576 M. 1). CHATEAUBRIAND. 



doubtless have been condemned to the flames by the Sorbonne. But 

 in 1802, the epoch in which it came out, the clergy, only just escaped 

 from the shipwreck of their order, while they were singing the praises 

 of the consul Bonaparte, who had just formed a compact with them 

 that stripped them of three-fourths of their dearest privileges, thought 

 themselves but too happy to encourage a work which, although treat- 

 ing 1 religion as novel-writers handle history, could not fail at any 

 rate of being a great support to them at the most critical juncture of 

 their affairs. The French clergy confidently trusted that the pen of 

 Chateaubriand would become for them what the sword of Charlemagne 

 had proved to the Romish Church of old a sword which had been 

 worn out in immolating thousands of Vaudois, Albigeois, and Pro- 

 testants. It is only just, however, to say that Chateaubriand did not 

 become the tool of the priesthood, but rendered a far greater service 

 to the cause of religion by taking the pilgrim's staff and the device of 

 the troubadour than he could have accomplished if he had entered 

 the lists as its sword-girt champion of the cross. 



In the midst of these pious occupations, however, he cultivated ele- 

 gant literature with success, and encouraged it with liberality : in this 

 respect his conduct merits the highest praise. A short time previous 

 to the events of July he gave in his resignation as the king's am- 

 bassador at Rome, not, as many have been simple enough to believe, 

 because he disapproved of the steps of the minister Polignac, who would 

 have substituted absolute power for a constitutional government selon 

 la charte, but because he felt a pique, arising from the circumstance 

 that Charles X. had judged him incapable of figuring in this famous 

 conspiracy of the ordonnunces. During the grandes journees he did 

 nothing either for Charles or Philippe, doubtless in the hope of being 

 called to recompose the monarchy.* When, therefore, he saw on the 

 7th of August, 1830, that France was saved, and saved without him, 

 he became furious, and in his famous or rather infamous speech, in 

 which he refused to take the oath of allegiance to Louis Philippe, 

 he proposed nothing less than to cause a second revolution always 

 supported by the hope of being called to re-organize the broken ma- 

 terials of the government. He struggled like a madman, but in vain ; 

 he gained nothing, save his removal from the peerage. His friends 

 were distracted at the ridiculous part he had played in these events. 

 Those who favoured the only order of things at all practicable in 

 such times shrugged up their shoulders at his absurd vanity; whilst 

 the least indulgent hissed him. His next step was to employ his 

 utmost endeavours in order to be persecuted and exiled by the new 

 government, whom he furiously attacked ; and, being unsuccessful 

 even in this, he at last, when driven to despair, adopted the magnani- 

 mous resolution of flying from France and its blind government, and of 

 exiling himself, in lieu of receiving the crown of political martyrdom 

 so ardently desired by him, which he too well felt could be no 

 longer gained in that country. In compliance with this notable de- 



* " Jai tonjours dans ma poche 

 L'Aigle ou la fleur de Its." 



Chanson sui les Gironettes. 



