Jules Michelet

French historian

• Born: August 21, 1789
• Birthplace: Paris, France
• Died: February 9, 1874
• Place of death: Hyères, France

France’s greatest national historian, Michelet was one of the guiding forces of modern historical writing. His contributions included coining the concept of the “Renaissance” and calling attention to the role of geography in human history.

Early Life

Jules Michelet (meesh-leh) was the only child of a poor Parisian printer. His early life was one of material privation but deep familial love. Forced to work in his father’s establishment from an early age, the youth lived a solitary life and experienced few of the common joys of childhood. His only pleasure came from his long walks after hours in the famous cemetery, Père Lachaise, and his occasional visits to Lenoir’s Museum. It was from the latter that he first experienced a vivid realization of history and a fascination with the past.

Michelet’s antagonism toward the Church and toward monarchy, which would loom so large in his later writings, stemmed, in part, from his youth. The family of the future historian, already in dire poverty, was reduced to absolute destitution during the Reign of Terror as Robespierre’s henchmen combed the streets of Paris, jailing and executing men whose manuscripts his father had published. Fearing for his life, the elder Michelet first curtailed his printing projects and was finally forced to terminate his business by the government. Unemployment led to debts for which his father was arrested in 1808 and incarcerated for nearly a year. The collapse of his father’s occupation and his ensuing imprisonment engendered in Jules a hatred of Napoleon I, clerics, and the empire that endured to his death. In his last work, Histoire du XIX^e siècle (1872-1875; history of the nineteenth century), he continued to spew forth the vitriolic opinions inculcated during his childhood.

Although financial problems led to marital strife, both parents agreed on one thing; Jules should be formally educated whatever the cost. After being tutored in Latin by a family friend, Michelet entered Lycée Charlemagne in 1812, which proved to be socially disastrous. His life of solitude had not prepared him for the competitive academic world, and the small, sensitive, shy lad became the object of endless verbal and physical abuse. The owl in daylight, as one source described him, endured the abuse and, capitalizing on his native intelligence, innate writing skills, and untiring work habits, became the top student in his class.

Michelet’s brilliant academic career won for him a teaching position at the Collège Sainte-Barbe in 1822. In 1827, he published a translation of Giambattista Vico’s Principi di scienza nuova d’intorno alla comune natura delle nazione (1744; The New Science, 1948) that brought him both public acclaim and an appointment to teach history and philosophy at the École Normale Supérieure, a position he held until 1838, when he accepted a chair at the Collège de France. In addition to his academic positions, he served as head of the history section of the National Archives from 1830 to 1852.

Life’s Work

The philosophical foundation for Michelet’s seventeen-volume Histoire de France (1833-1867; partial translation as The History of France , 1844-1846) and the seven-volume Histoire de la révolution française (1847-1853; History of the French Revolution , 1972), his life’s work, slowly evolved in 1827 as he came under the influence of German Romanticism. Vico, the little-known Neapolitan philosopher, taught Michelet that all history was universal, constantly in motion, and that humanity was the common element unifying all ages. Men die, but humanity, the receptacle for human wisdom, lives on.

A still-embryonic scholar, Michelet first expressed his historical philosophy in Introduction à l’histoire universelle (1831; introduction to universal history), maintaining that history was nothing more than the story of liberty: humankind’s ongoing struggle to free itself from nature and fatality. As history was constantly in motion, he likened it to the movement of the sun. It rose in the east, in India, moved westward to Persia, Greece, Rome, and culminated in France. In his typically unabashed, chauvinistic manner, Michelet explained that France was superior to the rest of Europe in culture and civilization and, being such, was the new apostle of liberty. Along this line of reasoning, France became synonymous with humanity, and France alone would control the destiny of humankind. Thus, in Vico, Michelet found both a philosophy of history and a mission. His life’s work would be to show how the French people fostered and nourished the spirit of liberty.

The History of France filled seventeen volumes, took thirty-four years to write, and was a labor of love. Of the seventeen volumes, only the first six merit serious consideration. These six, written between 1833 and 1844, are based on primary sources, contain no obvious bias, and reflect a unique historical method. Michelet’s objective was to treat the “whole of the parts”—the land, its people, events, institutions, and beliefs—but it was the people who were the important element. The remaining eleven volumes (written between 1854 and 1867), covering the end of the Middle Ages to the Revolution, are inferior, as Michelet was forced to write them without full benefit of manuscripts and documentation. Michelet, having been relieved of his professorship and archival position for refusing to swear an oath of allegiance to Napoleon III, voices in volumes seven through thirteen his hostility toward the monarchy and toward Christianity.

In the interval that divided his work on The History of France, Michelet turned his attention to the French Revolution. Using the turmoil of 1789 as a backdrop, he painted a gloomy picture of the state of affairs in France; he maintained that the Church, supported by the monarchy, was threatening education, which had been an essential reform of the Revolution. In both History of the French Revolution and Le Peuple (1846; The People , 1846), he maintained that France was once again suffering under the tyranny of Christian monarchy and it was time for the people to sally forth and rekindle the light for justice and liberty. In History of the French Revolution, the voice is that of a revolutionary as Michelet becomes one of the common people who won the triumph for law and justice in 1789. His objective was to stir the masses. So effective was his effort that he has been credited with being instrumental in instigating the revolutions of 1848, which, in addition to his refusal to swear allegiance to Napoleon, cost him his academic post at the Collège de France as well as his archival position.

Deprived of rank and income, Michelet was forced to move to the countryside with only the company of his young wife, Athenais, to comfort him. As his own suffering paralleled his father’s at the hands of the government, it is not surprising that when he resumed work on The History of France an obvious bias against the government ran through the remaining volumes. In January, 1874, the great historian fell ill, and a month later, on February 9, 1874, he died of a heart attack. Although initially interred at Hyères, France, in May, 1875, his body was later exhumed, and, before thousands of public officials, students, and friends, he was buried a second time at Père Lachaise, where he had spent his happiest moments as a child.

Significance

Jules Michelet was a product of the Romantic movement, the world of color, passion, and poetry, but his love for France became excessive. So intense were his emotions that he could not see life as it was. As his patriotism turned into idolatry and as he deified the French people and the Revolution, it became impossible for him to explain the terror of the age. Although his work must be admired for its novelty and beauty, it must also be scorned for its mysticism.

Despite Michelet’s flaws, his labors were not without merit. He was the first to use the term “Renaissance” to refer to a specific period in history. He was the first to insist that geography was a determining factor in shaping a state. He was the first to make widespread use of artifacts in interpreting the past. He was the first to assign a major role to common persons as the molder of their own destinies. If his excessive love for France distorted his analysis, his historical method was destined to play a major role in inspiring future historians to view the past in its totality.

Bibliography

Geyl, Pieter. Debates with Historians. Rev. ed. Cleveland: World, 1958. Provides good balance to Gooch’s work (see below), as Geyl is critical of Michelet. Although attention is given to both The History of France and History of the French Revolution, the latter is emphasized. The major criticism is Michelet’s attempt to use emotionalism and sentimentality to make wrong appear right.

Gooch, G. P. History and Historians in the Nineteenth Century. 2d ed. New York: Barnes & Noble Books, 1952. The best work on nineteenth century historiography in English. Gives one of the more favorable views of Michelet. Gooch notes the historian’s bias toward the monarchy, his anticlerical position, and his excessive adoration of France.

Kippur, Stephen A. Jules Michelet: A Study of Mind and Sensibility. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1980. This biography considers Michelet’s childhood, social status, and intellectual development as they contributed to his work as a historian and professor. Kippur examines Michelet’s ideas on France, religion, and “the people.” Gives a good analysis of Michelet’s major works and is a balanced account.

Mitzman, Arthur. Michelet, Historian: Rebirth and Romanticism in Nineteenth Century France. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1990. Places Michelet’s work within the context of nineteenth century Romanticism.

Orr, Linda. Jules Michelet: Nature, History, and Language. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1976. Orr provides excellent coverage of Michelet’s nonhistorical writings. Gives particular attention to his writings on natural science. Traces Michelet’s search for patterns of coherence in nature, which influenced his historical works. Draws upon Michelet’s journal to provide fascinating insight into the personal aspects of his private life.

Rigney, Ann. Imperfect Histories: The Elusive Past and the Legacy of Romantic Historicism. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2001. Rigney analyzes the work of Michelet and other historians of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries to describe how they strove to provide an alternative account of everyday experience.

Thompson, J. W. A History of Historical Writing. Vol. 2. Magnolia, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1967. This good source gives a chronological account of the major aspects of Michelet’s life. Particularly good on the problems leading to Michelet’s anticlerical stance in his history of the Revolution. Advocates dividing Michelet’s works into two categories for analysis.