Exploring the ideological foundations of counterrevolutionary insurgencies against Napoleon, the focus lies on key figures like Joseph de Maistre, Chateaubriand, and De Bonald. Their ideology includes challenging written constitutions, emphasising divine principles, critiquing Napoleon’s neglect of traditional values, and advocating for the Bourbons’ return. Significantly, De Maistre and De Bonald sees religion and monarchy as inseparable forces, which we will learn is fundamental to many of the counterrevolutionary ideologies printed. Turning to the opposition against Napoleon’s policies, thinkers like Chateaubriand laments the human toll of wars, aligning with counterrevolutionary ideals. De Maistre critiques Napoleon’s financial policies, opposing rapid money circulation and centralisation. Beyond elites, these ideologies influenced popular uprisings, notably in regions like Bordeaux and Vendée. The dissemination of ideological propaganda through pamphlets fuelled discontent, underscoring the profound impact of counterrevolutionary ideology.

Joseph de Maistre’s counterrevolutionary philosophy is deeply reflected in his conception of a constitution. For De Maistre, a constitution is not a product of human contrivance, or a set of written laws designed through reason, characteristic of the 1804 Napoleonic Code. Instead, he asserts that true constitutional principles are divine in origin and pre-exist any written legal code. De Maistre’s perspective that “That which is most essential, most intrinsically constitutional… is never written, and could not be, without endangering the state,”^[1] starkly contrasts with the revolutionary approach to constitutions, particularly evident in the French Revolution, where written constitutions were seen as the foundation of a new social order. The revolutionaries aimed to construct constitutions based on reason, liberty, and equality, often through explicit written documents outlining the rights and obligations of citizens. In contrast, De Maistre argues that the weakness of a constitution is proportional to the multiplicity of written constitutional articles. 

History and religion play crucial roles in counterrevolutionary ideas, and their perspective on these matters significantly differs from that of the revolutionaries. De Maistre sees history not as a product of human agency but as a manifestation of divine providence. He contends that fundamental principles are passed down through unwritten traditions and precede the establishment of any formal legal structure.^[2] In De Maistre’s work “The Pope,” we find a compelling insight into his views on religion and the role it plays in defining the West. He saw the Revolution as divine punishment, along with other notable thinkers like Augustin Barruel, as the West is intricately tied to its religious heritage, and in particular, the authority of the Pope in the Catholic Church.^[3] In his view, the Pope represents the spiritual and moral backbone of the West, serving as a unifying force that transcends political boundaries. De Maistre argues that the influence of the Pope is essential in maintaining order, and the spiritual guidance he provides is integral to the preservation of societal harmony.^[4] By emphasising the role of the Pope and the Catholic Church, De Maistre is aligning himself with the traditional institutions that the Enlightenment and the French Revolution sought to challenge. For him, the Church is not merely a religious institution but a crucial pillar of the social and political order. This aligns with his broader counterrevolutionary stance, which seeks to defend and uphold the established hierarchies and religious views against the tumultuous changes advocated by revolutionaries. De Maistre’s association of the West with its religious traditions reflects his belief in the inseparability of religion and governance. His counterrevolutionary philosophy is grounded in the idea that a divine authority must underpin political structures for them to be stable and just. The Pope, as the spiritual leader of the West, symbolises this divine authority, and De Maistre sees the rejection of such authority, being replaced by Napoleon, as a perilous path that can lead to chaos and disorder.

Like De Maistre, De Bonald’s work, “Thoughts on Various Subjects,” provides a rich source for understanding his vision of society and the role of religion and monarchy in preserving order, which aligns with broader counterrevolutionary ideologies. His emphasis on the fundamental principles applied to the moral and material governance of families extends to the societal level.^[5] Influenced by Montesquieu, De Bonald advocates for the crucial role of religion in preserving societal order. According to him, religion places monarchy in the hearts of the people, suggesting a symbiotic relationship between spiritual beliefs and the political structure.^[6] He perceives the agricultural state as essentially monarchical, where the territorial property functions as a small kingdom governed by the will of the head. In this vision, religion and monarchy become intertwined forces that contribute to maintaining stability within the family and society at large. It must also be said that De Bonald’s bias towards religion didn’t blind him from certain abuses, as he constantly rejected wealth and technical progress in addition to Napoleonic reform, unlike De Maistre, who believed the social function of religion would preserve the wealth of his class.^[7]

Chateaubriand, another prominent counterrevolutionary figure, offers a scathing critique of Napoleon’s rule in his work “On Buonaparte and the Bourbons.” He portrays Napoleon as a ruler who, despite his military prowess, was fundamentally disconnected from the traditional values that Chateaubriand held dear. According to Chateaubriand, Napoleon’s reign was marked by a disregard for the historical and cultural heritage of France, especially in the aftermath of the French Revolution. Napoleon is depicted as a ruler who, in Chateaubriand’s eyes, wielded power without a genuine understanding or appreciation for the importance of preserving traditional institutions and values. Chateaubriand contends that the French Revolution had already caused significant upheaval in the societal fabric, and Napoleon’s rule further exacerbated the erosion of these traditional values.^[8] Chateaubriand, with his deep attachment to the Bourbon monarchy, argues that the return of the Bourbons to the throne is essential for the restoration of France’s historical continuity and the reestablishment of the traditional values that he believed were indispensable for the country’s well-being. This critique reveals Chateaubriand’s staunch counterrevolutionary ideology, rooted in a desire to reverse the radical changes brought about by the French Revolution and reinstate the monarchy as a guardian of traditional values.

The ideological underpinnings of counterrevolutionary thought were distinctly manifest in the vehement opposition to Napoleon Bonaparte’s policies. One of the central points of contention for counterrevolutionary thinkers was Napoleon’s relentless pursuit of military conquests. Chateaubriand, a vocal critic, lamented that Napoleon “sacrifice everything for a success, and to kill half his soldiers by marches well beyond human power without worrying about a defeat. “^[9] The human toll exacted by these campaigns, coupled with the destabilisation of traditional structures, provoked counterrevolutionaries to question the moral cost of Napoleon’s ambitions. The statement reflects Chateaubriand’s critical perspective on Napoleon’s rule, particularly emphasising the human cost of the military victories achieved under Napoleon’s leadership. Chateaubriand is highlighting the heavy toll in terms of lives lost and the devastating impact on French families and society as a whole due to conscription to fight expansive wars bought about by Napoleon’s regime.^[10]

Joseph de Maistre, in his critique, emphasised the economic ramifications of Napoleon’s rule. Napoleon’s financial policies, marked by rapid circulation and a focus on individual gain, were diametrically opposed to the counterrevolutionary vision of a society where the government serves the virtues of the people. Church’s which were fundamental welfare operators in pre-revolutionary Europe, were now being secularised under Napoleon, to provide funds for the state, funding his wars. De Maistre was a strong critic of this and many of his readers also saw less benefits than negatives to Napoleon’s policy.^[11] Moreover, the centralisation of power under Napoleon ran afoul of the counterrevolutionary belief in decentralised governance. De Bonald, reflecting on governance, stated, “A government should do little for the pleasures of the people, enough for their needs, and everything for their virtues.” Napoleon’s concentration of power contradicted this vision, emphasising pleasure over virtue. 

Counterrevolutionary ideologies, steeped in philosophical critiques, transcended the realms of intellectual discourse to permeate the masses, sparking widespread popular uprisings against Napoleon’s rule. Counterrevolutionary philosophers, with their critiques of Napoleon’s policies, found resonance among diverse segments of society. Chateaubriand’s eloquent denunciation of Napoleon’s military exploits, echoed by De Bonald’s vision of a virtuous society, struck a chord with those disenchanted by the turmoil brought about by incessant wars and societal upheaval. The counterrevolutionary call for a return to traditional values, anchored in religion and monarchy, appealed to individuals grappling with the uncertainties of the post-revolutionary era. The dissemination of counterrevolutionary ideas among the masses was facilitated by various means, including pamphlets, clandestine publications, and oral traditions. Chateaubriand’s writings, such as his critique of Napoleon’s militarism, found their way into popular consciousness through these channels. De Bonald’s vision, emphasising the role of religion and monarchy, gained traction through pamphlets that circulated in both urban centres and rural communities. These counterrevolutionary ideas became a source of solace for those yearning for a return to stability and tradition.

Specific regions and cities emerged as hotbeds of counterrevolutionary sentiment. In Bordeaux 1815, a city with a history of monarchist sentiments, Chateaubriand’s critiques found a receptive audience, contributing to the region’s steadfast opposition to Napoleonic rule. Many southern royalists battled to establish jurisdiction in the “Royaume du Midi” (Southern Kingdom) and was triggered by the restoration of the Bourbon dynasty which saw Louis XVIII adopt a new approach to rule and adopted Napoleonic principles of governance. It saw opponents of the Revolution betrayed that the Bourbon restoration hadn’t bought about a throw-back to the post-Napoleonic way. They believed the new constitution undermined the authority of the king, and this was definitely influenced by De Maistre’s writings.^[12] Ideological propaganda played a pivotal role in mobilising popular sentiment against Napoleon.  Counterrevolutionary thinkers recognised the power of disseminating their ideas through accessible mediums. Brochures, speeches, and clandestine publications served as conduits for counterrevolutionary propaganda. Chateaubriand’s critiques and De Bonald’s societal vision were effectively disseminated, creating a narrative that fuelled popular discontent and provided a conceptual framework for resistance. Although people had their personal and local reasons for fighting against revolutionary ideas, the influence that these counterrevolutionary ideologies played on the public was significant in shaping the insurgencies against Napoleon. The dissemination of these ideas, often through clandestine means, and case studies of regions with strong sentiments illustrate the profound impact of counterrevolutionary thought on shaping the narrative of resistance against Napoleonic rule.

The Vendée Uprising during the French Revolution was deeply influenced by counterrevolutionary ideology, as exemplified in counterrevolutionary Jean-Francois de La Harpe’s pamphlet “Du Fanatisme.” La Harpe staunchly supported the refractory clergy, defended the Vendée revolt, and vividly chronicled the atrocities of the Terror. The pamphlet dramatically adopted a militant ant philosophical stance, asserting that the Revolution was a divine punishment inflicted by God upon a nation to instruct and preserve the world. La Harpe squarely placed blame on the “grands philosophes,”^[13] accusing them of leading the French astray and provoking divine wrath for fifty years. The pamphlet linked the errors of the fallen people to the philosophy embraced by writers who identified themselves as philosophes. This vehement denouncement reflects the counterrevolutionary conviction that the Enlightenment ideals propagated by philosophes were responsible for the chaos of the Revolution, aligning with the broader theme of the Vendée Uprising’s ideological resistance against the perceived corrosive influence of Enlightenment thought.^[14]

In conclusion, the counterrevolutionary philosophers, Joseph de Maistre, Chateaubriand, and De Bonald, contributed significantly to the intellectual foundation of the resistance against Napoleon’s rule. De Maistre’s vision of a constitution grounded in divine principles, Chateaubriand’s critique of Napoleon’s disregard for traditional values, and De Bonald’s emphasis on the symbiotic relationship between religion and monarchy provided a robust ideological framework for opposition. Their collective stance against the revolutionary principles In summary, the counterrevolutionary philosophers—Joseph de Maistre, Chateaubriand, and De Bonald—played a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual foundation of resistance against Napoleon’s rule. Their critiques, rooted in opposition to revolutionary principles, resonated beyond elite circles, significantly influencing popular uprisings.

While the Bourbon restoration marked a return to monarchy, challenges persisted in fully realising counterrevolutionary ideals, highlighting the tension between tradition, and evolving political realities. The insurgencies against Napoleon were fuelled by the philosophers’ critiques, particularly emphasising the human toll of wars, economic ramifications, and the erosion of traditional values. Although geopolitical factors played a crucial role in Napoleon’s downfall, ideological resistance posed a formidable challenge. In conclusion, the role of ideology in counterrevolutionary insurgencies against Napoleon had a profound and lasting influence on the political, social, and cultural fabric of post-Napoleonic Europe.

Bibliography:

1. Armenteros, Carolina. (2011) “The French Idea of History.” Cornell University Press. p.225-226.

2. Chateaubriand. (1814) “On Buonaparte and the Bourbons” Wilmington, 2004. p.3-22.

3. De Bonald, Louis. (1817) “Thoughts on Various Subjects.” Translated by Christopher Olaf Blum 2004, Wilmington. P.45-52.

4. De Maistre, Joseph. (1847) “Essay on the Generative Principle of Political Constitutions.” Boston: Little Brown. p. 42-42, 93-95, 129-130.

5. De Maistre, Joseph. (1918) “The Pope.” New York: Noward Fertig, 1975. P.290-299, 314-333, 341-346.

6. Fitzpatrick, Brian. (2000) Napoleon’s Legacy: The Royaume du Midi of 1815. Bridgend: WBC Book Manufacturers. p.167-179.

7. McMahon, Darrin M. (2002) “Enemies of the Enlightenment: the French Counter-Enlightenment and the making of modernity.” United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. p.57-65.

8. Schenk, H.G. (1947) “The Aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars” Great Britain: Butler & Tanner Ltd, p.6-9.

---

^[1] De Maistre, Joseph. (1847) “Essay on the Generative Principle of Political Constitutions.” Boston: Little Brown. p. 42-42, 93-95, 129-130.

^[2] Armenteros, Carolina. (2011) “The French Idea of History.” Cornell University Press. p.225-226.

^[3] McMahon, Darrin M. (2002) “Enemies of the Enlightenment: the French Counter-Enlightenment and the making of modernity.” United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. p.57-65.

^[4] De Maistre, Joseph. (1918) “The Pope.” New York: Noward Fertig, 1975. P.290-299, 314-333, 341-346.

^[5] De Bonald, Louis. (1817) “Thoughts on Various Subjects.” Translated by Christopher Olaf Blum 2004, Wilmington. P.45-52.

^[6] Schenk, H.G. (1947) “The Aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars” Great Britain: Butler & Tanner Ltd, p.6-9.

^[7] Schenk, H.G. (1947) p.9-16. 

^[8] Chateaubriand. (1814) “On Buonaparte and the Bourbons” Wilmington, 2004. p.3-22.

^[9] Chateaubriand, p.11.

^[10] Chateaubriand, p.11-14.

^[11] Armenteros, p.166-170.

^[12] Fitzpatrick, Brian. (2000) Napoleon’s Legacy: The Royaume du Midi of 1815. Bridgend: WBC Book Manufacturers. p.167-179.

^[13] McMahon, Enemies of the Enlightenment. p.115-118.