March 09, 2014 <Back to Index>
PAGE SPONSOR |
Honoré Gabriel Riqueti, comte de Mirabeau (March 9, 1749 – 2 April 1791) was a French revolutionary, as well as a writer, diplomat, freemason, journalist and French politician at the same time. He was a popular orator and statesman. During the French Revolution, he was a moderate, favoring a constitutional monarchy built on the model of Great Britain. He unsuccessfully conducted secret negotiations with the French monarchy in an effort to reconcile it with the Revolution. The family of Riqueti (sometimes spelled Riquet), originally of the small town of Seyne (but the family has its distant origins in Italy), became wealthy through merchant trading in Marseilles. In 1570, Jean Riqueti bought the château and seigniory of Mirabeau, which had belonged to the great Provençal family of Barras. In 1685, Honoré Riqueti obtained the title marquis de Mirabeau. He died in 1737. His
son, Jean Antoine, grandfather of Honoré Gabriel Riqueti, served
with distinction through all the later campaigns of the reign of Louis XIV. At the Battle of Cassano (1705), he suffered a neck wound so severe he thereafter had to wear a silver stock.
Because he tended to be blunt and tactless, he never rose above the
rank of colonel. On retiring from the service, he married
Françoise de Castellane with whom he had three sons: Victor
(marquis de Mirabeau), Jean Antoine (bailli de Mirabeau) and Louis
Alexandre (Comte de Mirabeau). Honoré Gabriel Riqueti, comte de
Mirabeau was the son of Victor. Honoré Mirabeau was born at Le Bignon, near Nemours, the eldest surviving son of the economist Victor de Riqueti, marquis de Mirabeau and
his wife Marie - Geneviève de Vassan. He was also the fifth child
and second son of the couple. When he was three years old, a virulent
attack of smallpox left
his face disfigured. This, combined with Mirabeau's resemblance to his
maternal ancestors and his fondness for his mother, contributed to his
father's dislike of him. Destined
for the army, at age eighteen, he was entered at military boarding
school in Paris in the regiment of Berri - Cavaleria at Saints. Of this school, which had Joseph Louis Lagrange for its professor of mathematics, there is an amusing account in the life of Gilbert Elliot who met Mirabeau there. On leaving school in 1767 he received a commission in a cavalry regiment which his grandfather had commanded years before. Mirabeau's
love affairs are well known, owing to the celebrity of the letters to
"Sophie". In spite of his ugliness, he won the heart of the lady to
whom his colonel was attached; this led to such scandal that his father
obtained a lettre de cachet, and Mirabeau was imprisoned in the Ile de Ré. On being released, the young count obtained leave to accompany the French expedition to Corsica as
a volunteer. During the Corsican expedition, Mirabeau contracted
several more gambling debts and engaged in another scandalous love
affair. However, he proved his military genius in the Corsican
expedition, and also conducted a thorough study of the island during
his stay. The study was most likely very factually incorrect, but his
desire to learn of a country that had been previously unstudied
emphasizes Mirabeau’s endless curiosity and inquisitiveness,
particularly into the traditions and customs of society. The French
Army is where Mirabeau learned the value of hard work. This aspect of
Mirabeau’s personality contributed to his popular success in the later
years of the Revolution. After
his return, he tried to keep on good terms with his father, and in 1772
he married a rich heiress, Marie - Marquerite - Emilie de Covet, daughter
of the marquess de Marignane.
Emilie, who was 18 years old, was apparently engaged to a much older
nobleman, the Comte the Valbelle. Nonetheless, Mirabeau pursued her for
several months expecting that his marriage to her would benefit him
from the allowance that the couple would received from their parents.
After several months of failed attempts at being introduced to the
heiress, Mirabeau bribed one of the marquess's maids to let him into
their residence, where he pretended to have had a sexual encounter with
Emilie. To avoid losing face, her father saw that they got married just
a couple of days after that incident. Mirabeau received a small
allowance of 6,000 livres from his father and never received the expected 3,000 livres allowance from the marquess. Mirabeau,
who was still facing financial trouble and increasing debt, could not
keep up with the expensive lifestyle his wife was used to and their
extravagances forced his father to send him into semi - exile in the
country, where he wrote his earliest extant work, the Essai sur le despotisme.
The couple had a son who died early, mostly due to the poor living
conditions they experienced during that time. Then the marquess asked
for judicial separation in 1782. She was defended by Jean
Étienne Mary Portalis, who later became one of the editors of
the Civil code. Mirabeau defended his own cause in this trial which he
lost, holding resentment against Portalis forever. His violent disposition led him to quarrel with a country gentleman who had insulted his sister, and his exile was changed by lettre de cachet into imprisonment in the Château d'If in 1774. In 1775 he was transferred to the castle of Joux, where he was not closely confined, having full leave to enter the town of Pontarlier.
In a house of a friend he met Marie Thérèse de Monnier,
his "Sophie", and the two fell in love. He escaped to Switzerland,
where Sophie joined him; they then went to the United Provinces, where he lived by hack work for
the booksellers; meanwhile Mirabeau had been condemned to death at
Pontarlier for seduction and abduction, and in May 1777 he was seized
by the Dutch police, sent to France and imprisoned by a lettre de cachet in the castle of Vincennes. The early part of his confinement is marked by the indecent letters to Sophie (first published in 1793), and the obscene Erotica biblion and Ma conversion. In Vincennes, he met the Marquis de Sade, who was also writing erotic works; however the two disliked each other intensely. It
was in these writings, however, that Mirabeau developed experience as
an orator. He learned how to curb his natural eloquence, his dialectic
become firmer, commanding and moving. The prison in which he was held
in was the first platform to hear his voice. Later during his confinement, he wrote Des Lettres de Cachet et des prisons d'état,
published after his liberation (1782). It exhibits an accurate
knowledge of French constitutional history skillfully applied in an
attempt to show that the system of lettres de cachet was
not only philosophically unjust but also constitutionally illegal. It
shows, though in a rather diffuse and declamatory form, the application
of wide historical knowledge, keen philosophical perception, and
genuine eloquence to a practical purpose which was the great
characteristic of Mirabeau, both as a political thinker and as a
statesman. His
release from Vincennes (August 1782) began the second period of
Mirabeau's life. Mirabeau not only succeeded in reversing the sentence
of death against him but also got an order for M. de Monnier to pay the
costs of the whole law proceedings. It was thought Mirabeau would come
out of the lawsuit in Aix ruined: his past convictions in prison,
scandalous relationships with women, and the bad relationship with his
father the Marquis all gave him a terrible reputation among judges and
adversaries. However, despite being condemned by the judge, his
reputation was greatly enhanced in the eyes of the public. He had
withered his opponents, crushed the opposing lawyer and turned the
cards in his favor regarding the death sentence, and from this day
forward Mirabeau became a man of the people. Upon his release, he found that his Sophie had consoled herself with a young officer, after whose death she had committed suicide. From Pontarlier he went to Aix - en - Provence, where he claimed the court's order said that his wife should return to
him. She naturally objected, and he finally lost in the third appeal of
the case when Emilie's father produced to the court compromising
letters from Mirabeau addressed to the marquess. Mirabeau then
intervened in the suit between his father and mother before the parlement of Paris, and attacked the ruling powers so violently that he had to leave France and return to Holland, where he tried to live by writing. For a period he was employed by the publisher Marc - Michel Rey. About this time he met Madame de Nehra, the daughter of Willem van Haren,
a Dutch statesman and political writer. She was an educated, refined
woman, capable of appreciating Mirabeau's good points. His life was
strengthened by the love of Mme de Nehra, his adopted son, Lucas de
Montigny, and his little dog, Chico. After a time in Holland he went to
England, where his treatise on lettres de cachet was much admired, having been translated into English in 1787, and where he was soon admitted into the best Whig literary and political society of London, through his old school friend Gilbert Elliot, who had become a leading Whig member of parliament. Of all his English friends none seem to have been as close as Lord Shelburne and Sir Samuel Romilly. Romilly was introduced to Mirabeau by Sir Francis D'Ivernois (1757 – 1842), and undertook the translation of Mirabeau's the Considérations sur l'ordre de Cincinnatus into English. It
was one of several works Mirabeau wrote in the year 1785, and it is a
good specimen of his method. He had read a pamphlet published in
America attacking the order, founded in 1783 as a bond of association
between officers who had fought in the American Revolutionary War against
Britain; the arguments struck him as true and valuable, so he
rearranged them in his own fashion, and rewrote them in his own
oratorical style. Several other pamphlets Mirabeau wrote in 1785 attacked financial speculation. Among those, De La Caisse d'Escompte was prescient in that it correctly predicted the risky nature and ultimate demise of the French "Discount Bank." This
book — which condemned the fiscal politics of the state as going against
the interest of the public — was among the influential literature
critical of the French government in the years leading up to the French
Revolution. He
soon found such work did not pay enough to keep his retinue, and sought
employment from the French foreign office, either as a writer or a
diplomat. He first sent Mme de Nehra to Paris to make peace with the
authorities, and then returned himself, hoping to get a job through an
old literary collaborateur of his, Durival, at this time director of
finance at the department of foreign affairs. One of this official's
functions was to subsidize political pamphleteers, and Mirabeau hoped
to be so employed. However, he ruined his chances with a series of
writings on financial questions. On his return to Paris he had become acquainted with Étienne Clavière,
the Genevese exile, and a banker named Panchaud. From them he learnt
about the abuse of stock - jobbing, and seizing their ideas he began to
regard stock - jobbing, or agiotage, as the source of all evil, and to attack in his usual vehement style the Banque de St-Charles and the Compagnie des Eaux. This pamphlet brought him into controversy with Caron de Beaumarchais, who certainly did not get the best of it, but it lost him any chance of employment with the government. However, his ability was too great to be overlooked by the foreign minister, Charles Gravier, Comte de Vergennes. After a preliminary trip to Berlin in early 1786, he was dispatched that July on a mission to the royal court of Prussia; returning in January, Mirabeau published a full account in his Secret History of the Court of Berlin (1787). This
account denounced the Prussian court as scandalous and corrupt,
described the King of Prussia as weak and overly emotional, and labeled
Prince Henry of Prussia, brother of Frederick the Great and a guest of
the French court, as narrow minded and incompetent. The resulting
uproar was an extreme embarrassment for the French government, which
quickly censored the book but could not prevent its widespread
notoriety. Mirabeau's episode provided inspiration to many more radical
publishers who came to regard Mirabeau as a leader of the coming
revolution. During his journey he had made the acquaintance of Jakob Mauvillon, an expert on Prussia; Mirabeau made use of his expertise in his De la monarchie prussienne sous Frédéric le Grand (London,
1788). While this book gave him a good reputation as a historian, in
the same year he lost a chance of political employment. He had offered
himself as a candidate for secretary to the Assembly of Notables, which
the King Louis XVI had just convened. To bring his name before the public, he published another financial work, the Dénonciation de l'agiotage, which contained such violent diatribes that he not only lost his election but was obliged to retire to Tongeren.
He further injured his prospects by publishing the reports he had sent
in during his secret mission at Berlin. But 1789 was at hand; the Estates - General was summoned; Mirabeau's period of probation was over. On hearing of the king's decision to summon the Estates - General, Mirabeau went to Provence, and offered to assist at the preliminary conference of the nobility of his district, but was rejected. He appealed to the Third Estate and was elected to the Estates in both Aix and Marseilles.
He chose to accept the seat for the former city, and was present at the
opening of the Estates - General on 4 May 1789. From this time the record
of Mirabeau's life forms the best history of the first two years of the National Constituent Assembly.
Among a large crowd of unfamiliar politicians in the Estates General,
Mirabeau was one figure who stood out. He was famous and not only did
the people place great faith in him – they feared him. His great
capacity for work and extensive knowledge were easily seen, but the
scandals of his private life with women, time in prison, and extensive
debt were all well known. At
every important crisis his voice was heard, though his advice was not
always followed. He possessed both logical acuity and passionate
enthusiasm. From
the beginning, he recognized that government should exist to allow the
population to pursue its daily work in peace, and that for a government
to be successful it must be strong. At
the same time he thoroughly understood that for a government to be
strong, it must be in harmony with the wishes of the majority of the
people. He
had studied the British system of government, and he hoped to establish
in France a system similar in principle yet distinct. In the first
stage of the Estates - General, Mirabeau was very important. He was soon
recognized as a leader, to the chagrin of Jean Joseph Mounier, because he always knew his own mind, and was prompt in emergencies. He is attributed with the successful consolidation of the National Assembly. After the storming of the Bastille,
he warned the Assembly of the futility of passing fine - sounding decrees
and urged the necessity of action. Although the cause of liberty had
triumphed, Mirabeau foresaw that the intervention of armed mobs would
only drive the path of Revolution further and further along a
destructive path of violence. He
declared that the night of 4 August was but an orgy, giving the people
immense theoretical liberty while not assisting them to practical
freedom, overthrowing the old régime before a new one could be
constituted. His failure to control the theorists showed Mirabeau,
after the removal of the king and the Assembly to Paris, that his
eloquence could not enable him to guide the Assembly by himself, and
that he must get additional support. He wished to establish a strong
ministry, which should be responsible, like the English ministry, but
to an assembly chosen to represent the people of France better than the British House of Commons, at that time, represented the common people of Great Britain. He first thought of becoming a minister was at a very early date, if we may believe a story contained in the Mémoires of the duchesse d'Abrantes, that in May 1789 Queen Marie Antoinette tried
to bribe him, but that he refused and expressed his wish to be a
minister. The indignation with which the queen repelled the idea may
have made him consider Duke of Orléans as
a possible constitutional king, because his title would of necessity be
parliamentary. But the weakness of the Duke of Orléans was too
palpable, and in a famous remark Mirabeau expressed his utter contempt
for him. He also attempted to form an alliance with Lafayette, but the two could not agree on a personal level, and Lafayette had his own theories about a new French constitution. Mirabeau tried for a time to act with Necker,
and obtained the sanction of the Assembly for Necker's financial
scheme, not because it was good, but because, as he said, "no other
plan was before them, and something must be done." The Comte de la Marck was
a close friend of the queen, and had been elected a member of the
Estates - General. His acquaintance with Mirabeau, begun in 1788, ripened
during the following year into a friendship, which La Marck hoped to
turn to the advantage of the court. After the march on Versailles he
consulted Mirabeau as to what measures the king ought to take, and
Mirabeau, delighted at the opportunity, drew up an admirable state
paper, which was presented to the king by Monsieur, afterwards Louis XVIII. This
Mémoire gives insight into Mirabeau's genius for politics: The
main position was that the king was not free in Paris; he must
therefore leave Paris towards the interior of France to a provincial
capital, best of all to Rouen,
and there he must appeal to the people and summon a great convention.
It would be ruin to appeal to the nobility, as the queen advised. At
this great convention the king must show himself ready to recognize
that great changes had taken place, that feudalism and absolutism had for ever disappeared, and that a new relationship between king and
people must arise, which must be loyally observed on both sides in the
future. To establish this new constitutional position between king and
people would not be difficult, because the indivisibility of the
monarch and his people is anchored in the heart of the French people. This was Mirabeau's programme,
from which he never diverged, but which was far too statesmanlike to be
understood by the king, and far too assertive of the altered condition
of the monarchy to be palatable to the queen. Mirabeau followed up his Mémoire with
a scheme for a great ministry containing all the most notable men:
Necker would be prime minister, "to render him as powerless as he is
incapable, and yet preserve his popularity for the king"; the duc de
Liancourt, the Duc de la Rochefoucauld; La Marck; Talleyrand, Bishop of Autun; Mirabeau, without portfolio; Target,
mayor of Paris; Lafayette, as generalissimo of the army; Louis
Philippe, comte de Ségur, as foreign minister; Mounier; and le Chapelier. This
scheme got noised abroad, and was ruined by a decree of the Assembly of
7 November 1789, such that no member of the Assembly could become a
minister; this decree destroyed any chance of the sort of harmony
between ministers and parliament which existed in England, and dashed
Mirabeau's hopes. The queen utterly refused to take Mirabeau's counsel
saying "I hope that we shall never sink so low that we shall have to
ask for aid from Mirabeau.", and La Marck left Paris. However, in April 1790 La Marck was suddenly recalled by the comte de Mercy - Argenteau, the Austrian ambassador to
Paris and became the queen's most trusted political adviser. From this
time to Mirabeau's death, he was the bearer of almost daily
communications between Mirabeau and the queen. Mirabeau at first
attempted to make an alliance with Lafayette, but it was useless, for
Lafayette was not a strong man himself. From
May 1790, to his death in April 1791, Mirabeau retained a close
connection with the court, and drew up many state papers for it. In
return the court paid his debts and gave him a monthly subsidy of six
thousand francs; but it ought never to be said that he was bribed, for
the court's gold never made him swerve from his political principles;
never, for instance, was he a royalist. He regarded himself as a
minister, though an unofficial one, and believed himself worthy of such
position. Mirabeau was not the traitor that many believed him to be
because he continued to uphold the ideals which were the foundation of
his political beliefs and tried to make possible a bridge between the
ideas and wants of the King and the Revolutionaries. Mirabeau
focused his efforts on two main issues: changing the ministry and
dealing with impending civil war. His attempts to form political
alliances with Lafayette and Necker failed and resulted in open
hostility. Necker disappeared from the French court and no longer posed
a threat. Lafayette, however, was very powerful due to the fact that he
held a monopoly on the military and the national guard. At first,
Mirabeau attempted to undermine Lafayette’s power, but decided to solve
the problem of the ministry, and maintain stability, by removing all
ministers and placing the ministry entirely under Lafayette. In effect,
Mirabeau suggested that the king distance himself from politics and let
the revolution run its course, because it would inevitably destroy
itself through its contradictory nature. Furthermore, Mirabeau proposed
that, if his plan should fail, Paris should no longer be the capital of
France, showing a conservative line of thinking: the only way to end
the revolution would be to destroy its place of birth. Mirabeau’s
prospects with the crown were good until 1790, when the Chatelet
charged, in the National Assembly, that the inciters of the October
days were the duc d’Orleans and Mirabeau himself. The charges were
later removed, but for Mirabeau, the accusation brought the realization
that his strategy of working closely with both the Assembly and the
court was beginning to backfire. In a later meeting with the king and
queen, Mirabeau maintained that not only was civil war inevitable, it
was necessary for the survival of the monarchy. Mirabeau believed that
the decision to go to war, even civil war, must come only from the
king. In a letter of confidence to Mirabeau, Louis wrote that, as a
Christian king, he could not declare war on his own subjects. However,
that would not stop him from reacting in kind if his subjects declared
war first. In order to avoid provoking a civil war, the king refrained
from confronting the Constituent Assembly, and hoped instead for a
constitution that he could agree to. Once the civil constitution of the
clergy destroyed this hope, Louis adopted a strategy of strengthening
royal authority and the church’s position, and accepted the use of
force – civil war – to accomplish this. Mirabeau's involvement with the
court is as interesting for the insights it provides into the mind of
Louis XVI as it is for the effects it produced in the Revolution. On
the question of the veto he took a practical view and, seeing that the
royal power was already considerably weakened, declared for the king's
absolute veto and against the suspensive veto. He knew from his British
experience that such a veto would be impractical unless the king knew
the people were on his side, and that if it were used unjustifiably the
power of the purse possessed by the representatives of the people could
bring about a bloodless revolution,
as in England in 1688. He saw that much of the Assembly's inefficiency
arose from the members' inexperience and their incurable verbosity; so,
to establish some system of rules, he got his friend Romilly to draw up
a detailed account of the rules and customs of the British House of
Commons, which he translated into French, but which the Assembly,
puffed up by a belief in its own merits, refused to use. On the subject
of peace and war he supported the king's authority, with some success.
Again, Mirabeau, almost alone in the Assembly, held that the soldier
ceased to be a citizen when he became a soldier; he must submit to the
deprivation of his liberty to think and act, and must recognize that a
soldier's first duty is obedience. With such sentiments, it is no
wonder that he approved of the vigorous conduct of the marquis de Bouillé at Nancy,
which was to his credit as Bouillé was opposed to him. Lastly,
in matters of finance he showed his wisdom: he attacked Necker's
"caisse d'escompte," which was to have the whole control of the taxes,
as usurping the Assembly's power of the purse; and he heartily approved
of the system of assignats, with the reservation that the issue should be limited to no more than one-half the value of the lands to be sold. In
foreign affairs, he held that the French people should conduct their
Revolution as they wished, and that no foreign nation had any right to
interfere with the country's internal affairs. But he knew that
neighboring nations were disturbed by the progress of the Revolution
and feared its influence on their own peoples, and that foreign
monarchs were being importuned by French émigrés to
intervene on behalf of the French monarchy. To prevent this
intervention, or rather to give no pretext for it, was the guiding
principle in his foreign policy. He was elected a member of the comité diplomatique of
the Assembly in July 1790, and in this capacity he was able to prevent
the Assembly from doing much harm with regard to foreign affairs. He
had long known Armand Marc, comte de Montmorin,
the foreign secretary, and, as matters became more strained, he entered
into daily communication with the minister, advising him on every
point, and, while dictating his policy, defended it in the Assembly.
Mirabeau's exertions in this respect showed him to be a statesman; and
his influence is best shown by the confused state of affairs in this
area after his death. Mirabeau's health had been damaged by the excesses of his youth and his strenuous work in politics, and in 1791, he contracted pericarditis.
However, some attributed his illness to a poisoning. By this time, it
is evident that the King had lost all confidence in his former adviser,
and Mirabeau’s plans never took effect. Although he had been only
recently elected president for two weeks of the National Assembly, despite the continuous medical attention paid to him by his friend and physician, Cabanis, Mirabeau would survive to perform his duties until his death on 2 April
1791, in Paris. It was here that he directed debates with eloquence
further increasing his popularity. The people of Paris cherished him as
one of the fathers of the Revolution. As
he lay on his death bed, weak and unable to speak, Mirabeau's last
action before passing was to write one word: "dormir" (to sleep). During
the king’s trial, Mirabeau’s dealings with the royal court were brought
to light, and he was largely discredited by the public after it became
known that he had secretly acted as an intermediary between the
monarchy and the revolution and had taken payment for it. He received a grand burial, and it was for him that The Panthéon in Paris was created as a burial place for great Frenchmen. The street where he died (rue de la Chaussée d'Antin) was renamed rue Mirabeau.
In 1792 his secret dealings with the king were uncovered: his remains
were removed from the Pantheon in 1794 and were replaced with those of
Marat. His remains were then buried anonymously in Clamart's graveyard. In spite of searches performed in 1889, they were not found. At
the time of his death, Mirabeau greatly feared for the future of any
constitutional Monarchy in France, as he recognized that many powerful
and radically inclined interests would not give such arrangements their
support. Mirabeau tried to remove the tyrannical power of the King, but
additionally tried to substitute a strong and respectable governing
power. The tragedy of his life was that he was unable to put into
practice freely his moderate policy and ideas without any conflicts
from the other provisional powers. He provided the Assembly with a
guiding and powerful direction, and when he died there was no one to
pick up on his legacy. His first literary work, except the bombastic but eloquent Essai sur le despotisme (Neufchâtel, 1775), was a translation of Robert Watson's Philip II, done in Holland with the help of Durival; his Considerations sur l'ordre de Cincinnatus (London, 1788) was based on a pamphlet by Aedanus Burke (1743 – 1802), of South Carolina,
who opposed the aristocratic tendencies of the Society of the
Cincinnati, and the notes to it were by Target; his financial writings
were suggested by the Genevese exile, Clavière. During
the Revolution he received yet more help; men were proud to labour for
him, and did not murmur because he absorbed all the credit and fame.
Étienne Dumont, Clavière, Antoine Adrien Lamourette and
Étienne Salonion Reybaz were but a few of the most distinguished
of his collaborators. Dumont was a Genevese exile, and an old friend of
Romilly's, who willingly prepared for him those famous addresses which
Mirabeau used to make the Assembly, pass by sudden bursts of eloquent
declamation; Clavière helped him in finance and not only worked
out his figures but also even wrote his financial discourses;
Lamourette wrote the speeches, on the Civil Constitution of the Clergy;
Reybaz not only wrote for him his famous speeches on the assignats, the
organization of the national guard, and others, which Mirabeau read
word for word at the tribune, but also even the posthumous speech on
succession to the estates of intestates, which Talleyrand read in the
Assembly as the last work of his dead friend. |