#miollis

[psalm22-6]

Source: The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 June 1864

The readers of Victor Hugo's last romance, Les Miserables — and they are many, and the work, with all its faults, is a striking one — can hardly fail to have been impressed by the portrait of the lowly, self-denying Bishop of D— ; the 'bishop' to whom his affectionate flock could find, in one of his own baptismal names, so appropriate an epithet, that he is represented as having been familiarly known amongst them as Monseigneur Bien-venu — Monseigneur Welcome. To many, and to English readers especially, the character may appear forced and fanciful; and yet, allowing for the not unnatural exaggeration of a novelist, exaggeration which has unfortunately a tendency to throw upon an otherwise charming character on air of ridicule, the portrait of Monseigneur Myriel is no unfaithful sketch of the life and character of the prelate who for the first quarter of the present century (from 1806 to 1838) adorned the episcopal throne of Digne, in the south of France. Those who have had the courage to wade through the formidable array of volumes of an author of undoubted talent, but of extravagance of style and imagination unbounded — an author who mingles in one marvellous amalgam the true and the false, good and evil, the pathetic and the horrible — with a bad taste disconcerting to those most disposed to admire his real ability; will perhaps gladly learn something more of the true history of the saintly bishop whom Monsieur Victor Hugo has brought before us as fulfilling so touching, but at the same time so singular a part.

There is no concealment about the matter. The prelate introduced by our author to serve as the framework for his socialistic and pantheistic theories, and called by him Monseigneur Charles François Bienvenu Myriel, Bishop of D— , is none other than the late Charles François Melchior Bienvenu Miollis.Bishop of Digne. The most cursory comparison of the facts of the venerable prelate's life with the portrait drawn by the novelist is sufficient to establish this. Born at Aix, in Provence, in the year 1753, of pious parents, his father being a zealous and conscientious magistrate, he was ordained priest by the Bishop of Carpentras, in the year 1777, and sent forthwith to fulfill the functions of the priesthood at Brignolles. The strange story of his marriage, and of his worldly and dissipated life is due entirely to the vivid imagination of the novelist, and is a libel upon the character of this good man, who from childhood manifested the most earnest piety; piety which we may well believe to have been fostered by that pure home life to which his father had accustomed him, and of which that father had set the best example, by the praiseworthy practice of daily family prayer, and of other works of virtue and religion. At the epoch of the Revolution, Mons. Miollis, who was conscientiously unable to take the oath required of the clergy by the Revolutionary Government, appears to have emigrated to Rome, and, during his residence in that city, to have devoted himself to researches into the history and antiquities of the Christian metropolis. Eleven manuscript volumes remain to attest his industry, and contain the most interesting results of his enquiries. Upon his return to France, he became attached, in the capacity of vicaire (curate), to the parish of Saint Saviour, at Aix, where he had long been known for his devotion to works of charity, and his zeal for the instruction of the young in the principles of Christianity. It was with regret that, in 1894, he left this modest post, to return to his former cure and it was at Brignolles that, two years afterwards, the episcopate, literally, sought him out. Far from seeking this promotion, he never ceased to reproach himself with having allowed a burden, which he esteemed beyond his powers, to be laid upon him nor was he fully reassured on this point till after he had completely freed himself from the yoke. When the Emperor Napoleon came to a rupture with Pope Pius VII, Monseigneur de Miollis made on concealment of his sentiments. Summoned to the Council of 1811, with his colleagues, his bearing was firm and honourable. The following anecdote is wonderfully characteristic of the man. The Emperor, having had with him a long private interview with the object of gaining over the Bishop to his own views, the prelate replied, with deep respect but perfect firmness, "Sire, It is my, rule and practice to come to no decision in matters of moment without taking counsel of the Holy Spirit. Allow me time." The following day, the Emperor again accosting him, as follows: " Well, Monsieur, and what says the Holy Spirit ?" "Sire," replied the Bishop of Digne, "not a word of what your Majesty was pleased to say to me yesterday." When the Emperor, on his return from Elba, passed through the city of Digne, the Bishop, insensible alike to fear and favour, remained at home in his palace. The Emperor, respecting the noble independency of the Prelate, continued his course, the course which, though he knew it not, was so soon to terminate on the field of Waterloo.

In the early years of his episcopate, the diocese of Digne comprehended the department of the Upper and Lower Alps, a sufficiently extended district. Moreover, during the prolonged vacancy of the Archbishopric of Aix it fell to the lot of Monseigneur Miollis to discharge, in addition, the episcopal functions in the dioceses; so that he had not only to traverse the rude mountains, intersected by torrents, and bordered by precipices, and for the most part trackless, of the Alpine districts, which he was accustomed to do either in a light car, or mounted modestly, like our Saviour, upon an ass, or even on foot, staff in hand; but it became necessary for him to take long journeys, even to the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, for the purpose of preaching and confirming; the consecration of churches, and the visitation of schools, hospitals, and the poor — duties, which he performed with indefatigable zeal. At last, in 1838, overcome by age and the laborious nature of his duties, he resigned the see, and retiring to the house of a married sister, in Aix, devoted himself to the preparation for death, and for the account which he would soon have to render of his long administration. During the five years thus spent, he was the admiration of the whole place, as well on account of his profound humility as for the incomparable patience with which he endured the pains and infirmities of old age, supported by an union with God so close, so constant that nothing could henceforth disturb him. On the 27th June, 1843, the venerable Monseigneur de Miollis slept the sleep of the just, at the age of ninety years and nine months; leaving to his clergy and his flock, together with the reputation of his lofty and beautiful holiness, the legacy of the inextinguishable memory of his works of piety and charity His funeral was a veritable triumph. The city of Digne, in the cathedral of which, by his own desire he was interred, was adorned as for a festival, and in place of the mourning and sadness which are the usual accompaniments of such scenes, there was a certain subdued and holy joy, a sort of spontaneous and popular ovation as to a saint already glorified. [. . .] The readers of Les Miserables, or of this brief sketch, may satisfy any interest in the life of the subject of these notes which may have been excited in them by reference to the Life of Monseigneur Miollis, by L'Abbé Bondil; an 8vo. of something under 300 pages, published at Paris (Repos. Rue Bonaparte) a year or two ago, and costing something less than half-a-crown. To those who have derived their notions of the Bishop solely from Monsieur Hugo, the perusal of his life may be recommended almost as a matter of duty, inasmuch as they will thereby learn that all the good attributed by the novelist to his priestly hero falls short of reality; while certain false ideas to which the romance can hardly fail to have given rise will be found to have no place in the reality. To all, the memoir referred to may be suggested as an interesting and well written account of one whom the staunchest "Protestant " will allow to have been a "good and faithful servant" of his Lord. L.H.R.

[lesmisscraper]

The Actual Model of Myriel, Bishop Bienvenu de Miollis.

[lyrics365]

夏の透明猶予

うざいくらいの晴天に 目を細めてしまう 書かされた職業欄 オトナとかできないよ バケツに溜まった感情は 涙だけじゃなくて 不安、焦りと成長痛 抱きしめてよ 投げ出したくなった まわりの目ばっか気にしていた 踏み出せないで終わってしまう 執行猶予みたいじゃんか 透明な未来へせーので 「あぁ、つまんねーなぁ！」 まだ大丈夫って思い込む 夏空の下 「したいことなんてない」 (それ正解) 「夢を持っていなさい」 (それ不正解) 私はずっ��笑えてる 夏は終わらない 言葉にできない想いが増える ���しさ、気遣い あと恋とか イヤホンつけたまま数分間 眺め続けてた車窓(まど)みたいな 青いフィルターで世界と見つめ合って 少し寂しくなる 叶わぬ夢たちが そこら中寝転んで泣いている 不完全な悔しさって どこにぶつければいいんでしょうか 「気にしてない」 って自分に唱え続けたら いつの間にか見失った 本当の私…

[jelepermets]

Les Mis Letters: 1.1.1

I want to start by shouting out Guy Rosa and Nicole Savy for their amazing footnotes, and actually highlight part of their footnote for the first chapter:

La dernière phrase du chapitre suivant dénonce ironiquement l'illusion réaliste autent qu'elle la fortifie ... le portrait relève d'une authenticité qui transgresse l'exactitude.

The last sentence of the next chapter both undermines and fortifies the illusion of realism [...] the portrait reveals an authenticity which supersedes an exact replica.

This is talking about how M Myriel is taken from the figure of Charles-Francois Bievenu de Miollis (1753 - 1843). In basing it off a real person, Hugo points to a very concrete example of his ideals for a clergyman. Yet, by taking artistic liberty, the ideas and themes of the novel are freed from a debt to authenticity and through anachronism Hugo's points about M Myriel are strengthened. Myriel must partially be fantasy, because in many ways he is distinct from the vast majority, if not the entirety, of the Catholic church.

But the footnotes go further. Zooming out, Savy and Rosa point out that this meshing of reality and principle. Les Mis is "occupé non pas à dire le réel mais à l'accomplir ... la rèalité n'est que la réalité: l'idéal est la vérité" [is occupied not just in depiction but in accomplishment [...] reality is only reality: the ideal is the truth]. I don't have much to add on except a rousing yes but I really do think this is something to keep in mind throughout the book.

This also makes me think about how Hugo frames what we are supposed to know about M Myriel. We don't know how he became a priest, all biographical information is the result of whispers and perhaps suspect. It's possible that everything we know about M Myriel besides his actions is fiction. And I think this is interesting because it draws attention to not only the mythologizing of the good (which both the general population and the author himself do in M Myriel's case), but also in the fact that M Myriel's backstory both does and does not matter.

After all, what M Myriel does in story is most important, no? And yet, why is it necessary for the villagers to make up this story abotu a dissipated noble who then became essentially a living saint? What does this say about narratives of redemption? About narratives of goodness, class, rank? I don't have an answer for these questions per se, but I think they're interesting to ponder.

And that's it for now.

[zmywarkastopa]

Is there any reason why the place where Myriel was a bishop i redacted? Im asking because in my physical copy it clearly states that this was Digne (today Digne-Les-Bain). Also from 1805 to 1838 François-Melchior-Charles-Bienvenu de Miollis was a bishop there so our dear friend Charles-François-Bienvenu Myriel is a very obvious nod to him.

[cliozaur]

It’s a miracle of literature: all the characters who died at the end of the book can be resurrected the very next day if you start reading anew! Hello, my dears!

Hugo commences by introducing the most crucial and influential figure of the Brick—Bishop Myriel with his unexpected clerical career. When I was a child, before reading Les Misérables for the first time, I read a book about real stories behind famous novels. Among them was the tale of a priest trusting a convict, which struck Hugo so much that he made it the foundation for his book’s plot. (But as far as I understand, it was not a part of the life-story of Bienvenu de Miollis—a man who inspired the character of Bishop Myriel.)

We are also introduced to two delightful female characters: Mlle Baptistine and Mme Magloire. I adore Hugo’s elderly women characters!

Can anyone explain why Hapgood changed Digne with mysterious D___? Did “Digne” sound offensive to late nineteenth-century American readers?

[josefavomjaaga]

Junot in Eugène's correspondence of 1813

Just to add to the confusion about Junot’s sojourn in Illyria, I’ve put together a list of excerpts that I could find at first glance about Junot in volume 9 of the DuCasse edition of Eugène’s correspondence. It is quite likely that some letters are missing, DuCasse only publishing what he considered worthy of publication.

For context: Eugène was technically only viceroy of Italy but factually control center for anything connected to the Italian peninsula, Illyria and the Ionian islands, often tasked with support (and soon defense) and communication. He had, however, left for the Russian campaign in mid-1812 and only returned back to Milan on 18 May 1813 (to a complete economical breakdown and the bankrupcy of several Milanese banks due to Napoleon’s »France first!« policy, btw).

Junot, as to him, according to Paul Pisani’s book about Dalmatia, reached Trieste on 25 May 1813 (not sure if this is correct, see below), coming from France where he had been since February (?), following the Russian campaign.

Eugène to Napoleon, Milan, 19 May 1813 […] The news from Illyria is that the Duke of Abrantès is touring the Dalmatian coast.

If Eugène, on the second day of his return home, already has news about Junot in Illyria, the latter must have been in the region for some time before 25 May. Maybe Pisani only meant his official entry into Trieste.

Eugène to Napoleon, Milan, 14 June 1813 [Listing up preparations and fortifications in Italy, then in the provinces not directly under his command] […] I have written to the Duke of Abrantès about the position of Zara and Raguse: I am also writing to him to form some supplies around the points of Laybach to nourish the troops due to assemble there. […] I intend to create two corps for the observation army on 1 July [...]. One of the two corps will be commanded by General Grenier, and, as I think that neither General Miollis, given his age, nor the Duc d'Abrantès, given the state of his health, are suitable for the other corps, I would ask Your Majesty for a general officer, like General Grouchy, if it is true that he is currently unemployed.

This is Eugène for the first time addressing the elephant in the room: Illyria is under command of Junot, and Junot is not fit to command an army, not even an army corps anymore.

Same date, different letter: Sire, I have the honour of reporting to Your Majesty that the latest reports from the sea announce the 4th battalion of the 4th Light Infantry, which I am sending to Dalmatia to relieve the two battalions of the 5th Light Infantry, had happily landed at Trieste. Today's telegraphs from Venice report that a ship and a corvette, a second ship and a frigate are cruising at the tip of Istria. 4 or 5 boats from the latter vessels appeared three days ago in front of Fiume, where they disembarked and caused some disorder in town. I have not yet received a report from the Duke of Abrantès, who, according to what I have just learned, is settling in Gorizia on account of his health, in other words, at one of the farthest ends of his government. I am very upset that Your Majesty has not placed someone in that country who would not cause General Bertrand to be missed as much.

General Bertrand of course being Junot’s predecessor as governor of Illyria. - This letter was the main reason why I wanted to make this post, in particular the last sentence. Eugène actually writes »Je suis faché que Votre Majesté...«., and for Eugène, that’s quite a strong wording. In fact, it’s precisely the wording Napoleon usually uses if he wants to express his strong displeasure at something (only topped by »je suis mécontent«). Eugène daring to openly critisize Napoleon’s decision is highly unusal for him.

But I get his frustration. He was left pretty much alone with everything concerning Italy, be it politics or military, and could not even rely on the governor of the most vulnerable province because Napoleon had decided to put somebody in charge there who was clearly incapable of doing his job.

Which makes me wonder why Napoleon had sent Junot to Illyria in the first place. Sure, maybe he had thought Junot would have nothing but representative duties there, maybe he really had not suspected Austria would change sides. Which would be stupid because his generals in charge of the remnants of the Grande Armée had informed him of Austria’s wavering attitude since at least March 1813, Poniatowsi probably earlier. But as soon as Napoleon realized there was a chance of Austria going to war – and he had realized by this time, hence his insistence Eugène organise the defense of Illyria – it was essential to replace Junot with somebody else.

Why didn’t he do it? Frankly, I feel like he didn’t care. Defending Italy was Eugène’s job, after all. And Napoleon needed all good generals and all good troops in Germany. Same attitude as in Spain.

But in the next letter, Junot for the first time gives a sign of life:

Eugène to Napoleon, Milan, 22 June 1813 […] The Duke of Abrantès answers me that he has taken all the measures to complete the supply of Raguse and Zara, and that he hopes that it will be done very shortly. I recommended that he take preparatory measures to ensure the subsistence of the troops who might perhaps gather towards Laybach.

And some more on the next day, in the next letter:

Eugène to Napoleon, Milan, 23 June 1813 […] I have the honour of sending to Your Majesty several reports from the Duke of Abrantès concerning the presence of the enemy in the Illyrian area and the two small landings they have made near Ragusa and in Istria.

So apparently Junot (or somebody acting for him) was still able to put together reports at this point.

Eugène to Napoleon, Milan, 27 June 1813 Sire, I had the honour of writing to Your Majesty to ask for General Grouchy for one of the lieutenancies of the army of Italy. In the event that Your Majesty does not deem it appropriate to grant me this, I will ask him for General Molitor to command the 2nd lieutenancy. I have already served with this general and I have nothing but praise for him. Your Majesty appears to be considering General Miollis and the Duc d'Abrantès; but I dare to assure you that neither of them is suitable for this command, one because of his age, the other because of his health, given the qualities necessary to train young troops and command them.

Eugène still really fearing Napoleon might put Junot in charge of an army at this point. Also, Napoleon still not having answered Eugène's request from two weeks ago, while time was pressing, shows how much interest he had in events in Italy.

Eugène to Napoleon, Milan, 29 June 1813 […] I report to Your Majesty that on the 24th of this month the enemy made a small landing in Istria near Pola, of approximately 5 to 600 men. He ransacked several houses and particularly the public administrations and took several civil servants with him. I have not yet received detailed reports of this fact from the Duke of Abrantès.

And now the shit hits the fan:

Eugène to Napoleon, Monza, 30 June 1813 Sire, I have the honour of reporting to Your Majesty that I received this morning the two letters that I enclose here as originals. The private information I received concurs with these two reports. I think that it is becoming very urgent, for Your Majesty's service, to appoint a good general officer to fulfil the functions of Governor of Illyria. The Duc d'Abrantès is definitely no longer good for anything, and I think that Your Majesty can authorise him to return to France to look after his health. However, as it was my duty to provide for the most urgent matters, I immediately sent Adjutant Commandant Lecat to Illyria to fulfil the duties of Chief of Staff. He is a very calm and reliable officer, who is used to dealing with details and who will surely carry out the orders he receives.

So this is the point when Junot’s subordinates take the – rather extraordinary – step to write to the next guy up the line they could find, i.e. Eugène, to please please please do something. The something then being Eugène sending somebody who can do Junot’s job, without officially replacing him.

Then we have a brief and rather curious letter from Napoleon, who at this point cannot yet have received Eugène’s last one about Junot needing to be replaced:

Napoleon to Eugène, Dresden, 1st July 1813 My son, I am sending you a letter from the Duke of Abrantès. As you have command of Illyria, I assume that you are providing for the defence of this country.

I really wish there was more information to this. (Does somebody happen to have the 1813 volume of the new Correspondance Générale)? Had Junot complained to Napoleon about a lack of help coming from Italy? Or had he accidentally/on purpose sent reports he should have sent to Eugène to Napoleon directly instead? Some later remarks make me suspect that.

Eugène to Napoleon, Monza, 2 July 1813 I also have the honour of sending Your Majesty the report made to me by the colonel of the gendarmerie of Illyria on the continuing illness of the Duc d'Abrantès. I have written to the Intendant General of the Illyrian provinces asking him to give all his care to the Governor General, to have him carefully guarded at home if his state of insanity continues, and that, if this state causes the slightest scandal, he should send him to France to take care of his health.

Apparently Eugène has received additional information and realizes that it’s become necessary to lock Junot away from the public.

Eugène to Napoleon, Padua, 5 July 1813 Sire, I have the honour of sending word to Your Majesty that a secretary of the Duke of Abrantès is arriving at this moment to tell me verbally, on behalf of the Duke, that the English have landed at Fiume.

This would be the landing mentioned in Eugène’s letter of 14 June, presumably? Or a second one? In any case, sending a secretary all the way to meet Eugène in Italy instead of using the official channels is probably another sign of Junot loosing his cognitive capabilities.

In the meantime, in Germany, Napoleon gets the news:

Napoleon to Eugène, Dresden, 6 July 1813 My son, I have received your dispatch of 1 July with the letter from the consul of Trieste of 28 June. After an event like this, there is not a moment to lose in ordering the Duc d'Abrantès to go home to Burgundy. The administration will pass into the hands of the intendant. You can give this mission to one of your aides-de-camp, who will report to you on everything and submit anything important to your decision. Show this unfortunate man all the kindness his position requires; but remove him quickly from a country where he is a distressing sight.

And because on second thought it probably dawned on him that this situation was, in the end, his own fault for sending Junot to such an important post in the first place, he firmly puts the blame elsewhere one day later:

Napoleon to Eugène, Dresden, 7 July 1813 My son, I am surprised that after everything the Duc d'Abrantès has done you have not sent him back to France. I can only express my displeasure that you have not put an end to such a distressing spectacle for French people in a foreign country. Send him away without delay and, as he must not go to Paris, where he is too well known, he must be taken to his father's home near Dijon. Write to the Minister of War requesting that his wife go to meet him and take him there.

Of course Eugène is not in any position to simply remove and reinstate the highest-ranking official of a French province, an official who has been installed by the emperor. I would not want to hear what Napoleon would have had to say if Eugène actually had done that. 😋 (Just ask Soult, he knows.)

Also, I’m not really very fond of Laure Junot. But she has all my sympathy here, together with Junot’s old father. - Tell his wife and his family to take care of the living carcass we depose on their doorsteps!

The main thing Napoleon seems concerned with about Junot's situation is appearance. Junot must not embarrass the empire. I feel like that's what pains me the most.

Eugène to Napoleon, Venise, 8 July 1813 Sire, I have received the reports on the situation in Illyria which the Duke of Abrantès sent to the Minister of War, and which Your Majesty has done me the honour of returning to me. I have the honour of reporting to Your Majesty of the measures which I considered necessary to take to ensure tranquillity there: […]

This I presume to be the reply to Napoleon’s brief letter from 1st July. (That concerns you, as you’re in charge of that Illyrian stuff.) Apparently, Junot had sent those reports about the situation in Illyria all the way to Clarke in Paris, instead of to Eugène (who repeatedly remarked that he was waiting for reports), and Clarke then had nothing better to do then send it onto Napoleon, who then sent them back to Eugène. It’s not as if these are pressing matters, after all.

Eugène to Napoleon, Udine, 11 July 1813 […] I saw the Duke of Abrantès myself yesterday in Treviso; I could ascertain that he had completely lost his mind and that he badly needed treatment for his health. I took the necessary steps to ensure that two officers and two attendants would bring him back to his family with all possible care, and I arranged for the appropriate funds to be handed over to him, as he was completely destitute in this respect.

Eugène to Napoleon, same date, second letter, apparently somewhat later I have just received the letter which Your Majesty wrote to me concerning the Duc d'Abrantès. Your Majesty will see from the letter I had the honour of writing to Him this morning that I had already taken the measures made necessary by the Duke's health, after ascertaining his situation for myself. I am carrying out the order given to me by Your Majesty concerning Illyria, by immediately sending General d'Anthouard, the only one of my aides-de-camp of a high rank who is currently available.

Which is probably something that should not be overlooked: All this took place during frantic action, and Eugène had to take care of Junot while being overburdened with tasks from reorganizing the military situation between Piedmont and Illyria, putting together an army corps at Laibach and evacuating all mercury and other resources from the Illyrian mines so invading Austrian forces would not get them (explicit order from His Majesty dearest). So loosing his only experienced aide-de-camp was probably not all too welcome at the moment.

Eugène to Napoleon, still 11 July 1813, third letter, in the evening […] Your Majesty will have seen from my previous reports that the Duke of Abrantès is already on his way to France. He is accompanied by two officers and several ordinances. I have given orders that he be handed over to his family in Burgundy, and I have written to the Duke of Feltre so that, in accordance with Your Majesty's intentions, his wife can come and meet him.

Oh, and because Napoleon alone is not enough, now minister of War Clarke also has something to say:

Clarke to Eugène, Paris, 19 July 1813 Monseigneur, the news I have received from Gorizia and the dispatches addressed by Your Imperial Highness to the Emperor, which His Majesty has sent me, have informed me of the unfortunate state in which the Duke of Abrantès finds himself and which no longer leaves him the freedom of mind necessary to maintain the command entrusted to him. The Emperor has deigned to inform me that he is going to provide for the replacement of the General Duc d'Abrantès, and to designate another general officer for this purpose; but, while waiting for His Majesty's choice to be known, it is important that the exercise of military authority not be interrupted in the present circumstances. I have no doubt that this matter has attracted the particular attention of Your Imperial Highness. He is asked to inform me of the arrangements he has ordered to temporarily ensure the service since the departure of the Duc d'Abrantès.

I think that’s 19th century French court speak for »Ey! I’m the minister of war here and nobody tells me about Junot going crazy? What’s going on? You better make sure there’s somebody in Illyria, boy, `cause god knows when Napoleon is going to do something about the situation!«

Napoleon actually did act rather quickly, as Eugène already informs his ADC d’Anthouard five days later about Fouché being the new governor of Illyria.

I believe that’s all mentions of Junot’s deteriorating health in Eugène’s corespondence. Maybe it’s useful to somebody.

[aki1975]

1769: Napoleon wurde geboren.

1786: Tod Friedrichs des Großen. Friedrich Wilhelm II König von Preußen. Friedrich der Große war die zentrale Figur des 18. Jahrhunderts, während Frankreich im vorhergehenden Jahrhundert und Frankreich und Napoleon in der späten Zeit des 18. Jahrhunderts und zu Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts die Hauptakteure waren. Seit dem 18. Jahrhundert war Frankreich das bevölkerungsreichste Land Europas, das politisch zentralisierteste und aus militärischer Sicht am besten organisierte Land. Das Heilige Römische Reich wurde im letzten Jahrhundert durch Preußen und mehrere deutsche Fürstentümer geschwächt.

1796: Italienische Feldzüge.

1797: Friedrich Wilhelm III König von Preußen. Vertrag von Campoformio. Frankreich sicherte sich die linken Rheinufergebiete, die später zu französischem Territorium wurden. Österreich erhielt Venedig, Istrien und Dalmatien. Damit endete die jahrhundertelange Unabhängigkeit der Republik Venedig.

1798: Der Papst Pius VI wurde auf Firenze verbannt.

1799: Napoleon Erster Konsul

1800: Die Österreicher wurden bei Marengo besiegt

1804: Napoleon Kaiser gekrönt und später König von Italien

1805: Ulm und später Austerlitz. Napoleon besiegte Österreich und Russland und zwang Kaiser Franz II., das Heilige Römische Reich aufzulösen: jetzt Franz I von Osterreich. Unter Napoleon und dem Rheinbund, nach dem Ende des Heiligen Römischen Reiches, profitierten die deutschen Länder von der Säkularisation und der Modernisierung durch den Code Napoléon, obwohl der Handel unter der Kontinentalsperre gegen England stark litt.

1806: Jena und Auerstedt. Diese Doppelschlacht führte zur vollständigen Niederlage Preußens und zur Besetzung Berlins. Die Rheinbund war ein Staatenbund deutscher Fürstentümer, der unter Napoleons Einfluss am 12. Juli 1806 gegründet wurde. Die Napoleonischen Kriege förderten den Geist der Unabhängigkeit in Deutschland. Die Reden an die deutsche Nation von Johann Gottlieb Fichte wurden zu einem Symbol dieser Bewegung.

1807: Die Schlacht bei Eylau zeigte Napoleons Verwundbarkeit, doch bei Friedland stellte er seine militärische Überlegenheit erneut unter Beweis. Der daraus resultierende Frieden von Tilsit zementierte Napoleons Macht in Europa und schwächte Preußen und Russland erheblich, auch wenn dieser Frieden nur von kurzer Dauer war. Königtum von Vestaflien.

1808: Papst Pius VII. wurde französischen Truppen unter dem Kommando von General Miollis gefangen genommen.

1809: Wagram. Die Schlacht bei Wagram fand am 5. und 6. Juli 1809 während des Fünften Koalitionskriegs zwischen Napoleon Bonaparte und der Habsburger Monarchie statt. Sie war eine der größten und bedeutendsten Schlachten der Napoleonischen Kriege und endete mit einem entscheidenden Sieg für die französischen Truppen. Der Papst wurde in Savona verhaftet.

1810: Ehe mit Maria Luisa von Habsburg.

1812: Russiache Feldzüge. Nach der Schlacht von Borodino und der Besetzung Moskaus im September musste Napoleon feststellen, dass die Russen nicht kapitulierten. Beim Fluss Beresina (im heutigen Belarus) wurde der Rückzug der Franzosen durch russische Truppenm blockiert.

1813: Leipzig. Führte zum Rückzug der französischen Truppen aus Deutschland und markierte den Beginn seines Endes.

1814: Napoleon blieb während der Hundert Tage auf der Insel Elba, bevor er nach Frankreich zurückkehrte.

1815: Waterloo. Die preußischen Soldaten unter dem Kommando von von Blücher spielten eine entscheidende Rolle in der Schlacht von Waterloo.

1821: Napoleon starb 1821 auf der Insel St. Helena. Obwohl Preußen durch Napoleon zunächst gedemütigt und geschwächt wurde, führte die Krise zu einer umfassenden Modernisierung des Staates. Die Preußischen Reformen legten den Grundstein für den späteren Aufstieg Preußens zur führenden Macht in Deutschland und zur Gründung des Deutschen Reiches im Jahr 1871.

1834: Trotz der politischen Restauration begann sich die Wirtschaft in Deutschland zu entwickeln. Der Handel wuchs, und es entstanden erste Industriezentren. Preußen führte den Zollverein ein, ein Wirtschaftsverband, der die Zölle zwischen den deutschen Staaten abschaffte und den Binnenhandel förderte. Diese Machtbalance zwischen Preußen und Österreich prägte die Politik des 19. Jahrhunderts.

1840: Friedrich Wilhelm IV König von Preußen.

[mali-umkin]

Mgr Miollis, who inspired the character of Mgr Myriel in Les Misérables, could soon be beatified. If only the Church took upon herself to actually study Mgr Myriel's conversation with the Conventionnel G.!

The real man went into exile during the Revolution, as he refused to take the oath on the Constitution. If he did not receive the blessing of a former Conventionnel, he very possibly did allow a convict, Paul Maurin, to take shelter in his home.

[pilferingapples]

More: The historical inspiration for Myriel, Bishop Miollis, was appointed under Napoleon in 1815, and remained Bishop of Digne until retiring in 1838. As part of the negotiation, holdover bishops were required to make an "act of submission" to the Pope, which Miollis wouldn't have had a problem with, and neither would Myriel, I don't think. either the real Miollis nor the historical Myriel were "constitutional bishops" appointed under the Revolution. They were imperial bishops appointed under the 1801 Concordat. Which was seen by hard-liners as still kind of heretical, but a much lesser form of heresy than serving as a bishop under the 1790 Civil Constitution of the Clergy.

Commentary in the Letters discord from David Montgomery, who does The Siecle podcast, on Myriel and his bishopric:

Okay, so let's look at Myriel's bishopric. As we know, Myriel was appointed a bishop under Napoleon. A cool origin story, a cool quip. But when the Bourbons took back over, they did not see the bishops appointed under the Revolutionary and Napoleonic governments as legitimate! Louis XVIII's envoy wanted the pope to revert back to the status quo of 1789 — purging all the bishops who had been appointed since then. Which would have included saintly Bienvenu Myriel. All in all there were 14 imperial and ex-Revolutionary bishops hanging about, of which Myriel would have been one. But the Pope refused to go along with this, as much as he hated the Revolution, too. But firing all the bishops appointed since then would have been tantamount to admitting a mistake, and popes hate admitting mistakes. So negotiations between France and the Vatican dragged on for years. At one time Louis sent Jules de Polignac down to the Pope to try and smooth things over (which is, at least, a better use of Polignac's skills than Charles X made). Eventually, the compromise couldn't get rid of those bishops who had refused to resign. Some new bishoprics were created and boundaries redrawn, but the holdover bishops stuck around untol they died or quit.

[vapaus-ystavyys-tasaarvo]

I don't know if anyone has pointed this out yet in the Les Mis Letters tag, but I figured I'd mention it just in case: the Bishop Myriel is based on a real historical person:

Both were bishops of Digne beginning in 1806, both known as "Monseigneur Bienvenu", both famous for their charity and humility.

There are differences as well of course, but the source of inspiration is clear.

Miollis also didn't live in the episcopal palace although the part about switching with a hospital isn't accurate. According to this source I found linked on the official page of the Diocese of Digne (on a website that looks like it's from the very early 00's at best), if I understood correctly, the palace wasn't available as it had been taken over by the district during the Revolution and was being used for various administrative offices.

This is a PDF link, just to warn you:

A son arrivée à Digne, l'immeuble n'étant pas en état, il acquit une maison bourgeoise, rue de l'Hubac (la maison est bien à son nom au cadastre de Digne), où il vécut modestement et très charitablement.

He acquired a bourgeois house on the rue de l'Hubac, where he lived modestly. I'm not entirely sure what the palace being "pas en état" means in this context tbh, I'm sorry.

The house where Miollis lived

Picture by Szeder László

Close up of the plaque

Picture by Renaud Camus

This house was not next to the episcopal palace (circled in red on the right) but closer to the Cathedral St. Jérôme in the old city centre, see the red arrow:

(Map from 1921 which is over a century later and thus isn't quite accurate for our era, but it was the oldest map I could find that shows the buildings clearly and readably; modern maps lack the palace which has since been demolished)

The house is sort of behind a few retaining walls (?) and downhill from the cathedral, there is a rather steep hill to climb, but it's a very short walk otherwise (the Cathedral is built right on top of the hill, it's hard to see from the map but all the houses and streets around the cathedral are built on a very steep slope in all directions, each "ring" of houses lower than the last one as you get further from the cathedral.)

[psalm22-6]

Source: the San Jose Mercury News, 30 December 1888 Am I missing something or could you just print anything in the newspaper back then? I have seen several old articles in American newspapers speculating about who the bishop is based on and for some reason the name Miollis never comes up! 

[georges-flayols]

Oratoire Place Miollis

[mindys2018project365]

May 13, 2018  DAY 133.  Good-bye hideous Barbie pink.  Hello calming blue.

[corallorosso]

9 gennaio 1979 ....... si scatena la furia fascista! Massimo rispetto per le compagne ferite. Un commando di merde fasciste dei NAR, composto da Valerio Fioravanti, Dario Pedretti, Patrizio Trochei, Livio Lai, Alessandro Pucci, Paolo Pizzonia e Gabriele De Francisci assalta la sede di RADIO CITTA' FUTURA, la famosa emittente romana lanciando molotov all'impazzata, Fioravanti spara con una mitraglietta, altri con pistole! Erano le 10,20, cinque donne del Collettivo delle Casalinghe di Radio Donna, ospitata per mancanza di attrezzature e di soldi nei locali di Radio Città Futura, riuscirono ad uscire dalla radio in fiamme malgrado fossero ferite gravemente aiutandosi una con l’altra. Anna Attura, 38 anni, Rosetta Padula 35 anni, Carmela Incafù, 58 anni, Gabriella Pignone, 47 anni, Annunziata Miolli, 55 anni, finiscono al policlinico con prognosi dai 20 ai 90 giorni, ad eccezione di Anna, la più grave. Anna fu sbattuta contro il muro, le appoggiarono in pancia una pistola col silenziatore e sparano una due, tre, quattro, cinque, sei volte, prognosi riservata per gravi emorragie interne e lungo intervento operatorio con asportazione dell’utero e parte dell’ intestino. Qualche ora dopo, due telefonate al quotidiano Il Tempo e all’Ansa, a nome dei NAR, rivendicano l’attentato compiuto per vendicare i missini uccisi il 7 gennaio 1978 in via Acca Larenzia. Michi Caravelli

[youmichau]

Miolly fusion designed by @xsaviira