Maurice Druon

When the King Destroys France

Our longest war, the Hundred Years' War, was simply a legal dispute that ended on the battlefield.

Paul Claudel

Introduction

In tragic times, History raises great people to the crest, but the tragedies themselves are the work of mediocrity.

At the beginning of the 14th century, France was the most powerful, most populous, most vital, richest state in the entire Christian world, and it was not for nothing that they were so afraid of its invasions, resorted to its arbitration court, and sought its protection. And it already seemed that the French century was about to dawn for all of Europe.

How could it be that forty years later this same France was defeated on the battlefields by a country whose population was five times smaller; that its nobility was divided into warring parties; that the townspeople rebelled; that her people were exhausted under the unbearable burden of taxes; that the provinces fell away one after another; that gangs of mercenaries were abandoning the country to destruction and plunder; that the authorities were openly laughed at; that money was worthless, commerce was paralyzed, and poverty reigned everywhere; no one knew what tomorrow would bring him. Why did this power collapse? What turned her fate around so dramatically?

Mediocre! The mediocrity of its kings, their stupid vanity, their frivolity in matters of state, their inability to surround themselves with the right people, their carelessness, their arrogance, their inability to nurture great plans or at least follow those that were hatched before them.

Nothing great will happen in the political sphere - everything will be fleeting if there are no people whose genius, character traits, and will can ignite, unite and direct the energy of the people.

Everything perishes when the head of the state is replaced by feeble-minded people. Unity disintegrates on the wreckage of greatness.

France is an idea combined with History, in essence an arbitrary idea, but since the thousandth year it has been adopted by the persons of the reigning house and is passed on from father to son with such stubborn constancy that primogeniture in the senior branch soon becomes a completely sufficient basis for the legal accession to the throne.

Of course, luck also played a significant role here, as if fate decided to pamper this nascent nation and sent it a whole dynasty of indestructibly strong rulers. From the election of the first Capetian until the death of Philip the Fair, only eleven kings succeeded each other on the throne over the course of three and a quarter centuries, and each left behind male offspring.

Oh, of course, not all of these lords were eagles. But almost always, after an untalented or unlucky prince, he immediately ascended the throne, as if it were the mercy of Heaven, a high-flying sovereign or a great minister ruled for a weak monarch.

Very young France almost died when it fell into the hands of Philip I, a man endowed with minor vices and, as it turned out later, incapable of managing state affairs. But after him appeared the indefatigable Louis VI the Fat, who, upon ascending the throne, received a reduced power, since the enemy was only five leagues from Paris, and who left it after his death not only restored to its previous size, but also expanded the territory of France right up to all the way to the Pyrenees. The weak-willed, eccentric Louis VII plunges the state into disastrous adventures by launching an overseas campaign; however, Abbot Suger, ruling in the name of the king, managed to maintain the unity and vitality of the country.

And finally, France experiences unheard-of luck, not just one, but three in a row, when from the end of the 12th century to the beginning of the 14th century it was ruled by three gifted or even outstanding monarchs, and each sat on the throne for quite a long period of time: they reigned - one forty-three years, the second forty-one years, the third twenty-nine years - so that all their main plans managed to be realized. Three kings, not at all similar to each other either in natural characteristics or in their merits, but all three are head and shoulders above, if not more, ordinary kings.

Philip Augustus, the blacksmith of History, begins to forge a truly united fatherland, annexing nearby and even not too close lands to the French crown. Saint Louis, an inspired champion of the faith, relying on royal justice, establishes uniform legislation. Philip the Fair, the great ruler of France, relying on the royal administration, will create a unified state. Each of this trio thought least of all about pleasing anyone; First of all, they sought to act, and to act with the greatest benefit for the country. Everyone has had the lot to drink from the bitter drink of unpopularity. But after their death they were mourned much more than they were hated, ridiculed or vilified during their lifetime. And most importantly, what they were striving for continued to exist.

Fatherland, justice, state are the foundations of the nation. Under the auspices of these three pioneers of the idea of ​​a French kingdom, the country emerged from a period of uncertainty. And then, realizing itself, France established itself in the Western world as an undeniable, and soon the dominant reality.

Twenty-two million inhabitants, securely guarded borders, an easily convened army, subdued feudal lords, strictly controlled administrative areas, safe roads, brisk trade. What other Christian country could now compare with France, and what Christian country did not look at her with envy? Of course, the people grumbled under the too heavy right hand of the sovereign, but they will grumble even more when, from under the firm right hand, they fall into too sluggish or too extravagant hands.

After the death of Philip the Handsome, everything suddenly fell apart. The long streak of success in inheriting the throne came to an end.

All three sons of the Iron King took turns succeeding the throne, leaving behind no male offspring. In previous books we have already told about the numerous dramas at the royal court of France that were played out around the crown being resold at auction of vanity claims.

Over the course of fourteen years, four kings go to their graves; there was a lot to be confused about. France is not used to rushing to Reims so often. It was as if lightning struck the trunk of the Capetian tree. And few people were consoled by the fact that the crown passed to the Valois branch, a branch that was essentially fussy. Frivolous braggarts, exorbitant vanities, all in show and nothing inside, the scions of the Valois branch, who ascended the throne, were sure that they should smile in order to make the whole kingdom happy.

Their predecessors identified themselves with France. But these identified France with the idea that they had about themselves. After the curse that brought a continuous series of deaths, the curse of mediocrity.

The first Valois, Philip VI, nicknamed the “foundling king”, in short, just an upstart, failed to assert his power for ten years, because by the end of this decade his cousin Edward III of England started dynastic feuds: he laid claim to his rights to the throne of France, and this allowed him to support in Flanders, and in Brittany, and in Saintonge, and in Aquitaine all those cities and all those lords who were dissatisfied with the new sovereign. If the monarch on the French throne had been more decisive, the Englishman would probably never have dared to take this step.

Philip of Valois not only failed to prevent the danger threatening the country - where is it, his fleet was lost at Sluys through the fault of the admiral he personally appointed, no doubt appointed only because the admiral knew absolutely nothing either in naval affairs or in naval battles; and the king himself, on the evening of the Battle of Crecy, wanders across the battlefield, calmly leaving his cavalry to destroy his own infantry.

When Philip the Fair imposed a new tax on the people, which he was accused of, he did this wanting to strengthen the defense capability of France. When Philip of Valois demanded even heavier taxes, it was only to pay for his defeats.

Over the last five years of his reign, the rate of minted coins will fall one hundred and sixty times, silver will lose three-quarters of its value. They tried in vain to establish fixed prices for food products; they reached dizzying proportions. The cities, suffering from never-before-seen inflation, grumbled silently.

When disaster spreads its wings over a country, everything gets mixed up and natural disasters are combined with human mistakes.

The plague, the great plague that came from the depths of Asia, brought its scourge down on France more severely than on all other states of Europe. City streets turned into dead suburbs - into a slaughterhouse. A quarter of the inhabitants were carried away here, and a third there. Entire villages were deserted, and all that remained among the uncultivated fields were huts abandoned to the mercy of fate.

LES ROIS MAUDITS:

QUAND UN ROI PERD LA FRANCE

© 1977 by Maurice Druon, Librarie Plon et Editions Mondiales

© Zharkova N., translation from French, 2012

© Edition in Russian, design. Eksmo Publishing House LLC, 2012

Our longest war, the Hundred Years' War, was simply a legal dispute that ended on the battlefield.

Paul Claudel

In tragic times, History raises great people to the crest, but the tragedies themselves are the work of mediocrity.

At the beginning of the 14th century, France was the most powerful, most populous, most vital, richest state in the entire Christian world, and it was not for nothing that they were so afraid of its invasions, resorted to its arbitration court, and sought its protection. And it already seemed that the French century was about to dawn for all of Europe.

How could it be that forty years later this same France was defeated on the battlefields by a country whose population was five times smaller; that its nobility was divided into warring parties; that the townspeople rebelled; that her people were exhausted under the unbearable burden of taxes; that the provinces fell away one after another; that gangs of mercenaries were abandoning the country to destruction and plunder; that the authorities were openly laughed at; that money was worthless, commerce was paralyzed, and poverty reigned everywhere; no one knew what tomorrow would bring him. Why did this power collapse? What turned her fate around so dramatically?

Mediocre! The mediocrity of its kings, their stupid vanity, their frivolity in matters of state, their inability to surround themselves with the right people, their carelessness, their arrogance, their inability to nurture great plans or at least follow those that were hatched before them.

Nothing great will happen in the political sphere - everything will be fleeting if there are no people whose genius, character traits, and will can ignite, unite and direct the energy of the people.

Everything perishes when the head of the state is replaced by feeble-minded people. Unity disintegrates on the wreckage of greatness.

France is an idea combined with History, in essence an arbitrary idea, but since the thousandth year it has been adopted by the persons of the reigning house and is passed on from father to son with such stubborn constancy that primogeniture in the senior branch soon becomes a completely sufficient basis for the legal accession to the throne.

Of course, luck also played a significant role here, as if fate decided to pamper this nascent nation and sent it a whole dynasty of indestructibly strong rulers. From the election of the first Capetian until the death of Philip the Fair, only eleven kings succeeded each other on the throne over the course of three and a quarter centuries, and each left behind male offspring.

Oh, of course, not all of these lords were eagles. But almost always, after an untalented or unlucky prince, he immediately ascended the throne, as if it were the mercy of Heaven, a high-flying sovereign or a great minister ruled for a weak monarch.

Very young France almost died when it fell into the hands of Philip I, a man endowed with minor vices and, as it turned out later, incapable of managing state affairs. But after him appeared the indefatigable Louis VI the Fat, who, upon ascending the throne, received a reduced power, since the enemy was only five leagues from Paris, and who left it after his death not only restored to its previous size, but also expanded the territory of France right up to all the way to the Pyrenees. The weak-willed, eccentric Louis VII plunges the state into disastrous adventures by launching an overseas campaign; however, Abbot Suger, ruling in the name of the king, managed to maintain the unity and vitality of the country.

And finally, France experiences unheard-of luck, not just one, but three in a row, when from the end of the 12th century to the beginning of the 14th century it was ruled by three gifted or even outstanding monarchs, and each sat on the throne for quite a long period of time: they reigned - one forty-three years, the second forty-one years, the third twenty-nine years - so that all their main plans managed to be realized. Three kings, not at all similar to each other either in natural characteristics or in their merits, but all three are head and shoulders above, if not more, ordinary kings.

Philip Augustus, the blacksmith of History, begins to forge a truly united fatherland, annexing nearby and even not too close lands to the French crown. Saint Louis, an inspired champion of the faith, relying on royal justice, establishes uniform legislation. Philip the Fair, the great ruler of France, relying on the royal administration, will create a unified state. Each of this trio thought least of all about pleasing anyone; First of all, they sought to act, and to act with the greatest benefit for the country. Everyone has had the lot to drink from the bitter drink of unpopularity. But after their death they were mourned much more than they were hated, ridiculed or vilified during their lifetime. And most importantly, what they were striving for continued to exist.

Fatherland, justice, state are the foundations of the nation. Under the auspices of these three pioneers of the idea of ​​a French kingdom, the country emerged from a period of uncertainty. And then, realizing itself, France established itself in the Western world as an undeniable, and soon the dominant reality.

Twenty-two million inhabitants, securely guarded borders, an easily convened army, subdued feudal lords, strictly controlled administrative areas, safe roads, brisk trade. What other Christian country could now compare with France, and what Christian country did not look at her with envy? Of course, the people grumbled under the too heavy right hand of the sovereign, but they will grumble even more when, from under the firm right hand, they fall into too sluggish or too extravagant hands.

After the death of Philip the Handsome, everything suddenly fell apart. The long streak of success in inheriting the throne came to an end.

All three sons of the Iron King took turns succeeding the throne, leaving behind no male offspring. In previous books we have already told about the numerous dramas at the royal court of France that were played out around the crown being resold at auction of vanity claims.

Over the course of fourteen years, four kings go to their graves; there was a lot to be confused about. France is not used to rushing to Reims so often. It was as if lightning struck the trunk of the Capetian tree. And few people were consoled by the fact that the crown passed to the Valois branch, a branch that was essentially fussy. Frivolous braggarts, exorbitant vanities, all in show and nothing inside, the scions of the Valois branch, who ascended the throne, were sure that they should smile in order to make the whole kingdom happy.

Their predecessors identified themselves with France. But these identified France with the idea that they had about themselves. After the curse that brought a continuous series of deaths, the curse of mediocrity.

The first Valois, Philip VI, nicknamed the “foundling king”, in short, just an upstart, failed to assert his power for ten years, because by the end of that decade his cousin Edward III of England started dynastic feuds: he laid claim to his rights to the throne of France, and this allowed him to support in Flanders, and in Brittany, and in Saintonge, and in Aquitaine all those cities and all those lords who were dissatisfied with the new sovereign. If the monarch on the French throne had been more decisive, the Englishman would probably never have dared to take this step.

Philip of Valois not only failed to prevent the danger threatening the country - where is it, his fleet was lost at Sluys through the fault of the admiral he personally appointed, no doubt appointed only because the admiral knew absolutely nothing either in naval affairs or in naval battles; and the king himself, on the evening of the Battle of Crecy, wanders across the battlefield, calmly leaving his cavalry to destroy his own infantry.

Page 1 of 78

Our longest war, the Hundred Years' War, was simply a legal dispute that ended on the battlefield.

Paul Claudel

Introduction

In tragic times, History raises great people to the crest, but the tragedies themselves are the work of mediocrity.

At the beginning of the 14th century, France was the most powerful, most populous, most vital, richest state in the entire Christian world, and it was not for nothing that they were so afraid of its invasions, resorted to its arbitration court, and sought its protection. And it already seemed that the French century was about to dawn for all of Europe.

How could it be that forty years later this same France was defeated on the battlefields by a country whose population was five times smaller; that its nobility was divided into warring parties; that the townspeople rebelled; that her people were exhausted under the unbearable burden of taxes; that the provinces fell away one after another; that gangs of mercenaries were abandoning the country to destruction and plunder; that the authorities were openly laughed at; that money was worthless, commerce was paralyzed, and poverty reigned everywhere; no one knew what tomorrow would bring him. Why did this power collapse? What turned her fate around so dramatically?

Mediocre! The mediocrity of its kings, their stupid vanity, their frivolity in matters of state, their inability to surround themselves with the right people, their carelessness, their arrogance, their inability to nurture great plans or at least follow those that were hatched before them.

Nothing great will happen in the political sphere - everything will be fleeting if there are no people whose genius, character traits, and will can ignite, unite and direct the energy of the people.

Everything perishes when the head of the state is replaced by feeble-minded people. Unity disintegrates on the wreckage of greatness.

France is an idea combined with History, in essence an arbitrary idea, but since the thousandth year it has been adopted by the persons of the reigning house and is passed on from father to son with such stubborn constancy that primogeniture in the senior branch soon becomes a completely sufficient basis for the legal accession to the throne.

Of course, luck also played a significant role here, as if fate decided to pamper this nascent nation and sent it a whole dynasty of indestructibly strong rulers. From the election of the first Capetian until the death of Philip the Fair, only eleven kings succeeded each other on the throne over the course of three and a quarter centuries, and each left behind male offspring.

Oh, of course, not all of these lords were eagles. But almost always, after an untalented or unlucky prince, he immediately ascended the throne, as if it were the mercy of Heaven, a high-flying sovereign or a great minister ruled for a weak monarch.

Very young France almost died when it fell into the hands of Philip I, a man endowed with minor vices and, as it turned out later, incapable of managing state affairs. But after him appeared the indefatigable Louis VI the Fat, who, upon ascending the throne, received a reduced power, since the enemy was only five leagues from Paris, and who left it after his death not only restored to its previous size, but also expanded the territory of France right up to all the way to the Pyrenees. The weak-willed, eccentric Louis VII plunges the state into disastrous adventures by launching an overseas campaign; however, Abbot Suger, ruling in the name of the king, managed to maintain the unity and vitality of the country.

And finally, France experiences unheard-of luck, not just one, but three in a row, when from the end of the 12th century to the beginning of the 14th century it was ruled by three gifted or even outstanding monarchs, and each sat on the throne for quite a long period of time: they reigned - one forty-three years, the second forty-one years, the third twenty-nine years - so that all their main plans managed to be realized. Three kings, not at all similar to each other either in natural characteristics or in their merits, but all three are head and shoulders above, if not more, ordinary kings.

Philip Augustus, the blacksmith of History, begins to forge a truly united fatherland, annexing nearby and even not too close lands to the French crown. Saint Louis, an inspired champion of the faith, relying on royal justice, establishes uniform legislation. Philip the Fair, the great ruler of France, relying on the royal administration, will create a unified state. Each of this trio thought least of all about pleasing anyone; First of all, they sought to act, and to act with the greatest benefit for the country. Everyone has had the lot to drink from the bitter drink of unpopularity. But after their death they were mourned much more than they were hated, ridiculed or vilified during their lifetime. And most importantly, what they were striving for continued to exist.

Fatherland, justice, state are the foundations of the nation. Under the auspices of these three pioneers of the idea of ​​a French kingdom, the country emerged from a period of uncertainty. And then, realizing itself, France established itself in the Western world as an undeniable, and soon the dominant reality.

Twenty-two million inhabitants, securely guarded borders, an easily convened army, subdued feudal lords, strictly controlled administrative areas, safe roads, brisk trade. What other Christian country could now compare with France, and what Christian country did not look at her with envy? Of course, the people grumbled under the too heavy right hand of the sovereign, but they will grumble even more when, from under the firm right hand, they fall into too sluggish or too extravagant hands.

After the death of Philip the Handsome, everything suddenly fell apart. The long streak of success in inheriting the throne came to an end.

All three sons of the Iron King took turns succeeding the throne, leaving behind no male offspring. In previous books we have already told about the numerous dramas at the royal court of France that were played out around the crown being resold at auction of vanity claims.

Over the course of fourteen years, four kings go to their graves; there was a lot to be confused about. France is not used to rushing to Reims so often. It was as if lightning struck the trunk of the Capetian tree. And few people were consoled by the fact that the crown passed to the Valois branch, a branch that was essentially fussy. Frivolous braggarts, exorbitant vanities, all in show and nothing inside, the scions of the Valois branch, who ascended the throne, were sure that they should smile in order to make the whole kingdom happy.

Their predecessors identified themselves with France. But these identified France with the idea that they had about themselves. After the curse that brought a continuous series of deaths, the curse of mediocrity.

John II the Good

The seventh, apocryphal, part of “Cursed Kings” is actually not included in the series itself. The first six books were published in the period 1955-1960 and were a completely complete series. The seventh, “When the King Destroys France,” was released only in 1977 and is no longer connected in any way with the plot of the series. Nevertheless, it is most directly related to the theme of “Cursed Kings”.

Throughout all the novels, the author persistently pursued the idea of ​​the role of personality in history. Strong kings created France. Their weak successors brought her to the edge of the abyss. The first Valois look like complete nonentities in comparison with Philip IV the Fair. Not only did they plunge the country into the Hundred Years' War. War itself is inevitable. What’s worse is that these mediocrities managed to miserably lose its first stage, the apotheosis of which was the Battle of Poitiers in 1356. This is exactly what the seventh novel, “When the King Destroys France,” is about.

Maurice Druon gives a damning assessment of the first two kings of the Valois dynasty already in the preface. The first of them, Philip VI, almost brought the country to a complete disaster, from which it was saved just a couple of steps. Unlike his predecessors, this king had a son, who, alas, was spared even by the plague. Under the gallant leadership of John II, the last two steps will be rapidly overcome.

The novel is structured in the form of a monologue by Cardinal Elie de Talleyrand of Périgord. This is the same cardinal who tried to reconcile the warring parties on the eve of the battle of Poitiers. That is, he found himself in the thick of events, which he talks about personally. It depends on you, but for me this form of presentation is not entirely successful. It's not the most fun thing to do - reading one person's monologue over hundreds of pages. But what is, is what it is.

The monologue is pronounced after the battle of Poitiers. However, the cardinal (aka Maurice Druon in this case) is not limited to recent events. No, he’s just delving into the origins of France’s problems, starting with Philip VI. Then he moves on to John II.

It should be noted that the first twenty years of the Hundred Years' War were tense. The battles of Sluys, Crecy, and Poitiers fit here. Here is the Black Death, that is, the plague pandemic, internal strife, the war with Charles the Evil. The cardinal talks about all this, deducing from each case the moralizing “the king is an idiot.” not so literally, of course, but still. Assessments of the actions of the British, the position of the Pope, and the empire immediately follow.

The campaign of 1356, the year of Poitiers, is examined in most detail. How exactly did everything turn out in such a way that the Black Prince (the son of the English king) found himself driven into a corner and squeezed by the superior forces of the French. And since it so happened that Cardinal Perigord is the most active negotiator on the eve of the battle, a lot of attention was paid to these negotiations. And again the conclusion is the same - the king is an idiot who rejected favorable conditions, a self-confident fool, convinced of the inevitability of his victory. And if only he had used his powers wisely, then of course he would have won. But no.

And finally, the battle itself comes to a close. There is nothing particularly revolutionary here - a classic picture, known even from textbooks. Repetition of well-known dialogues, incidents, and attacks from other sources. The story of how the British fought for the right to capture the king is also conveyed in accordance with the classics. In general, it is the description of the battle that is characterized by its almost complete absence. It’s not even fair to prepare the reader for the climax for so long and then quickly skip it somewhere. But, apparently, Maurice Druon is not a battle painter.

There is no joy from the fact that the king remained alive. It would be better if he died in battle. But no, it doesn’t sink. They piled on so many people, but they didn’t finish off the most necessary ones. A dead king of France would do far less harm than a captured king. That is, even by the very fact of his survival, John II harms France. Actually, this is how she takes the last step into the abyss. It is worthy of wonder how this country was able to climb out of this hole into which the crowned nonentities drove it.

Quote:

“Instead of rushing to the aid of Clermont, Audreghem deliberately broke away from him, wanting to bypass the British from Miosson. But then he ran into the army of Earl Warwick, whose archers prepared for him the same fate as the warriors of Salisbury for Marshal Clermont. Soon the news spread that Odregem was wounded and captured. And there was neither a rumor nor a breath about the Duke of Athens. He simply disappeared during the melee. In a few minutes, three of their military leaders died before the eyes of the French. The beginning, needless to say, is not very encouraging. But only three hundred people were killed or driven back, and John's army numbered twenty-five thousand, and these twenty-five moved forward step by step. The king perched himself on his war horse and, like a statue, towered over this boundless sea of ​​armor that slowly flowed along the road.