Étiquette : Karel
Derrière les « chevaux célestes » chinois, la science terrestre
Le fait qu’aujourd’hui encore, en parlant d’une voiture, on utilise l’unité « cheval » (CV) pour indiquer la puissance et donc le « travail » que le moteur peut fournir, en dit long sur le rôle majeur que les chevaux ont joué dans l’histoire de l’humanité.
Récemment invité à une conférence à Kaboul, en Afghanistan, j’ai évoqué à propos du besoin d’investissement en infrastructures hydrauliques, la domestication du cheval comme un bel exemple du passage d’une « plateforme infrastructurelle donnée » à une « plateforme supérieure », le terme plateforme faisant référence ici non pas à l’impact direct de l’infrastructure en question, mais à l’effet beaucoup plus large induit dans l’ensemble de l’économie d’un pays.
Nul besoin d’être anthropologue pour comprendre que l’histoire de l’humanité a radicalement changé avec la domestication du cheval, certaines choses considérées comme impossibles auparavant devenant, du jour au lendemain, la normalité.
La question de savoir quand et comment l’animal a été domestiqué reste sujet à controverse. Bien que des chevaux apparaissent dans l’art rupestre du paléolithique dès 36 000 ans avant notre ère (grotte Chauvet, France), il s’agissait alors de chevaux sauvages sans doute chassés pour leur viande.
Pour les zoologistes, la domestication se définit comme la maîtrise de l’élevage, pratique confirmée par des restes de squelettes anciens indiquant des changements dans la taille et la variabilité des populations de chevaux anciens.
D’autres chercheurs s’intéressent à des éléments plus généraux de la relation homme-cheval, notamment les preuves squelettiques et dentaires de l’activité professionnelle, les armes, l’art et les artefacts spirituels, ainsi que les modes de vie. Il est prouvé que les chevaux furent une source de viande et de lait avant d’être dressés comme animaux de travail.
En Inde, près de Bhopal, les abris-sous-roche du Bhimbetka, qui constituent le plus ancien art rupestre connu du pays (100 000 av. JC)), représentent des scènes de danse et de chasse de l’âge de pierre ainsi que des guerriers à cheval d’une époque plus tardive (10 000 av. JC).
Les preuves les plus évidentes de l’utilisation précoce du cheval comme moyen de transport sont les sépultures présentant des chevaux avec leurs chars. Les plus anciens vrais chars, datant d’environ 2000 av. JC, ont été retrouvés dans des tombeaux de la culture de Sintachta, dans des sites archéologiques situés le long du cours supérieur de la rivière Tobol, au sud-est de Magnitogorsk en Russie. Il s’agit de chars à roues à rayons tirés par deux chevaux.
Kazakhstan et Ukraine
Jusqu’à récemment, on pensait que le cheval le plus communément utilisé aujourd’hui était un descendant des chevaux domestiqués par la culture de Botaï, vivant dans les steppes de la province d’Akmola au Kazakhstan.
Cependant, des recherches génétiques récentes (2021) indiquent que les chevaux de Botaï ne sont que les ancêtres du cheval de Przewalski, une espèce qui a failli disparaître.
Selon les chercheurs, notre cheval commun, Equus ferus caballus, aurait été domestiqué il y a 4200 ans en Ukraine, dans la région du Don-Volga, c’est-à-dire la steppe pontique-caspienne de l’Eurasie occidentale, vers 2200 av. JC. Au fur et à mesure de leur domestication, ces chevaux ont été régulièrement croisés avec des chevaux sauvages.
Il est intéressant de noter à cet égard que, selon « l’hypothèse kourgane » formulée par Marija Gimbutas en 1956, c’est depuis cette région que la plupart des langues indo-européennes se sont répandues dans toute l’Europe et certaines parties de l’Asie.
Le nom vient du terme russe d’origine turque, « kourgane », qui désigne les tumuli caractéristiques de ces peuples et qui marquent leur expansion en Europe.
La Route du thé, du cheval ou de la soie?
La description des échanges commerciaux, culturels et humains tout au long des « Routes de la soie » a fait couler beaucoup d’encre. Or, ce terme est récent. Ce n’est qu’en 1877 que le géographe allemand Ferdinand von Richthofen l’utilise pour la première fois afin de désigner ces axes Est-Ouest structurant les échanges mondiaux.
En réalité, il s’avère que l’une des principales marchandises échangées sur ladite Route de la soie était… les chevaux et autres animaux de labour (mules, chameaux, ânes et onagres).
Si l’on y échangeait effectivement la soie et le thé, ces produits constituaient, comme la porcelaine et l’or, un moyen pour régler d’autres achats, notamment les chevaux que les Chinois cherchaient à acquérir.
Ce que l’on appelait la « Route du thé et du cheval » (route de la soie du sud) partait de la ville de Chengdu, dans la province du Sichuan, en Chine, traversait le Yunnan vers le sud, jusqu’en Inde et dans la péninsule indochinoise, et s’étendait vers l’ouest jusqu’au Tibet.
C’était une route importante pour le commerce du thé en Chine du Sud et en Asie du Sud-Est, et elle a contribué à la diffusion de religions comme le taoïsme et le bouddhisme dans la région. Il est vrai que « Route de la soie » est plus poétique que « route du crottin » !
La Steppe et ses nomades
Constamment harcelée par les peuples nomades des steppes du Nord, la Chine entreprit la construction de sa Grande Muraille dès le VIIe siècle av. JC.
La liaison entre les premiers éléments fut réalisée par Qin Shi Huang (220-206 avant JC.), le premier empereur de Chine, et l’ensemble du mur, achevé sous la dynastie des Ming (1368-1644), est devenu l’un des exploits les plus remarquables de l’histoire humaine.
Le terme générique de « nomades eurasiens » englobe les divers groupes ethniques peuplant la steppe eurasienne, se déplaçant à travers les steppes du Kazakhstan, du Kirghizistan, du Tadjikistan, du Turkménistan, d’Ouzbékistan, de Mongolie, de Russie et d’Ukraine.
En domestiquant le cheval vers 2200 av. JC., ces peuples augmentèrent considérablement les possibilités de vie nomade.
Par la suite, leur économie et leur culture se concentrèrent sur l’élevage de chevaux, l’équitation et le pastoralisme nomade, permettant de riches échanges commerciaux avec les peuples sédentaires vivant en bordure de la steppe, que ce soit en Europe, en Asie ou en Asie centrale.
On pense qu’ils opéraient souvent sous forme de confédérations. Par définition, les nomades ne créent pas d’empires. Sans forcément les occuper, en contrôlant les points névralgiques, ils règnent en maître sur d’immenses territoires.
Ce sont eux qui développèrent le char, le chariot, la cavalerie et le tir à l’arc à cheval, introduisant des innovations telles que la bride, le mors, l’étrier et la selle, qui traversèrent rapidement toute l’Eurasie et furent copiées par leurs voisins sédentaires.
Durant l’âge du fer, des cultures scythes (iraniennes) apparurent parmi les nomades eurasiens, caractérisées par un art distinct, dont la joaillerie en or force l’admiration.
Le cheval en Chine
Les objets funéraires chinois fournissent une quantité extraordinaire d’informations sur le mode de vie des Chinois de l’Antiquité. La cavalerie militaire, mise sur pied dès le IIIe siècle avant J.C., s’y développe afin de faire face aux guerriers nomades et archers à cheval qui menacent la Chine le long de sa frontière septentrionale. Leurs grands et puissants chevaux étaient nouveaux pour les Chinois.
Échangés contre de la soie de luxe, comme nous l’avons dit, ils sont la première importation majeure en Chine depuis la Route de la soie. Des vestiges archéologiques montrent qu’en l’espace de quelques années, les merveilleux destriers arabes deviennent extrêmement populaires auprès des militaires et des aristocrates chinois, et les tombes des classes supérieures sont remplies de représentations de ces grands chevaux destinés à être utilisés dans l’au-delà. Ils restent cependant difficiles à trouver sur place…
Les diplomates chinois et le royaume de Dayuan (Ferghana)
À la fin du IIe siècle av. JC., Zhang Qian, diplomate et explorateur de la dynastie Han, se rend en Asie centrale et découvre trois civilisations urbaines sophistiquées créées par des colons grecs appelés Ioniens.
Le récit de sa visite en Bactriane, et son étonnement d’y trouver des marchandises chinoises sur les marchés (acquises via l’Inde), ainsi que ses voyages en Parthie et au Ferghana, sont conservés dans les œuvres de Sima Qian, l’historien des premiers Han.
À son retour, son récit incite l’empereur chinois à envoyer des émissaires à travers l’Asie centrale pour négocier et encourager le commerce avec son pays. « Et c’est ainsi que naquit la route de la soie », affirment certains historiens.
Outre la Parthie et la Bactriane, Zhang Qian visite, dans la fertile vallée de Ferghana (aujourd’hui essentiellement au Tadjikistan), un État que les Chinois baptisèrent le royaume de Dayuan (« Da » signifiant « grand » et « Yuan » étant la translittération du sanskrit Yavana ou du pali Yona, utilisé dans toute l’Antiquité en Asie pour désigner les Ioniens, ou colons grecs).
Les Actes du grand historien et le Livre des Han décrivent Dayuan comme un pays de plusieurs centaines de milliers d’habitants, vivant dans 70 villes fortifiées de taille variable.
Ils cultivent le riz et le blé et produisent du vin à partir de leurs vignes. Ils avaient des traits caucasiens et des « coutumes identiques à celles de la Bactriane » (l’État le plus hellénistique de la région depuis Alexandre le Grand), dont l’épicentre se trouve alors au nord de l’Afghanistan. (voir notre article)
En outre, le diplomate chinois rapporte un fait d’un grand intérêt stratégique : la présence, dans la vallée de la Ferghana, de chevaux incroyables, rapides et puissants, élevés par ces Ioniens !
Or, comme nous l’avons déjà dit, la Chine, se sentant menacée en permanence par les peuples nomades des steppes, était en train de construire sa Grande Muraille. Elle avait également conscience de son infériorité militaire par rapport aux nomades des steppes et déplorait son manque cruel de puissants chevaux.
Sans oublier que, dans l’échelle des valeurs chinoises, le cheval possédait une valeur spirituelle et symbolique presque aussi forte que le dragon : il pouvait voler et représentait l’esprit divin et créatif de l’univers lui-même, chose essentielle pour tout empereur désireux d’acquérir aussi bien la sécurité militaire pour son empire que son immortalité personnelle.
Bref, posséder de bons chevaux est alors une question allant au-delà de la sécurité nationale, tout en l’incluant. À tel point qu’en 100 av. JC., lorsque le souverain de la vallée de Ferghana refuse de lui fournir des chevaux de qualité, la dynastie Han déclenche contre Dayuan la « guerre des chevaux célestes ».
Guerre des chevaux célestes
C’est un conflit militaire qui se déroule entre 104 et 102 av. JC. entre la Chine et Dayuan, Etat peuplé d’Ioniens (entre l’Ouzbékistan, le Kirghizstan et le Tadjikistan actuels
Tout d’abord, l’empereur Wu décide d’infliger une défaite décisive aux nomades des steppes, les Xiongnu, qui harcèlent la dynastie Han depuis des décennies.
Pour les faire plier, en 139 av. JC, il envoie le diplomate Zhang Qian avec pour mission d’arpenter l’ouest et d’y forger une alliance militaire avec les nomades chinois Yuezhi contre les Xiongnu.
Zhang Qian, comme nous l’avons dit, se rend en Parthie, en Bactriane et à Dayuan. À son retour, il impressionne l’empereur en lui décrivant les « chevaux célestes » de la vallée de Ferghana, qui pourraient grandement améliorer la qualité des montures de la cavalerie Han lors des combats contre les Xiongnu.
La cour des Han envoie alors jusqu’à dix groupes de diplomates pour acquérir ces « chevaux célestes ».
Une mission commerciale et diplomatique arrive donc à Dayuan avec 1000 pièces d’or et un cheval d’or pour acheter les précieux animaux. Dayuan, qui était à cette époque l’un des États les plus occidentaux à avoir des émissaires à la cour des Han, commerce déjà avec eux depuis un certain temps à son grand avantage. Non seulement sa population accède aux marchandises orientales, mais apprend des soldats Han la fonte des métaux pour fabriquer des pièces et des armes. Cependant, contrairement aux autres envoyés à la cour des Han, ceux de Dayuan ne se conforment pas aux rituels des Han et se montrent arrogants, pensant que leur pays est trop éloigné pour avoir à craindre une invasion.
Dès lors, dans un élan de folie et par pure arrogance, le roi du Dayuan non seulement refuse le marché, mais confisque l’or. Les envoyés des Han maudissent les hommes de Dayuan et brisent le cheval d’or qu’ils avaient amené. Furieux de cet acte de mépris, les nobles de Dayuan ordonnent aux militaires de Yucheng, qui se trouvent à leur frontière orientale, d’attaquer les envoyés, de les tuer et de s’emparer de leurs marchandises.
Humiliée et furieuse, la cour des Han envoie alors une armée dirigée par le général Li Guangli pour soumettre Dayuan, mais leur première incursion s’avère mal organisée et insuffisamment approvisionnée.
Deux ans plus tard, une seconde expédition, plus importante et mieux approvisionnée, parvient à assiéger la capitale des Dayuan, « Alexandria Eschate » (aujourd’hui proche de Khodjent, au Tadjikistan), forçant les Dayuan à se rendre sans condition.
Les forces expéditionnaires y installent alors un régime pro-Han et repartent avec 3000 chevaux. Il n’en restera que 1000 à leur arrivée en Chine, en 101 av. JC.
Le Dayuan accepte également d’envoyer chaque année deux chevaux célestes à l’empereur et des semences de luzerne sont ramenées en Chine, fournissant des pâturages de qualité supérieure pour élever de beaux chevaux afin de fournir une cavalerie capable de faire face aux Xiongnu qui menacent le pays.
Les chevaux ont depuis lors captivé l’imagination populaire en Chine, inspirant des sculptures, faisant l’objet d’élevage dans le Gansu et dotant la cavalerie de 430 000 chevaux de ce type sous la dynastie des Tang.
La Chine et la Révolution agricole
Après avoir imposé son rôle dans la stratégie militaire pour les siècles à venir, le cheval devient, avec la maîtrise de l’eau, le facteur clé permettant d’accroître la productivité agricole.
Contrairement aux Romains, qui préféraient utiliser du « bétail humain » (esclaves) plutôt que des animaux (qu’ils élevaient pour les courses), les Chinois ont contribué de façon décisive à la survie de l’humanité avec deux innovations cruciales concernant l’attelage des chevaux.
Rappelons que pendant toute l’Antiquité, que ce soit en Égypte ou en Grèce, charrues et chariots sont tirés à l’aide d’une bande de cuir encerclant le cou de l’animal.
Cet attelage s’apparente au joug utilisé pour les bœufs, la charge étant attachée au sommet du collier, au-dessus du cou. Le cheval se trouvant ainsi constamment étranglé, ce système réduit considérablement sa capacité à travailler, et plus il tire, plus il a du mal à respirer.
En raison de cette contrainte physique, le bœuf restera l’animal préféré pour les travaux lourds tels que le labourage. Cependant, il est lent, difficile à manœuvrer et n’a pas l’endurance du cheval, qui est deux fois supérieure pour une puissance équivalente.
La Chine aurait d’abord inventé la « bricole », large courroie de cuir enserrant le poitrail du cheval, ce qui était un premier pas dans la bonne direction.
Au Ve siècle, la Chine invente « le collier d’épaule », conçu comme un ovale rigide qui s’adapte au cou et aux épaules du cheval sans lui couper le souffle.
Il présente les avantages suivants :
— Il soulage la pression exercée sur la gorge du cheval, libérant les voies respiratoires de toute constriction, ce qui améliore considérablement le débit d’énergie de l’animal.
— Les traits peuvent être attachés de chaque côté du collier, ce qui permet au cheval de pousser sur ses pattes postérieures, plus puissantes, au lieu de tirer avec celles de devant, plus faibles.
Vous me direz qu’il s’agit là d’une simple anecdote. Vous avez tort, car ce qui semble n’être qu’un changement mineur aura des conséquences gigantesques.
La Renaissance européenne
Dans le cadre d’une alliance stratégique et d’une coopération avec le califat humaniste des Abbassides de Bagdad (voir notre article), Charlemagne et ses successeurs ont défriché de vastes terrains pour l’agriculture, amélioré l’usage de l’eau et généralisé le collier d’épaule pour les chevaux de trait.
Grâce à ce nouvel outil beaucoup plus efficace, les agriculteurs européens ont pu tirer pleinement parti de la force du cheval, qui sera alors capable de tirer une autre innovation récente, la lourde charrue. Cela s’est avéré particulièrement appréciable pour les sols durs et argileux, ouvrant de nouvelles terres à l’agriculture.
Le collier, la charrue lourde et le fer à cheval ont contribué à l’essor de la production agricole.
Ainsi, entre l’an 1000 et l’an 1300, on estime qu’en Europe, les rendements agricoles ont triplé, permettant de nourrir un nombre croissant de citoyens dans les villes urbaines apparues au XVe siècle et de donner le coup d’envoi à la Renaissance européenne. Merci la Chine !
Certains chiffres laissent néanmoins perplexes :
–Il aura fallu des milliers d’années à l’humanité pour domestiquer le cheval, en 2200 av. JC. (bien après la vache).
— Il faudra encore 2700 ans à l’humanité pour trouver, au Ve siècle de notre ère, la façon la plus efficace d’utiliser sa force motrice…
Le passage d’une plateforme d’infrastructure inférieure à une plate-forme d’infrastructure supérieure peut certes prendre un certain temps. Les nouvelles plateformes supérieures d’aujourd’hui s’appellent l’espace et l’énergie de fusion.
N’attendons pas encore un millénaire pour savoir comment les utiliser correctement !
Grands travaux : l’exemple inspirant du « Plan Freycinet »
En 1878, le ministre des travaux publics, l’ingénieur et polytechnicien Charles de Freycinet (1828-1923), proche de Léon Gambetta, lance un ambitieux programme de travaux publics.
Il comprenait principalement le parachèvement des voies ferrées, mais aussi la construction de canaux et d’installations portuaires, l’ensemble conçu comme un tout intégré où chaque partie apporte sa contribution.
L’analyse de Charles de Freycinet sur les buts de la science économique est limpide et se résume en une phrase : « Le progrès économique, c’est la plus grande satisfaction pour le moindre effort. »
Si l’objectif phare est de donner accès au chemin de fer à tous les Français, il s’agit de favoriser le développement économique du pays par le désenclavement des régions reculées.
Les promoteurs du plan veulent également aboutir à un contrôle plus strict de l’État voire au rachat des compagnies de chemins de fer.
L’analyse de Freycinet sur les buts de la science économique n’est pas sans rappeler la pensée du philosophe et scientifique allemand Leibniz :
« La science économique étant l’étude des causes qui concourent à la satisfaction des besoins matériels de l’homme, le progrès économique peut se résumer d’un mot: c’est la plus grande satisfaction pour le moindre effort. En d’autres termes, il consiste dans l’accroissement continu de la production pour une somme de travail déterminée.
Ainsi, rendre son effort de plus en plus efficace, de plus en plus fécond, tel est le véritable problème pour l’économie. Telle est la voie qui le conduit à l’affranchissement dont nous parlions et qui permet d’entrevoir cette vie idéale, de xxx et de lumières, qui est à la fois la plus noble des jouissances et l’accomplissement du plus impérieux des devoirs.
« On remarquera en quoi le progrès économique, tel que nous le comprenons, diffère de l’idée qui généralement a cours. On considère assez souvent comme étant un progrès une société dans laquelle la richesse augmente. Pour nous, ce signe extérieur ne suffit pas… ».
(Page 1 de son projet de livre Le Progrès économique de 1887, manuscrit jamais publié)
Pour sa mise en œuvre, le « plan Freycinet » est inscrit dans la loi de Finances et une première loi est votée le 18 mai 1878.
Ensuite, il fait l’objet de trois lois promulguées par Jules Grévy, président de la République, à quelques jours d’intervalle:
1. Nouvelles lignes ferroviaires nationales et secondaires
La première concerne la construction de 8700 kilomètres de nouvelles voies ferroviaires soit 154 lignes dites d’intérêt général (avec un écartement des voies d’1m43) afin de desservir toutes les sous-préfectures du pays.
Leur construction est assurée, soit par les grandes compagnies privées, le coût étant le plus souvent pris en charge par l’État, soit par l’État lui-même. Freycinet est ainsi à l’origine de la compagnie de l’État (loi du 18 mai 1878).
Dans le même temps il s’agit de désenclaver tous les chefs lieux de cantons par des réseaux secondaires (lignes dites « d’intérêt local » avec un écartement des voies d’1 m) construites principalement à l’initiative des conseils généraux.
La longueur des ces réseaux départementaux passera de 2187 kilomètres en 1880 à 17 653 km en 1913.
2. L’aménagement du réseau fluvial
Dans le domaine de la navigation fluviale le plan Freycinet ambitionne la création d’un réseau national unifié et cohérent de voies navigables, par l’amélioration de 14 600 km de voies existantes et par la mise en service de 1900 km de canaux supplémentaires.
Le plan Freycinet porte les dimensions des écluses à 39 m de long pour 5,20 m de large, afin qu’elles soient franchissables par des péniches de 300 à 350 tonnes.
En conséquence, les bateaux au gabarit Freycinet ne doivent pas dépasser 38,5 m sur 5,05 m.
Le « gabarit Freycinet » correspond aujourd’hui au gabarit européen de classe I.
En France, 5800 km de voies fluviales ont conservés cette taille et en 2011, 23 % du trafic fluvial y transite.
3. La modernisation des ports
Au niveau portuaire, Freycinet déplore que :
« Les crédits accordés pour ces travaux [la modernisation des ports] n’aient jamais été à la hauteur des besoins et tandis que les Anglais, les Hollandais, les Belges dépensaient sous nos yeux des centaines de millions pour créer ou transformer leurs magnifiques établissements de Liverpool, de Glasgow, d’Amsterdam ou d’Anvers, nous restions toujours fort loin en arrière. »
L’originalité du plan Freycinet, au niveau portuaire, recouvre trois aspects :
–le souci de l’interconnexion,
–l’étendue et
–le mode de financement.
La modernisation des ports, affirme-t-il :
« est imposée par la transformation du matériel naval, par le développement incessant des chemins de fer et des autres voies de communication, par les besoins de célérité et de régularité qui s’introduisent chaque jour davantage dans les habitudes du commerce et de l’industrie. »
Freycinet, qui avait bien conscience que la bataille pour le maritime se gagne sur terre ferme. Un port sans hinterland capable d’accueillir les flux de marchandises est comme un cœur déconnecté d’artères en mesure de faire circuler le sang.
Freycinet mettra donc l’accent sur l’amélioration de l’intermodalité, ce qui signifie l’extension des quais, la multiplication des bassins, notamment à flot, l’approfondissement des chenaux, afin que « l’installation générale soit appropriée à la fois aux deux modes de transport qui viennent s’y rencontrer ».
Alors que l’État financera les superstructures, les infrastructures, l’outillage sera à la charge des chambres de commerce ou des particuliers par voie de concession. 116 ports sur 188 sont ainsi modernisés.
–La longueur utile des quais passe de 140 km en 1879 à 205 km en 1900, une augmentation de 46 % ;
–le nombre de ports présentant plus de 7 mètres de profondeur s’est élevé de 9 en 1878 à 15 en 1900 ;
–le tonnage de jauge de navires entrés et sortis a progressé de 64 % entre 1878 et 1898 ;
–aux mêmes dates, le poids des marchandises importées ou exportées a augmenté de 75 %, passant de 17 à 30 millions de tonnes.
L’abaissement du prix du fret, l’accroissement de la rapidité et de la régularité des transports, le perfectionnement des moyens de manutention sont autant de progrès à enregistrer.
Un plan décennal
Dans son chiffrage initial, largement dépassé au final, le plan prévoyait de consacrer environ 3 milliards de francs aux lignes de chemin de fer, 1 milliard aux canaux et 500 millions aux ports. Le tout était financé par un crédit d’État à 3 %, remboursable en 75 annuités.
Si à l’origine, le « plan Freycinet » aurait du être réalisé en dix ans, la faillite retentissante de la banque l’Union générale en 1882 (cadre du roman L’Argent de Zola) et la crise économique qu’elle engendrera, retarderont sa mise en œuvre.
La crise du crédit public brise l’élan et entraîne à moyen terme le ralentissement considérable du rythme des réalisations. Cet arrêt brutal aura deux conséquences.
D’une part, l’allongement des délais de construction provoque une élévation de leurs coûts, et de l’autre, l’abandon prématuré du système de financement imaginé par la loi du 11 juin 1878.
Ainsi, ce n’est qu’en 1914, c’est-à-dire après 36 ans, que l’ensemble du plan arrivera, à quelques détails près, à son stade de réalisation.
Entre-temps, cette mobilisation des forces productives, par effet d’entrainement, à fait naître le savoir-faire permettant la réalisation de la tour Eiffel ou les écluses du canal de Suez et celui de Panama.
Faute de crédit productif public et de volonté politique réelle, à part quelques miracles accomplis à l’époque De Gaulle/Pompidou, la France n’a jamais connue une initiative de cette ampleur visant à susciter un « choc de productivité » par l’investissement en infrastructures. Quel candidat aura aujourd’hui le courage et la compétence pour défendre un « Nouveau plan Freycinet » ?
Relance française
Le 1er octobre 2020, dans sa chronique dans Le Monde, Pierre-Cyrille Hautcoeur, professeur à PSE, directeur d’études EHESS, confirme la réussite retentissante du Plan Freycinet.
Extrait:
« Que ce soit sous l’effet direct du plan Freycinet ou d’un regain plus large d’optimisme, le PNB croît de 20 % de 1879 à 1882, l’investissement de près de 40 %, indiquent Maurice Lévy-Leboyer et François Bourguignon dans La Croissance française au XIXe siècle (Economica, 1985).
« Cette reprise rapide s’accompagne d’une flambée d’opérations financières, notamment autour du grand emprunt d’Etat lancé en 1881 pour financer le plan. Elle est stoppée net par le krach de 1882, auquel une partie des banques nouvellement créées ne résiste pas. Si le marasme reprend, le plan Freycinet n’en est pas moins poursuivi, et quasi achevé avant 1914.«
Gain de population
« Mal aimé par certains, qui y voient – avec un brin d’anachronisme – l’origine étatique du développement excessif d’une technologie révolue et peu profitable, ainsi qu’une hausse irresponsable de la dette publique (les 6 milliards du plan représentent 30 % du PNB de 1879), le plan Freycinet n’empêche pourtant pas l’industrie automobile française d’être l’une des plus innovatrices au monde, ni la croissance française d’être particulièrement élevée de 1895 à 1914.
« Il a, en outre, atteint nombre de ses objectifs : le renforcement durable du BTP et de la métallurgie, et le développement, désormais piloté par l’Etat, d’un système national de chemins de fer qui contribue à l’intégration économique et sociale du territoire. Les 964 communes – notamment toutes les sous-préfectures et beaucoup de chefs-lieux – connectées au réseau grâce au plan Freycinet gagnent en population par rapport aux autres villes dans les décennies qui suivent ; les départements les plus concernés y gagnent aussi en revenu relatif. Ce désenclavement progressif des campagnes traduit dans les faits, parallèlement à la diffusion des écoles et bureaux de poste, la promesse d’égalité de la République, et lui rallie durablement les populations. »
Horse-power, the Earthly Science behind China’s “Heavenly Horses”
Indicating the major role horses have played in the history of mankind, the fact that still today, when people talk about the engine of their cars, they use the term “horsepower” (hp) to indicate how much “work” the engine is capable of.
In a lecture on hydro-infrastructure in Kabul, Afghanistan, I recently used the domestication of the horse as an example of what one should understand when we talk about moving from a “lower” to a “higher infrastructure platform”.
The history of mankind completely changed with the domestication of the horse. Things considered “impossible” before the domestication of the horse became the “new normal”. How and when horses became domesticated has been disputed. Although horses appear in Paleolithic cave art as early as 36,000 BC (Chauvet cave, France), these were wild horses and were probably hunted for meat.
Zoologists define « domestication » as human control over breeding, which can be detected in ancient skeletal samples by changes in the size and variability of ancient horse populations. Other researchers look at the broader evidence, including skeletal and dental evidence of working activity; weapons, art, and spiritual artifacts; and lifestyle patterns of human cultures. There is evidence that horses were kept as a source of meat and milk before they were trained as working animals.
In India, close to Bopal, the “Bhimbetka rock shelters”, which are the oldest known rock art of the country, figures dance and hunting scenes from the Stone Age as well as of warriors on horseback from a later time (10 000 BC).
Horses were a late addition to the barnyard. Dogs were domesticated 15,000 years ago; sheep, pigs and cattle, about 8,000 to 11,000 years ago. But clear evidence of horse domestication doesn’t appear in the archaeological record until about 5,500 years ago.
The clearest evidence of early use of the horse as a means of transport is from chariot burials. The earliest true chariots known are from around 2,000 BC, in burials of the Sintashta-Petrovka culture in modern Russia in a cluster along the upper Tobol river, southeast of Magnitogorsk.
They contain spoke-wheeled chariots drawn by teams of two horses.
Kazakhstan and Ukraine
Up till recently, it was thought that the most common horse used today was a descendant of the horses domesticated by the Botai culture living in the steppes of the Akmola Province of Kazakhstan, around 3500 BC.
Recent genetic research points to the fact that the Botai horses were the forefathers of the Przewalski horse, a species that nearly disappeared.
Our common horse, the Equus ferus caballus, genetic research says, has been domesticated 4,200 years ago in Ukraine, in an area known as the Volga-Don, in the Pontic-Caspian steppe region of Western Eurasia, around 2,200 BC.
As these horses were domesticated, they were regularly interbred with wild horses.
Interesting in this respect, is the fact that according to the “Kurgan” or “steppe hypothesis”, most Indo-European languages spread from the same region throughout Europe and parts of Asia.
It postulates that the people of a Kurgan culture in the Pontic steppe north of the Black Sea were the most likely speakers of what some call the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE).
The term is derived from the Turkic word kurgan, meaning tumulus or burial mound.
Tea Road, Horse Road or Silk Road?
As a matter of fact, the main commodities traded on the “Silk Road” (a term only coined in 1877 by the German geographer Ferdinand Von Richthofen), were… horses, mules, camels, donkeys and onagers.
Silk and tea were of course traded, but appeared mainly as a means… to pay for horses. People “paid” with silk, gold, porcelain and tea, the animals they needed to secure the survival of their society!
What was known as the « Tea-Horse Road » (Southern Silk Road) extended from the city of Chengdu in Sichuan Province, China, south through Yunnan into India and the Indochina Peninsula, and extended westwards into Tibet. It was an important route for the tea trade throughout South China and Southeast Asia and contributed to the spread of religions like Taoism and Buddhism across the region.
Eurasian Steppe
China, feeling itself under constant threat from the nomadic steppe people from the North, started building the first parts of its “Great Wall” as early as the VIIth Century BC, with selective stretches joined by Qin Shi Huang (220–206 BC), the first emperor of China and completed under the Ming dynasty (1368–1644) to become one of the most impressive feats in history.
The Eurasian nomads were groups of nomadic peoples living throughout the Eurasian Steppe. The generic title encompasses the varied ethnic groups who have at times inhabited the steppes of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Mongolia, Russia, and Ukraine.
By the domestication of the horse around 2,200 BC (i.e. 4,200 years ago), they vastly increased the possibilities of nomadic life and subsequently their economy and culture emphasized horse breeding, horse riding, and nomadic pastoralism, usually engaging in trade with settled peoples around the steppe edges, be it in Europe, Asia or Central Asia.
Nomads, by definition, don’t create empires. It is thought they operated often as confederations. But it was them who developed the chariot, wagon, cavalry, and horseback archery and introduced innovations such as the bridle, bit, stirrup, and saddle and the very rapid rate at which innovations crossed the steppe-lands spread these widely, to be copied by settled peoples bordering the steppes.
During the Iron Age, Scythian (Persian) culture emerged among the Eurasian nomads, which was characterized by a distinct Scythian art.
China and the Horse
Throughout China’s long and storied past, no animal has impacted its history as greatly as the horse. Its significance was such that as early as the Shang dynasty (ca.1600-1100 BC), military might was measured by the number of the war chariots available to a particular kingdom.
The mounted cavalery, which emerged in the IIIrd century BC grew rapidly during the IInd century BC to meet the challenge of horse-riding peoples threatening China along the northern frontier.
Their large, powerful, horses were very new to China. As said before, traded for luxurious silk, they were the first major import to China from the “Silk Road.”
Chinese grave goods provide extraordinary amounts of information about how the ancient Chinese lived. Archaeological evidence shows that within a few years, the marvelous Arabian steeds had become immensely popular with military and aristocracy alike and upper-class tombs began to be filled with images of these great horses for use in the afterlife. But horses were hard to find in China.
Chinese diplomats and the Kingdom of Dayuan (Ferghana)
Something had to be done. In the late IInd Century BC, Zhang Qian, a Han dynasty diplomat and explorer, travels to Central Asia and discovers three sophisticated urban civilizations created by Greek settlers he named « Ionians ». The account of his visit to Bactria, including his recollection of his amazement at finding Chinese goods in the markets (acquired via India), as well as his travels to Parthia and Ferghana, are preserved in the works of the early Han historian Sima Qian.
Upon returning to China, his account prompts the Emperor to dispatch Chinese envoys across Central Asia to negotiate and encourage trade with China. Some historians say that this dicision gave « birth of the Silk Road.«
Besides Parthia and Bactria, where Chinese goods were being traded via Indian imports, Zhang Qian visited, in the fertile Ferghana valley (today essentially in Tajikistan), a State the Chinese called the “Kingdom of Dayuan” (“Da” meaning “great”, and “Yuan” being the transliteration of Sanskrit Yavana or Pali Yona, used throughout antiquity in Asia to designate « Ionians », i.e. Greek settlers).
The Records of the Grand Historian and the Book of Han describe the Dayuan as numbering several hundred thousand people living in 70 walled cities of varying size. They grew rice and wheat, and made wine from grapes. They had Caucasian features and “customs identical to those of Bactria” (the most Hellenistic state of the region since Alexander the Great) which is today’s northern Afghanistan.
The Chinese diplomat reported something of great strategic interest: unbelievable, fast and powerful horses raised by these Ionians in the Ferghana Valley!
Now, as said before, China felt under permanent threat by the nomadic people from the steppes and was in the process of building the “Great Wall”. China also was acutely aware that the nomadic steppe people derived their military superiority from something dramatically lacking at home: powerful horses !
Added to that, the fact that in terms of China’s scale of values, horses where nearly of the same mythological nature as dragons: they could fly and represented the divine, creative spirit of the universe itself, something essential for any Chinese emperor eager to acquire both military security for his Empire and for his personal immortality.
In short, having good horses became an issue of national security. So much, that in 100 BC, the Han dynasty started what is known as the “War of the Heavenly Horses” with Dayuan, when its ruler refused to provide high quality horses to China !
The War of the Heavenly Horses
The War of the Heavenly Horses was a military conflict fought in 104 BC and 102 BC between China and a part of the Saka-ruled (Scythian) Greco-Bactrian kingdom known to the Chinese as Dayuan, in the Ferghana Valley (between modern-day Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan).
First, Emperor Wu decided to defeat the nomadic steppe Xiongnu, who had harassed the Han dynasty for decades.
As said earlier, in 139 BC, the emperor sent diplomat Zhang Qian to survey the west and forge a military alliance with the Yuezhi nomads against another group of nomads, the Xiongnu. On the way to Central Asia through the Gobi desert, Zhang was captured twice. On his return, he impressed the emperor with his description of the « Heavenly Horses » of Dayuan, that could greatly improve the quality of Han cavalry mounts when fighting the Xiongnu.
The Han court sent at least five or six, and perhaps as many as ten diplomatic groups annually to Central Asia during this period to get a hold on these “Heavenly Horses”.
A trade mission arrived in Dayuan with 1000 pieces of gold and a golden horse to purchase these precious animals.
Dayuan, who was one of the furthest western states to send envoys to the Han court at that point, had already been trading with the Han for quite some time and benefited greatly from it. Not only were they overflowed by eastern goods, they also learned from Han soldiers how to cast metal into coins and weapons. However unlike the other envoys to the Han court, the ones from Dayuan did not conform to the proper Han rituals and behaved with great arrogance and self-assurance, believing they were too far away to be in any danger of invasion.
Hence, in a stroke of folly and taken by pure arrogance, the Dayuan king not only refused the deal, but confiscated the payment in gold. The Han envoys cursed the men of Dayuan and smashed the golden horse they had brought. Enraged by this act of contempt, the nobles of Dayuan ordered Yucheng, which lay on their eastern borders, to attack and kill the envoys and seize their goods.
Upon receiving word of the trade mission’s demise, humiliated and enraged, the Han court sent an army led by General Li Guangli to subdue Dayuan, but their first incursion was poorly organized and under-supplied.
A second, larger and much better provisioned expedition was sent two years later and successfully laid siege to the Dayuan capital at Alexandria Eschate, and forced Dayuan to surrender unconditionally.
The Han expeditionary forces installed a pro-Han regime in Dayuan and left with 3,000 horses, although only 1,000 remained by the time they reached China in 101 BCE.
The Ferghana also agreed to send two Heavenly horses each year to the Emperor, and lucerne seed was brought back to China providing superior pasture for raising fine horses in China, to provide cavalry which could cope with the Xiongnu who threatened China.
The horses have since captured the popular imagination of China, leading to horse carvings, breeding grounds in Gansu, and up to 430,000 such horses in the cavalry during the Tang dynasty.
China and the agricultural revolution
After imposing its role in military strategy for the next centuries, horsepower, together with water management, became a crucial factor to raise the productivity of the world’s food production.
First, contrary to the Romans, who preferred to use “human cattle” (slaves) rather than animals (which they raised for race contests), the Chinese greatly contributed to the survival of mankind with two crucial innovations respecting a more efficient use of horse power.
As can be seen in murals and paintings, through the ancient world, be it in Egypt or Greece, plows and carts were pulled using animal harnesses that had flat straps across the neck of the horse, with the load attached at the top of the collar, above the neck, in a manner similar to a yoke used for oxen.
In reality, this greatly limited a horse’s ability to exert itself as it was constantly choked at the neck. The harder the horse pulled, the harder it became to breathe.
Due to this physical limitation, oxen remained the preferred animal to do heavy work such as plowing. Yet oxen are hard to maneuver, are slow, and lack the quality of horses, whose power is equivalent but whose endurance is twice that of oxen.
China reportedly first invented the “breast strap” which was the first step in the right direction.
Then, in the Vth Century, China also invented what is called the “rigid horse collar”, designed as an oval that fits around the neck and shoulders of the horse.
It has the following advantages:
–First, it relieved the pressure of the horse’s windpipes. It left the airway of the horse free from constriction improving massively the animal’s energy through-put.
–Second, the traces could be attached to the sides of the collar. This allowed the horse to push forward with its more powerful hind-legs rather than pulling with the weaker front legs.
Now you can argue that this is anecdotal. It is NOT, because what appears as only a slight change had absolutely monumental consequences.
European Renaissance
In a strategic alliance and cooperation with the humanist Baghdad Abbasid caliphate, Charlemagne and his successors introduced the “rigid horse collar” in Europe.
With that new, far more efficient tool, European farmers finally could take full advantage of a horse’s strength. The horse was able to pull another recent innovation, the heavy plow. This became particularly important in areas where the soil was hard and clay-like. This opened up new plots of lands to agriculture. The rigid horse collar, the heavy plow, and horseshoes helped usher in a period of increased agricultural production.
As a result, between 1000 CE and 1300 CE, it is estimated that in Europe, crop yields increased by threefold, allowing to feed a rising number of citizens in the urban cities appearing in the XVth century and kick starting the global “Golden” European Renaissance. Thank you, China!
Some numbers are nevertheless disturbing:
–it took humanity thousands of years to finally domesticate the horse (long after the cow), in 3200 BC.
–it took humanity another 3700 years to learn how to find out, in the Vth century AD, the most efficient way to use horse-power…
Shifting from a “lower” infrastructure platform to a “higher” infrastructure platform might take some time. Today’s new “higher” platforms are called “space data” and “fusion power.” Let’s not wait another century to find out how to use them correctly!
Afghanistan : « Le pays des 1000 cités d’or » et l’histoire d’Aï Khanoum
Invité par le Centre de recherche et de développement Ibn-e-Sina en tant que représentant de l’Institut Schiller, Karel Vereycken est intervenu le 7 novembre à la conférence sur la reconstruction du pays.
Son propos introductif, devant un groupe de travail composé d’historiens, d’archéologues et de membres de l’Académie des sciences d’Afghanistan, a donné lieu à une longue après-midi d’échanges sur le rôle de l’art, la méthodologie scientifique et les combats à mener pour sortir l’Afghanistan de son isolement et préserver un héritage culturel qui certes est afghan, mais appartient à toute l’humanité.
Parler de la culture d’un pays étranger est toujours une chose difficile, surtout si l’on n’en connaît pas la langue et si l’on n’a pas pu séjourner et voyager dans le pays pendant de longues périodes. Par conséquent, je ne peux que vous offrir mes impressions de l’extérieur et commenter ce que j’ai découvert dans des livres. Vous allez donc m’aider en me corrigeant et en me signalant ce qui a échappé à mon attention.
L’Afghanistan est un pays fascinant. Sa réputation de « tombeau des Empires » a capté mon imagination. Récemment, votre pays s’est émancipé de l’occupation américaine et de l’OTAN. Une poignée de combattants déterminés a mis en déroute un immense empire déjà en train de s’autodétruire. 34 ans plus tôt, le pays avait chassé l’occupant russe, après avoir résisté à l’Empire britannique au cours des trois guerres anglo-afghanes du XIXe siècle (1839-42, 1878-80 et 1919), alors que Londres, engagé dans le « Grand Jeu » (Great Game), tentait d’empêcher la Russie d’accéder aux mers chaudes.
Pour éviter d’être colonisé à la fois par la Russie et la Grande-Bretagne, l’Afghanistan a même courageusement refusé d’avoir des chemins de fer, ce qui explique qu’il n’existe aujourd’hui que 300 km de voies ferrées, une situation bien sûr inacceptable aujourd’hui.
Cette capacité de résistance et ce sentiment de dignité découlent, j’en suis convaincu, du fait que votre pays a su faire siennes les diverses influences qui s’y sont rencontrées. Voilà ce qui est devenu au fil des siècles le socle d’une forte identité afghane, totalement à l’opposé de l’étiquette tribale que les colonisateurs cherchent à lui coller.
J’aborderai uniquement, aujourd’hui, l’influence grecque, qui s’est avérée majeure à partir du moment où Alexandre le Grand traverse le Hindou Kouch, en 329 av. JC.
Dès lors, des dizaines de milliers de colons grecs, appelés Ioniens, s’installent en Asie centrale.
Sous le règne de ses successeurs concurrents, l’immense empire d’Alexandre le Grand se décompose en plusieurs entités et royaumes.
En 256 av. JC, Diodote Ier Soter fonde en Afghanistan le royaume gréco-bactrien, connu sous le nom de « Bactriane », dont le territoire englobe une grande partie de l’Afghanistan, de l’Ouzbékistan, du Tadjikistan et du Turkménistan actuels, ainsi que certaines parties de l’Iran et du Pakistan. L’influence grecque y perdure au moins jusqu’à l’arrivée de l’Islam au VIIIe siècle.
La Bactriane
De nombreuses fouilles archéologiques confirment un développement urbain, économique, social et culturel remarquable.
Strabon (64 av. JC – 24 après JC), comme d’autres historiens grecs, qualifiait déjà la Bactriane de « Terre des mille cités », une terre que tous les écrivains, anciens et modernes, louaient pour la douceur de son climat et sa fertilité, car « la Bactriane produit tout, sauf de l’huile d’olive. »
Pour le naturaliste romain Pline l’Ancien (23 – 79 après JC), en Bactriane,
« les grains de blé poussent si gros qu’un seul grain est aussi gros que nos épis. »
Sa capitale Bactres (aujourd’hui Balkh, proche de Mazâr-e Charîf au nord de l’Afghanistan), « Mère des cités », figure parmi les villes les plus riches de l’Antiquité.
C’est là qu’Alexandre le Grand épouse Roxana (« Petite étoile ») et adopte l’habit perse pour pacifier son Empire. C’est également là que naîtra le père du grand médecin et philosophe Ibn Sina (Avicenne), avant de s’installer à Boukhara (Ouzbékistan).
Au fil du temps, la Bactriane sera le creuset de cultures et de civilisations où se mêlent, sur le plan artistique, architectural et religieux, traditions grecques et cultures locales.
Si le grec y est la langue de l’administration, les langues locales y foisonnent. Rien que les noms des villes démontrent la prédominance de la culture hellénique.
Ainsi, Ghazni s’appelle « Alexandrie en Opiana », Bagram « Alexandrie au Caucase », Kandahar « Alexandrie Arachosia », Hérat « Alexandria Ariana », etc., et la liste ne s’arrête pas là.
La ville de Gonur Depe (actuellement au Turkménistan, au nord de Mary, l’ancienne Merv), capitale du Royaume de Margiane, est un autre exemple de ce qu’on s’accorde maintenant à appeler la « Culture de l’Oxus »)
Aï Khanoum, la grecque
Si certaines villes ne font que changer de nom, d’autres sont construites ex nihilo. C’est le cas d’Aï Khanoum (« Dame Lune » en ouzbek), cité érigée au confluent du grand fleuve Amou Daria (l’Oxus des Grecs) et de la rivière Kokcha.
En 1961, le roi d’Afghanistan (Mohammed Zahir Shah), voulant marquer son indépendance vis-à-vis des Soviétiques et des Américains, invite la France à participer aux fouilles.
C’est le Département des archéologues français en Afghanistan (DAFA) qui met au jour les vestiges d’un immense palais dans la ville basse, ainsi qu’un grand gymnase, un théâtre pouvant accueillir 6000 spectateurs, un arsenal et deux sanctuaires.
Entourée de terres agricoles bien irriguées, la ville elle-même était divisée entre une ville basse et une acropole de 60 mètres de haut.
Bien qu’elle n’est pas située sur une route commerciale majeure, Aï Khanoum commande l’accès aux mines du Hindou Koush. De vastes fortifications, continuellement entretenues et améliorées, entourent la ville.
Un monument au cœur de la ville y présente une stèle inscrite en grec avec une longue liste de maximes incarnant les idéaux de la vie grecque. Celles-ci sont copiées de Delphes et se terminent par :
« Dès l’enfance, apprends les bonnes manières ;
dans la jeunesse, maîtrise tes passions ;
dans la vieillesse, sois de bon conseil ;
dans la mort, n’aie aucun regret. »
L’architecture du site indique que les colons grecques y vivent en bonne entente avec les populations locales. Elle est très grecque mais intègre en même temps diverses influences artistiques et éléments culturels que les Ioniens ont pu observer au cours de leur voyage du bassin méditerranéen à l’Asie centrale. Par exemple, ils utilisent les styles néo-babylonien et achéménide pour la construction de leurs cours.
Shortugai et la Civilisation de la vallée de l’Indus
La date précise des premières fondations d’Aï Khanoum reste inconnue.
A une jetée de là, Shortugai, avant-poste commercial et minier de la fameuse civilisation de l’Indus (dite « harappéenne ») qui, au IIIe millénaire avant notre ère, était à l’avant-garde sur le plan de l’irrigation et de la maîtrise de l’eau. (voir notre article)
Des scientifiques de l’Institut indien de technologie de Kharagpur et du Service archéologique d’Inde ont publié le 25 mai 2016, dans la revue Nature, les fruits d’une recherche qui permettrait de dater la civilisation harappéenne d’au moins 8000 ans avant JC et non 5500 ans, comme on le croyait jusqu’à présent. Cette découverte majeure signifierait qu’elle serait encore plus ancienne que les civilisations mésopotamienne et égyptienne.
Shortugai est construite avec des briques standardisées typiques de la vallée de l’Indus. Des sceaux de la civilisation de la vallée de l’Indus ont également été trouvés sur d’autres sites archéologiques d’Afghanistan.
Pendant plusieurs siècles, Shortugai a fonctionné comme un site minier exceptionnel pour l’extraction de l’étain (un minerai indispensable pour la fabrication du bronze), de l’or et du fameux lapis-lazuli, cette pierre précieuse bleue qui, avec l’or, habille de sa splendeur la tombe du pharaon égyptien Toutankhamon et d’autres tombes religieuses majeures en Mésopotamie (Irak).
Les données archéologiques démontrent que Shortugai commerçait avec ses voisins d’Aï Khanoum et construisit les premiers systèmes d’irrigation de la région, une spécialité de la civilisation de la vallée de l’Indus.
Bien des sites restent inexplorés en Afghanistan, pays où les guerres, les occupations étrangères et les pillages ont perturbé ou rendu impossible les recherches archéologiques.
Voici quelques-unes des découvertes de la DAFA, dont certaines restent exposées au Musée national de Kaboul.
Relations avec l’Inde
Ce qu’on a trouvé à Aï Khanoum, les pièces de monnaie, les objets et les céramiques, notamment d’origine indienne, témoigne qu’il s’agissait d’une importante plaque tournante du commerce avec l’Inde.
En 258 avant notre ère, Ashoka le Grand, souverain de l’empire Maurya (l’État dominant en Inde), fait ériger ce que l’on appelle « l’Edit grec d’Ashoka à Kandahar », une inscription rupestre bilingue, en grec et en araméen. Une autre inscription d’Ashoka était rédigée uniquement en grec.
Le contenu même de ces édits donne également une indication claire du niveau des échanges entre l’Inde et le monde hellénistique. Par exemple, dans son XIIIe édit, Ashoka, faisant preuve d’érudition, énumère avec précision tous les souverains du monde hellénistique de son époque.
Relations avec la Chine
Outre son interaction avec le sous-continent indien, la Bactriane établira des contacts avec une puissance située encore plus à l’est : la Chine.
À la fin du IIe siècle avant JC, Zhang Qian, diplomate et explorateur de la dynastie Han, arrive en Bactriane. Le récit de sa visite, y compris son étonnement d’y trouver des marchandises chinoises sur les marchés (acquises via l’Inde), ainsi que ses voyages dans le reste de l’Asie centrale, sont conservés dans les œuvres de l’historien Sima Qian.
À son retour en Chine, Zhang Qian informe l’empereur de l’existence de civilisations urbaines sophistiquées en Asie centrale : le Dayuan (vallée de la Ferghana), la Bactriane (Afghanistan) et la Partie (nord-est du plateau iranien).
Les découvertes de Zhang Qian incitent l’empereur à envoyer des émissaires chinois en Asie centrale pour y favoriser le commerce avec la Chine. Certains historiens n’hésitent pas à qualifier cette décision de l’Empereur chinois de « naissance de la Route de la soie ».
Déclin et chute
Une grande partie des ruines actuelles d’Aï Khanoum datent de l’époque d’Eucratides Ier (172-145 av. JC), qui a considérablement réaménagé la ville et l’a peut-être rebaptisée Eucratideia, d’après son nom.
Il fut assassiné en 145 av. JC. par son fils. Un an plus tard, le royaume s’effondre face à l’invasion des nomades.
Aï Khanoum est pillée une première fois en 145 av. JC par les Sakas, des tribus iraniennes d’origine scythe, suivis quinze ans plus tard par les nomades chinois Yuezhi.
Le « complexe du trésor » d’Aï Khanoum montre des signes de pillage lors de deux assauts, à quinze ans d’intervalle. D’après des témoins oculaires, certaines villes se sont arrangées avec les envahisseurs et organisèrent une coexistence pacifique. Les villes qui ont résisté, comme Aï Khanoum, ont été pillées et incendiées.
L’empire Kouchan
Les nomades chinois Yuezhi se sédentarisent et créent au début du Ier siècle l’Empire kouchan, qui englobe une grande partie de ce qui est aujourd’hui l’Ouzbékistan, l’Afghanistan, le Pakistan et l’Inde du Nord.
Son territoire s’étend de l’Asie centrale et du Gandhara (frontière occidentale actuelle du Pakistan) à Pataliputra, dans la plaine du Gange (Inde d’aujourd’hui). La capitale principale de son empire était située à Purushapura (aujourd’hui Peshawar au Pakistan).
C’est sous le règne de Kanishka le Grand (vers 127-150) que l’Empire kouchan deviendra célèbre pour ses réalisations militaires, politiques et spirituelles. Kanishka échange des ambassadeurs avec l’empereur romain Marc Aurèle (161-180) et l’empereur Han de Chine. Il noue des contacts diplomatiques avec la Perse sassanide et le royaume d’Aksoum (Yémen et Arabie saoudite d’aujourd’hui).
Si la dynastie kouchane reprend la tradition gréco-bactrienne, elle se forge peu à peu sa propre identité.
Les artistes kouchans enrichirent la sculpture bouddhique en donnant à Bouddha la forme humaine, innovation qui fut la plus importante de l’époque.
En 127, Kanishka remplace le grec par le bactrien, une langue moyenne iranienne utilisant l’alphabet grec.
Le bouddhisme
Les Kouchans joueront également un rôle majeur dans la transmission du bouddhisme. Le rayonnement de cette religion venue des rives du Gange favorisera celui des Routes de la soie.
Dans le domaine de la religion, les Kouchans, initialement attirés par l’hindouisme, joueront un rôle majeur dans la transmission du bouddhisme mahayana du Gandhara vers la Chine, l’Asie centrale et même le Sri Lanka, favorisant ainsi l’expansion de la route de la soie.
Tous ces facteurs ont inauguré une période de paix relative de 200 ans, connue comme la « Pax Kouchana ».
À partir du milieu du IIIe siècle après JC, l’Empire kouchan, affaibli, commence à se désintégrer. Dans sa partie occidentale, il passe sous le contrôle des Kushanshahs, c’est-à-dire les Indo-Sassanides (perses), progressivement supplantés au nord par les Hephtalites (appelés également les « Huns blancs » ou « Huns iraniens ») venus de la steppe d’Asie centrale.
Le bouddhisme connaît néanmoins une période de grande prospérité, comme l’illustrent les descriptions du moine chinois Xuanzang du VIIe siècle ainsi que la construction des statues géantes de bouddhas dans la vallée de Bamiyan en Afghanistan.
L’Islam
Après avoir conquis l’Iran, l’islam pénètre l’Afghanistan par le nord. Il n’y a pas de preuve d’un rejet massif de la nouvelle religion, sauf dans des régions isolées. Cependant, la volonté de rester indépendants des gouverneurs nommés par Damas (Omeyyades) puis par Bagdad (Abassides) se manifeste rapidement. C’est même à partir d’une province couvrant une partie du nord de l’Afghanistan, le Khorasan, que se répand initialement une partie de l’insurrection contre les Omeyyades pour les remplacer par le califat abbasside d’Haroun-al-Rachid, plus humaniste, et la création de Bagdad (voir notre article).
À partir de la fin du Xe siècle, une dynastie d’origine turque, les Ghaznévides, bâtit autour de leur capitale Ghazni (Afghanistan) un vaste sultanat qui s’étend jusqu’en Inde et fonde une communauté musulmane durable.
Leur influence culturelle se mesure par la beauté de l’architecture qu’ils nous ont laissée, mais aussi par le patronage qu’ils accordèrent au grand poète épique Ferdowsi (940-1025), à qui l’on doit la grande épopée nationale en langue persane, le Shahnameh : Le livre des rois.
Les Ghaznévides ont été suivis par une nouvelle dynastie, les Ghorides, originaire de la partie centrale de l’Hindou Kouch. C’est à eux que l’on doit l’impressionnant minaret de Jam.
Ce riche patrimoine culturel, qui a jeté les bases de leur identité et qui a donné sa dignité au peuple afghan, a été ignoré, détruit par les guerres successives, pillé et saccagé.
Fortement combattu par les talibans au pouvoir à Kaboul, ISIS, Daech et d’autres groupes terroristes, dont certains encouragés en sous-main par des agences de renseignement occidentales se sont livrés à un pillage à échelle quasi-industrielle du patrimoine culturel afghan. Pour eux, la revente d’objets d’art et d’antiquités est une des principales sources de revenus.
Recommandations
Aujourd’hui, le temps est venu d’un nouveau départ. L’Afghanistan peut changer complètement son image dans le monde, qui a été polluée par des adversaires et des ennemis qui veulent maintenir l’Afghanistan comme une zone de non-développement pour leur propre grand jeu géopolitique.
Ma proposition pour renouveler la contribution de l’Afghanistan à la culture mondiale est simple.
Avec Mes Aynak, qui signifie « petite mine », située à 35 km au sud de Kaboul, l’Afghanistan dispose du deuxième plus grand gisement de cuivre au monde. Alors que la Chine et les autres pays du BRICS ont besoin de ce métal précieux pour leur développement industriel, la mine offrira un revenu substantiel dont l’Afghanistan a un besoin urgent pour reconstruire le pays.
Le 25 mai 2008, Ibrahim Adel, ministre des Mines, et Shen Heting, directeur général de MCC, l’actionnaire majoritaire du consortium MCC-Jiangxi Copper MJAM, ont signé le contrat minier de Mes Aynak.
Ce contrat décrivait les conditions du premier grand projet minier et du plus important investissement étranger en Afghanistan. Cependant, suite à des incidents de sécurité qui ont créé d’importants problèmes d’insécurité, et sous la pression des puissances étrangères, le projet a été bloqué.
Paradoxalement, cela a donné aux archéologues le temps de mettre au jour sur le site minier une zone de 40 ha d’une valeur culturelle exceptionnelle de classe mondiale, principalement un vaste complexe de monastères bouddhistes, comprenant des stupas (temples), des peintures murales, des sculptures et des centaines d’artefacts archéologiques, etc.
Même si le contrat (fichier pdf) a pu être modifié depuis 2008, on ne peut que constater que le contrat initial contient une série d’aspects potentiellement très intéressants, à la fois pour la Chine mais surtout pour l’Afghanistan lui-même.
- EXPORTER DU MÉTAL, PAS DU MINERAI
De même que la Bolivie ne veut pas exporter du lithium (matière première) mais des batteries (produit fini transformé à haute valeur ajoutée), l’Afghanistan ne veut pas exporter du minerai de cuivre mais du cuivre métal. Pour atteindre cet objectif, le contrat prévoit la construction d’une fonderie sur le site.
Paragraphe IV, 33 : « Afin de respecter son engagement envers le gouvernement de financer, construire et exploiter une fonderie en Afghanistan, la MCC a demandé au gouvernement de lui donner accès à des gisements de phosphates, de calcaire et de quartz qu’elle pourra utiliser dans le cadre du projet Aynak. » - ACHATS LOCAUX
Paragraphe VII, 38 : « MCC s’efforce d’acheter des biens et des services en Afghanistan s’ils sont disponibles. » - MAIN-D’ŒUVRE LOCALE
Paragraphe VIII, 39, a : « MCC emploie du personnel afghan, dans toute la mesure du possible. » - APPROVISIONNEMENT EN EAU
Paragraphe IV, 32 : « MCC s’est engagée auprès du gouvernement à construire des puits d’approvisionnement en eau et des systèmes de canalisation … pour répondre aux besoins en eau douce du projet. La MCC s’est également engagée à réutiliser et à recycler l’eau de traitement dans la mesure du possible. » - CENTRALE AU CHARBON
Paragraphe IV, 31 : « MCC s’est engagée auprès du ministère des Mines à construire … une centrale au charbon d’une capacité de 400 mégawatts pour fournir de l’énergie électrique au projet et à Kaboul. » - CHEMIN DE FER
Paragraphe IV, 30 : « MCC s’est engagée à construire un chemin de fer associé au projet ». - LOGEMENT
Paragraphe IV, 24 : « MCC doit fournir des logements de qualité et en quantité suffisante à ses salariés et à leurs familles immédiates, à un prix de location raisonnable. » - SOINS MÉDICAUX
Paragraphe IV, 25 : « MCC fournira des soins médicaux gratuits à tous ses salariés et à leurs familles… et établira, dotera en personnel et entretiendra des dispensaires, des cliniques et des hôpitaux en nombre suffisant … » - ÉCOLES
Paragraphe IV, 26 : « MCC doit fournir gratuitement un enseignement primaire et secondaire adéquat aux enfants de tous les salariés et résidents de la zone entourant Aynak. » - CADRE DE VIE
Paragraphe IV, 27 : « MCC construira et financera le fonctionnement de centres d’activités récréatives adéquats tels que des gymnases et des terrains de sport. … En outre, il construira un marché/une zone commerciale. » - RELIGION
Paragraphe IV, 28 : « MCC respectera et protégera les convictions religieuses du peuple afghan. »
Le monde serait stupéfait en constatant que l’Afghanistan mobilise ses meilleurs architectes et urbanistes pour construire une nouvelle ville à Mes Aynak qu’il baptisera poétiquement, l’« Aï Khanoum du XXIe siècle ».
A Kaboul, un archéologue de premier plan qui travaille sur le site depuis une décennie, m’a confié avec une joie non-dissimulée que, suite à d’intenses discussions en octobre dernier entre les autorités afghanes et l’entreprise chinoise, une issue heureuse a été trouvée.
A l’heure actuelle, dit-il, les deux parties ont convenu de préserver, non plus une infime partie du site archéologique (la partie centrale avec les temples bouddhistes), mais l’ensemble des vestiges historiques du site en surface. A en croire mon interlocuteur, la décision est prise que l’ensemble du site sera désormais exclusivement exploité par la technique d’exploitation minière souterraine. N’en déplaise à la presse occidentale, le sauvetage de Mes Aynak révèle au monde le vrai visage du nouveau gouvernement afghan.
Il rendra également pensable, d’ici un certain temps, la reconstruction des bouddhas géants de la vallée de Bamiyan, l’un de 55 mètres et l’autre de 38 mètres, détruits en 2001. Plusieurs experts, lors de colloques récents de l’UNESCO, ont précisé que les difficultés techniques ne sont pas insurmontables, les bouddhas étant fabriqué en stuc. Le soi-disant « danger » que les sculptures soient considérées comme « fausses » n’a aucun sens, tant que l’intention d’atteindre un bien supérieur par leur reconstruction est réelle.
La « Proposition technique pour la revitalisation des statues du Bouddha de Bâmiyân » de 2017, élaborée par le département d’architecture de l’université japonaise Mukogawa Women’s University, mérite d’être examinée. Sans doute pourra-t-on faire mieux, mais elle a le mérite d’exister. Des chercheurs chinois se disent également prêts à donner un coup de main.
Rappelons que le monde compte 620 millions de bouddhistes qui considèrent Bamiyan comme une partie de leur culture et pourraient envisager de venir en Afghanistan pour mieux comprendre leur propre histoire.
Si l’Afghanistan indiquait clairement au monde qu’il a décidé de renforcer ses activités économiques et minières tout en protégeant, notamment grâce à l’aide généreuse de la Chine, le patrimoine culturel mondial sur son sol, il apparaîtra aux yeux de tous ce qu’il est désormais aujourd’hui : une force du bien, de la tolérance et de la paix dans le monde, en cohérence avec sa propre identité et son histoire.
L’Afghanistan apparaîtra comme le « Bouddha de feu » (IIe-IIIe siècle) du Musée national de Kaboul, où l’on voit la réponse donnée par Bouddha à un défi lancé par des hérétiques selon lequel il ne pouvait pas faire de miracles.
Connu sous le nom de « miracles jumeaux », on y voit Bouddha confiant avec des flammes sortant de ses épaules et des cours d’eau de ses pieds ! En altérant ces deux flux, dit la légende, Bouddha a même fait apparaître un arc-en-ciel !
En augmentant sa production d’énergie et en gérant d’une façon plus intelligence ses ressources en eau, l’Afghanistan démontrera, j’en suis convaincu, sa splendide force spirituelle !
Merci à tous et j’ouvre le débat à vos questions.
Afghanistan: « The Land of 1000 Golden Cities » and the Story of Ai-Khanoum
Edited transcript of Karel Vereycken’s presentation at the workshop on the « Cultural heritage of Afghanistan », presented in Kabul on Nov. 7 at the International conference on the economic reconstruction of Afghanistan organized by the Ibn-e-Sina Research and Development Center.
To talk about the culture of a foreign country is always a difficult thing to do, especially if one doesn’t know the language and if one wasn’t able to stay and travel around the country for a longer period. Therefore, I only can offer some impressions from the outside and things I read in books. So probably you will have to correct those things that escaped my attention.
Seen from the outside, Afghanistan is a fascinating country. Its reputation as the “Graveyard of Empires” captured my imagination. Most recently, Afghanistan resisted American and NATO occupation. A handful of determined combatants defeated a huge Empire already in the process of defeating itself. Before, Afghanistan resisted Russian occupation. And in the XIXth century, it resisted the British Empire during three Anglo-Afghan wars: the first in 1839-42, the second in 1878-1880 and the third one in 1919. Britain was playing the “Great Game”, trying to prevent Russia from getting access to the warm waters of the Arab gulf and the Indian Ocean. To prevent being colonized by both Russia and Britain, Afghanistan even courageously refused to have railroads, explaining why there only exists 300 km of rail today, a situation of course inacceptable today.
This capacity to resist, this quality of self respect and dignity, I think, derives from the fact that Afghanistan, being a roundabout on what was called the Silk-Road, absorbed and integrated into its own culture the best of the various influences that came to meet in this region and this became over centuries the foundation upon which was built the Afghan identity.
Totally opposed to that, foreign colonial powers, of course, always have wanted to erase the history, culture and heritage of the subjects over which they want to rule by “divide and conquer”. Justifying themselves as the unifying central power, they always pretend locals are mere representatives of eternally quarreling tribes.
The Greek influence along this trade spread massively into Central Asia in the IVth Century BC with Alexander the Great (356 BC – 323 BC) crossing the Hindu Kush mountain range in 329 BC.
Alexander and his successors brought with them thousands of Greek settlers sometimes called the « The Ionians ». Greek influence, before reaching regions as distant from Macedonia as India, would last at least till the arrival of Islam in the VIIIth Century.
The Greco-Bactrian Kingdom
Under the rule of his competing successors, Alexander the Great’s huge empire collapsed into various entities and kingdoms.
One of them, and I will limit myself to this one as an example, stands what today’s historians call the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom or Bactria (or Bactriana), where Greek influence can be thoroughly documented by archeological findings that demonstrate an exceptional urban, economic, social and cultural development.
Bactria was founded in 256 BC by the Seleucid (persian) satrap Diodotus I Soter and lasted till its fall in 145 BC. Its territory stretched out from the Parthian Empire at its West side, to the North of the Indus River Valley civilization, much older, at its East. It covered much of present-day Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan, and some parts of Iran and Pakistan.
Among the largest and richest cities of antiquity one counts cities as Ai-Khanoum and Bactria‘s capital Bactra (todays Balkh, some kilometers east of Mazar-e-Shariff in Afghanistan), the city where Ibn-Sina’s father, before moving to Buchara, currently Uzbekistan, was born.
Centuries before, it was also in Balkh, that Alexander the Great married Roxana (« Little Star »), the daughter of a Bactrian warlord and adopted local dress in a vast effort to create peace inside his Empire.
Strabo (64 or 63 BC – c. 24 AD), as many other Greek historians, referred to Bactria as « The Land of a 1000 Golden Cities », a land that all writers, both ancient and modern, praised for its gentle climate and fertility:
« Bactria produces everything, except olive oil. »
And for the Roman naturalist Pliny the Elder (AD 23/24 – AD 79), in Bactria,
« the grains of wheat grow so large that a single grain is as big as our ears of corn. »
Often erected at key strategic positions of trading routes, over time Bactria‘s cities became significant cultural centers where local and Greek traditions interacted and blended in artistic areas, as well as in architecture and religion.
Greeks lived alongside the local population in these places. The Greek language was used in this Central Asian region for administrative, economic, and philosophical matters. However, due to the constant flow of ideas and people of different professions, it was employed alongside local languages.
It is sufficient to look at the Greek names of many afghan cities to realize how predominant the Greek heritage is in this country.
Nearly all cities founded by Alexander the Great were of course called “Alexandria”, the best known being the major port of Egypt where Greek scientists such as Eratosthenes and others worked and lived.
- Ghazni, for example, was simply named “Alexandria” (in Opiana);
- Bagram, mainly known as the former US Airbase, was called “Alexandria in the Caucasus” and “Kapisa” in the Middle Ages.
- Kandahar had a Greek name: “Alexandria Arachosia”;
- Herat was “Alexandria Ariana”;
- Merv in today’s Turkmenistan was named “Alexandria” and later “Antiochia in Margiana”.
And the list doesn’t end there.
Also part of Bactria, the city and oasis of Gonur Depe (now in Turkmenistan, north of Mary, the ancient Merv), capital of the Kingdom of Margiane, is another example of what has been called the Bactro-Margian Archeological Complex (BMAC), more recently rebranded as the « Oxus Culture ».
Other parts of today’s Afghanistan also came under the influence of Hellenistic culture under the rule of what are called the “Indo-Greek” Kingdoms, but that is yet another long story which I will not tell today.
Ai-Khanoum, the Greek
Some cities in Bactria just got new names, but others were entirely built new or given a new beginning. Such seems to have been the case of an ancient city whose name remains unknown but who became known over centuries as Ai-Khanoum (meaning “Lady Moon” in Uzbek).
The city was beautifully located at the confluence of the Amou Daria (the Greek “Oxus”) and the Kokcha rivers.
In 1961, after visiting the site on a hunting trip, the King of Afghanistan, (Mohammed Zahir Shah), showed huge interest.
Invited by Afghanistan, which wanted to mark its independance from both the Soviets and the US, it was a French archaeological delegation, led by Paul Bernard of the Département des archéologues français en Afghanistan (DAFA), that unearthed the remains of a huge palace in the lower town, along with a large gymnasium, a theater capable of holding 6000 spectators, an arsenal, and two sanctuaries.
The precise date of Ai-Khanoum‘s initial foundations remains unknown. Interesting enough, Ai-Khanoum was erected some 20 kilometers south of Shortugai, an outpost and trading colony of the very innovative Indus Valley Civilization (also known as “Harappan”) during the late third millennium BC. (see my article here)
Shortugai was built with the typical Indus Valley standardized bricks. Indus Valley Civilization seals have also been found on other sites.
For several centuries Shortugai operated as an exceptional mining site for the extraction of tin, a key component of bronze, gold and the world famous magical blue gems of lapis lazuli used for the tomb of the Egyptian pharaon Toutankhamun and other major religious tombs in Mesopotamia (Iraq).
Shortugai traded with its southern neighbors of Ai-Khanoum and constructed the first irrigation systems in the area, a specialty of the Indus Valley Civilization.
In Ai-Khanoum, several inscriptions were found, along with coins, artifacts, and ceramics including from Indian origin showing the extensive trade relations of the city ! One monument in the heart of the city displayed a stela inscribed in Greek with a long list of maxims embodying the ideals of Greek life. Those were copied from Delphi and ended with:
« In childhood, learn good manners;
in youth, control your passions;
in old age, be of good counsel;
in death, have no regrets. »
Unfortunately, the onset of the Soviet-Afghan War in the late 1970s halted scholarly progress and during the following conflicts in Afghanistan, the site was extensively looted.
The excavations in Ai-Khanoum nevertheless show archaeological evidence of the Greek presence and their peaceful coexistence with the local populations in this region.
Its architecture remains very Greek, but has also integrated various artistic influences and cultural elements which they saw during their travel from the Mediterranean area to Central Asia. For example, they used the Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid styles – for the construction of their courtyards.
Here are some of the findings of the DAFA, most of them in possession and eventually on display at the National Museum in Kabul.
Surrounded by well-irrigated farmland, the city itself was divided between a lower town and a 60-meter-high (200 ft) acropolis. Although not situated on a major trade route, Ai-Khanoum controlled access to both mining in the Hindu Kush and strategically important choke points. Extensive fortifications, which were continually maintained and improved, surrounded the city.
Trading with India
Ai-Khanoum also became an important trade hub with India. It is a testament to the level of Greek interaction with India and the influence of urban centres such as Ai-Khanoum in the region that even as early as 258 BCE, Ashoka the Great, ruler of the Maurya Empire (the dominant state in India), created the so-called « Kandahar Greek Edict of Ashoka », a bilingual rock inscription written in Greek and Aramaic. Another of Ashoka’s inscriptions near Kandahar was written solely in Greek. The actual content of these edicts also gives a clear indication of the level of exchange between India and the Hellenistic world. In his 13th Edict, Ashoka accurately names all of the rulers in the Hellenistic world at the time of the inscription.
Relations with China
In addition to its interaction with the Indian subcontinent, the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom as a whole would eventually come to develop increasing contacts with a power even further to the East: China.
In the late Second Century BC, Zhang Qian, a Han dynasty diplomat and explorer, arrived in Bactria. His account of his visit to Bactria, including his recollection of his amazement at finding Chinese goods in the markets (acquired via India), as well as his travels in the rest of Central Asia, is preserved in the works of the early Han historian Sima Qian.
Upon returning to China, Zhang Qian informed the Emperor of the sophisticated urban civilisations in Ferghana, Bactria and Parthia. Zhang Qian’s discoveries prompted the Emperor to dispatch Chinese envoys across Central Asia to negotiate and encourage trade with China. Some historians are convinced that « this was the birth of the Silk Road. »
Many of the present ruins of Ai-Khanoum date from the time of Eucratides I (reigned 172–145 BC), who substantially redeveloped the city and who may have renamed it Eucratideia, after himself.
Eucratides I was killed in 145 BC by his son and soon after his death, the Greco-Bactrian kingdom collapsed.
This invasion of Ai-Khanoum was probably carried out by the Iranian Saka tribes of Scythian origin driven south by the nomadic Chinese Yuezhi peoples, who in turn formed a second wave of invaders, in around 130 BC. The treasury complex of the city shows signs of having been plundered in two assaults, fifteen years apart.
According to eye-witness reports, some cities made arrangements with the invaders and organized peaceful co-existence. Urban cities that resisted, such as Ai-Khanoum, were plundered and burned to the ground.
Kushan Empire
Very soon, showing a very interesting process of sedentarization, after the Saka tribes, the Yuezhi themselves took over Bactria and created in the early Ist century the “Kushan Empire” encompassing much of what is now Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Northern India and which lasted from around the year 30 AD till its subjugation in 375 AD by the (persian) Kushanshahs, the name used to designate the Kushano-Sasanian Kingdom that established its rule over Bactria over the declining Kushans.
The Kushan empire, which lasted till the end of 300 AD, was a center-point of the Silk Roads. Northern Pakistan and parts of India became part of the kingdom, which extended from Central Asia and Gandhara (Today’s western border of Pakistan) to Pataliputra on the Gangetic plain (today’s India). The main capital of his empire was located at Puruṣapura (today’s Peshawar in Pakistan).
Kanishka the Great was an emperor of the Kushan dynasty, under whose reign (c. 127–150 CE) the empire reached its zenith. He is famous for his military, political, and spiritual achievements. Under his rule, the Kushan Empire exchanged ambassadors with the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (161-180) and the Han Emperor of China. He had had diplomatic contacts with Sassanian Persia and the Kingdom of Aksum (today’s Yemen and Saudi Arabia).
So while initially the Kushan dynasty followed Greek cultural ideas and iconography after the Greco-Bactrian tradition, they gradually developed their own.
For example, while initially they kept the Greek language for administrative purposes but in 127 AD, Kanisha replaced Greek with Bactrian, an Iranian language written in Greek letters, as the official language of administration in the empire.
In the domain of religion, the Kushans, which initially were attracted by Hinduism, would play a major role in the transmission of Mahayana Buddhism from Gandhara across the Karakoram range to China, Central Asia and even Sri Lanka, favoring the overall expansion of the Silk Road.
All of these factors ushered in a period of relative peace for 200 years, sometimes described as “Pax Kushana”.
From the middle of the 3rd century AD, the weakened Kushan kingdom began to disintegrate. In its western part, it came under the control of the (persian) Sassanids, gradually supplanted in the north by the Hephtalites (Called the « White » or « Iranian Huns ») from the Central Asian steppe.
Buddhism nevertheless enjoyed a period of great prosperity, as illustrated by the descriptions of the VIIth century Chinese monk Xuanzang and the construction of the giant buddha statues of the Bamiyan Valley in Afghanistan.
Islam
After conquering Iran, Islam penetrated Afghanistan from the north. There is no evidence of mass rejection of the new religion, except in isolated areas. However, the desire to remain independent from the governors appointed by Damascus and then Baghdad soon became apparent. It was even from a province covering part of northern Afghanistan, Khorasan, that part of an insurrection spread against the Umayyad to replace them with the more humanist Abbasid Caliphate of Harun-al-Rachid and the creation of Baghdad (see my article here)
From the end of the Xth century, a dynasty of Turkish origin, the Ghaznevids, built a vast sultanate around their capital Ghazni, extending as far as India and establishing a long-lasting Muslim community.
Their cultural influence can be measured by the beauty of the architecture they left us, but also by the patronage they gave to the great poet Ferdowsi (940-1025), to whom we owe the great Persian-language national epic Shahnameh: The Book of Kings.
The Ghaznevids were followed by a new dynasty, the Ghorids, from the central Hindu Kush. It was to them that we owe Jam’s “Minaret”.
Much of this rich cultural heritage, which laid the foundations of their identity and gave dignity to the Afghan people, has been ignored, destroyed in successive wars, looted and plundered.
ISIS, Daech and other terrorist groups, some of them backed by certain western intelligence agencies, currently being eliminated by the Afghan government, have engaged in industrial plunder using their loot as a source of income.
Recommandations
Today, the time is ripe for a new beginning. Afghanistan can completely change its image in the world, which currently has been polluted by adversaries and enemies that want to keep Afghanistan a zone of non-development for their own new geopolitical Great Game.
My proposal to renew Afghanistan’s contribution to world culture is simple.
Mes Aynak, meaning “Little Mine”, 35 km south of Kabul, is in reality the world’s second largest copper reserve. While China and other BRICS countries need copper for industrial development, the mine could generate a substantial income which Afghanistan urgently requires to rebuild the country.
On May 25, 2008, Ibrahim Adel, Minister of Mines, and Shen Heting, general manager of MCC, the MCC-Jiangxi Copper MJAM consortium’s majority stakeholder, signed the Mes Aynak mining contract. The contract described the conditions for the first major mining project andbiggest foreign investment in Afghanistan.
However, after security incidents created major insecurity problems, and pressured by foreign powers, the project was stalled.
Archeological remains of Buddhist complex in Mes Aynak copper mine.
Paradoxically, this gave archeologists the time to unearth on the mining site an area of 40 ha of exceptional world class cultural value, mainly a vast complex of buddhist monasteries, including stupas (temples), murals, sculptures and hundreds of archeological artifacts, and more.
Even if the contract (pdf file) might have been modified since 2008, one cannot but note that the initial contract contains a series of potentially very interesting aspects, both for China but mainly for Afghanistan itself.
- SMELTER
Just as Bolivia doesn’t want to export lithium (as a raw material) but batteries (a finished transformed product with high added value), Afghanistan doesn’t want to export copper ore but copper metal. To achieve that aim, the contract plans to build a smelter on the site Part IV, 33: « In order to fulfill its commitment to the Government to fund, construct and operate a smelter in Afghanistan, MCC has requested that the Government provide access to deposits of phosphats, limestone and quartz for MCC’s use in the Aynak Project. » - LOCAL PURCHASING
Part VII, 38: « MCC shall use its best efforts to purchase goods and services in Afghanistan if they are available. » - LOCAL WORKFORCE
Part VIII, 39, a : « MCC shall employ Afghan personnel, to the maximum extent practicable. » - WATER
Part IV, 32: « MCC has made a commitment to the Government to construct water supply wells and pipeline systems … to supply the project’s fresh water requirements. MCC has also committed to reuse and re-circulate process water to the extent possible. » - POWER SUPPLY
Part IV, 31: « MCC has made a commitment to the Ministry of Mines to construct … one 400 megawatt capacity coal fired plant to supply electrical power to the project and to Kabul. » - RAILWAY
Part IV, 30: « MCC has committed to construct a railway associated with the project ». - HOUSING
Part IV, 24: « MCC shall provide housing facilities of sufficient quality and quantity for its employees and their immediate families at a reasonable rental rate. » - MEDICAL FACILITIES
Part IV, 25: « MCC shall furnish free medical care and attention to all its employees and families of employees … and shall establish, staff and maintain sufficient dispensary, clinic and hospital facilities … » - SCHOOLS
Part IV, 26: « MCC shall provide, free of charge, adequate primary and secondary school education for the children of all employees and residents in the area surrounding Aynak. » - ENTERTAINMENT AND SHOPPING
Part IV, 27: « MCC shall construct and fund the operation of adequate recreational activity centers such as gymnasiums and sport fields. … In addition, it shall construct a market/shopping area. » - RELIGION
Part IV, 28: MCC shall « respect and protect the religious belief of the Afghan people. »
The world would be stunned if Afghanistan would mobilize its best architects and city builders and make the new city under construction in Mes Aynak « The Aï Khanoum of the XXIst Century ». Let’s think about it.
According to a senior field archeologist who worked on the site for a decade, following intense discussions last October between the Afghan authorities and the Chinese company, big progress has been made. As of now, he says, both are fully committed to preserve the entire historical remains on the surface and not only a small part. While the contract planned to do « open-pit » mining in the western part and only wanted to preserve the central part with the Buddhist stupas (temples), from now on, says this highly credible source, the entire site will be mined by (more expensive) underground mining exploitation techniques that will leave the surface historical remains untouched.
If the world discovers the remains of the Mes Aynak buddhist monasteries are saved, Afghanistan’s image in the world will change. In a second period, it might become much easier to consider the reconstruction of the Bamiyan giant buddha statues, one of 55 meters and the other of 38 meters, destroyed in 2001.
It has been scientifically demonstrated by several experts speaking at conferences of UNESCO that this is not a technical problem and relatively easy to accomplish. The so-called “danger” that the sculptures would be considered as “fake” makes no sense, as long as the intention to reach a higher good by their reconstruction is real.
The 2017 “Technical Proposal for Revitalizing the Bamiyan Buddha Statues”, by the department of architecture of the Japanese Mukogawa Women’s University should be studied. It needs to be improved but it has the merit to exist. One should not forget that 620 million Buddhists in the world consider Bamiyan as a part of their own culture and might consider coming to Afghanistan to visit the site.
If Afghanistan would make it clear to the world it has decided to bolster its economic and mining activities but in the same time will protect at all cost and, in this case, with generous Chinese help, the world’s cultural heritage on its soil, it would underline its willingness to act as a force of good, tolerance and peace in the world, in coherence with its own identity and history.
An Afghan economic and cultural « miracle » would impress the world as much as Buddha in the story of the Greek influenced Buddha statue found north of Kabul in 1965.
Called the « Fire Buddha » (IInd-IIIrd Century) it represents Buddha’s response to a challenge from heretics that he could not perform miracles.
Known as « The Twin miracles », flames emanated from his shoulders and water poured from his feet, demonstrating his pre-eminence. By alternating both currents (fire and water), a wonderful rainbow appeared and convinced the heretics this man definitely was kind of special.
Today, in a simular miracle, by boosting its energy production and smart water management, Afghanistan will demonstrate its spiritual strength !
Thank You,
Rembrandt and the Light of Agapè
Rembrandt Harmenszoon van Rijn. Don’t count on me here to tell his story in a few lines! (*1) In any case, since the romantics, all, and nearly to much has been said and written about the rediscovered Dutch master of light inelegantly thrown into darkness by the barbarians of neo-classicism.
By Karel Vereycken, June 2001.
The uneasy task that imparts me here is like that of Apelles of Cos, the Greek painter who, when challenged, painted a line evermore thinner than the abysmal line painted by his rival. In order to draw that line, tracing the horizons of the political and philosophical battles who raged that epoch will unveil new and surprising angles throwing unusual light on the genius of our painter-philosopher.
First, we will show that Rembrandt (1606-1669) was « the painter of the Thirty years War » (1618-1648), a terrible continental conflict unfolding during a major part of his life, challenging his philosophical, religious and political commitment in favor of peace and unity of mankind.
Secondly, we will inquire into the origin of that commitment and worldview. Did Rembrandt met the person and ideas of the Czech humanist Jan Amos Komensky (« Comenius ») (1592-1670), one of the organizers of the revolt of Bohemia? This militant for peace, predecessor of Leibniz in the domain of pansophia (universal wisdom), traveled regularly to the Netherlands where he settled definitively in 1656. A strong communion of ideas seems to unite the painter with the great Moravian pedagogue.
Also, isn’t it astonishing that the treaties of Westphalia, who put an end to the atrocious war, are precisely based on the notions of repentance and pardon so dear to Comenius and sublimely evoked in Rembrandt’s art?
Finally, we will dramatize the subject matter by sketching the stark contrast opposing Rembrandt’s oeuvre with that of one of the major war propagandist: (Sir) Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640).
Rembrandt, who finished rejecting any quest for earthly glory could not but paint his work away from that of the fashion-styled Flemish courtier painter. Moreover, Rubens was in high gear mobilizing all his virtuoso energy in support of the oligarchy whose Counter Reformation crusades and Jesuitical fanaticism were engulfing the continent with gallows, fire and innocent blood.
What Rembrandt advises us for his painting also applies to his life: if you stick your head to close to the canvass, the toxic odors will sharply irritate your nose and eyes. But taking some distance will permit you to discover sublime and unforgettable beauty.
What Art?
Since the triumph of Immanuel Kant‘s modernist thesis, the Critique of the Faculty of Judgment, it has not been « politically correct » to assert that art has a political dimension. And with good reason! If art can influence the course of history and shape it through its power, it is because it is a vector of ideas! An impossibility, according to the Kantian thesis, because art is a gratuitous act, free of everything, including meaning. The ultimate freedom! You either like it or you don’t, it’s all a matter of taste.
Following in the footsteps of the German poet Friedrich Schiller, we’re here to convince you otherwise, and abolish the tyranny of taste. For us, art is an eminently political act, although the work of art has nothing in common with a mere political manifesto, and the artist can in no way be reduced to an ordinary « activist ».
His domain, that of the poet, the musician or the visual artist, is to be a guide for mankind. To enable people to identify within themselves what makes them human, i.e. to strengthen that part of their soul, of their divine creativity, which places them entirely at the zenith of their responsibility for the whole of creation.
To achieve this, and we’ll develop this here, what counts in art is the type of conception of love it communicates. By making this « universal » sensitive, sublime art makes the most elevated conception of love accessible.
Such art, which forces us think, employs enigmas, ambiguities, metaphores and ironies to give us access to the idea beyond the visible. For art that limits itself to theatricality and the beauty of form fatally sinks into erotic, romantic love, depriving man of his humanity and therefore of his revolutionary power.
Rubens will be the ambassador of the great un-powers of his time: the glory of the empire and the magnificent financial strength of those days « new economy », the « tulip bubble ». In short, the oligarchy.
Rembrandt, in turn, will be the ambassador of the have-nots: the weak, the sick, the humiliated, the refugees; he will live in the image of the living Christ as the ambassador of humanity. It might seem strange to you to call such a man the « the painter of the thirty years war. »
Paradoxically, his historical period underscores the fact that very often mankind only wakes up and mobilizes its best resources for genius when confronted with the terrible menace of extinction. Today, when the Cheney’s, the Rumsfeld’s and the Kissinger’s want to plunge the world into a « post-Westphalian epoch », in reality a new dark age of « perpetual war », Rembrandt will be one of our powerful weapons of mass education.
Historical context and the origins of the war
Before entering Rembrandt, it is indispensable to know what was at stake those days. The academic name « Thirty Years War » indicates only the last period of a far longer period of « religious » conflict which was taking place around the globe during the sixteenth century, mainly centered in central Europe, on the territory of today’s Germany.
While 1618 refers to the revolt of Bohemia, the 1648 peace of Westphalia defines a reality far beyond the apparent religious pretext: the utter ruin of the utopian imperial dream of Habsburg and the birth of modern Europe composed of nation-states (*2)
On the reasons for « religious » warfare, let us look at the first half of the sixteenth century. At the eighteen years long Council of Trent (1545-1563), the Roman Catholic Church discarded stubbornly all the wise advise given earlier to avoid all conflict by one of its most ardent, but most critical supporters: Erasmus of Rotterdam.
As Erasmus forewarned, by choosing as main adversary the radical anti-semite demagogue Martin Luther, the church degraded itself to sterile and intolerant dogmatism, opening each day new highways for « the Reformation ».
The religious power-sharing of the « Peace of Augsburg » of 1555, between Rome and the protestant princes, temporarily calmed down the situation, but the ambiguous terms of that treaty incorporated all the germs of the new conflicts to come. Note that « freedom of religion » meant above all « freedom of possession ». The « peace » solely applied to Catholics and Lutherans, authorizing both to possess churches and territories, while ostracizing all the others, very often abusively labeled « Calvinists ».
Playing diabolically on internal divisions, some evil Jesuits of those days set up Calvinists and Lutherans to combat each other bitterly, by claiming, for example in Germany, that Calvinism was illegal since not explicitly mentioned in the treaty. Furthermore, the citizen obtained no real freedom of religion; he was simply authorized to leave the country or adopt the confessions of his respective lord or prince, which in turn could freely choose.
As a result of a general climate of suspicion, the protestant princes created in 1608 the « Evangelical Union » under the direction of the palatine elector Frederic V. Their eyes and hopes were turned on King Henri IV‘s France, where the Edit of Nantes and other treaties had ended a far long era of religious wars. After Henry IV‘s assassination in 1610, the Evangelical Union forged an alliance with Sweden and England.
The answer of the Catholic side, was the formation in 1609 of a « Holy League » allied with Habsburg’s Spain by Maximilian of Bavaria. Beyond all the religious and political labels, a real war party is created on both sides and the heavy clouds carrying the coming tempest threw their menacing shadows on a sharply divided Europe.
1618: The Revolt of Bohemia
Hence, after the never-ending revolt of the Netherlands, the very idea of an insurrection of Bohemia drove the Habsburgs (and the slave trading Fugger and Welser banking empires controlling them) into total hysteria, since they felt the heath on their plans. If Bohemia would become « a new, but larger Holland », then many other nations, such as Poland, could join the Reformation camp and destabilize the imperial geopolitical power balance forever.
As from 1576, the crown of Bohemia was in the hands of the Catholic Rudolphe II, Holy Roman Emperor. Despite a far-fetched passion for esotericism, Rudolphe II will be the protector of astronomers Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler in Prague.
In 1609, the Protestants of Bohemia obtain from him a « Letter of Majesty » offering them certain rights in terms of religion. After his death in 1612, his brother Matthias, Holy Roman Emperor, became his successor and left the direction of the country to cardinal Melchior Klesl, a radical Counter Reformation militant refusing any application of the « letter of majesty ».
This set the conditions for the famous « defenestration of Prague », when two representatives of the imperial power were thrown out of the window and fall on a manure heap, at the end of hot diplomatic negotiations. That highly symbolical act was in reality the first signal for a general uprising, and following the early death of Matthias, the rebels made Frederic V their sovereign instead of accepting Habsburg’s choice.
Charles Zerotina, a protestant nobleman and Comenius, (see box below), a Moravian reverend and respected community leader, masterminded that revolt. Frederic V, for example was crowned in 1619 by Jan Cyrill, who was Zerotina’s confessor, and whose daughter will become Comenius wife.
The insurgents were defeated at the battle of White Mountain, close to Prague, in 1620 by a Catholic coalition, composed of Spanish troops pulled out of Flanders together with Maximilian’s Bavarians. On the scene: French philosopher René Descartes, who paid his own trip and who was part of the war coalition and joined in entering defeated Prague in search for Kepler’s astronomical instruments… (*3)
An arrest warrant immediately targeted Comenius, who escaped with Zerotina from bloody repression. Protestantism was forbidden and the Czech language replaced by German.
Most resistance leaders were arrested and 27 beheaded in public. Their heads were put up on pins and shown on the roof of Prague’s Saint-Charles bridge.
One of them was the famous Jan Jessenius, head of the University of Prague who performed one of Europe’s early public anatomical dissections in 1600 and was a close friend of Tycho Brahe. To warn those who used their speech to encourage « heresy », his tongue was pulled out before he was beheaded, quartered and impaled.
Thirty thousand people went into exile while Frederic V and his court took refuge in Den Haag in the Netherlands. There, but years before, Comenius had a personal encouter with the future « Winterkönig » and his wife Elisabeth Stuart, on their way back from their wedding in England for which Shakespeare had arranged a representation of « The Tempest ».
A World War
1618 marked the outbreak of an all-out war across Europe, provoked by the imperial drive of Habsburg to reunify all of the continent behind one unique emperor and one single religion.
As of 1625, aided by French and English financial facilities, Christian IV of Denmark and Gustave Adolphus of Sweden intervened on the northern flank against Habsburg descending from the north as far as up till Munich.
Then, France opened another flank on the western front in 1635. Catholic cardinal Richelieu, who defeated the Huguenots at LaRochelle in 1628 (since he « fought their political rights but not their religious ones », will heavily aid the Protestant camp. His fears were that,
« if the protestant party is completely in shambles, the offensive of the house of Austria will come down on France ».
The famous etchings of the Lorraine engraver Jacques Callot, « Misery and calamities of war » of 1633, give an idea how this savage war swept Europe with its cortège of misery, famine, epidemics and desolation.
The estimated population loss on the territory of present day Germany indicates a downturn from 15 to less than 10 million. Hundreds of cities were turned back into simple villages and thousands of communities simply disappeared from the map.
War affected all the colonies of those powers involved in the conflict. Dutch and English pirates would sink any Spanish or Portuguese ships encountered at the other edge of the Earth’s curve. For Spain, loyal pillar of Habsburg, 250 million ducats were spent for the war effort (between 1568 and 1654), despite the state bankruptcy of 1575. That amount represents more than the double of the revenue from the loot of the new world (gold, spices, slaves, etc.) which scarcely amounted only to 121 million ducats…
Rembrandt and Comenius
That the young Rembrandt was totally heckled by the situation of general war which was shaking up Europe is easily visible in the early self-portrait of Nuremberg.
Here he portrays himself divided between two choices. One shoulder reveals the gorget, a piece of armor that invokes the patriotic call for serving the nation calling on every young Dutchman of his generation in age of serving the military, especially after the surprise attack of the Spanish troops on Amersfoort of august 1629.
The other shoulder is nonchalantly caressed by a « liefdelok », the French « cadenette » or lovelock exhibited by amorous adolescents. What to choose? Love the nation, or the beloved?
More and more irritated by the ambitions of Constantijn Huygens, the powerful secretary of the stadholder which got him well-paid orders for the government and made him move from Leiden to Amsterdam, Rembrandt’s thinking and activity gets ever more concentrated and powerful.
Ten years later, the dying away of his wife Saskia in 1642, year of the « Night watch », plunges the painter into a deep personnal existential crisis. Gone, the self-portraits where he paints himself as an Italian courtier, with a glove in one hand carrying a heavy golden chain around his neck fronting for his social status and competing with the court. Suddenly he seems to realize that the totality of the world’s gold will never buy back the lost lives of those once loved.
When interrogated on the matter, Rembrandt would bluntly state he didn’t need to go to Italy, as the tradition used to be, since everything Italy ever produced came to him anyway as it was available in one form or another on the Amsterdam art market. But traveler he was, as drawings of the gates of London indicate, done in the early forties, maybe the year Comenius crossed the channel?
In 1644, the neo-Platonist rabbi and teacher of Spinoza, Menasseh Ben Israel, for which Rembrandt illustrated books, received a letter from Comenius agent John Dury, chaplain of Mary Princess of Orange, starting a discussion on the reintegration of the Jews in England, and Menasseh finally went for negotiations to meet Cromwell in 1655.
The Nightly Conspiracy
Although some timid hypothesis’ exists concerning Comenius‘ influence on Rembrandt, a rigorous historian’s research could certainly bring more light on this matter.
Although Rembrandt’s worldview evolved in an environment of the Mennonite community, peace-loving Anabaptists miles away from any political commitment, Rembrandt’s passion for the « cause of Bohemia » seems particularly striking in « The nightly conspiracy of Claudius Civilus at the Schakerbos ».
The large painting figured as one in a series planned to decorate the new Amsterdam city hall to celebrate the revolt of the Batavians against the Romans. Starting from historical elements of Tacitus, the story had been cooked up to warm up Dutch patriotism since the reference to Spanish tyranny was clear to all. For reasons unknown today, Rembrandt’s painting was taken down after a couple of months. To mock the cowardice of the ruling elites, Rembrandt seems to have transposed the historical scene into his present timeframe.
One Swedish historian thinks that the leader of the conspiracy here is not Claudius Civilis (the Batavian general who lost an eye in battle), but another general who equally lost an eye in battle and which was non-other than the Hussite general Jan Zizka! (*4).
Remember that Comenius and the revolt of Bohemia strongly identified with John Huss. Looking closely makes you discover that Rembrandt’s Claudius Civilis is indeed dressed up in central European costume. From left to right one sees first a Dutch patrician. Is this a portrait of the then rising republican Jan De Wit?
Next, one sees a monk, without weapons, who poses his hand on Civilus’ arm in a conspiratorial gesture. Is this Comenius resistance movement, the Unity of the Brethren?
According to the historians, the two chalices, one wide, the other narrow, could signify the « Eucharist under the two species », namely that bread and wine be shared with all, which happened to be one of the demands of the Jan Hus tradition.
One also can identify a Jew or rabbi taking place in the conspiracy. Looks pretty weird for a simple Batavian conspiracy! That the establishment was unhappy to see their hero painted as an ugly Cyclops seems probable.
But to be challenged in their flight forward into pompous fantasy in stead of taking up the urgent tasks of their time was another one.
King of Swedish Steel, Louis De Geer
Comenius arrives in Amsterdam on invitation of the de Geer family in 1656, the year of Rembrandt’s bankruptcy (*5).
Louis de Geer, alias « the Steel King » and his son Laurent were the life-long protectors of Comenius for whom they paid the funeral and even build a chapel in the city of Naarden, some miles outside Amsterdam.
Originally from Luik (Liège) in today’s Belgium, that uncompromising Calvinist family settled in Amsterdam. It was the de Geer family who led the foundations of Sweden’s industrial flowering of iron, steel and copper . To do this, de Geer brought three hundred families of Walloon steelworkers to Sweden, and for whom he build hospitals, schools, housing projects and commercial facilities.
De Geer also financed the scottish preacher John Dury and the « intelligencer » Samuel Hartlib, two active friends of Comenius in England. At war with the Royal Society and Francis Bacon, they wanted to render scientific knowledge available to all of the population.
John Milton’s treatise On Education was dedicated to the same Samuel Hartlib. Louis de Geer and Sweden’s prime Minister Johan Skytte, realized Comenius education projects were the best of all possible investment to foster the physical economy. His educational reforms created a labor force of such an exceptional quality and astonishing productivity, that they warmly invited him to Sweden and asked him to reform the nation’s educational system.
That relationship of Comenius with the de Geer family leads us to Rembrandt, since Louis de Geer’s sister, Marghareta, and her husband Jacob Trip, one of the major shareholders of the Swedish copper mines, had their portrait done by Rembrandt, offering him a well paid order during very difficult years.
The City of Amsterdam allotted Comenius a yearly pension, encouraged him to publish his complete works on pedagogy and offered him the keys of the city library. Comenius brought over his family and assistants and installed a library and a printing shop behind the Westerkerk where Rembrandt will be buried.
Comenius, when going every day from his house to his printing shop crossed the street where Rembrandt lived his last days. Since early this century, Czech curators got convinced that Rembrandt’s Portrait of an old man at the Uffizi Gallery in Florence, is in reality a portrait of Comenius (*6).
True or not, one has to realize that Rembrandt demanded to each of his models to sit each day for four hours over a period of three months to paint their portrait, a thing maybe not so evident for the aging Comenius.
But what is known with certainty is the fact that one of Rembrandt’s pupils, Juriaen Ovens, painted Comenius portrait during that period.
The Peace of Westphalia and the « Via Lucis »
Although Bohemia did not gain its long-desired independence at the peace of Westphalia, one cannot underestimate Comenius influence on the negotiations leading to the establishment of the peace-treaty. His work, Cesta Pokoje (Road to peace) of 1630, written in Czech is described as,
« an ethical-religious writing in which love, faith and mutual comprehension are established as the single ethical foundations of a possible peace ».
From 1641 to 1642, right before the start of the first peace negotiations, Comenius wrote the Via Lucis (The path of light), which could have been used as a guiding memorandum for the negotiators.
At the question if this Via Lucis was a millenarist mystical vision, as has been often pretended, we can consider the following.
Asked what could be hoped for and when a major change could take place, Comenius answered that the hope would come with the arrival of a time where the Gospel of the Kingdom would be preached all over the world and universal peace established.
That change could arise as the result of the emergence of a light to which will turn not only the Christian, but all the people of the world.
That light will come, « from the combination of the lanterns of human conscience, of a rational consideration of the works of God or of nature, and from the law or divine will ».
For him, « human enterprise can, through prayer and considerations of pious men imagine the possible ways to unite these rays of light, to irradiate them on the entirety of the human species and to spill similar thoughts in the minds of others » (*7).
One identifies exactly that concept in an etching of Rembrandt that Goethe awkwardly used by having it copied as frontispiece for his Faust in 1790 (*8).
The subject here is not at all a man going along to get along with the devil, but light (mirror of Christ) enlightening the life and the mind of the mortals. Way before Voltaire and opposed to the Venetian illuminati, Comenius and Rembrandt made own the metaphor of light.
To get an even more precise idea of Comenius demands for peace, one can read another memorandum called Angelus Pacis (The peace-angel),
« send to the English and Dutch peace Ambassadors at Breda, a writing designated to be sent afterwards to all the Christians of Europe and then to all the nations of the world in order to stop them, that they cease fighting each other ».
Comenius first remarks laconically that England and Holland are morally so degraded that they even don’t need some spiritual difference as a pretext, but fight each other for purely material possessions! As a way out, he proposes a new friendship:
« But how do you conceive that new friendship (or rather reestablishment of your friendship)? Will it be not by the general pardon that you will allow each other? The wise men have always seen the oblivion of received injuries as the surest road leading to peace. Touching too rudely the wounds, is to revivify the pains and to furnish the wounds an occasion for irritation.
« When this is true, it would be to be wished that the river Aa, whose tranquil waters irrigate Breda, would turn for this hour into the river Lethe of which the poets tell us that whoever drinks their water forgets everything of the past.
« The one who is guilty of trouble, God will find him, even when men, for love of peace, spare him. That the just one starts accusing himself; that means that the one whose conscience accuses him of having broken the friendship and witnessed enmity, should, according to justice, be the first one and the most ardent to reestablish friendship. If the offended party neglects that duty of justice, it will be the honor of the offended party to assume that honorable role, according to the word of the philosopher. » (*9)
COMENIUS: TEACH EVERYTHING TO ALL AND EVERYONE
Jan Amos Komensky (« Comenius ») (1592-1670) was above all a militant teacher, practicing « the universal art of teaching everything to everybody » (pan-sophia) and reckless source of inspiring enthusiasm.
One year after his death in 1670, Leibniz wrote of him: « time will come, Comenius, that honors will be offered to your works, to your hopes and even to the objects of your desires ».
In some domains, indeed, Comenius was Leibniz‘s precursor. First, he fought the fossilization of thought resulting from the dominant Aristotelianism: « Little time after that unification between Christ and Aristotle, the church fell into a pitiable state and became filled with the uproar of theological dispute ».
Strong defender of the free will that he didn’t see entirely in contradiction with an Augustinianconcept of predestination, he felt closer to John Huss than to Calvin, while generally labeled a « Calvinist » by historians.
In 1608, Comenius enters the Latin School of Prérov (Moravia), a school reorganized at the demand of Charles Zerotina on the model of the Calvinist school of Sankt-Gall in Switzerland. Zerotina was one of the key figures of the Bohemian nobility, promoter of the Church of Unity of Brethren, organizer of popular education and key leader of the international anti-Habsburg resistance. For example, in 1589 he lends a considerable amount of money to the French King Henri IV, which he meets in Rouen, France, in 1593 in support of ending the religious wars with the the Spanish.
Henri IV’s conversion to Catholicism (« Paris is worth a mass ») ruined Zerotina’s hope to reproach the Unity of Brethren with the French Huguenots. Befriended with Theodore de Bèze, which he met regularly when studying in Basel and Geneva, Zerotina sent Comenius to study at the Herborn University in Nassau. That University was founded in 1584 by Louis of Nassau, brother of William the Silent, the leader of the revolt of the Netherlands against Habsburg’s Spain. Louis of Nassau, a key international coordinator of the revolt was in permanent contact with the humanist Huguenot leader Gaspard de Coligny in France and with Walsingham, the chancellor of England’s Queen Elisabeth Ist.
Together with Zerotina, Comenius unleashed the revolt of Bohemia of 1618. After spending some time with the guerrilla forces for which he drew a map of Moravia, Comenius went into exile, as bishop of his church, the « Unity Brethren of Bohemia ».
Till his death, he was the soul of the Bohemian resistance, the gray eminence of the Diaspora and the guardian that prevented the Czech language from disappearing, since it was replaced by German in Bohemia. Since wars are only possible if large parts of the population remain uneducated, for Comenius education became the leading edge to fight for Peace.
Opposed to the Jesuit educators who consolidated their own power by education the elites only, Comenius, starting from his conviction that every individual is made in the living image of God, elaborated with great passion a very high level curriculum, which he wanted accessible to all, as he develops this in his « The Great Didactic » (1638).
Following the advice of Erasmus and Vivès, Comenius abolishes corporal punishment and decides to bring boys and girls in the same class. With him, a school needs to be available in every village, free of cost and open to everybody.
Breaking the division between intellectual and manual work, the schools were part-time technical workshops, anticipating France’s Ecole Polytechnique and the Arts et Metiers (technical school to perfect working people), completely oriented towards the joy of discovery. Leibniz idea of academies originated in Comenius’ schools and societies of friends.
For him, as for Leibniz, the body of physics couldn’t walk without the legs of metaphysics. Integrating that transcendence, he strongly rejected the very idea that nature was reducible to a mere aggregate defined by formal laws, and he adamantly lambasted Bacon, Galileo and Descartes for doing so. In stead, nature has to be looked to as a dynamic process defined by the becoming. That becoming is not repetitive, but permanent progression and potentialization: nature has a quality of development, tending towards self-accomplishment and harmony.
He was severely attacked by Descartes’ « Judgment of the Pansophical works » and mocked by Voltaire, who made him appear as Candide‘s naive philosophy teacher « Pangloss ».
Founder of modern pedagogy, he realized children are beings of affection, before becoming beings of reason. Up till those days, ignorant children were often seen as possessed by the devil, a devil which had to be beaten out of them. The French cardinal Pierre de Bérulle, founder of the Oratorians, reflected that mindset when he wrote that « infancy is the most vile and abject state of man’s nature after that of death ».
To make knowledge accessible to all, Comenius revolutionized the dogmas of that educational approach. In well-ordered classrooms, beautifully decorated with maps, classes would last only one hour covering all the domains one fiends in an engraving of Comenius: theology, manual works, music, astronomy, geometry, botany, printing, construction, painting and sculpture.
Comenius taught Latin, but was strongly convinced that every pupil had to master first his mother tongue. That was a total revolution, since up till then, Latin was taught in Latin, and to bad for those who didn’t understand already !
He also will also re-introduce illustrated textbooks (« The sensible world in images »)(1653), which had been stupidly banned from schools to « not invite the senses to disturb the intellect ». For Comenius, images have the same role as a telescope, displacing the field of perception beyond immediate limits.
His ideas, and especially the rapid successes of schools adopting his pedagogy attracted all of Europe and beyond. In 1642, Comenius was hired by Johan Skytte, the influential chancellor of the University of Uppsala, to reorganize the Swedish education system according to his principles. Skytte, an erudite Platonist inspired by Erasmus, will be Gustaphe Adolph’s preceptor and his son Bengt Skytte will be an influential teacher of Leibniz.
Before that job, Comenius discarded a similar offer originating from Richelieu of France and the offer that came from John Winthrop Junior from the United States who offered Comenius to preside Harvard University, newly founded in the Massachussetts Bay Colony of America.
Rembrandt and Forgiveness
To express in art that precise moment where love gives birth to pardon and repentance will be precisely one of Rembrandt’s favorite subjects. The fact that he choose the name Titus for his son, after the roman emperor who supposedly had showed great clemency toward the early Christians, demonstrates that point. But Titus was also the name of a bishop of Creta who was a close collaborator of Apostle Paul.
Rembrandt was fascinated by the figure of Saint-Paul, who used to be after all a roman officer who, through his conversion, showed the possible transformation of each individual for the better, capable of becoming a militant for the good.
Rembrandt’s self-portrait of the Rijksmuseum, with the famous « ghost-image » of a badly lit dagger nearly planted his breast supposedly represent him as Saint-Paul, traditionally represented defending Christian faith with the scripture in one hand and the sword in the other.
The bible in the armored hand do appear in that painting, but the sword here seems more as a dagger, suggesting an eventual reference to the name given by Erasmus to his Christian’s manual, the « Enchiridion » after the Greek word egkheiridion (dagger).
The Prodigal Son
In one of Rembrandt’s late works, the « Return of the prodigal son », despite the fact that the work was completed by a pupil, we see how profoundly he dealt with precisely that subject. The expressiveness of the figures is amplified by the nearly life-size representation on the wide canvas (262 x 205 cm).
The father’s eyes, plunged in interior vision, look yonder the small passage by which the son hasarrived, as doubting of the happiness that overwhelms him, since his son « who was dead », « came back to life ».
The son, who installs his convicts head on the father’s abdomen, engages in the act of total repentance. The naked foot who leaves behind the rotten shoe, communicates in a metaphorical way that sinners deed of repentance, offering what he has inside. The father embraces his son by putting his pardoning hands on his shoulders, while the jealous brothers stand by wondering and enraged why so much love is given to the son « who had spoiled the fathers good with prostitutes ».
Three observations indicate Comenius person and thought might have inspired this work.
First, according to all available portraits, the face of the father shows heavy resemblance with the treats of Comenius himself, a well known militant for peace based on repentance and pardon which Rembrandt probably met frequently during that period.
Second, and after a second look, the son doesn’t look European at all, but actually Negroid, which would add to the painting some critical thoughts on the widely practiced slavery of the European powers of those days.
To conclude, one could interpret the parable of the prodigal son in a much larger sense: is this not man itself, son of God, who returns to his father after having wandered on the roads of sin? Comenius, after a moment of nearly total desperation uses that same image in his book The labyrinth of the world and the paradise of the hearth (1623).
Similar to the image employed by the Dutch painter Hieronymous Bosch, in his « ambulant salesman », man gets lost in the multiplicity of the world that leads him to self-destruction, but after a crisis decides to regain divine unity.
In order to add still another dimension to the discussion on the quality of love involved in art, it is useful to contrast our master with the works of the most talented belonging to the tradition of his detractors: Peter-Paul Rubens.
Rembrandt, Rubens and other Philistines
But before investigating Rubens, it is appropriate to consider the following. Despite the fact that Rembrandt came out of the immense intellectual ferment of the late sixteenth century University of Leiden, one of the cradle’s of humanism, one cannot escape the fact that his lashing career would have infatuated many.
Remember, Constantijn Huygens « discovered Rembrandt » in 1629, while still a young millers son running a small boutique with Jan Lievens, asking them to come to Amsterdam and work for the government. (*10).
Rembrandt’s « patron » nevertheless would write without blushing in his diary Mijn Jeugd (my youth) that Peter Paul Rubens, the Flemish baroque painter was « one of the seven marvels of the world ».
Rubens was, before everything else, the talented standard bearer of the « enemy » Counterreformation and its Jesuits army, whose admiration made Rembrandt totally uncomfortable. How could this virtuoso painter be seen as the brightest star on the firmament of painting? According to some, Huygens was looking for « a Dutch Rubens », capable of making shine the « elites » of the nation.
Rembrandt at one point got so irritated with Huygens’ shortsightedness that he
offered him a large painting called Samson blinded by the Philistines. The work, a pastiche of the violent style, painted « à la Rubens », shows roman soldiers gouging out Samson’s eye with a dagger. Did Rembrandt suggest that his Republic (the strong giant) and its representatives were blinded by their own philistinism?
When a little Page becomes a great Leporello
Rembrandt perfectly translates the feeling of revulsion any honest Dutch patriot would have felt in front of Rubens. Had the Dutch elites already forgotten that Peter Paul’s father, Jan Rubens, once a Calvinist city councilor of Antwerp close to the leadership of the revolt of the Netherlands, had severely damaged the integrity of the father of the fatherland by engaging in an extra-conjugal relationship with Anna of Saxen, the unstable spouse of William the Silent?
Humiliated, but with courage and determination, Rubens mother fought as a lioness to free her husband from an uncertain jail. Her son Peter Paul, could not but become the calculated instrument of vengeance against the protestants and an indispensable tool to do away the blame hanging over the family. Hence, at the age of twelve, Peter Paul was sent to the special college of Romualdus Verdonck, a private school specifically designed to train the shock troops of the Counterreformation.
From there on, Rubens becomes a pageboy at the little court of Marguerite de Ligne, countess de Lalaing at Oudenaarde, whose descendants still form the Royal blood of today’s Belgium. As a kid, Rubens copied the biblical images of the woodprints of Holbein and the Swiss engraver Tobias Stimmer. After two waves of iconoclasm (1566 and 1581), the Counterreformation was very eager to recruit image-makers of all kinds, but under strict regulations specified by the final session of the Council of Trent in 1563. (*12).
After a short training by Abraham van Noort, Rubens career was boosted by his entering of the workshop of Otto van Veen. Born in Leiden in 1556 and trained by the Jesuits, « Venius » was the pupil of the master-courtier Federico Zuccari in Rome. Zuccari was the court painter of Habsburg’s Philippe II of Spain and the founder of the « Accademia di San Luca ». Traveling from court to court, Venius succeeded in getting the favors of Alexander Farnèse, the malign Spanish governor in charge of occupying Flanders.
Farnèse, who actually organized the successful assassination of the father of the Netherlands, the erasmian humanist William the Silent in 1584, nominated Venius as his court painter and as engineer of the Royal armies.
Furthermore, Venius will be the man who opened Rubens mind on Antiquity and together they will read and comment classical authors in Latin. Especially, he will show Rubens that an artist, if he wants to attain glory during his lifetime, must appeal a little bit to his talent and a very much to the powerful.
In Italia
In may 1600, Rubens rides his horse to Venice. In June, during Carnival he encounters the Duke of Mantua, Vincent of Gonzague, who is the cousin of archduke Albert who is ruling then Flanders with Isabella since 1598.
The duke of Mantua, the oligarchic type Mozart portrays in his « Don Giovanni » and Verdi explicitly in « Rigoletto », was very fond at the idea to add a « fiamminghi » to his stable.
The court of Mantua, in a competition of magnificence with other courts, notably those of Milan, Florence or Ferrare, employed once the painter Mantegna, the architect Leon Battista Alberti and the codifier of courtly manners Baldassare Castiglione. At the times of Rubens, the court paid the living of poet Torquato Tasso and the composer Monteverdi which wrote in Mantua his « Orpheus » and « Ariane » in 1601.
Galileo was also one of the guests for a short period in 1606. But especially, the Duke had in his possession one of the largest collections of works of art of that period, and his agents in Italy and all over the world were in charge of identifying new works worth becoming part of the collection.
An inventory of 1629 lists three Titian’s, two Raphael’s, one Veronese, one Tintoretto, eleven Giulio Romano’s, three Mantegna’s, two Corregia’s and one Andrea del Sarto amidst others. Similar to Giulio Romano who became the mere instrument of the « scourge of the princes » Pietro Aretino, our Flemish painter became just another Leporello, an obligingly « valet » enslaved by the Duke.
When we look to his self-portrait with his Circle of friends in Mantua, we see a fearful man, who « became somebody » because surrounded by « people who made it » and recognized by the powerful.
In Espagna
Immediately the Duke gave Rubens a truly Herculean task: transport a quite sophisticated present to Philippe III and his prime minister the Duke of Lerma from Mantua to Madrid. On top of a little chariot specially designed for hunting and several boxes of perfume, the core of the present consisted of not less then forty copies of the best paintings of the Duke’s private collection, notably some Raphael‘s and Titians. On top, Rubens’ mission was « to paint the fanciest women of Spain » during his trip. While his patron in Mantua whines for his return, Rubens will deploy his seductive capabilities at the Spanish court which looked far more promising to his career.
Back in Italy, his immediate going to Rome seems an opportune move, since in these days Barocci was held for to old, Guido Reni for to young. Also, Annibale Carracci appeared out of order since suffering from melancholic apoplexies while Caravagio, accused of murder, was hiding on the properties of his patrons, the Colonna’s.
But essentially, Rubens goes to the holy city because he’s enthusiastically promoted there by the Genovese cardinal Giacoma Serra, very impressed by the « splendid portraits » of women Rubens painted for the Spinola-Doria dynasty in Genoa.
Nevertheless, hearing about the imminent death of his mother, Rubens rushes to Antwerp, and after much a hesitation settles his workshop there, far at a distance from the centers of power, but close to the fabulous privileges he obtains from the Spanish regents over the Netherlands, Albrecht and Isabella.
In Antwerpia
These advantages were such that conspiracy-theorist see them as sufficient proof that there was a blueprint to kill the soul of the Erasmian spirit in Christian painting in the region.
First, Rubens will receive 500 guilders per year without any obligation concerning his artistic output except the double portrait of the rulers, any supplementary order necessitating separate payment.
Next, Rubens obtains a status permitting him to bypass the regulations and obligations of the Saint-Luc painters guild, particularly the rule that limits the number of pupils and the amount of their salary. And since a lot is never enough, Rubens obtains a tax-exemption status in Antwerp! As a real patrician he orders the building of his palace.
Broken down long time ago, and for whatever reasons, one has to observe that it was during the times of Flemish collaboration with Hitler’s Germany (from 1938 to 1946) that his Genovese modeled resort, temporarily recreated in 1910 for the Universal Exposition in Brussels, will be entirely rebuild after the engravings of Jacobus Harrewijn of 1692, decorated as the original and the interior filled with fitting old furniture (*14).
It is true that his enthusiasm for opulent blondes and violent action was interpreted by Nazi historians as the expression of profound sympathy for the Nordic races, while his visual energy was seen as the antithesis of « degenerated » art. The Rubens cult in Antwerp might tell us something interesting about the recurrent rise of rightwing extremism in that city.
Propaganda Genius
Rubens feat was to « merchandize » the ruling taste of the oligarchy of his time. Similar to the German filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl under Hitler, Rubens became the genial producer of their propaganda. Precocious child and brilliant draughtsman, he had spent hours and hours working after Italian collections and bas-reliefs in the ruins of Rome.
Since the « Warrior-pope » Julius II and Leo X took over the Vatican, art had to submit to the dictatorship of the degenerated taste of imperial Rome. Eight years of work, from 1600 to 1608, in Genoa, Mantua, Florence, Rome, without forgetting Madrid, with free access to nearly all the great collections of antiquities and paintings of the old families, enabled Rubens to constitute a « data-base », whose fructification will generate the bulk of his fortune.
Specialists do point easily to the unending stream of visual quotes identified in his works. A group of Michelangelo in « The Baptism of Christ » (Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp); a pose of Raphael’s Aristotle in the School of Athens in his « St-Gregory with St-Domitilla, St-Maurus and Papianus » (Gemäldegalerie, Berlin) or one of his Madonna’s in « The fall of man » (Rubenshuis, Antwerp), without forgetting a head of the Laocone in the « Elevation of the Cross » (Cathedral, Antwerp) or the « contraposto » of a Venus coming straight away from a roman statuary in « The union of Earth and Water » (Hermitage, Saint-Petersburg). (*11).
The Tulip, Seneca plus Ultra
The desire to be accepted by the ruling oligarchs becomes even clearer when we discover his admiration for Seneca.
Through his education and under the influence of his brother Philippe, Peter Paul Rubens will become a fanatical follower of the Roman neo-stoic Seneca (4 BC – 65 AC). In his painting The four philosophers, Rubens paints himself standing, once again « on the map » with those who got a chair at the table.
With a view on the palatine hill in the background, site of the Apollo cult considered the authentic Rome, we see his brother Philippe, a renowned jurist, sitting across the leading stoic ideologue of those days, Justus Lipsius and his pupil Wowerius, all situated beneath a niche filled with a bust of Seneca honored by a vase with four tulips, two of them closed, and the other two opened.
Originally from Persia, the tulip bulb was brought from Turkey to Europe by an Antwerp diplomat in 1560. Its culture degenerated rapidly from a hobby for gentleman-botanist into the immense collective folly known as the Tulip Mania and « tulip-bubble » or « Windhandel » (wind-trade).
That gigantic speculative bubble bursted in Haarlem on February 2, 1637, while some days earlier, a tulip with the name of « vice-roy » went for 2500 guilders, paid in real goods being two units of wheat and four of rye, four fat calves, eight pigs, a dozen of sheep, two barrels of wine, four tons of butter, a thousand pounds of cheese, a bed and a silver kettle drum (*14).
As can be seen in his painting Rubens in his garden with Helena Fourment, Rubens was not indifferent to that highly profitable business. Behind the master and his spouse, appears discretely behind a tree in Rubens garden a rich field of tulips!
But in the « Four philosophers », the tulip is nothing else than a metaphor of the « Brevity of life », an essay of Seneca.
The latter, tutor of Nero, preached a Roman form of sharp cynicism known under the label of fatum (fatality): to rise to (Roman) grandeur, man must cultivate absolute resignation. By an active retreat of oneself on oneself and by a obstinate denegation of a threatening and absurd world, man discovers his over-powerful self. That power even increases, if the self decides that death means nothing.
At the opposite of Socrates, who accepted to die for giving birth to the truth, Seneca makes his suicide his main existential deed. Waiting for his hour, his job is to steer his boredom by managing alternating pleasures and pains in a world where good and bad have no more sense.
As all cases of radical Aristotelianism, that philosophy, or « art of life » steers us in the hell of dualism, separating « reason », cleaned from any emotion, from the unbridled horses driving our senses. These two ways of being unfree makes us a double fool. Rubens fronts for that philosophy in his work Drunk Silenus.
The excess of alcohol evacuates all reason and brings man back to his bestial state, a state which Rubens considers natural. Instead of being a polemic, the painting reveals all the complacency of the painter-courtier with the concept of man being enslaved by blind passion. Instead of fighting it, as Friedrich Schiller outlines the case repeatedly and most explicitly in his « On the Esthetical Education of Mankind », Rubens cultivates that dualism and takes pleasure in it. And sincerely tries to recruit the viewer to that obscene and degrading worldview.
Peace IS war
As an example of « allegories », let us look for a moment at Rubens canvas Peace and War.
Above all, that painting is nothing but a glittering « business-card » as one understands knowing the history of the painting. At one point, Rubens, who had become a diplomat thanks to his international relations, organized successfully the conclusion of a peace-treaty between Spain and England (which collapsed fairly soon).
Repeating that for him « peace » was based on the unilateral capitulation of the Netherlands (reunification of the Catholic south with the North ordered to abandon Protestantism), he succeeded entering the Spanish diplomatic servicesomething pretty unusual for a Flemish subject, in particular during the revolt of the Netherlands.
Following this diplomatic success, the painter is threefold knighted: by the Court of Madrid to which he presents a demand to obtain Spanish nationality; by the Court of Brussels and also by the King of England!
Before leaving that country, he offers his painting « Peace and War » to King Charles. The canvas goes as follows: Mars is repelled by wisdom, represented as Minerva, the goddess protecting Rome. Peace is symbolized by a woman directing the flow of milk spouting out of her breast towards the mouth of a little Pluto. In the mean time a satyr with goat hooves displays the corn of abundance…
On the far left, a blue sky enters on stage while on the right the clouds glide away as carton accessories of a theatre. Rubens main argument here for peace is not a desire for justice, but the increase of pleasures and gratifications resulting from the material objects which men could accumulate under peace arrangements! Ironically, seen the cupidity of the ruling Dutch elites, which Rembrandt would lambaste uncompromisingly, it seems that Rubens might have succeeded in convincing these elites to sell the Republic for a handful of tulips. If only his art would have been something else then self-glorification! Here, his style is purely didactical, copied from the Italian mannerism Leonardo despised so much.
Instead of using metaphors capable to make people think and discover ideas, the art of Rubens is to illustrate symbolized allegories. The beauty of an invisible idea has never, and can not be brought to light by this insane iconographical approach. His « style » will be so impersonal that dozens of assistants, real slave laborers, will be generously used for the expansion of his enterprise.
King Christian IV’s physician, Otto Sperling, who visits Rubens in 1621 reported:
« While still painting he was hearing Tacitus read aloud to him and at the same time was dictating a letter. When we kept silent so as not to disturb him with our talk, he himself began to talk to us while still continuing to work, to listen to the reading and to dictate his letter, answering our questions and then displaying his astonishing power. »
« Then he charged a servant to lead us through his magnificent palace and to show us his antiquities and Greek and Roman statues which he possessed in considerable number. We then saw a broad studio without windows, but which captured the light of the day through an aperture in the ceiling. There, were united a considerable amount of young painters occupied each with a different work of which M. Rubens had produced the design by his pencil, heightened with colors at certain points. These models had to be executed completely in paint by the young people till finally, M. Rubens administered with his own hand the final touch.
« All these works came along as painted by Rubens himself, and the man, not satisfied to merely accumulate an immense fortune by operating in this manner, has been overwhelmed with honors and presents by kings and princes ». (*15).
We know, for example, that between 1609 and 1620, not less than sixty three altars were fabricated by « Rubens, Inc. ». In 1635, in a letter to his friend Pereisc, when the thirty years war is ravaging Europe, Rubens states cynically « let us leave the charge of public affairs to those who’s job it is ».
The painter asks and obtains a total discharge of his public responsibilities the same year while retiring to enjoy a private life with his new young partner.
Painter of Agapè, versus painter of Eros
Being a human, Rembrandt correctly had thousand reasons to be allergic to Rubens. The latter was not simply « on the wrong side » politically, but produced an art inspiring nothing but lowness: portraits designated to flatter the pride of the mighty by making shine and glitter some shabby gentry; history scenes being permanent apologies of Roman fascism where, under the varnish of pseudo-Catholicism, the alliance of the violent forces of nature and iron-cold reason dominated. Behind the « art of living » of Seneca, there stood the brutal methods of manipulation of the perfect courtier described by Baldassare Castiglione in his « Courtier ». For courtly ethics, everything stands with balance (sprezzatura) and appearance, and behind the mask of nice epithets operates the savage passions of seduction, possession, rape and power-games.
On the opposite, Rembrandt is the pioneer of interiority, of the creative sovereignty of each individual. To show the beauty of that interiority, why not underline paradoxically exterior ugliness?
In the « Old man and young boy » of Domenico Ghirlandajo, an imperfect appearance unveils a splendid beauty. The old man has a terribly looking nose, but the visual exchange between him and the boy shows a quality of love which transcends both of them. At the opposite of Seneca, they don’t contemplate the « brevity of life », but the longevity or « immortality of the soul ».
Martin Luther King, in a sermon tries equally to define these different species of love. After defining Eros (carnal love), and Philia (brotherly love), he says:
« And then the Greek language comes out with another word. It’s the word agape. Agape is more than Eros; it’s more than an aesthetic or romantic love; it is more than friendship. Agape is understanding, creative, redemptive goodwill for all men. It is an overflowing love which seeks nothing in return. Theologians would say that it is the love of God operating in the human heart. And so when one rises to love on this level, he loves every man, not because he likes him, not because his ways appeal to him, but he loves every man because God loves him, and he rises to the level of loving the person who does an evil deed, while hating the deed that the person does. » (*17)
Then, King shows how that love intervenes into the political domain:
« If I hit you and you hit me and I hit you back and you hit me back and go on, you see, that goes on ad infinitum. It just never ends. Somewhere somebody must have a little sense, and that’s the strong person.
The strongperson is the person who can cut off the chain of hate, the chain of evil. And that is the tragedy of hate, that it doesn’t cut it off. It only intensifies the existence of hate and evil in the universe. Somebody must have religion enough and morality enough to cut it off and inject within the very structure of the universe that strong and powerful element of love. »
You probably understood our point here. Martin Luther King, in his battle for justice, was living in the same « temporal eternity » as Rembrandt and Comenius opposing the thirty years war. Isn’t that a most astonishing truth: that the most powerful political weapon at man’s disposal is nothing but transforming universal love, over more available to everyone on simple demand? But to become a political weapon, that universal love cannot remain a vague sentiment or fancy romantic concept. Strengthened by reason, Agapè can only reach height with the wings of philosophy.
Rembrandt and Comenius knew that « secret », which will remain a secret for the oligarchs, if they remain what they are. »
The Little Fur
Another comparison between two paintings will make the difference even more clearer between Eros and Agapè: Het pelsken (the little fur) of Rubens (left) and Hendrickje bathing in a river of Rembrandt (right).
That comparison has a particular significance since the two paintings show the young wives of both painters. At the age of fifty-three Rubens remarried the sixteen year old Helena Fourment, while Rembrandt settled at the age of forty-three with the twenty-two year old Hendrickje Stoffels.
The naked Helena Fourment, with staring eyes, and while effecting an hopeless gesture of pseudo-chastity, pulls a black fur coat over her shoulders. The stark color contrast between the pale body skin and the deep dark fur, a typical baroque dramatic touch of Rubens, unavoidably evokes basic instincts. No wonder that this canvas was baptized the « little fur » by those who composed the catalogues.
However, paradoxically, Hendrickje is lifting her skirt to walk in the water, but entirely free from any erotic innuendo! Her hesitating, tender steps in the refreshing water seem dominated by her confident smile. Here, the viewer is not some « Peeping Tom » intruding into somebody’s private life, but another human being invited to share a moment of beauty and happiness.
Suzanne and the Elderly
Another excellent example is the way the two painters paint the story of Suzanne and the elderly. Comenius, was so impassioned by this story that in 1643 he called his daughter Zuzanna in 1646 his son Daniel. This Biblical parable (Daniel 13) deals with a strong notion of justice, quite similar to the one already developed in Greece by Sophocles Antigone. In both cases, in the name of a higher law, a young woman defies the laws of the city.
In her private garden, far from intruding viewers, the beautiful Suzanne gets watched on by two judges which will try to blackmail her: or you submit to our sexual requests, or we will accuse you of adultery with a young man which just escaped from here! Suzanne starts shouting and refuses to submit to their demands. The next day, Suzanne gets accused publicly by the judges (the strongest) in front of her family, but Daniel, a young man convinced of her innocence, takes her defense and unmasks the false proofs forged by the judges. At the end, the judges receive the sentence initially slated for Suzanne.
In the Rubens painting, a voluptuous Suzanne lifts her desperate eyes imploring divine help from heaven. The image incarnates the dominant but
insane ideology of both Counterreformation Catholicism and radical Protestantism: the denial of the free will, and thus of the incapacity to obtain divine grace through one’s acting for the good. For the Calvinist/protestant ideologues, the soul was predestinated for good or evil. Reacting by a simple inversion to the crazy indulgences, it was « logical » that no earthly action could « buy » divine grace. So whatever one did, whatever our commitment for doing the good on earth, nothing could derail God’s original design. The Counterreformation Catholics thought pretty much the same, except that one could claim God’s indulgence in the context of the rites of the Roman Catholic Church, especially by paying the indulgences: « No salvation outside the church ».
In a spectacular way, Rembrandt’s Suzanne and the elderly reinstates the real evangelical Christian humanist standpoint: a chaste Suzanne looks straight in the eyes of the viewer which is witnessing the terrible injustice happening right under his nos. So, will you be the new Daniel? Will you find the courage to intervene against the laws of the State to defend a « Divine » justice? Hence, agapè is that infinite love for justice and truth, that leads you to courageous action and makes you a sublime personality capable of changing history, in the same way Antigone, Jeanne d’Arc, or Suzanne did before.
Plato versus Aristotle
The fact that Rembrandt was a philosopher is regularly put into question, even denied. The inventory of his goods, established when his enemies forced him into bankruptcy in 1654, doesn’t mention any book outside a huge bible, supposedly establishing a legitimate suspicion of him being near to illiteracy. While romanticized biographies portray him as an accursed poet, a narcissistic genius or the simple-minded mystical visionary son of a miller, a comment in 1641 from the artist Philips Angel underscores, not his painting, but Rembrandt’s « elevated and profound reflection ».
It is Aristotle contemplating Homer’s bust, which demonstrates once and for ever how stupid the Romantics can be. Ordered by an Italian nobleman, the painting shows Aristotle as a Venetian aristocrat, as a perfect courtier: with a wide white shirt, a large black hat and especially carrying a heavy golden chain.
In short, clothed as Castiglione, Aretino, Titian and Rubens… Rembrandt shows here his intimate knowledge of the species nature of Plato’s enemies of the Republic, that oligarchy to whom Aristotelianism became a quasi-religion.
With great irony, the canvas completely mocks knowledge derived from the « blind » submittal to sense perception. Here Rembrandt seems to join Erasmus of Rotterdam saying « experience is the school of fools! ».
Equipped with empty eyes, incapable of perception, Aristotle is groping with an uncertain hand Homer’s head of which he was supposedly a knowledgeable commentator. Homer, the Greek poet who turned blind, stares worriedly to Aristotle with the open eyes of mind.
That inversion of the respective roles of Aristotle and Homer is dramatized by situating the source enlightening the scene as a tangent behind the bust of the poet.
Light reflections illuminating Aristotle’s hat underneath make appear the ironical « ghost image » of donkey ears, the conventional attribute widely used since the Renaissance to designate the stubbornness of scholastic Aristotelianism.
To this Aristotelian blindness, Rembrandt, whose own father became blind, opposes the other clear-sightedness of Simeon, as seen in his last painting, found on Rembrandt’s easel after his death.
All during his life, Simeon had wished to see the Christ with his own eyes. But, growing old, that hope quitted him with along with his sight. As he did every day, Simeon went one day to the temple. There, Maria asked him to keep her child in his arms. Suddenly, an infinite joy
overwhelmed Simeon, who, without seeing Christ with his mortal eyes, saw him much more clearly with his mind than all the healthy seers. Rembrandt wanted us to reflect on that conviction: don’t believe what you see, but act coherently with God’s design and you might see him. On Simeon’s hands, a series of dashes of paint suggest some kind of crystal ball, an image which only « appears » when our minds dares to see it, underlining Simeon’s prophetic nature.
Jesus Christ healing the sick
Rembrandt’s anti-Aristotelian philosophy is also explicitly manifest in an engraving known as Christ healing the sick, an exceptionally large etching on which he worked passionately over a six year period. In order to « sculpt » the ambiguous image of the Christ, son of both God and mankind, Rembrandt executed six oil portraits featuring young rabbi’s of Amsterdam. But it was Leonardo’s fresco, the Last Supper, which Rembrandt extensively studied as shown by drawings done after reproductions, that seems to have been his starting point.
Scientific analysis of his still existing copperplate indicate that the Christ’s hands were originally drawn as an exact imitation of Leonardo’s « Last Supper » fresco.
Completely different from the kind of « spotlight theatrics » that go from Caravagio to Hitchcock, the work reminds the description of the myth of the cavern in Plato’s Republic. But here stands the Christ blessing the sick.
Transfigured, and akin to the prisoners in Beethoven’s opera Fidelio, the sick people walk from right to left towards Christ. Encountering the light transforms them into philosophers!
One generally identifies easily, amidst others, Homer and Aristotle (who’s turning his head away from Christ), but also Erasmus and Saint-Peter, which according to some possesses here the traits of Socrates.
The etching brings together in a single instant eternal several sequences of Chapter XIX of Saint Mathew:
“Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
In a powerful gesture, Christ brushes aside even the best of all wise wisdom to make his love the priority, where Peter desperately tries to prevent the children from being presented to Jesus.
Sitting close to him we observe the image of an undecided young wealthy man plunged in profound doubts, since he desired eternal life but hesitated to sell his possessions and give it all to the poor.
When he left, Jesus commented that it was certainly easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the his kingdom.
Above simple earthly space situated in clock-ticking time, the action takes place in « the time of all times », an instantaneous eternity where human minds are measured with universality, some kind of « last judgment » of divine and philosophical consciousness.
The healing of the sick souls and bodies is the central breaking point which articulates the two universes, the one of sin and suffering, with the one of the good and happiness. Christ’s love, metaphorized as light, heals the « sick » and makes philosopher-kings out of them. They appear nearly as apostles and figure exactly on the same level as the apostles of Leonardo‘s milan fresco The last Supper. Brought out of darkness into the light, they become themselves sources of light capable of illuminating many others.
That « light of Agapè » is the single philosophical basis of Rembrandt’s revolution in the techniques of oil-painting: in stead of starting drawing and paint on a white gesso underground or lightly colored under-paint (the so-called priming, eventually adding imprimatura), all the later works are painted on a dark, even black under-paint!
The « modern » thick impasto, possible through the use of Venetian turpentine and the integration of bee wax, are revived by Rembrandt from the ancient « encaustic » techniques described by Pliny the Elder. They were employed by the School of Sycione three hundred years before Christ and gave us Alexander the Great‘s court painter Apelles, and the Fayoum mommy paintings in Alexandria, Egypt (*17).
Building the color-scale inversely permitted Rembrandt to reduce his late palette to only six colors and made him into a « sculptor of light ». His indirect pupil, Johannes Vermeer, systemized Rembrandt’s revolutionary discovery (*18).
Deprived of much earthly glory during their lives, Rembrandt and Comenius were immediately scrapped from official history by the oligarchic monsters that survived them. But their lives represent important victories for humanity. Their political, philosophical, esthetical and pedagogical battles against the oligarchy and its « valets » as Rubens, makes them eternal.
They are and will remain inexhaustible sources of inspiration for today’s and tomorrows combat.
NOTES:
- Karel Vereycken, « Rembrandt, bâtisseur de nation« , Nouvelle Solidarité, June 1985.
- The treatises of Westphalia (Munster and Osnabruck) of 1648, and the ensuing separate peace accords between France and the Netherlands with Spain, finally shred into pieces every political, philosophical and juridical argument serving as basis of the notion of empire, and by doing so put an end to Habsburg’s imperial fantasy, the « Thirty years war ». As some had outlined before, notably French King Henry IV’s great advisor Sully in his concept of « Grand Design », making the sovereign nation-state the highest authority for international law was, and remains today, the only safe road to guaranty durable peace. Empires, by definition, mean nothing but perpetual wars. If you want perpetual war, create an empire! Hence, through this revolution, small countries obtained the same rights as those held by large ones and the notions of big= strong, and small=weak, went out of the window. The Hobbesian idea that « might makes right » was abolished and replaced by mutual cooperation as the sole basis of international relations between sovereign nation-states. Hence, tiny Republics, as Switzerland or the Netherlands,the latter at war with Spain for nearly eighty years, finally obtained peace and international recognition. Second, and that’s undoubtedly the most revolutionary part of the agreements, mutual pardon became the core of the peace accords. For example paragraph II stipulated explicitly « that there shall be on the one side and the other a perpetual Oblivion, Amnesty or Pardon of all that has been committed since the beginning of these Troubles, in what place, or what manner soever the Hostilitys have been practis’d, in such a manner, that no body, under any pretext whatsoever, shall practice any Acts of Hostility, entertain any Enmity, or cause any Trouble to each other; » (translation: Foreign Office, London). Moreover, several paragraphs (XIII, XXXV, XXXVII, etc.) stipulate (with some exceptions) that there will be a general debt forgiveness concerning financial obligations susceptible of maintaining a dynamic of perpetual vengeance. In reality, the Peace of Westphalia was the birth of new political order, based on the creation of a new international economic and monetary system necessary to build peace on the ruins of the bankrupt imperial order.
- Footnote, p. 77 in Comenius by Olivier Cauly, Editions du Félin, Paris, 1995.
- Brochure dealing with that painting published by the Nationalmuseum of Stockholm.
- To put to an end to the politically motivated financial harassment which was organized by the family of his deceased wife, Saskia van Uylenburgh, Rembrandt submits on July 14, 1656 to the Dutch High Court a cessio bonorum (Cessation of goods to the profit of the creditors), accepting the sale of his goods. In 1660, Rembrandt abandons the official management of his art trading society to his wife Hendrickje Stoffels and his son Titus.
- p. 105, Henriette L.T.de Beaufort, in Rembrandt, HDT Willinck & Zoon, Harlem, 1957.
- p. 358, Samuel Hartlib and Universal Reformation, Cambridge University Press, 1994.
- p. 12-13, Bob van den Bogaert, in « Goethe & Rembrandt », Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam 1999.
- p. 25, Marcelle Denis in Comenius, pédagogies & pédagogues, Presse Universitaire de France, 1994.
- Constantijn Huygens (1596-1687), was an exceptional precocious erudite. Politician, scientist, moralist, music composer, he played the violin at the age of six, wrote poems in Dutch, Latin, French, Spanish, English and Greek. His satire, « ‘t Kostelick Mal » (expensive folly), opposed to the « Profijtelijk Vermaak » (profitable amusement) makes great fun of courtly manners and the then rampant beaumondism. His son, Christiaan Huygens was a brilliant scientist and collaborator of Leibniz at the Paris Academy of sciences.
- One has to outline shortly here that contrary to the rule of the Greek canon of proportions (height of man = seven heads and a half), the Romans, as Leonardo seems to observe sourly in his drawing reworking Vitrivius, increase the body size up to eight and sometimes many more heads. It was the Greek canon established after the « Doryphore » of Polycletius, which settled the matter much earlier after many Egyptian inquiries on these matters. Leonardo, who wasn’t a fool, realized Vitruvius proportions (8 heads) are wrong, as can be seen by the two belly-buttons appearing in the famous man bounded by square and circle. Hence, the proportional « reduction » of the head was an easy trick to create the illusion of a stronger, more powerful musculature. That image of a biological man displaying « small head, big muscles » supposedly stood as the ultimate expression of Roman heroism. Foreknowledge of this arrangement permits the viewer to identify accurately what philosophy the painter is adhering to: Greek humanist or Roman oligarch? That Rubens chose Rome rather than Athens, leaves no doubt, as proven by his love for Seneca.
- « The holy Council states that it isn’t permitted to anybody, in any place or church, to install or let be installed an unusual image, unless it has been approved so by the bishop »; « finally any indecency shall be avoided, of that sort that the images will not be painted or possess ornaments of provoking beauty… » P. 1575-77, t. II-2, in G. Alberigo, « The ecumenical Councils », quoted by Alain Taton (p. 132) in « The Council of Trent », editions du CERF, Paris, 2000.
- p. 172, Simon Schama, in his magnificent Rembrandt’s eyes, Knopf, New York, 1999.
- For a more elaborate description of the tulip-bubble, Simon Schama, p. 471, « L’embarras de richesses, La culture hollandaise au Siècle d’Or », Gallimard, Paris, 1991.
- p. 117, Otto Sperling, Christian IV’s doctor, quoted by Marie-Anne Lescouret in her biography Pierre-Paul Rubens, J.C. Lattès, Paris, 1990.
- « Love your enemies », sermon of Martin Luther King, November 17, 1957, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery, Alabama. Quoted in Martin Luther King, Minuit, quelqu’un frappe à la porte, p.63, Bayard, Paris 1990.
- p. 87-88, Karel Vereycken, in The gaze from beyond, Fidelio, Vol. VIII, n°2, summer 1999.
- Johannes Vermeer of Delft was a close friend of Karel Fabritius, the most outstanding pupil of Rembrandt, who died at the age of thirty-four when the powderkeg of Delft exploded. Vermeer became the executor of his last will, a role generally reserved for the closest friend or relative. Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek, the inventor of the microscope and Leibniz correspondent, will become in turn the executor of Vermeer’s last will. That filiation does nothing more than prove the constant cross-fertilization of the artistic and scientific milieu. The Dutch « intimist » school, of which Vermeer is the most accomplished representative, is the most explicit expression of a « metaphysical » transcendence, transposed for political reasons, from the domain of religion, into the beauty of daily life scenes.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY:
- Baudiquey, Paul, Le retour du prodigue, Editions Mame, 1995, Paris.
- Bély, Lucien, L’Europe des Traités de Westphalie, esprit de la diplomatie et diplomatie de l’esprit, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 2000.
- Callot, Jacques, etchings, Dover, New York, 1974.
- Castiglione, Baldassare, Le Livre du Courtisan, GF-Flammarion, 1991.
- Cauly, Olvier, Comenius, Editions du Félin, Paris, 1995.
- Clark, Kenneth, An introduction to Rembrandt, Readers Union, Devon, 1978.
- Comenius, La Grande Didactique, Editions Klincksieck, Paris, 1992.
- Denis, Marcelle, Comenius, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris 1994.
- Descargues, Pierre, Rembrandt, JC Lattès, 1990.
- Goethe Rembrandt, Tekeningen uit Weimar, Amsterdam University Press, 1999.
- Grimberg, Carl, Histoire Universelle, Marabout Université, Verviers, 1964.
- Haak, B., Rembrandt, zijn leven, zijn werk, zijn tijd, De Centaur, Amsterdam.
- Hobbes, Thomas, Le Citoyen ou les fondements de la politique, Garnier Flammarion, Paris, 1982.
- Jerlerup, Törbjorn, Sweden und der Westphalische Friede, Neue Solidarität, mai 2000.
- King, Martin Luther, Minuit, quelqu’un frappe à la porte, Bayard, Paris, 2000.
- Komensky, Jan Amos, Le labyrinthe du monde et le paradis du cœur, Desclée, Paris, 1991.
- Lescourret, Marie Anne, Pierre-Paul Rubens, JC Lattès, Paris, 1990.
- Marienfeld Barbara, Johann Amos Comenius : Die Kunst, alle Menschen alles zu lehren. Neue Solidarität.
- Rembrandt and his pupils, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, 1993.
- Sénèque, Entretiens, Editions Bouquins, Paris, 1993.
- Schama Simon, Rembrandt’s Eyes, Knopf, New York 1999.
- Schama, Simon, L’embarras de richesses, La culture hollandaise au Siècle d’Or, Gallimard, 1991.
- Schiller, Friedrich, traduction de Regnier, Vol. 6, Histoire de la Guerre de Trente ans, Paris, 1860.
- Sutton, Peter C., Le Siècle de Rubens, Mercatorfonds, Albin Michel, Paris, 1994.
- Tallon, Alain, Le Concile de Trente, CERF, Paris, 2000.
- Tümpel, Christian, Rembrandt, Fonds Mercator-Albin Michel, 1986.
- Van Lil, Kira, La peinture du XVIIème siècle aux Pays-Bas, en Allemagne et en Angleterre, dans l’art du Baroque, Editions Köneman, 1998, Cologne.
How Jacques Cœur put an end to the Hundred Years’ War
has much to inspire us today.
Without waiting for the end of the Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453), Jacques Cœur, an intelligent and energetic man of whom no portrait or treatise exists, decided to rebuild a ruined, occupied and tattered France.
Not only a merchant, but also a banker, land developer, shipowner, industrialist and master of mines in Forez, Jacques Coeur was a contemporary of Joan of Arc (1412-1431), who lived in 1429 in Coeur’s native city of Bourges.
First and foremost, he entered into collaboration with some of the humanist popes of the Renaissance, patrons of the scientific genius Nicolaus Cusanus and the painter Piero della Francesca. With Europe threatened with implosion and chaos, their priority was to put an end to interminable warfare and unify Christendom.
Secondly, following in the footsteps of Saint-Louis (King Louis IX), Cœur was one of the first to fully assume France’s role as a naval power. Finally, thanks to an intelligent foreign exchange policy and by taking advantage of the maritime and overland Silk Roads of his time, he encouraged international trade. In Bruges, Lyon and Geneva, he traded silk and spices for cloth and herring, while investing in sericulture, shipbuilding, mining and steelmaking.
Paving the way for the reign of Louis XI, and long before Jean Bodin, Barthélémy de Laffemas, Sully and Jean-Baptiste Colbert, his mercantilism heralded the political economy concepts later perfected by the German-American economist Friedrich List or the first American Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton.
We will concentrate here on his vision of man and economy, leaving aside important subjects such as the trial against him, his relationship with Agnès Sorel and Louis XI, to which many books have been dedicated.
Jacques Cœur (1400-1454) was born in Bourges, where his father, Pierre Cœur, was a merchant pelletier. Of modest income, originating from Saint-Pourçain, he married the widow of a butcher, which greatly improved his status, as the butchers’ guild was particularly powerful.
The Hundred Years’ War
The early XVth century was not a particularly happy time. The « Hundred Years’ War » pitted the Armagnacs against the Burgundians allied with England. As with the great systemic bankruptcy of the papal bankers in 1347, farmland was plundered or left fallow.
While urbanization had thrived thanks to a productive rural world, the latter was deserted by farmers, who joined the hungry hordes populating towns lacking water, hygiene and the means to support themselves. Epidemics and plagues became the order of the day; cutthroats, skinners, twirlers and other brigands spread terror and made real economic life impossible.
Jacques Cœur was fifteen years old when one of the French army’s most bitter defeats took place in France. The battle of Agincourt (1415) (Pas-de-Calais), where French chivalry was routed by outnumbered English soldiers, marked the end of the age of chivalry and the beginning of the supremacy of ranged weapons (bows, crossbows, early firearms, etc.) over melee (hand-to-hand combat). A large part of the aristocracy was decimated, and an essential part of the territory fell to the English. (see map)
King Charles VII
In 1418, the Dauphin, the future Charles VII (1403-1461), as he is known thanks to a painting by the painter Jean Fouquet, escaped capture when Paris was taken by the Burgundians. He took refuge in Bourges, where he proclaimed himself regent of the kingdom of France, given the unavailability of his insane father (King Charles VI), who had remained in Paris and fallen to the power of John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy.
The dauphin probably instigated the latter’s assassination on the Montereau bridge on September 10, 1419. By his ennemies, he was derisively nicknamed « the little King of Bourges ». The presence of the Court gave the city a boost as a center of trade and commerce.
Considered one of the most industrious and ingenious of men, Jacques Coeur married in 1420 Macée de Léodepart, daughter of a former valet to the Duke of Berry, who had become provost of Bourges.
As his mother-in-law was the daughter of a master of the mints, Jacques Coeur’s marriage in 1427 left him, along with two partners, in charge of one of the city’s twelve exchange offices. His position gave rise to much jealousy. After being accused of not respecting the quantity of precious metal contained in the coins he produced, he was arrested and sentenced in 1428, but soon benefited from a royal pardon.
Yolande d’Aragon
Although the Treaty of Troyes (1420) disinherited the dauphin from the kingdom of France in favor of a younger member of the House of Plantagenets, Charles VII nonetheless proclaimed himself King of France on his father’s death on October 21, 1422.
The de facto leader of the Armagnac party, retreating south of the Loire, saw his legitimacy and military situation considerably improved thanks to the intervention of Joan of Arc (1412-1431), operating under the benevolent protection of an exceptional world-historic person: the dauphin’s mother-in-law Yolande of Aragon (1384-1442), Duchess of Anjou, Queen of Sicily and Naples (Note 1).
Backed and guided by Yolande, Jeanne helped lift the siege of Orléans and had Charles VII crowned King of France in Reims in July 1429. In the mean time Yolande d’Aragon established contacts with the Burgundians in preparation for peace, and picked Jacques Coeur to be part of the Royal Court (Note 2).
The contemporary chronicler Jean Juvenal des Ursins (1433–44), Bishop of Beauvais described Yolande as « the prettiest woman in the kingdom. » Bourdigné, chronicler of the house of Anjou, says of her: « She who was said to be the wisest and most beautiful princess in Christendom. » Later, King Louis XI of France recalled that his grandmother had « a man’s heart in a woman’s body. »
A twentieth-century French author, Jehanne d’Orliac wrote one of the few works specifically on Yolande, and noted that the duchess remains unappreciated for her genius and influence in the reign of Charles VII. « She is mentioned in passing because she is the pivot of all important events for forty-two years in France », while « Joan [of Arc] was in the public eye only eleven months. »
Journey to the Levant
In 1430, Jacques Cœur, already renowned as a man « full of industry and high gear, subtle in understanding and high in comprehension; and all things, no matter how high, knowing how to lead by his work » (Note N° 3), with Barthélémy and Pierre Godard, two Bourges notables, set up,
« a company for all types of merchandise, especially for the King our lord, my lord the Dauphin and other lords, and for all other things for which they could provide proof ».
In 1431, Joan of Arc was handed over to the English by the Burgundians and burned alive at the stake in Rouen. One year later, in 1432, Jacques Cœur went to the Levant. A diplomat and humanist, Cœur went as an observer of customs as well as economic and political life.
His ship coasted from port to port, skirting the Italian coast as closely as possible, before rounding Sicily and arriving in Alexandria, Egypt. At the time, Alexandria was an imposing city of 70,000 inhabitants, bustling with thousands of Syrian, Cypriot, Genoese, Florentine and Venetian ships.
In Cairo, he discovered treasures arriving from China, Africa and India via the Red Sea. Around the Sultan’s Palace, Armenian, Georgian, Greek, Ethiopian and Nubian merchants offered precious stones, perfumes, silks and carpets. The banks of the Nile were planted with sugar cane and the warehouses full of sugar and spices.
Selling Silver at the Price of Gold
To understand Jacques Coeur’s financial strategy, a few words about bimetallism. At the time, unlike in China, paper money was not widely used. In the West, everything was paid for in metal coins, and above all in gold.
According to Herodotus, Croesus issued silver and pure gold coins in the 6th century BC. Under the Roman Empire, this practice continued. However, while gold was scarce in the West, silver-lead mines were flourishing.
Added to this, in the Middle Ages, Europe saw a considerable increase in the quantities of silver coinage in circulation, thanks to new mines discovered in Bohemia. The problem was that in France, national production was not sufficient to satisfy the needs of the domestic market. As a result, France was obliged to use its gold to buy what was lacking abroad, thus driving gold out of the country.
According to historians, during his trip to Egypt, Coeur observed that the women there dressed in the finest linens and wore shoes adorned with pearls or gold jewels. What’s more, they loved what was fashionable elsewhere, especially in Europe. Coeur was also aware of the existence of poorly exploited silver and copper mines in the Lyonnais region and elsewhere in France.
Historian George Bordonove, in his book Jacques Coeur, trésorier de Charles VII (Jacques Coeur, treasurer of Charles VII), reckons that Coeur was quick to note that the Egyptians « strangely preferred silver to gold, bartering silver for equal weight ». whereas in Europe, the exchange rate was 15 volumes of silver for one volume of gold !
In other words, he realized that the region « abounded in gold », and that the price of silver was very advantageous. The opportunity to enrich his country by obtaining a « golden » price for the silver and copper extracted from the French mines must have seemed obvious to him
What’s more, in China, only payments in silver were accepted. In other words, the Arab-Muslim world had gold, but lacked silver for its trade with the Far East, hence its huge interest in acquiring it from Europe…
Lebanon, Syria and Cyprus
Cœur then travels via Beirut to Damascus in Syria, at the time by far the biggest center of trade between East and West.
The city is renowned for its silk damasks, light gauze veils, jams and rose essences. Oriental fabrics were very popular for luxury garments.
Europe was supplied with silk and gold muslin from Mosul, damasks with woven motifs from Persia or Damascus, silks decorated with baldacchino figures, sheets with red or black backgrounds adorned with blue and gold birds from Antioch, and so on.
The « Silk Road » also brought Persian carpets and ceramics from Asia. The journey continues to another of the Silk Roads’ great maritime warehouses: Cyprus, an island whose copper had offered exceptional prosperity to the Minoan, Mycenaean and Phoenician civilizations.
The best of the West was bartered here for indigo, silk and spices.
Genoa and Venice
During his voyage, Coeur also discovered the maritime empires of Venice and Genoa, each enjoying the protection of a Vatican dependent on these financial powers.
The former, to justify their lucrative trade with the Muslims, claimed that « before being Christian », they were Venetians…
Like the British Empire, the Venetians promoted total free trade to subjugate their victims, while applying fierce dirigisme at home and prohibitive taxes to others. Any artist or person divulging Venetian know-how suffered terrible consequences.
Venice, outpost of the Byzantine Empire and supplier to the Court of Constantinople, a city of several million inhabitants, developed fabric dyeing, manufactured silks, velvets, glassware and leather goods, not to mention weapons. Its arsenal employs 16,000 workers.
Its rival, Genoa, with its highly skilled sailors and cutting-edge financial techniques, had colonized the Bosphorus and the Black Sea, from where treasures from Persia and Muscovy flowed. They also shamelessly engaged in the slave trade, a practice they would pass on to the Spanish and especially the Portuguese, who held a monopoly on trade with Africa.
Avoiding direct confrontation with such powers, Cœur kept a low profile. The difficulty was threefold: following the war, France was short of everything! It had no cash, no production, no weapons, no ships, no infrastructure!
So much so, in fact, that Europe’s main trade route had shifted eastwards. Instead of taking the route of the Rhône and Saône rivers, merchants passed through Geneva, and up the Rhine to Antwerp and Bruges. Another difficulty was soon added: a royal decree prohibited the export of precious metals! But what immense profits the Kingdom could draw from the operation.
The Oecumenial Councils
On his return from the Levant, France’s history accelerated. While preparing the economic reforms he wanted, Jacques Cœur also became involved in the major issues of the day. Through his brother Nicolas Cœur, the future bishop of Luçon, he played an important role in the process initiated by the humanists to unify the Western Church in the face of the Turkish threat.
Since 1378, there had been two popes, one in Rome and the other in Avignon. Several councils attempted to overcome the divisions. Nicolas Cœur attended them. First there was the Council of Constance (1414 to 1448), followed by the Council of Basel (1431), which, after a number of interruptions, was transferred to Florence (1439), establishing a doctrinal « union » between the Eastern and Western churches with a decree read out in Greek and Latin on July 6, 1439, in the cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, i.e. under the dome of Florence’s dome, built by Brunelleschi.
The central panel of the Ghent polyptych (1432), painted by the diplomatic painter Jan Van Eyck on the theme of the Lam Gods (the Lamb of God or Mystic Lamb), symbolizes the sacrifice of the Son of God for the redemption of mankind, and is capable of reuniting a church torn apart by internal differences. Hence the presence, on the right, of the three popes, here united before the Lamb. Van Eyck also painted portraits of Cardinal Niccolo Albergati, one of the instigators of the Council of Florence, and Chancellor Rolin, one of the architects of the Peace of Arras in 1435.
The Peace treaty of Arras
To achieve this, the humanists concentrated on France. First, they were to awaken Charles VII. After the victories won by Joan of Arc, wasn’t it time to win back the territories lost to the English?
However, Charles VII knew that peace with the English depended on reconciliation with the Burgundians. He therefore entered into negotiations with Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy.
The latter no longer expected anything from the English, and wished to devote himself to the development of his provinces. For him, peace with France was a necessity. He therefore agreed to treat with Charles VII, paving the way for the Arras Conference in 1435.
This was the first European peace conference. In addition to the Kingdom of France, whose delegation was led by the Duke of Bourbon, Marshal de La Fayette and Constable Arthur de Richemont, and Burgundy, led by the Duke of Burgundy himself and Chancellor Rolin, it brought together Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg, Mediator Amédée VIII of Savoy, an English delegation, and representatives of the kings of Poland, Castile and Aragon.
Although the English left the talks before the end, thanks to the skill of the scholar Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini, at that cardinal of Cyprus (and futur Pope Pius II) and spokesman for the Council of Basel, the signing of the Treaty of Arras in 1435 led to a peace agreement between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians, the first step towards ending the Hundred Years’ War.
In the meantime, the Council of Basel, which had opened in 1431, dragged on but came to nothing, and on September 18, 1437, Pope Eugene IV, advised by cardinal philosopher Nicolaus Cusanus and arguing the need to hold a council of union with the Orthodox, transferred the Council from Basel to Ferrara and then Florence. Only the schismatic prelates remained in Basel. Furious, they « suspended » Eugene IV and named the Duke of Savoy, Amédée VIII, Felix V, as the new pope. This « anti-pope » won little political support. Germany remained neutral, and in France, Charles VII confined himself to implementing many of the reforms decreed in Basel by the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges on July 13, 1438.
King’s Treasurer and Great State Servant
In 1438, Cœur became Argentier de l’Hôtel du roi. L’Argenterie was not concerned with the kingdom’s finances. Rather, it was a sort of commissary responsible for meeting all the needs of the sovereign, his servants and the Court, for their daily lives, clothing, armament, armor, furs, fabrics, horses and so on.
Cœur was to supply the Court with everything that could neither be found nor manufactured at home, but which he could bring in from Alexandria, Damascus and Beirut, at the time major nodal points of the Silk Road by land and sea, where he set up his commercial agents, his « facteurs » (manufacturers).
Following this, in 1439, after having been appointed Master of the Mint of Bourges, Jacques Cœur became Master of the Mint in Paris, and finally, in 1439, the King’s moneyer. His role was to ensure the sovereign’s day-to-day expenses, which involved making advances to the Treasury and controlling the Court’s supply channels.
Then, in 1441, the King appointed him commissioner of the Languedoc States to levy taxes. Cœur often imposed taxes without ever undermining the productive reconstruction process. And in times of extreme difficulty, he would even lend money, at low, long-term rates, to those who had to pay it.
Ennobled, Coeur became the King’s strategic advisor in 1442. He acquired a plot of land in the center of Bourges to build his « grant’maison », currently the Palais Jacques Coeur. This magnificent edifice, with fireplaces in every room and an oven supplying the rest and bath room with hot water, has survived the centuries, although Coeur rarely had the occasion to live there.
Coeur is a true grand state servitor, with broad powers to collect taxes and negotiate political and economic agreements on behalf of the king. Having reached the top, Coeur is now in the ideal position to expand his long-cherished project.
Rule over Finance
On September 25, 1443, the Grande Ordonnance de Saumur, promulgated at Jacques Coeur’s instigation, put the state’s finances on a sounder footing.
As Claude Poulain recounts in his biography of Jacques Coeur:
« In 1444, after affirming the fundamental principle that the King alone had the right to levy taxes, but that his own finances should not be confused with those of the kingdom, a set of measures was enacted that affected the French at every level. »
These included: « Commoners owning noble fiefs were obliged to pay indemnities; nobles who had received seigneuries previously belonging to the royal domain would henceforth be obliged to share in the State’s expenses, on pain, once again, of seizure; finally, the kingdom’s financial services were organized, headed by a budget committee made up of high-ranking civil servants, ‘Messieurs des Finances’. »
In clear, the nobility was henceforth obliged to pay taxes for the Common Good of the Nation !
The King’s Council of 1444, headed by Dunois, was composed almost exclusively, not of noblement but of commoners (Jacques Coeur, Jean Bureau, Étienne Chevalier, Guillaume Cousinot, Jouvenel des Ursins, Guillaume d’Estouteville, Tancarville, Blainville, Beauvau and Marshal Machet). France recovered and enjoyed prosperity.
If France’s finances recovered, besides « taxing the rich », it was above all thanks to strategic investments in infrastructure, industry and trade. The revival of business activity enabled taxes to be brought in. In 1444, he set up the new Languedoc Parliament in conjunction with the Archbishop of Toulouse and, on behalf of the King, presided over the Estates General.
Master Plan
In reality, Jacques Cœur’s various operations, sometimes mistakenly considered to be motivated exclusively by his own personal greed, formed part of an overall plan that today we would describe as « connectivity » and at the service of the « physical economy ».
The aim was to equip the country and its territory, notably through a vast network of commercial agents operating both in France and abroad from the major trading cities of Europe (Geneva, Bruges, London, Antwerp, etc.), the Levant (Beirut and Damascus) and North Africa (Alexandria, Tunis, etc.), in order to promote win-win trade. ), to promote win-win trade, while reinvesting part of the profits in improving national productivity: mining, metallurgy, arms, shipbuilding, training, ports, roads, rivers, sericulture, textile spinning and dyeing, paper, etc.
Mining
Of special interest were the silver mines of Pampailly, in Brussieu, south of l’Arbresle and Tarare, 25 kilometers west of Lyon, acquired and exploited as early as 1388 by Hugues Jossard, a Lyonnais jurist. They were very old, but their normal operation had been severely disrupted during the war. In addition, there were the Saint-Pierre-la-Palud and Joux mines, as well as the Chessy mine, whose copper was also used for weapons production.
Jacques Cœur made them operational. Near the mines, « martinets » – charcoal-fired blast furnaces – transformed the ore into ingots. Cœur brought in engineers and skilled workers from Germany, at the time a region far ahead of us in this field. However, without a pumping system, mining was no picnic.
Under Jacques Cœur’s management, the workers benefited from wages and comforts that were absolutely unique at the time. Each bunk had its own feather bed or wool mattress, a pillow, two pairs of linen sheets and blankets, a luxury that was more than unusual at the time. The dormitories were heated.
High quality food was provided to the laborers: bread containing four-fifths wheat and one-fifth rye, plenty of meat, eggs, cheese and fish, and desserts included exotic fruits such as figs and walnuts. A social service was organized: free hospitalization, care provided by a surgeon from Lyon who kept accident victims « en cure ». Every Sunday, a local priest came to celebrate a special mass for the miners. On the other hand, workers were subject to draconian discipline, governed by fifty-three articles of regulation that left nothing to chance.
The Ports of Montpellier and Marseille
On his return from the Levant in 1432, Jacques Coeur chose to make Montpellier the nerve center of his port and naval operations.
In principle, Christians were forbidden to trade with Infidels. However, thanks to a bull issued by Pope Urban V (1362-1370), Montpellier had obtained the right to send « absolved ships » to the East every year. Jacques Cœur obtained from the Pope that this right be extended to all his ships. Pope Eugene IV, by derogation of August 26, 1445, granted him this benefit, a permission renewed in 1448 by Pope Nicholas V.
At the time, only Montpellier, in the middle of the east-west axis linking Catalonia to the Alps (the Roman Domitian Way) and whose outports were Lattes and Aigues-Mortes, had a hinterland with a network of roads that were more or less passable, an exceptional situation for the time.
In 1963, it was discovered that at the site of the village of Lattes (population 17,000), 4 km south of today’s Montpellier and on the River Lez, there had been an Etruscan port city called Lattara, considered by some to be the first port in Western Europe. The city was built in the last third of the VIth century BC. A city wall and stone and brick houses were built. Original objects and graffiti in Etruscan – the only ones known in France – have suggested that Etrurian brokers played a role in the creation and rapid urbanization of the settlement.
Trading with the Greeks and Romans, Lattara was a very active Gallic port until the 3rd century AD. Then maritime access changed, and the town fell into a state of numbness.
In the 13th century, under the impetus of the Guilhem family, lords of Montpellier, the port of Lattes was revitalized, only to regain its splendor when Jacques Cœur set up his warehouses there in the 15th century.
As for the port of Aigues-Mortes, built from top to bottom by Saint-Louis in the XIIIth century for the crusades, it was also one of the first in France. To connect the two, Saint-Louis dug the canal known as « Canal de la Radelle » (today’s Canal de Lunel), which ran from Aigues-Mortes across the Lake of Mauguio to the port of Lattes. Cœur restored this river-port complex to working order, notably by building Port Ariane in Lattes.
Over the following centuries, these disparate elements of canals and water infrastructure will become an efficient network built around the Canal du Rhône à Sète, a natural extension of the « bi-oceanic » Canal du Midi (between the Meditteranean and the Atlantic) begun by Jean-Baptiste Colbert (see map).
Coeur had the local authorities involved in his project, shaking Montpellier out of its age-old lethargy. At the time, the town had no market or covered sales buildings. Also lacking were moneychangers, shipowners and other cloth merchants.
In Montpellier, an entire district of merchants and warehouses was erected him, the Great Merchants Lodge, modeled on those in Perpignan, Barcelona and Valencia.
Numerous houses in Béziers, Vias and Pézenas also belonged to him, as did residences in Montpellier, including the Hôtel des Trésoriers de France, which, it is said, was topped by a tower so high that Jacques Cœur could watch his ships arrive at the nearby Port of Lattes.
And yet, as an old merchant and industrial city, Montpellier had long been home to Italians, Catalans, Muslims and Jews, who enjoyed a tolerance and understanding that was rare at the time. It’s easy to see why François Rabelais felt so at home here in the XVIth century.
Port of Marseille
The hinterland was rich and industrious. It produced wine and olive oil, in other words, exportable goods. Its workshops produced leather, knives, weapons, enamels and, above all, drapery.
From 1448 onwards, faced with the limitations of the system and the constant silting-up of the port infrastructure, Coeur moved one of his agents, the navigator and diplomat Jean de Villages, his nephew by marriage, to the neighboring port of Marseille, at that time outside the Kingdom, to the home of King René d’Anjou, where port operations were easier, a deep harbor protected from the Mistral by hills and a port equipped with waterfront shops and storehouses. The boost that Jacques Coeur gave to Montpellier’s port Lattes, Jean de Villages, on Coeur’s behalf, immediately gave to Marseille.
Shipbuilding
Good ports mean ocean-going ships! Hence at that time, the best France could do was build a few river barges and fishing boats.
To equip himself with a fleet of ocean-going vessels, Cœur ordered a « galéasse » (an advanced model of the ancient three-masted « galley », designed primarily for boarding) from the Genoa arsenals.
The Genoese, who saw only immediate profit in the project, soon discovered that Coeur had had the shapes and dimensions of their ship copied by local carpenters in Aigues Mortes!
Furious, they landed at the shipyard and took it back, arguing that Languedoc merchants had no right to fit out ships and trade without the prior approval of the Doge of Venice!
Stained glass window of a ship (a caraque) in the Palais de Jacques Cœur in Bourges.
After complicated negotiations, but with the support of Charles VII, Coeur got his ship back. Cœur let the storm pass for a few years. Later, seven great ships would leave the Aigues-Mortes shipyard, including « La Madeleine » under the command of Jean de Villages, a great sailor and his loyal lieutenant.
Judging by the stained-glass window and bas-relief in the Palais de Coeur in Bourges, these were more like caraques, North Sea vessels with large square sails and much greater tonnage than galleasses. But that’s not all!
Having understood perfectly well that the quality of a ship depends on the quality of the wood with which it is built, Cœur, with the authorization of the Duke of Savoy, had his wood shipped from Seyssel. The logs were floated down the Rhône, then sent to Aigues-Mortes via the canal linking the town to the river.
The crews
One last problem remained to be solved: that of crews. Jacques Cœur’s solution was revolutionary: on January 22, 1443, he obtained permission from Charles VII to forcibly embark, in return for fair wages, the « idle vagabonds and caimans » who prowled the ports.
To understand just how beneficial such an institution was at the time, we need to remember that France was being laid to waste by bands of plunderers – the routiers, the écorcheurs, the retondeurs – thrown into the country by the Hundred Years’ War. As always, Coeur behaves not only according to his own personal interests, but according to the general interests of France.
Connecting France to the Silk Road
Now with financial clout, ports and ships at his disposal, Cœur organized win-win commercial exchanges and, in his own way, involved France in the land and Maritime Silk Road of the time. First and foremost, he organized « détente, understanding and cooperation » with the countries of the Levant.
After diplomatic incidents with the Venetians had led the Sultan of Egypt to confiscate their goods and close his country to their trade, Jacques Coeur, a gentleman but also in charge of a Kingdom that remained dependent on Genoa and Venice for their supplies of arms and strategic raw materials, had his agents on site mediating a happy end to the incident.
Seeing other potential conflicts that could disrupt his strategy, and possibly inspired by Admiral Zheng He‘s great Chinese diplomatic missions to Africa from 1405 onwards, he convinced the king to send an ambassador to Cairo in the person of Jean de Villages, his loyal lieutenant.
The latter handed over to the Sultan the various letters he had brought with him. Flattered, the Sultan handed him a reply to King Charles VII:
« Your ambassador, man of honor, gentleman, whom you name Jean de Villages, came to mine Porte Sainte, and presented me your letters with the present you mandated, and I received it, and what you wrote me that you want from me, I did.
« Thus I have made a peace with all the merchants for all my countries and ports of the navy, as your ambassador knew to ask of me… And I command all the lords of my lands, and especially the lord of Alexandria, that he make good company with all the merchants of your land, and on all the others having liberty in my country, and that they be given honor and pleasure; and when the consul of your country has come, he will be in favor of the other consuls well high…
« I send you, by the said ambassador, a present, namely fine balsam from our holy vine, a beautiful leopard and three bowls (cups) of Chinese porcelain, two large dishes of decorated porcelain, two porcelain bouquets, a hand-washer, a decorated porcelain pantry, a bowl of fine green ginger, a bowl of almond stones, a bowl of green pepper, almonds and fifty pounds of our fine bamouquet (fine balsam), a quintal of fine sugar. Dieu te mène à bon sauvement, Charles, Roy de France. »
To the Orient, Coeur exported furs, leathers and, above all, cloth of all kinds, notably Flanders cloth and Lyon canvas. His « factors » also offered Egyptian women dresses, coats, headdresses, ornaments and jewels from our workshops. Then came basketry from Montpellier, oil, wax, honey and flowers from Spain for the manufacture of perfumes.
From the Near East, he received animal-figured silks from Damascus (Syria), fabrics from Bukhara (Uzbekistan) and Baghdad (Iraq); velvet; wines from the islands; cane sugar; precious metals; alum; amber; coral; indigo; coral; indigo from Baghdad; madder from Egypt; shellac; perfumes made from the essence of the flowers he exported; spices – pepper, ginger, cloves, cinnamon, jams, nutmegs, etc. – and more.
From the Far East, by the Red Sea or by caravans from the Euphrates and Turkestan, came to him: gold from Sudan, cinnamon from Madagascar, ivory from Africa, silks from India, carpets from Persia, perfumes from Arabia – later evoked by Shakespeare in Macbeth – precious stones from India and Central Asia, lapis lazuli from Afghanistan, pearls from Ceylon, porcelain and musk from China, ostrich feathers from the black Sudan.
Manufactures
As we saw in the case of mining, Coeur had no hesitation in attracting foreigners with valuable know-how to France to launch projects, implement innovative processes and, above all, train personnel. In Bourges, he teamed up with the Balsarin brothers and Gasparin de Très, gunsmiths originally from Milan. After convincing them to leave Italy, he set up workshops in Bourges, enabling them to train a skilled workforce. To this day, the Bourges region remains a major center of arms production.
In the early days of printing in Europe, Coeur bought a paper mill in Rochetaillée, on the Saône near Lyon.
In Montpellier, he took an interest in the dyeing factories, once renowned for their cultivation of madder, a plant that had become acclimatized in the Languedoc region.
It’s easy to understand why Cœur had his agents buy indigo, kermes seeds and other coloring substances. The aim was to revive the manufacture of cloth, particularly scarlet cloth, which had previously been highly sought-after.
With this in mind, he built a fountain, the Font Putanelle, near the city walls, to serve the population and the dyers.
In Montpellier, he also teamed up with Florentine charterers based in the city, for maritime expeditions.
Through their intermediary, Coeur personally traveled to Florence in 1444, registering both his associate Guillaume de Varye and his own son Ravand as members of the « Arte della Seta » (silk production corporation), the prestigious Florentine guild whose members were the only ones authorized to produce silk in Florence.
Coeur engaged in joint ventures, as he often did in France, this time with Niccolo Bonnacorso and the Marini brothers (Zanubi and Guglielmo). The factory, in which he owned half the shares, manufactured, organized and controlled the production, spinning, weaving and dyeing of silk fabrics.
It is understood that Coeur was also co-owner of a gold cloth factory in Florence, and associated in certain businesses with the Medici, Bardi and Bucelli bankers and merchants. He was also associated with the Genevese and Bruges families.
Going International
Jacques Coeur organized a vast distribution network to sell his goods in France and throughout Europe. At a time when passable roads were extremely rare, this was no easy task. Most roads were little more than widened paths or poorly functioning tracks dating back to the Gauls.
Cœur, who had his own stables for land transport, renovated and expanded the network, abolished internal tolls on roads and rivers, and re-established the collection (abandoned during the Hundred Years’ War) of taxes (taille, fouage, gabelle) to replenish public finances.
Jacques Cœur’s network was essentially run from Bourges. From there, on the French level, we could speak of three major axes: the north-south being Bruges-Montpellier, the east-west being Lyon-Tours. Added to this was the old Roman road linking Spain (Barcelona) to the Alps (Briançon) via Languedoc.
From Bourges, for example, the Silverware, which served the Court, was transferred to Tours. This was only natural, since from 1444 onwards, Charles VII settled in a small castle near Tours, Plessis-les-Tours. So it was at the Argenterie de Tours that the exotic products the Court was so fond of were stocked. This did not prevent the goods from being shipped on to Bruges, Rouen or other towns in the kingdom.
Counters also existed in Orléans, Loches, Le Mans, Nevers, Issoudun and Saint-Pourçain, birthplace of the Coeur family, as well as in Fangeaux, Carcassonne, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Limoges, Thouars, Saumur, Angers and Paris.
Orléans and Bourges stocked salt from Guérande, the Vendée marshes and the Roche region. In Lyon, salt from the Camargue and Languedoc saltworks. River transport (on the Loire, Rhône, Saône and Seine rivers) doubled the number of road carts.
Jacques Coeur revived and promoted trade fairs. Lyon, with its rapid growth, geographic location and proximity to silver-lead and copper mines, was a particularly active trading post. Goods were shipped to Geneva, Germany and Flanders.
Montpellier received products from the Levant. However, trading posts were set up all along the coast, from Collioure (then in Catalonia) to Marseille (at the home of King René d’Anjou), and inland as far as Toulouse, and along the Rhône, in particular at Avignon and Beaucaire.
A trading post was set up in La Rochelle for the salt trade, certainly with a view to expanding maritime traffic. Jacques Cœur also had « factors » in Saint-Malo, Cherbourg and Harfleur. After the liberation of Normandy, these three centers grew in importance, and were joined by Exmes. In the north-east, Reims and Troyes are worth mentioning. They manufactured cloth and canvas. Abroad, Geneva was a first-rate trading post, as the city’s fairs and markets had already acquired an international character.
Coeur also had a branch in Bruges, bringing back spices and silks from the Levant, and shipping cloth and herring from there.
The fortunes of Bruges, like many other towns in Flanders, came from the cloth industry. The city flourished, and the power of its cloth merchants was considerable. In the 15th century, Bruges was one of the lungs of the Hanseatic League, which brought together the port cities of northern Europe.
It was in Bruges that business relations were handled, and loan and marine insurance contracts drawn up. After cloth, it was the luxury industries that ensured its prosperity, with tapestries. By land, it took less than three weeks to get from Bruges to Montpellier via Paris.
Between 1444 and 1449, during the Truce of Tours between France and the English, Jacques Coeur tried to build peace by forging trade links with England.
Coeur sent his representative Guillaume de Mazoran. His other trusted associate, Guillaume de Varye, began trading in sheets from London in February 1449. He also bought leather, cloth and wool in Scotland. Some went to La Rochelle, others to Bruges.
Internationally, Coeur continued to expand, with branches in Barcelona, Naples, Genoa (where a pro-French party was formed) and Florence.
At the time of his arrest in 1451, Jacques Coeur had at least 300 « factors » (associates, commercial agents, financial representatives and authorized agents), each responsible for his own trading post in his own region, but also running « factories » on the spot, promoting meetings and exchanges of know-how between all those involved in economic life. Several thousand people associated and cooperated with him in business.
The Military Reform that saved the Nation
Cœur used the profits from this lucrative business to serve his country. When in 1449, at the end of the truce, the English troops were left to their own devices, surviving by pillaging the areas they occupied, Agnès Sorel, the king’s mistress, Pierre de Brézé, the military leader, and Jacques Cœur, encouraged the king to launch a military offensive to finally liberate the whole country.
Coeur declared bluntly:
« Sire, under your shadow, I acknowledge that I have great proufis and honors, and mesme, in the land of the Infidels, for, for your honor, the souldan has given me safe-conduct to my galleys and factors… Sire, what I have, is yours. »
We’re no longer in 1435, when the king didn’t have a kopeck to face strategic challenges. Jacques Coeur, unlike other great lords, according to a contemporary account,
« spontaneously offered to lend the king a mass of gold, and provided him with a sum amounting, it is said, to around 100,000 gold ecus to use for this great and necessary purpose ».
Under the advice of Jacques Coeur and others, Charles VII was to carry out a decisive military reform.
On November 2, 1439, at the Estates General that had been meeting in Orleans since October of that year, Charles VII ordered a reform of the army following the Estates General’s complaint about the skinners and their actions.
As Charles V (the Wise) had tried to do before him, he set up a system of standing armies that would engage these flayers full-time against the English. The nobility got in the king’s way. In fact, they often used companies of skinners for their own interests, and refused to allow the king alone to be responsible for recruiting the army.
In February 1440, the king discovered that the nobles were plotting against him. Contemporaries named this revolt the Praguerie, in reference to the civil wars in Prague’s Hussite Bohemia.
Yolande d’Aragon passed away in November 1442, but Jacques Coeur would continue pressuring the King to go ahead with the required reforms.
Following the Truce of Tours in 1444, an ordinance was issued on May 26 announcing no general demobilization should occur; instead, the best of the larger units were reconstituted as “companies of the King’s ordinance » (Compagnies d’Ordonnance),” which were standing units of cavalry well selected and well equipped; they served as local guardians of peace at local expense. This consisted of some 10,000 men organized into 15 Ordonnance companies, entrusted to proven captains. These companies were subdivided into detachments of ten to thirty lances, which were assigned to garrisons to protect the towns’ inhabitants and patrol the countryside. In a territory similarly patrolled by the forerunners of our modern gendarmerie, robbery and plunder quickly ceased.
Although still a product of the nobility, this new military formation was the first standing army at the disposal of the King of France. Previously, when the king wished to wage war, he called upon his vassals according to the feudal custom of the ban. But his vassals were only obliged to serve him for forty days. If he wished to continue the war, the king had to recruit companies of mercenaries, a plague against which Machiavelli would later warn his readers. When the war ended, the mercenaries were dismissed. They then set about plundering the country. This is what happened at the start of the Hundred Years’ War, after the victories of Charles V and Du Guesclin.
Then, with the Ordinance of April 8, 1448, the Francs-Archers corps was created. The model for the royal « francs archiers » was probably taken from the militia of archers that the Dukes of Brittany had been raising, by parish, since 1425.
The Ordinance stipulated that each parish or group of fifty or eighty households had to arm, at its own expense, a man equipped with bow or crossbow, sword, dagger, jaque and salad, who had to train every Sunday in archery. In peacetime, he stays at home and receives no pay, but in wartime, he is mobilized and receives 4 francs a month. The Francs-Archers thus formed a military reserve unit with a truly national character.
As writes the Encyclopedia Brittanica:
« With the creation of the “free archers” (1448), a militia of foot soldiers, the new standing army was complete. Making use of a newly effective artillery, its companies firmly in the king’s control, supported by the people in money and spirit, France rid itself of brigands and Englishmen alike. »
At the same time, artillery grandmaster Gaspard Bureau and his brother Jean (Note N° 4) developed artillery, with bronze cannons capable of firing cast-iron cannonballs, lighter hand cannons, the ancestors of the rifle, and very long cannons or couleuvrines that could be dragged on wagons and taken to the battlefield.
As a result, when the time came to go on the offensive, the army went into battle. From all over the country, the Francs-Archers, made up of commoners trained in every region of France rather than nobles, began to converge on the north.
The war was on, and this time, « the gale changed sides ». The merciless French army, armed to the highest standards, pushed its opponents to the limit. This was particularly true at the Battle of Formigny near Bayeux, on April 15, 1450. It was a kind of Azincourt in reverse, with English losses amounting to 80% of the forces engaged, with 4,000 killed and 1,500 taken prisoner. At last, towns and strongholds returned to the Kingdom!
Helping a Humanist Pope
As mentioned above, the Council of Basel had ended in discord. On the one hand, with the support of Charles VII and Jacques Coeur, Eugene IV was elected Pope in Rome in 1431. On the other, in Basel, an assembly of prelates meeting in council sought to impose themselves as the sole legitimate authority to lead Christendom. In 1439, the Council declared Eugene IV deposed and appointed « his » own pope: the Duke of Savoy, Amédée VIII, who had abdicated and retired to a monastery. He became pope under the name of Felix V.
His election was based solely on the support of theologians and doctors of the universities, but without the support of a large number of prelates and cardinals.
In 1447, King Charles VII commissioned Jacques Coeur to intervene for Eugene IV’s return and Felix V’s renunciation. With a delegation, he went to Lausanne to meet Felix V. While the talks were going well, Eugene IV died. As Felix V saw no further obstacles to his pontificate, the Pontifical Council in Rome quickly proceeded to elect a new pope, the humanist scholar Nicholas V (Tommaso Parentucelli).
To make France’s case to him, Charles VII sent Jacques Coeur at the head of a large delegation. Before entering the Eternal City, the French formed a procession.
The parade was sumptuous: more than 300 horsemen, dressed in bright, shimmering colors, bearing weapons and glittering jewels, mounted on richly caparisoned horses, dazzled and impressed the whole of Rome, except for the English, who saw themselves doubled by the French to serve the Pope’s mission.
From the very first meeting, Nicholas V was charmed by Jacques Coeur. Slightly ill, Coeur was treated by the pope’s physician. Thanks to information obtained from the Pontiff, notably on the limits of concessions to be made, Coeur’s delegation subsequently obtained the withdrawal of Felix V, with whom Coeur remained on good terms.
Nicholas V, it should be remembered, was a happy exception. Nicknamed the « humanist pope », he knew Leonardo Bruni (Note N° 5), Niccolò Niccoli (Note N° 6) and Ambrogio Traversari (Note N° 7) in Florence, in the entourage of Cosimo de’ Medici.
With the latter and Eugenio IV, whose right-hand man he was, Nicholas V was one of the architects of the famous Council of Florence, which sealed a « doctrinal union » between the Western and Eastern Churches. (Note N° 8)
Elected pope, Nicholas V considerably increased the size of the Vatican Library. By the time of his death, the library contained over 16,000 volumes, more than any other princely library.
He welcomed the erudite humanist Lorenzo Valla to his court as apostolic notary. Under his patronage, the works of Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius and Archimedes were reintroduced to Western Europe. One of his protégés, Enoch d’Ascoli, discovered a complete manuscript of Tacitus’ Opera minora in a German monastery.
In addition to these, he called to his court a whole series of scholars and humanists: the scholar and former chancellor of Florence Poggio Bracciolini, the Hellenist Gianozzo Manetti, the architect Leon Battista Alberti, the diplomat Pier Candido Decembrio, the Hellenist Giovanni Aurispa, the cardinal-philosopher Nicolas de Cues, founder of modern science, and Giovanni Aurispa, the first to translate Plato’s complete works from Greek into Latin.
Nicholas V also made gestures to his powerful neighbors: at the request of King Charles VII, Joan of Arc was rehabilitated.
Later, when he sought refuge in Rome, Jacques Coeur was received by Nicholas V as if he was a member of his family.
The Coup d’Etat against Jacques Coeur
Jacques Coeur’s adventurous life ended as if in a cloak-and-dagger novel. On July 31, 1451, Charles VII ordered his arrest and seized his possessions, from which he drew one hundred thousand ecus to wage war.
The result was one of the most scandalous trials in French history. The only reason for the trial was political. The hatred of the courtiers, especially the nobles, had built up. By making each of them a debtor, Coeur, believing he had made allies of them, made terrible enemies. By launching a number of national products, he undermined the financial empires of Genoa, Venice and Florence, which eternally sought to enrich themselves by exporting their products, notably silk, to France.
One of the most relentless, Otto Castellani, a Florentine merchant, treasurer of finances in Toulouse but based in Montpellier, and one of the accusers whom Charles VII appointed as commissioner to prosecute Jacques Coeur, practiced black magic and pierced a wax figure of the silversmith with needles!
Lastly, Charles VII undoubtedly feared collusion between Jacques Coeur and his own son, the Dauphin Louis, future Louis XI, who was stirring up intrigue after intrigue against him.
In 1447, following an altercation with Agnès Sorel, the Dauphin had been expelled from the Court by his father and would never see him again. Jacques Cœur lent money to the Dauphin, with whom he kept in touch through Charles Astars, who looked after the accounts of his mines.
« Trade with infidels », « Lèse majesté », « export of metals », and many other pretexts, the reasons put forward for Jacques Coeur’s trial and conviction are of little interest. They are no more than judicial window-dressing. The proceedings began with a denunciation that was almost immediately found to be slanderous.
A certain Jeanne de Mortagne accused Jacques Coeur of having poisoned Agnès Sorel, the king’s mistress and favorite, who died on February 9, 1450. This accusation was implausible and devoid of any serious foundation; for, having placed all her trust in Jacques Coeur, she had just appointed him as one of her three executors.
Coeur is imprisoned for a dozen equally questionable reasons. When he refused to admit what he was accused of, he was threatened with « the question » (torture). Confronted by the executioners, the accused, trembling with fear, claims that he « relies » on the words of the commissioners charged with breaking him.
His condemnation came on the same day as the fall of Constantinople, May 29, 1453. Only the intervention of Pope Nicholas V saved his life. With the help of his friends, he escaped from his prison in Poitiers, and took the route of the convents, including Beaucaire, to Marseille for Rome.
Pope Nicholas V welcomed him as a friend. The pontiff died and was succeeded by his successor. Jacques Cœur chartered a fleet in the name of his illustrious host, and set off to fight the infidels. Jacques Coeur, we are told, died on November 25, 1456 on the island of Chios, a Genoese possession, during a naval battle with the Turks.
The great King Louis XI, unloved son of Charles VII, as evidenced by his ordinances in favor of the productive economy, would continue the recovery of France begun by Jacques Coeur. Many of Coeur’s collaborators soon entered his service, including his son Geoffroy, who, as cupbearer, became Louis XI’s most trusted confidant.
Charles VII, by letters patent dated August 5, 1457, restored to Ravant and Geoffroy Coeur a small portion of their father’s property. It was only under Louis XI that Geoffroy obtained the rehabilitation of his father’s memory and more complete letters of restitution.
NOTES:
- During the five years between Joan of Arc’s first appearances and her departure for Chinon, several people attached to the Court stayed in Lorraine, including René d’Anjou, the youngest son of Yolande d’Aragon. While Charles VII remained undecided, his mother-in-law welcomed La Pucelle with maternal solicitude, opening doors for her and lobbying the king until he deigned to receive her. During the Poitiers trial, when Jeanne’s virginity had to be verified, she presided over the council of matrons in charge of the examination. She also provided financial support, helped her gather her equipment, provided safe stopping points on the road to Orléans, and gathered food and relief supplies for the besieged. To this end, she did not hesitate to open her purse wide, even going so far as to sell her jewelry and golden tableware. Yolande’s support was rewarded on April 30, 1429 with the liberation of Orléans, followed on July 17 by the King’s coronation in Reims. Although many of her contemporaries praised her simplicity, her closeness to her subjects and the warmth of her court, Yolande d’Aragon was a stateswoman. And whatever sympathy she may have felt for her protégée, she would not hesitate to abandon her to her sad fate when her warlike impulses no longer accorded with her own political objectives : to negociate a peaceful alliance with the Duchy of Burgundy. The Duchess knew how to be implacable, and like her comrades-in-arms, the Church and the King himself, she abandoned La Pucelle to the English, to Cauchon, to her trial and to the stake. For more: Gérard de Senneville, Yolande d’Aragon : La reine qui a gagné la guerre de Cent Ans, Editions Perrin)
- Georges Bordonove, Jacques Coeur, trésorier de Charles VII, p. 90, Editions Pygmalion, 1977).
- Description given by the great chronicler of the Dukes of Burgundy, Georges Chastellain (1405-1475), in Remontrances à la reine d’Angleterre.
- Jean Bureau was Charles VII’s grand master of artillery. On the occasion of his coronation in 1461, Louis XI knighted him and made him a member of the King’s Council. Louis XI stayed at Jean Bureau’s Porcherons house in northwest Paris after his solemn entry into the capital. Jean Bureau’s daughter Isabelle married Geoffroy Coeur, son of Jacques.
- Leonardo Bruni succeeded Coluccio Salutati as Chancellor of Florence, having joined his circle of scholars, which included Poggio Bracciolini and the erudite Niccolò Niccoli, to discuss the works of Petrarch and Boccaccio. Bruni was one of the first to study Greek literature, and contributed greatly to the study of Latin and ancient Greek, offering translations of Aristotle, Plutarch, Demosthenes, Plato and Aeschylus.
- Niccolò Niccoli built up one of the most famous libraries in Florence, and one of the most prestigious of the Italian Renaissance. He was assisted by Ambrogio Traversari in his work on Greek texts (a language he did not master). He bequeathed this library to the Florentine Republic on condition that it be made available to the public. Cosimo the Elder de’ Medici was entrusted with implementing this condition, and the library was entrusted to the Dominican convent of San Marco. Today, the library is part of the Laurentian Library.
- Prior General of the Camaldolese Order, Ambrogio Traversari was, along with Jean Bessarion, one of the authors of the decree of church union. According to the Urbino court historian Vespasiano de Bisticci, Traversari gathered in his convent at San Maria degli Angeli near Florence. There, Traversari brought together the heart of the humanist network: Nicolaus Cusanus; Niccolo Niccoli, who owned an immense library of Platonic manuscripts; Gianozzi Manetti, orator of the first Oration on the Dignity of Man; Aeneas Piccolomini, the future Pope Pius II; and Paolo dal Pozzo Toscanelli, the physician-cartographer and future friend of Leonardo da Vinci, whom Piero della Francesca also frequented.
- Philosophically speaking, reminding the whole of Christendom of the primordial importance of the concept of the filioque, literally « and of the son », meaning that the Holy Spirit (divine love) came not only from the Father (infinite potential) but also from the Son (its realization, through his son Jesus, in whose living image every human being had been created), was a revolution. Man, the life of every man and woman, is precious because it is animated by a divine spark that makes it sacred. This high conception of each individual was reflected in the relationship between human beings and their relationship with nature, i.e., the physical economy.
The Congress for Cultural Freedom: How the CIA « weaponized » Modern Art
This article, first published in 2006, came as a book review of the book Who Paid the Piper of British researcher Frances Stonor Saunder, published in French Article under the title Qui mène la danse? La CIA et la guerre froide culturelle, 506 pages, Editions Denoël, Paris, 2003.
This book, which caused a stir in Germany, England and the Hispanic world, is literally appalling. Not only for what it reveals, but above all for what it leaves unsaid.
After years of meticulous research, interviews and archival work, the young writer Frances Stonor Saunders, producer of historical documentaries for the BBC, delivers an uncompromising account of the Anglo-American cultural Cold War against the Soviet Union from 1947 onwards.
Congress for Cultural Freedom
At the heart of this secret « Kulturkampf », a veritable cultural Cold War, was the Paris-based Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), headed from 1950 to 1967 by CIA agent Michael Josselson.
Josselson, who spoke four languages, along with music composer Nicholas Nabokov, was a former member of the psychological warfare division of the Office for Strategic Services (OSS), which US President Harry Truman replaced with the CIA in 1945.
The first thing that strikes the reader is the analogy between the language of the Cold War and the narrative of today’s war hawks to justify a new crusade « against terrorism. »
Back then, under the guise of a merciless struggle against the horrors of Stalinism, the Anglo-American imperial faction deployed whole swathes of the CIA in an attempt to impose Bertrand Russell‘s utopian vision of « world government. »
The CIA described itself as an « Order of Knights Templar » charged with « saving Western freedom from Communist darkness ». Its principal theoretician was George Kennan, Director of the Policy Planning Staff at the State Department.
Like the « Noble Lies » employed today by the neo-conservatives, followers of Leo Strauss, Kennan asserted in 1947 that the Communists had gained a position of prominence in Europe,
« through the shameless and skillful use of lies. They fought us with the weapon of unreality and irrationalism. Can we triumph over this unreality with rationalism, truth, honest and well-intentioned economic assistance? »
Obviously not! And the most formidable weapon for world domination will be, as always: the soft power of « culture ».
Indeed, « you can’t be a great power if you don’t have the art to go with it, it’s like Venice without Tintoretto or Florence without Giotto ».
So, ironically, while American public opinion was held hostage by the McCarthyite psychosis for whom « all modern art is communist », to the point of suspecting certain abstract paintings of indicating the exact location of American military bases (sic), the oligarchs saw in « lyrical abstract » expressionism the virtues of a specifically anti-communist ideology.
By a simple logic of inversion, everything that Nazis and Stalinists considered « degenerate art » automatically became emblematic of the values of freedom and free enterprise, and therefore got massively financed… in the greatest secrecy.
With a wealth of detail, the author documents the mesh of this operation over some five hundred pages. It is, of course, impossible to summarize here the descriptions of the lives of dozens of men, women, musicians, authors, magazines, networks and foundations, each page of which delivers a few pearls.
Some of the details shed a special light on contemporary French history.
The CIA in Paris
In Paris, it was Irving Brown (1911-1989), a representative of the powerful AFL-CIO union (with free access to secret Marshall Plan funds), who offered the CCF in Paris a suite in the Hôtel Baltimore on Avenue Kléber to set up its temporary headquarters, before paying the rent for a permanent office on Boulevard Haussmann.
On behalf of his boss Jay Lovestone (1897-1990), himself a helper of the CIA’s James Jesus Angleton, Irving Brown financed anything that might weaken France’s resistance to the utopia of world government, i.e. anything that might harm Gaullism and, to a certain extent, Communism.
Josselson and his wife met him quite often in a gay bar, « L’Indifférent ». One evening, they find him handing over a large sum of money to a Marseille mobster. A fan of the big boys, Brown was heavily involved in anything that could reduce the influence of the Communists.
It was from that perspective that he helped former members of the Vichy government, as well as Trotskyites. He controlled French ports, broke strikes and financed the new Force Ouvrière union to split the CGT communist union, all the while promoting modern art!*
Alongside Irving Brown, the CCF board included Michael Josselson, Lawrence de Neufville (his CIA recruiter, later appointed to Radio Free Europe), Arthur Koestler, Melvin Lasky, former Trotskyist James Burnham, as well as Carlo Schmid of the German SPD, Haakon Lie, leader of the Norwegian Labour Party, and David Rousset of the French Parti Socialiste.
In his book The Machiavellians, Burnham used Machiavelli to « challenge egalitarian political theory and show the persistence and inescapability of the elite, even in an age of equality ».
In 1953, Burnham played a crucial role in the CIA’s Operation AJAX, which overthrew Dr. Mossadegh in Teheran and replaced him with the Shah.
Later, « more presentable » funding sources than Irving Brown came into play: CIA front organizations such as the Farfield Foundation, headed by Julius Fleischman, or the Hoblitzelle Foundation, but also classics like the Ford, Carnegie or Rockefeller brothers’ foundations.
Thanks to these generous donors, the CCF made millions of dollars available to literary magazines such as
- Encounter, edited by former Trotskyite Irving Kristol (father of current neo-conservative William Kristol) in London;
- Preuves, edited in Paris by François Bondy of the European Union of Federalists;
- Der Monat, edited by Melvin Lasky in Berlin;
- Tempo Presente, edited by Ignazio Silone in Rome;
- Soviet Survey, edited in Israel by historian Walter Laqueur.
After the OSS’s (reciprocal) expressions of sympathy for Hemingway or Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, these magazines opened their columns to authors such as Jorge-Louis Borges, Raymond Aron, Arnold Toynbee, Bertrand Russell, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Herbert Read or Hugh Trevor-Roper, or contributed to the publication of their writings.
In 1950, the CIA commissioned the production of a cartoon based on George Orwell’s Animal Farm (real name Eric Blair).
Also in Paris, CIA man Peter Matthiessen helped found the Paris Review run by John Train, a far-right liberal New York billionaire.
CIA Culture
Destruction of the well tempered music
The CCF also financed major musical events to promote « modern » twelve-tone serialism (dodecaphony), such as the April 1952 festival organized by Nicolas Nabokov in Paris.
Nabokov believed that « dodecaphony abolishes natural hierarchies » and allows us to free ourselves from the internal logic of music.
Anne C. Shreffler argues that the « compositional avant-garde » was politicized more by its advocacy of personal freedom than by political influence. Shreffler goes on to argue that both the Soviet Union and the United States sent out messages that dealt with « freedom. » However, Western Europe and the United States claimed a « moral high ground » in the struggle for individual freedom, a high ground that made certain artistic aesthetics (e.g., cubism, surrealism, dodecaphony, and existentialism) almost « obligatory » for artists.
The promotion of « liberated » music as a counterpoint to « Social Realism« , which essentially « marginalized » the populist Soviet musical aesthetic, was explicitly a politically calculated move by the Congress for Cultural Freedom.
The festival opened with « The Rite of Spring » of Igor Stravinsky, new convert to twelve-tone dodecaphonic system.
Among the participants from the USA: Leontyne Price, Aaron Copland, Samuel Barber, the New York City Ballet (Balanchine‘s troupe), the Boston Symphony Orchestra, the New York Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), James T. Farrell, W.H. Auden and Gertrude Stein.
European participants included Jean Cocteau, William Walton, Laurence Olivier, Benjamin Britten, the Vienna Opera, Covent Garden Opera, Czeslaw Milosz, Denis de Rougemont and Guido Piovene, to name but a few.
Appointed Eisenhower’s special advisor on Cold War strategy, American Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller played a fundamental role in promoting the CIA’s modernist painting. Supporting left-wing artists practicing abstract expressionism was commonplace for the Rockefellers.
Nelson’s mother, Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, had founded the Museum of Modern Art in New York – the Modern Art Museum (MoMA) – asserting that reds would stop being reds « if we gave them artistic recognition ». Several MoMA trustees were also trustees of the Farfield Foundation, as indicated, a CIA front.
As Donald Jameson of the CIA put it:
« We understood that this was the kind of art that has nothing to do with social realism and makes it even more stylized, rigid and confined than it was. »
MoMA bought works by Diego Riviera, Jackson Pollock, Arshile Gorky, Alexander Calder, Robert Motherwell, Stuart Davis, Edward Hopper and others.
By attributing the « success » of an impressive number of contemporary cultural actors to the will of an imperial elite, motivated by a more than suspect ideological blindness and endowed, what’s more, with unparalleled financial resources and communication strategies, Stonor Saunders’ book immediately casts deep discredit on all post-war artistic creation.
Most of these « artists » were chosen because they conveyed an ideology deemed compatible with the totalitarian designs of the high priests of world order.
Only the reactionary Peregrine Worsthorne titles his book review of Saunders’ Who Paid the Piper, « How Western Culture was saved by the CIA », nostalgically lamenting the Machiavellian genius of the Anglo-American elite in its heyday.
Of course, some artists weren’t necessarily aware of the source of the funds, but they all expected them to fill their pockets… And perhaps most shockingly of all, the CIA took art more seriously than many citizens or critics of the time.
So, perhaps this survey does posthumous justice to all those talents sacrificed on the altar of illusory power. Think of all those crushed hopes, sabotaged careers and stifled seeds of genius. For in this delirious tournament of the Cold War, the great priesthood ruling over the art world would only saddle those willing to bend the knee, while with a wave of the hand, send others to the deadly silence of oblivion.
NOTE:
*In his book Les Trotskistes (Fayard, 2002), Christophe Nick states, with regard to the non-communist student union UNEF, that at one time, « thanks to Irwing Brown‘s good offices, the U.S. Embassy was able to cover the student union’s end-of-month budgets ».
In Secrets de famille (Fayard, Paris 2001), Serge Raffy reveals that « Lionel Jospin, then First Secretary of the Socialist Party, met in Washington on April 14, 1982 with leaders of the American AFL-CIO union to reassure them that the Mauroy government would include Communist ministers. The man who organized the meeting was a CIA agent, Irving Brown, the same man who founded and financed the French trade union Force Ouvrière to combat the Communist CGT financed by Soviet Russia. Irving Brown is also said to have constantly maintained links between the Trotskyites, and in particular the OCI, and FO. »
On the right, the student union, Union Inter-Universitaire (UNI), which made the career of so many politicians on the right, was also backed by CIA agent of influence Irving Brown and received $575,000 between April 1984 and April 1985 from the government of the United States through the National Endowment for Democracy.
Van Eyck, a Flemish Painter using Arab Optics?
What follows is an edited transcript of a lecture by Karel Vereycken on the subject of “Perspective in XVth-century Flemish religious painting”.
It was delivered at the international colloquium “La recherche du divin à travers l’espace géométrique” (The quest for the divine through geometrical space) at the Paris Sorbonne University on April 26-28, 2006, under the direction of Luc Bergmans, Department of Dutch Studies (Paris IV Sorbonne University).
Introduction
« Perspective in XVth-century Flemish religious painting ». At first glance, this title may seem surprising. While the genius of fifteenth-century Flemish painters is universally attributed to their mastery of drying oil and their intricate sense of detail, their spatial geometry as such is usually identified as the very counter-example of the “right perspective”.
Disdained by Michelangelo and his faithful friend Vasari, the Flemish « primitives » would never have overcome the medieval, archaic and empirical model. For the classical “narritive”, still in force today, stipulates that only « Renaissance » perspective, obeying the canon of « linear », “mathematical” perspective, is the only « right », and the “scientific” one.
According to the same narrative, it was the research carried out around 1415-20 by the Duomo architect Filippo Brunelleschi (1377-1446), superficially mentioned by Antonio Tuccio di Manetti some 60 years later, which supposedly enabled Leon Battista Alberti (1404-1472), proclaiming himself Brunelleschi’s intellectual heir, to invent « perspective ».
In 1435, in De Pictura, a book entirely devoid of graphic illustration, Alberti is said to have formulated the premises of a perspectivist canon capable of representing, or at least conforming to, our modern notions of Cartesian space-time (NOTE 1), a space-time characterized as « entirely rational, i.e. infinite, continuous and homogeneous », « in one word, a purely mathematical space [dixit Panofsky] » (NOTE 2)
Long afterwards, in a drawing from the Codex Madrid, Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) attempted to unravel the workings of this model.
But in the same manuscript, he rigorously demonstrated the inherent limitations of the Albertian Renaissance perspectivist canon.
The drawing on f°15, v° clearly shows that the simple projection of visual pyramid cross-sections on a plane paradoxically causes their size to increase the further they are from the point of vision, whereas reality would require exactly the opposite. (NOTE 3)
With this in mind, Leonardo began to question the mobility of the eye and the curvilinear nature of the retina. Refusing to immobilize the viewer on an exclusive point of vision (NOTE 4), Leonardo used curvilinear constructions to correct these lateral deformations. (NOTE 5) In France, Jean Fouquet and others worked along the same lines.
But Leonardo’s powerful arguments were ignored, and he was unable to prevent this rewriting of history.
Despite this official version of art history, it should be noted that at the time, Flemish painters were elevated to pinnacles by Italy’s greatest patrons and art connoisseurs, specifically for their ability to represent space.
Bartolomeo Fazio, around the middle of the 15th century, observed that the paintings of Jan van Eyck, an artist billed as the « principal painter of our time », showed « tiny figures of men, mountains, groves, villages and castles rendered with such skill that one would think them fifty thousand paces apart. » (NOTE 6)
Such was their reputation that some of the great names in Italian painting had no qualms about reproducing Flemish works identically. I’m thinking, for example, of the copy of Hans Memlinc‘s Christ Crowned with Thorns at the Genoa Museum, copied by Domenico Ghirlandajo (Philadelphia Museum).
But post-Michelangelo classicism deemed the non-conformity of Flemish spatial geometry with Descartes’ « extended substance » to be an unforgivable crime, and any deviation from, or insubordination to, the « Renaissance » perspectivist canon relegated them to the category of « primitives », i.e. « empiricists », clearly devoid of any scientific culture.
Today, ironically, it is almost exclusively those artists who explicitly renounce all forms of perspectivist construction in favor of pseudo-naïveté, who earn the label of modernity…
In any case, current prejudices mean that 15th-century Flemish painting is still accused of having ignored perspective.
It’s true, however, that at the end of the XIVth century, certain paintings by Melchior Broederlam (c. 1355-1411) and others by Robert Campin (1375-1444) (Master of Flémalle) show the viewer interiors where plates and cutlery on tables threaten to suddenly slide to the floor.
Nevertheless, it must be admitted that whenever the artist « ignores » or disregards the linear perspective scheme, he seems to do so more by choice than by incapacity. To achieve a limpid composition, the painter prioritizes his didactic mission to the detriment of all other considerations.
For example, in Campin’s Mérode Altarpiece, the exaggerated perspective of the table clearly shows that the vase is behind the candlestick and book.
Jan van Eyck’s Lam Gods (Mystic Lamb) in Ghent is another example.
Never could so many figures, with so much detail and presence, be shown with a linear perspective where the figures in the foreground would hide those behind. (NOTE 7)
But the intention to approximate a credible sense of space and depth remains.
If this perspective seems flawed by its linear geometry, Campin imposes an extraordinary sense of space through his revolutionary treatment of shadows. As every painter knows, light is painted by painting shadow.
In Campin’s work, every object and figure is exposed to several sources of light, generating a darker central shadow as the fruit of crossed shadows.
Van Eyck influenced by Arab Optics?
Roger Bacon, statue in Oxord.
This new treatment of light-space has been largely ignored. However, there are several indications that this new conception was partly the result of the influence of « Arab » science, in particular its work on optics.
Translated into Latin and studied from the XIIth century onwards, their work was developed in particular by a network of Franciscans whose epicenter was in Oxford (Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, etc.) and whose influence spread to Chartres, Paris, Cologne and the rest of Europe.
It should be noted that Jan van Eyck (1395-1441), an emblematic figure of Flemish painting, was ambassador to Paris, Prague, Portugal and England.
I’ll briefly mention three elements that support this hypothesis of the influence of Arab science.
Curved mirrors
Robert Campin (master of Flémalle) in the Werl Triptych (1438) and Jan van Eyck in the Arnolfini portrait (1434), each feature convex mirrors of considerable size.
It is now certain that glaziers and mirror-makers were full members of the Saint Luc guild, the painters’ guild. (NOTE 8)
But it is relevant to know that Campin, now recognized as having run the workshop in Tournai where the painters Van der Weyden and Jacques Daret were trained, produced paintings for the Franciscans in this city. Heinrich Werl, who commissioned the altarpiece featuring the convex mirror, was an eminent Franciscan theologian who taught at the University of Cologne.
Artistic representation of Ibn Al-Haytam (Alhazen)
These convex and concave (or ardent) mirrors were much studied during the Arab renaissance of the IXth to XIth centuries, in particular by the Arab philosopher Al-Kindi (801-873) in Baghdad at the time of Charlemagne.
Arab scientists were not only in possession of the main body of Hellenic work on optics (Euclid‘s Optics, Ptolemy‘s Optics, the works of Heron of Alexandria, Anthemius of Tralles, etc.), but it was sometimes the rigorous refutation of this heritage that was to give science its wings.
After the decisive work of Ibn Sahl (Xth century), it was that of Ibn Al-Haytam (Latin name : Alhazen) (NOTE 9) on the nature of light, lenses and spherical mirrors that was to have a major influence. (NOTE 10)
As mentioned above, these studies were taken up by the Oxford Franciscans, starting with the English bishop of Lincoln, Robert Grosseteste (1168-1253).
In De Natura Locorum, for example, Grosseteste shows a diagram of the refraction of light in a spherical glass filled with water. And in his De Iride he marvels at this science which he connexts to perspective :
« This part of optics, so well understood, shows us how to make very distant things appear as if they were situated very near, and how we can make small things situated at a distance appear to the size we desire, so that it becomes possible for us to read the smallest letters from incredible distances, or to count sand, or grains, or any small object.«
Grosseteste’s pupil Roger Bacon (1212-1292) wrote De Speculis Comburentibus, a specific treatise on « Ardent Mirrors » which elaborates on Ibn Al-Haytam‘s work.
Flemish painters Campin, Van Eyck and Van der Weyden proudly display their knowledge of this new scientific and technological revolution metamorphosed into Christian symbolisms.
Their paintings feature not only curved mirrors but also glass bottles, which they use as a metaphor for the immaculate conception.
A Nativity hymn of that period says:
« As through glass the ray passed without breaking it, so of the Virgin Mother, Virgin she was and virgin she remained… » (NOTE 11)
The Treatment of Light
In his Discourse on Light, Ibn Al-Haytam develops his theory of light propagation in extremely poetic language, setting out requirements that remind us of the « Eyckian revolution ». Indeed, Flemish « realism » and perspective are the result of a new treatment of light and color.
Ibn Al-Haytam:
« The light emitted by a luminous body by itself -substantial light- and the light emitted by an illuminated body -accidental light- propagate on the bodies surrounding them. Opaque bodies can be illuminated and then in turn emit light. »
This physical principle, theorized by Leonardo da Vinci, is omnipresent in Flemish painting. Just look at the images reflected in the helmet of St. George in Van Eyck‘s Madonna to Canon van der Paele (NOTE 12).
In each curved surface of Saint George’s helmet, we can identify the reflection of the Virgin and even a window through which light enters the painting.
The shining shield on St. George’s back reflects the base of the adjacent column, and the painter’s portrait appears as a signature. Only a knowledge of the optics of curved surfaces can explain this rendering.
Ibn Al-Haytam:
« Light can penetrate transparent bodies: water, air, crystal and their counterparts. »
And :
« Transparent bodies have, like opaque bodies, a ‘receiving power’ for light, but transparent bodies also have a ‘transmitting power’ for light.«
Isn’t the development of oil mediums and glazes by the Flemish an echo of this research? Alternating opaque and translucent layers on very smooth panels, the specificity of the oil medium alters the angle of light refraction.
In 1559, the painter-poet Lucas d’Heere referred to van Eyck‘s paintings as « mirrors, not painted scenes.«
Binocular perspective
Before the advent of « right » central linear perspective, art historians sought a coherent explanation for its birth in the presence of several seemingly disparate vanishing points by theorizing a so-called central « fishbone » perspective.
In this model, a number of vanishing lines, instead of coinciding in a single central vanishing point on the horizon, either end up in a « vanishing region » (NOTE 13), or align with what some call a vertical « vanishing axis », forming a kind of « fishbone ».
French Professor Dominique Raynaud, who worked for years on this issue, underscores that « all medieval treatises on perspective address the question of binocular vision », notably the Polish scholar Witelo (1230-1280) (NOTE 15) in his Perspectiva (I,27), an insight he also got from the works of Ibn Al-Haytam.
Witelo presents a figure to defend the idea that
« the two forms, which penetrate two homologous points of the surface of the two eyes, arrive at the same point of the concavity of the common nerve, and are superimposed at this point to become one » (Perspectiva, III, 37).
A similar line of reasoning can be found in Roger Bacon‘s Perspectiva Communis, written by John Pecham, Archbishop of Canterbury (1240-1290) for whom:
« the duality of the eyes must be reduced to unity »
So, as Professor Raynaud proposed, if we extend the famous vanishing lines (i.e., in our case, the « fish bones ») until they intersect, the « vanishing axis » problem disappears, as the vanishing lines meet. Interestingly, the result is a perspective with two vanishing points in the central region!
Suddenly, the diagrams drawn up to demonstrate the « empiricism » of the Flemish painters, if viewed from this point of view, reveal a legitimate construction probably based on optics as transmitted by Arab science and rediscovered by Franciscan networks and others.
Two paintings by Jan van Eyck clearly demonstrate that he followed this approach: The Madonna with Canon van der Paele of 1436 and the Dresden Tryptic of 1437.
What seemed a clumsy, empirical approach in the form of a « fishbone » perspective (left) turns out to be a binocular perspective construction.
Was this type of perspective specifically Flemish?
A close examination of works by Ghiberti, Donatello and Paolo Uccello, generally dating from the first half of the XVth Century, reveals a mastery of the same principle.
Cusanus
But this whole demonstration is merely a look into the past through the eyes of modern scientific rationality. It would be a grave error not to take into account the immense influence of the Rhenish (Master Eckhart, Johannes Tauler, Heinrich Suso) and Flemish (Hadewijch of Antwerp, Jan van Ruusbroec, etc.) « mystics ».
This trend began to flourish again with the rediscovery of the Christianized neo-Platonism of Dionysius the Areopagite (Vth-VIth century), made accessible… by the new translations of the Franciscan Grosseteste in Oxford.
The spiritual vision of the Aeropagite, expressed in a powerful imagery language, is directly reminiscent of the metaphorical approach of the Flemish painters, for whom a certain type of light is simply the revelation of divine grace.
In On the Heavenly Hierarchy, Dionysius immediately presents light as a manifestation of divine goodness. It ennobles us and enables us to enlighten others:
« Let those who are illuminated be filled with divine clarity, and the eyes of their understanding trained to the work of chaste contemplation; finally, let those who are perfected, once their primitive imperfection has been abolished, share in the sanctifying science of the marvelous teachings that have already been manifested to them; similarly, let the purifier excel in the purity he communicates to others; let the illuminator, gifted with a greater penetration of spirit, equally fit to receive and transmit light, happily flooded with sacred splendor, pour it out in pressing streams on those who are worthy… » [Chap. III, 3]
Let’s think again of the St. George in Van Eyck‘s Madonna to Canon van der Paele, which indeed pours forth the multiple images of the Virgin who enlightens him.
This theo-philosophical trend reached full maturity in the work of Cardinal Nicolas of Cusa (Cusanus) (1401-1464) (NOTE 16), embodying the extremely fruitful encounter of this « negative theology » with Greek science, Socratic knowledge and Christian Humanism.
In contrast to both a science « without a hypothesis of God » and a metaphysics with an esoteric drift, an agapic love leads it to the education of the greatest number, to the defense of the weak and the humiliated.
The Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life, educating Erasmus of Rotterdam and inspiring Cusanus, are the best example of this.
But let’s sketch out some of Cusanus’ key ideas on painting.
In De Icona (The Vision of God) (1453), which he sent to the Benedictine monks of the Tegernsee, Cusanus condenses his fundamental work On Learned Ignorance (1440), in which he develops the concept of the coincidence of opposites. His starting point was a self-portrait of his friend « Roger », the Flemish painter Rogier van der Weyden, which he sent together with his sermon to the monks.
This self-portrait, like the multiple faces of Christ painted in the XVth century, uses an « optical illusion » to create the effect of a gaze that fixes the viewer, regardless of his or her position in front of the altarpiece.
In De Icona, written as a sermon, Cusanus asks monks to stand in a semicircle around the painting and watch this gaze pursue them as they move along the segment of the curve. In fact, he elaborates a pedagogical paradox based on the fact that the Greek name for God, Theos, has its etymological origin in the verb theastai (to see, to look at).
As you can see, he says, God looks at you personally, and his gaze follows you everywhere. He is therefore one and many. And even when you turn away from him, his gaze falls on you. So, miraculously, although he looks at everyone at the same time, he nevertheless establishes a personal relationship with each one. If « seeing » for God is « loving », God’s point of vision is infinite, omniscient and omnipotent love.
A parallel can be drawn here with the spherical mirror at the center of Jan van Eyck’s painting The Arnolfini portrait, painted in 1434, nineteen years before this sermon.
Firstly, this circular mirror is surrounded by the ten stations of Christ’s Passion, juxtaposed by a rosary, an explicit reference to God.
Secondly, it reveals a view of the entire room, an image that completely escapes the linear perspective of the foreground. A view comparable to the allcompassing « Vision of God » developed by Cusanus.
Finally, we see two figures in the mirror, but not the image of the painter behind his easel. These are undoubtedly the two witnesses to the wedding. Instead of signing his painting with « Van Eyck invent. », the painter signed his painting above the mirror with « Van Eyck was here » (NOTE 17), identifying himself as a witness.
As Dionysius the Aeropagite asserted:
« [the celestial hierarchy] transforms its adepts into so many images of God: pure and splendid mirrors where the eternal and ineffable light can shine, and which, according to the desired order, reflect liberally on inferior things this borrowed brightness with which they shine. » [Chap. III, 2]
The Flemish mystic Jan van Ruusbroec (1293-1381) evokes a very similar image in his Spiegel der eeuwigher salicheit (Mirror of eternal salvation) when he says:
« Ende Hi heeft ieghewelcs mensche ziele gescapen alse eenen levenden spieghel, daer Hi dat Beelde sijnre natueren in gedruct heeft. » (And he created each human soul as a living mirror, in which he imprinted the image of his nature).
And so, like a polished mirror, Van Eyck’s soul, illuminated and living in God’s truth, acts as an illuminating witness to this union. (NOTE 18)
So, although the Flemish painters of the XVth century clearly had a solid scientific foundation, they choose such or such perspective depending on the idea they wanted to convey.
In essence, their paintings remain objects of theo-philosophical speculation or as you like « intellectual prayer », capable of praising the goodness, beauty and magnificence of a Creator who created them in His own image. By the very nature of their approach, their interest lay above all in the geometry of a kind of « paradoxical space-light » capable, through enigma, of opening us up to a participatory transcendence, rather than simply seeking to « represent » a dead space existing outside metaphysical reality.
The only geometry worthy of interest was that which showed itself capable of articulating this non-linearity, a « divine » or « mystical » perspective capable of linking the infinite beauty of our commensurable microcosm with the immeasurable goodness of the macrocosm.
Thank you,
NOTES:
- Recently, Italian scholars have pointed to the role of Biagio Pelacani Da Parma (d. 1416), a professor at the University of Padua near Venice, in imposing such a perspective, which privileged only the « geometrical laws of the act of vision and the rules of mathematical calculation ».
- Erwin Panofsky, Perspective as Symbolic Form, p.41-42, Les Éditions de Minuit, Paris, 1975.
- Institut de France, Manuscrit E, 16 v° « the eye [h] perceives on the plane wall the images of distant objects greater than that of the nearer object. »
- Leonardo understands that Albertian perspective, like anamorphosis, condemns the viewer to a single, immobile point of vision.
- See, for example, the slight enlargement of the apostles at the ends of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper in the Milan refectory.
- Baxandall, Bartholomaeus Facius on painting, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 27, (1964). Fazio is also enthusiastic about a world map (now lost) by Jan van Eyck, in which all the places and regions of the earth are depicted recognizably and at measurable distances.
- To escape this fate, Pieter Bruegel the Elder used a cavalier perspective, placing his horizon line high up.
- Lionel Simonot, Etude expérimentale et modélisation de la diffusion de la lumière dans une couche de peinture colorée et translucide. Application à l’effet visuel des glacis et des vernis, p.9 (PhD thesis, Nov. 2002).
- Ibn Al-Haytam (Alhazen) (965-1039) wrote some 200 works on mathematics, astronomy, physics, medicine and philosophy. Born in Basra, after working on the development of the Nile in Egypt, he travelled to Spain. He is said to have carried out a series of highly detailed experiments on theoretical and experimental optics, including the camera obscura (darkroom), work that was later to feature in Leonardo da Vinci’s studies. Da Vinci may well have read the lengthy passages by Alhazen that appear in the Commentari of the Florentine sculptor Ghiberti. According to Gerbert d’Aurillac (the future Pope Sylvester II in 999), Bishop of Rheims, brought back from Spain the decimal system with its zero and an astrolabe, it was thanks to Gerard of Cremona (1114-c. 1187) that Europe gained access to Greek, Jewish and Arabic science. This scholar went to Toledo in 1175 to learn Arabic, and translated some 80 scientific works from Arabic into Latin, including Ptolemy’s Almagest, Apollonius’ Conics, several treatises by Aristotle, Avicenna‘s Canon, and the works of Ibn Al-Haytam, Al-Kindi, Thabit ibn Qurra and Al-Razi.
- In the Arab world, this research was taken up a century later by the Persian physicist Al-Farisi (1267-1319). He wrote an important commentary on Alhazen’s Treatise on Optics. Using a drop of water as a model, and based on Alhazen’s theory of double refraction in a sphere, he gave the first correct explanation of the rainbow. He even suggested the wave-like property of light, whereas Alhazen had studied light using solid balls in his reflection and refraction experiments. The question was now: does light propagate by undulation or by particle transport?
- Meiss, M., Light as form and symbol in some fifteenth century paintings, Art Bulletin, XVIII, 1936, p. 434.
- Note also the fact that the canon shows a pair of glasses…
- Brion-Guerry in Jean Pèlerin Viator, sa place dans l’histoire de la perspective, Belles Lettres, 1962, p. 94-96, states in obscure language that « the object of representation behaves most often in Van Eyck as a cubic volume seen from the front and from the inside. Perspectival foreshortening is achieved by constructing a rectangle whose sides form the base of four trapezoids. The orthogonals thus tend towards four distinct points of convergence, forming a ‘vanishing region' ».
- Dominique Raynaud, L’Hypothèse d’Oxford, essai sur les origines de la perpective, PUF, Paris 1998.
- Witelo was a friend of the Flemish Dominican scholar Willem van Moerbeke, a translator of Archimedes in contact with Saint Thomas Aquinas. Moerbeke was also in contact with the mathematician Jean Campanus and the Flemish neo-Platonic astronomer Hendrik Bate van Mechelen. Johannes Kepler‘s own work on human vision builds on that of Witelo.
- Cusanus was above all a man of science and theology. But he was also a political organizer. The painter Jan van Eyck fought for the same goals, as evidenced by the ecumenical theme of the Ghent polyptych. It shows the Mystic Lamb, symbolizing the sacrifice of the Son of God for the redemption of mankind, capable of reuniting a church torn apart by internal differences. Hence the presence of the three popes in the central panel, here united before the lamb. Van Eyck also painted a portrait of Cardinal Niccolo Albergati, one of the instigators of the great Ecumenical Council organized by Cusanus in Ferrara and then moved to Florence. If Cusanus called Van der Weyden « his friend Roger », it is also thought that Robert Campin may have met him, since he would have attended the Council of Basel, as did one of his commissioners, the Franciscan theologian Heinrich Werl.
- Jan Van Eyck was one of the first painters in the history of art to date and sign his paintings with his own name.
- Myriam Greilsammer’s book L’Envers du tableau, Mariage et Maternité en Flandre Médiévale (Editions Armand Colin, 1990) documents Arnolfini’s sexual escapades. Arnolfini was taken to court by one of his victims, a female servant. Van Eyck seems to have understood that the knightly Arnoult Fin, Lucchese financier and commercial representative of the House of Medici in Bruges, required the somewhat peculiar presence of the eye of the lord.
Et si on corrigeait les erreurs de Marx?
Transcription éditée de la présentation de Karel Vereycken, 14 juin 2018.
Chers amies et amis, bonjour,
Ce soir je vais vous amener sur la planète Marx, la planète rouge ! Non pas parce qu’il y a quelques métaux rares à ramasser mais simplement parce qu’à partir de cette planète vous allez mieux voir ce qu’il se passe sur terre !
Vous allez aussi mieux comprendre pourquoi l’économiste américain Lyndon LaRouche (1922-2019), qui est depuis quarante ans l’inspirateur de notre mouvance au niveau international, a fait de Karl Marx (1818-1883) son « point de départ » pour élaborer sa propre contribution à la science économique, en partant d’une réfutation de tout ce que Marx a de gravement problématique dans sa conception de l’homme et de l’économie.
Alors que tout le monde disait qu’on avait enterré le vieux barbu en 1991, après la dislocation de l’Union soviétique, le voici de retour et en pleine forme, surtout depuis la crise de 2008 ! Voyons ensemble si c’est une bonne ou une moins bonne nouvelle.
Enfin, il y a des prétextes plus immédiats :
- 2018, année du bicentenaire de sa naissance.
- Sur la crise financière, Marx a vu juste, nous disent certains. Une note de février 2018 de l’économiste Patrick Artus pour la banque Natixis a surpris ses lecteurs. Dans ce document intitulé « La dynamique du capitalisme est aujourd’hui bien celle qu’avait prévue Karl Marx », l’économiste observe, dans les pays de l’OCDE, la succession d’évolutions que Karl Marx avait déjà anticipées : baisse tendancielle du profit, compression des salaires, spéculations boursières… Or, si les banquiers nous disent que Marx avait raison, il y a un problème, soit chez les banquiers, soit chez Marx, soit chez les deux… On va regarder ça.
- Certaines pensées de Marx sont toujours vivaces dans les esprits : la lutte des classes perdure et certains nous disent que « puisque les capitalistes ramassent des profits record, prenons l’argent là où il est », ou bien : « La crise, quelle crise ? Il n’y a pas de crise ! les riches deviennent plus riches et les pauvres plus pauvres, c’est la nature même du capitalisme », ou encore : « La régulation ne sert à rien, il faut changer de système. »
Bicentenaire de Marx, mini-bio
Karl Heinrich Marx est né à Trèves en 1818, c’est-à-dire il y a 200 ans. Son père, un avocat issu d’une famille de marchands et de rabbins, s’est converti au protestantisme pour exercer sa profession.
Après avoir étudié à Bonn, Karl obtient son doctorat en philosophie à Iéna.
Le philosophe allemand Hegel meurt du choléra en novembre 1831. Ses élèves et disciples se divisent en hégéliens de droite (conservateurs) et hégéliens de gauche, qui retiennent son message révolutionnaire.
A Berlin, Marx fréquente les clubs d’hégéliens « de gauche » et y adhère. Considéré comme des fauteurs de troubles potentiels, ils n’ont pas la faveur du régime. Marx, hégélien de gauche et juif, se voit empêché d’exercer sa profession de professeur d’université.
En 1842, comme alternative, il devient alors journaliste et crée à Cologne La Gazette rhénane, dont il est le rédacteur en chef à l’âge de 24 ans. Jeune journaliste, il milite pour la liberté de la presse et défend le libre-échange. Alors que sous l’Empire français, les libertés individuelles avaient progressé en Rhénanie, c’en est fini depuis l’occupation des Prussiens.
Ainsi, en 1843, bien que Marx démissionne de son poste, son journal est fermé.
Jenny von Westphalen, contre l’avis de sa famille aristocratique, se marie avec Marx la même année. Ils auront sept enfants. Avec sa femme, Marx part en exil en France, où il rencontre le poète Heinrich Heine, lui aussi fâché avec les Prussiens.
Il y rencontre également un autre hégélien de gauche, l’allemand Friedrich Engels installé en Angleterre et qui a fait des études sur la classe ouvrière anglaise.
Sous la pression des Prussiens, Guizot, le ministre français de l’Intérieur, ordonne l’expulsion de Marx qui s’exile en Belgique. Il écrit alors à son ami, le poète allemand Heinrich Heine : « De tous ceux que je laisse en partant, c’est la perte de Heine et du patrimoine qu’il représente qui m’est le plus pénible (…) J’aimerais vous emporter dans mes bagages. »
Marx se révolte contre l’idéalisme allemand et l’hypocrisie des intellectuels de son époque, et se plaint que « les philosophes n’ont fait qu’interpréter diversement le monde. Or, ce qui importe, c’est de le transformer ».
Expulsé à son tour de Bruxelles, Marx est de retour à Paris début 1948, puis, après le déclenchement de la révolution de mars, à Cologne. Expulsé de nouveau d’Allemagne, il revient à Paris qu’il doit finalement quitter pour Londres, où il restera définitivement en exil. Plusieurs de ses enfants meurent de façon précoce et ce n’est que grâce à l’argent d’Engels, qui a repris l’usine familiale à Manchester, qu’il arrive à joindre les deux bouts.
Enfin, c’est en 1867 qu’il publie le premier chapitre du Capital, ce qu’il affirme être le « missile le plus terrible » jamais lancé contre la bourgeoisie.
Jacques Attali, avec sa délectation habituelle, note pour sa part :
« La police britannique surveille cet apatride aux relations planétaires, mais ne s’intéresse pas spécialement à lui. Elle sait que, depuis son arrivée quinze ans auparavant, l’Empire britannique n’est pas son principal sujet de préoccupation, ni la Couronne sa principale ennemie. L’organisation internationale qu’il dirige, et à laquelle les syndicats britanniques sont si largement associés, n’est pas considérée comme hostile à la monarchie ; quant à ses livres, si rares, ils ne se vendent pas.
« Et même s’il a critiqué violemment, dans la presse américaine, Palmerston et la politique de Londres, il ne fait jamais le moindre appel à la violence ni ne remet en cause les institutions du pays. «
Cela n’a pas empêché Xi Jinping, pourtant considéré comme l’ennemi n°1 de l’Empire britannique, d’offrir à la ville de Trèves une énorme statue en bronze de Karl Marx en l’honneur de sa contribution !
Fondement de sa doctrine
Marx résume sa critique de l’exploitation capitaliste dans son œuvre principale, Le Capital, une critique de l’économie politique, publiée en quatre tomes. Le Tome I est publié en 1867, les trois autres seront publiés par son ami Friedrich Engels en 1885 et 1894, donc après la mort de Marx en 1883.
Pour tenter de combattre les énormes écarts de richesse de son époque et expliquer que le capitalisme engendre les conditions de sa propre destruction, Marx définit plusieurs concepts clés qui forment un tout cohérent.
Je ne prends ici que les principales :
- Comme socle philosophique : « le matérialisme dialectique » de Hegel.
- Enquête sur l’origine de « la plus-value ».
- Enquête sur le « coût du travail ».
- « Contradictions internes » du capitalisme dont la « baisse tendancielle du profit ».
- Solution : la « lutte des classes ».
1. Le matérialisme dialectique et historique
Il reprend le « matérialisme dialectique » du philosophe allemand G.W.F. Hegel, pour qui l’histoire obéit à une transformation dialectique qui engendre une nouvelle réalité.
Ce qui séduit le jeune Marx c’est la notion de dialectique que Hegel reprend de Platon : une marche de la pensée procédant par contradictions surmontées en allant de « l’affirmation » à « la négation », et de la négation à « la négation de la négation » (on dit parfois : thèse, antithèse, synthèse).
Pour sa démonstration, Hegel pervertit le concept de l’Idée chez Platon. Pour Hegel, c’est le dynamisme de l’Esprit qui se réalise dans l’histoire du monde. Le devenir s’opère par dépassements successifs des contradictions. Dépasser, ici, c’est nier mais en conservant, sans anéantir.
On pourrait dire qu’il s’agit d’une lecture aristotélicienne de la fameuse « coïncidence des opposés » développés par le cardinal Nicolas de Cues lors des débats théologiques sur la Trinité précédant le concile de Florence.
En 1807, dans son œuvre principale, La phénoménologie de l’Esprit, Hegel donne un exemple de sa démarche avec sa « dialectique du maître et de l’esclave ».
Tout homme, pour connaître et se connaître, a besoin de reconnaissance. Dans une première phase, dans un duel à mort, c’est le maître qui accepte le risque de mourir pour arracher la reconnaissance de l’autre qui lui, y renonce. Or, celui qui refuse ce risque se rend esclave de celui qui prend ce risque.
Ensuite, dans un processus dialectique, on assiste à une inversion des rôles. Car, contrairement au maître, l’esclave travaille. Et en travaillant à transformer, il va se transformer lui-même et donc s’ouvrir la voie de l’autonomie. Le maître, lui, ne travaille pas, il fait réaliser l’objet consommable, puis s’en approprie la jouissance. Ainsi, puisque le maître dépend du travail effectué par l’esclave, les rôles s’inversent et le maître devient l’esclave de son esclave. Enfin, lorsque l’esclave accepte de risquer sa propre vie, c’est lui et non pas le maître qui devient l’agent de la révolution historique.
Cette dialectique a largement de quoi séduire les jeunes rebelles de la génération de Marx !
Dans la préface de la deuxième édition du Capital (1867) Marx indique sa filiation avec la pensée de Hegel tout en précisant sa différence :
Sa différence avec Hegel :
« Ma méthode dialectique ne diffère pas seulement quant au fondement, de la méthode hégélienne : elle en est le contraire direct. Pour Hegel, le processus de la pensée, dont il fait même, sous le nom d’idée, un sujet autonome, est le créateur de la réalité qui n’en est que le phénomène extérieur. Pour moi, le monde des idées, n’est que le monde matériel, transposé et traduit dans l’esprit humain.«
Sa filiation avec Hegel :
« (la dialectique) est un scandale et un objet d’horreur aux yeux des bourgeois (…) et cela pour différentes raisons : dans l’intelligence positive des choses existantes, elle implique en même temps l’intelligence de leur négation, de leur destruction nécessaire ; elle conçoit toute forme en cours de mouvement et, par conséquent, d’après son côté périssable ; elle ne se laisse imposer de rien et est, de par son essence, critique et révolutionnaire.«
Soulignons qu’aujourd’hui, Hegel est une des grandes références des néoconservateurs anglo-américains pour la simple raison qu’il arrive à la conclusion que l’historicité de l’existence humaine est impossible sans la violence. Un monde entièrement pacifique est en contradiction avec la nature de cette historicité. L’existence humaine est, par conséquent, mieux comprise en termes de lutte à mort pour la reconnaissance que de recherche d’harmonie, comme le prônent les moralistes.
La dialectique chez Marx
Marx reprend la dialectique du maître (le capitaliste) et de l’esclave (le travailleur). Mais plutôt que de la situer sur le plan de l’esprit, il la situe sur le plan économique.
Selon lui, c’est l’évolution du travail qui va transformer les hommes et les rapports sociaux. Car par le travail, l’homme se produit lui-même et produit la société. Car pour Marx, « ce n’est pas la conscience des hommes qui détermine leur existence, c’est au contraire leur existence sociale qui détermine leur conscience ».
L’histoire, en gros, se résume à une succession « logique » de modes de production : communautés primitives, esclavagisme, féodalisme, capitalisme et communisme.
Cependant, comme le note Jacques Cheminade dans La faille du marxisme,
« le pire aspect de Marx est qu’il falsifie l’histoire de l’économie politique. Il la fait partir de la publication de La Richesse des nations d’Adam Smith (Londres, 1776), véritable manifeste de la Compagnie des Indes orientales britannique, qui avait pris le contrôle de la monarchie anglaise à la fin de la guerre de Sept ans, en 1763. Plus d’un siècle et demi après la publication de Société et Economie de Leibniz (1671), Marx n’a rien à dire d’intéressant sur le colbertisme ou le mercantilisme, rien sur Lazare Carnot et sa théorie des machines, rien sur l’Ecole polytechnique et les travaux de Chaptal ou Dupin, rien sur les fondateurs économiques de l’Etat-nation, rien de passionnant sur Laffemas, Montchrestien ou Sully, rien de sérieux sur le développement industriel des Etats-Unis contre le régime impérial britannique.«
Pour Marx, le capitalisme naît exclusivement avec la naissance du salariat et pas avant.
A cela, précise Cheminade, il faut ajouter que:
« Marx découple toute morale de son analyse historique. Pour lui, l’esclavage – malgré l’ouvrage que lui a adressé Henry Carey [sur cette question] et ce qu’il sait des Etats-Unis – est une étape nécessaire dans l’accumulation du capital, et c’est grâce à l’accumulation produite par l’esclavage que le passage au féodalisme a été possible, de même que c’est grâce à l’accumulation produite par le servage que le capitalisme a pu apparaître. Il s’agit pour Marx d’étapes sans doute tragiques, injustes, mais nécessaires, fatales.«
Comme chez Hegel, l’histoire se déroule (presque) en dehors de toute intervention humaine. Pourtant, Marx n’a pas tort lorsqu’il constate que le progrès scientifique et technologique change les rapports sociaux :
« Les rapports sociaux sont intimement liés aux forces productives. En acquérant de nouvelles forces productives, les hommes changent leur mode de production, et en changeant le mode de production, la manière de gagner leur vie, ils changent tous leurs rapports sociaux. Le moulin à bras vous donnera la société avec le suzerain ; le moulin à vapeur, la société avec le capitalisme industriel.«
En 1848, dans Le Manifeste, Marx et Engels, pour nous convaincre de cette dialectique historique, se félicitent de la façon dont la bourgeoisie (c’est-à-dire le capitalisme) a liquidé la féodalité et le nationalisme (ce que nous appelons la mondialisation aujourd’hui) :
« Par l’exploitation du marché mondial, la bourgeoisie donne un caractère cosmopolite à la production et à la consommation de tous les pays. Au grand désespoir des réactionnaires, elle a enlevé à l’industrie sa base nationale. Les vieilles industries nationales ont été détruites et le sont encore chaque jour. Elles sont supplantées par de nouvelles industries (…) qui n’emploient plus de matières premières indigènes, mais des matières premières venues des régions les plus lointaines, et dont les produits se consomment non seulement dans le pays même, mais dans toutes les parties du globe. (…)
« À la place de l’ancien isolement des provinces et des nations se suffisant à elles-mêmes, se développent des relations universelles, une interdépendance universelle des nations.«
Ainsi, autant la féodalité a créé les conditions de sa propre destruction en accouchant du capitalisme, autant elle crée les conditions pour l’enfantement d’une société nouvelle. Par exemple, en concentrant les moyens de production dans d’énormes unités, les capitalistes créent les conditions où la classe ouvrière peut prendre conscience de son rôle en tant que classe et le cas échéant, renverser le système.
Sa vision dialectique l’amène à voir le système de son époque comme mourant, tout en étant optimiste sur celui qui peut émerger.
« À grands traits, les modes de production asiatique, antique, féodal et bourgeois moderne peuvent être qualifiés d’époques progressives de la formation sociale économique. Les rapports de production bourgeois sont la dernière forme contradictoire du processus de production sociale (…) Cependant les forces productives qui se développent au sein de la société bourgeoise créent en même temps les conditions matérielles pour résoudre cette contradiction. Avec cette formation sociale s’achève donc la préhistoire de la société humaine.«
Cependant, ces passages d’une plateforme sociétale inférieure à une plus élevée ne sont pas le résultat d’idées, mais la conséquence mécanique du matérialisme historique et d’une « lutte des classes » érigée en moteur exclusif de l’histoire dont elle accélère le déroulement.
Et pour expliciter que les idées n’y changent rien, il dira :
« À toute époque, les idées de la classe dominante sont les idées dominantes ; autrement dit, la classe qui est la puissance matérielle dominante de la société est en même temps la puissance spirituelle dominante.«
2. La plus-value et l’exploitation
La plus grande contribution de Marx à la science économique, nous dit-on, est son analyse de la plus-value.
Or, comme nous allons le montrer, elle est non seulement inopérante mais fondée sur des méthodes comptables, c’est-à-dire des axiomes erronés où l’on cherche à mesurer le monde vivant et en expansion avec des critères gouvernant le monde des objets morts et finis.
Dès qu’il parle macro-économie, en adoptant les méthodes comptables des physiocrates, Marx, tout comme hélas Rosa Luxemburg, se déleste de sa dialectique et de son amour pour un monde en transformation permanente…
Au lieu de provoquer une révolution axiomatique, Marx s’acharne à vouloir « prouver » qu’il a raison dans les mêmes termes utilisés par ceux qu’il conteste. Une approche suicidaire et fortement déconseillée !
Or, comme le disait un jour l’économiste américain Lyndon LaRouche : un vrai révolutionnaire, c’est quelqu’un qui, comme Einstein, commence par démontrer que tout ce qu’il a appris à l’école est totalement erroné et à le jeter à la poubelle de l’histoire ! Ce n’est, hélas, pas le cas de Marx, qui fait les poubelles de l’histoire pour alimenter sa théorie.
Une histoire de petits pois
A force de les étudier, Marx s’est fait infecter par ce que j’appellerais le « virus physiocrate ».
En économie politique, le plus connu de cette école était l’un des médecins de Louis XV, le Dr François Quesnay (1694-1774), membre de l’Académie des Sciences et de la Royal Society britannique, qui présenta en 1758 son « Tableau économique ».
Ses disciples, très nombreux, se réunissaient souvent. Parmi eux, Dupont de Nemours et Mirabeau notamment.
Or, pour Quesnay et les physiocrates, qui défendent la propriété privée et la liberté d’entreprendre, seule la terre est productive et source de richesse : c’est elle seule qui peut fournir un surplus.
Selon eux, la nation se réduit à trois classes :
- la « classe productive » constituée par les exploitants agricoles,
- la « classe des propriétaires fonciers », qui vivent de la rente et collectent la dîme,
- la « classe stérile », composée des artisans, manufacturiers et marchands.
Considérée comme utile et nécessaire, l’industrie est qualifiée de « stérile » car accusée de ne créer aucune « vraie » richesse.
Ecoutons le physiocrate italien Paoletti :
« L’industrie ne crée rien ; elle donne des formes, modifie. Mais, me dira-t-on, puisqu’elle crée des formes, elle est productive. Entendu. Mais elle ne crée pas de richesse, elle en dépense au contraire… L’économie politique suppose et étudie une production matérielle ; or, celle-ci ne se rencontre que dans l’agriculture qui, seule, multiplie la matière et les produits qui constituent la richesse… L’industrie achète à l’agriculture les matières premières pour les façonner ; en donnant à ces matières une forme déterminée, elle ne leur ajoute rien, ne les augmente pas… Remettez à un cuisinier des petits pois pour qu’il vous prépare un repas. Il vous les apportera sur la table, bien cuits et bien assaisonnés, mais la quantité n’aura pas changé. Donnez une égale quantité de petits pois à un jardinier avec ordre de les semer. Le moment venu, il vous en rendra pour le moins le quadruple. Voici la seule, l’unique production.«
Ainsi, le Tableau économique de Quesnay, véritable début de la macro-économie, tente de démontrer du point de vue comptable que c’est grâce à la classe productive (l’agriculture) que la société parvient à se reproduire comme un tout.
Quesnay donne comme exemple un royaume dont la production agricole rapporte chaque année 5 milliards. Cette somme est d’abord partagée entre la classe productive qui reçoit 3 milliards et la classe des propriétaires qui en reçoit 2. Cette dernière dépense les 2 milliards qu’elle reçoit en donnant un milliard à la classe productive et un autre à la classe stérile.
Cependant, la classe stérile reçoit un autre milliard de la classe productive ce qui fait deux en tout, une somme qu’elle va à son tour employer à la classe productive en achats pour la subsistance de ses agents et les matières premières de ses ouvrages. Et puisque la classe productive dépense elle-même les deux milliards restants en production, on retrouve la somme totale des 5 milliards de la richesse annuelle.
Pour enrichir la nation il faut donc donner primauté absolue à l’agriculture, seule source de plus-value, et réduire l’intervention de l’Etat, notamment en supprimant les réglementations qui entravent l’agriculture et le commerce. Si pour les physiocrates, la source de la richesse c’est la nature, pour les économistes classiques (Ricardo, Smith, etc.), c’est le libre-échange.
Ricardo n’est, au fond, qu’un post-physiocrate :
« Le produit de la terre, c’est-à-dire tout ce que l’on retire de sa surface par l’utilisation conjointe du travail, des machines et du capital, est réparti entre trois classes de la communauté : les propriétaires de la terre, les détenteurs du fonds ou capital nécessaire à son exploitation, et les travailleurs qui la cultivent. (…) Déterminer les lois qui gouvernent cette répartition, constitue le principal problème en Économie politique.«
La plus-value chez Marx
Regardons maintenant dans Le Capital de Marx comment il analyse le « procès » de production de la plus-value :
Le capital C se décompose en deux parties : une somme d’argent c dépensée pour les moyens de production, et une somme d’argent v dépensée pour la force de travail ; c représente la partie de la valeur transformée en capital constant, c la partie transformée en capital variable.
A l’origine, nous avons donc : C = c + v
Par exemple, le capital avance 500 livres sterling = 410 (c) + 90 (v)
A la fin du processus, il résulte de la marchandise, dont la valeur est c + v + pl (plus-value) ;
Nous avons donc : 410 (c) + 90 (v) + 90 (pl)
Le capital primitif C ou 500 livres sterling est devenu C’ ou 590 livres sterling. La différence est pl, soit une plus-value de 90 livres sterling.
Enfin, Marx appelle « composition organique du capital » (co) le rapport entre c et v.
Avec l’accumulation du capital, la co du capital augmente, c’est-à-dire que la part du capital variable diminue, et que celle du capital constant augmente. Le travail humain sera de plus en plus remplacé par le travail des machines et des robots.
Cependant, Marx persiste à soutenir que le « travail salarié » est la source exclusive de plus-value (Pl).
En réalité, copiant Adam Smith, il réduit v au seul travail « salarié », c’est-à-dire produisant une plus-value… financière et non pas une plus-value physique :
« Seule la forme sous laquelle [le] surtravail est extorqué au producteur immédiat, l’ouvrier, distingue les formations sociales économiques, par exemple la société esclavagiste de celle du travail salarié.«
Parmi les économistes, une blague circule qui se moque des méthodes comptables employées pour calculer le Produit intérieur brut (PIB) : « Si tu veux faire chuter le PIB, épouse ta femme de ménage ! »
3. Le coût du travail
Par contre, Marx analyse bien deux phénomènes : le coût du travail et la dérive de ce que nous appelons aujourd’hui le capitalisme financier.
Alors qu’il ne voit la plus-value produite que sous la forme de la conversion de la marchandise produite en valeur monétaire, il refuse, avec raison, de réduire le coût de production au simple coût du travail fourni pour une production donnée.
L’idée de base consiste à distinguer la valeur du travail (valeur, en temps de travail, des marchandises vendues par le capitaliste) et la valeur de la force de travail (salaire reçu par le salarié, supposé égal au temps de travail nécessaire pour reproduire sa force de travail). Ce que le capitaliste doit payer, dit Marx, ce n’est donc pas le coût « du travail », mais le coût « de la force de travail », c’est-à-dire les conditions de son existence dans la durée en tant que force productive.
C’est la différence entre la plus-value et le coût de cette « force de travail » qui définit la marge du profit du capitaliste.
Or ce dernier ne pense plus qu’à s’enrichir à tout prix. Marx constate que, déjà à son époque, le capital financier prend le dessus sur le capitalisme industriel. Si avant, en convertissant la marchandise en argent, un producteur pouvait acheter une autre marchandise, le but final n’est plus désormais la production ou la consommation, mais l’accumulation primitive du capital, c’est-à-dire faire plus d’argent avec de l’argent.
A partir de cette théorie de la valeur-travail, Marx va déduire sa théorie de l’exploitation de la force de travail. Pour ce faire, Marx affirme que les ouvriers vendent non pas le produit de leur travail, mais leur « force de travail ».
Ce que le propriétaire de l’entreprise achète, c’est leur capacité physique et intellectuelle à faire un travail : c’est leur force de travail. La force de travail est donc une marchandise. Pour Marx, c’est une marchandise exceptionnelle car elle permet de créer plus de valeur qu’elle n’en a coûté (c’est la plus-value).
Exemple : si le salarié travaille 9 heures par jour et que le salaire ne représente que 4 heures de travail, la plus-value sera de 5 heures. Ce temps de « surtravail » est à l’origine du profit du capitaliste.
Le capitalisme ne peut donc vivre sans l’exploitation du prolétariat. Les relations entre classes sociales ne peuvent être qu’antagonistes puisque l’une (capitaliste) n’existe que par l’exploitation de l’autre (prolétaire).
« Le capital est du travail mort, qui ne s’anime qu’en suçant tel un vampire du travail vivant, et qui est d’autant plus vivant qu’il en suce davantage.«
C’est sur cette base que le socialiste français Paul Lafargue élabore son Droit à la Paresse. Une fois que le salarié a produit ce qu’il faut pour la simple reproduction de la société, il peut renoncer sans danger à produire la plus-value pour les capitalistes. (Note 1)
Les moyens d’accroître la plus-value
Les capitalistes cherchent toujours à accroître la plus-value. Ils disposent à cet effet de deux moyens :
- accroître la pl absolue en augmentant les cadences ou la durée du travail et par conséquent « le travail gratuit » ;
- accroître la pl relative en développant la productivité ou en diminuant le temps de travail nécessaire à la production des biens et services destinés à la reproduction de la force de travail.
Pourtant, Marx reste optimiste, car:
« le capitalisme contribue au progrès de la civilisation en ce qu’il extrait ce surtravail par des procédés et sous des formes qui sont plus favorables que ceux des systèmes précédents (esclavage, servage, etc.) au développement des forces productives, à l’extension des rapports sociaux et à l’éclosion des facteurs d’une culture supérieure. Il prépare ainsi une forme sociale plus élevée, dans laquelle l’une des parties de la société ne jouira plus, au détriment de l’autre, du pouvoir et du monopole du développement social, avec les avantages matériels et intellectuels qui s’y rattachent, et dans laquelle le surtravail aura pour effet la réduction du temps consacré au travail matériel en général.«
4. Les « contradictions internes » du système capitaliste
Pour Marx, le capitalisme est un système historiquement daté et fondé sur l’exploitation de la force de travail, appelé à disparaître à cause de ses contradictions internes qui ne peuvent se résoudre qu’en passant à un régime fondé sur la propriété collective des moyens de production.
Ces contradictions sont au nombre de trois :
a) baisse tendancielle du taux de profit
b) paupérisation de la classe ouvrière
c) crise de surproduction
Marx cherche à montrer qu’avec le développement du capitalisme, on assistera à une opposition croissante entre une majorité misérable (prolétaires) et une minorité de riches propriétaires des moyens de production. La condition de la classe ouvrière doit se dégrader davantage avec le progrès technique et la concentration du capital. Cette dégradation débouchera un jour sur la révolte « expropriation des expropriateurs ».
a) Baisse tendancielle du profit
Le taux de profit selon Marx s’écrit : Pl/c+v
Comme nous l’avons indiqué, le rapport entre C et V définit ce que Marx appelle la « composition organique » du capital. Aujourd’hui on dirait que cette fonction indique s’il s’agit d’une économie « à faible intensité capitalistique » ou « à faible intensité de main d’œuvre ». Le premier modèle est celui du tiers-monde, le deuxième celui des pays avancés.
Pour Marx, la logique veut que si la composition organique augment, c’est-à-dire si le capitaliste investit dans l’amélioration de l’appareil productif (l’utilisation de la machine à la place de l’homme), par simple effet mécanique la part de v par rapport à c baissera. Et puisque selon son dogme, c’est exclusivement v (c’est-à-dire le travail salarié) qui est source de Pl, le taux de profit subira logiquement une baisse tendancielle.
b) Paupérisation de la classe ouvrière
L’augmentation de c, c’est-à-dire le remplacement de l’homme par la machine, conduit donc à des licenciements et une paupérisation de la force de travail. Or, faute de travail, le pouvoir d’achat de la force de travail chutera, provoquant une baisse de la consommation.
c) Crise de surproduction
Bien que cette baisse soit perçue par la classe capitaliste comme une « crise de surproduction », il s’agit en réalité d’une crise de sous-consommation puisque les besoins élémentaires des populations ne sont pas satisfaits.
« La contradiction de ce mode de production capitaliste réside dans sa tendance à développer de manière absolue les forces productives, qui entrent sans cesse en conflit avec les conditions spécifiques de la production dans lesquelles se meut le capital.
Car, « l’expansibilité immense et intermittente du système de fabrique, jointe à sa dépendance du marché universel, enfante nécessairement une production furieuse suivie d’un encombrement des marchés dont la contraction amène la paralysie.
« La raison ultime de toutes les crises réelles, précise Marx, c’est toujours la pauvreté et la consommation restreinte des masses. (…) C’est une pure tautologie de dire : les crises proviennent de ce que la consommation solvable ou les consommateurs capables de payer font défaut. (…). Dire que les marchandises sont invendables ne signifie rien d’autre que : il ne s’est pas trouvé pour elles d’acheteurs capables de payer, donc de consommateurs.«
Ainsi la « baisse tendancielle du profit » crée un cercle vicieux :
- concurrence grandissante
- surexploitation
- paupérisation
- crise de surproduction
- baisse tendancielle du profit
- spéculation boursière
Ces contradictions peuvent être freinées par la conquête de débouchés extérieurs. Marx pense bien sûr aux puissances européennes qui, pour compenser la baisse tendancielle du profit, se lancent dans le colonialisme en Afrique, en Asie et ailleurs.
Marx contre le protectionnisme
Aux Etats-Unis, Marx était totalement enthousiasmé à l’idée d’écrire pour le New York Tribune, surtout qu’il avait vraiment besoin d’argent. Le journal lui permettait d’enseigner le socialisme aux capitalistes. A cela s’ajoute qu’entre 1852 et 1854, presqu’un demi million d’Allemands ont émigré vers les Etats-Unis via New York, dont certains avaient participé à la révolution de 1848.
La Tribune était également le porte-voix des transcendentalistes américain, de sentiment assez opposé au capitalisme.
Le journal a publié 487 articles de Marx, 350 écrits de sa main et 12 en coopération avec Engels, les autres 125 étant signés par Engels tout seul. Un quart des articles ont été publiés comme des éditoriaux non signés.
A un moment donné, Marx dit à Engels que « depuis deux mois, l’équipe Marx-Engels a fonctionné quasiment comme l’équipe éditoriale de la Tribune », tellement leurs écrits furent utilisés.
Henry Charles Carey, le plus grand économiste protectionniste de l’époque et conseiller de Lincoln, était alors considéré comme « le patron virtuel » du journal. En 1852, il envoie à Marx deux de ses livres, dont L’harmonie des intérêts où, reprenant les doctrines d’Alexander Hamilton et de Henry Clay, il résume les doctrines de ce que les historiens appellent le Système américain d’économie politique.
Marx n’était pas particulièrement emballé par les écrits de Carey. Ainsi, dans une lettre à Engels, il note que Carey a « changé de camp ». Avant de devenir protectionniste et faire l’éloge de l’Etat, « Carey se plaignait d’un Etat trop interventionniste dans les affaires ». Ensuite, Carey, comme l’indique le nom de son livre, semblait sur une autre planète en termes de « lutte des classes ».
Dans sa lettre du 5 mars 1952 à Weydemeyer, Marx se lâche :
« H.C. Carey (de Philadelphie), le seul économiste d’importance, est la preuve éclatante que la société civile américaine manque de maturité pour fournir une réponse claire et cohérente à propos de lutte des classes.«
Et il poursuit :
« Il (Carey) s’en prend à Ricardo, le représentant le plus classique de la bourgeoisie et l’adversaire le plus stoïque du prolétariat, accusé d’être un homme dont les œuvres sont un arsenal pour les anarchistes, les socialistes et tous les ennemis du système bourgeois. Il en veut, pas seulement à lui, mais à Malthus, Mill, Say, Torrens, Wakefield, McCulloch, Senior, Whately, R. Jones et d’autres, les économistes les plus en vogue d’Europe, pour morceler la société et préparer la guerre civile parce qu’ils montrent que les bases des différentes classes tendent à faire naître des antagonismes croissants entre eux. Il tente de les réfuter (…) en montrant que les conditions économiques (la propriété), le profit (capital) et les salaires (travail salarié), au lieu d’être des conditions de combat et d’antagonismes, sont plutôt des conditions d’association et d’harmonie. La seule chose qu’il prouve, évidemment, c’est qu’il prend les conditions ‘sous-développées’ des Etats-Unis pour des ‘conditions normales’.«
« Même Carey lui-même est frappé par le début de disharmonie aux Etats-Unis. Quelle est la source de ce phénomène étrange ? Carey l’explique par l’influence destructrice de l’Angleterre, par son désir d’arriver à un monopole industriel sur le marché mondial (…) L’Angleterre crée une entorse à toutes les relations économiques du monde (…) L’harmonie des relations économiques repose, selon Carey, sur la coopération harmonieuse des villes et de la campagne, de l’industrie et de l’agriculture. Ayant dissout cette harmonie fondamentale chez elle, en Angleterre, dans une concurrence, elle procède à la détruire sur le marché mondial, et elle est donc l’élément destructeur de l’harmonie générale. La seule défense sont les tarifs protecteurs – la barricade nationale contre l’industrie anglaise de grande taille (…) Ainsi, toutes les relations qui lui apparaissent comme harmonieuses à l’intérieur des frontières nationales spécifiques ou autrement, dans la forme abstraite des relations générales de la société bourgeoise, (…) lui apparaissent comme disharmonieuses là où elles apparaissent dans leur forme la plus développée : le marché mondial.«
Le 14 juin 1853, il écrit à Engels : « Ton article sur la Suisse était évidemment une gifle indirecte contre la ligne qui domine la Tribune et son Carey. J’ai continué cette guerre cachée (hidden warfare) dans mon premier article sur l’Inde, dans lequel la destruction de l’industrie domestique indienne par l’Angleterre est décrite comme révolutionnaire. Ce sera drôlement choquant pour lui.«
Tout en rajoutant : « Les Britanniques, soit dit en passant, ont géré l’Inde comme des porcs, et cela perdure jusqu’aujourd’hui.«
Contre Carey, on vient de le voir, Marx mènera, comme un idéologue et surtout comme un journaliste, à moitié sérieux, à moitié pour rire, une « guerre de l’ombre ».
En 1841, Friedrich List, un autre père fondateur du protectionnisme intelligent (inspiré par le Français Chaptal), publie son Système national d’économie politique. Engels incite alors Marx à écrire au plus vite une réfutation des thèses protectionnistes.
Marx s’acquitta de la tâche, sans toutefois faire publier son analyse. Elle le sera bien plus tard sous le titre Notes critiques sur Friedrich List.
Marx y traite List de « philistin » : « Au lieu d’étudier l’histoire réelle, M. List cherche à deviner les mauvais buts secrets des individus.«
Pour Marx, les nations appartiennent à tout le monde : « La nationalité du travailleur n’est pas française, anglaise, allemande, c’est le capital. L’air qu’il respire chez lui n’est pas l’air français, anglais, allemand, c’est l’air des usines (…) ». Pour en conclure que « l’argent est la patrie de l’industriel« .
Du point de vue de la dialectique, Marx estime que, de toute façon, l’extension du capitalisme à la terre entière allait susciter la naissance de l’Internationale ouvrière.
Le 7 janvier 1848, dans son « Discours sur la question du libre-échange« , Marx déploie sa dialectique sophiste :
« Il faut choisir : soit on refuse l’ensemble de l’économie politique, telle qu’elle existe à présent, soit il faut admettre que la liberté des échanges entraînera une sévérité accrue des lois de l’économie politique à l’égard des classes laborieuses. Est-ce dire que nous sommes contre le libre-échange ? Non point, nous sommes partisans du libre-échange parce qu’avec le libre-échange, toutes les lois de l’économie, avec leurs étonnantes contradictions, peuvent s’exercer à une plus grande échelle, et s’étendre à un vaste territoire, voire la terre entière. L’accumulation de ces contradictions résultera en un combat final qui permettra l’émancipation des prolétaires.«
Certes, ce discours venait deux ans après l’abolition des lois protectionnistes sur la production céréalière (corn laws), défendue par les Chartistes anglais. Marx y fait référence lorsqu’il dit : « En général, si l’on veut le libre-échange, c’est pour soulager la condition de la classe laborieuse ( …) Frapper de droits protecteurs les grains étrangers, c’est infâme, c’est spéculer sur la famine des peuples… »
Et surtout, au « protectionnisme national et bourgeois », Marx préfère un « libre-échange étendant à la totalité du monde les contradictions du capitalisme ». Point de vue cynique, en un sens, puisqu’il s’agissait pour Marx de pousser les ouvriers à participer à leur propre défaite : cessons de vouloir domestiquer un capitalisme qu’il faut accompagner à la destruction !
Le protectionnisme intelligent défendu par Carey et List est donc systématiquement combattu par Marx sur des bases idéologiques et économiques. « L’illusion » d’une solution gagnant-gagnant prônée par L’harmonie des intérêts de Carey n’est considérée que comme une fausse solution, retardant la fin du capitalisme inscrite dans le code génétique de la dialectique historique. Aujourd’hui Marx dirait sans doute la même chose de la Chine lorsqu’elle propose une coopération gagnant-gagnant et des politiques économiques « inclusives », tout en disant éventuellement que l’extension du capitalisme là-bas porte les promesses de son éradication.
C’est pour cette opposition viscérale à toute idée d’Etat-nation moderne, que l’extrême-gauche actuelle déteste autant le président Franklin Roosevelt.
L’Etat s’éteindra avec le capitalisme
Au-delà de la régulation économique, Marx dira tout et son contraire sur l’Etat. Marx et Engels voient avant tout l’Etat comme un instrument aux mains de la classe dominante (la bourgeoisie), destinée à dominer la classe des prolétaires. Mais pour assurer sa domination, la bourgeoisie confie à l’Etat la gestion de ses intérêts généraux et peut lui confier une certaine autonomie. Bien que l’Etat s’élève parfois « au-dessus des classes » pour rétablir un ordre social menacé, il ne peut jamais agir pour « l’intérêt général », car ce concept n’est qu’une invention des capitalistes pour endormir les masses.
Pourtant, le 5e point du Manifeste de 1848 exige « la centralisation du crédit entre les mains de l’Etat, par une banque nationale à capital d’Etat et à monopole exclusif ».
Pour Marx et Engels, la dictature du prolétariat est une phase transitoire vers une société sans classes, où l’Etat « s’éteindra ».
Engels précise cette dialectique dans L’origine de la famille, de la propriété privée et de l’Etat, dont une sixième édition parut à Stuttgart dès 1894 :
« Le prolétariat s’empare du pouvoir d’Etat et transforme les moyens de production d’abord en propriété d’Etat. Mais par là, il se supprime lui-même en tant que prolétariat, il supprime toutes les différences et oppositions de classes, et également en tant qu’Etat. La société antérieure, évoluant dans des oppositions de classes, avait besoin de l’Etat, c’est-à-dire, dans chaque cas, d’une organisation de la classe exploiteuse pour maintenir ses conditions de production extérieures, donc surtout pour maintenir par la force la classe exploitée dans les conditions d’oppression données par le mode de production existant (esclavage, servage, salariat). (…) Quand il finit par devenir effectivement le représentant de toute la société, il se rend lui-même superflu.
Dès qu’il n’y a plus de classe sociale à tenir dans l’oppression ; dès que, avec la domination de classe et la lutte pour l’existence individuelle motivée par l’anarchie antérieure de la production, sont éliminés également les collisions et les excès qui en résultent, il n’y a plus rien à réprimer qui rende nécessaire un pouvoir de répression, un Etat.
Le premier acte dans lequel l’Etat apparaît réellement comme représentant de toute la société, – la prise de possession des moyens de production au nom de la société -, est en même temps son dernier acte propre en tant qu’Etat. L’intervention d’un pouvoir d’Etat dans des rapports sociaux devient superflue dans un domaine après l’autre, et entre alors naturellement en sommeil. Le gouvernement des personnes fait place à l’administration des choses et à la direction des opérations de production. L’Etat n’est pas ‘aboli’, il s’éteint.«
Ainsi, pense Marx, lutte de classes aidant, le capitalisme est condamné à disparaître et avec lui, cet outil de répression qu’est l’Etat.
5. La lutte des classes
D’après la dialectique matérialiste reprise par Marx de Hegel, comme nous l’avons vu plus haut, ce ne sont pas les idées qui changent le monde, mais le changement des rapports de classes résultant des changements dans les rapports de production. Et ce changement est sa propre cause.
Car, « À un certain stade de leur développement, les forces productives matérielles de la société entrent en contradiction avec les rapports de production existants, ou, ce qui n’en est que l’expression juridique, avec les rapports de propriété au sein desquels elles s’étaient mues jusqu’alors. De formes de développement des forces productives qu’ils étaient, ces rapports en deviennent des entraves. Alors s’ouvre une époque de révolution sociale.«
Précisons qu’avant Marx, on qualifiait de classe chaque profession ayant un revenu différent : les propriétaires fonciers vivaient de la rente, les entrepreneurs, du capital investi, et les travailleurs de leur salaire. Or, Marx et Engels, un brin complotistes, décrètent, notamment dans Le Manifeste, que désormais le monde se réduit à deux classes : la bourgeoisie (les capitalistes) et le prolétariat (qui vend sa force de travail), dont l’une ne peut prospérer qu’en détruisant l’autre.
Philosophiquement, Marx et surtout Engels introduisent donc ce fameux gagnant-perdant qui est l’essence même des forces qu’ils prétendent combattre. Si aujourd’hui vos enfants sont inondés de jeux vidéos, c’est bien parce que ces « jeux » permettent aux grands sorciers du GAFAM de leur imposer les mêmes « valeurs » et le « paradigme » d’un monde où le « gagnant-gagnant pour tous » est tout simplement impossible.
« Maintenant, dit Marx, en ce qui me concerne, ce n’est pas à moi que revient le mérite d’avoir découvert l’existence des classes dans la société moderne, pas plus que la lutte qu’elles s’y livrent. Des historiens bourgeois avaient exposé bien avant moi l’évolution historique de cette lutte des classes et des économistes bourgeois en avaient décrit l’anatomie économique. Ce que j’ai apporté de nouveau, c’est : de démontrer que l’existence des classes n’est liée qu’à des phases historiques déterminées du développement de la production ; que la lutte des classes mène nécessairement à la dictature du prolétariat ; que cette dictature elle-même ne représente qu’une transition vers l’abolition de toutes les classes et vers une société sans classes.«
Jaurès contre Marx
Jean Jaurès, en 1901, dans son introduction aux Etudes socialistes, tout en rendant hommage à Marx pour ses contributions, ne va pas hésiter à faire quelques mises au point notamment en disant : « Je dirai presque que Marx avait besoin d’un prolétariat infiniment appauvri et dénué dans sa conception dialectique de l’histoire moderne. »
Car:
« c’est sous une transposition hégélienne du christianisme que Marx se représente le mouvement moderne d’émancipation. De même que le Dieu chrétien s’est abaissé au plus bas de l’humanité souffrante pour relever l’humanité toute entière, de même que le Sauveur, pour sauver en effet tous les hommes, a dû se réduire à ce degré de dénuement tout voisin de l’animalité, (…) de même dans la dialectique de Marx, le prolétariat, le Sauveur moderne, a dû être dépouillé de toute garantie, dévêtu de tout droit, abaissé au plus profond du néant historique et social, pour relever en se relevant toute l’humanité.«
De là, précise Jaurès, « chez Marx, une tendance originelle à accueillir difficilement l’idée d’un relèvement partiel du prolétariat. De là une sorte de joie, où il entre quelque mysticité dialectique, à constater les forces d’écrasement qui pèsent sur les prolétaires.«
« Marx se trompait, dit Jaurès. Ce n’est pas du dénuement absolu que pouvait venir la libération absolue. Quelque pauvre que fût le prolétaire allemand, il n’était pas la pauvreté suprême. D’abord dans l’ouvrier moderne il y a d’emblée toute la part d’humanité conquise par l’abolition des sauvageries et des barbaries premières, par l’abolition de l’esclavage et du servage. Puis, quelque médiocres que fussent en effet à ce moment les titres historiques propres des prolétaires allemands, ils n’en étaient point tout à fait démunis.
« Leur histoire, depuis la Révolution française, n’était pas tout à fait vide. Et surtout, par leur sympathie pour l’action émancipatrice des prolétaires français, des ouvriers du 14 juillet, des 5 et 6 octobre, du 10 août, des sections parisiennes, ils avaient une part dans les titres historiques du prolétariat français, devenus des titres universels, comme la Déclaration des droits de l’homme avait été un symbole universel, comme la chute de la Bastille avait été une délivrance universelle.
Au moment même où Marx écrivait pour le prolétariat allemand ces paroles de mystique abaissement et de mystique résurrection, les prolétaires allemands, comme d’ailleurs Marx lui-même, tournaient leur cœur et leurs yeux vers la France, vers la grande patrie des titres historiques du prolétariat.
« Mais quoi d’étrange que Marx, avec cette conception dialectique première, ait accordé la primauté dans l’évolution capitaliste à la tendance de dépression ? Quoi d’étonnant que dans Le Capital encore il ait écrit que ’l’oppression, l’esclavage, l’exploitation, la misère, s’accroissaient’, mais aussi ’la résistance de la classe ouvrière’ (…)«
« Les socialistes, précise Jaurès, les uns ouvertement, les autres avec des précautions infinies, quelques-uns avec une malicieuse bonhomie viennoise, tous déclarent qu’il est faux que dans l’ensemble la condition économique et matérielle des prolétaires aille en empirant. Des tendances de dépression et des tendances de relèvement, ce n’est sont pas au total, et dans la réalité immédiate de la vie, les tendances dépressives qui l’emportent.
« Dès lors il n’est plus permis de répéter après Marx et Engels que le système capitaliste périra parce qu’il n’assume même pas à ceux qu’il exploite le minimum nécessaire à la vie. Dès lors, il devient puéril d’attendre qu’un cataclysme économique menaçant le prolétariat dans sa vie même provoque, sous la révolte de l’instinct vital, ’l’effondrement violent de la bourgeoisie’. Ainsi, les deux hypothèses, l’une historique, l’autre économique, d’où devait sortir, dans la pensée du Manifeste communiste, la soudaine révolution prolétarienne, la Révolution de la dictature ouvrière, sont également ruinées.«
Marx, admirateur de Darwin
Bien que Marx ait développé sa conception de la lutte des classes lors de son exil en Belgique, il se trouve conforté par la publication de L’origine des espèces de Charles Darwin, qu’il lira en décembre 1860 sur les conseils de son ami Engels. Le 19 décembre de la même année, il lui écrit : « Voilà le livre qui contient la base, en histoire naturelle, pour nos idées. »
Et s’adressant à Ferdinand Lasalle le 16 janvier 1861 : « Le travail de Darwin, lui dit-il, est d’une grande importance et sert mon but dans la mesure où il fournit dans les sciences naturelles une base pour la lutte de classe historique.«
Marx finit par réviser quelque peu son jugement. A Engels, il confie le 18 juin 1862 :
« Il est remarquable de voir comment Darwin reconnaît chez les animaux et les plantes sa propre société anglaise, avec sa division du travail, sa concurrence, ses ouvertures de nouveaux marchés, ses inventions et sa malthusienne ‘lutte pour la vie’. C’est la ‘guerre de tous contre tous’ de Hobbes.«
Pourtant, à l’automne de la même année, il assiste à six conférences de Thomas Henry Huxley, surnommé « le bouledogue de Darwin ».
En 1873, dans le second livre du Capital, Marx définit la sélection naturelle darwinienne comme « l’histoire d’une technologie naturelle, c’est-à-dire la formation d’organes dans les plantes et les animaux, qui servent d’instruments de production pour le maintien de leur vie ».
Il envoie à Darwin une copie de son livre avec ce message : « A M. Darwin de la part de son admirateur sincère Karl Marx. »
Jacques Attali, qui semble ignorer les documents historiques, se trompe donc lourdement lorsqu’il écrit que « Marx ne croit pas que les idées de Darwin soient transposables à l’analyse sociale.«
Pour Attali, Sadi Carnot, Marx et Darwin sont « les trois géants de ce siècle ». Pour le premier, découvreur de la seconde loi de la thermodynamique, le temps s’écoulerait irréversiblement vers le désordre [c’est-à-dire vers l’entropie que Sadi Carnot réserve uniquement aux systèmes fermés et d’aucune façon à l’histoire de l’homme ou de l’univers comme un tout], pour le second (Marx) vers la liberté et enfin pour le troisième vers le mieux adapté…
Abraham Lincoln
Lors de son allocution de 1861, Lincoln, dont l’élection fut soutenue par Karl Marx, semble tenir un discours quasi-marxiste lorsqu’il déclare :
« Le travail précède le capital et en est indépendant. Le capital n’est que le fruit du travail et n’aurait jamais pu exister si le travail n’avait pas existé avant lui. Le travail est supérieur au capital et mérite une considération bien plus haute. Le capital a des droits qui doivent être défendus comme les autres droits. Enfin, il ne s’agit pas non plus de nier qu’il existe, et qu’il existera toujours, une relation entre le capital et le travail dans la production de bénéfices mutuels.«
En réalité, il se base sur l’approche hamiltonienne et dénonce la lutte des classes en plaidant pour « l’harmonie des intérêts » cher à son conseiller Henry Carey :
« L’erreur consiste à croire que toutes les relations de la société s’inscrivent exclusivement dans cette relation [de lutte des classes]. (…) Dans la plupart des Etats du Sud, une majorité de gens, toutes couleurs confondues, ne sont ni des esclaves ni leurs maîtres, alors que dans le Nord, une vaste majorité n’est ni employée ni employeur. (…) Beaucoup de gens indépendants habitant dans tous ces Etats étaient des journaliers. Le débutant sans un sou travaille un temps pour un salaire, obtient un surplus et l’utilise pour acheter des outils et un lopin de terre à cultiver. Il travaille alors à son compte et finit par employer d’autres débutants pour l’assister. C’est le système juste et généreux qui ouvre la voie à tous, leur donne l’espoir et l’énergie pour progresser et améliorer les conditions de vie de tous. Aucun homme ne mérite plus notre confiance que celui qui a surmonté la pauvreté.«
Lettre de Marx à Lincoln
En dépit de sa différence, le 30 décembre 1864, Marx écrit, au nom de l’Association internationale des travailleurs, une lettre au président Abraham Lincoln le félicitant de sa réélection :
« Si la résistance au pouvoir des esclavagistes a été le mot d’ordre modéré de votre première élection, le cri de guerre triomphal de votre réélection est : mort à l’esclavage !
« Depuis le début de la lutte titanesque que mène l’Amérique, les ouvriers d’Europe sentent instinctivement que le sort de leur classe dépend de la bannière étoilée. La lutte pour les territoires qui inaugura la terrible épopée, ne devait-elle pas décider si la terre vierge de zones immenses devait être fécondée par le travail de l’émigrant, ou souillée par le fouet du gardien d’esclaves ?
« Lorsque l’oligarchie des trois cent mille esclavagistes osa, pour la première fois dans les annales du monde, inscrire le mot esclavage sur le drapeau de la rébellion armée ; lorsque à l’endroit même où, un siècle plus tôt, l’idée d’une grande république démocratique naquit en même temps que la première déclaration des droits de l’homme, qui ensemble donnèrent la première impulsion à la révolution européenne du XVIIIe siècle – lorsque à cet endroit la contre-révolution se glorifia, avec une violence systématique, de renverser ‘les idées dominantes de l’époque de formation de la vieille Constitution’ et présenta ‘l’esclavage comme une institution bénéfique, voire comme la seule solution au grand problème des rapports entre travail et capital’, en proclamant cyniquement que le droit de propriété sur l’homme représentait la pierre angulaire de l’édifice nouveau – alors les classes ouvrières d’Europe comprirent aussitôt, et avant même que l’adhésion fanatique des classes supérieures à la cause des confédérés ne les en eût prévenues, que la rébellion des esclavagistes sonnait le tocsin pour une croisade générale de la propriété contre le travail et que, pour les hommes du travail, le combat de géant livré outre-Atlantique ne mettait pas seulement en jeu leurs espérances en l’avenir, mais encore leurs conquêtes passées.
« C’est pourquoi, ils supportèrent toujours avec patience les souffrances que leur imposa la crise du coton et s’opposèrent avec vigueur à l’intervention en faveur de l’esclavagisme que préparaient les classes supérieures et ‘cultivées’, et un peu partout en Europe contribuèrent de leur sang à la bonne cause.
« Tant que les travailleurs, le véritable pouvoir politique du Nord, permirent à l’esclavage de souiller leur propre République ; tant qu’ils se glorifièrent de jouir – par rapport aux Noirs qui avaient un maître et étaient vendus sans être consultés – du privilège d’être libres de se vendre eux-mêmes et de choisir leur patron, ils furent incapables de combattre pour la véritable émancipation du travail ou d’appuyer la lutte émancipatrice de leurs frères européens.
« Les ouvriers d’Europe sont persuadés que si la guerre d’Indépendance américaine a inauguré l’époque nouvelle de l’essor des classes bourgeoises, la guerre anti-esclavagiste américaine a inauguré l’époque nouvelle de l’essor des classes ouvrières. Elles considèrent comme l’annonce de l’ère nouvelle que le sort ait désigné Abraham Lincoln, l’énergique et courageux fils de la classe travailleuse, pour conduire son pays dans la lutte sans égale pour l’affranchissement d’une race enchaînée et pour la reconstruction d’un monde social.«
Marx contre les tsars
Bien que la Russie soit le premier pays à avoir traduit Le Capital, Marx voua une haine particulière au système tsariste.
En 1852, il se fait même payer par le diplomate anglais David Urquhart pour écrire une série d’articles contre la Russie qui paraîtront dans la Free Press, le journal d’Urquhart. Tout en le considérant comme un fou, Marx reprend sa thèse et accuse Lord Palmerston, le Premier ministre britannique, d’être « à la solde » de Moscou…
Bien que le tsar Alexandre II, un despote éclairé, ait aboli le servage en 1861 et menace l’Empire britannique d’action militaire s’ils interviennent aux Etats-Unis pour défendre « leurs intérêts », c’est-à-dire les esclavagistes, Marx n’en a cure.
En 1881, après l’assassinat d’Alexandre II le 13 mars, alors que les auteurs de l’attentat étaient quatre jeunes bourgeois obsédés par la haine de l’autocratie, Marx, dans une lettre à sa fille Jenny Longuet, en parle en ces termes :
« Ce sont des individus foncièrement habiles, sans pose mélodramatique, simples, positifs, héroïques… Ils s’efforcent de montrer à l’Europe que leur manière d’agir est spécifiquement russe, historiquement inévitable, une forme de tremblement de terre de Chio.«
Bizarrement, Jacques Attali, qui, dans son Karl Marx ou l’esprit du monde, ne tarit d’éloges quand ce dernier défend la mondialisation, prend bien soin de ne pas mentionner ces faits.
Et à l’occasion d’un meeting slave pour la célébration de l’anniversaire de la Commune, Marx et Engels saluèrent l’attentat contre Alexandre II comme « un événement qui, après des luttes longues et violentes, conduira finalement à la création d’une commune russe ».
Consciemment ou pas, Marx apparaît comme l’instrument politique de la géopolitique Britannique pour qui il ne constituait aucune menace.
Résumons les erreurs de Marx :
- reprend la dialectique de Hegel pour faire pire ;
- reprend les erreurs des physiocrates, pour qui la nature et le travail salarié sont la seule source de plus-value, et non pas les manufactures ;
- refuse de reconnaître le rôle du progrès technologique dans la formation du capital ;
- pense que l’Etat n’est qu’un outil de répression qui s’éteindra avec l’avènement d’une société sans classes ;
- oppose à un système perdant-perdant (l’exploitation), un autre système perdant-perdant (la lutte des classes), fondé sur la violence inhérente à la dialectique hégélienne ;
- estime sa doctrine confirmée par Darwin et ignore les naturalistes républicains (Humboldt, Arago, etc.) ;
- pourfend le protectionnisme de List et Carey ;
- promeut l’internationalisation du libre-échange pour amener le capitalisme à s’autodétruire ;
- soutient Lincoln mais combat sa politique économique ;
- félicite les assassins du tsar Alexandre II de Russie, un allié de Lincoln, qui vient d’abolir le servage ;
- s’adonne aux mesquineries d’un petit journaliste.
Si le « marxisme » se proclame révolutionnaire, il ne l’est point au niveau des axiomes. C’est sans doute pourquoi, surtout depuis la mort de Marx, la promotion de ce type de « marxisme » a été assurée par certaines forces géopolitiques qui préfèrent de loin les rebelles aux révolutionnaires.
La révolution LaRouche
Dans les années 1970, le penseur et économiste américain Lyndon LaRouche, avec son livre Dialectical Economics (1974), a totalement bouleversé la science de l’économie marxiste en reprenant, sur la base de sa compréhension de la thermodynamique, les catégories identifiées par Marx (c/v/Pl).
Chez LaRouche, il ne s’agit plus de catégories monétaires ou comptables mortes, mais de facteurs dynamiques distincts, évoluant au sein d’une fonction de croissance qui ne définit plus une plus-value financière mais une plus-value de l’économie réelle, c’est-à-dire humaine, sociale et sociétale, mesurable sous la forme du taux d’accroissement du potentiel relatif de densité démographique, ce fameux PRDD dont la presse nous parle à longueur de journée (ironique).
Du coup, revu et corrigé par LaRouche, le modèle marxiste se trouve libéré de sa prison malthusienne et entropique. Un article de mon ami Benjamin Bak vous aidera à comprendre les rudiments de la révolution larouchiste en économie.
Autant Marx accueillait volontiers des ouvriers déconcertés de tout bord dans l’Internationale ouvrière, autant j’ai bon espoir que les marxistes honnêtes nous rejoindront dans la bataille.
Notes :
- Paul Lafargue, un des piliers du marxisme, devient le gendre de Marx en se mariant avec sa fille Laura. Il est élu député du Nord en 1891 et prendra parti pour Dreyfus. En 1896, Laura Marx-Lafargue hérite d’une partie de la fortune d’Engels. Paul et Laura achètent alors une propriété à Draveil où ils vivent d’une « manière hédoniste », tout en suivant les affaires du monde. A 69 ans, en 1911, proche de la limite d’âge de 70 ans qu’il s’était fixée, il se suicide à Draveil avec son épouse Laura Marx, en se justifiant dans une courte lettre : « Sain de corps et d’esprit, je me tue avant que l’impitoyable vieillesse qui m’enlève un à un les plaisirs et les joies de l’existence et qui me dépouille de mes forces physiques et intellectuelles, ne paralyse mon énergie, ne brise ma volonté et ne fasse de moi une charge à moi et aux autres.«
The Maritime Silk Road, a history of 1001 Cooperations
Today, it’s fashionable to present maritime issues in the context of a moribund British geopolitical ideology that pits countries and peoples against each other. However, as this brief history of the Maritime Silk Road, drawn mainly from a document by the International Tourism Organization, demonstrates, the ocean has above all been a fantastic place for fertile encounters, cultural cross-fertilization and mutually beneficial cooperation.
The ancient Chinese invented many of the things we use today, including paper, matches, wheelbarrows, gunpowder, the noria (water elevator), sluice locks, the sundial, astronomy, porcelain, lacquer paint, the potter’s wheel, fireworks, paper money, the compass, the stern rudder, the tangram, the seismograph, dominoes, skipping rope, kites, the tea ceremony, the folding umbrella, ink, calligraphy, animal harnesses, card games, printing, the abacus, wallpaper, the crossbow, ice cream, and especially silk, which we’ll be talking about here.
The Origins of Silk
Before we talk about silk « routes », a few words about the origins of sericulture, i.e. the rearing of silkworms.
As recent archaeological discoveries confirm, silk production is an age-old skill. The presence of the mulberry tree for silkworm rearing was noted in China around the Yellow River by the Yangshao culture during the Middle Neolithic period in China, from 4500 to 3000 BC.
In general, we prefer to retain the legend that silk was discovered around 2500 BC, by the Chinese princess Si Ling-chi, when a cocoon accidentally fell into her tea bowl. When she tried to remove it, she discovered that the cocoon, softened by the hot water, had a delicate, soft and strong thread that could be unwound and assembled. Thus was born the idea of making cloth. The princess then decided to plant a number of white mulberry trees in her garden to raise silkworms.
The silkworms (or bombyx) and mulberry trees were divinely cared for by the princess (silkworms feed solely on the leaves of white mulberry trees).
Silk production is a time-consuming process that requires careful monitoring. Silk moths lay around 500 eggs during their lives, which last from 4 to 6 days. After the eggs hatch, the baby worms feed on mulberry leaves in a controlled environment. They have a ferocious appetite and their weight can increase considerably. Once they’ve stored up enough energy, the worms secrete a white jelly from their silk glands and use it to build a cocoon around themselves. After eight or nine days, the worms are killed and the cocoons are immersed in boiling water to soften the protective filaments, which are wound onto a spool. These filaments can be 600 to 900 meters long. Several filaments are assembled to form a thread. The silk threads are then woven into a fabric or used for fine embroidery or brocade, a rich silk fabric embellished with brocaded designs in gold and silver thread.
The Early Silk Trade
Under threat of capital punishment, sericulture remained a well-kept secret, and China retained its monopoly on manufacturing for millennia.
It wasn’t until the Zhou dynasty (1112 BC) that a maritime Silk Road was established from China to Japan and Korea, as the government decided to send Chinese from the port in Bohai Bay (on the Shandong Peninsula) to train local inhabitants in sericulture and agriculture. The techniques of silkworm rearing, reeling and weaving were gradually introduced to Korea via the Yellow Sea.
When Emperor Qin Shi Huang unified China (221 BC), many people from the states of Qi, Yan and Zhao fled to Korea, taking with them silkworms and their rearing techniques. This accelerated the development of silk spinning in Korea.
Korea played a central role in China’s international relations, particularly as an intellectual bridge between China and Japan. Its trade with China also enabled the spread of Buddhism and porcelain-making methods. Although initially reserved for the imperial court, silk spread throughout Asian culture, both geographically and socially. Silk quickly became the luxury fabric par excellence that the whole world craved.
During the Han dynasties (206 BC to 220), a dense network of trade routes exploded cultural and commercial exchanges across Central Asia, profoundly impacting civilizational dynamics. The Han dynasty continued to build the Great Wall, notably creating the commandery of Dunhuang (Gansu), a key post on the Silk Road. Over two centuries B.C., its trade extended to Greece and Rome, where silk was reserved for the elite.
In the IIIrd century, India, Japan and Persia (Iran) unlocked the secret of silk manufacture and became major producers.
Silk Reaches Europe
According to a story by Procopius, it was not until 552 AD that the Byzantine emperor Justinian obtained the first silkworm eggs. He had sent two Nestorian monks to Central Asia, and they were able to smuggle silkworm eggs to him hidden in rods of bamboo. While under the monks’ care, the eggs hatched, though they did not cocoon before arrival.
A church manufacture in the Byzantine Empire was thus able to make fabrics for the emperor. Later emerged the intention of developing a large silk industry in the Eastern Roman Empire, using techniques copied from the Persian Sassanids.
Another version claims that it was the Han emperor Wu (IInd century) who sent ambassadors, bearing gifts such as silk, to the West.
In the VIIth century, sericulture spread to Africa and Sicily, from where, under the impetus of Roger I of Sicily (c. 1034-1101) and his son Roger II (1093-1154), the silkworm and mulberry were introduced to the ancient Peloponnese.
In the Xth century, Andalusia became the epicenter of silk manufacturing with Granada, Toledo and Seville. With the Arab conquest, sericulture spread to the rest of Spain, Italy (Venice, Florence and Milan) and France. The earliest French traces of sericulture date back to the 13th century, notably in the Gard (1234) and Paris (1290).
In the XVth century, faced with the ruinous import of Italian silk (raw or manufactured), Louis XI tried to set up silk factories, first in Tours on the Loire, then in Lyon, a city at the crossroads of north-south routes where Italian emigrants were already trading in silks.
In the XIXth century, silk production was industrialized in Japan, but in the XXth century, China regained its place as the world’s largest producer. Today, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Uzbekistan and Brazil all have large production capacities.
Cultural Melting Pot
As much as silk itself, the transportation of silk by sea dates back to time immemorial.
For the Chinese, there are two main routes: the East China Silk Road (to Korea and Japan) and the South China Silk Road (via the Strait of Malacca to India, the Persian Gulf, Africa and Europe).
In Vietnam, the Hanoi Museum holds a coin dating back to the year 152, bearing the effigy of the Roman emperor Antoninus the Pious. The coin was discovered in the remains of Oc Eo, a Vietnamese town south of the Mekong Delta, thought to have been the main port of the Funan Kingdom (Ist to IXth centuries).
This kingdom, which covered the territory of present-day Cambodia and the Mekong Delta administrative region of Vietnam, flourished from the 1st to the 9th century. The first mention of the Fou-nan kingdom appears in the report of a Chinese mission that visited the area in the 3rd century.
The Founamians were at the height of their power when Hinduism and Buddhism were introduced to Southeast Asia.
Then, from Egypt, Greek merchants reached the Bay of Bengal. Considerable quantities of pepper then reached Ostia, Rome’s port of entry. All the historical evidence shows that East-West trade was flourishing as early as the first millennium.
Persians and Arabs in India, China and Asia
On the western side, at the entrance to Kuwait Bay, 20 kilometers off the coast of Kuwait City, not far from the mouth of the shared estuary of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the Persian Gulf, the island of Failaka was one of the meeting places where Greece, Rome and China exchanged goods.
Under the Sassanid dynasty (226-651), the Persians developed their trade routes all the way to Southeast Asia, via India and Sri Lanka.
This trading infrastructure was later taken over by the Arabs when, in 762, they moved to Baghdad.
From the IXth century onwards, the city of Quilon (Kollam), the capital of Kerala in India, was home to colonies of Arab, Christian, Jewish and Chinese merchants.
On the western side, Persian and then Arab navigators played a central role in the birth of the maritime Silk Road. Following the Sassanid routes, the Arabs pushed their dhows, or traditional Arab sailing ships, from the Red Sea to the Chinese coast and as far as Malaysia and Indonesia.
These sailors brought with them a new religion, Islam, which spread throughout Southeast Asia. While the traditional pilgrimage (the hajj) to Mecca was initially only an aspiration for many Muslims, it became increasingly possible for them to make it.
During the monsoon season, when winds were favorable for sailing to India in the Indian Ocean, the twice-yearly trade missions were transformed into veritable international fairs, offering an opportunity to transport large quantities of goods by sea in conditions (apart from pirates and unpredictable weather) relatively less exposed to the dangers of overland transport.
The Maritime Silk Road under the Sui, Tang and Song Dynasties
It was under the Sui dynasty (581-618) that the Maritime Silk Road set out from Quanzhou, a coastal city in Fujian province in south-east China, on its first trade routes.
With its wealth of scenic spots and historic sites, Quanzhou has been proclaimed « the starting point of the Maritime Silk Road » by UNESCO.
It was at this time that the first printing methods appeared in China. Wooden blocks were used to print on textiles. In 593, the Sui emperor Wen-ti ordered the printing of Buddhist images and writings. One of the earliest printed texts is a Buddhist script dating from 868, found in a cave near Dunhuang, a stopover town on the Silk Road.
Under the Tang dynasty (618-907), the Kingdom’s military expansion brought security, trade and new ideas. The fact that the stability of Tang China coincided with that of Sassanid Persia enabled the land and sea Silk Roads to flourish. The great transformation of the maritime Silk Road began in the 7th century, when China opened up to international trade. The first Arab ambassador took up his post in 651.
The Tang Dynasty chose Chang’an (now Xi’an) as its capital. It adopted an open attitude towards different beliefs. Buddhist, Taoist and Confucian temples coexisted peacefully with mosques, synagogues and Nestorian Christian churches. As the terminus of the Silk Road, Chang’an’s western market is becoming the center of world trade. According to the Tang Authority Six register, over 300 nations and regions had trade relations with Chang’an.
Almost 10,000 foreign families from the west lived in the city, especially in the area around the western market. There were many foreign inns staffed by foreign maids chosen for their beauty. The most famous poet in Chinese history, Li Bai, often strolled among them. Foreign food, costumes and music were the fashion of Chang’an.
After the fall of the Tang dynasty, the Five Dynasties and the Ten Kingdoms (907-960), the arrival of the Song dynasty (960-1279) ushered in a new period of prosperity, characterized by increased centralization and economic and cultural renewal. The maritime silk route regained its momentum. In 1168, a synagogue was built in Kaifeng, capital of the Southern Song dynasty, to serve merchants on the Silk Road.
During the same period, as Islam expanded, trading posts sprang up all around the Indian Ocean and the rest of Southeast Asia.
China encouraged its merchants to seize the opportunities offered by maritime traffic, in particular the sale of camphor, a highly sought-after medicinal plant. A veritable trade network developed in the East Indies under the auspices of the Kingdom of Sriwijaya, a city-state in southern Sumatra, Indonesia (see below), which for nearly six centuries served as a link between Chinese merchants on the one hand, and Indians and Malays on the other. A trade route truly emerged, deserving the name of the maritime « Silk Road ».
Increasing quantities of spices passed through India, the Red Sea and Alexandria in Egypt, before reaching the merchants of Genoa, Venice and other Western ports. From there, they moved on to the northern European markets of Lübeck (Germany), Riga (Lithuania) and Tallinn (Estonia), which from the 12th century onwards became important cities in the Hanseatic League.
In China, during the reign of the Song emperor Renzong (1022-1063), a great deal of money and energy was spent on bringing together knowledge and know-how. The economy was the first to benefit.
Drawing on the know-how of Arab and Indian sailors, Chinese ships became the most advanced in the world.
The Chinese, who had invented the compass (at least by 1119), quickly surpassed their competitors in cartography and the art of navigation, as the Chinese junk became the bulk carrier par excellence.
In his geographical treatise, Zhou Qufei, in 1178, reports:
« The big ships that cruise the South Sea are like houses. When they unfold their sails, they look like huge clouds. Their rudders are dozens of feet long. A single ship can house several hundred men. On board, there’s enough food to last a year.«
Archaeological digs confirm this reality, such as the wreck of a XIVth-century junk found off the coast of Korea, in which over 10,000 pieces of ceramic were discovered.
During this period, coastal trade gradually shifted from the hands of Arab traders to those of Chinese merchants. Trade expanded, notably with the inclusion of Korea and the integration of Japan, the Malabar coast of India, the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea into existing trade networks.
China exported tea, silk, cotton, porcelain, lacquers, copper, dyes, books and paper. In return, it imported luxury goods and raw materials, including rare woods, precious metals, precious and semi-precious stones, spices and ivory.
Copper coins from the Song period have been discovered in Sri Lanka, and porcelain from this period has been found in East Africa, Egypt, Turkey, some Gulf states and Iran, as well as in India and Southeast Asia.
The Importance of Korea and the Kingdom of Silla
During the first millennium, culture and philosophy flourished on the Korean peninsula. A well-organized and well-protected trading network with China and Japan operated there.
On the Japanese island of Okino-shima, numerous historical traces bear witness to the intense exchanges between the Japanese archipelago, Korea and the Asian continent.
Excavations carried out in ancient tombs in Gyeongju, today a South Korean city of 264,000 inhabitants and capital of the ancient Kingdom of Silla (from 57 BC to 935), which controlled most of the peninsula from the VIIth to the IXth century, demonstrate the intensity of this kingdom’s exchanges with the rest of the world, via the Silk Road.
Indonesia, a Major Maritime Power at the Heart of the Maritime Silk Road
In Indonesia, Malaysia and southern Thailand, the Kingdom of Sriwijaya (VIIth to XIIIth centuries) played a major role as a maritime trading post, storing high-value goods from the region and beyond for later sale by sea. In particular, Sriwijaya controlled the Strait of Malacca, the essential sea passage between India and China.
At the height of its power in the XIth century, Sriwijaya’s network of ports and trading posts traded a vast array of products and commodities: rice, cotton, indigo and silver from Java, aloe (a succulent plant of African origin), vegetable resins, camphor, ivory and rhinoceros horns, tin and gold from Sumatra, rattan, redwoods and other rare woods, gems from Borneo, rare birds and exotic animals, iron, sandalwood and spices from East Indonesia, India and Southeast Asia, and porcelain, lacquer, brocade, textiles and silk from China.
With its capital at Palembang (population 1.7 million) on the Musi River in what is now the southern province of Sumatra, this Hindu-Buddhist-inspired kingdom, which flourished from the VIIIth to the XIIIth century, was the first major Indonesian kingdom and the country’s first maritime power.
By the VIIth century, it ruled a large part of Sumatra, the western part of Java and a significant part of the Malay Peninsula. It extended as far north as Thailand, where archaeological remains of Sriwijaya cities still exist.
Buddhism on the Maritime Silk Road
The museum in Palembang (today Indonesia) – a town where Chinese, Indian, Arab and Yemeni communities, each with their own particular institutions, have co-prospered for generations – tells a wonderful story of how the Maritime Silk Road generated exemplary mutual cultural enrichment.
Buddhism was closely tied to international or cross-boundary trade. Early inscriptions indicate it was common for seafarers to pray to the Buddha for a safe voyage.
The maritime routes were very challenging as they were often beset with cyclones and typhoons, and piracy was an ever-present danger.
As a consequence, merchant support for Buddhism along these travel routes helped to establish monastic life far beyond India. Monks and nuns also took passage on these trading ships, and the merchants sought good karma by helping them travel to spread the teachings of the Buddha.
Madagascar, Sanskrit and the Cinnamon Road
Map of the expansion of Austronesian languages.
Today, Madagascar is inhabited by Blacks and Asians. DNA tests have confirmed what has long been known: many of the island’s inhabitants are descended from Malay and Indonesian sailors who set foot on the island around the year 830, when the Sriwijaya Empire extended its maritime influence towards Africa.
Further evidence of this presence is the fact that the language spoken on the island borrows Sanskrit and Indonesian words.
To demonstrate the feasibility of such sea voyages, in 2003 a team of researchers sailed from Indonesia to Ghana via Madagascar aboard the Borobudur, a reconstruction of one of the sailing ships featured in many of the 1,300 bas-reliefs decorating the 8th-century Buddhist temple of Borobudur on the island of Java in Indonesia.
Many believe that this vessel is a representation of those once used by Indonesian merchants to cross the ocean to Africa. Indonesian navigators usually used relatively small boats. To ensure balance, they fitted them with outriggers, both double (ngalawa) and single.
Their boats, whose hulls were carved from a single tree trunk, were called sanggara. Merchants from the Indonesian archipelago could reach as far east as Hawaii and New Zealand, a distance of over 7,000 km.
In any case, the researchers’ boat, equipped with an 18-meter-high mast, managed to cover the Jakarta – Maldives – Cape of Good Hope – Ghana route, a distance of 27,750 kilometers, or more than half the circumference of the Earth!
The expedition aimed to retrace a very specific route: the cinnamon route, which took Indonesian merchants all the way to Africa to sell spices, including cinnamon, a highly sought-after commodity at the time. Cinnamon was already highly prized in the Mediterranean basin long before the Christian era.
On the walls of the Egyptian temple at Deir el-Bahari (Luksor), a painting depicts a major naval expedition said to have been ordered by Queen Hatshepsut, who reigned from 1503 to 1482 BC. Around the painting, hieroglyphs explain that these ships carried various species of plants and fragrant essences destined for the cult. One of these was cinnamon. Rich in aroma, it was an important component of ritual ceremonies in the kingdoms of Egypt.
Cinnamon originally grew in Central Asia, the eastern Himalayas and northern Vietnam. The southern Chinese transplanted it from these regions to their own country and cultivated it under the name gui zhi.
From China, gui zhi spread throughout the Indonesian archipelago, finding a very fertile home there, particularly in the Moluccas. In fact, the international cinnamon trade was a monopoly held by Indonesian merchants. Indonesian cinnamon was prized for its excellent quality and highly competitive price.
The Indonesians sailed great distances, up to 8,000 km, across the Indian Ocean to Madagascar and northeast Africa. From Madagascar, products were transported to Rhapta, in a coastal region that later became known as Somalia. From there, Arab merchants shipped them north to the Red Sea.
The Strait of Malacca
For China, the Strait of Malacca has always represented a major strategic interest. When the great Chinese admiral Zheng He led the first of his expeditions to India, the Near East and East Africa between 1405 and 1433, a Chinese pirate by the name of Chen Zuyi took control of Palembang.
Zheng He defeated Chen’s fleet and captured the survivors. As a result, the strait once again became a safe shipping route.
According to tradition, a prince of Sriwijaya, Parameswara, took refuge on the island of Temasek (present-day Singapore), but eventually settled on the west coast of the Malay Peninsula around 1400 and founded the city of Malacca, which would become the largest port in Southeast Asia, both successor to Sriwijaya and precursor to Singapore.
Following the decline of Sriwijaya, the Kingdom of Majapahit (1292-1527), founded at the end of the XIIIth century on the island of Java, came to dominate most of present-day Indonesia.
This was the period when Arab sailors began to settle in the region.
The Majapahit kingdom established relations with the Kingdom of Champa (192-1145; 1147-1190; 1220-1832) (South Vietnam), Cambodia, Siam (Thailand) and southern Myanmar.
The Majapahit kingdom also sent missions to China. As its rulers extended their power to other islands and sacked neighboring kingdoms, they sought above all to increase their share and control of the trade in goods passing through the archipelago.
The island of Singapore and the southernmost part of the Malay Peninsula was a key crossroads on the ancient maritime Silk Road.
Archaeological excavations in the Kallang estuary and along the Singapore River have uncovered thousands of shards of glass, natural and gold beads, ceramics and Chinese coins from the Northern Song period (960-1127).
The rise of the Mongol Empire in the middle of the XIIIth century led to an increase in seaborne trade and contributed to the vitality of the Maritime Silk Road.
Marco Polo, after a 17-year overland journey to China, returned by ship. After witnessing a shipwreck, he sailed from China to Sumatra in Indonesia, before setting foot on land again at Hormuz in Persia (Iran).
Under the Yuan and Ming Dynasties
Under the Song dynasty, large quantities of silk goods were exported to Japan. Under the Yuan dynasty (1271-1368), the government set up the Shi Bo Si, a trade office, in a number of ports, including Ningbo, Canton, Shanghai, Ganpu, Wenzhou and Hangzhou, enabling silk exports to Japan.
During the Tang, Song and Yuan dynasties, and at the beginning of the Ming dynasty, each port set up an oceanic trading department to manage all foreign maritime trade.
Maritime travel was dependent on the seasonal winds: the summer monsoons blow from the south-west (May to September) and reverse direction in the winter (October to April). As a result, seafaring merchants developed sailing circuits that allowed them to use the monsoon winds to travel long distances, then return home when the wind patterns shifted.
Trade with southern India and the Persian Gulf flourished. Trade with East Africa also developed with the monsoon season, bringing ivory, gold and slaves. In India, guilds began to control Chinese trade on the Malabar coast and in Sri Lanka.
Trade relations became more formalized, while remaining highly competitive. Cochin and Kozhikode (Calicut), two major cities in the Indian state of Kerala, competed to dominate this trade.
Admiral Zheng He’s Maritime Explorations
Chinese maritime exploration reached its apogee in the early XVth century under the Ming dynasty (1368-1644), which chose a Muslim court eunuch, Admiral Zheng He, to lead seven diplomatic naval expeditions.
Financed by Emperor Ming Yongle, these peaceful missions to Southeast Asia, East Africa, the Indian Ocean, the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea were intended above all to demonstrate the prestige and grandeur of China and its Emperor. The aim was also to recognize some thirty states and establish political and commercial relations with them.
In 1409, prior to one of these expeditions, the Chinese admiral Zheng He asked craftsmen to make a carved stone stele in Nanjing, the present-day capital of Jiangsu province (eastern China). The stele traveled with the flotilla and was left in Sri Lanka as a gift to a local Buddhist temple. Prayers to the deities in three languages – Chinese, Persian and Tamil – were engraved on the stele. It was found in 1911 in the town of Galle, in south-west Sri Lanka, and a replica is now in China.
Zheng’s armada was made up of armed bulk carriers, the most modest being larger than Columbus’ caravels. The largest were 100 meters long and 50 meters wide. According to Ming chronicles of the time, an expedition could comprise 62 ships, each carrying 500 people. Some carried military cavalry, others tanks of drinking water. Chinese shipbuilding was ahead of its time. The technique of hermetic bulkheads, imitating the internal structure of bamboo, offered incomparable safety. It became the standard for the Chinese fleet before being copied by the Europeans 250 years later. Compasses and celestial maps painted on silk were also used.
The synergy that may have existed between Arab, Indian and Chinese sailors, all men of the sea who fraternized in the face of ocean adversity, was impressive. For example, some historians believe that the name « Sindbad the Sailor », which appears in the Persian tale of a sailor’s adventures from the time of the Abbasid dynasty (VIIIth century) and was included in the Tales of the One Thousand and One Nights, derives from the word Sanbao, the honorary nickname given by the Chinese Emperor to Admiral Zheng He, literally meaning « The Three Jewels », i.e. the three indissociable capital virtues: essence, breath, and spirit.
Maritime museums in China (Hong Kong, Macau, Fuzhou, Tianjin and Nanjing), Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia showcase Admiral Zheng’s expeditions.
However, at least twelve other admirals carried out similar expeditions to Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean.
In 1403, Admiral Ma Pi led an expedition to Indonesia and India. Wu Bin, Zhang Koqing and Hou Xian made others. After lightning caused a fire in the Forbidden City, a dispute broke out between the eunuch class, supporters of the expeditions, and the learned mandarins, who obtained the cessation of expeditions deemed too costly. The last voyage took place between 1430 and 1433, 64 years before the Portuguese explorer Vasco da Gama arrived in 1497.
Japan, for its part, similarly restricted its contacts with the outside world during the Tokugawa period (1600-1868), although its trade with China was never suspended. It was only after the Meiji Restoration in 1868 that a Japan open to the world re-emerged.
Withdrawing into themselves, trade with both China and Japan fell into the hands of maritime trading posts such as Malacca in Malaysia or Hi An in Vietnam, two cities now recognized by Unesco as world heritage sites. H?i An was a major stopover port on the sea route linking Europe and Japan via India and China. In the shipwrecks found at Hi An, researchers have discovered ceramics awaiting their departure for Sinai in Egypt.
History of Chinese Ports
Over the years, the main ports on the Maritime Silk Road have changed. From the 330s onwards, Canton and Hepu were the two most important ports. However, Quanzhou replaced Canton from the end of the Song to the end of the Yuan dynasty. At that time, Quanzhou in Fujian province and Alexandria in Egypt were considered the world’s largest ports. Due to the policy of closure to the outside world imposed from 1435 and the influence of war, Quanzhou was gradually replaced by the ports of Yuegang, Zhangzhou and Fujian.
From the beginning of the IVth century, Canton was an important port on the Silk Road. Gradually, under the Tang and Song dynasties, it became not only the largest, but also the most renowned port of the Orient worldwide. During this period, the sea route linking Canton to the Persian Gulf via the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean was the longest in the world.
Although later supplanted by Quanzhou under the Yuan dynasty, Canton remained China’s second-largest commercial port. Compared with the others, it is considered to have been a consistently prosperous port over the 2,000-year history of the Maritime Silk Road.
The Tributary System of 1368
China’s last imperial dynasty, the Qing, reigned from 1644 to 1912.
Since the arrival of the Ming dynasty, maritime trade with China proceded in two different ways:
- The Chinese « tributary system » ;
- The Canton system (1757-1842).
Born under the Ming in 1368, the « tributary system » reached its apogee under the Qing. It took the refined form of a mutually beneficial, inclusive hierarchy.
States adhering to it showed respect and gratitude by regularly presenting the Emperor with tribute made up of local products and performing certain ritual ceremonies, notably the « kowtow » (three genuflections and nine prostrations). They also demanded the Emperor’s investiture of their leaders and adopted the Chinese calendar. In addition to China, they included Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, the Ryükyü Islands, Laos, Myanmar and Malaysia.
Paradoxically, while occupying a central cultural status, the tributary system offered its vassals the status of sovereign entities, enabling them to exercise authority over a given geographical area.
The Emperor won their submission by showing virtuous concern for their welfare and promoting a doctrine of non-intervention and non-exploitation. Indeed, according to historians, in financial terms, China was never directly enriched by the tributary system. In general, all travel and subsistence expenses for tributary missions were covered by the Chinese government. In addition to the costs of running the system, the gifts offered by the Emperor were generally far more valuable than the tributes he received. Each tributary mission was entitled to be accompanied by a large number of merchants, and once the tribute had been presented to the Emperor, trade could begin.
It should be noted that when a country lost its status as a tributary state as a result of a disagreement, it would try at all costs, and sometimes violently, to be allowed to pay tribute again.
The Canton System of 1757
The second system concerned foreign, mainly European, powers wishing to trade with China. This involved the port of Guangzhou (then called Canton), the only port accessible to Westerners.
This meant that merchants, notably those of the British East India Company, could dock not in the port but off the coast of Canton, from October to March, during the trading season. It was in Macao, then a Portuguese possession, that the Chinese provided them with permission to do so. The Emperor’s representatives would then authorize Chinese merchants (hongs) to go on board to trade with foreign ships, while instructing them to collect customs duties before they left.
This way of trading expanded at the end of the XVIIIth century, particularly with the strong English demand for tea.
In fact, it was Chinese tea from Fujian that American « insurgents » threw into the sea during the famous « Boston Tea Party » in December 1773, one of the first events against the British Empire that sparked off the American Revolution.
Products from India, particularly cotton and opium, were exchanged by the East India Company for tea, porcelain and silk.
The customs duties collected by the Canton system were a major source of revenue for the Qing dynasty, even though it banned the purchase of opium from India. This restriction imposed by the Chinese Emperor in 1796 led to the outbreak of the Opium Wars, the first as early as 1839.
At the same time, rebellions broke out in the 1850-60s against the weakened Qing reign, coupled with further wars against hostile European powers.
In 1860, the former Summer Palace (Yuanming Park), with its collection of pavilions, temples, pagodas and libraries – the residence of the Qing dynasty emperors 15 kilometers northwest of Beijing’s Forbidden City – was ravaged by British and French troops during the Second Opium War.
This assault goes down in history as one of the worst acts of cultural vandalism of the XIXth century. The Palace was sacked a second time in 1900 by an eight-nation alliance against China.
Today, a statue of Victor Hugo and a text he wrote against Napoleon III and the destruction of French imperialism can be admired there, as a reminder that this was not the work of a nation, but of a government.
By the end of the First World War, China had 48 open ports where foreigners could trade according to their own jurisdictions.
The 20th century was an era of revolution and social change. The founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 led to inward-looking attitudes.
It wasn’t until 1978 that Deng Xiaoping announced a policy of opening up to the outside world in order to modernize the country.
In the XXIst century, thanks to the One Belt (economic) One Road (maritime) Initiative launched by President Xi Jingping, China is re-emerging as a major world power offering mutually beneficial cooperation in the service of a better shared future for mankind.
The ancient practice of debt cancellation
While anyone with a modicum of rationality knows that a huge proportion of the world’s debts are absolutely unpayable, it’s a fact that today any debt cancellation, however odious or illegitimate, remains taboo.
By Karel Vereycken, December 2020.
Debt repayment is presented by heads of state and government, central banks, the IMF and the mainstream press as imperative, inevitable, indisputable, compulsory. Citizens have elected their governments, so they must resign themselves to paying the debt. For not to pay is more than violating a symbol: it is to exclude oneself from civilization, and to renounce in advance any new credit that is granted only to « good payers ». What counts is not the effectiveness of the act, but the expression of one’s « good faith », i.e. one’s willingness to submit to the strongest. The only possible discussion is how to modulate the distribution of the necessary sacrifices.
It seems that the ultra-liberal, monetarist model that has been surreptitiously imposed on us is that of the Roman Empire: zero debt for states and cities, and no debt forgiveness for citizens!
In his treatise on Duties (De officiis), written in 44-43, Cicero, who had just quelled a revolt by people demanding a debt remission, justifies the radical nature of his policy towards indebtedness:
« What does the establishment of new debt accounts [i.e., remission] mean, if not that you buy land with my money, that you have this land, and that I don’t have my money? That’s why we have to make sure there are no debts, which can harm the state. There are many ways of avoiding it, but if there are debts, not in such a way that the rich lose their property and the debtors acquire the property of others. Indeed, nothing maintains the State more strongly than good faith (fides), which cannot exist if there is no need to pay one’s debts. Never has anyone acted more forcefully to avoid paying their debts than under my Consulate. It was attempted by men of all kinds and ranks, with weapons in hand, and by setting up camps. But I resisted them in such a way that this entire evil was eliminated from the State. »
What has been carefully concealed is that another human practice has also existed: moratoria, partial and even generalized debt cancellations have taken place repeatedly throughout history and were carried out according to different contexts.
Often, proclamations of generalized debt cancellation were the initiative of self-preservation-minded rulers, aware that the only way to avoid complete social breakdown was to declare a « washing of the shelves » – those on which consumer debts were inscribed – cancelling them to start afresh.
The American anthropologist David Graeber, in Debt, the first 5000 years (2011), pointed out that the first word we have for « freedom » in any human language is Sumerian amargi, meaning freed from debt and, by extension, freedom in general, the literal meaning being « return to the mother » insofar as, once debts were cancelled, all debt slaves could return home.
Debt cancellations were sometimes the result of bitter social struggles, wars and crises. What is certain is that debt has never been a detail of history.
David Graeber sums it up:
« For millennia, the struggle between rich and poor has largely taken the form of conflicts between creditors and debtors – disputes over the justice or injustice of interest payments, peonage, amnesty, property seizure, restitution to the creditor, confiscation of sheep, seizure of vineyards and the sale of the debtor’s children as slaves. And over the last 5,000 years, with remarkable regularity, popular insurrections have begun in the same way: with the ritual destruction of debt registers – tablets, papyri, ledgers or other media specific to a particular time and place. (After which, the rebels generally attacked cadastres and tax registers.) »
And as the great ancient scholar Moses Finley was fond of saying,
« All revolutionary movements have had the same program: cancellation of debts and redistribution of land. »
Let us now examine some historical precedents for voluntary debt forgiveness.
Debt cancellation in Mesopotamia
The earliest known debt cancellation was proclaimed in Mesopotemia by Entemena of Lagash c. 2400 BCE.
One of his successors, Urukagina, who was the last ruler of the 1st Dynasty of Lagash, is known for his code of rules that includes debt cancelation.
Urukagina’s code is the first recorded example of government reform, seeking to achieve a higher level of freedom and equality by limiting the power of priesthood and a usurous land-owner oligarchy. Usury and seizure of property for debt payment were outlawed. « The widow and the orphan were no longer at the mercy of the powerful man ».
Similar measures were enacted by later Sumerian, Babylonian and Assyrian rulers of Mesopotamia, where they were known as « freedom decrees » (ama-gi in Sumerian).
This same theme exists in an ancient bilingual Hittite–Hurrian text entitled « The Song of Debt Release ».
The reign of Hammurabi, King of Babylon (located in present-day Iraq), began in 1792 BC and lasted 42 years.
The inscriptions preserved on a 2-meter-high stele in the Louvre are known as the « Hammurabi Code ». It was placed in a public square in Babylon. If it is a long, very severe code of justice, prescribing the application of the law of retaliation (« an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth »), its epilogue nevertheless proclaims that « the powerful cannot oppress the weak, justice must protect the widow and the orphan (…) in order to render justice to the oppressed ».
Hammurabi, like the other rulers of the Mesopotamian city-states, repeatedly proclaimed a general cancellation of citizens’ debts to public authorities, their high officials and dignitaries.
Thanks to the deciphering of numerous documents written in cuneiform, historians have found indisputable evidence of four general debt cancellations during Hammurabi’s reign (at the beginning of his reign in 1792, in 1780, in 1771 and in 1762 BC).
Babylonian society was predominantly agricultural. The temple and palace, and the scribes and craftsmen they employed, depended for their sustenance on a vast peasantry from whom land, tools and livestock were rented.
In exchange, each farmer had to offer part of his production as rent. However, when climatic hazards or epidemics made normal production impossible, producers went into debt.
The inability of peasants to repay debts could also lead to their enslavement (family members could also be enslaved for debt).
The Hammurabi Code obviously wanted to change this. Article 48 of the Code of Laws states:
« Whoever owes a loan, and a storm buries the grain, or the harvest fails, or the grain does not grow for lack of water, need not give any grain to the creditor that year, he wipes the tablet of the debt in the water and pays no interest for that year. »
This ideal of justice is notably supported by the terms kittum, « justice as the guarantor of public order », and « justice as the restoration of equity. » It was asserted in particular during the « edicts of grace » (designated by the term mîsharum), a general remission of public and private debts in the kingdom (including the release of people working for another person to repay a debt).
Thus, to preserve the social order, Hammurabi and the ruling power, acting in their own interests and in the interests of society’s future, periodically agreed to cancel all debts and restore the rights of peasants, in order to save the threatened old order in times of crisis, or as a kind of reset at the beginning of a sovereign’s reign.
Proclamations of general debt cancellation are not confined to the reign of Hammurabi; they began long before him and continued afterwards. There is evidence of debt cancellations as far back as 2400 BC, six centuries before Hammurabi’s reign, in the city of Lagash (Sumer); the most recent date back to 1400 BC in Nuzi.
In all, historians have accurately identified some thirty general debt cancellations in Mesopotamia between 2400 and 1400 BC.
These proclamations of debt cancellation were the occasion for great festivities, usually during the annual spring festival. Under the Hammurabi dynasty, the tradition of destroying the tablets on which debts were written was established.
In fact, the public authorities kept precise accounts of debts on tablets kept in the temple. Hammurabi died in 1749 BC after a 42-year reign. His successor, Samsuiluna, cancelled all debts to the state and decreed the destruction of all debt tablets except those relating to commercial debts.
When Ammisaduqa, the last ruler of the Hammurabi dynasty, acceded to the throne in 1646 BC, the general cancellation of debts he proclaimed was very detailed. The aim was clearly to prevent certain creditors from taking advantage of certain families. The annulment decree stipulates that official creditors and tax collectors who have expelled peasants must compensate them and return their property, on pain of execution.
After 1400 BC, no deeds of debt cancellation have been found, as the tradition has been lost. Land was taken over by large private landowners, and debt slavery returned.
In Egypt
In Ancient Egypt interest-bearing debt did not exist for most of its history. When it started spreading in the Late Period, the rulers of Egypt regulated it and a number of debt remissions are known to have occurred during the Ptolemaic era, including the one whose proclamation was inscribed on the Rosetta Stone.
Now on display at the British Museum in London, the « Rosetta Stone » was discovered on July 15, 1799 at el-Rashid (Rosetta) by one of Napoleon’s soldiers during the Egyptian campaign. It contains the same text written in hieroglyphs, demotic (Egyptian cursive script) and Greek, giving Jean-François Champollion (1790-1832) the key to the passage from one language to another.
This was a decree issued by Pharaoh Ptolemy V on March 27, 196 BC, announcing an amnesty for debtors and prisoners. The Greek Ptolemy dynasty that ruled Egypt institutionalized the regular cancellation of debts.
It was perpetuating known practices, since Greek texts mention that Pharaoh Bakenranef, who ruled Lower Egypt from c. 725 to 720 BC, had promulgated a decree abolishing debt slavery and condemning debt imprisonment.
TRANSCRIPTION OF THE PHARAOH’S DECREE
ON THE ROSETTA STONE:
Assembled the Chief Priests and Prophets there and those who enter the inner temple to worship the gods, and the Fanbearers and Sacred Scribes and all the other priests of the temples of the earth who have come to meet the king at Memphis, for the feast of the Assumption of PTOLEMEE, THE LIVING FOREVER, THE BELOVED OF PTAH, THE GOD EPIPHANES EUCHARISTOS, the successor of his father, All assembled in the temple of Memphis on this day when it was declared:
“that King PTOLEMEE, THE LIVING FOREVER, THE BELOVED OF PTAH, THE GOD EPIPHANES EUCHARISTOS, the son of King Ptolemy and Queen Arsinoe, the Philopator Gods, both benefactors of the temple and those who dwell therein, as well as their subjects, being a god from a god and the goddess loves Horus the son of Isis and Osiris who avenged his father Osiris by being favorably disposed towards the gods, delivered to the revenues of the temples silver and corn and undertook much expenditure for the prosperity of Egypt, and the maintenance of the temples, and was generous to all out of his own resources ;
“and exempted them from some of the revenues and taxes levied in Egypt and alleviated others so that his people and all others could be in prosperity during his reign ;
“and that he cleared the debts to the crown for many Egyptians and for the rest of the kingdom; ”
The existence of this decree therefore confirms that the practice had existed for many centuries.
The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (Ist Century BC) provides the following rationale for abolishing the debt bondage by Pharaoh Bakenranef:
« For it would be absurd… that a soldier, at the moment perhaps when he was setting forth to fight for his fatherland, should be haled to prison by his creditor for an unpaid loan, and that the greed of private citizens should in this way endanger the safety of all »
As one can see here, one of the very pragmatic reasons for debt cancellation was that the Pharaoh wanted to have a peasantry capable of producing enough food and, if need be, able to take part in military campaigns. For both of these reasons, it was important to ensure that peasants were not expelled from their lands under the thumb of creditors.
In another part of the region, the Assyrian emperors of the 1st millennium BC also adopted the tradition of debt cancellation.
In Greece: Solon of Athens
In Greece, the Athenian lawmaker Solon (c. 638 BC–558 BC), in order to rectify the widespread serfdom and slavery that had run rampant by the 6th century BCE, introduced a set of laws nown as the Seisachtheia introducing debt relief.
Before Solon, according to the account of the Constitution of the Athenians attributed to Aristotle, debtors unable to repay their creditors would surrender their land to them, then becoming hektemoroi, i.e. serfs who cultivated what used to be their own land and gave one sixth of produce to their creditors. However, should the debt exceed the perceived value of debtor’s total assets, then the debtor and his family would become the creditor’s slaves as well. The same would result if a man defaulted on a debt whose collateral was the debtor’s personal freedom. The fight for debt relief and the fight to abolish slavery were in practice identical.
Solon’s seisachtheia laws immediately cancelled all outstanding debts, retroactively emancipated all previously enslaved debtors, reinstated all confiscated serf property to the hektemoroi, and forbade the use of personal freedom as collateral in all future debts. The laws instituted a ceiling to maximum property size – regardless of the legality of its acquisition (i.e. by marriage), meant to prevent excessive accumulation of land by powerful families.
In the Torah and Old Testament
Social justice, particularly in the form of forgiving debts that shackle the poor to the rich, is a leitmotif in the history of Judaism. It was practiced in Jerusalem in the 5th century BC.
The writing of the Torah was completed at this time. Deuteronomy, 15 states:
The Year for Canceling Debts
15 At the end of every seven years you must cancel debts.
2 This is how it is to be done: Every creditor shall cancel any loan they have made to a fellow Israelite. They shall not require payment from anyone among their own people, because the Lord’s time for canceling debts has been proclaimed.
3 You may require payment from a foreigner, but you must cancel any debt your fellow Israelite owes you.
4 However, there need be no poor people among you, for in the land the Lord your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you,
5 if only you fully obey the Lord your God and are careful to follow all these commands I am giving you today.
6 For the Lord your God will bless you as he has promised, and you will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. You will rule over many nations but none will rule over you.
7 If anyone is poor among your fellow Israelites in any of the towns of the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward them.
8 Rather, be openhanded and freely lend them whatever they need.
9 Be careful not to harbor this wicked thought: “The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near,” so that you do not show ill will toward the needy among your fellow Israelites and give them nothing. They may then appeal to the Lord against you, and you will be found guilty of sin.
10 Give generously to them and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to.
11 There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your fellow Israelites who are poor and needy in your land.
Thus, the Israelites were obliged to free Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to them for debt, and to offer them some of the produce of their small livestock, their fields and their wine presses, so that they would not return home empty-handed.
As the law is too rarely applied, Leviticus reaffirms it by modulating it:
The Year of Jubilee
8 “‘Count off seven sabbath years—seven times seven years—so that the seven sabbath years amount to a period of forty-nine years.
9 Then have the trumpet sounded everywhere on the tenth day of the seventh month; on the Day of Atonement sound the trumpet throughout your land.
10 Consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee for you; each of you is to return to your family property and to your own clan.
11 The fiftieth year shall be a jubilee for you; do not sow and do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the untended vines.
12 For it is a jubilee and is to be holy for you; eat only what is taken directly from the fields.
13 “‘In this Year of Jubilee everyone is to return to their own property.
14 “‘If you sell land to any of your own people or buy land from them, do not take advantage of each other.
15 You are to buy from your own people on the basis of the number of years since the Jubilee. And they are to sell to you on the basis of the number of years left for harvesting crops.
16 When the years are many, you are to increase the price, and when the years are few, you are to decrease the price, because what is really being sold to you is the number of crops.
17 Do not take advantage of each other, but fear your God. I am the Lord your God.
Today, some will tell you that under these conditions, a year before the jubilee date, credit would necessarily be scarce and expensive, and that debt would thus find its limit!
This is a mistake, because to ensure that the law is followed, the codes describe in detail how purchases and sales of goods between private individuals must be carried out according to the number of years elapsed since the previous jubilee (i.e., the number of years remaining before the goods must be returned to their previous owner).
Another passage, this time from the prophet Jeremiah, vividly illustrates the scope of the law on the remission of debts.
Faced with the advance of enemy armies towards Jerusalem in 587 B.C., Jeremiah supports, in God’s name, the undertaking of King Zedekiah (then ruler of the Kingdom of Judea), who demands the immediate release of all those enslaved for debt from the powerful forces of his kingdom (Jer. 34:8-17).
Jeremiah forcefully recalls the ancient demand for the freeing of slaves… which the king, in fact, needs to patriotically reunite the social classes before the battle, and give himself sufficient troops free of all servile obligations!
A passage in the Book of (the prophet) Nehemiah (447 BC), the governor of Persian Judea under Artaxerxes I of Persia (465–424 BC), influenced by the ancient Mesopotamian tradition, also proclaims the cancellation of debts owed by indebted Jews to their rich compatriots.
The social situation Nehemiah discovered in Judea was appalling. To remedy the problem, Nehemiah placed the law of debt relief within a religious framework, the Covenant with Yahweh. From then on, it was God himself who commanded the forgiveness of debts and the liberation of slaves and their land, for the land belonged to God alone.
Nehemiah Helps the Poor
« Now the men and their wives raised a great outcry against their fellow Jews.
2 Some were saying, “We and our sons and daughters are numerous; in order for us to eat and stay alive, we must get grain.”
3 Others were saying, “We are mortgaging our fields, our vineyards and our homes to get grain during the famine.”
4 Still others were saying, “We have had to borrow money to pay the king’s tax on our fields and vineyards.
5 Although we are of the same flesh and blood as our fellow Jews and though our children are as good as theirs, yet we have to subject our sons and daughters to slavery. Some of our daughters have already been enslaved, but we are powerless, because our fields and our vineyards belong to others.”
6 When I heard their outcry and these charges, I was very angry.
7 I pondered them in my mind and then accused the nobles and officials. I told them, “You are charging your own people interest!” So I called together a large meeting to deal with them
8 and said: “As far as possible, we have bought back our fellow Jews who were sold to the Gentiles. Now you are selling your own people, only for them to be sold back to us!” They kept quiet, because they could find nothing to say.
9 So I continued, “What you are doing is not right. Shouldn’t you walk in the fear of our God to avoid the reproach of our Gentile enemies?
10 I and my brothers and my men are also lending the people money and grain. But let us stop charging interest!
11 Give back to them immediately their fields, vineyards, olive groves and houses, and also the money you are charging them—one percent of the money, grain, new wine and olive oil.”
12 “We will give it back,” they said. “And we will not demand anything more from them. We will do as you say.”
If we add to these passages the countless verses forbidding the lending of interest to fellow human beings and the taking of property as collateral, we get an idea of what the Israelites in the land of Canaan had put in place to try and maintain a certain social equilibrium.
Alas, in the first century AD, debt forgiveness and the freeing of slaves from debt were swept away from all Near Eastern cultures, including Judea.
The social situation there had deteriorated to such an extent that Rabbi Hillel was able to issue a decree requiring debtors to sign away their right to debt forgiveness.
In the Bible and New Testament
What happened to debt forgiveness in the New Testament?
While the Acts of the Apostles and the writings of the Fathers of the Church sometimes express a great docility, Jesus’ position on the forgiveness of debts, as reported repeatedly and most forcefully in Luke’s Gospel, chapter 4:16-21, appears to be marked by a revolutionary prophetic breath.
Luke places the passage at the beginning of Jesus’ public life. He makes it a key to everything that follows.
16 Jesus went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read,
17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him.
21 He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”
Let’s not forget that the « year of the Lord’s favor (Jubilee Year) » to which he called, demanded at once rest for the land, forgiveness of debts and the liberation of slaves.
In the midst of the slave-owning Roman Empire, which fiercely rejected the concept of debt forgiveness, Jesus’ declaration could only be seen as a declaration of war on the ruling system.
Before he was arrested, Jesus made a highly symbolic material gesture: he forcefully overturned the tables of the money-changers in the Jerusalem temple. For the Jewish high priests and the Roman authorities, this was too much.
Peace of Westphalia of 1648
In 1648, after five years of negotiations, led by the French diplomat Abel Servien on the instructions of Cardinal Mazarin, the “Peace of Westphalia” was signed, putting an end to the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648).
Long before the UN Charter, 1648 made national sovereignty, mutual respect and the principle of non-interference the foundations of international law.
But there was more. As we have documented, the peace deal also included the cancelation of debts that had become the very reason for continuing the war.
Unpayable, unsustainable and illegitimate debts, interests, bonds, annuities and financial claims, explicitly identified as fueling a dynamic of perpetual war, were examined, sorted out and reorganized, most often through the cancellation of debts (articles 13 and 35, 37, 38 and 39), through moratoria or debt rescheduling according to specific timetables (article 69).
Article 40 concludes that debt cancellations will apply in most cases, “and yet the Sums of Money, which during the War have been exacted bona fide, and with a good intent, by way of Contributions, to prevent greater Evils by the Contributors, are not comprehended herein. » (Implying that these debts would have to be honored.)
Finally, looking to the future, for Commerce to be “reestablished”, the treaty abolished many tolls and customs established by “private” authorities for they were obstacles to the exchange of physical goods and know-how and hence to mutual development. (Art. 69 and 70).
TREATY OF WESTPHALIA (1648)
Art. 13:
“Reciprocally, the Elector of Bavaria renounces entirely for himself and his Heirs and Successors the Debt of Thirteen Millions, as also all his Pretensions in Upper Austria; and shall deliver to his Imperial Majesty immediately after the Publication of the Peace, all Acts and Arrests obtain’d for that end, in order to be made void and null.”
Art. 35:
“That the Annual Pension of the Lower Marquisate, payable to the Upper Marquisate, according to former Custom, shall by virtue of the present Treaty be entirely taken away and annihilated; and that for the future nothing shall be pretended or demanded on that account, either for the time past or to come.”
During the Cold War
In the United States, Eisenhower was elected in November 1952.
His Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, otherwise an evil man, noted that, despite the Marshall Plan, Europe, still burdened by a mountain of debt dating from before the First World War and the Treaty of Versailles, was unable to regain momentum.
So much so that it is in danger of turning to the USSR!
Action was called for. In 1953, under the leadership of German banker Hermann Abs, a former Deutsche Bank executive, a major conference was organized in London.
It was decided to write off 66% of Germany’s 30 billion marks in debt.
It was wisely agreed that annual repayments of German debt should never exceed 5% of export earnings. Those wishing to have their debts repaid by Germany should instead buy its exports, enabling it to honor its debts.
In other words, nothing like the madness recently imposed on Greece to « save » the euro!
Although this was done in the name of geopolitical principles, i.e. « in favor of some » but « against others », once again, it was in the name of a better future, i.e. a Europe capable of being the showcase of capitalism in the face of Moscow, that we were able to shed the weight of the past.
On the origins of Modern Art, the problem of Symbolism
“At the turn of this century, painting is in bad shape. And for those who love the fatherland of paintings, very soon there will only remain the closed spaces of museums, in the same way there remains parcs for the amateurs of nature, to cultivate the nostalgia of that what doesn’t exist any longer…”
Jean Clair, Harvard graduate, director of the Musée Picasso
and of the centenary of the Venice Biennale of Contemporary Art in 1995.
Karel Vereycken, April 1998
Something is fairly rotten in the kingdom of Art, and if today (1998), finally some kind of debate breaks out, it is, halas, for quite bad reasons. Since it is uniquely in the context of budget cuts imposed on Europe by the Maastricht treaty that some questions are raised to challenge public opinion on a question carefully avoided till now: can we go on indefinitely subsidizing “modern artistic creation”, or what pretends to be so, with the tax-payers money, without any demand and outside any criteria?
Abusively legitimated by its status as a victim of the totalitarian regimes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao, Modern Art’s value as an act of resistance to totalitarianism watered away with the collapse of these regimes.
While we oppose the current budgetary cuts, since it would finish off the sick patient, we nevertheless propose to examine truthfully the illness and the potential remedies to be administered.
In France, the slightest critique immediately provoked the traditional hysterical fits. Raising a question, formulating an interrogation or even simply expressing a doubt on the holiness of Modern Art continues to be considered tantamount to starting an Inquisition. Even well integrated critiques such as the « left » leaning author Jean Baudrillard, or the director of the Paris Picasso museum Jean Clair and even the modern painter Ben, immediately bombarded by acid counter-attacks from the french and international Art nomenclature, accusing them of being “reactionaries”, “obscurantist” and, to crown it all, of being “fascists”, “nazis” and even “anti-Semites”.
For seasoned observers these attacks remind the simplicity of Stalinist rhetoric: “Anybody discussing the revolution is a fascist”. Modernist musical composer Pierre Boulez even accused a journalist of being a “Vichy collaborator” because unconvinced of the utility of the computers of his musical research foundation IRCAM.
That spark of debate, if any, became rapidly poisoned by the possessive defense of the scarce budget allocations. Why all this noise? Jean Clair already exposed his views fourteen years ago in his book “Considérations sur l’Etat des Beaux-Arts, Critique de la Modernité” (1983) without provoking such a hullabaloo.
But in times of crisis, funds seem to provoke more passion than fundamentals. In any case, we welcome Clair’s courage. His ironical critique of the rampant snobbism of the tiny, incestuous world of contemporary Art makers is totally uncompromising. His defense of the necessary rebirth of the basic skills of drawing and pastel is on the mark.
Clair rightly makes a distinction between « Contemporary » art on one side and « Modern » art on the other side. Contemporary Art, broke with Modern Art from the point it became a systemic apology of “non-sense [absence of meaning] that was elected a system. » Reality, writes Clair, leads him to demand that we return to “meaning” (deliberately banned by « contempory » art) which was the very power of « Modern » Art.
To understand this difference, inspired by the insights and works of my friend, american art historian Michael Gibson, we shall document here that the birth of « Modern » art was nothing but a mutation from figaritive « Symbolism » to non-figurative (abstract) Symbolism, both accepting their role of expressing a symbolic meaning. « Contemporary art », profiting from the confusion of the idea of a « secret » meaning inherent in symbolic artistry, then sneaked in and tried to pretend that any sort of meaning should and could be eliminated from artistic expression.
QUESTION:
« So if I understood you correctly, you claim there exist criteria that are universal, enabling rational man to distinguish with reason between beauty and ugliness which would free art from the arbitrary caprices of taste?”
ANSWER:
« Uh, yes, and even if one cannot establish a catalogue filled with models and instructions enforceable till the end of all times, we firmly think there exists a way of looking at things, a mental attitude which we can prove to have been fruitful since the early cave paintings, as those of Chauvet in southern France dating from 50.000 years B.C., till today. »
To say it differently, there is no such thing as the aesthetics of form, but some kind of aesthetics of the soul.
Any attempt to frame aesthetics, as a set of formal rules of the visible forms is the shortest road to finish in a sterile academic dead end.
By analogy, we could say that such an attempt in the domain of language would make linguistics the science of poetry…
Leonardo da Vinci defined the mission of the painter as the one who has to « make visible the invisible ». So it is up to us to define the aesthetics of the invisible and how they manifest themselves in the visible realm.
How to represent the world
Let’s look at ways of representing phenomena by starting from what appears to be the « most simple ».
A. “Bounded objects” of an inorganic or organic nature: for example stones, a glass bottle, but also a flower or the body of an animal or a man. Their relative finiteness makes their representation easier. But to “make them alive”, one has to show their participation to something infinite: the infinite variations of the color or a stone, the numerous reflections of light shattered by the glass bottle, the relative infinite number of leaves of a tree, the huge number of successive gestures which dictate spirit and life to the bodies of living beings. As you can see now, these so-called “simple” phenomena oblige us to choose, beyond simple sense perception, perceptions that enable us to express the idea of the object rather than its mere form.
B. “Openly unbounded objects”: for example a wave of the ocean, a forest, the clouds in the sky, or the expression of the eyes of a human being. Even more than in A., the Chinese principle of the “li” has to be considered. Instead of imitating their exterior form, and since their sometimes turbulent shapes escape in any case from our limited sense-perceptions, the exterior form has to be regarded as the expression of the idea that was the generating principle and we have to concentrate on choosing elements in the visible realm that indicate that “higher reality”. That makes the difference between the portrait of a living being and the portrait of a wax model…
C. “Ideas free from an object”: for example Love, Justice, Fidelity, Laziness, Cold, etc. How can we build gangways to the visible capable of representing these “higher ideas”?
ANSWER:
- Instead of representing the idea, I can try to substitute it with the object of the idea (one of Plato’s favorite subjects). For example I can try to represent the idea of Love by representing a woman. However, she cannot be but the object or the subject of love (She is loved or loves), but she is not Love itself.
- Since I’m in trouble having a representation in the visible realm of an idea of a “superior” nature, I decide to designate it by symbol. For example, a little heart to symbolize Love. For a Martian visiting Earth in the context of interplanetary tourism, the little heart has no meaning. By logical deduction, he could arrive at the conclusion the heart indicates heart patients, or cardiologists or eventually the designed victims of an Aztec sacrificial cult. In order to understand what is involved, some earthling has to initiate him into the pre-convened meaning of the symbol to which the inhabitants of earth agreed to. If not, it might take some time before he understands the “secret” meaning of the symbol.
- That symbol can be a simple visible element but also a little story we call allegorical. Illustrating an allegory will always remain a simple didactical exercise far underneath the sublime mission of art.
- The notion of a parable, as those one finds in the Bible, brings us closer to the wanted solution by its metaphorical character (Meta-poros in Greek meaning: that which carries beyond). The isochronical presence of several paradoxes, provoking surprise and irony by the ambiguities of the painting shakes up the sense certainty of our empirical perceptions that darken so much our natural predisposition for beauty.
SYMBOL and METAPHOR, What’s the difference?
Symbol: designates a thing
Metaphor: carries beyond the thing
Symbol: its only value is expressed by itself
Metaphor: its only value is given to it by implicit analogy.
Symbol: its secret meaning can only be learnt by convention
Metaphor: its meaning can be discovered by sovereign cognition.
Rembrandt’s Saskia
Let us examine together Rembrandt’s painting “Saskia as Flora” (1641), where she offers a flower to the viewer. Is this a portrait of Rembrandt’s wife along with the portrait of a flower? Or is there a new concept involved that arises in our mind as a result of this juxtaposition that could be called Love or Fidelity (to you I offer my beauty, as I offer you this flower…) The putting into visual analogy of two quite different things make appear a third one, which is in fact the real subject.
The easiest example of a real metaphorical paradox can be seen at work in wordplay or a cartoon drawing. For example if I draw a young couple in love and replace the head of the young man with the head of a dog, a completely different meaning is given to the image. The viewer, intrigued by the love relationship is surprised by the possessive (or submissive) character suggested by the dog head. Variations of the type of dog and his expression will vary the very meaning of the image. Once again, it is by the use of an implicit analogy that an unexpected arrangement gives us the means to grapple an idea beyond the object represented.
The little light bulb that goes on in our heads when we solve a metaphorical paradox gives us a threefold happiness. First the joy to think, since our thought process is precisely based on that unique process. Second to live in harmony with our world, which being a creative process itself “condemns” us to be free. And finally the joy that derives from the sharing of that happiness of discovery with other human beings who get even more creative in turn. Hence, every scientific or artistic discovery becomes a ray of light enlightening the path for humanity to go. The glowing enders of yesterday give us the fire to illuminate tomorrow.
But to do so, one cannot represent in a formal way the solution found. One is obliged to recreate the context which obliges the viewer to walk the same road we did till the precise point where he discovers himself the poetical concept.
The science of enigmas of Leonardo da Vinci
Renaissance genius Leonardo da Vinci was a specialist of this kind of « organized » enigmas, conspiracies to have us think. Let’s have a look at his painting “Saint John the Baptist”, his last painting and somehow his last will resuming all the best science of his creative mind. The ambiguous character of the person has been often used as “proof” of Leonardo’s alleged homosexuality.
One can indeed ask the question if represented here we see a man or a woman? The strong muscles of the arms plead for male while the gracious face argues for female. Desperate, our mind asks if this is devil or angel? While one finger points to heaven, similar to Raphael’s Plato in the « School of Athens », the other hand rests on the heart, and in the same time a coquette smile meets intelligent eyes…
Of course, Saint-John the Baptist, patron saint of Florence served as the symbol of a humanist Platonic current that realized the fact that the « little lights » of classical Greece announced the coming of the « great light » of Christianity.
Scholastical Catholicism of those days pretended that anybody living before Christ could be nothing more than a pagan. So what about Saint John the Baptist? The compositional method here employed is not of a symbolical nature, but that of paradoxical metaphor, i.e. build by enigmas that guide us, if we accept the challenge, to reflect in a philosophical way about the nature of mankind: how is it possible we are finite in some parts and infinite in others? That we are mind, life and matter? Of divine and human nature?
That is in some words what we mean by the method of paradoxical metaphors, the only method which gives sense to the word « classic », since conceived in a universal way for all men in the time of all times.
The opposite approach is the symbolist one, officially named after an artistic current that swept over Europe at the end of the XIXth century.
Together with impressionism that capitulated to positivism, symbolism was the mother of Modern Art and its bastard son Contemporary Art.
The symbol, erected as a method of artistic expression, is characteristic of a society that is incapable of change. It celebrates the banishing of the movement of progress but masks that self-denial with the never-ending multiplication of images and objects, always equal to themselves. Symbolism is nothing but the transformation into an object of a strong emotion or a mystical thought. The increase of its effect through incantation, fetishism, repetition, etc., agitating the symbol for its magical value as such, evokes the same obsessive fixation as pornography. As the American thinker Lyndon LaRouche ironically underscored the point:
“the difference between Beethoven (method of metaphor) and Wagner (method of symbolism) is defined by the level at which emotions are provoked in the audience. In the case of Beethoven, the beauty evoked brings us to tears. In the case of Wagner, it is the chairs that get wet…”
From there on, as we will document in due course, the arising of “Modern Art” reveals itself to be nothing more than a mere linear transposition of “figurative” symbolism to “abstract” symbolism.
These terms are obviously empty shells, since all figuration is figurative, and all figuration is the expression of what could be called an “abstract” concept or idea, conscious or not.
So, contrary to Contemporary Art, whose aggressive meaning is that nothing has, can or has the right to have any meaning, Modern Art claims to possess a sense of meaning, but that meaning is mystical-symbolical and hermetic by nature. We are not saying that symbols should be banned from Art, but we cannot but underline that symbolistical though as a compositional method is incompatible with Art’s nature.
Real Art concentrates on communicating a unique human quality, the Sublime, that expresses freedom and not that of a man enslaved either to his sentiments neither to his principles.
Contemporary Art, as all large scale swindles, needs quite some rhetoric and literature to convince it’s public of its pure absolute relativity. It is said that each of us sees it differently; that we all possess our own criteria and that formulating any judgment is by itself already an act of a totalitarian fascist in germ. It is somehow like the thief who accuses his victim of cupidity and lack of brotherly love when the victim refuses to hand over his purse. But if one claims the right to create something without meaning, one equally revindicates the right to no critique, and therefore ends any form of real debate beyond « it gives me a kick » or « no kick ».
That Art, when it is sincere, by claiming it cannot be apprehended by human cognition, defines itself as egoistical and asocial. It cannot but harvest what it sows: indifference.
Before entering two personalities considered being the godfathers of Modern Art, Wassily Kandinsky (1866-1944) and Piet Mondrian (1872-1944), it is necessary to situate the historical context in which they operated. Then we will investigate a high level political operation: the Theosophical Society whose malefic theories exerted great influence on both godfathers of Modern Art.
Symbolism, the final stage of Romanticism
To crush the republican spirit that emerged at the end of the eighteenth century, which saw the American and French revolution, the European oligarchy deployed initially Napoleon Bonaparte.
Then, on the ruins of the Napoleonic wars, they promoted the iron corset of the Holy Alliance and the impotent ideology of regretting: the privilege of the suffering heart. Romanticism, often described as a “movement for the liberation of the me, as a reaction against the regularity of classicism and the rationality of the preceding centuries” became the official culture of the Restoration before being adopted by the Monarchy of July.
Even the talented French poet Baudelaire, prisoner of the zeitgeist stated shamelessly: “What is there more absurd than progress?” or, premonitory:
“Who says romanticism says Modern Art, i.e. intimacy, spirituality, color, aspiration towards the infinite”.
In a way this was the expression of a certain revolt against positivism, a “scientific” materialism which some tried to impose top down and for which the hearts of men were not mobilized.
We are light-years away from the “science for all” approach which radiated Gaspard Monge at the early Ecole Polytechnique, or Lazare Carnot’s “Ode to enthusiasm”. It was the same Holy alliance that forced Carnot into exile and outrooted Monge´s influence at the Ecole, crushing France’s scientific and industrial progress.
In 1871, Louis Pasteur, in a beautiful article “Why France did not find a superior man in the moment of peril” analyzed the dramatic events of those days.
But also Germany was living under a real cultural dictatorship. Prince Metternich, by the Carlsbad decrees forbade any representation of Friedrich Schiller‘s theatre plays. Also, the “sulfurous” poet Heinrich Heine, mocking the Salons of Mme de Stael and all the other nostalgics of the lost glory of the past, became the permanent target of the Holy Alliance’s police operations.
Francesco Goya, who strongly lambasted the massacres of Bonaparte’s Spanish expedition (1810-1814) in his series “The disasters of War”, characterized this particular historic moment in his engraving “The sleep of Reason generates monsters”.
The Great Upheaval
On the economic front, it was only after Abraham Lincoln defeated the British backed pro-slavery Confederacy and the then ensuing industrial buildup (1861-1876), that a little progress was tolerated in Europe.
The oligarchy had to solve the following paradox: How can we counterbalance the rising American power while in the same time prevent the emergence of Republics in Europe, inspired by the American System, on the ruins of the European empires?
What some have called the « Great Upheaval » was nothing less than a profound transformation of daily life in Europe. It was precisely at that time that the Symbolist current got so dominant.
In the “industrial polygon of the Europe of steam” which connected Glasgow, Stockholm, Gdansk, Lodz, Trieste, Florence and Barcelona, it is estimated that of 7 persons from the country side, 1 stayed working the land, another went to the new world or the colonies, and the remaining 5 went working in the cities. The same estimate says that close to 60 million people left Europe. One can imagine the cultural choc for those who quit the magical world of pastoral backwardness.
In that sense, Symbolism was also a means for the oligarchy to deprive these incoming populations from the benefits of urban culture by keeping them in a state of irrationality.
The fear of political takeover by sovereign Nation-States dedicated to industrial and scientific progress was so great that the British Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston (1784-1865), activated through his agent Guiseppe Mazzini (1805-1872), the “Young Europe” movement, uniting most revolutionary currents of those days. Under the auspices of the Foreign Office’s Arab Bureau, the east saw the sudden birth of a whole series of Arab countries, eventually localized on this or that oilfield.
The Theosophical Society
It is in that context that one has to situate the extraordinary offensive of the Theosophical Society (TS), one of these pseudo-religions rising out of the esoterical swamp of the second half of the nineteenth century. It is useful to zoom in on the life of Helena Petrowna Blavatsky (HPB) (1831-1891), the main front figure of the TS.
Granddaughter of the Prussian General Alexis von Rottenstern-Hahn, HPB was born in 1831 in Ukraine.
At the age of sixteen, her parents married her to an old General with the name of Nicéphore Blavatsky, vice-governor ofprovince of Erivan, which she quitted nearly immediately.
In 1848, she meets a Copt with the name of Paulos Metamon and as early as 1851 she turns up in London, where she meets the “spiritualists” and meets the “revolutionary” Mazzini. In 1856 she affiliates with the Young Europe’s Carbonarist association.
Then, she travels across different continents having become a toy in the hands of her British promoters which she refers to as her “Spiritual masters”, as she called one of her controlling agents “Master Morya”.
As soon as 1851 she travels to the US and Mexico, crossing Texas and Louisiana. After numerous trips in the Caucasus, Syria and Lebanon, we find her on November 3, 1867, riding a horse siding Garibaldi. Severely wounded at the battle of Mentana, she’s left for dead.
While recuperating in Paris, she meets a journalist with the name of Michal, and the founder of French spiritism, Allan Kardec. The former claim they discovered and developed HPB’s faculties as a medium. Deployed in that capacity to Cairo, and in the USA, she’s accused of being a fraudster. It is relevant to situate Edgar Allan Poe’s literary production as the effort of the pro American system faction to ridicule the British offensive in favor of esoteric irrationality.
Colonel Henry Steel Olcott
Around 1874, Blavatsky receives the order to enter into contact with a lawyer and insurance expert: Henry Steel Olcott.
Former officer of the Military Police, he became colonel during the civil war and shared his life in between Masonic lodges and spiritism. Active as a journalist, he was in charge of covering paranormal phenomena for the New York Sun and the New York Graphic.
Olcott got many inroads into the American esoterical scene of those days: John King, William Stainton Moses, Leadbeater, the Miracle Club of Philadelphia and a secret society called The Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor whose members signed their writings with a swastika, symbol of the divinity of Tibet, the immense mountain plateau where supposedly the Aryan race found refuge at the time of the great deluge…
Then, on October 20, 1875 was founded in New York a “Society for Spiritualist investigations”. Its president was Olcott; the two vice-presidents were Felt and Pancoast, while Blavatsky figured as a mere secretary. Without willing to downplay her personal role, it looks she was brought in more for propagandistical reasons than in regard of her proper leadership qualities. As prominent members one can mention William Q. Judge and Charles Sotheran, both high dignitaries of Anglo-American masonry.
It is also remarkable that the Confederate General Albert Pike, Grand Master of the Scottish Rite of the Southern district based in Charleston, and one of the founders of the Ku Klux Klan met Blavatsky in those days, but seems to have dropped her, considering her to low level. Pike’s spiritual reputation is largely overdone and he has been accused of having extensively plagiarized the French occultist Elipha Levi.
Less than a month later, on November 17, 1875, the Society’s named was changed into “Theosophical Society”. Olcott and Blavatsky immediately started a great project to conquer the minds of India.
Officially, they pretended to establish “The Great Contact”, a bridge between the initiated of the East with those of the West and to fusion them together.
HPB gets without any difficulty the American nationality while Olcott obtains from the president of the United States, Rutherford Hayes, a handwritten clearance, a document requesting American diplomats all over the world to provide them their aid. Also, the US Secretary of State provided Olcott a diplomatic passport, something relatively rare for a non-career diplomat. When they reached ground in India, all this American help will give them the means to establish the “British Theosophical Society” (sic).
The British oligarchy seemed to have preferred Hinduism and its great toleration of the cast system where individuals’ desires for a better life are hoped for in the next one, as a preferential partner for the British oligarchy and its imperial class society.
The fundamental choice of the cultural matrix that defines the particular beliefs, transcending any particular form of regime, has always been the “secret weapon” guaranteeing the survival of the oligarchical system. In this way, it is not any longer necessary to police people’s minds on issues, since you control the underlying axioms shaping their thought process itself.
What the Theosophical Society claims today in regard to its role in the birth of a national consciousness of India is an ugly lie, and maybe without Theosophy India might have gained independence a century earlier!
While it is true that Gandhi, who encountered the TS in a vegetarian club in London, studied their works, he never really adopted their convictions. After having started the TS in India, Olcott, in the same geopolitical strategy, will explore Buddhism going through Asia and settle in Japan to wake up the “sleeping masses”.
Olcott composed a Buddhist catechism, created a multicolor Buddhist flag and a General Committee of Buddhist Affairs that functioned as a kind of Vatican for Buddhism. He also held an extraordinary conference in Japan’s military center, Hiroshima. There he distributes swastikas to the audience to which he predicts the coming of terrible wars will strike humanity and that Hiroshima will become one of the symbols for peace and fraternity in the world (sic)!
Swipe Christianity of the Earth!
Olcott and Blavatsky seemed to be quite effective in performing funny magical tricks. Some of them were described by one of their victims, Mme de Jelihowsky:
- Clear and direct answers, of telepathic nature.
- Formulas pronounced in Latin, by way of hits, for remedies which resulted always in healing.
- Divulgation in public of secrets concerning persons that were present but that hurted Blavatsky by their doubts.
- Change of the weight of furniture or persons at will.
- Letters written by unknown correspondents with a writing that was not hers. Often, when somebody asked a question she would say: go in your room, and in such or such a place you will find a letter answering your question.
- Appearance and disappearance of objects without a plausible explanation.
- Faculty to let music be heard at will, wherever and whenever desired.
When depressed, Blavatsky admitted she swindled her admirers.
In their magazine, “The Blue Lotus”, Olcott wrote on November 27, 1895, p. 418:
“Certain days, she was in such a state of mind that she denied the powers by which she had given us carefully controlled demonstrations and pretended to have deceived her public”.
Behind all this cheap mumbo-jumbo reserved for the naïve members of the TS, there was small initiated elite aware of their real geo-strategical imperialism of the mind.
“Our aim”, said Blavatsky, in line with British geopolitics, “is not to restore Hinduism, but to swipe Christianity of the Earth”.
After the cremation of Baron of Palm, a rich donator of the TS, the first one in the history of the United States against which over three thousand people demonstrated, and who’s only aim was to introduce Hinduism to the U.S. population, Olcott and HPB exposed confusedly their doctrine in 1878 in “Isis unveiled”, a 1300 pages book that she called “the work of her life”, available in a more popular version under the name of “The Secret Doctrine”.
From the standpoint of Theosophy (which some called Theosophistry), and in a pure remake of manicheanism, religious beliefs could be classified between male and female religions.
The latter gave preponderance to peace, tranquility, sensuality, fertility and adaptation to the environment, while the male religions gave extensive privilege to the spirit of conquest and undertaking, to proselytism and to the superiority of male virtues.
Of course, Abraham and Moses, founders of the great monotheistic religions in which man does not adapt but intervenes and even discovers his specific harmony by transforming nature and highering its order, were targeted as the animal to be hunted. It was indeed these religions that largely overruled the ancient cult of mother goddess Gaia that became the Isis cult.
Isis cult
ISIS
Isis is the most illustrious of the Egyptian goddesses, in charge of the home, marriage and fertility. Her power spread throughout the universe after she discovered the secret name of the supreme God, Ra.
She embodied the feminine principle, the magical source of all transformation, and was considered by all esotericists to be the Initiatrix, the one who held the secret of life, death and resurrection.
According to legend, she put back together her husband Osiris, whom the serpent Set had cut into fourteen pieces and scattered across Egypt. Only one piece was missing: the penis. Isis made one in silver. Her marriage to Osiris gave birth to Horus, who triumphed in the battle against the evil spirit, Set, but Isis asked him to spare her in order to maintain the cosmic battle between good and evil…
Often designated by the annealed cross, symbol of millions of years of future life, which is confused with the « Isis knot », symbol of immortality, Isis is also represented by the Ouroboros, or the snake that bites its own tail: sexual union with oneself, permanent self-fertilization, perpetual transformation from death to life.
To dominate the battlefield of the mind, a Machiavellian strategy was conceived:
1. Since the adoration of the mother goddess and the practice of female virtues nearly remained exclusively existent in India and Tibet, archaic Hinduism had to be revived. That is the reason why the Theosophists ran to India in order to prevent the nearby extinction of Hinduism. In France, Blavatsky’s main sponsor in that effort was the wealthy Duchesse de Pomar, a Spanish aristocrat descending from the Marquis of Northampton. For that aim, Orientalism and the practice of Yoga had to be encouraged and popularized.
2. Since the TS on its own was too tiny to weaken Christianity, Judaism and Islam, the TS combined its efforts with anti-progress Fabian Socialism. The just battle for republican secularism, founded on the mutual respect of religious freedom was distorted into a virulent denunciation of the Judeo-Christian philosophical outlook. The socialist inspiration of Jean Jaurès, while criticizing the inherent materialism of financial capitalism and Marxism passionately defended, in the name of a sense of transcendence, the right of entire growth and the pursuit of happiness for every human individual.
3. To fight “male supremacy”, it was decided by speech and action to defend anything that supposedly opposed it. Defend universal peace, to fight for the end of sexual discrimination, to make women free from their body, to make love become stronger than violence. For that reason, the TS always took a woman as its front figure. Annie Besant, an attractive Irish protestant and a member of the Fabian Society took the leadership of the TS after having directed the “Malthusian League” of England in 1877.
Such a project obviously didn’t rally much enthusiasm in those days, especially not in Catholic countries. The opposition was so strong that the TS adapted its outlook into some form of esoteric Christianity designed to penetrate the Christian strata. But for HPB, Judeo-Christian monotheism remained nothing else but a barbaric schism of Buddhism:
“What some called with despise paganism was the ancient wisdom full of divinity; and Judaism with its offshoots, Christianity and Islam took all their inspiration of their ethnic father…”
According to HPB, Jesus the Essenian was persecuted by the Jews because “the Essenian were converts, Buddhist missionaries that had come to Egypt, Greece and even Judea”
So, for her, Christianity had to be “de-judaizised” to make it again compatible with the female principle. The basic postulate behind all this was her fascination for the Aryan civilization whose symbol, the Swastika, of notorious nazi reputation, figures still today in the emblem of the ST.
THE SWASTIKA
A widespread symbol in all ancient civilizations (Asia, Central America, Mongolia, India, Northern Europe, Celts, Basques, Etruscans, etc.), it represents the vortex of creation.
The swastika, which often replaces the wheel, is made of a cross, each branch of which is quadrupled, as in vectorial orientations that define a gyratory direction and then return to the center. Its numerical value is therefore four times four = sixteen. This is the powerful development of reality or the Universe, an expression of extreme secular power. Its appropriation by Hitler was no accident.
The rise of the Nazi movement has been associated with the rise of the famous Thule Society, another esoteric society in the theosophical style, in which we find Karl Haushofer, Adolf Hitler’s real master thinker.
The anthroposophists of Rudolf Steiner, a great admirer of Nietzsche and the eugenicist Haeckel, are a dissident branch of the Theosophical Society, omnipresent today among the German « Grünen » (Greens).
The Nabis (the Prophets)
That gives us some elements to situate the historical context into which arrived Modern Art. Esotericism was so much an invading fashion that many painters tried to explore pre-Christian religions to discover “forgotten symbols”.
That was certainly the case of the French symbolist Gustave Moreau when he painted the Gnostic myth of Jupiter and Sémélé. His pupils were the “moderns” Henri Matisse, Georges Rouault and Albert Marquet.
Another young symbolist, Emile Bernard inspired Gauguin, which in turn inspired Paul Sérusier.
Art historian Michael Gibson keenly pointed out the fact that a great number of the founding figures of Modern Art (Kandinsky, Mondrian, Malevitch, Picasso, etc.) have ALL been figurative symbolists at their start.
We are convinced they remained so, but that they deconstructed, i.e. downscaled, the complexity of their symbolic language to more primitive elements of the visual field (a color, a line, a number, a geometry, etc.).
Gibson accurately identified the precise moment of that historical turning point towards modernism with the shift provoked by the group of the “Nabis”.
In 1888, close to Pont-Aven in Brittany France, Paul Sérusier painted one day in the presence of Gauguin a landscape composed of vibrating primitive flat surfaces of colors on the top of his box of cigars.
That work was nicknamed “The Talisman” by his comrades who considered it a revelation of a new approach in painting, the absolute destruction of any reference to physical space by the use of light or perspective. Welcome to the mystical flat space of color and its “interior light”.
Paul Sérusier, Emile Bernard, Paul Gauguin and some friends rapidly called themselves the “Nabis”, which meant prophets in Hebrew.
They regularly met in a house they called “The Temple” on 22, Boulevard Montparnasse in Paris. The phrasing alone already indicates the messianic mindset of these converts. Hoaxer Sar Joséphin Péladan united in 1892 all these young talents to the Salon of the Rosicrucians.
In the « Amendments of the Esthetical Rosicrucians », Peladan explicitly prescribed history painting, the painting of patriotic or military scenes and also,
« any representation of contemporary life, portraits, rustic scenes, seascapes, oriental scenes, domestic animals, flowers, fruits, accessories and other exercises painters insolently dare to expose ».
On the contrary « and to privilege the ideal of Catholicism and mysticism, the Rosicrucian order will welcome any work founded on legend, myth, allegory, dream, etc. »
One sees here, how Catholicism, as much as its opponents, if stripped from its content and reduced to its bare symbols could coexist peacefully with these insanities.
One ends up wondering why a World War didn’t break out earlier with elites espousing such follies! And when it did break out in 1914, Jacques Emile Blanche declared,
« Very often during this chemical and scientific ‘cubist’ war, in the night damaged by the air raids, I dreamt about Stravinsky’s Sacre du Printemps ».
Peladan’s Salon brought together symbolists from Belgium, Holland, Germany, such as Ferdinand Hodler, Carlos Swabe, Jan Toorop, Ferdinand Knopff, Jean Delville, Georges Minne and Xavier Mellery, with « Nabis » like Emile Bernard, Félix Valloton and Charles Fillinger.
A great part of this came into France from across the Channel where a real revolt was going on against the Academicism of Sir Joshua Reynolds.
Under the auspices and protection of the very popular John Ruskin, a real nostalgic fanatic willing to bring humanity back to a pre-Renaissance mystical feudal order, appeared the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, the PRB, that one of it’s degenerate founders, Dante Gabriel Rosetta, with sincere self irony called « Penis Rather Better »...
Kandinsky: from positivism to mysticism
The life path of the Russian painter Wassily Kandinsky, universally identified as the official godfather of Modern Art, gives us even more insight in the subject matter.
Kandinsky was born on December 4, 1866 amidst a wealthy orthodox family of aristocrats that made it as tea merchants. As Henri Matisse, he enters the University to study law and political economy.
In 1889 he’s sent on a mission by the Imperial Society of Natural Sciences and Ethnography to study the criminal law of the Finish community, the syrjaenen, a non-christianized tribe living in the province of Vologda, five hundred kilometers north of Moscow.
Kandinsky admitted in 1937:
« To be honest, the origin of my abstract painting has to be looked for in the popular Russian painting which I discovered for the first time during my trip to Northern Russia. »
Obtaining the post of law professor in 1896, another event that takes place the same year will completely “blow” his mind and decide him to quit his academic career entering a profound
mystical crisis.
That event was the discovery of radioactivity by the French physician Antoine-Henri Becquerel:
« For me, the disintegration of the atom, was the same thing as the disintegration of the entire world. The most solid walls suddenly collapsed. Everything became precarious, unstable and floppy. I wouldn’t any longer be astonished to see a stone melt in the air in front of me and become invisible. Science seemed to be annihilated: its most solid bases were a delusion, an error of scientists who were not building in a transfigurated light their work with a solid hand stone by stone, but grappling in the darkness. There, looking for truths by chance, and in their blindness, they confounded one object for the other. »
Kandinsky’s transition from “materialistic positivism” to “mystical spiritualism” is a clinical study case of the point we want to demonstrate.
Ecstatic after the discovery of a Wagner opera performance in Moscow, he leaves Russia to go live in Munich. He gives the following description of that experience:
« Lohengrin seemed a perfect realization of Moscow. The violins, the profound bases and particularly the wind instruments personify for me the splendid power of the twilight hours. »
In 1900, after a first refusal, he is admitted, together with Paul Klee, to enter the Academy of Franz von Stück, a well-referenced symbolist of Munich.
Von Stück’s painting, the « Kiss of the Sphinx » takes up the same theme as Moreau’s « Jupiter and Sémélé. » Attracted by (female) beauty, man in reality embraces death (a woman), a remake of the classical Eros/Thanatos theme.
Der Blaue Reiter to defeat materialism
One year later, the pupil becomes himself a teacher and creates the group “Phalanx”, symbol of the fight against Academicism.
Kandinsky reveals himself as an able organizer of art exhibits, throwing in his personal fortune and capable of convincing other sponsors.
Very rapidly he gives the exhibits an international dimension and the presence of foreign artists reinforces the illusion that the new tendency in art possesses a universal character. In the theosophist tradition, he rightly opens his academy to women, excluded till then from art academies!
His admiration for Blavatsky is limitless.
« Blavatsky was certainly the first to establish, after living for years in India, a solid link between these so-called « savages » and our culture. At that point, there came into being one of the greatest spiritual movements uniting a great number of people, materializing that union under the form of a « Theosophical Society ». That society is composed of lodges, who try to approach the questions of the spirit by the way of interior knowledge. »
Uniting the group of « Die Brücke » with his own efforts and those of Franz Marc and Paul Klee, he called into being the almanac of the “Blaue Reiter” (Blue Cavalier), in reality a reworked image of a Byzantine icon of Saint-Georges defeating the dragon of evil transposed into a bleu cavalier defeating materialism.
In his ground text of 1909, Concerning Spiritual in Art and painting in particular, Kandinsky builds up a theoretical system where every color possesses its own separate identity:
« Red, as one imagines oneself, as a color without border, typically warm, acts interiorly as a very living color, vivid and agitated, which does not possess the thoughtless character or yellow that gets dispersed to all sides, but gives the effect, despite all its energy and intensity, of the powerful note of immense force nearly conscious of its aim.
« There is in that effervescence and that eagerness, principally in itself and scarcely turned towards the exterior, some sort of male maturity. »
« When it is medium, as cinnabar, the red gets more permanent and increases its sharp sensibility: it is like a passion that burns with regularity, a force certain of itself, which is not easy to overlay, but which can be extinguished by the blue as red iron by water. That red tolerates nothing cold that makes it lose its resonance and its meaning. Or more exactly, that tragic, brutal cooling down produces a tone that painters, especially today, avoid and outlaw as « dirty ». They are wrong. Dirt, through its material form, represents materially, as a material being, possesses its interior resonance as any other material being. That why the attempt to avoid dirtiness in painting is as unjust and arbitrary as yesterday’s fear in front of « pure » color.
« One does not have to forget that all the means derived from the interior necessity are pure. Said differently, that what is dirty from the outside is pure from the inside. If not, what is pure from the outside is dirty inside. »
« The six colors, who, by couples, form three major contrasts, present themselves to us as a great circle, as a snake which bites its tail (symbol of infinity and eternity). And on the right and on the left we find the two great possibilities for silence; the one of death and the one of birth. »
One sees here the splendid rigor of a law professor, charmed by the “sense of construction of Roman law”, applying his science zealously to mysticism. Kandinsky’s writings are always inhabited with references to music, such as resonance, harmony, rhythm, etc.
In the same way musical ideas got freed of the presence of text and words, Kandinsky and argue that the same thing can be done in the visual domain using merely color, rhythm, form, etc. taken as entities on themselves.
But what music is he talking about, beneath Wagner? In Kandinsky’s immediate entourage we find the atonal composer Arnold Schönberg, who exploded the well-tempered system according to the same mystical principles, making it as such incapable of transmitting ideas.
From Mondrian to Breker
The famous Dutch cubist, Piet Mondrian, was another original product resulting from the mixture of Theosophy and Calvinist rigorism.
At that time, the TS launched a recruitment drive calling on those desiring to “have a place amidst the pioneers of the coming thinking”.
The unique picture decorating the wall of Mondrian’s studio in Laren was a large picture of Blavatsky. The artist was in frequent discussion with the Dutch theosophist writer Schoenmakers whose books Mondrian was distributing.
In 1892, he starts studying Theosophy and joins the TS in 1909.
His triptych, “Evolution” expresses the three stages of spiritual evolution: on the left, the mother goddess with triangles pointing down, the lowest level. In the middle, a female figure, with triangles pointing up, stage of activity and awakening. On the right the synthesis of both, the crossing triangles forming a David star.
Let us not forget talking about the official art of the Third Reich, with the figurative symbolism of the outright pagan sculptor Arno Breker.
Breker was Hitler’s personal pet sculptor and realized in 1936 the infamous incarnations of the Ubermensch (superior man) for the Nazi’s Olympic Stadium in Berlin.
As proven by interviews after the war, the so-called “apolitical” Breker was very well aware for what kind of power he was working.
His work “Bereitschaft” (readiness) of 1939 proves the case.
Mascot of the Parisian elites, since trained by a Frenchman, his personal exhibit at the Orangerie in Paris in 1942 drew over 80.000 visitors. He shared the fascist ethics of filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl, always ready to popularize nazi symbology.
Breker was befriended with Jean Cocteau, Vlaminck and Derain, and turned down Stalin’s offer to work for the USSR after the war.
A cubist in his early days (1922), he was disappointed by the meeting he had with Paul Klee and the Bauhaus, and invested himself in the total deification of the human body. Breker confirmed: “I always tried to give a meaning with symbols”.
In all his spirituality, Breker did not hesitate in his “Vision of Europe” to transpose an eagle’s heads on human bodies, making them into Horus, son of Isis.
The inversion of these symbolisms, restating the supremacy of male values over female values was nothing less than the creation of esthetics of war.
In 1980, Breker explained in an interview how he saved the life of Picasso and that of Aristide Maillol’s Jewish companion, Dina Vierny using his direct position as an intimate of Adolph Hitler.
The Italian futurists are another obscene example. Many proudly joined the fascist movements and some were really chocked Hitler condemned their modernism at a Nuremberg rally.
Marinetti, who published his “Futurist Manifesto” in Le Figaro in 1909 claimed proudly:
« Point 3: Literature being up till now an apology of contemplating immobility, ecstasy and sleep, we want to exalt the aggressive movement, the fevery insomnia, the gymnastic step, the dangerous jump, the slap in the face and the punching.
« Point 7: There is no beauty outside struggle. There are no masterpieces without aggressive character. Poetry must be a violent assault on unknown forces, to summate them to lie down before man…
« Point 9: We want to glorify war –the unique hygiene of the world, militarism, and patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the nice ideas that kill, and the disdain of women…
« Point 10: We want to demolish the Museums and Libraries, fight moralism, feminism and all of opportunistic and utilitarian cowardness. »
As we have demonstrated, this modernism is nothing less than the restoration of the most backward values of ancient civilizations, deprived of their dynamic and reduced to caricatures of their worst defaults.
What we defend here is on the contrary a Renaissance, that is a universal but authentic process of artistic creation fertilized by the best contributions of all cultures, be them Indian, African, Asiatic, American or European.
Our critique of Modernism is not based on any nostalgic longing for a supposedly perfect Golden Age that is no more, but on the commitment to valorize mans dignity and mind.
If you really want to use the word modern, talk about the Mummy portraits of the Fayoum of the second and third century after DC.
Theosophy today
Even if there still exists today an international network of Blavatsky lodges from Antwerp to Philadelphia or Saint Petersburg, it has been in the recent days mainly the radical green current who is leading the fight to destroy the humanist cultural paradigm.
As the Theosophists yesterday, the Greens which have replaced the mother goddess (sounds too religious) with Mother earth (Gaia) express the same messianic zeal in their commitment to sweep the earth and often rally de facto the forces of race, soil and blood.
As yesterday, the green current gets supported by the highest spheres of Anglo-American aristocratic gangsterism.
Deceased financial angel of French archconservative Philippe de Villiers, Jimmy Goldsmith, has a brother, Teddy, who happens to be one of the main funders of Greenpeace!
Documents and articles consulted:
- Chaitkin, Anton, Tarpley, Webster, The Palmerston Zoo, Executive Intelligence Review, Vol. 21, nr.16, Apr.15, 1994.
- Cheminade, Jacques, Time to destroy the myth of Napoleon Bonaparte, Executive Intelligence Review, Vol. 23, 42, Oct.18, 1996.
- Clair, Jean, Considérations sur l’Etat des Beaux Arts – Critique de la Modernité, Gallimard, Paris 1983.
- Gibson, Michael, Le Symbolisme, Editions Taschen, Paris, 1994.
- Kandinsky, Nina, Kandinsky et moi, Flammarion, Paris 1978.
- Kandinsky, Wassily, Concerning the Spiritual in Art, and painting in particular, Dover Editions, New York, 1977.
- Lantier, Jacques, La Théosophie, Editions Culture, Art, Loisirs, Paris.
- LaRouche, Lyndon, How Cauchy ruined France, EIR, Vol.24, nr. 24, June 20, 1997.
- Noël, Bernard, Arno Breker et l’Art officiel, Jacques Damase Editeur, Paris 1981.
- Prampolino, Enrico, Stile Futuristica, nr. 3, Turin 1933.
- Parmelin, Hélène, Peinture, pierre de touche de la liberté, L’Unité nr. 416, 1978.
Rembrandt: 400 years old and still young!
Rembrandt H. van Ryn, was born on July 15, 1606, as the son of a not so poor miller living in the revolutionary city of Leyden in the Netherlands.
Today (2006), four hundred years later, even without any knowledge of the specific historical context, few are those that remain indifferent to his artistic message and skill. Why Rembrandt? What particular quality of his paintings, engravings and drawings gave him the power to reach over centuries of time?
As we will document here, Rembrandt, a precocious intellectual, became already quite « universal » as a young adult. But let’s try to find out what « universal » means.
The Revolt of the Netherlands
The revolt of the Burgundian Netherlands (Note 1) against the tyranny the Fuggers, bankers at the helm of the Spanish and Austrian Habsburg empire, resulted in the tragic break-up of this « nation-state in the making » between the north (today’s Netherlands) and the south (the territory that today includes Belgium and part of northern France).
The Habsburg empire, while brutally sticking to the rich southern part (Flanders), cynically offered the « insurgents » that, if they wished to have a country, they could settle in the malaria-infested swamps of the North, where 75% of the territory lies below sea level, but nevertheless an area slowly domesticated by generations of hardworking farmers thanks to a vast system of canals, dikes and locks, patiently erected since the end of the thirteenth century.
But Charles V, and even worse, his son Philip II of Spain, didn’t believe in the power of mind or that of work. Instead, they believed in the power of the sword and the terror of the Inquisition. After a long war and much unnecessary bloodshed, their policies had reached an impasse, and on April 9, 1609, the semi-bankrupt Habsburgs were forced to sign a twelve-year truce with the new Republic of the Netherlands.
Education
That same year, Rembrandt, hardly 3 years old, entered basic school, where girls and boys learn to read, to write and to calculate. School opens at 6 a.m. in the summer, at 7 a.m. in winter, and finishes only at 7 p.m. Classes start with prayer, the reading and discussion of passages of the Bible and the singing of psalms. Here Rembrandt develops an elegant handwriting and more than rudiments of the Bible.
The Netherlands want to survive. Its leaders wisely used the 12 year truce (1609-1621) to fulfill their commitment to the general welfare. This way, early XVIIth century Holland became maybe the first country of the world where everybody got the chance to learn how to read, write and calculate.
That universal school system, whatever its inadequacies, offered to both poor and rich alike, was the secret of the Dutch « Golden Century ». It’s schooling will also create the generations of Dutch immigrants that will participate a hundred years afterwards in the American Revolution
Others would enter the secondary school at the age of 12, but Rembrandt precociously enters Leyden’s Latin School at the age of 7. There, pupils generally, besides rhetoric, logic and calligraphy, learn, not only Greek and Latin, but English, French, Spanish or Portuguese. Then, in 1620, at the age of 14, since no age limit in the Netherlands bridled young talents, Rembrandt inscribed at the Leyden University. His choice is not Theology, Law, Science, nor Medicine, but Literature.
Did Rembrandt want to add to his knowledge of Latin, the mastery of Greek and Hebrew philology and perhaps Chaldean, Coptic or Arabic? After all, Leyden was already publishing Arabic-Latin dictionaries, while the Netherlands were increasingly growing to become the book printing centre of the world.
From its foundation in 1585, after a historic battle for the city’s freedom, Leyden University became a rallying point for humanists worldwide and a center for new discoveries in optics, physics, anatomy and cartography, offering the world such famous scientists as Christian Huygens (1629-1695) and Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723), both correspondents of Leibniz.
People flocked in from Flanders, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, England and even Hungary. By 1621, over fifty Frenchmen were teaching in Leyden. In a desperate effort to pollute this source of creativity, in 1630, René Descartes registered as a « mathematician » at the University of Leyden. (Note 2)
But the big trouble had already started way before. A disastrous theological « debate » degenerated into a conflict akin to civil war. On the one side, Jacob Arminius, founder of the « Remonstrant » current upholding the Erasmian-Rabelaisian concept of man endowed with a free will although that free will remained to be fine-tuned with the grace of God. This view was also held by the elder general and capable national leader, Johan van Oldenbarnevelt (1547-1619).
On the opposing side, one Franciscus Gomarus, defender of the fatalist Calvinist doctrine of « predestination », a doctrine adhered to by Prince Maurits, the young incoming son of the founder of the nation, William the Silent. While leaders were strongly divided, the 1619 « Dordrecht Synod » installed the radical Calvinist doctrine as the law.
But Leyden was mostly « Arminian » and so was Rembrandt. Rembrandt’s 1633 and 1635 portraits of Johannes Uytenbogaert, the main reverend leading the Arminians who was obliged to spent several years of his life in exile to escape from persecution, show how closely Rembrandt was connected to this movement.
So, when Rembrandt entered University, the situation was very hot. Arminian-minded teachers are on the leave and often forced to do so. So was Rembrandt, and after two months, at age 14, he quitted University and went full time into painting and set up his own workshop.
By 1621, the truce had come to an end, and the Spanish army was once again conducting an all-out war against the Netherlands, which was accused, not without reason, of supporting the Bohemian revolt and harboring the leaders of its resistance. (Note 3)
As a young intellectual confronted with injustice and political and religious madness, Rembrandt entered the studio of Jacob Isaaczoon van Swanenburg, a learned Dutch painter who lived in Venice and Naples, where he worked from 1600 to 1617 before running into trouble with the Inquisition, which accused him of « painting on Sundays ».
Few works have survived from this master, renowned for his city views and portraits. But his subjects and style resemble those of the great humanist Hieronymus Bosch. For three long years, Rembrandt learned how to grind pigments, master essences, varnishes, brushes, canvases and panels.
But above all, Swanenburgh made his pupil a master in the art of engraving and etching.
Pelgrims of Emmaus
Rembrandt’s interest in the power of ideas clearly appears in the « Pilgrims at Emmaus », where an atmosphere of astonishment and horror break out when Christ reveals himself to the disbelievers.
Then, before setting up his studio, Rembrandt will spend six months in the workshop of Pieter Lastman in Amsterdam. With Lastman, Rembrandt finally finds a master that departs from the traditional Dutch landscapes, still-lives and boring group portraits.
Building on the theatrical settings of Caravaggio, Lastman paints biblical, Greek and Roman mythology. He paints history! And Rembrandt always desired to become a historieschilder. Now, Rembrandt finally found in painting the literature he was looking for when inscribing in the University.
Also, in Lastman’s workshop, he meets the talented Jan Lievens, with whom he will work for a while.
Knowing how to know thyself
Rembrandts reputation is largely the fruit of the near to one hundred multiform self-portraits, including about twenty engravings, covering the walls of numerous museums around the world. Some pragmatists tell us Rembrandt did that many self-portraits because he just was the cheapest model in town, and probably the most patient one. Others claim he was simply noting down his unending grimaces, the famous tronies, to prepare future dramatic historical paintings.
We think there is more to it and we approve Simon Schama who wrote that, « The reason for the multiplication of his self-image was not a relentless, almost monomaniacal assertion of the artistic ego but something like the exact opposite. »
The self-portrait, an art expression that has nearly disappeared from today’s practice, always throws an extremely daring challenge to the painter looking into the mirror. Is this me? I didn’t realize I look that way. I’ve changed again! What is wrong? The a priori ideas in the mind of the perceiver or the sense perceptions he’s confronted with? Real thinking, in essence, comes down to confronting not just those burning paradoxes, but the joy of overcoming them with self reflexive irony, and a truthful commitment to the permanent discovery and communication of that increasing irony through a Socratic dialogue.
Rembrandt, at the age of 22 starts training his first pupil, Gerrit Dou, only fifteen years old. Samuel van Hoogstraten, who was another young pupil, reported Rembrandt advising him:
« Try to learn introducing in your work what you know already. Then, very soon, you will discover what escapes you and want to discover. »
Hoogstraten’s self-portrait at age 17 demonstrates what a contagious genius Rembrandt became rapidly as a teacher.
But Rembrandt’s main problem was to show movement. Anima means soul and for Rembrandt animating the mind of the viewer was the art of making that viewer conscious of his own quality of moving the soul, i.e. moving the mover. Through this process of teaching and self-teaching Rembrandt works out various ways to tell his-stories.
One funny way to put faces into motion is to wrap them into clothing, put on jewelry, and choose a specific light setting that generates interesting eye-attracting shadows bringing into light the plastic volumes. Explore facial expressions evoking anger, fear, happiness, self-doubt, laughter, etc.
The real subject is not Rembrandt, but the discovery of human consciousness through self-consciousness. The mirror image permits oneself to look over one’s shoulder down on oneself. Leonardo and others advised artists to view their own work in a mirror, since the « fresh » mirror image offered the artist another « viewpoint », revealing those remaining imperfections that had escaped from his attention.
Also, the compassion and self esteem one is forced to develop in that process becomes a basic ingredient for promethean and agapic character formation. Then, Rembrandt’s joyful process of self-discovery spills naturally over into the portraits done of others.
Look how funny Saskia smiles, when she dresses up « as Rembrandt » with a feathered reddish hat, carrying a golden chain and with her little hand lost in Rembrandt’s large glove.
Then, there are also the self-portraits in assistenza, where the painter’s face pops up uninvited in a larger painting, such as in Velazquez‘ « Las Meninas ».
The Stoning of Saint-Stephen
One of Rembrandt’s grimacing faces appears behind the martyr in the first known painting by the young Rembrandt, The Stoning of Saint-Stephen. Executed at the age of 19, the work powerfully expresses the basis of Rembrandt’s ideas. Loaded with some twenty figures, the subject had previously been treated by Lastman and Adam Elsheimer, a young German Mannerist living in Rome, whose works Rembrandt had admired while contemplating reproductions in Swanenburgh’s studio.
But why Saint-Stephen? Rembrandt’s choice stems directly from the subject. This Greek-speaking Jewish convert, the first Christian martyr, was tried by a court of law for blasphemy. He unabashedly told the Sanhedrin judges that they were « stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears » and that they were people who had « received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it… »
Stephen also told them that God could not be kept « locked up in a temple ». At one point, Stephen,
« being full of the Holy Spirit, and having his eyes fixed on heaven, saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and he said: ‘Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God’.
« And crying aloud, they stopped their ears, and with one accord rushed upon him; and having pushed him out of the city, they stoned him; and the witnesses laid their garments at the feet of a young man called Saul. And they stoned Stephen, who prayed and said: Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And kneeling down, he cried aloud: Lord, do not impute this sin to them. »
The painting leaves the left side entirely in shadow, in a partially failed attempt to evoke the idea of Stephen seeing the « open heavens. » Saul is in the shadows because he is the one encouraging the execution. Later, on the road to Damascus, he would have his own vision of the « heavens opening » and in turn convert to Christianity, since Saul is none other than the future St. Paul.
In short, as we have said, at the age of 19, Rembrandt powerfully asserts the principles for which he wants to live and for which he is prepared to die, ideas that he must have discovered at the age of fourteen during the great Sophist event, the great « theological debate » that was the beginning of the end of the Republic.
Ideas
Historians might scream there is no space here for political manifestos. They are right. Rembrandt’s ideas go far beyond simple minded militantism, and their political impact is much more profound.
In 1641, an artist, Philips Angel, adressing the painting guild, honored Rembrandt and underscored the artist’s « elevated and profound reflection ». What were these « elevated and profound » ideas all about?
- Truth. Somebody must mobilize the courage to stand up and tell the truth in front of established authorities or misleading public opinion. That theme comes regularly back, notably with « Suzanna and the Elders ». Daniel, a witness of injustice will speak up and saves Suzanna from the death sentence.
- Reason. Faith and religion do not always coincide with religious rites. Look to the angry angel preventing Abraham from killing his own son in « The sacrifice of Isaac ». Think before acting! Reason, love of God and love for mankind must guide any religious practice and on the basis of reason, a dialogue of cultures can enrich humanity.
- Self-perfection. Change, yes. People can find in themselves the means to identify their errors and change for the better. The example of Saint-Paul will stand as a permanent reference for Rembrandt, who painted him several times and even represented himself as the Church father.
- Love, Repentance, Pardon. In a period of permanent danger of « religious wars », Rembrandt strongly identifies with Saint Stephen’s demand « Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. » Rembrandt will paint several times « The return of the prodigal son ». The father gives a great feast for the returning son because he « who was dead came back to life ». The notion of pardon, and acting in the advantage of the other, will become the key concept for the success of the world Peace of Westphalia concluded in 1648 ending the thirty years war, including the recognition of the Netherlands as a sovereign state.
The Night Watch
Misrepresented as a nocturnal scene, the Night Watch is probably one of the greatest intellectual provocations against cold Aristotelian classicism.
The Netherlands was at war. Amsterdam, like most major cities, maintained a considerable militia of archers, crossbowmen and harquebusiers. These small citizen armies had a firing range and a meeting hall, the Kloveniersdoelen, where soldiers could rest after training.
Obviously, such glorious gatherings deserved to be immortalized in vast group portraits, where all the members of the company was presented in such a way that, as van Hoogstraten put it, « you could, as it were, behead them all with a single cannon shot. »
Rembrandt completely overturned this traditional representation. Firstly, apart from the 2 captains and their 16 companions (who each paid for their presence on the canvas), Rembrandt added another third of figures to the original number.
Secondly, the revolutionary concept implemented is the idea of depicting the whole group as « on the march », not just advancing, but raising flags and weapons after passing under a circular arch seen just behind them.
Thirdly, a spectacular sense of movement emanates from the rapid oscillation of a chiaro-oscura, illuminating one part, casting another into shadow.
Finally, the show seems formally a confused, chaotic scene. People enter from all sides. In infinite heteronomy, one loads his rifle, another beats the drum, another raises his spear while another stares at his rifle.
Beyond this apparent hectic confusion, what remains is the spirit of a republican citizenry called to arms and moving from chaos to unity, a subject Rembrandt represented the same year in an allegorical oil sketch, Concord of the State.
Against narrow academic rigor, the spirit of inclusion of the multitude so common to Flemish painters like Bruegel was once again manifesting itself.
Van Hoogstraten, defending Rembrandt against these critics (as usual, those who were jealous of his brilliant performance) commented:
« Rembrandt observed this requirement [of unity] very well… and although in the opinion of many he went too far, making the painting more according to his personal taste than according to the individual portraits he had been commissioned to paint.
Nevertheless, the painting, no matter how harsh the critics, will stand, in my judgment, against all these rivals because it is so picturesque in its conception and because it is so powerful that, according to some, all the other doelen works look like playing cards in comparison. »
Immortality
We took here just a few examples to demonstrate that Rembrandts universal character derives directly from his ruthless commitment, directed to make us conscious of the creative potential given to all human beings, men and women, old and young, Christians, Jews, Muslims or others, a creative and creating human nature called the soul.
This commitment is once again available in today’s new generation and can therefore be mobilized for great achievements.
From this point of view, Rembrandt is in a good position to become a reference individual capable of leading us out of the current cultural « dark age », where video games teach our children to take perverse pleasure in gratuitous violence and push them to become « naturally born killers ».
In contrast, a Rembrandt who catches life and loves mankind will trace the divine in the slightest spark of light. As some sort of 5th apostel, without ever painting God directly, Rembrandt reveals the harmony of his creation.
Those who took time studying his paintings can tell themselves: « God exists, I just met Rembrandt », since through Rembrandt’s art God’s tender love and blessing power are revealed to us in our human reality.
That « immortal » nature of Rembrandt’s soul will doubtlessly nourish the « immortality » of the creative geniuses he will inspire. Let us not wait another four hundred years to celebrate such a genius, for what he brings us is living and not to be buried in the history of art
Notes:
- Friedrich Schiller, The revolt of the Netherlands; Karel Vereycken, How Erasmus Folly saved our Civilization; Karel Vereycken, « Rembrandt, bâtisseur de nations » in Nouvelle Solidarité, June 10 and 17, 1985.
- Years earlier, René Descartes, using his own funds, made a trip to Bohemia and in 1620 took part in the battle of Montagne Blanche, leading to the massacre of Prague, the capital of Bohemia. One biographer reports that Descartes, entering Prague, immediately appropriated Kepler’s Brahe scientific instruments.
- For a detailed report on the links between Rembrandt and Comenius and the Bohemian revolt, see Karel Vereycken, The light of Agapê, Rembrandt and Comenius versus Rubens, Ibykus N°85, 2003.
- Ernst van Wetering, director of the Rembrandt Research Project (RRP), on the basis of scientific examinations of Rembrandt’s works, estimates that the master required his models to pose for three hours a day for at least three months.
- Karel Vereycken, Leonardo, painter of movement, Fusion N°108, 2006.
Devotio Moderna, Brothers of the Common Life: the cradle of humanism in the North
Presentation of Karel Vereycken, founder of Agora Erasmus, at a meeting with friends in the Netherlands on September 10, 2011.
The current financial system is bankrupt and will collapse in the coming days, weeks, months or years if nothing is done to end the paradigm of financial globalization, monetarism and free trade.
To exit this crisis implies organizing a break-up of the banks according to principles of the Glass-Steagall Act, an indispensable lever to recreate a true credit system in opposition to the current monetarist system. The objective is to guarantee real investments generating physical and human wealth, thanks to large infrastructure projects and highly qualified and well-paid jobs.
Can this be done? Yes, we can! However, the true challenge is neither economic, nor political, but cultural and educational: how to lay the foundations of a new Renaissance, how to effect a civilizational shift away from green and Malthusian pessimism towards a culture that sets itself the sacred mission of fully developing the creative powers of each individual, whether here, in Africa, or elsewhere.
Is there a historical precedent? Yes, and especially here, from where I am speaking to you this morning (Naarden, Netherlands) with a certain emotion. It probably overwhelms me because I have a rather well informed and precise sense of the role that several key individuals from the region where we are gathered this morning have played and how, in the fourteenth century, they made Deventer, Zwolle and Windesheim an intellectual hotbed and the cradle of the Renaissance of the North which inspired so many worldwide.
Let me summarize for you the history of this movement of lay clerics and teachers: the Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life, a movement that nurished our beloved Erasmus of Rotterdam, the humanist giant from whom we borrowed the name to create our political movement in Belgium.
As very often, it all begins with an individual decision of someone to overcome his shortcomings and give up those « little compromises » that end up making most of us slaves. In doing so, this individual quickly appears as a « natural » leader. Do you want to become a leader? Start by cleaning up your own mess before giving lessons to others!
Geert Groote, the founder
The spiritual father of the Brothers is Geert Groote, born in 1340 and son of a wealthy textile merchant in Deventer, which at that time, like Zwolle, Kampen and Roermond, were prosperous cities of the Hanseatic League.
In 1345, as a result of the international financial crash, the Black Death spread throughout Europe and arrived in the Netherlands around 1449-50. Between a third and a half of the population died and, according to some sources, Groote lost both parents. He abhorred the hypocrisy of the hordes of flagellants who invaded the streets and later advocated a less conspicuous, more interior spirituality.
Groote had talent for intellectual matters and was soon sent to study in Paris. In 1358, at the age of eighteen, he obtained the title of Master of Arts, even though the statutes of the University stipulated that the minimum age required was twenty-one.
He stayed eight years in Paris where he taught, while making a few excursions to Cologne and Prague. During this time, he assimilated all that could be known about philosophy, theology, medicine, canon law and astronomy. He also learned Latin, Greek and Hebrew and was considered one of the greatest scholars of the time.
Around 1362 he became canon of Aachen Cathedral and in 1371 of that of Utrecht. At the age of 27, he was sent as a diplomat to Cologne and to the Court of Avignon to settle the dispute between the city of Deventer and the bishop of Utrecht with Pope Urban V. In principle, he could have met the Italian humanist Petrarch who was there at that time.
Full of knowledge and success, Groote got a big head. His best friends, conscious of his talents, kindly suggested him to detach himself from his obsession with « Earthly Paradise ». The first one was his friend Guillaume de Salvarvilla, the choirmaster of Notre-Dame of Paris. The second was Henri Eger of Kalkar (1328-1408) with whom Groote shared the benches of the Sorbonne.
In 1374, Groote got seriously ill. However, the priest of Deventer refused to administer the last sacraments to him as long as he refused to burn some of the books in his possession. Fearing for his life (after death), he decided to burn his collection of books on black magic. Finally, he felt better and healed. He also gave up living in comfort and lucre through fictitious jobs that allowed him to get rich without working too hard.
After this radical conversion, Groote decides to selfperfect. In his Conclusions and Resolutions he wrote:
« It is to the glory, honor and service of God that I propose to order my life and the salvation of my soul. (…) In the first place, not to desire any other benefit and not to put my hope and expectation from now on in any temporal profit. The more goods I have, the more I will probably want more. For according to the primitive Church, you cannot have several benefits. Of all the sciences of the Gentiles, the moral sciences are the least detestable: many of them are often useful and profitable both for oneself and for teaching others. The wisest, like Socrates and Plato, brought all philosophy back to ethics. And if they spoke of high things, they transmitted them (according to St. Augustine and my own experience) by moralizing them lightly and figuratively, so that morality always shines through in knowledge… ».
Groote then undertakes a spiritual retreat at the Carthusian monastery of Monnikshuizen near Arnhem where he devotes himself to prayer and study.
However, after a three-year stay in isolation, the prior, his Parisian friend Eger of Kalkar, told him to go out and teach :
« Instead of remaining cloistered here, you will be able to do greater good by going out into the world to preach, an activity for which God has given you a great talent. »
Ruusbroec, the inspirer
Groote accepted the challenge. However, before taking action, he decided to make a last trip to Paris in 1378 to obtain the books he needed.
According to Pomerius, prior of Groenendael between 1431 and 1432, he undertook this trip with his friend from Zwolle, the teacher Joan Cele (around 1350-1417), the historical founder of the excellent Dutch public education system, the Latin School.
On their way to Paris, they visit Jan van Ruusbroec (1293-1381), a Flemish “mystic” who lived in the Groenendael Priory on the edge of the Soignes Forest near Brussels.
Groote, still living in fear of God and the authorities, initially tries to make « more acceptable » some of the old sage’s writings while recognizing Ruusbroec as closer to the Lord than he is. In a letter to the community of Groenendael, he requested the prayer of the prior:
« I would like to recommend myself to the prayer of your provost and prior. For the time of eternity, I would like to be ‘the prior’s stepladder’, as long as my soul is united to him in love and respect.” (Note 1)
Back in Deventer, Groote concentrated on study and preaching. First he presented himself to the bishop to be ordained a deacon. In this function, he obtained the right to preach in the entire bishopric of Utrecht (basically the whole part of today’s Netherlands north of the great rivers, except for the area around Groningen).
First he preached in Deventer, then in Zwolle, Kampen, Zutphen and later in Amsterdam, Haarlem, Gouda and Delft. His success is so great that jealousy is felt in the church. Moreover, with the chaos caused by the great schism (1378 to 1417) installing two popes at the head of the church, the believers are looking for a new generation of leaders.
As early as 1374, Groote offered part of his parents’ house to accommodate a group of pious women. Endowed with a by-law, the first house of sisters was born in Deventer. He named them « Sisters of the Common Life », a concept developed in several works of Ruusbroec, notably in the final paragraph Of the Shining Stone (Van den blinckende Steen)
« The man who is sent from this height to the world below, is full of truth, and rich in all virtues. And he does not seek his own, but the honor of the one who sent him. And that is why he is upright and truthful in all things. And he has a rich and benevolent foundation grounded in the riches of God. And so he must always convey the spirit of God to those who need it; for the living fountain of the Holy Spirit is not a wealth that can be wasted. And he is a willing instrument of God with whom the Lord works as He wills, and how He wills. And it is not for sale, but leaves the honor to God. And for this reason he remains ready to do whatever God commands; and to do and tolerate with strength whatever God entrusts to him. And so he has a common life; for to him seeing [via contemplativa] and working [via activa] are equal, for in both things he is perfect.”
Radewijns, the organizer
Following one of his first sermons, Groote recruited Florens Radewijns (1350-1400). Born in Utrecht, the latter received his training in Prague where, also at the early age of 18, he was awarded the title of Magister Artium.
Groote then sent him to the German city of Worms to be consecrated priest there. In 1380 Groote moved with about ten pupils to the house of Radewijns in Deventer; it would later be known as the « Sir Florens House” (Heer Florenshuis), the first house of the Brothers and above all its base of operation?
When Groote died of the plague in 1384, Radewijns decided to expand the movement which became the Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life. Soon it will be branded the Devotio Moderna (Modern Devotion).
Books and beguinages
A number of parallels can be drawn with the phenomenon of the Beguines which flourished from the 13th century onward. (Note 2)
The first beguines were independent women, living alone (without a man or a rule), animated by a deep spirituality and daring to venture into the enormous adventure of a personal relationship with God. (Note 3)
Operating outside the official religious hierarchy, they didn’t beg but worked various jobs to earn their daily bread. The same goes for the Brothers of the Common Life, except that for them, books were at the center of all activities. Thus, apart from teaching, the copying and production of books represented a major source of income while allowing spreading the word to the many.
Lay Brothers and Sisters focused on education and their priests on preaching. Thanks to the scriptorium and printing houses, their literature and music will spread everywhere.
Windesheim
To protect the movement from unfair attacks and criticism, Radewijns founded a congregation of canons regular obeying the Augustinian rule.
In Windesheim, between Zwolle and Deventer, on land belonging to Berthold ten Hove, one of the members, a first cloister is erected. A second one, for women this time, is built in Diepenveen near Arnhem. The construction of Windesheim took several years and a group of brothers lived temporarily on the building site, in huts.
In 1399 Johannes van Kempen, who had stayed at Groote’s house in Deventer, became the first prior of the cloister of Mont Saint-Agnès near Zwolle and gave the movement new momentum. From Zwolle, Deventer and Windesheim, the new recruits spread all over the Netherlands and Northern Europe to found new branches of the movement.
In 1412, the congregation had 16 cloisters and their number reached 97 in 1500: 84 priories for men and 13 for women. To this must be added a large number of cloisters for canonesses which, although not formally associated with the Windesheim Congregation, were run by rectors trained by them.
Windesheim was not recognized by the Bishop of Utrecht until 1423 and in Belgium, Groenendael, associated with the Red Cloister and Korsendonc, wanted to be part of it as early as 1402.
Thomas a Kempis, Cusanus and Erasmus
Johannes van Kempen was the brother of the famous Thomas a Kempis (1379-1471). The latter, trained in Windesheim, animated the cloister of Mont Saint-Agnès near Zwolle and was one of the towering figures of the movement for seventy years. In addition to a biography he wrote of Groote and his account of the movement, his Imitatione Christi (The Imitation of Christ) became the most widely read work in history after the Bible.
Both Rudolf Agricola (1444-1485) and Alexander Hegius (1433-1498), two of Erasmus’ tutors during his training in Deventer, were direct pupils of Thomas a Kempis. The Latin School of Deventer, of which Hegius was rector, was the first school in Northern Europe to teach the ancient Greek language to children.
While no formal prove exists, it is tempting to believe that Cusanus (1401-1464), who protected Agricola and, in his last will, via his Bursa Cusanus, offered a scholarship for the training of orphans and poor students of the Brothers of the Common Life in Deventer, was also trained by this humanist network.
What is known is that when Cusanus came in 1451 to the Netherlands to put the affairs of the Church in order, he traveled with his friend Denis the Carthusian (van Rijkel) (1402-1471), a disciple of Ruusbroec, whom he commissioned to carry on this task.
A native of Limburg, trained at the famous Cele school in Zwolle, Dionysius the Carthusian also became the confessor of the Duke of Burgundy and is thought to be the “theological advisor” of the Duke’s ambassador and court painter, Jan Van Eyck. (Note 4)
Gansfort
Wessel Gansfort (1419-1489), another exceptional figure of this movement was at the service of the Greek Cardinal Bessarion, the main collaborator of Nicolas of Cusa (Cusanus) at the Council of Ferrara-Florence of 1437. Gansfort, after attending the Brothers’ school in Groningen, was also trained by Joan Cele‘s Latin school in Zwolle.
The same goes for the first and only Dutch pope, Adrianus VI, who was trained in the same school before completing his training with Hegius in Deventer. This pope was very open to Erasmus’ reformist ideas… before arriving in Rome.
Hegius, in a letter to Gansfort, which he calls Lux Mundi (Light of the World), wrote:
« I send you, most honorable lord, the homilies of John Chrysostom. I hope that you will enjoy reading them, since the golden words have always been more pleasing to you than the pieces of this metal. As you know, I went to the library of Cusanus. There I found some books that I didn’t know existed (…) Farewell, and if I can do you a favor, let me know and consider it done.”
Rembrandt
A quick look on Rembrandt’s intellectual training indicates that he too was a late product of this educational epic. In 1609, Rembrandt, barely three years old, entered elementary school where, like other boys and girls of his generation, he learned to read, write and… draw.
The school opened at 6 in the morning, at 7 in the winter, and closes at 7 in the evening. Classes begin with prayer, reading and discussion of a passage from the Bible followed by the singing of psalms. Here Rembrandt acquired an elegant writing style and much more than a rudimentary knowledge of the Gospels.
The Netherlands wanted to survive. Its leaders take advantage of the twelve-year truce (1608-1618) to fulfill their commitment to the public interest.
In doing so, the Netherlands at the beginning of the XVIIth century became the first country in the world where everyone had the chance to learn to read, write, calculate, sing and draw.
This universal educational system, no matter what its shortcomings, available to both rich and poor, boys and girls alike, stands as the secret behind the Dutch « Golden Century ». This high level of education also created those generations of active Dutch emigrants a century later in the American Revolution.
While others started secondary school at the age of twelve, Rembrandt entered the Leyden Latin School at the age of 7. There, the students, apart from rhetoric, logic and calligraphy, learn not only Greek and Latin, but also foreign languages such as English, French, Spanish or Portuguese. Then, in 1620, at the age of 14, with no laws restricting young talents, Rembrandt enrolled in University. The subject he chose was not Theology, Law, Science or Medicine, but… Literature.
Did he want to add to his knowledge of Latin the mastery of Greek or Hebrew philology, or possibly Chaldean, Coptic or Arabic? After all, Arabic/Latin dictionaries were already being published in Leiden at a time the city was becoming a major printing center in the world.
Thus, one realizes that the Netherlands and Belgium, first with Ruusbroec and Groote and later with Erasmus and Rembrandt, made an essential contribution in the not so distant past to the kind of humanism that can raise today humanity to its true dignity.
Hence, failing to extend our influence here, clearly seems to me something in the realm of the impossible.
Footnotes:
- Geert Groote, who discovered Ruusbroec’s work during his spiritual retreat at the Carthusian monastery of Monnikshuizen, near Arnhem, has translated at least three of his works into Latin. He sent The Book of the Spiritual Tabernacle to the Cistercian Cloister of Altencamp and his friends in Amsterdam. The Spiritual Marriage of Ruusbroec being under attack, Groote personally defends it. Thus, thanks to his authority, Ruusbroec’s works are copied in number and carefully preserved. Ruusbroec’s teaching became popularized by the writings of the Modern Devotion and especially by the Imitation of Christ.
- At the beginning of the 13th century the Beguines were accused of heresy and persecuted, except… in the Burgundian Netherlands. In Flanders, they are cleared and obtain official status. In reality, they benefit from the protection of two important women: Jeanne and Margaret of Constantinople, Countess of Flanders. They organized the foundation of the Beguinages of Louvain (1232), Gent (1234), Antwerp (1234), Kortrijk (1238), Ypres (1240), Lille (1240), Zoutleeuw (1240), Bruges (1243), Douai (1245), Geraardsbergen (1245), Hasselt (1245), Diest (1253), Mechelen (1258) and in 1271 it was Jan I, Count of Flanders, in person, who deposited the statutes of the great Beguinage of Brussels. In 1321, the Pope estimated the number of Beguines at 200,000.
- The platonic poetry of the Beguine, Hadewijch of Antwerp (XIIIth Century) has a decisive influence on Jan van Ruusbroec.
- It is significant that the first book printed in Flanders in 1473, by Erasmus’ friend and printer Dirk Martens, is precisely a work of Denis the Carthusian.
Erasmus’ dream: the Leuven Three Language College
In autumn 2017, a major exhibit organized at the University library of Leuven and later in Arlon, also in Belgium, attracted many people. Showing many historical documents, the primary intent of the event was to honor the activities of the famous Three Language College (Collegium Trilingue), founded in 1517 by the efforts of the Christian Humanist Erasmus of Rotterdam (1467-1536) and his allies. Though modest in size and scope, Erasmus’ initiative stands out as one of the cradles of European civilization, as you will discover here.
Revolutionary political figures, such as William the Silent (1533-1584), organizer of the Revolt of the Netherlands against the Habsburg tyranny, humanist poets and writers such as Thomas More, François Rabelais, Miguel Cervantes and William Shakespeare, all of them, recognized their intellectual debt to the great Erasmus of Rotterdam, his exemplary fight, his humor and his great pedagogical project.
For the occasion, the Leuven publishing house Peeters has taken through its presses several nice catalogues and essays, published in Flemish, French as well as English, bringing together the contributions of many specialists under the wise (and passionate) guidance of Pr Jan Papy, a professor of Latin literature of the Renaissance at the Leuven University, with the assistance of a “three language team” of Latinists which took a fresh look at close to all the relevant and inclusively some new documents scattered over various archives.
“The Leuven Collegium Trilingue: an appealing story of courageous vision and an unseen international success. Thanks to the legacy of Hieronymus Busleyden, counselor at the Great Council in Mechelen, Erasmus launched the foundation of a new college where international experts would teach Latin, Greek and Hebrew for free, and where bursaries would live together with their professors”, reads the back cover of one of the books.
For the researchers, the issue was not necessarily to track down every detail of this institution but rather to answer the key question: “What was the ‘magical recipe’ which attracted rapidly to Leuven between three and six hundred students from all over Europe?”
Erasmus’ initiative was unprecedented. Having an institution, teaching publicly Latin and, on top, for free, Greek and Hebrew, two languages considered “heretic” by the Vatican, was already tantamount to starting a revolution.
Was it that entirely new? Not really. As early as the beginning of the XIVth century, for the Italian humanists in contact with Greek erudites in exile in Venice, the rigorous study of Greek, Hebraic and Latin sources as well as the Fathers and the New Testament, was the method chosen by the humanists to free mankind from the Aristotelian worldview suffocating Christianity and returning to the ideals, beauty and spirit of the “Primitive Church”.
For Erasmus, as for his inspirer, the Italian humanist Lorenzo Valla (1403-1457), the « Philosophy of Christ » (agapic love), has to come first and opens the road to end the internal divisions of Christianity and to uproot the evil practices of greed (indulgences, simony) and religious superstition (cult of relics) infecting the Church from the top to the bottom, and especially the mendicant orders.
To succeed, Erasmus sets out to clarify the meaning of the Holy Writings by comparing the originals written in Greek, Hebrew and Latin, often polluted following a thousand years of clumsy translations, incompetent copying and scholastic commentaries.
Brothers of the Common Life
My own research allows me to recall that Erasmus was a true disciple of the Sisters and Brothers of the Common Life of Deventer in the Netherlands, a hotbed of humanism in Northern Europe. The towering figures that founded this lay teaching order are Geert Groote (1340-1384), Florent Radewijns (1350-1400) and Wessel Gansfort (1420-1489), all three said to be fluent in precisely these three languages.
The religious faith of this current, also known as the “Modern Devotion”, centered on interiority, as beautifully expressed in the little book of Thomas a Kempis (1380-1471), the Imitation of Christ. This most read book after the Bible, underlines the importance for the believer to conform one owns life to that of Christ who gave his life for mankind.
Rudolph Agricola
Hence, in 1475, Erasmus father, fluent in Greek and influenced by famous Italian humanists, sends his son to the chapter of the Brothers of the Common Life in Deventer, at that time under the direction of Alexander Hegius (1433-1499), himself a pupil of the famous Rudolph Agricola (1442-1485) which Erasmus had the chance to listen to and which he calls a “divine intellect”.
Follower of the cardinal-philosopher Nicolas of Cusa (1401-1464), enthusiastic advocate of the Italian Renaissance and the Good Letters, Agricola would tease his students by saying:
“Be cautious in respect to all that you learned so far. Reject everything! Start from the standpoint you will have to un-learn everything, except that what is based on your sovereign authority, or on the basis of decrees by superior authors, you have been capable of re-appropriating yourself”.
Erasmus, with the foundation of the Collegium Trilingue will carry this ambition at a level unreached before. To do so, Erasmus and his friend apply a new pedagogy. Hence, instead of learning by heart medieval commentaries, pupils are called to formulate their proper judgment and take inspiration of the great thinkers of the Classical period, especially “Saint Socrates”. Latin, a language that degenerated during the Roman Empire, will be purified from barbarisms.
With this approach, for pupils, reading a major text in its original language is only the start. An explorative work is required: one has to know the history and the motivations of the author, his epoch, the history of the laws of his country, its geography, cosmography, all considered to be indispensable instruments to put each text in its specific literary and historical context and allowing reading, beyond the words, the intention of their author.
This “modern” approach (questioning, critical study of sources, etc.) of the Collegium Trilingue, after having demonstrated its efficiency by clarifying the message of the Gospel, will rapidly travel over Europe and reach many other domains of knowledge, notably scientific issues! By uplifting young talents, out of the small and sleepy world of scholastic certitudes, this institution rapidly grew into a hotbed for creative minds.
For the ignorant reader who often considers Erasmus as some kind of comical writer praising madness which lost it after an endless theological dispute with Martin Luther, such a statement might come as a surprise.
Scientific Renaissance
While Belgium’s contributions to science, under Emperor Charles Vth, are broadly recognized and respected, few are those understanding the connection uniting Erasmus with a mathematician as Gemma Frisius and his pupil and friend Gerard Mercator, an anatomist such as Andreas Vesalius or a botanist such as Rembert Dodonaeus.
Hence, as already thoroughly documented in 2011 by Professor Jan Papy in a remarkable article, the scientific renaissance which bloomed in the Netherlands and Belgium in the early XVIth century, could not have taken place if it were for the “linguistic revolution” provoked by the Collegium Trilingue.
Because, beyond the mastery of their vernacular languages (French and Dutch), hundreds of youth, by studying Greek, Latin and Hebrew, suddenly got access to all the scientific treasures of Greek Philosophy and the best authors in those newly discovered languages.
At last, they could read Plato in the text, but also Anaxagoras, Heraclites, Thales of Millet, Eudoxus of Cnidus, Pythagoras, Eratosthenes, Archimedes, Galen, Vitruvius, Pliny the elder, Euclid and Ptolemy whose work they will master and eventually correct.
As the books published by Peeters account in great detail, during the first century of its existence, the Collegium Trilingue had a rough time confronting political uproar and religious strife. Heavy critique came especially form the “traditionalists”, a handful of theologians for which the Greeks were nothing but schismatics and the Jews the assassins of Christ and esoterics.
The opposition was such that Erasmus himself never could teach at the Collegium and, while keeping in close contact, decided to settle in Basel, Switzerland, in 1521.
Despite all of this, the Erasmian revolution conquered Europe overnight and a major part of the humanists of that period were trained or influenced by this institution. From abroad, hundreds of pupils arrived to follow classes given by professors of international reputation.
27 European universities integrated pupils of the Collegium in their teaching staff: among them stood Jena, Wittenberg, Cologne, Douai, Bologna, Avignon, Franeker, Ingolstadt, Marburg, etc.
Teachers at the Collegium were secured a decent income so that they weren’t obliged to give private lectures to secure a living and could offer public classes for free. As was the common practice of the Brothers of the Common Life in Deventer, a system of bursa allowed talented though poor students, including many orphans, to have access to higher learning. “Something not necessarily unusual those days, says Pr Jan Papy, and done for the sake of the soul of the founder (of the Collegium, reference to Busleyden)”.
While visiting Leuven and contemplating the worn-out steps of the spiral staircase (wentelsteen), one of the last remains of the building that had a hard time resisting the assaults of time and ignorance, one can easily imagine those young minds jumping down the stairs with enthusiasm going from the dormitory to the classroom. Looking at the old shopping list of the school’s kitchen one can conclude the food was excellent with lots of meat, poultry but also vegetables and fruits, and sometimes wine from Beaune in Burgundy, especially when Erasmus came for a visit! While over the years, of course, the quality of the learning transmitted, would vary in accordance with the excellence of its teachers, the Collegium Trilingue, whose activity would last till the French revolution, gave its imprint in history by giving birth to what some have called the “Little Renaissance” of the first half of the XVIth century.
In France, the Sorbonne University reacted with fear and in 1523, the study of Greek was outlawed in France.
François Rabelais, at that time a monk in Vendée, saw his books confiscated by the prior of his monastery and deserts his order. Later, as a doctor, he translated the medical writings of the Greek scientist Galen from Greek into French. Rabelais’s letter to Erasmus shows the highest possible respect and intellectual debt to Erasmus.
In 1530, Marguerite de Navarre, sister of King Francis, and reader and admirer of Erasmus, at war with the Sorbonne, convinced her brother to allow Guillaume Budé, a friend of Erasmus, to create the “Collège des Lecteurs Royaux” (ancestor of the Collège de France) on the model of the Collegium Trilingue. And to protect its teachers, many coming directly from Leuven, they got the title of “advisors” of the King. The Collège taught Latin, Hebrew and Greek, and rapidly added Arab, Syriac, medicine, botany and philosophy to its curriculum.
Dirk Martens
Also celebrated for the occasion, Dirk Martens (1446-1534), rightly considered as one of the first humanists to introduce printing in the Southern Netherlands.
Born in Aalst in a respected family, the young Dirk got his training at the local convent of the Hermits of Saint William. Eager to know the world and to study, Dirk went abroad. In Venice, at that time a cosmopolite center harboring many Greek erudite in exile, Dirk made his first steps into the art of printing at the workshop of Gerardus de Lisa, a Flemish musician who set up a small printing shop in Treviso, close to Venice.
Back in Aalst, together with his partner John of Westphalia, Martens printed in 1473 the first book in the country with a movable type printing press, a treatise of Dionysius the Carthusian (1401-1471), a friend and collaborator of cardinal-philosopher Nicolas of Cusa, as well as the spiritual advisor of Philip the Good, the Duke of Burgundy and thought to be the occasional « theological » advisor of the latter’s court painter, Jan Van Eyck.
If the oldest printed book known to us is a Chinese Buddhist writing dating from 868, the first movable printing types, made first out of wood and then out of hardened porcelain and metal, came from China and Korea in 1234.
The history of two lovers, a poem written by Aeneas Piccolomini before he became the humanist Pope Pius II, was another early production of Marten’s print shop in Aalst.
Proud to have introduced this new technique allowing a vast increase in the spreading of good and virtuous ideas, Martens wrote in one of the prefaces: “This book was printed by me, Dirk Martens of Aalst, the one who offered the Flemish people all the know-how of Venice”.
After some years in Spain, Martens returned to Aalst and started producing breviaries, psalm books and other liturgical texts. While technically elaborate, the business never reached significant commercial success.
Martens then moved to Antwerp, at that time one of the main ports and cross-roads of trade and culture. Several other Flemish humanists born in Aalst played eminent roles in that city and animate its intellectual and cultural life. Among these:
—Cornelis De Schrijver (1482-1558), the secretary of the City of Aalst, better known under his latin name Scribonius and later as Cornelius Grapheus. Writer, translator, poet, musician and friend of Erasmus, he was accused of heresy and hardly escaped from being burned at the stake.
—Pieter Gillis (1486-1533), known as Petrus Aegidius. Pupil of Martens, he worked as a corrector in his company before becoming Antwerp’s chief town clerk. Friend of Erasmus and Thomas More, he appears with Erasmus in the double portrait painted by another friend of both, Quinten Metsys (1466-1530).
—Pieter Coecke van Aelst (1502-1550), editor, painter and scenographer. After a trip to Italy, he set up a workshop in Antwerp. Pieter will produce patrons for tapestries, translated with the help of his wife the works of the Roman architect Vitruvius into Dutch and trained the young Flemish painter Bruegel the Elder who will marry his daughter.
Invention of pocket books
In Antwerp, Martens became part of this milieu and his workshop became a meeting place for painters, musicians, scientists, poets and writers. With the Collegium Trilingue, Martens opens a second shop, this time in Leuven to work with Erasmus. In order to provide adequate books to the Collegium, Martens proudly became, in the footsteps of the Venetian Printer Aldo Manuce, one of the first printers to concentrate on in-octavo 8° (22 x 12 cm), i.e. “pocket” size books affordable by all and which students could take home !
For the specialists of the Erasmus house of Anderlecht, close to Brussels,
“Martens innovated in nearly all domains. As well as in terms of printing types as lay-out. He was the first to introduce Italics, Greek and Hebrew letter types. He also generalized the use of ‘New Roman’ letter type so familiar today. During the first thirty years of the XVIth century, he also operated the revolution in lay-out (chapters and paragraphs) that gave birth to the modern book as we know it today. All this progress, he achieved in close cooperation with Erasmus”.
Thomas More’s Utopia
In 1516, it was Dirk Martens who printed the first edition of Thomas More’s Utopia. Among the hundreds of editions he printed mostly alone, 61 books and writings of Erasmus, notably In Praise of Folly. He also produced More’s edition of the roman satirist Lucian and Columbus’ account of the discovery of the new world. In 1423, Martens printed the complete works of Homer, quite a challenge!
In 1520, a papal bull of Leo X condemned the errors of Martin Luther and ordered the confiscation of his writings to be burned in public in front of the clergy and the people.
For Erasmus, burning books didn’t automatically erased their their content from the minds of the people. “One starts by burning books, one finishes by burning people” Erasmus warned years before Heinrich Heine said that “There, were one burns books, one ends up burning people”.
Printers and friends of Erasmus, especially in France, died on the stake opening the doors for the religious wars that will ravage Europe for the century to come.
What Erasmus feared above all, is that with the Vatican’s brutal war against Luther, it is the entire cultural renaissance and the learning of languages that got threatened with extinction.
In July 1521, confronted with the book burning, the German painter and engraver Albrecht Dürer, who made his living with bible illustrations, left Antwerp with his wife to return to his native Nuremberg.
Thirty years later, in 1552, the great cartographer Gerardus Mercator, a brilliant pupil of the Collegium Trilingue, for having called into question the views of Aristotle, went into exile and settled in Duisbourg, Germany.
In 1521, at the request of his friends who feared for his life, Erasmus left Leuven for Basel and settled in the workshop of another humanist, the Swiss printer Johann Froben.
In 1530, with a foreword of Erasmus, Froben published Georgius Agricola’s inventory of mining techniques, De Re Metallica, a key book that vastly contributed to the industrial revolution of Saxen, Switzerland, Germany and the whole of Europe.
Conclusion
If certain Catholic historians try to downplay the hostility of their Church towards Erasmus, the fact remains that between 1559 and 1900, the full works of Erasmus were on the “Index Vaticanus” and therefore “forbidden readings” for Catholics.
If Thomas More, whom Erasmus considered as his twin brother, was canonized by Pius XI in 1935 and recognized as the patron saint of the political leaders, Erasmus himself was never rehabilitated.
Interrogated by this author in a letter, the Pope Francis returned a polite but evasive answer.
Let’s rebuild the Collegium Trilingue !
With the exception of the staircase, only a few stones remain of the historical building housing the Collegium Trilingue. In 1909, the University of Louvain planned to buy up and rebuild the site but the First World War changed priorities. Before becoming social housing, part of the building was used as a factory. As a result, today, there is no overwhelming charm. However, seeing the historical value of the site, we cannot but fully support a full reconstruction plan of the building and its immediate environment.
It would make the historical center of Leuven so much nicer, so much more attractive and very much more loyal to its own history. On top, such a reconstruction wouldn’t cost much and might interest private investors. The images in 3 dimensions produced for the Leuven exhibit show a nice Flemish Renaissance building, much in the style of the marvels constructed by architect Rombout II Keldermans.
Every period has the right to honestly “re-write” its own history, without falsifications, according to its own vision of the future.
It has to be noted here that the world famous “Rubenshuis” in Antwerp, is not at all the original building, but a scrupulous reconstruction of the late 1930s.
The hidden lesson of Sugata Mitra’s “Hole-in-the-Wall” experience
There are over a billion Indians. Unfortunately, around half of them are illiterate. Only one in four has access to proper sanitation. Some 350 million Indians live on less than one euro a day. And yet, in a strange paradox, India is also home to some of the world’s most advanced high-tech companies. New Delhi is, in a way, India’s Silicon Valley. And very recently, Indian genius has succeeded in landing a rover on the Moon.
Scandalized by the lack of access to education for his country’s children living far from urban centers, Dr. Sugata Mitra, an Indian physicist turned educational technology researcher, has been conducting a series of experiments since 1999, dubbed « The Hole-in-the-Wall », whose astonishing results are calling into question the foundations of conventional pedagogy.
“In early 1999”, writes Mitra, “colleagues and I sunk a computer into the opening of a wall near our office in Kalkaji, New Delhi. The area was located in an expansive slum, with desperately poor people struggling to survive.”
The screen was visible from the street, and the PC was available to anyone who passed by and all the people living “on the other side of the wall”. The computer had online access and a number of programs that could be used, but no instructions were given for its use. In principle, the children in this neighborhood could neither read nor write, and spoke a Tamil dialect. So, objectively speaking, the chances of them being able to cope with the computer were almost nil.
Fortunately, in the real world, things are different. Barely eight minutes after the computer had been installed, a young boy who had never seen a television screen in his life came up to sniff it out and explore the strange intruding object.
Asked if he could touch the screen, Mitra replied, « It’s on your side of the wall. » The rule was that everything on their side of the wall could be touched. The child soon realized that by moving the mouse in a certain direction, something moved on the screen in a similar way. Excited by what he had discovered, he immediately called his friends and showed them what he could do.
Typically, in the « Hole in the Wall » experiment, only one child operates the computer. He is surrounded by a first group of three others who give him advice. A second group of around sixteen children completes the team, who also interact with the child handling the equipment. Their advice is often less sound, or even wrong, but they learn too.
In hardly a few months, these kids were able to learn up to 200 English words. Although they couldn’t always pronounce them correctly, they understood their meaning and were able to interact with the computer. « You left us these machines that only speak English, so we had to learn it, » they said. Most of them succeeded in learning to navigate, play games and to draw pictures with a given application. What’s more, they have no trouble exchanging emails, and much more besides.
By repeating the experiment in several poor Indian towns, with boys as well as girls, Mitra, suspected of charlatanism by those who felt challenged by what his experience revealed, managed to dispel initial doubts that « someone » had secretly offered training to the children in advance.
What to conclude?
If the results are astonishing, they are often misinterpreted, with everyone, including Mitra himself, trying to demonstrate his or her own pre-established theory. You be the judge.
For Europeans, the experiment itself is considered borderline acceptable. Using children as “guinea pigs” without their parents’ permission is unethical by European standards. And isn’t bringing technology to the poor and thinking that everything will take care of itself one of those practices tinged with neo-colonialism that the World Bank ranks among the worst approaches to educational technology?
For their part, the gurus of Silicon Valley and GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft) were jubilant! They’ve been telling us for years: just give every child a computer (which they manufacture and control) and they’ll educate themselves! Really?
Remember the « One Laptop per Child » project launched a decade ago, to provide inexpensive solar-powered laptops and tablets to children in the poor countries? Without wishing to criticize the good will of its promoters, let’s just say that simply making computers available has not proved a promising approach. A recent evaluation of the project in Peru confirms this.
For his part, Mitra, whose goodwill cannot be questioned, came to the conclusion that experience shows that primary education can, at least in part, pretty much “take care of itself,” if the pupils are offered a « non-invasive education » environment.
Mutual Education
Dr. Mitra, unfortunately, seems to be missing the major point of what his experience brilliantly demonstrates.
I explain:
In France, after having been an enthusiastic proponent of computers for all, author and high school teacher Vincent Faillet has also come to believe that giving every child a tablet is not the right approach. With good reason, he points out that it’s not the computer, tablet, or screen that teaches children, but the human interaction among students:
« Peer-to-peer learning, as defined by Sugata Mitra and which has amazed many pedagogues, » writes Faillet, « is in reality nothing more and nothing less than a modern, spontaneous form of ‘mutual education’. It’s striking to note that, despite the centuries that separate these observations, we find a constant pattern: children in a learning situation, grouped around a common screen for interaction, be it a box of sand, a blackboard or a computer screen. The idea of interaction is essential. As Sugata Mitra himself says, students don’t get the same results if there were to be one computer per child. You always require several children for ONE computer, in the same way that several children in mutual schools gather around the same blackboard. » (La Métamorphose de l’Ecole, Vincent Faillet, 2017)
(For more on the “Mutual Tuition” methods of Carnot, Bell and Lancaster, see the author’s article on artkarel.com website)
The experiment is obviously promising for remote and poor regions, provided we understand what has just been said. What is certain is that the experience reminds the inhabitants of the North of the ineffectiveness of their pedagogical practices, and the high level of passivity engendered by our educational systems.
After the eradication of Lazare Carnot’s cherished « mutual teaching » methods in 1815, Jean-Baptiste de La Salle’s « simultaneous » method triumphed. The master teaches. His authority is unquestionable. As if at mass, the pupils stand still, remain religiously silent and obey.
In 2004, Hole-in-the-Wall Education Ltd., was founded, exporting Mitra’s idea to Cambodia and Africa. Mitra has also applied his method in England. Also there, the spectacular results caused quite a stir: students who teach each other, he claims, are 7 years ahead of their academic peers. As long as they are part of a mutual teaching process, the Internet, tablets and smartphones will find their rightful place as mere tools at the service of the teacher, and not destined to replace him or her.
Pupils as young as 8 or 9 who are allowed to search the internet to prepare for the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE), not only pass the test, but still remember what they have learned when tested again three months later. We’ve even seen 14-year-olds pass baccalaureate-level tests at Newcastle University. Will they find jobs commensurate with their skills in the Global West ?
In the following excerpt,
Dr Mitra describes his findings:
“Certain common observations from our experiments emerged, suggesting the following learning process occurs when children self-instruct in computer usage:
1. Discoveries tend to happen in one of two ways: When one child in a group already knows something about computers, he or she shows off those skills to the others. Or, while the others watch, one child explores randomly in the GUI (Graphical User Interface) environment until an accidental discovery is made. For example, the child may discover that the cursor changes to a hand shape at certain places on the scre
2. Several children repeat the discovery for themselves by asking the first child to let them try it.
3. While in Step 2, one or more children make more accidental or incidental discoveries.
4. All the children repeat all the discoveries made and, in the process, make more discoveries. They soon start to create a vocabulary to describe their experiences.
5. The vocabulary encourages them to perceive generalizations, such as, « When you click on a hand-shaped cursor, it changes to the hourglass shape for a while and a new page comes up. »
6. They memorize entire procedures for doing something, such as how to open a painting program and retrieve a saved picture. Whenever a child finds a shorter procedure, he or she teaches it to the others. They discuss, hold small conferences, make their own timetables and research plans. It is important not to underestimate them.
7. The group divides itself into the « knows » and the « know-nots, » much as they might divide themselves into « haves » and « have-nots » with regard to their possessions. However, a child that knows will share that knowledge in return for friendship and reciprocity of information, unlike with the ownership of physical things, where they can use force to get what they do not have. When you « take » information, the donor doesn’t « lose » it!
8. A stage is reached when no further discoveries are being made and the children occupy themselves with practicing what they have already learned. At this point, intervention is required to plant a new seed for discovery (…) Usually, a spiral of discoveries follows and another self-instructional cycle begins.”
Source: edutopia.org
Ce que nous apprend l’expérience du « trou-dans-le-mur » de Sugata Mitra
On dénombre plus d’un milliard d’Indiens. Environ la moitié d’entre eux est malheureusement illettrée. Seulement un sur quatre a accès à des sanitaires dignes de ce nom. Quelque 350 millions d’Indiens vivent avec moins d’un euro par jour. Et pourtant, comme un étrange paradoxe, l’Inde est aussi l’un des terreaux qui voit fleurir des entreprises de haute technologie parmi les plus avancées au monde. New Delhi, c’est un peu la Silicon Valley à l’indienne. Et depuis peu, le génie indien a su poser un astromobile sur la Lune.
Scandalisé par le manque d’accès à l’éducation dont souffrent les enfants de son pays vivant loin des centres urbains, le Dr Sugata Mitra, un physicien indien devenu chercheur en technologie éducationnelle, a conduit, à partir de 1999, une série d’expériences baptisée « The Hole in the Wall » (le trou dans le mur), dont les résultats étonnants bousculent les fondements de la pédagogie conventionnelle.
Mitra, dont le bureau est accolé à un mur séparant un quartier résidentiel de New Delhi du bidonville de Kalkaji, décide alors de faire un trou dans ce mur. Il y installe son ordinateur et rend accessible son écran et la souris aux enfants vivant « de l’autre côté du mur ».
En principe, les enfants de ce quartier ne savent ni lire ni écrire et parlent un dialecte tamoul. La possibilité qu’ils puissent se débrouiller avec l’ordinateur est donc objectivement presque nulle.
Or, dans le monde réel, les choses se passent différemment. A peine huit minutes après l’installation de l’ordinateur, un gosse qui n’a jamais vu une télévision de sa vie vient renifler l’objet.
Lorsqu’il demande s’il peut toucher l’écran, Mitra lui répond : « C’est de votre côté du mur. » La règle veut, en effet, qu’ils aient le droit de toucher tout ce qui est de leur côté du mur.
Rapidement l’enfant se rend compte qu’en bougeant la souris dans un certain sens, quelque chose se déplace sur l’écran de façon similaire. Excité par ce qu’il a découvert, il appelle sans tarder ses copains et leur montre ce qu’il est capable de faire. En règle générale, dans l’expérimentation « Le trou dans le mur », un seul enfant manipule l’ordinateur. Il est entouré d’un premier groupe de trois autres qui lui donnent des conseils. Un second groupe d’environ seize enfants complète l’équipe, qui interagissent aussi avec l’enfant qui manipule le matériel. Leurs conseils sont souvent moins avisés, voire faux, mais ils apprennent aussi.
En quelques mois, les enfants sont capables d’apprendre jusqu’à deux cents mots d’anglais. S’ils ne les prononcent pas toujours correctement, ils en comprennent le sens et parviennent à interagir avec l’ordinateur. « Vous nous avez laissé ces machines qui ne parlent que l’anglais, alors nous avons dû l’apprendre ! » lui disent-ils. La plupart savent naviguer, jouer à des jeux ou faire des dessins avec Paint. Mieux encore, ils s’échangent sans problème des courriels, et bien d’autres choses encore.
En répétant l’expérience dans plusieurs villes pauvres d’Inde, avec des garçons aussi bien qu’avec des filles, Mitra, soupçonné de charlatanisme, parvient à dissiper les doutes initiaux insinuant qu’il y avait forcément « quelqu’un » qui avait formé les enfants à l’avance.
Les leçons à en tirer
Si les résultats étonnent, ils sont souvent mal interprétés, chacun, y compris Mitra, cherchant à démontrer sa propre théorie établie d’avance. Je vous laisse juge.
Pour les Européens, l’expérience elle-même est considérée comme à la limite de l’acceptable. Faire des enfants des cobayes sans l’autorisation de leurs parents n’est pas très éthique d’après les normes européennes. Et apporter de la technologie chez les pauvres et penser que tout s’arrangera tout seul, n’est-ce pas une de ces pratiques teintées de néo-colonialisme que la Banque mondiale classe parmi les pires approches en matière de technologie éducationnelle ?
De leur côté, les gourous de la Silicon Valley et du GAFAM jubilent ! Ils nous le disent depuis des années : il suffit de donner un ordinateur (qu’ils fabriquent et contrôlent) à chaque enfant et il s’éduque tout seul ! Vraiment ?
Rappelons-nous le projet « One Laptop per Child » lancé il y a une décennie, consistant à fournir des ordinateurs portables et des tablettes à énergie solaire, peu chères, aux enfants du tiers-monde. Sans vouloir critiquer la bonne volonté de ses promoteurs, disons que le fait de mettre simplement des ordinateurs à disposition ne s’est pas avéré une approche prometteuse. Une récente évaluation du projet faite au Pérou le confirme.
Pour sa part, Mitra, dont la bonne volonté est incontestable, conclut que l’expérience montre que l’éducation primaire peut se faire, du moins en partie, à peu près toute seule, une démarche qu’il a baptisée « éducation non invasive ».
A notre avis, le Dr Mitra semble malheureusement rater l’essentiel de ce que son expérience met brillamment en lumière.
En France, après en avoir été partisan, l’enseignant Vincent Faillet en est venu à penser, lui aussi, qu’offrir une tablette à chaque enfant n’est pas la bonne approche. Avec raison, il souligne que ce n’est pas l’ordinateur, la tablette ou l’écran qui enseigne aux enfants, mais bien l’interaction entre élèves :
« L’apprentissage entre pairs tel qu’il est défini par Sugata Mitra et qui a émerveillé nombre de pédagogues est, en réalité, ni plus ni moins qu’une forme moderne et spontanée d’enseignement mutuel. Il est frappant de constater qu’en dépit des siècles qui séparent ces observations, on retrouve un schéma constant : des enfants en situation d’apprentissage, regroupés autour d’une surface d’interaction commune, qu’il s’agisse de sable, d’un tableau ou d’un écran d’ordinateur. L’idée d’interaction est essentielle. Sugata Mitra le dit lui-même, les élèves n’obtiennent pas les mêmes résultats s’il devait y avoir un ordinateur par enfant. Il faut toujours plusieurs enfants pour un ordinateur, de la même façon que plusieurs enfants des écoles mutuelles se regroupent autour d’un même tableau. »
(La métamorphose de l’école, Vincent Faillet, 2017)
L’expérience est évidemment prometteuse pour les régions éloignées et pauvres, à condition que l’on comprenne bien ce qui vient d’être dit.
Ce qui est certain, c’est que l’expérience rappelle aux habitants du Nord l’inefficacité de leurs pratiques pédagogiques, avec la forte passivité qu’engendrent nos systèmes éducationnels. Après l’éradication des méthodes d’« enseignement mutuel » chères à Lazare Carnot en 1815, c’est la méthode « simultanée » de Jean-Baptiste de La Salle qui triomphe. Le maître enseigne. Son autorité est incontestable. Comme à la messe, les élèves ne bougent pas, se taisent et obéissent.
(Voir sur ce site notre article sur l’enseignement mutuel)
En 2004 est créée Hole-in-the-Wall Education Ltd., une entreprise qui exporte l’idée de Mitra au Cambodge et en Afrique. Ce dernier a également mis sa méthode en application en Angleterre.
Là aussi, ses résultats spectaculaires ont fait grand bruit : les élèves qui enseignent les uns aux autres, assure-t-il, ont sept ans d’avance sur leur niveau académique. Pourvu qu’ils s’inscrivent dans un processus d’enseignement mutuel, internet, tablettes et smartphones retrouvent effectivement toute leur place, celle d’outils au service de celui qui enseigne, et non pas voués à le remplacer.
Des élèves de seulement 8 ou 9 ans auxquels on permet de chercher sur internet pour se préparer au General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE), non seulement réussissent l’épreuve, mais se souviennent encore de ce qu’ils ont appris lorsqu’on les teste à nouveau trois mois plus tard. On voit même des enfants de 14 ans passer avec succès des épreuves du niveau du baccalauréat à l’Université de Newcastle. Trouveront-ils des emplois à la hauteur de leurs compétences ?
Le Dr Mitra décrit ses résultats:
Extrait :
« Certaines observations communes ont émergé de nos expériences, suggérant que le processus d’apprentissage suivant se produit lorsque les enfants s’auto-instruisent dans l’utilisation de l’ordinateur :
« 1. Les découvertes ont tendance à se produire de deux manières : lorsqu’un enfant d’un groupe a déjà des connaissances en informatique, il montre ses compétences aux autres. Ou bien, pendant que les autres observent, un enfant explore au hasard l’environnement graphique jusqu’à ce qu’il fasse une découverte accidentelle. Par exemple, l’enfant peut découvrir que le curseur prend la forme d’une main à certains endroits de l’écran.
« 2. Plusieurs enfants répètent la découverte en demandant au premier enfant de les laisser essayer.
« 3. Au cours de l’étape 2, un ou plusieurs enfants font d’autres découvertes accidentelles ou fortuites.
« 4. Tous les enfants répètent toutes les découvertes faites et, ce faisant, en font d’autres. Ils commencent bientôt à créer un vocabulaire pour décrire leurs expériences.
« 5. Ce vocabulaire les encourage à percevoir des généralisations, telles que « lorsque vous cliquez sur un curseur en forme de main, il prend la forme d’un sablier pendant un certain temps et une nouvelle page s’affiche ».
« 6. Ils mémorisent des procédures entières pour faire quelque chose, par exemple pour ouvrir un programme de peinture et récupérer une image sauvegardée. Chaque fois qu’un enfant trouve une procédure plus courte, il l’enseigne aux autres. Ils discutent, organisent de petites conférences, établissent leurs propres calendriers et plans de recherche. Il est important de ne pas les sous-estimer.
« 7. Le groupe se divise entre « ceux qui savent » et « ceux qui ne savent pas », de la même manière qu’il se divise entre « ceux qui ont » et « ceux qui n’ont pas » en ce qui concerne leurs possessions. Cependant, un enfant qui sait partagera ses connaissances en échange d’une amitié et d’une réciprocité de l’information, contrairement à ce qui se passe avec la propriété des choses physiques, où ils peuvent utiliser la force pour obtenir ce qu’ils n’ont pas. Lorsque vous lui « prenez » une information, le donneur ne la « perd » pas !
« 8. Un stade est atteint lorsque les enfants ne font plus de découvertes et qu’ils s’emploient à mettre en pratique ce qu’ils ont déjà appris. À ce stade, il est nécessaire d’intervenir pour planter une nouvelle graine de découverte (…). Généralement, une spirale de découvertes s’ensuit et un autre cycle d’auto-apprentissage commence. »
Source : Sugata Mitra, 2012
Sète, vue sur le Golfe du Lion
Hippolyte Carnot, père de l’éducation républicaine moderne
Sommaire
- Introduction
- Dans la tempête
- De la charité à la scolarisation universelle
- Malebranche et les Oratoriens
- La Révolution des esprits
- Le Comité d’Instruction publique
- Condorcet et le « Parti américain »
- Le plan Condorcet
- La bataille sous la Convention
- Lazare Carnot sous les Cent-Jours
- Hippolyte reprend le flambeau de son père Lazare
- L’exil de Lazare Carnot
- Hippolyte avec l’Abbé Grégoire
- Comme Friedrich Schiller, patriote et citoyen du monde
- La Révolution de juillet 1830
- Ministre de l’Instruction publique sous la IIe République
A. Ecole Maternelle
B. Ecole Primaire
C. Exposé des motifs de la loi de juin 1848 sur l’Ecole
D. Des instituteurs pour éclairer le monde rural
E. Enseignement secondaire
F. Haute Commission des études scientifiques et littéraires
G. Une Ecole d’Administration
H. Education pour tous tout au long de la vie
I. Bibliothèques circulantes
J. Beaux-Arts, hygiène et gymnastique au programme
K. Concorde citoyenne
- Conclusion
- Annexe : œuvres d’Hippolyte Carnot
- Quelque ouvrages et articles consultés
« L’arbre que vous plantez est jeune comme la République elle-même
(…) Il étendra sur vous ses rameaux, de même que la République étendra sur la France
les bienfaits de l’Instruction populaire. »
Hippolyte Carnot, Memorial, dossier 13, 1848.
1. Introduction
Hippolyte Carnot (1801-1888) n’a ni la gloire de son père Lazare Carnot (1753-1823), « l’organisateur de la victoire » de l’An II, ni le renom de son frère, l’inventeur de la thermodynamique Léonard Sadi Carnot (1796-1832), ni le destin tragique de son fils, François Sadi Carnot (1837-1887), président de la République assassiné par un anarchiste à Lyon.
L’histoire retient presqu’ exclusivement ses magnifiques « Mémoires sur Lazare Carnot par son fils », où il relate l’action, les idées et la vie de son père, le « grand Carnot », esprit scientifique, poète, fervent républicain et ministre de la Guerre.
Hippolyte reste méconnu alors que sa longue vie (87 ans), un peu plus longue que celle de Victor Hugo (83 ans) couvre presque tout un siècle (1801-1888) et que son œuvre et son influence sont considérables.
Comme le démontre amplement la lecture de « Hippolyte Carnot et le ministère de l’Instruction publique de la IIe République » (PUF, 1948), écrit par son fils, le médecin Paul Carnot (1867-1957), il était bien plus qu’un simple observateur ou commentateur des événements.
Dans la tempête
Le XIXe siècle est une période de profonds changements. La flamme de l’espérance allumée par les Révolutions américaine et française, l’idéal de la liberté, de la fraternité et de l’émancipation, aussi bien des individus, des peuples que des Etats souverains, s’avère in-éteignable, s’affirme et se prolonge tout au long du XIXe siècle. La longue marche vers un nouveau paradigme est semée d’embûches. Les mutations s’opèrent lentement sur fond de crises brutales et de ruptures violentes.
Durant sa longue vie, Hippolyte Carnot connaîtra indirectement ou directement :
- Deux empires :
1803-1814 : Premier Empire sous Napoléon Bonaparte
1852-1870 : Second Empire sous Napoléon III - Trois monarchies :
1814-1815 : Première restauration sous Louis XVIII
1815-1830 : Seconde restauration sous Charles X
1830-1848 : Monarchie de juillet sous Louis-Philippe, duc d’Orléans. - Deux républiques :
1848-1852 : IIe République
1870 : IIIe République - Trois révolutions exprimant la ferveur républicaine :
1830 (Trois glorieuses) ;
1848 (soulèvements) ;
1871 (Commune).
Ainsi, dans un environnement toujours en transformation, traversant révolutions, coups d’État, monarchies, empires ou républiques, guerres et procès, celui qui sera (trop) brièvement ministre de l’Instruction publique en 1848, ami de Victor Hugo, Hippolyte Carnot sera un bâtisseur et un inspirateur.
Philosophe et journaliste, mémorialiste et ministre, franc-maçon et croyant, exilé politique et député, sénateur et membre de l’Académie, il participe à tous les combats pour les libertés publiques et privées, jette les bases de la formation des professeurs et de l’école gratuite et obligatoire, y compris maternelle, crée l’ancêtre de l’ENA et défend les causes les plus avancées (scolarisation des filles, suffrage universel, lutte contre l’esclavage et abolition de la peine de mort).
Rémi Dalisson, dans une biographie passionnante et richement documentée « Hippolyte Carnot 1801-1888. La liberté, l’école et la République », publié aux éditions du CNRS en 2011, preuves à l’appui, souligne que « la vulgate d’un Jules Ferry inventant l’école républicaine et laïque est largement battue en brèche ».
Etant donné que le nom et encore moins l’action d’Hippolyte Carnot ne figurent nulle part sur le site du ministère, l’auteur se désole que « rares sont ceux, y compris au ministère de l’Éducation nationale, qui rendent hommage au rôle et la personnalité d’Hippolyte Carnot ».
Les anthologies de textes et discours fondateurs de l’école républicaine, qui se sont multipliées ces dernières années, l’oublient systématiquement.
« C’est donc la réparation d’une injustice et d’un oubli que nous effectuerons en retraçant la vie et l’œuvre d’Hippolyte Carnot qui vont bien au-delà de ses projets et réalisations éducatives. Par sa stature, sa formation, son parcours, ses idées, ses écrits et combats, cet homme aux multiples talents nous permettra de retracer l’histoire de la construction de l’école et donc de la société au XIXe siècle (…) Et comme cette question renvoie à la question politique, sociale voire économique et culturelle de la nation, et comme le ministre fut de tous les combats philosophiques de son siècle (…) c’est en grande partie l’histoire d’un siècle qui sera évoquée (…) ».
Le texte intégral de cette magnifique biographie est en accès gratuit sur internet et nous nous en sommes largement inspiré pour écrire ce texte.
3. De la charité à la scolarisation universelle
Afin de pouvoir pleinement appréhender l’apport fondamental des conceptions de Lazare Carnot et du début de leur mise en œuvre par son fils Hippolyte, un bref historique de la scolarisation de notre pays s’impose.
Éduquer une poignée d’enfants plus ou moins talentueux ? On a su faire, surtout depuis les conseils savoureux des grands pédagogues de la Renaissance (Vittorino da Feltre, Alexandre Hegius, Erasme de Rotterdam, Juan Luis Vivès, Comenius, etc.). Mais organiser l’enseignement obligatoire, laïque et gratuit pour toute une nation, garçons et filles, restait un énorme défi à relever.
Et comme le montre la chronologie qui suit, la route vers la scolarisation universelle a été semée de nombreuses embûches.
En France, dès le XVIe siècle, l’Etat royal confie à l’église catholique (Jésuites, Oratoriens) le soin de former les enfants de la noblesse : seules les familles aisées arrivent à payer un précepteur pour les leurs, les autres, souvent qualifiés de personnes « n’étant pas faites pour des études », restent essentiellement analphabètes.
Au XVIIe siècle, de saints hommes, émus de la grande misère des enfants du peuple fondèrent des ordres enseignants qui prirent en charge gratuitement les orphelins et les enfants abandonnés. Un enseignement avant tout religieux, mais leur fournissant de quoi manger, des rudiments d’éducation et des bases d’écriture et de calcul. Au XVIIIe siècle, des congrégations féminines prirent en charge de la même façon les filles pauvres.
Peu importe ses motivations réelles, Louis XIV, après la révocation de l’édit de Nantes en 1685, ordonne en 1698 à chaque communauté villageoise ou paroisse d’ouvrir une école dont le maître doit être un prêtre catholique. C’est la première fois que l’Etat envisage de donner de l’instruction à des enfants des régions rurales. En charge d’y arriver, les Frères des Ecoles chrétiennes (« Lassalliens ») avec les méthodes qui seront les leurs.
Les chiffres de l’alphabétisation à la fin de l’Ancien Régime montrent l’ampleur et les limites de l’œuvre accomplie. On estime à cette époque à 37 % la proportion des Français assez instruits pour signer leur acte de mariage au lieu de 21 % un siècle plus tôt. L’instruction féminine progressait lentement et environ un quart des femmes étaient alphabétisées, très sommairement pour nombre d’entre elles. Les disparités étaient importantes entre les villes et les campagnes.
4. Malebranche et les Oratoriens
Parmi les congrégations, les Oratoriens, depuis 1660 sous l’influence du philosophe et théologien Nicolas Malebranche (1638-1715) qui en prend la direction, font exception. En rupture avec l’aristotélisme des Jésuites et le dualisme prôné par René Descartes, Malebranche, devenu membre honoraire de l’Académie des Sciences, par des échanges épistolaires soutenus, va se laisser gagner par la vision optimiste du grand scientifique allemand Wilhelm Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716). Réconciliant sciences et foi, sur le plan métaphysique, son dieu est un Dieu sage et raisonnable respectant toujours son essence et les lois de l’ordre qu’il engendre. Sa perfection réside avant tout dans sa fonction de législateur, identifiée à la sagesse ou à la raison, plutôt que dans un pouvoir arbitraire.
Deux exemples démontrent l’excellence de l’ enseignement des Oratoriens : Gaspard Monge et Lazare Carnot, deux grands esprits scientifiques et futurs cofondateurs de l’Ecole polytechnique. Convaincus que l’avenir politique, économique et industriel de la République en dépendait, ils mèneront le combat pour que la meilleure éducation possible soit accessible à tous et pas seulement aux privilégiés dont ils faisaient partie.
Fils d’un marchand savoyard, Gaspard Monge (1746-1818), suit des études au collège des Oratoriens de Beaune, sa ville natale. Dès 17 ans, il enseigne les mathématiques chez les Oratoriens de Lyon, puis en 1771, les mathématiques et la physique à l’École du Génie établie à Mézières. La même année, il entre en contact avec le physicien Jean Le Rond d’Alembert (1717-1783) et correspond avec le mathématicien Nicolas de Condorcet (1743-1794) qui le pousse à présenter quatre mémoires, un dans chacun des domaines des mathématiques qu’il étudie alors. Ses talents de géomètre ne tardent pas à s’exprimer : à l’Ecole du Génie de Mézières, il invente « la Géométrie descriptive » qui sera intégrée dans le programme d’études de l’école et qui fut essentielle à la révolution industrielle qui s’annonçait…
Quant au futur général Lazare Carnot (1753-1823), fils d’un notaire bourguignon, après des études chez les Oratoriens d’Autun (1762), il intègre lui aussi l’École du Génie de Mézières (1771) où il reçoit l’enseignement de Gaspard Monge.
5. La Révolution des esprits (1789)
En 1789, la Révolution chamboulera la situation. Dès le 13 février 1790, toutes les corporations et congrégations religieuses sont supprimées par décret et les religieux reçoivent l’injonction de prêter serment à la Révolution. C’est une remise en cause totale d’une Église toute puissante mais également l’effondrement du peu d’instruction qui existait.
En rupture avec l’Ancien Régime, la Constitution de 1791 affirme qu’il sera
« créé et organisé une instruction publique commune à tous les citoyens. »
Un rapport et un projet de loi, sont présentés par Talleyrand (1754-1838), le 10 septembre 1791. Rédigé grâce à la contribution des plus grands savants de l’époque (Condorcet, Lagrange, Monge, Lavoisier, La Harpe), le Rapport sur l’Instruction publique de Talleyrand, constitue une véritable rupture par rapport à la façon dont l’instruction était conçue pendant l’Ancien régime. Il pose la question de l’instruction publique dans des termes nouveaux, aussi bien au niveau des principes (l’instruction publique est présentée comme une nécessité à la fois politique, sociale et morale, et donc comme quelque chose que l’Etat doit garantir aux citoyens) qu’au niveau formel. Ce plan embrasse l’ensemble de l’éducation nationale, qui est organisée sur quatre niveaux et dont les établissements sont distribués sur le territoire national en fonction des découpages administratifs. Il met sur le papier les bases d’un enseignement gratuit pour tous y compris les filles (écoles et programmes séparés) et précise qu’« on y apprendra les premiers éléments de la langue française, soit parlée, soit écrite ».
En 1794, le juriste Bertrand Barère de Vieuzac (1755-1841) précisera :
« Nous enseignerons le français aux populations qui parlent le bas-breton, l’allemand, l’italien ou le basque, afin de les mettre en état de comprendre les lois républicaines, et de les rattacher à la cause de la Révolution. »
Faute de temps, il n’est pas voté.
Dans son projet de loi, Talleyrand propose la création d’une école primaire dans chaque commune. L’Assemblée constituante venait de fixer l’organisation territoriale encore en place aujourd’hui. Le décret du 14 décembre 1789 venait de créer 44 000 municipalités (sur le territoire des anciennes « paroisses ») baptisées « communes » en 1793. La loi du 22 décembre 1789 créa les départements, le décret du 26 février 1790 en fixa le nombre à 83.
6. Le Comité d’Instruction publique (1791)
Un mois après le rapport de Talleyrand, le 14 octobre 1791, à l’Assemblée nationale législative, est créé un premier « Comité d’Instruction publique » dont Condorcet est élu président et l’avocat Emmanuel de Pastoret vice-président, les autres membres étant le futur général Lazare Carnot, le député Jean Debry, le mathématicien Louis Arbogast et l’homme politique Gilbert Romme.
Condorcet préside, en outre, l’une des trois sections, celle relative à l’organisation générale de l’Instruction publique. Le 5 mars 1792 il est nommé rapporteur du projet de décret sur l’organisation générale de l’instruction publique que le comité doit présenter à l’Assemblée.
Formé à 11 ans au collège des Jésuites de Reims, il est envoyé à 15 ans au collège de Navarre à Paris. De cette éducation-là, avant tout religieuse, il conservera toute sa vie des souvenirs douloureux et lui reprochera notamment ses brutalités et ses méthodes humiliantes. Son indignation le conduit à imaginer une approche totalement différente. Dans La Bibliothèque de l’homme public, il publie en 1791 « Cinq mémoires sur l’Instruction publique » constituant un véritable plan.
Ils seront la base du projet qu’il rédige à la Législative et seront approuvés par le comité d’instruction publique le 18 avril et présentés à l’Assemblée nationale les 20 et 21 avril 1792.
7. Condorcet et le parti américain
Hagiographe du physiocrate Anne Robert Jacques Turgot (1727-1781), tout en critiquant le sectarisme des « économistes », Condorcet adhère à certaines thèses physiocrates, notamment l’établissement de l’impôt sur le seul revenu agricole, considéré comme l’unique source de richesse de la nation, l’industrie étant considérée comme une catégorie « stérile » de l’économie nationale (voir mon article « La face cachée de la planète Marx »).
Pour les physiocrates, grands défenseurs de la rente terrienne qui les engraissait, l’ennemi à combattre était bien cet Etat centralisé, dirigiste et mercantile que Colbert, marchant dans les pas de Sully, avait commencé à mettre en place.
Ce qui n’empêche pas Condorcet, plus courageux que bien des gens de sa génération, de monter sur le devant de la scène pour soutenir ouvertement la Révolution américaine dans sa lutte contre les horreurs de l’Empire britannique : esclavage, peine de mort, droits de l’homme et de la femme.
Bien qu’ami de Voltaire, Condorcet écrit un éloge vibrant de Benjamin Franklin. Ami du pamphlétaire anglais influent Thomas Paine (1737-1809), il publie en 1786 « De l’influence de la Révolution d’Amérique sur l’Europe », dédié à La Fayette. Dans ce vibrant plaidoyer pour la démocratie et la liberté de la presse, Condorcet considère que l’Indépendance américaine pourrait servir de modèle à un nouveau monde politique.
Avec Paine et du Chastellet, Condorcet collabore de façon anonyme à une publication intermittente, Le Républicain, qui promeut les idées républicaines. À cette époque, il existe dans le monde seulement quelques états appelés républiques (les cantons suisses, Venise, les Provinces-Unies, notamment).
Par la suite, Condorcet se disputera violemment avec le deuxième président des Etats-Unis, John Adams, dont les encyclopédistes rejettent avec mépris le projet d’un parlement bicaméral.
Condorcet se lie également avec le président américain Thomas Jefferson qui promeut et fait publier les écrits de Condorcet en faveur du physiocrate Turgot pour les faire connaître en Amérique. Le 31 juillet 1788, Jefferson écrit à James Madison : « Je vous envoie aussi deux petits pamphlets du marquis de Condorcet, dans lesquels se trouve le jugement le plus judicieux que j’aie jamais vu sur les grandes questions qui agitent cette nation en ce moment ». Il s’agissait des « Lettres d’un Citoyen des États-Unis à un Français et des Sentiments d’un Républicain ».
Pendant son séjour à Paris, Jefferson fréquente le salon cosmopolite de Mme de Condorcet. Avant de retourner en Amérique, il reçoit ses amis les plus proches une dernière fois chez lui, à l’hôtel de Langeac : Condorcet, La Rochefoucauld, Lafayette et le gouverneur Morris.
Après le retour de Jefferson en Amérique, Condorcet continua son dialogue avec le secrétaire d’État américain de Washington. Le 3 mai 1791, il lui envoya une copie du rapport sur le choix d’une unité de mesure, présenté par Borda, Lagrange, Laplace, Monge et lui-même, à l’Académie des sciences le 19 mars, et soumis ensuite à l’Assemblée nationale le 26. Il s’agissait en effet d’un centre d’intérêt commun : le 4 juillet 1790, Jefferson avait présenté au Congrès américain son rapport sur les poids et les mesures, dont il avait envoyé un exemplaire à Condorcet. C’était la même foi dans le progrès qui encourageait les deux hommes à soutenir l’idée d’un système de mesure décimal et universel.
Dans une lettre, Jefferson informe Condorcet des travaux d’un mathématicien et astronome américain noir, Benjamin Banneker, auteur d’un almanach, dont il lui envoie un exemplaire. Dans les « Réflexions sur l’esclavage des nègres », bien que partisan convaincu de la liberté des noirs, Condorcet s’était exprimé en faveur d’une abolition graduelle de l’esclavage de la même manière que Jefferson dans ses « Notes on the State of Virginia ».
Jefferson oscilla dans ses positions, attribuant l’infériorité des Noirs tantôt à des causes naturelles, tantôt aux effets de l’esclavage, tandis que Condorcet – en accord avec Franklin – était convaincu depuis toujours de l’égalité naturelle de tous les hommes.
Dans les faits, celui qui fut le troisième président des Etats-Unis, posséda plus de 600 esclaves au cours de sa vie adulte. Il a libéré deux esclaves de son vivant, et cinq autres ont été libérés après sa mort, dont deux de ses enfants issus de sa relation avec son esclave Sally Hemings. Après sa mort, les autres esclaves ont été vendus pour rembourser les dettes de sa succession.
Jefferson s’oppose avec force aux « Fédéralistes » comme Alexander Hamilton qui promeuvent un Etat fédéral fort, le dirigisme économique à la Colbert et le mercantilisme. Condorcet va encourager Jefferson dans son projet de « démocratie agraire », la vision physiocratique des grands propriétaires terriens qui deviendra, jusqu’à l’arrivée de Lincoln et son conseiller Henry Carey, l’idéologie du Parti Républicain américain.
8. Le Plan Condorcet
Les progrès de la science et de la raison mèneront au bonheur des sociétés et des individus, estime Condorcet. Dans l’Esquisse d’un tableau historique des progrès de l’esprit humain, il écrit :
« Nos espérances, sur l’état à venir de l’espèce humaine, peuvent se réduire à ces trois points importants : la destruction de l’inégalité entre les nations, les progrès de l’égalité dans un même peuple ; enfin, le perfectionnement réel de l’homme. »
Préférant « L’Instruction publique » à l’éducation nationale, il rêve d’une instruction totalement indépendante de l’État et libre de tout dogmatisme :
« La puissance publique ne peut même sur aucun objet, avoir le droit de faire enseigner des opinions comme des vérités ; elle ne doit imposer aucune croyance. » (Sur l’instruction publique, premier mémoire, 1791).
Esquissant des principes laïques, pour Condorcet, « les principes de la morale enseignée dans les écoles et dans les instituts seront ceux qui, fondés sur nos sentiments naturels et sur la raison, appartiennent également à tous les hommes. »
A l’Assemblée nationale, il est massivement applaudi lorsqu’il déclare que « dans ces écoles les vérités premières de la science sociale précéderont leurs applications. Ni la Constitution française ni même la Déclaration des droits ne seront présentées à aucune classe de citoyens, comme des tables descendues du ciel, qu’il faut adorer et croire. Leur enthousiasme ne sera point fondé sur les préjugés, sur les habitudes de l’enfance ; et on pourra leur dire : ‘Cette Déclaration des droits qui vous apprend à la fois ce que vous devez à la société et ce que vous êtes en droit d’exiger d’elle, cette Constitution que vous devez maintenir aux dépens de votre vie ne sont que le développement de ces principes simples, dictés par la nature et par la raison dont vous avez appris, dans vos premières années, à reconnaître l’éternelle vérité. Tant qu’il y aura des hommes qui n’obéiront pas à leur raison seule, qui recevront leurs opinions d’une opinion étrangère, en vain toutes les chaînes auront été brisées, en vain ces opinions de commande seraient d’utiles vérités ; le genre humain n’en resterait pas moins partagé en deux classes, celle des hommes qui raisonnent et celle des hommes qui croient, celle des maîtres et celle des esclaves.’»
Pour Condorcet, il s’agit d’assurer le développement des capacités de chacun et de tendre au perfectionnement de l’humanité. Son projet propose d’instituer cinq catégories d’établissements :
- les écoles primaires visant à la formation civique et pratique ;
- les écoles secondaires dans lesquelles sont surtout enseignées les mathématiques et les sciences ;
- les instituts, assurant dans chaque département la formation des maîtres d’écoles primaires et secondaires et, aux élèves, un enseignement général ;
- les lycées, lieu de formation des professeurs et de ceux qui « se destinent à des professions où l’on ne peut obtenir de grands succès que par une étude approfondie d’une ou plusieurs sciences. » ;
- la Société nationale des sciences et des arts ayant pour mission la direction des établissements scolaires, l’enrichissement du patrimoine culturel et la diffusion des découvertes.
Son plan se caractérise également par l’égalité des âges et des sexes devant l’instruction, l’universalité et la gratuité de l’enseignement élémentaire et la liberté d’ouverture des écoles. Enfin la religion ne doit relever que de la sphère privée.
Le projet n’oublie nullement « le peuple », car des conférences hebdomadaires et mensuelles destinées aux adultes doivent permettre de « continuer l’instruction pendant toute la durée de la vie », une ambition que reprendront à leur compte l’abbé Grégoire (1750-1831) et Hippolyte Carnot.
Comme le relate Paul Carnot :
« L’Assemblée Constituante, dans sa courte existence, n’avait pu que transmettre le fameux rapport de Talleyrand à la Convention. Celle-ci, après les rapports, non moins fameux – de Condorcet et de Lakanal, après les discussions de son Comité d’Enseignement (presque aussi actif que le Comité de Salut public), avait proclamé des principes qui sont toujours les nôtres ceux de l’École primaire, obligatoire, gratuite et laïque. La Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme (art. XXII) proclamait, avec Robespierre ‘L’Instruction est le besoin de tous ; la société doit favoriser, de tout son pouvoir, les progrès de la raison publique et mettre l’Instruction à la portée de tous les citoyens’. »
Tous les partis, chose rare, étaient d’accord sur ces points. Les Girondins (Condorcet, Ducos) disaient, avec François Xavier Lanthenas (1754-1799), que:
« L’instruction est la première dette de l’État envers les citoyens. »
A propos de la gratuité, Georges Danton dira
« Nul n’est maître de ne pas donner l’instruction à ses enfants. Il n’y a pas de dépense réelle là où est le bon emploi pour l’intérêt public. Après le pain, l’instruction est le premier besoin du peuple.»
Mais le programme d’instruction publique menant à la perfectibilité de l’humanité, grâce à la raison, n’est pas une priorité, car le roi Louis XVI, sur proposition du général Dumouriez, vient de décider de se rendre à l’Assemblée nationale pour lui proposer de déclarer la guerre contre l’Autriche… A cela s’ajoute que l’argent pour l’éducation manque.
Condorcet doit interrompre la lecture de son projet. A la fin de l’après-midi de ce 20 avril 1792, l’Assemblée adopte la déclaration de guerre au roi de Bohême et de Hongrie, à l’unanimité moins sept voix. Le lendemain Condorcet termine la lecture de son projet. L’Assemblée décrète l’impression du rapport mais en diffère la discussion. C’est en vain que Romme, au nom du comité d’Instruction publique, demandera le 24 mai l’inscription à l’ordre du jour de la discussion du rapport. Le projet de Condorcet n’aura pas, tout comme le rapport de Talleyrand, le temps d’être débattu et ne sera pas adopté.
9. La bataille sous la Convention (1792-1795)
Les protagonistes de l’an I (sous la Convention) ne furent guère plus décisionnaires. Un nouveau Comité d’instruction publique est constitué. L’abbé Grégoire, abolitionniste et ami intime de Lazare Carnot et plus tard de son fils Hippolyte, et Joseph Lakanal (1762-1845) en font partie.
Le 12 décembre 1792, Marie-Joseph de Chénier (1764-1811) lit les propositions de Lanthénas qui reprend les idées de Talleyrand et Condorcet. Les discussions sont stériles et le projet est balayé par Marat. Ce dernier s’exclame ce jour-là :
« Quelque brillants, dit il, que soient les discours que l’on nous débite ici sur cette matière, ils doivent céder place à des intérêts plus urgents. Vous ressemblez à un général qui s’amuserait à planter et déplanter des arbres pour nourrir de leurs fruits des soldats qui mouraient de faim. Je demande que l’assemblée ordonne l’impression de ces discours, pour s’occuper d’objets plus importants. »
L’année d’après, Robespierre opte pour un plan d’éducation nationale imaginé par Lepeltier de Saint-Fargeau (1760-1793).
Selon ce plan, présenté par Robespierre en personne, le 13 juillet 1793, l’instruction sans une bonne dose d’idéologie républicaine ne saurait suffire à la régénération de l’espèce humaine. C’est donc l’État qui doit se charger d’inculquer une morale républicaine, en prenant en charge l’éducation en commun des enfants entre 5 et 12 ans.
Le 21 Janvier 1793, le Roi est décapité. Alors que pour Carnot, il s’agit de ne plus jamais permettre le retour de la lignée des Bourbons, Condorcet, adversaire par principe à la peine de mort, s’y oppose. Les débats sur l’instruction publique sont ajournés. Ce n’est qu’en fin d’année qu’une législation de compromis sur l’organisation des écoles primaires voit le jour ; elle rend l’instruction obligatoire et gratuite pour tous les enfants de six à huit ans et fixe la liberté d’ouvrir des écoles. Le décret du 19 décembre 1793 précise que les études primaires forment le premier degré de l’instruction : on y enseignera les connaissances rigoureusement nécessaires à tous les citoyens et les personnes chargées de l’enseignement dans ces écoles s’appelleront désormais « instituteurs ». Ce décret ne sera que partiellement appliqué.
1794 vit rédiger une profusion de textes législatifs sur le sujet :
- le décret du 27 janvier 1794 impose enfin l’instruction en langue française.
- Le 21 octobre 1794 une autre décision organise la distribution des premières écoles dans les communes.
- Le 30 octobre est créée, pour former des enseignants, la première « école normale » sur l’impulsion de Dominique Joseph Garat, de Joseph Lakanal et du Comité d’instruction publique. La loi précise qu’« Il sera établi à Paris une École normale, où seront appelés, de toutes les parties de la République, des citoyens déjà instruits dans les sciences utiles, pour apprendre, sous les professeurs les plus habiles dans tous les genres, l’art d’enseigner ». L’école, prévue pour près de 1 500 élèves, s’installe dans un amphithéâtre du Muséum national d’histoire naturelle, trop petit pour accueillir toute la promotion. Rapidement fermée, elle réunit néanmoins des professeurs brillants, tels que les scientifiques Monge, Vandermonde, Daubenton et Berthollet.
- Le 17 novembre, Lakanal fait adopter une loi rendant l’instruction gratuite, la République assurant un traitement et un logement aux instituteurs et autorisant la création d’écoles privées.
Également en 1794, Jacques-Élie Lamblardie, Gaspard Monge et Lazare Carnot, pères fondateurs de l’institution, se voient confier la mission d’organiser une « Ecole centrale des travaux publics », renommée « École polytechnique » en 1795 par Claude Prieur de la Côte d’Or, pour pallier la pénurie d’ingénieurs dans la France d’après la Révolution.
Malheureusement, sur le plan d’une scolarisation universelle, le bilan de 1795 est désastreux : aucun des décrets de 1794 n’a été appliqué!
Pire encore, le 25 octobre 1795, une nouvelle loi élaborée par Pierre Daunou marque même un recul : faute de budget, l’instruction n’est plus gratuite, les instituteurs doivent être salariés par les élèves (et leurs riches parents) et le programme scolaire devient indigent. Cette loi est restée en vigueur jusqu’aux textes napoléoniens sur l’enseignement secondaire et supérieur en 1802. Si elle prévoit l’abandon de l’obligation scolaire et de la gratuité, cette loi préconise la création d’une école primaire par canton et « d’école centrales » secondaires dans chaque département.
Les nouvelles autorités fixent aux communes des délais pour l’organisation des écoles. Elles mandatent des envoyés spéciaux pour voir si les communes prennent les mesures nécessaires pour rechercher et installer un instituteur.
Dans les villes, l’administration parvient à recueillir un certain nombre de candidats instituteurs, mais à la campagne, bien souvent la liste demeure vierge. Les administrations locales, en plus du problème de recrutements, se heurtent au problème du local, du mobilier, du chauffage de l’école et des ouvrages à utiliser. Les instituteurs en exercice se plaignent de la pénurie d’élèves car l’école républicaine suscite de la méfiance. Quand l’instituteur se risque à remplacer le catéchisme et les Évangiles par la Constitution et les Droits de l’Homme, les parents, incités en cela par des prêtres réfractaires, préfèrent garder leurs enfants chez eux. Le Comité d’instruction publique est submergé de questions, accablé de suggestions et de demandes.
Le 17 novembre 1795, Lakanal fait adopter par la Convention une nouvelle loi. L’instruction reste gratuite mais non obligatoire. Elle assure un traitement fixe et une retraite aux instituteurs et institutrices et leur fournit un local et un logement. Elle autorise tout citoyen à fonder des écoles particulières (privées).
10. Lazare Carnot sous les Cent-Jours (mars-juin 1815)
Le 9 novembre 1799, Bonaparte fomente un coup d’État et établit le régime du Consulat. Premier Consul, il signe avec le pape Pie VII le Concordat le 16 juillet 1801 qui abolit la loi de 1795 séparant l’Église de l’État.
Saisissant l’occasion du moment, et avant tout cherchant à répondre aux besoins immédiats, le ministre de l’Intérieur, le chimiste et industriel républicain Jean-Antoine Chaptal (1756-1832) soumet alors à Bonaparte un projet d’organisation de l’enseignement secondaire, confié, en particulier aux Oratoriens de Tournon. En 1800 il présente son « Rapport et projet de loi sur l’instruction publique. »
Rappelé par le Premier consul, Lazare Carnot reçoit le portefeuille de la Guerre qu’il conservera jusqu’à la conclusion de la paix d’Amiens en 1802, après les batailles de Marengo et d’Hohenlinden.
Révolutionnaire de la première heure, mais aussi modéré et républicain, il vote contre le Consulat à vie, puis est le seul Tribun à voter contre l’Empire le 1er mai 1804. Dès lors, privé de toute influence politique, il se recentre sur l’Académie des sciences. En 1814, la défense d’Anvers, ville dont il sera maire, lui est confiée : il s’y maintient longtemps et ne consent à remettre la place que sur l’ordre de Louis XVIII.
Mais quelques mois plus tard, l’Empereur revient au pouvoir pour les Cent-Jours, du 20 mars au 7 juillet 1815 (3 mois et 17 jours). C’est à ce moment que Lazare Carnot, menacé d’arrestation au point de se cacher rue du Parc-Royal, est nommé ministre de l’Intérieur le 22 mars 1815. Et comme ce ministère comporte dans ses attributions l’Instruction publique, il peut alors lancer le projet éducatif qui lui tient à cœur.
Trois jours après son installation au ministère, Lazare Carnot commande une étude sur l’enseignement.
Elle s’inspire des travaux de la « Société d’encouragement pour l’industrie nationale », fondée par Chaptal et dirigée par le philanthrope Joseph Marie de Gérando, lui aussi éduqué par les Oratoriens à Lyon et, avec Laborde, Lasteyrie et Jomard, partisan de la nouvelle méthode d’enseignement mutuel. (voir notre article sur ce site).
Carnot impulsera également la fondation de « Société pour l’instruction élémentaire (SIE) » afin de promouvoir ce type d’éducation.
Pour Carnot et Grégoire, l’éducation et l’instruction doivent « élever à la dignité d’Homme tous les individus de l’espèce humaine », éduquer autant que moraliser, et répandre l’amour entre les hommes.
Pendant les Cent-Jours, Carnot a juste eu le temps de préparer, en avril 1815, un « plan d’ensemble pour l’éducation populaire » suivi d’un décret et de la création d’une Commission spéciale pour l’enseignement élémentaire chargée de tracer des perspectives en la matière en s’inspirant des modèles anglais et hollandais.
Familiarisé avec les « brigades » inventées par Gaspard Monge à l’école du Génie de Mézières et ensuite à Polytechnique, où les meilleurs élèves encadrent les autres, Carnot est plus que favorable au système de l’enseignement mutuel dans les écoles populaires. Répandu en Angleterre et en Suisse, Carnot va l’établir en France.
Convaincu de l’importance de la musique, il souhaite l’enseignement de celle-ci aux élèves. Dans cette intention, il rencontre plusieurs fois Alexandre-Étienne Choron (1771-1834), lui aussi passé par les Oratoriens, qui réunit un certain nombre d’enfants et leur fit exécuter en sa présence plusieurs morceaux appris en fort peu de leçons. Par ailleurs, Carnot connaissait le pédagogue Louis Bocquillon, dit Wilhem (1781-1832) depuis dix ans. Il entrevit aussi la possibilité d’introduire, par lui, le chant dans les écoles, et tous deux visitèrent ensemble celle de la rue Jean-de-Beauvais, ouverte à Paris à trois cents enfants. De son côté, Wilhem créa le mouvement musical de masse des « orphéons ».
11. Hippolyte Carnot reprend le flambeau de son père Lazare
Lazare, un esprit scientifique de haut vol, a des idées bien arrêtées sur l’éducation qui forgeront la personnalité de ses fils, notamment celle d’Hippolyte, le futur ministre de l’Instruction publique de la seconde République. Pour les deux Carnot,
« toutes les institutions sociales doivent avoir pour but l’amélioration sous le rapport physique, intellectuel et moral de la classe la plus nombreuse et la plus pauvre. »
Plus que des « têtes bien pleines », il aspirait à faire de ses fils des « têtes bien faites », et de « nous faire connaître la saveur des bonnes choses plutôt que nous rendre infaillibles sur le sens des mots », selon les mots de son cadet. Pour Lazare, il s’agit de mettre à l’épreuve en famille les principes éducatifs qu’il prône pour la nation.
Bien que peu féru de langues mortes et plus attiré par les langues vivantes, Lazare initie ses enfants au latin, redevenu langue obligatoire dans les lycées impériaux créés en mai 1802. Pour le reste, si la riche bibliothèque paternelle permet à Sadi Carnot et à son frère Hippolyte de se familiariser avec les classiques indispensables à la culture humaniste qui fonde l’enseignement secondaire, elle les initie à d’autres penseurs plus contemporains et novateurs.
Parmi eux, Hippolyte s’intéresse à ceux qui se penchent sur les questions éducatives comme Rousseau, mais aussi à des philosophes plus originaux comme Saint-Simon dont son père disait :
« Voilà un homme que l’on traite d’extravagant, or il a dit plus de choses sensées dans toute sa vie que les sages qui le raillent […]. Mais c’est un esprit très original, très hardi dont les idées méritent de fixer l’attention des philosophes et des hommes d’État. »
Évoquant son père, Hippolyte dira plus tard :
« Les leçons que nous recevions avaient toutes pour objet de nous rendre, comme le maître qui les donnait, vertueux sans effort, sages sans système. »
Lazare Carnot fait entrer Hippolyte à l’institution polytechnique, 8 avenue de Neuilly. D’après Dalisson,
« le jeune Carnot y reçoit une éducation spartiate où, si la discipline n’exclut pas les châtiments corporels sous la férule ‘d’Inspecteurs généraux’, la pédagogie est novatrice. Les élèves sont répartis dans des classes selon leur âge et l’enseignement allie éducation intellectuelle et physique à travers des programmes qui complètent l’éducation paternelle. Hippolyte se perfectionne ainsi en lecture, en langues, anciennes et vivantes, en littérature, en mathématiques, en physique et géométrie, goûte à la chronologie, à l’histoire, au dessin, à la musique, à l’escrime et à la danse, se révélant en tout point un excellent élève ».
12. Exil de Lazare Carnot (1816)
Après la seconde abdication de Napoléon, Lazare Carnot fait partie du gouvernement provisoire. Exilé au moment de la Restauration, il est banni comme régicide en 1816 et se retire à Varsovie, puis à Magdebourg, où il consacrera le reste de ses jours à l’étude et surtout à l’éducation de ses enfants.
Dalisson : « quand il ne va pas en cours, il (Hippolyte) sert de secrétaire à son père qui continue son éducation ». A Magdebourg, « l’une des consolations de Carnot était de compléter l’éducation de son jeune fils, dont il dirigeait plus spécialement les études vers les questions historiques et l’économie sociale ». C’est donc en Prusse qu’Hippolyte trouve sa voie, abandonne les sciences « dures » pour se consacrer à la philosophie en général et à la philosophie politique et sociale en particulier. Là-bas, l’éducation a un statut privilégié depuis que Frédéric II a rendu l’enseignement primaire obligatoire en 1763, envisagé une forme de gratuité (pour les familles pauvres) et créé des gymnases pour le Secondaire. De quoi inciter Carnot père et fils à imaginer comment la France peut rattraper son retard.
Mieux encore, comme le précise Dalisson :
« la Prusse reste un royaume qui, comme la France quelques années plus tôt, a procédé à une levée en masse en 1813 pour chasser l’envahisseur. Le lien entre instruction populaire et sentiment national, entre éducation et économie, entre libéralisme et éducation nationale s’impose et rejoint les idéaux éducatifs de la famille Carnot. C’est pourquoi, à la demande du gouvernement, Lazare bâtit un projet éducatif en créant une ‘école professionnelle’ dans ce lointain pays d’accueil. Aidé d’Hippolyte il met sur pied un système complet d’enseignement pour l’agriculture et l’industrie. Si nous n’avons pas trace du texte, il influença sans doute le jeune homme pour ses années parisiennes et libérales autant que pour son futur ministère ».
13. Hippolyte avec l’abbé Grégoire
De retour en France, Hippolyte se met en rapport avec les anciens amis de son père, notamment l’abbé Grégoire. Figure emblématique de la lutte pour l’émancipation des juifs et des noirs, cet « évêque révolutionnaire » réclame l’abolition totale des privilèges et prône le suffrage universel masculin.
Sur le principe, Hippolyte approuve. Cependant, dans la pratique, après avoir constaté l’engouement du peuple pour les exécutions publiques, il découvre avec quelle facilité on peut mener, voire manipuler une foule en jouant sur l’irrationnel, sur la passion et les pulsions, toutes choses qui rendent délicat l’usage du suffrage universel et peuvent mener à la dictature. Il en conclut que l’instruction populaire doit éclairer le peuple pour le faire revenir à des sentiments plus fraternels et raisonnables.
Pour l’abbé Grégoire, comme pour Carnot père et fils, l’esclavage doit être aboli, les nations doivent s’affranchir des Empires en recouvrant leur souveraineté et l’éducation doit affranchir les citoyens de l’ignorance, un ensemble de sujets merveilleusement réunis dans l’iconographie des bas-reliefs du socle de la statue de Gutenberg à Strasbourg, monument commémoratif réalisé par un ami aussi bien de l’abbé Grégoire que d’Hippolyte Carnot, et plus tard de Victor Hugo : le sculpteur David d’Angers.
Membre du Comité d’instruction publique, Grégoire réclame, comme le faisaient déjà avant lui les Oratoriens, la généralisation de la langue française et devient le rapporteur de la suppression des anciennes académies et de la création de l’Institut.
L’ouverture de toute une série ‘d’écoles spéciales’, tels l’Ecole polytechnique (1794) et l’Institut des langues orientales (1795), l’établissement du Musée du Louvre (1793), l’avant-projet de l’implantation d’une Bibliothèque nationale (1790), la création du Bureau des Longitudes (1795), le lancement des nouvelles unités de poids et mesures, système métrique et décimal, l’extension des écoles élémentaires à toutes les communes et l’un des fleurons de cette politique : la fondation du Conservatoire national des arts et métiers (1794) durent l’essentiel de leur mise en œuvre à l’énergie débordante de l’abbé Grégoire.
Il s’agit de transmettre des savoirs techniques à deux types de publics. D’un côté, des « grandes » écoles, tournées vers les nouvelles élites du pays, mettent en place un enseignement de haut niveau pour former savants et ingénieurs (École polytechnique, Ponts et chaussées, etc.) ou les futurs professeurs du nouveau système d’instruction publique avec l’École normale (1794) ; de l’autre, des écoles destinées à l’encadrement intermédiaire dans les manufactures, de bons ouvriers et chefs d’ateliers : c’est le cas des écoles d’arts et métiers, héritières de l’école professionnelle imaginée en 1780 à Liancourt (60) par le duc de la Rochefoucauld.
Sont également instaurées plusieurs grandes institutions qui existent encore aujourd’hui, parmi lesquelles, hors celles déjà nommées, le Muséum d’histoire naturelle (1793) au Jardin royal des plantes médicinales (1793) ou le musée des Monuments français (1795).
L’abbé Grégoire fait entrer le jeune Hippolyte dans la loge maçonnique dont il fait partie, Les Philadelphes. Inspiré par le combat de Grégoire, dont il sera l’exécuteur testamentaire et sur lequel il publiera une œuvre vers la fin de sa vie, Hippolyte, à peine âgé de 23 ans, publie « Gunima, nouvelle africaine du XVIIIe siècle » (1824) un conte philosophique relatant l’éducation morale du jeune Benjamin qui confronte ses préjugés et l’injustice du régime esclavagiste et de servitude des peuples dits hottentots du Cap aux principes des Lumières.
Étonnamment moderne, l’histoire relève le défi de la fraternité au moment où la France répondait aux revendications de reconnaissance d’Haïti.
Fidèle à la philosophie de l’abbé Grégoire, il proteste contre l’expulsion des juifs de Dresde où ils sont interdits de séjour. Indigné, il tente d’alerter l’opinion : depuis 1789 les juifs sont des citoyens français comme les autres. Il réaffirme sa foi dans la liberté des cultes qui a permis l’émancipation des juifs et s’écrie :
« Si l’on appelle juif celui que, dès le sein de sa mère, la société condamne au plus vil esclavage, qui végète sans droit dans sa patrie et sert de plastron aux insultes de la populace, à qui ses actions ne méritent rien (…) et que poursuivent sans relâche la honte et le mépris, alors je suis un juif et le serai toujours ».
14. Comme Friedrich Schiller, patriote et citoyen du monde
Extrait du livre de Dalisson :
« La position de Carnot est résumée lors d’une fête en hommage à la Révolution française, le 19 mars 1838, à Paris. Il porte un toast au nom de ‘la sainte égalité, de la solidarité entre tous les peuples et toutes les races d’hommes dans un esprit de fraternité’ à ‘l’abolition de l’esclavage, à la cessation de cet affreux scandale de l’humanité’.
« De ce jour, il collabore régulièrement avec Victor Schoelcher, journaliste, franc-maçon, proche des saint-simoniens et membre des mêmes sociétés que lui et qu’il retrouvera trois ans plus tard au gouvernement de la République, puis en exil. Schoelcher a été confronté à l’esclavage à Cuba dès 1828 et pense aussi que leur émancipation doit être progressive, avant de changer d’avis et de devenir partisan de l’abolition immédiate.
« La liberté doit aussi s’appliquer aux peuples et donc aux nations, car ‘le principe de toute souveraineté réside dans la nation’. Fils de 1789 éduqué pendant les luttes d’émancipations nationales, étudiant pétri de romantisme, passionné par les révoltes des années quinze et trente avant d’être happé par le ‘Printemps des peuples’, Carnot place sa confiance dans la liberté des nations : ‘Le salut viendra des peuples s’unissant pour venir à bout de l’ennemi commun, le despotisme.’ Si les nations et les peuples libérés arrivent à s’entendre et à s’unir, elles bâtiront même ‘l’Europe unie’.
« Il soutiendra tout au long du siècle tous les combats nationaux, et donc les unités nationales, contre les empires qui oppriment les minorités. Car la nationalité, ‘c’est le droit de l’homme proclamé en 1789, le droit de se grouper selon ses affinités de caractère, de tradition, de race, de langue, c’est au fond la LIBERTÉ même’. Il est donc acquis, y compris après la guerre de 1870, à une sorte de « ‘droit des peuples à disposer d’eux-mêmes’ dans une Europe fondée sur la liberté des peuples.
« Dans ses écrits sur la politique extérieure revient régulièrement la maxime de Friedrich Schiller : ‘L’homme est créé libre, il est libre, fut-il né dans des chaînes. (…) Devant l’homme libre, ne tremblez pas.’ Cette liberté des peuples et des nations doit même s’appuyer, horresco referens, sur la nécessaire réconciliation entre la France et l’Allemagne, deux peuples voisins que les vicissitudes de l’histoire ont séparés, mais qui sont « deux amis que de longues querelles ont divisés et qui ont besoin de s’expliquer’ ».
14. La Révolution de juillet 1830
La Révolution de 1830, dite aussi révolution de Juillet ou encore « Trois Glorieuses », se déroule à Paris du 27 au 29 juillet 1830.
Une partie des Parisiens se soulève contre la politique très réactionnaire du gouvernement du roi Charles X. Immédiatement se pose la question : « que mettre à la place du roi ? » Beaucoup comptaient restaurer la République.
Le 30 juillet les députés et les journalistes favorables au duc d’Orléans font placarder des affiches qui rappellent le passé « patriote » du duc, un ancien de Valmy qui se réclame des idées de George Washington, et de son engagement pour l’avenir : il sera « un roi-citoyen ». Sans condition les représentants du peuple (95 députés présents à Paris) proposent que le duc d’Orléans soit nommé Lieutenant-Général du royaume. Le 31 juillet ce dernier accepte le poste et se rend à l’Hôtel de Ville de Paris, le quartier général des républicains.
Là, devant la foule réunie, il reçoit l’accolade de La Fayette, tous les deux enroulés dans le drapeau tricolore. Lafayette estime qu’une transition graduelle vers une République passe forcément par une Monarchie constitutionnelle. Le 9 août, les députés modifient la Charte de 1814 qui devient « la charte » constitutionnelle de 1830 et le duc d’Orléans est proclamé « roi des Français » sous le nom de Louis-Philippe Ier.
Hippolyte Carnot, toujours dans la modération, croit fermement à la « démocratie représentative » et est élu trois fois député sous la Monarchie de 1830. Tribun de l’opposition au régime, il prépare la suite.
15. Ministre de l’Instruction publique sous la IIe République
Après une première tentative de rétablir des valeurs républicaines, neutralisée par le « coup d’Etat » de Louis-Philippe en 1830, les soulèvements de 1847-48 se terminent en février 1848 par la constitution, à l’Hôtel de Ville de Paris, du « Gouvernement provisoire » dirigé par plusieurs amis d’Hippolyte Carnot, instaurant la IIe République.
Les premières mesures du gouvernement provisoire se veulent en rupture avec la période précédente.
- La peine de mort est abolie dans le domaine politique.
- Les châtiments corporels sont supprimés le 12 mars et la contrainte par corps (prison pour dette) le 19 mars.
- Le 4 mars une commission est mise en place pour résoudre le problème de l’esclavage dans les colonies françaises. Sous l’égide du ministre des Colonies, l’astronome républicain François Arago (1786-1853), ami intime d’Alexandre de Humboldt, et dont le secrétaire d’Etat s’appelle Victor Schoelcher, les travaux de cette commission permettent l’abolition de l’esclavage le 27 avril.
Dans le domaine politique, les changements sont importants.
- La liberté de la presse et celle de réunion sont proclamées le 4 mars.
- Le 5 mars le gouvernement institue le suffrage universel masculin, en remplacement du suffrage censitaire en vigueur depuis 1815. D’un coup le corps électoral passe de 250 000 à 9 millions d’électeurs… Cette mesure démocratique fait du monde rural, qui regroupe les trois quarts des habitants, le maître de la vie politique, et ce, pour de nombreuses décennies.
- Des élections destinées à désigner les membres d’une assemblée constituante sont prévues pour le 9 avril. La Garde nationale que dirige Lafayette, jusque-là réservée aux notables, aux boutiquiers, est ouverte à tous les citoyens.
Le gouvernement provisoire proposa de nommer Hippolyte Carnot comme ministre de l’Intérieur ; il refusa, mais accepta celui de l’Instruction publique (que Victor Hugo venait de refuser), auquel on joignit les cultes, qui jusqu’alors avaient relevé du ministère de la Justice.
Si Carnot souhaite que les cultes soient réunis à l’instruction publique, c’est que non seulement il n’avait aucun sentiment d’hostilité à l’égard de l’Eglise, mais il croyait voir dans une étroite alliance de la République et du clergé la meilleure garantie du progrès.
« J’ai moi-même, a-t-il écrit, le sentiment religieux trop profondément gravé au cœur pour ne pas être et pour ne pas vouloir que l’on soit autour de moi plein de déférence à l’égard des ministres de toutes les religions. »
Et encore : « Mes efforts constants ont eu pour but de rattacher le clergé inférieur à la République. Le ministre de la religion et le maître d’école sont à mes yeux les colonnes sur lesquelles doit s’appuyer l’édifice républicain. »
16. Les réformes d’Hippolyte Carnot
En s’appuyant sur le degré d’instruction des Français à l’âge du mariage, cette carte met en
évidence une grande disparité entre les régions. Ainsi, le taux d’alphabétisation des
habitants du nord et de l’est est-il nettement supérieur à celui des habitants du sud et de
l’ouest. La France alphabétisée est celle des grandes villes, des campagnes riches et des
populations denses.
Pendant son ministère très court, muni d’une vision d’ensemble longuement mûrie et préparée d’avance, il annoncera, parfois plusieurs fois par semaine, des réformes républicaines de tous les grands chantiers de l’éducation, de la première enfance jusqu’aux adultes en passant par la formation des enseignants, des grands commis de l’État et de l’ensemble des citoyens. En déclarant dans ses notes préparatoires qu’il « importe que les divers degrés du système d’enseignement s’intègrent les uns dans les autres, conduisant directement de l’un à l’autre ».
A. Ecoles maternelles
Pour Carnot, les « salles d’asile » ne sont guère que des établissements charitables dirigées par les religieuses. On y fait peu pour l’éducation de la première enfance. Leur nom qui rappelle des idées de misère et d’aumône est remplacé le 28 avril par celui « d’école maternelle ».
« L’enfant doit y trouver l’éducation qu’il ne peut recevoir de sa mère, c’est-à-dire les soins du corps, le langage du sentiment, et ces petits exercices destinés, non pas encore à meubler l’intelligence, mais seulement à l’entrouvrir ».
Dans l’esprit de Jean Reynaud (1806-1863) (sous-secrétaire d’État à l’Instruction publique) et de Carnot, la salle d’asile n’est ni une école d’instruction, ni un lieu de refuge pour des enfants privés de leurs parents. A Paris est créée simultanément une « Ecole maternelle normale », recevant des élèves âgés de vingt à quarante ans.
B. Ecole primaire
Dès le 27 février, dans une circulaire aux recteurs, Carnot marquait l’intention d’améliorer la condition du personnel enseignant primaire :
« La condition des instituteurs primaires est un des objets principaux de ma sollicitude… C’est à eux que sont confiées les bases de l’éducation nationale. Il n’importe pas seulement d’élever leur condition par une juste augmentation de leurs appointements ; il faut que la dignité de leur fonction soit rehaussée de toute manière… Il faut qu’au lieu de s’en tenir à l’instruction qu’ils ont reçue dans les écoles normales primaires, ils soient constamment sollicités à l’accroître… Rien n’empêche que ceux qui en seront capables ne s’élèvent jusqu’aux plus hautes sommités de notre hiérarchie. Leur sort quant à l’avancement ne saurait être inférieur à celui des soldats ; leur mérite a droit aussi de conquérir des grades… Mais, pour que tous soient animés dans une voie d’émulation si glorieuse, il est nécessaire que des positions intermédiaires leur soient assurées. Elles le feront naturellement par l’extension que doit recevoir dans les écoles primaires supérieures l’enseignement des mathématiques, de la physique, de l’histoire naturelle, de l’agriculture. Les instituteurs primaires seront donc invités, au nom de la République, à se préparer à servir au recrutement du personnel de ces écoles. Tel est un des compléments de l’établissement des écoles normales primaires. L’intérêt de la République est que les portes de la hiérarchie universitaire soient ouvertes aussi largement que possible devant ces magistrats populaires. »
Le ministre s’attaque donc le 30 juin à l’enseignement primaire. Avant lui, l’ordonnance du 29 février 1816 avait marqué un tournant. Elle établissait un comité cantonal chargé de la surveillance des écoles et obligeait, dans son article 14, les communes, sans leur en donner les moyens, à « pourvoir à ce que les enfants qui l’habitent reçoivent l’instruction primaire, et à ce que les enfants indigents la reçoivent gratuitement », celles-ci pouvant se regrouper pour remplir cette obligation. En clair, l’éducation primaire était complètement laissée aux communes qui à leur tour, faute de locaux et de moyens, faisaient appel aux congrégations religieuses.
Le ministre propose donc « d’élever la condition des instituteurs en les transformant, de fonctionnaires des communes en fonctionnaires d’État » pour les émanciper des potentats locaux, des parents et des religieux. Car,
« il faut certes que l’instituteur soit accepté dans sa commune, mais s’il en dépend trop, il n’est pas assez considéré. Il importe donc qu’il ne puisse point être destitué capricieusement ».
Dans cette optique, il supprime le « certificat de moralité » qui inféodait les instituteurs à l’Église et, accessoirement, au pouvoir.
A côté de l’obligation scolaire (pour les deux sexes et pour les communes de 300 habitants au moins) et la gratuité totale déjà évoquées, il veut compléter les programmes pour former un « tronc uniforme (…) destiné à tout passer en revue pour servir à déterminer les vocations » qui préfigure l’école de Jules Ferry et va plus loin que les seuls lire, écrire et compter.
Outre l’histoire et la géographie nationales, deux des marottes de Carnot, le chant, l’histoire naturelle, la musique et le dessin linéaire, deux matières destinées à épanouir et instruire, on trouve plusieurs spécificités dans les nouveaux textes. La première, qui sera reprise trente ans plus tard, est une sorte d’instruction civique que le ministre qualifie de
« devoirs et droits de l’homme et du citoyen, le développement des sentiments de liberté, d’égalité et de fraternité (…), bases d’un enseignement civique pour l’éducation républicaine du pays ».
Hippolyte avait été élu le 23 avril 1848 membre de l’Assemblée constituante. Lorsque, le 10 mai 1848, la « Commission exécutive » (du 9 mai au 28 juin 1848) remplace le « Gouvernement provisoire » (24 février – 9 mai 1848), il conserve son portefeuille ; mais l’exécutif, « afin de renforcer l’élément révolutionnaire », lui adjoignit Jean Reynaud (1806-1863), comme lui un ancien saint-simonien élu aussi représentant, comme sous-secrétaire d’Etat : « Je connaissais la modération réelle de ses principes, écrit Carnot ; il connaissait la fermeté des miens ; nous rîmes ensemble du rôle qu’on prétendait lui assigner ».
Edouard Charton (1807-1890), également un ancien saint-simonien, devenu lui aussi membre de l’Assemblée, donna sa démission de secrétaire général ; mais il continua ses bons offices sans titre officiel.
Parmi les actes de Carnot dans cette seconde période de son ministère, il faut mentionner le dépôt, le 3 juin, d’un projet de décret ouvrant un crédit de 995 000 francs, destiné à augmenter, pour le second semestre de 1848, le traitement de ceux des instituteurs primaires dont le traitement fixe et éventuel demeurait inférieur à six cents francs ; et un second crédit, de 105 000 francs, destiné à secourir, dans le courant de 1848, les institutrices communales dont les traitements fixe et éventuel demeuraient inférieurs à quatre cents francs (le décret fut voté le 7 juillet).
C. Exposé des motifs de la loi de juin 1848 sur l’École
La rédaction de la loi d’instruction primaire se poursuivait en petit comité, chargé de coordonner les travaux préparés par la Haute Commission. Elle fut achevée dans le courant de juin ; mais le dépôt du projet, retardé par les événements, ne put avoir lieu que le 30 juin. L’exposé des motifs s’exprime ainsi :
« Citoyens représentants, la différence entre la République et la monarchie ne doit se témoigner nulle part plus profondément, dans le domaine de l’instruction publique, qu’en ce qui touche les écoles primaires. Puisque la libre volonté des citoyens doit désormais imprimer au pays sa direction, c’est de la bonne préparation de cette volonté que dépendront à l’avenir le salut et le bonheur de la France.
« Le but de l’instruction primaire est ainsi nettement déterminé. Il ne s’agit plus seulement de mettre les enfants en mesure de recevoir les notions de la lecture, de l’écriture et de la grammaire ; le devoir de l’Etat est de veiller à ce que tous soient élevés de manière à devenir véritablement dignes de ce grand nom de citoyen qui les attend. L’enseignement primaire doit, par conséquent, renfermer tout ce qui est nécessaire au développement de l’homme et du citoyen, tel que les conditions actuelles de la civilisation française permettent de le concevoir. En même temps qu’il faut introduire dans cet enseignement une plus grande somme de connaissances, il faut aussi le faire concourir plus directement à l’éducation morale, et particulièrement à la consécration du grand principe de la fraternité que nous avons inscrit sur nos drapeaux et qu’il est indispensable de faire pénétrer et vivre partout dans les cœurs pour qu’il soit véritablement immortel. C’est là, citoyens, que l’enseignement primaire vient se joindre à l’enseignement religieux, qui n’est pas du ressort des écoles, mais auquel nous faisons un appel sincère, à quelque culte qu’il se rapporte, parce qu’il n’y a point de base plus solide et plus générale à l’amour des hommes que celle qui se déduit de l’amour de Dieu.
« L’établissement de la République, en donnant à l’enseignement primaire cette tendance nouvelle, commandait aussi, comme conséquences naturelles, deux mesures importantes, qui sont de rendre cet enseignement gratuit et obligatoire.
Nous le voulons obligatoire, parce qu’aucun citoyen ne saurait être dispensé, sans dommage pour l’intérêt public, d’une culture intellectuelle reconnue nécessaire au bon exercice de sa participation personnelle à la souveraineté.
Nous le voulons gratuit, par là même que nous le voulons obligatoire, et parce que sur les bancs des écoles de la République il ne doit pas exister de distinctions entre les enfants des riches et ceux des pauvres.
Nous vous demandons de proclamer la liberté de l’enseignement, c’est-à-dire le droit de tout citoyen de communiquer aux autres ce qu’il sait, et le droit du père de famille de faire élever ses enfants par l’instituteur qui lui convient. Nous considérons la déclaration de ce droit comme une des applications légitimes et sincères de la parole de liberté que notre République a jetée au monde avec enthousiasme, (…) Il nous a même semblé que ce ne serait pas un des moindres moyens de relever les écoles publiques que de laisser un plein essor aux écoles privées, à condition que dans cette carrière d’émulation il ne manquât aux premières aucune chance favorable (…) En un mot, citoyens, l’idée d’après laquelle nous nous sommes dirigés a été l’union continuelle du principe de l’autorité avec celui de la liberté. (…) C’est dans cette conciliation entre deux principes également respectables que consiste tout l’esprit de la loi que nous avons l’honneur de vous soumettre. »
Source : Hippolyte Carnot, Bulletin des lois, 1848.
D. Appel aux instituteurs pour éclairer le monde rural
Le 5 mars, un décret fixa au 9 avril la convocation des assemblées électorales pour la nomination, par le suffrage universel, de « l’Assemblée constituante » qui siégera du 4 au 26 mai. Ce sont les premières élections depuis 1792 à se dérouler au suffrage universel masculin. Par décision de la IIe République, le nombre d’électeurs qui passe à 9 395 035, a été multiplié par 40 !
Or, comme nous l’avons dit, si Hippolyte Carnot est en théorie pour le suffrage universel, avec une grande majorité de Français non-éduqués, l’expression du vote risque de conduire au désastre.
Aucune partie de l’instruction primaire, écrit-il, « n’a été plus négligée, sous les précédents gouvernements, que la formation des enfants comme citoyens ». Dès lors, beaucoup des électeurs que le décret du gouvernement provisoire vient d’investir du droit de suffrage ne sont-ils pas, surtout dans les campagnes, suffisamment instruits des intérêts de la chose publique.
Pour tenter d’éclairer ces électeurs sur leurs droits et libertés, Carnot fait appel aux instituteurs :
« Excitez autour de vous les esprits capables d’une telle tâche à composer en vue de vos instituteurs de courts manuels, par demandes et par réponses, sur les droits et les devoirs des citoyens. Veillez à ce que ces livres parviennent aux instituteurs de votre ressort, et qu’ils deviennent entre leurs mains le texte de leçons profitables.
« C’est ce qui va se faire à Paris sous mes yeux ; imitez-le. Que nos 36 000 instituteurs primaires se lèvent donc à mon appel pour se faire immédiatement les réparateurs de l’instruction publique devant la population des campagnes. Puisse ma voix les toucher jusque dans nos derniers villages ! Je les prie de contribuer pour leur part à fonder la République. Il ne s’agit pas, comme du temps de nos pères, de la défendre contre le danger de ses frontières, il faut la défendre contre l’ignorance et le mensonge, et c’est à eux qu’appartient cette tâche. Des hommes nouveaux, voilà ce que réclame la France. Une révolution ne doit pas seulement renouveler les institutions, il faut qu’elle renouvelle les hommes. On change d’outil quand on change d’ouvrage. C’est un principe capital de politique. »
« Mais les instituteurs ne doivent pas seulement, en éclairant les électeurs, leur enseigner à choisir les représentants les plus capables de consolider le régime démocratique ; ils peuvent faire davantage : « Pourquoi nos instituteurs primaires ne se présenteraient-ils pas, non seulement pour enseigner ce principe, mais pour prendre place eux-mêmes parmi ces hommes nouveaux ? Il en est, je n’en doute pas, qui en sont dignes : qu’une ambition généreuse s’allume en eux ; qu’ils oublient l’obscurité de leur condition ; elle était des plus humbles sous la monarchie ; elle devient, sous la République, des plus honorables et des plus respectées (…) Qu’ils viennent parmi nous, au nom de ces populations rurales dans le sein desquelles ils sont nés, dont ils savent les souffrances, dont ils ne partagent que trop la misère. Qu’ils expriment au sein de la législature les besoins, les vœux, les espérances de cet élément de la nation si capital et si longtemps délaissé. Tel est le service nouveau que, dans ce temps révolutionnaire, je réclame du zèle de Messieurs les instituteurs primaires. »
C’étaient là des paroles comme la France n’en avait pas entendu depuis l’an II. Elles causèrent une émotion profonde ; elles mirent la flamme au cœur de tout ce qu’il y avait de jeune et de généreux dans le personnel enseignant primaire, en même temps qu’elles produisaient dans le camp des conservateurs la plus vive irritation. Furibard, Léon Faucher écrivait, le 7 mars, à un ami : « Lisez la circulaire de Carnot aux recteurs. C’est le chef-d’œuvre de la folie ! »
L’appel du ministre pour la composition de manuels sur les droits et les devoirs du citoyen fut entendu. Dans plusieurs académies, les recteurs firent rédiger et publier des catéchismes d’enseignement civique.
A Paris, l’historien Henri Martin fit paraître un Manuel de l’instituteur pour les élections ; le philosophe Charles Renouvier publia, sous les auspices du ministre, un Manuel républicain de l’homme et du citoyen : ces deux ouvrages furent envoyés d’office aux recteurs, et distribués par leurs soins.
Au niveau électoral, leurs efforts ne furent pas couronnés de succès. Les élections qui auront finalement lieu le 23 avril donnent une majorité aux modérés (« monarchistes camouflés » et « républicains modérés »).
Les républicains « avancés », dont Carnot fait partie, sont nettement battus. La nouvelle assemblée se réunit le 4 mai. Elle proclame la République et met fin à l’existence du gouvernement provisoire. Elle élit une « Commission exécutive » dont sont exclus les éléments les plus progressistes du gouvernement provisoire.
E. Enseignement secondaire
Le 28 février 1848, une circulaire exposa, dans ses grandes lignes, le programme du ministre et de ses collaborateurs ; elle « déroule les principes généraux de notre entreprise », dit Carnot. On y lisait :
« Il est nécessaire, dans l’intérêt de la société, qu’un certain nombre de citoyens reçoive des connaissances plus étendues que celles qui suffisent pour assurer le développement de l’homme. C’est à quoi répondra l’établissement de l’instruction secondaire. Le gouvernement républicain se propose de recruter ces agents si essentiels dans la masse du peuple. Il faut donc veiller à ce que les portes de l’instruction secondaire ne soient fermées à aucun des élèves d’élite qui se produisent dans les établissements primaires.
« Toutes les mesures nécessaires à cet égard seront prises. — C’est dans les écoles supérieures seulement que le principe de la spécialité, prudemment préparé dans les autres, doit se dessiner tout à fait. L’accès aux leçons de ces écoles ne peut être défendu à personne ; mais c’est en vue des élèves dignes de servir aux intérêts généraux qu’elles doivent être instituées. Il n’y a que la décision des examens qui puisse y conférer tous les droits. »
F. Une Ecole d’administration
Un décret du 8 mars 1848 annonce qu’une :
« Ecole d’administration, destinée au recrutement des diverses branches d’administration dépourvues jusqu’à présent d’écoles préparatoires, sera établie sur des bases analogues à celles de l’Ecole polytechnique ».
Pour Carnot, il s’agit de créer un foyer capable de « rayonner » sur toute la France « la lumière républicaine », en promouvant les valeurs philosophiques des droits de l’homme. Ce n’est pas au privé mais bien à l’État d’établir « une pépinière pour les services publics » en formant des administrateurs dévoués corps et âme à l’intérêt général.
Faute de subventions suffisantes, l’école est installée dans un bâtiment délabré, l’ancien Collège du Plessis (rue Saint-Jean-de-Beauvais, c’est-à-dire là où son père avait fait installer la l’école pilote pour l’enseignement mutuel !), et le ministère apportera les chaises ; les élèves furent tenus de suivre les cours du Collège de France, répétés ensuite et commentés par des maîtres de conférences. Les programmes sont éclectiques : à côté de l’enseignement professionnel, une « large part est faite aux études scientifiques, mais aussi littéraires qui meublent l’intelligence et lui donnent de l’ampleur ».
Contrairement à l’ENA de nos jours, on y enseigne non pas le « management » et la statistique, mais l’architecture, le dessin, l’histoire de l’art et les religions orientales. Prise dans les turbulences politiques, cette école ne survécut pas au ministre qui l’avait fondée mais fera date.
G. Haute Commission des études scientifiques et littéraires
En vue de la préparation d’une nouvelle loi sur l’instruction primaire, et de la recherche des solutions à apporter aux questions nouvelles qui surgissaient, Carnot institua une Haute Commission des études scientifiques et littéraires, dont la présidence fut donnée à Jean Reynaud, et où il fit entrer « les hommes les plus notables et les plus amis du progrès dans les sciences, dans les lettres, dans l’administration, et surtout dans l’enseignement ».
Parmi les noms des 45 membres de cette Commission, notons ceux du chansonnier Pierre-Jean de Béranger, de Boussingault, d’Henri Martin, de Poncelet, d’Edgar Quinet et de Charles Renouvier.
H. Education pour tous, tout au long de la vie
Sur le plan de l’instruction, en 1848, la situation reste désastreuse. Sur 300 000 conscrits, plus de 112 000 ne savent ni lire, ni écrire. Si l’on prend les plus âgés, la proportion est encore supérieure à ce tiers. D’où l’arrêté du 8 juin, qui institua à Paris des lectures publiques du soir, « destinées à populariser la connaissance des chefs-d’œuvre de notre littérature nationale ». Elles devaient avoir lieu deux fois par semaine, « dans différents locaux situés, autant que possible, au sein des quartiers les plus populeux de Paris ».
Les paysans, soit les deux tiers de la population, qui ne bénéficient d’aucune structure associative et sont éloignés des villes et des écoles, sont la cible prioritaire du ministre. Ce sont eux qu’il faut prioritairement convertir par la lecture, clé de l’instruction et de l’émancipation, et mener jusqu’aux maisons d’école :
« Les maîtres, devenus bibliothécaires leur feront la lecture, à haute et intelligible voix, pourront les instruire, les intéresser et (…) les passionner pour la vie politique du pays. Les enseignants en l’état de leurs disponibilités prodigueront des enseignements généraux pour l’état agricole et des lectures à la maison d’école ou à la mairie, pour l’instruction civique et même la littérature. »
I. Bibliothèques « circulantes »
En partant du constat que « nous manquons de livres de lecture pour le peuple comme il y en a ailleurs », le ministre met sur pied un vaste réseau public de bibliothèques communales de toutes tailles. Il charge l’éditeur Paulin de rassembler des collections de livres les plus variés possible dans chaque quartier des villes et chaque canton rural pour les mettre gratuitement à la disposition du peuple. Il crée également toute une gamme d’établissements complémentaires comme les bibliothèques spéciales près des facultés pour mettre le savoir le plus savant à la disposition du plus grand nombre. Sur une idée de Jules Simon, il entend créer des bibliothèques populaires et rurales qu’il rebaptise « collections circulantes » avec des enseignants qui « parcourraient les petits villages et porteraient aux enfants isolés l’instruction qu’ils ne pourraient trouver ailleurs ». Les « bibliothécaires missionnaires » de ces établissements itinérants seront des « instituteurs conservateurs de la petite bibliothèque populaire », qui guideront le public, contrôleront les prêts et pourront lire à la demande.
C’est dans cette optique bibliophile qu’il faut replacer la création, au printemps 1848, d’un Service officiel des lectures publiques du soir. L’objectif est toujours le même : donner le meilleur au peuple. C’est ce qu’explique Émile Deschanel : « Le ministre de la République voulut que le peuple souverain eût, lui aussi, ses lecteurs et professeurs. » Ce service, aussi politique que moral, rappelle les séances organisées par les philanthropes ou les saint-simoniens, censées remplacer les cabarets et les bals trop arrosés. Elles permettront à l’ouvrier (et plus tard au paysan) fatigué « du labeur quotidien de trouver un asile commode, un plaisir qui porterait avec lui l’instruction, de bons conseils et la familiarité des grands esprits de notre race ».
Il s’agit de vulgariser les textes patrimoniaux et, si besoin, de les commenter pour « instruire noblement les auditeurs en les amusant », raconte l’ancien saint-simonien Sainte-Beuve. Le programme de ces lectures doit donc être varié pour ne point lasser. Les grands classiques comme Corneille et Molière alternent avec l’Histoire à la Michelet qui a une fonction civique évidente, et des comédies ou des chansons comme celles de Béranger.
Les premières séances parisiennes devant des ouvriers et des artisans pleins de respects sont un succès « dans un silence attentif où les moindres impressions se peignent sur les visages ». Le ministre relève des réactions amusées aux comédies, patriotes à l’évocation des grandes batailles comme Crécy, critiques devant un style ampoulé et déroutées devant les Fables de la Fontaine. Dans cette logique le ministère envisage la création d’une Athénée libre sur les modèles allemand et américain. Il s’agit de réunir quelques professeurs dans un amphithéâtre ou dans d’anciennes salles de spectacles pour donner un enseignement libre et gratuit, ouvert à tous et délivré par « des pionniers dans des domaines encore inexplorés » des sciences et des techniques.
J. Beaux-Arts, hygiène et gymnastique au programme
Dans l’enseignement, outre des « éléments d’histoire et de géographie nationale », il ajoute le français, le droit public et l’hygiène, sans oublier la gymnastique pour améliorer la santé des plus démunis. Il s’agit là de la version pour adulte de ce que l’école nouvelle et l’instruction républicaine proposeront à tous les enfants de France. Ces cours doivent même mettre l’art à la portée de tous à travers la promotion du patrimoine : « Existe-t-il moyen plus puissant d’éducation populaire ? », dit-il en parlant de l’art en général et des Beaux-Arts en particulier.
Concrètement, le 29 mars, le ministre fonde avec treize professeurs l’Association Philotechnique destinée à donner aux ouvriers les connaissances professionnelles et techniques nécessaires aux métiers modernes.
L’Association s’accorde sur des cours de géométrie, de grammaire, d’algèbre, de mécanique et de dessin délivrés dans les salles de la Halle aux draps, puis à l’école Turgot. Les professeurs de lycées parisiens sont les premiers sollicités par l’Association pour compléter la formation en Histoire et en Droit.
L’expérience démarre début avril avec 150 ouvriers teinturiers du faubourg Saint-Marcel qui s’initient aux connaissances scientifiques dans l’amphithéâtre de l’Ecole de pharmacie. Rapidement, cet enseignement professionnel s’étend en province, comme à Orléans, avant de disparaître dans le tumulte de Juin.
Carnot veut aller plus loin et songe à des « clubs-écoles » sur le modèle écossais des « Mécanic-institutions », c’est-à-dire des salles de conférences, des bibliothèques et des cours permanents pour les ouvriers dans des bâtiments jouxtant les usines. Tenu au courant des travaux de Braille, il s’intéresse aussi aux sourds et aux aveugles, pour lesquels il compte multiplier les institutions spécialisées dépendant de son ministère, et non plus de l’Intérieur.
K. Concorde citoyenne
Pour couronner cette démocratisation, Carnot songe à l’une des méthodes les plus originales de la Révolution : la pédagogie civique par les fêtes publiques.
Fin février, il a déjà expérimenté leurs vertus citoyennes en participant à la plantation d’un arbre de la Liberté, pratique rituelle en 1848, dans les jardins de Saint-Nicolas à Paris. Dans cet établissement spécialisé dans l’éducation des enfants d’ouvriers, la cérémonie est placée sous le signe des Trois Couleurs. Le clergé bénit l’arbre comme le veut l’usage, en présence du maire de l’arrondissement. Le discours du ministre est édifiant : « L’arbre que vous plantez est jeune comme la République elle-même (…) Il étendra sur vous ses rameaux, de même que la République étendra sur la France les bienfaits de l’Instruction populaire. (…) Les bons écoliers deviennent les bons citoyens. »
Le ministre de l’Instruction a été aussi impressionné par la « Fête de la concorde » du 21 mars, entre la Bastille et le Champ de Mars, avec ses défilés, sa statuaire civique, ses revues d’œuvres industrielles, ses hymnes à la République et son enthousiasme réformateur. Cette pédagogie civique lui a semblé efficace grâce à sa représentation symbolique du régime et sa « foule d’hommes obéissant à une inspiration commune ».
17. Conclusion
Face à Carnot, la riposte de l’oligarchie est foudroyante. Figure du « parti de l’ordre », Adolphe Thiers, en 1848, n’hésite pas à déclarer : « Je demande que l’action du curé soit forte, beaucoup plus forte qu’elle ne l’est, parce que je compte beaucoup sur lui pour propager cette bonne philosophie qui apprend à l’homme qu’il est ici pour souffrir. »
Dès le 10 décembre 1848, date de l’élection de Louis Napoléon Bonaparte à la présidence de la République, le pouvoir s’appuie sur des forces issues du clergé et d’une droite rétrograde.
Cédant aux congrégations, il fait voter deux lois hypothéquant fortement et durablement les chances de réussite de l’école publique: la loi Parieu du 11 janvier 1850 et la loi Falloux du 15 mars 1850.
La première poursuit les enseignants restés fidèles à l’esprit de Carnot (4000 instituteurs seront révoqués). La seconde accentue les prérogatives de l’Eglise en matière d’enseignement et favorise le développement de l’enseignement congrégationiste.
En guise de conclusion, voici celle de Rémi Dalisson dont nous recommandons fortement la magnifique biographie sur Hippolyte Carnot :
« Sa pratique, ce sont ses textes législatifs sur l’instruction, y compris les programmes scolaires, aussi variés que novateurs, comme ceux de son École d’administration ou de ‘l’école maternelle’. Ils font de Carnot l’incontestable précurseur de Jules Ferry et du projet éducatif et civique de la Troisième République. Ses lois et décrets veulent (…) émanciper les enfants et en faire des citoyens actifs et critiques dans une démocratie apaisée, modérée et socialement fluide, sous l’égide d’instituteurs restaurés, symboles des temps nouveaux.
« Sa pratique, ce sont ses combats et ses engagements, et d’abord dans l’opposition à laquelle il appartient longtemps. Retenons ses écrits précoces contre la peine de mort, sa participation aux événements de 1830, son rôle en 1848 à l’Assemblée, son combat pour les instituteurs pour lesquels il se dépense sans compter et son exil volontaire. (…)
« Dans un siècle écrasé par le souvenir de deux guerres mondiales, par l’effacement de la République sous Vichy puis par la décolonisation et la chute du communisme, l’oubli de 1848 et de ses espoirs sociaux et éducatifs en dit long sur nos structures mentales et notre mémoire. Cette sorte d’amnésie, qui n’empêche d’ailleurs pas la sacralisation, souvent anachronique, du corpus républicain, a fait tomber Hippolyte Carnot et l’ensemble du XIXe siècle dans un bien triste oubli. La période n’évoque plus grand-chose, hormis quelques coups de projecteurs ponctuels. Elle est même à présent sacrifiée dans l’enseignement, comme si seul le XXe siècle était digne d’étude.
« A l’heure où le modèle scolaire français est remis en cause, où l’école républicaine doute de ses missions, où la laïcité est elle aussi discutée et où les enseignants se sentent abandonnés, il est plus que jamais nécessaire de connaître les racines d’un système éducatif intimement lié au régime républicain. Pour cela, à l’aube du XXIe siècle, la réévaluation de la vie et de l’œuvre d’Hippolyte Carnot, défenseur acharné de la liberté, de l’école, de Clio et de la République peut poser les bases d’une réflexion renouvelée et civique sur la chose scolaire ».
18. Annexe
Liste de principaux ouvrages d’Hippolyte Carnot:
- Gunima, nouvelle africaine du XVIIIe siècle, (Paris, Barba, 1824).
- Le Gymnase, recueil de morale et de littérature (Paris, Balzac, 1828).
- Doctrine de Saint-Simon (Bruxelles, Hauman, 1831).
- Mémoires de Grégoire, Évêque constitutionnel de Blois (Paris, Dupont, 6 vol., 1837-1845).
- Quelques réflexions sur la domesticité (Paris, Henry, 1838).
- Rapport sur la législation qui règle dans quelques états d’Allemagne les conditions de travail des jeunes ouvriers (Paris, Imp. Royale, 1840).
- Mémoires de Barère de Vieuzac (Paris, Labitte, 4 volumes, 1842-1844).
- L’Allemagne avant l’invasion française (Fragments, Paris, Revue indépendante, 1842).
- L’Allemagne pendant la Révolution (Fragments, Paris, Revue indépendante, 1843).
- Les Esclaves noirs (Paris, Magasin pittoresque, 1844).
- De l’esclavage colonial (Paris, Revue indépendante, 1845).
- Les Radicaux et la Charte, (Paris, Pagnerre, 1847).
- Le Ministère de l’Instruction Publique et des Cultes, 24 février-5 juillet 1848 (Paris, Pagnerre, 1848).
- Éducation républicaine, (Paris, Prost, 2 vol, 1849).
- L’insurrection littéraire en Allemagne (Fragments, Paris, Liberté de penser, 1848).
- Le Mémorial de 1848, (Paris, Revue indépendante, n.p. 1849).
- Doctrine saint simonienne (Paris, Librairie nouvelle, 1854).
- Mémoires sur Lazare Carnot par son fils (Paris, Pagnerre, 1861-63, réed. en 1893 et 1907, Hachette).
- Œuvres de Saint-Simon par Enfantin précédées de deux notices historiques par H. Carnot (Paris, Dentu, 1865).
- La Révolution française, résumé historique (2 vol., Paris, Dubuisson et Pagnerre, 1867).
- L’Instruction populaire en France (Paris, Degorce-Cadot, 1869).
- Trois discours sur l’instruction publique, (Paris, Degorce-Cadot, 1869).
- Cours de l’association philotechnique pour l’instruction gratuite des adultes (Paris, Parent, 1872).
- Ce que serait un nouvel Empire (Paris, Société du patriote, Bibliothèque utile, 1874).
- Lazare Hoche, général républicain (Paris, Société du patriote, Bibliothèque utile, 1874).
- D’une École d’Administration (Versailles, Aubert, 1878) ;
- Henri Grégoire, évêque républicain (Paris, Libraire des publications populaires, 1882).
- La Révolution française (Paris, Boulanger, 1888).
- Les premiers échos de la Révolution française au-delà du Rhin (Paris, Picard, 1888)
19. Quelques ouvrages et articles consultés:
- Rémi Dalisson, Hippolyte Carnot, la liberté, l’école et la République, CNRS Editions, Paris 2011.
- Paul Carnot, Hippolyte Carnot et le ministère de l’Instruction publique de la IIe République, PUF, Paris, 1948.
- Nicolas de Condorcet: Cinq mémoires sur l’Instruction publique
- Jacques Cheminade, Lazare Carnot, l’organisateur de la victoire:
- Jacques Cheminade, L’exemplarité de l’œuvre d’Henri Grégoire et de Lazare Carnot, 2005.
- Jacques Cheminade, Dino di Paoli et Claude Albert, L’Ecole polytechnique et la science de l’éducation républicaine, Campaigner publications, Paris, 1980.
- Site internet: Le temps des instituteurs;
- Karel Vereycken, La statue de Gutenberg à Strasbourg, le combat républicain de David d’Angers, juillet 2023.
- José Manuel Menudo, Une apologie des physiocrates par Condorcet, Dixhuitième siècle N° 46, pp 657 à 672.
- Nicolas de Condorcet, De l’influence de la révolution d’Amérique sur l’Europe (extraits):
- Manuel Albertone, Condorcet, Jefferson et l’Amérique:
- Dorette Huggins, John Adams et ses réflexions sur Condorcet:
- Karel Vereycken, L’enseignement mutuel, curiosité historique ou piste d’avenir?, août 2023.
- Corinne Doria, L’éducation morale dans les projets de loi sur l’instruction publique pendant la Révolution : un miroir des antinomies des Lumières, La Révolution française N°4/2013.
- Elisabeth et Robert Badinter, Condorcet, un intellectuel en Politique, Fayard, 1988.