"Germaine de Staël: Napoleon's Worst Enemy" Topic

"I may have overstated in the title. Anne Louise Germaine Necker, Baronne de Staël-Holstein (hereafter referred to as Germaine to save us all considerable time), was a formidable woman, and made herself the canker on Napoleon's tongue, but she may not have been his worst enemy. At least no worse an enemy than, say, I don't know, Russia. Nevertheless, she was a bee in Napoleon's bicorne hat. (A hat that was purchased at auction one year ago for $2.4 USD million, by the way. I hope you didn't miss your chance to buy it or the always useful lock of Napoleon's hair, which sold for a mere $50,000. USD You have to stay on top of the ads or these deals will pass you by.

But let's talk about Germaine.

In 1786, when Germaine was twenty years old, newly married, and making her debut into society, she was presented at Versailles to King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette. The custom was to make three curtsies, kneel, and kiss the hem of the queen's dress. Germaine tripped on her own dress during the third curtsy and "fell flat on her face."2 This was not a cute little Jennifer Lawrence stumble with a quick recovery. This was a woman splayed out on the floor, in front of basically every important person in France, requiring "a gaggle of courtiers" to get her back on her feet.2 A whole gaggle, you guys; that's probably an embarrassing amount of help. In the moment her face hit the floor, a gauntlet was inadvertently thrown; those bound to love her began loving her then, for grace (not the physical kind) under pressure and the humor she showed through the incident, while those determined to hate her decided she was too uncivilized to be tolerated…."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Worst?

I'd suggest here on TMP, alone, there's several far worse enemies than the dear Madame.

Talleyrand's comment on de Stael:

'I understand that Madame de Stael, in her novel, has disguised both herself and me as women.'

Apparently, Talleyrand had also fathered her first child.

The Directors had exiled de Stael from Paris 'for subversive activities' (she was Swiss, not French). Napoleon as First Consul allowed de Stael to return to Paris.

Napoleon had spurned her attempt to become his mistress, and so she then became his enemy.

When she persuaded her father to publish a booklet that severely criticized the French Consitution, Napoleon figured out that it was de Stael behind it and ordered her to leave Paris, but not France.

Goethe believed that de Stael 'had no conception of the meaning of duty.'

When in England, Byron noted that 'she harangued, she lectured, she preached English politics to the first of our English Whig politicians, the day after her arrival in England; and…preached politics no less to our Tory politicians the day after. The Sovereign himself, if I am not in error, was not exempt from this flow of eloquence.'

De Stael admired Germany and England and wanted France to be like them as well as like Switzerland. She also wanted France to go Protestant as she was a Protestant. She tried to get Napoleon to oppose the revolution in the Vaudois, Switzerland because it would end her income (feudal dues).

All in all, de Stael was a pain in the posterior and was against what Napoleon was doing in France as First Consul, but she was a minor player, if a player at all and she was not important.

Thanks Kevin!

Good point Ochoin… totally agree! (smile)

By the way, did this lady made a marriaged in England with Charles Tristan Montholon?… after he was accused to killed Napoleon?…

Amicalement
Armand

Napoleon's worst enemy was Napoleon.

Napoleon's worst enemy was Napoleon.

I wouldn't argue with that. He certainly made life more difficult for himself a lot of the time.

Napoleon's worst enemy was Napoleon.

Well said and a relief to everyone else who faced him. Considering he really should've won Waterloo, no one could ultimately beat Napoleon but Napoleon.

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

no one could ultimately beat Napoleon but Napoleon.
Well, apart from Melas at Marengo (Desaix then beat Melas), Archduke Charles at Aspern-Essling, Schwarzenberg at Leipzig, Blucher at La Rothiere and Wellington at Waterloo. They all beat Napoleon.

Kutusov also gets props for Maloyaroslavets. Although tactically bested on the day, he did force Napoleon's army to go out via the same route they marched in. As this had been stripped bare of supplies already, this pretty much ensured the destruction of the army.

Sir Sidney Smith beat him almost every time ;-)), funny in case Madame de Stael was so unimportant quite a lot of fuss is made about her.

Really? Are you giving sole credit to Smith for Napoleon's defeat at Acre? If you are, that is something of an exaggeration.

Seems to me there was also a garrison there that fought through the siege.

And the greatest single contributor to the successful defense was the émigré French engineer La Picard de Phelippeaux who was a 'major reason why Napoleon did not take Acre.'

See page 230 of the following:

link

Kutusov also gets props for Maloyaroslavets. Although tactically bested on the day, he did force Napoleon's army to go out via the same route they marched in. As this had been stripped bare of supplies already, this pretty much ensured the destruction of the army.

Kutusov was convincingly defeated by Eugene at Maloyaroslavets. And Napoleon was not 'forced' to go back to the old route for the retreat-it was a choice, but not a wise one.

This defeat undoubtedly influenced Kutusov not to take part in the Berezina fight as he had been repeatedly defeated by the French and was definitely 'gun-shy' to face Napoleon again.

"Seems to me there was also a garrison there that fought through the siege."

Presumably, a similar observation could be offered regarding any of Napoleon Bonaparte's military successes.

Imho Kevin is pointing that there were Ottomann soldiers who fought hard there… not only the British under Sir Sidney Smith… you have to give credit to them…

Amicalement
Armand

The English language can be funny.

Was Napoleon's "Worst" enemy his most capable opponent and his biggest threat therefore?

Or was his Worst enemy, by definition actually the least competent of all those that dared to oppose him? Poor old Mack or many a Spanish general come to mind.

In all fairness, Germaine de Staël was also Germaine de Staël's worst enemy.

And Benjamin Constant's.

And almost every man she ever spent significant time with, with the possible exception of her father, but he was pretty busy with other things.

I was always under the impression that Sir Sidney Smith defended St. Acre single handed, thanks for pointing out that he was supported by the Royal Navy, fellow officers and "Ottomans" – now who would have thought that, Boney won his victories of course alone and his defeats were caused by others.

now who would have thought that, Boney won his victories of course alone and his defeats were caused by others.

Where did you come up with this idea?

Napoleon certainly didn't say that. He gave full credit to his army and the troops for winning.

'…I give myself only half the credit for the battles I have won, and a general gets enough credit when he is named at all, for the fact is that a battle is won by the army.'-Napoleon

Thanks for clearing that up von W. I too laboured under the misapprehension that Wellington won Waterloo literally single-handed. After personally repelling d'Erlon, he saw off the French cavalry by forming himself into a square and then gathered 1,000 muskets which he fired personally at the advancing Old Guard. Luckily Blucher's one-man flank attack on Plancenoit succeeded at around this point and the two generals were able to drive the French from the field. Their armies just sat and watched.

At what point in his career was that?

@Brechtel198

What you are experiencing is a superciliousness born of an unimaginative bottom line that "Napoleon lost". This isn't the love of studying history, the era, the man, the army or the campaigns. It is the result of a handful trying to regain association with an idealized bygone golden era where the British always win and the French are always bumbling fools. For those who haven't seen the Sharpe series where the French are either unenthusiastic zombies or corrupt "baddies" while the 95th rifles run around like ultramodern army rangers, here is a sampling of this approach to "analyzing" Napoleon and his campaigns:

"They seek him here, they seek him there
Those Frenchies seek him everywhere
Is he in heaven or is he in hell?
That demned elusive Pimpernel"

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

I think you'll find Sir Percy Blakeney had his first outing a little while before Bernard Cornwell started typing.

Well said yet again, MP.