Is it true that as Napoleon progressed in 1815, the epithets in the headings of French newspapers changed from the “Corsican Monster” to Paris to “His Imperial Majesty”?

In social networks, there is often a story about how the French newspapers consistently called Napoleon during his return from the exile by the “monster”, “cannibal” and “usurper”, and then “his imperial majesty”. We decided to check if this is true.

Most often, the story of the behavior of the press during the return of Napoleon from the island of Elba is transmitted like this. In ten days, the headlines of the French newspapers changed depending on Bonaparte’s advancement to the capital: “The Corsican monster landed in the bay of the Juan”, “the cannibal goes to the grace”, “the usurpator entered Grenoble”, “Bonaparte occupied Lyon”, “Napoleon is approaching Fontaineglo”, “His Imperial Majesty is expected today in its faithful Paris.” The mention of this episode is, for example, in the Russian version "Wikipedia" With reference to the book of Academician Yevgeny Tarle Napoleon. This story is also found in historical publications - for example, on the website of the magazine "Amateur"True, without mentioning the source. Often it is also remembered in social networks, usually as an example of the political variability of the press. This story can be found in Livejournaland in "VKontakte", And on entertainment sites Pikabu, anekdot.ru And yaplakal.com.

Academician Tarle, chief specialist of the Soviet era on the history of the Napoleonic Wars, really cites this fragment In his book Napoleon, published in 1936. Tarle looks like this:

“The Paris press of the Paris press from extreme self -confidence turned to a complete decline in the spirit and undisguised fear close to the ruling spheres. Typical for her behavior these days was a strict sequence of epithets attached to Napoleon as his offensive movement is from the south to the north. The first news: "The Corsican monster landed in the bay of the Juan." Second news: "The cannibal goes to Grassa." Third news: "The usurpator entered Grenoble." The fourth news: "Bonaparte took Lyon." Fifth news: "Napoleon is approaching Fontainebleau." The sixth news: "His imperial majesty is expected today in his faithful Paris." All this literary gamut fit in the same newspapers, under the same edition for several days. ”

The selection of headings in itself looks doubtful: the structure of the newspapers was completely different. If you take the arbitrary number of the government Le Moniteur Universel for this period, it is clear that the messages look different.

Articles about the news from different cities are entitled: “Lemozh, March 3” or “Paris, March 7”. Other messages are not at all equipped with headings, as, for example, in the above excerpt from the number for March 8, 1815. But it can be assumed that this is not about headlines, but about phrases from various articles.

In the official Le Moniteur Universel, the first mention of Napoleon's return Appears Only March 7. The newspaper published a decree of King Louis XVIII of March 6, which said the following: "Napoleon Bonaparte proved himself as a traitor and rebel, invading the Var Department." Then, the decree tells about punitive measures that are waiting for those who assist Napoleon and his army. There are no assessment characteristics like “cannibal” or “Corsican monster” there.

The next day, March 8, the editors of the newspaper Moniteur I apologized Readers for delaying information about the landing of Napoleon. “The telegraph dispatches available to us did not contain any details,” writes Moniteur. Further, in a completely neutral information manner, he describes how Napoleon got to France exactly: on February 26, several ships left Portoferrayo, on March 1, they were already on the Juan bay raid, on the same day Napoleon landed on the shore. The next day, Bonaparte people headed on the way to Grass. All roads, according to Moniteur, were controlled by the troops faithful to the king, the paths to retreat were cut off. The first news of the landing, the newspaper emphasizes, ended up in Paris only on March 5. Again we pay attention to what Napoleon is called: Bonaparte, Napoleon and nothing else - no insults, no sonorous definitions.

A little further on the same page of the newspaper for March 8 is an appeal to the king of Parisian municipal advisers. It talks about “a foreigner who stepped on our shore at a heavy moment for the country”, about tyranny, which was under Napoleon. But again, no "cannibals".

On March 9, new Details. The newspaper talks about the desertion of Napoleon’s soldiers, about how the inhabitants of Grenoble and Marseille were hung in the windows of the white royal flags and shouted “Long live the king!”, About impeccable discipline in the government forces. As in the previous issue, the news should be addressed to the king, this time the cassation court. The landing in it is called "crazy adventure", and Napoleon himself is an "enemy of France and the whole world." But the newspaper only quotes the letter. By that time, Napoleon, without spilling a drop of blood, had already entered Grenoble, and his army increased several times due to the joined volunteers.

The sharpest statement in the first ten days after the landing of Napoleon belongs to Marshal Sulta, in the past one of the closest associates of the emperor, and in 1815 to the military minister under Louis XVIII. Moniteur Published His appeal to the army, in which the minister writes that Napoleon "so despises us that he considers us able to betray his legal ruler." But here there is nothing about monsters and cannibals.

In the following numbers, Moniteur continues to transmit news about the promotion of Napoleon, talk about the widespread support of the king and publish loyal letters from various institutions. The word “usurpator” finally comes across in the issue for March 11 - in letter judges of the Seine Department.

This continues until March 21. Number It is noteworthy for this day. It begins with a short news about the departure of the king and princes. And then the following article was printed: “Paris, March 20. His Imperial Majesty arrived this evening at 8 o’clock in his palace in Tuileries. Together with him, the same troops that were sent to stop him in Paris. ” At the end of the column, the newspaper promises the next day to publish a detailed story about what has happened over the past 20 days, from the moment of landing in the bay of Juan to the triumphal procession in Paris.

Thus, in the main Parisian newspaper for March 1815 there are no epithets that academician Tarle writes about. It remains to understand where this bright, but implausible fragment came from. In 1953, journalist Jacques Kaiser published article In the newspaper Monde, in which he suggested that a widely dispersed myth is nothing more than the fruit of the fantasy of Tarla himself. In France, at the same time, another option was more popular, more complete, printed in 1945 in the "History of the Paris Press" Rene Mazedier. In addition to the six headings known for Tarla, there were three more: “The cannibal left his lair”, “the tiger arrived in the GAP” and “the usurpator saw 60 lies from the capital”.

In 1954 appeared New article Kaiser, in which he made adjustments to his previous theory. He found that the headlines appeared much earlier, and their alleged author is none other than Alexander Dumas, the author of the Three Musketeers and Count Monte Cristo. In the book "Year in Florence" (1841) Dumas tells About the return of Napoleon from the Elbe. “In order to trace the triumphal procession of Napoleon to Paris, we just need to read Moniteur,” writes Dumas. And then it quotes the same Izvestia, which Tarle then took to his book.

“This is a real monument to journalism; After that, you can no longer write anything, you can’t achieve more, ”Dumas notes sarcastically.

But Dumas, as it turns out, was not the first to bring Izvestia about the advance of Napoleon. Most likely, the writer borrowed them from the collection "Jokes of the XIX century", Published in 1821. Among the many stories there is one that tells about censorship in 1815. And there are listed Those same Izvestia, and again with reference to Moniteur.

Thus, in real newspapers there is not a trace of the story that is often brought in blogs and historical works. Initially, it represents a fiction, a historical joke, in a grotesque form describing a rapid change in the political position of the newspaper, which in reality in this case behaved relatively neutral.

Photo on the cover: Wikimedia Commons

Not true

What do our verdicts mean?

Read on the topic:

1. Is it true that Napoleon was small in stature?
2. Did Napoleon say: “The people who do not want to feed their army will soon feed someone else's”?
3. Is it true that the nose of the Big Sphinx was repulsed by order of Napoleon?