), for an account of the role of the National Guard in the July days.Google Scholar
87 Castellane, , Journal, II, 359–60. Castellane was at Clermont on 2 August. The order to take the tricolour was received on the 3rd.Google Scholar
88 Odoards, Fantin des, Journal, p. 513.Google Scholar
89 La Motte, , Souvenirs et Campagnes, May 1831. It was only in the summer of 1831 that the new regime was able to place full confidence in the army which had been ‘de–Bourbonized’ by an extensive purge which accompanied the large number of resignations.Google Scholar