Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 16.djvu/250

Rh 236 MICHELET carried out, during the years between the downfall of Louis Philippe and the final establishment of Napoleon III., an enthusiastic Histoire de la Revolution Franchise. Despite or because of its enthusiasm, this is by no means Michelet s best book. The events were too near and too well known, and hardly admitted the picturesque sallies into the blue distance which make the charm and the danger of his larger work. In actual picturesqueness as well as in general veracity of picture, the book cannot approach Carlyle s ; while as a mere chronicle of the events it is inferior to half a dozen prosaic histories older and younger than itself. The coup d etat lost Michelet his place in the Record Office, as, though not in any way identified with the republic administratively, he refused to take the oaths to the empire. But the new regime only kindled afresh his republican zeal, and his second marriage (with Mademoiselle Adele Malairet, a lady of some literary capacity, and of republican belongings) seems to have further stimulated his powers. While the history steadily held its way, a crowd of extraordinary little books accompanied and diversified it. Sometimes they were expanded versions of its episodes, sometimes what may be called commentaries or companion volumes. In some of the best of them natural science, a new subject with Michelet, to which his wife is believed to have introduced him, supplies the text. The first of these (by no means the best) was Les Femmes de la Revolution (1854), in which Michelet s natural and inimitable faculty of dithyrambic too often gives way to tedious and not very conclusive argument and preaching. In the next, L Oiseau (1856), a new and most successful vein was struck. The subject of natural history was treated, not from the point of view of mere science, nor from that of sentiment, nor of anecdote, nor of gossip, but from that of the author s fervent democratic pantheism, and the result, though, as was to be expected, unequal, was often excellent. L, Insecte, in the same key, but duller, followed. It was succeeded by L 1 Amour (1859), one of the author s most popular books, and not unworthy of its popularity, but perhaps hardly his best. These remarkable works, half pamphlets half moral treatises, succeeded each other as a rule at the twelve months interval, and the succession was almost unbroken for five or six years. L Amour was followed by La Femme (1860), a book on which a whole critique of French literature and French character might be founded. Then came La Mer (1861), a return to the natural history class, which, considering the powers of the writer and the attraction of the subject, is perhaps a little disappointing. The next year (1862) the most striking of all Michelet s minor works, La Sorciere, made its appearance. Developed out of an episode of the history, it has all its author s peculiarities in the strongest degree. It is a nightmare and nothing more, but a nightmare of the most extraordinary verisimilitude and poetical power. This remarkable series, every volume of which was at once a work of imagination and of research, was not even yet finished, but the later volumes exhibit a certain fall ing off. The ambitious Bible de VHumanite (1864), an historical sketch of religions, has but little merit. In La Montagne (1868), the last of the natural history series, the tricks of staccato style are pushed even farther than by Victor Hugo in his less inspired moments, though as is inevitable in the hands of such a master of language as Michelet the effect is frequently grandiose if not grand. Nos Fils (1869), the last of the string of smaller books published during the author s life, is a tractate on educa tion, written with ample knowledge of the facts and with all Michelet s usual sweep and range of view, but with visibly declining powers of expression. But in a book published posthumously, Le Banquet, these powers reappear at their fullest. The picture of the industrious and famishing populations of the Riviera is (whether true to fact or not) one of the best things that Michelet has done. To complete the list of his miscellaneous works, two collec tions of pieces, written and partly published at different times, may be mentioned. These are Les Soldats de la Revolution and Legendes Democratiques du Nord. The publication of this series of books, and the comple tion of his history, occupied Michelet during both decades of the empire. He lived partly in France, partly in Italy, and was accustomed to spend the winter on the Riviera, chiefly at Hyeres. At last, in 1867, the great work of his life was finished. As it is now published it fills nineteen volumes. The first of these deals with the early history up to the death of Charlemagne, the second with the flourishing time of feudal France, the third with the 13th century, the fourth, fifth, and sixth with the Hundred Years War, the seventh and eighth with the establishment of the royal power under Charles VII. and Louis XI. The 16th and 17th centuries have four volumes apiece, much of which is very distantly connected with French history proper, especially in the two volumes entitled Renaissance and Reforme. The last three volumes carry on the history of the 1 8th century to the. outbreak of the Revolution. The characteristics which this remarkable history shares Avith Michelet s other works will be noted presently. At present it may be remarked that, as the mere division of subjects and space would imply, it is planned on very original principles. Michelet was perhaps the first historian to devote himself to anything like a picturesque history of the Middle Ages, and his account is still the most vivid though far from the most trustworthy that exists. His inquiry into manuscript and printed authorities was most laborious, but his lively imagination, and his strong religious and political prejudices, made him regard all things from a singularly personal point of view. Circumstances which strike his fancy, or furnish convenient texts for his polemic, are handled at inordinate length, while others are rapidly dismissed or passed over altogether. Yet the book is undoubtedly the only history of France which bears the imprint of genius, and in this respect it is not soon likely to meet a rival. Uncompromisingly hostile as Michelet was to the empire, its downfall and the accompanying disasters of the country once more stimulated him to activity. Not only did he write letters and pamphlets during the struggle, but when it was over he set himself to complete the vast task which his two great histories had almost covered by a History of the Nineteenth Century. He did not, however, live to carry it further than Waterloo, and the best criticism of it is ! perhaps contained in the opening words of the introduction to the last volume &quot; 1 age me presse.&quot; The new republic was not altogether a restoration for Michelet, and his professorship at the College de France, of which he con tended that he had never been properly deprived, was not given back to him. He died at Hyeres on the 9th of February 1874, and an unseemly legal strife between his representatives took place as to his funeral. The literary characteristics of Michelet are among the most clearly marked and also among the most peculiar in French litera ture. A certain resemblance to Lamennais has been already noted, and to this may be added an occasional reminiscence of the manner of Bossuet. But in the main Michelet, even in the minor details of style, is quite original and individual. His sentences and paragraphs are as different as possible in construction and rhythm from the orderly architecture of French classical prose. A very frequent device of his (somewhat abused latterly) is the omission of the verb, which gives the sentence the air of a continued interjection. Elsewhere lie breaks his phrase, not finishing the regular clause at all. In these points and many others the resemblance to his contemporary Carlyle is very striking ; and, different as were their points of view, their manners of seeing were by no means unlike. History to Michelet is always picturesque; it is a series of tableaux. Allusion has been already made to the singular per-