Tag: french

This is one of the greatest health scandals France has experienced in its history. The contaminated blood affair, which affects several countries but particularly France, contains all the elements to be a major event in our country’s history. Indeed, political and financial scandals are added to the health scandal (the transfusion of blood contaminated with the AIDS virus). This is a mixture whose impact is still felt today.

How did the contaminated blood scandal break out in France?

The contaminated blood scandal officially broke out in 1991 through the initiative of a journalist, Anne-Marie Casteret, who unveiled a disastrous health practice. However, the scandal actually began much earlier. The world quickly raised suspicions about blood transmission of the disease after discovering the first cases of AIDS in the early 1980s. As early as 1983, several health professionals recommended heating blood at high temperatures before transfusing it to hemophiliacs. This required treatment capabilities that were insufficient in France at the time. Between 1984 and 1985, the National Blood Transfusion Center ignored these recommendations and continued distributing contaminated blood products to hemophiliacs. While some pointed out negligence in explaining this situation, others quickly mentioned the related financial stakes.

Which diseases did contaminated transfusions transmit?

While AIDS is better understood today, this wasn’t the case during the contaminated blood transfusions.

Who revealed the contaminated blood scandal?

Journalist Anne-Marie Casteret deserves credit for uncovering the contaminated blood scandal. On April 25, 1991, the French journalist, who was trained as a doctor, revealed a confidential report of a meeting held a few years earlier at the National Blood Transfusion Center (CNTS) in the weekly magazine “l’Evénement du Jeudi.” The public then became aware of this affair and discovered the main aspects of the medical scandal. Very quickly, several journalists began investigating. The health scandal was followed by a financial scandal, then a political scandal. The main political leaders of the time were attacked for their contradictory decisions and called upon to explain themselves.

Who was the Minister of Health during the contaminated blood scandal?

The contaminated blood scandal primarily targets Laurent Fabius, who held positions as Minister of Budget under François Mitterrand from 1981 to 1983, Minister of Industry and Research from 1983 to 1984, and Prime Minister from 1984 to 1986. His name is often associated with Edmond Hervé, Minister of Health from 1983 to 1985, and Georgina Dufoix. This affair also implicated the French politician, who served as Minister of Social Affairs and National Solidarity from 1984 to 1986. Georgina Dufoix declared in November 1991, just a few months after the scandal’s revelation, that she felt deeply responsible but not guilty, a statement that became famous as “responsible but not guilty.”

What are the figures for the contaminated blood scandal?

Hemophiliacs, who needed blood transfusions in the early 1980s, were the main victims. During the same period, the number of hospitalized patients also increased. In total, several thousand people received potentially contaminated blood transfusions. In its confidential report, the CNTS acknowledged that one in two people who received a blood transfusion was infected, or nearly 2,000 people, including children. More than 1,000 HIV-positive and sick people, 66 widows, and 77 orphans had already received initial compensation when the scandal broke in 1991.

Victims’ associations gradually emerged to demand truth, justice, and compensation. By the end of 1991, 4,000 people were able to prove they had received a contaminated transfusion, and those who were HIV-positive received compensation. The disease affected more than 4,400 hemophiliacs in 1999. 2,000 of them had developed the disease. 40% had died.

Who was convicted in the contaminated blood trial?

In 1992, a long judicial procedure began against those responsible for the contaminated blood affair, supported by victims’ associations. During the first trial in criminal court in 1992, the administration and the CNTS (National Blood Transfusion Center) were sanctioned. A year later, the verdict was confirmed on appeal, and the state’s fault was recognized. Michel Garretta, former director of the CNTS, and Jean-Pierre Allain, former head of the CNTS research department, were sentenced to four years in prison, including two years of non-suspended sentences. In 1994, the Cassation Court intervened in the procedure.

The Court of Justice of the Republic opened the trial of former political leaders implicated in the contaminated blood scandal in 1999, trying them for “involuntary manslaughter.” The Court of Justice of the Republic acquitted Laurent Fabius, just as it did Georgina Dufoix. The Republic Court of Justice found only Edmond Hervé guilty of involuntary manslaughter, but exempted him from punishment.

Were the victims of the contaminated blood compensated?

Hemophiliacs and hospitalized patients who received contaminated blood transfusions received compensation thanks to the work of victims’ associations. The estimated total compensation for victims and their families in 1996 was 17 billion francs. The state itself financed a significant portion of these 17 billion francs, while insurers contributed another part.

What consequences did the contaminated blood scandal have?

The contaminated blood scandal had significant consequences due to its scale and severity.

Political level: The state failed in its protective role and as a guarantor of public health. A sense of distrust towards the state developed in public opinion. The responsibility of political decision-makers was also questioned.

Medical level: The contaminated blood scandal created a rift in the medical world between doctors and their leaders capable of concealing information. Here too, mistrust developed between different links in the medical chain, including between patients and healthcare professionals. Many doctors, for example, found themselves confronted with patients infected by blood transfusions that they themselves had prescribed.

Legal level: In the aftermath of the health scandal, a constitutional crisis occurred. It led to the creation of the Court of Justice of the Republic.

In 481 AD, Clovis inherited the kingdom of his father, Childeric I. After unifying the Frankish peoples, the Merovingian monarch launched into the conquest of Gaul. In 486, he defeated the Gallo-Roman leader, Syagrius, at the Battle of Soissons. Following their victory, the Franks plundered the churches in the region and took away many valuable objects. Shortly after, the bishop of Reims asked Clovis to return a vase. The latter agreed, thereby transgressing Frankish traditions. One of his men challenged him by striking the vessel, but the monarch swallowed his anger.

A year later, Clovis recognized the warrior and shattered his skull with his Francisca (a favored short war axe of the Franks). He then uttered these famous words: “Just as you did to the vase of Soissons!” These words have stood the test of time and notably echoed under the Third Republic. Nearly a century after Gregory of Tours first reported it, the story of the Soissons vase continues to generate discussion. However, it carries strong symbolism: the connection between the Catholic Church and Clovis, who asserted his authority over the Frankish chiefs.

What Was the Historical Context of the Vase of Soissons?

In 476 AD, the Western Roman Empire vanished, yielding a patchwork of barbarian kingdoms. Around 481, upon his father’s demise, Clovis assumed leadership of the Salian Franks. Having consolidated his authority, he initiated the conquest of Gaul. In 486, scarcely 20 years old, the Frankish king vanquished the Gallo-Roman leader Syagrius in the Battle of Soissons. This event marked the demise of the final remnants of Roman authority in Gaul.

The account of the Soissons vase comes to us from Gregory of Tours, who, a century later, chronicled it in his work, “The History of the Franks.” The bishop and historian situate this incident in 486, directly following the Battle of Soissons. Clovis subsequently selected the captured city as the new stronghold of his realm. Following their triumph over the Roman army, the Frankish forces pillaged the religious edifices within Syagrius’s territory, seizing numerous precious artifacts and liturgical decorations, including a splendid vase of unparalleled beauty.

What Is the History of the Vase of Soissons?

After the plundering, the Bishop of Reims, Saint Remi, requests that Clovis return the liturgical vessel to him. Eager to please Saint Remi, the young Frankish king, as documented by Gregory of Tours, accedes to his request. Confronted with the gathered booty, Clovis seeks permission from his warriors to retrieve the object for its return to the bishop. This action deviates from Frankish custom, which typically mandates the distribution of wealth through drawing lots.

Nonetheless, his men willingly acquiesced to their monarch’s request. Only one warrior dissents, striking the vessel with his Francisca, a prized short war axe of the Franks. Clovis tolerates the insult and surrenders the dented vase to Saint Remi. 

A year later, while inspecting his troops during the March field, Clovis identifies the dissenting warrior. Intent on retribution for the earlier challenge, he chastises the warrior for his negligent appearance. Subsequently, Clovis confiscates the warrior’s weapons and hurls them to the ground. The Frankish soldier stoops to retrieve them, at which point Clovis fatally strikes him with a blow from his Francisca, splitting his skull.

Why Do We Say “Remember the Vase of Soissons”?

At the Champ de Mars, Clovis delivers what could be considered a funeral oration for the warrior: “Just as you did to the vase of Soissons!” These words of the Merovingian king have remained famous throughout history, especially during the 19th and 20th centuries. During the Third Republic, school textbooks reported the most famous formulation: “Remember the vase of Soissons!” At that time, the national narrative, the story that valorizes the construction of the nation, becomes of great importance. Clovis, the first Frankish king converted to Christianity and grandson of the legendary Merovech occupies a central place.

It was during his reign that the borders of the Frankish kingdom were extended to most of Gaul. He is also credited with choosing Paris as the capital, and his victories are commemorated, notably at the Battle of Tolbiac. Baptized on December 25, between 496 and 511, he is honored as the founder of the Christian monarchy. Finally, the anecdote of the vase of Soissons, the first act of his reign, is remembered.

Did the Event of the Vase of Soissons Really Happen?

The episode of the Vase of Soissons remains a subject of debate among historians today. It is very difficult to separate fact from fiction due to the lack of detailed information about the Merovingian era. The writings of Gregory of Tours, who was not contemporary with Clovis, are the only source from this period. Therefore, it is impossible to confirm with absolute certainty the events the bishop described in the “History of the Franks,” written a century later.

They could have been distorted or twisted to serve the author’s ideas and used for political purposes. Nevertheless, the story of the vase of Soissons has a strong symbolic significance. Clovis departs from Frankish customs, centralizes power, and asserts his superiority over his warriors. He also demonstrates, through delayed violence, that one does not flout the king’s authority with impunity.

By returning the liturgical vase to Remigius, Clovis shows his respect for the bishops and aligns himself with the Catholic Church. With his baptism in Reims, he definitively rejects his pagan beliefs and ensures the support of the Gallo-Roman elites!

The Second French Empire, which Napoleon III (Louis Napoleon) ruled from December 2, 1852, to September 4, 1870, succeeded the brief French Second Republic. It marked a period of significant economic expansion, particularly in industry, finance, and banking, resulting in social changes such as the growth of the working class. After an authoritarian phase characterized by the repression of opposition, a degree of liberalization within the regime emerged.

Despite several military and diplomatic successes (Crimean War, Italian Campaigns), the failure of the Mexican Expedition and, notably, the military defeat against Prussia in 1870 led to the downfall of the Second Empire.

Napoleon III: Prince-President of the French Second Republic

On November 4, 1848, the fledgling French Second Republic adopted a new constitution after lengthy negotiations. This constitution vested executive power in a president elected by universal suffrage and legislative power in the National Assembly. Presidential elections were set for December 10 and 11, 1848.

These elections aligned perfectly with the political ambitions of Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, the nephew of the emperor, who sought a return to politics on this occasion.

Republican votes were divided among the candidacies of General Cavaignac (representing the moderate Republicans), Ledru-Rollin (the most hardline Republicans), Raspail (the revolutionary socialists), and Lamartine, who had lost all his popularity.

The popular current, represented by the more conservative candidates, rallied behind Louis Napoleon Bonaparte. The prince’s carefully crafted election program included amnesty for all political convicts, reduced taxes and military conscription, an ambitious public works policy to address unemployment, social welfare measures, and modifications to industrial legislation.

On December 20, 1848, Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte was elected with nearly three-quarters of the votes. He garnered support from peasants, a portion of the working class, and the Party of Order, whose influential members would hold key ministerial positions. Quickly, the president’s mandate veered towards an authoritarian regime, temporarily quashing the aspirations of the Republicans.

Birth of the Second French Empire

In 1851, faced with the impossibility of obtaining a constitutional revision allowing his reelection, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte orchestrated a coup d’état on the symbolic date of December 2nd. A skilled tactician, he positioned himself as a recourse in a deliberately darkened context, relied on the judgment of the people (universal suffrage), and placed his actions under dual symbolic patronage (the French Revolution and Napoleon I).

However, while an overwhelming majority of the French people approved of the new political regime and the prospect of a return to expansion in peace, the traumatizing anti-republican repression fueled lasting animosity toward him and prevented the complete success of his plebiscitary strategy.

The year 1852 marked a period of dictatorship in the Roman sense. With the social peril averted and the futile games of the parties interrupted, institutions aimed at restoring the country’s stability were hastily established. Essentially borrowing from the provisions of the Constitution of the Year VIII, the new constitution was ready on January 14, 1852, and pre-approved by the plebiscite on December 21.

The president, a “responsible leader” before the people, was chosen for ten years. He governed “by means” of ministers who depended solely on him and a Council of State composed of the “most distinguished” 50 individuals who shaped his draft laws and defended them against a Legislative Body (Corps législatif) that lost its designation as the National Assembly.

Only the president, who had the support of 8 million French citizens, could claim to represent the people; the Legislative Body consisted of 260 to 290 “deputies” and was no longer a representative body. It convened only three months a year to approve or amend bills; at least, it voted on the budget, but as a whole, it was without control over expenditure allocations, rendering its power negligible. The Senate, “formed of all the illustrious figures of the country,” held more prominence. It judged the constitutionality of laws and was the sole interpreter of the Constitution, subject to modification by a Sénatus-consult.

After a “journey of inquiry” across the country, where public opinion was shrewdly influenced by prefects, it was through the Sénatus-consult of November 7, ratified by a plebiscite on the 31st with 7,824,189 yes votes against 253,145 no votes, that the prince-president became the “Emperor of the French.” Napoleon III was crowned on December 2, the anniversary of his uncle’s coronation, the victory at Austerlitz, and the coup d’état of 1851.

Authoritarian Empire

With the assistance of a growing army of officials, which rose from 120,000 in 1851 to 265,000 by the end of the Empire, effective prefects with increased powers enforced the emperor’s will in the provinces. This period marks a significant step in France’s path towards centralization. The public was willingly prepared to follow. The prefects are responsible for appointing mayors, deputy mayors, and teachers.

In the legislative body elected on February 29, 1852, out of 261 deputies, only 8 were opposition members, including 3 Republicans who refused to take their seats to avoid swearing allegiance to the Constitution. Prefects manipulate the system of “official candidacy,” securing 5,600,000 votes for government candidates despite a 37% abstention rate.

In the 1857 elections, only 12 opponents out of 267 deputies, mainly Republicans, the Les Cinq (the Five), including Émile Ollivier, participated this time. The imperialists consistently garnered 5.5 million votes. Should we not acknowledge that such majorities cannot be entirely “manufactured” and that the authoritarian empire is indeed a popular regime? Perhaps the answer lies in “middle ground.” France was both anesthetized and captivated.

However, it becomes evident that the regime was reactionary, both politically and socially. The repression since December, extending to the General Security Law, a true “Law of Suspects,” in February 1858, primarily targeted the left—workers, republicans, and common people in both urban and rural areas, much to the satisfaction of the Order.

Since the 1851 French coup d’état, the Empire has acquired a “reactionary bent.” Despite the efforts of figures like Morny, president of the legislative body until 1865, or Persigny, interior minister until 1854, there has been no renewal of the political class, genuine Bonapartists are rare, and there was no “imperialist” party. The overwhelming majority in the legislative body was mostly composed of members from the former Order party, who, fearing “anarchy,” temporarily forgot that they were also “liberals.”

The Empire maintains and expands the arsenal of repressive laws from its predecessors, particularly in press matters. As the then-prince president of Bordeaux stated in 1852, it primarily depends on the Catholic Church. Congregations multiply; their numbers go from 4,000 religious in 1851 to 18,000 a decade later. They take control of primary and secondary education. The entire lower clergy and the majority of bishops aligned themselves with the Empire.

Napoleonic Ideas

Napoleon III does not, by any means, wish to be seen as a champion advocating for the restoration of order. Although he opposes the Reds, he does not align himself with the Whites. His aspiration is to be associated with the blue, his favorite phrase being ‘I belong to the Revolution.’ The preamble of the 1852 Constitution states that it “recognizes, confirms, and guarantees the great principles proclaimed, which form the basis of the French public power.” The emperor, a man of progress and a son of ’89, holds what an 1839 book titled “Napoleonic Ideas”

‘Abroad, national dignity!’ was the first of these ideas that he implemented. He had indeed promised that the Empire would bring about peace. However, it was necessary to engage in the bellicose game of Europe to erase the shame of the treaties of 1815. England stood by France’s side in 1854–1855 during the victorious Crimean War, undertaken to halt the Russian threat to the Turkish straits connecting the Black Sea to the Mediterranean. Prussia and Austria remained neutral, and the old coalition of 1815 was finally broken. At the Paris Congress of February 1856, France, appearing as a mediator, regained the place that suited her in the world.

A Europe committed to progress must uphold the principle of nationality and the right of peoples to self-determination. In 1859, alongside the small Piedmont, there was a victorious yet costly war against Austria to achieve the unity of Italy. Italy emerged nearly united, with only Venetia remaining under Austrian control, and notably, Rome was retained by the Pope. France acquired Nice and Savoy. This French pursuit of greatness is further evident in the global expansion from 1859 to 1867, encompassing the conquest of Cochinchina, the establishment of a protectorate over Cambodia, and the definitive presence in Senegal.

When the time came, a decree on November 24, 1860, restored the right of address to the Legislative Body. In 1861, the right to examine the budget in detail, by sections, was also reinstated. The Napoleonic idea extended to the ‘well-being of the people,’ declaring that ‘the reign of castes is over.’ Workers, whom the Empire sought to appease, gained the right to strike in 1864, marking a crucial conquest.

To ensure economic prosperity that generates well-being for all, free-trade treaties were signed with England in 1860 and, in the subsequent years, with other European countries.

Reign of Business

The Empire, in economic matters, demonstrated a decidedly modern approach. It was not yet a matter of state intervention, but progress was inspired and sometimes facilitated through direct assistance. The years 1852–1870 marked a privileged period of agricultural prosperity, driven by a favorable trend in global prices. Activities focused on territory development, land reclamation, the expansion of local roads, increased use of fertilizers, and the initiation of agricultural credit.

A revolution unfolded in the banking world. The sturdy yet cautious network of the “high” or “old” bank had long dominated all financial activities. A decree issued on November 18, 1852, authorized the establishment of the Crédit Mobilier by the Pereire brothers, aiming to become the prominent national investment bank envisioned by Saint-Simonian industrialists. The Crédit Mobilier played a decisive role in railroad ventures, both in France and abroad, including Spain and Austria, as well as in urban planning projects in Marseille and Paris. Additionally, it contributed to maritime navigation, exemplified by its involvement in establishing the Compagnie Générale Transatlantique.

Having played a high-stakes game and faced opposition from traditional banks, notably the Rothschilds, the Pereire brothers had to withdraw in 1867.

Less venturesome, major financial institutions emerge, mobilizing private deposits to capitalize on industry and business. They formed the framework of the future modern banking network: in 1863, Crédit Lyonnais; in 1864, Société Générale; and the Bank of the Netherlands, the precursor to Paribas.

A decisive revolution in communication also took place. By 1870, the French railway network, spanning 17,000 km, had been largely completed, providing a significant impetus to the development of heavy industries. These industries experienced a growth rate of over 6% per year, undergoing modernization and consolidation to confront English competition.

Notably, cities such as Paris, Lyon, Marseille, and Bordeaux underwent reconstruction and expansion, reflecting the adage, “When construction is booming, everything is thriving.” The Empire marked an era of financial dominance, as highlighted by a publicist in 1863, who stated, “Banks, steamships, railways, large factories, and companies of any kind, forming a capital of shares and bonds of 20 billion, were in the hands of 183 financiers.” However, despite being inadequately explained, a “slowdown” in growth initiated around 1860–1865, persisting until the end of the century.

The Metamorphosis of Paris Under the Second French Empire

Paris in the first half of the 19th century was a city in decline. Infrastructure, housing, roads, sewers, and hospitals had not kept pace with the significant population growth: within the boundaries of old Paris, 600,000 inhabitants lived in 1801, 817,000 in 1817, and 1,152,000 in 1856. In central neighborhoods, population densities frequently exceeded 1,000 inhabitants per hectare. The cholera outbreak claimed 18,400 lives in 1832 and 16,000 in 1849.

In 1853, Maxime du Camp stated that “Paris was becoming uninhabitable” at the time when Baron Haussmann was appointed prefect of the Seine. Fulfilling the emperor’s directive, Haussmann initiated an extensive project of redevelopment and beautification, entailing the demolition and reconstruction of entire districts. The Haussmannian avenues, broad and straight, adorned with tree-planted sidewalks and buildings featuring elegant facades, introduced a sense of openness to the urban fabric. Simultaneously, the transportation network underwent a profound overhaul.

A grand cross-section traversed Paris, extending from north to south through the boulevards of Strasbourg, Sébastopol, and Saint-Michel, and from west to east along the streets of Rivoli and Saint-Antoine. The expanded Place du Château-d’Eau (République) saw the extension of boulevards Magenta and Voltaire, along with the rue de Turbigo, aimed at facilitating access to vibrant working-class neighborhoods. Towards the west, expansive avenues radiated from the Étoile; to the north, Boulevard Haussmann and Rue La Fayette were crossed; and to the southeast, Boulevard Saint-Germain was developed.

• Also: Haussmann’s Renovation of Paris: Transformations Under the Second Empire

The Bois de Boulogne and Bois de Vincennes were developed. The sewer system expanded from 200 to 600 kilometers; water was sourced from the Marne and the Dhuys. The operation incurred a considerable cost of $2.5 billion. Left to private enterprise, construction led to rampant speculation. The affluent districts were embellished far more than the popular districts. However, with the annexation of its suburbs in 1860, Paris could accommodate nearly 2 million inhabitants in its 20 arrondissements within these 60,000 houses.

Rising Threats

The second decade of the reign reveals signs of wear and even cracks. In the 1863 elections, the opposition—diverse, ranging from liberal monarchists to republicans—secured 2 million votes, with about thirty elected representatives. Silenced since 1852, the political class regained momentum. On January 11, 1864, Thiers made a resounding return to the Legislative Corps, demanding “necessary” individual freedoms, freedom of the press, freedom of opinion, and, above all, parliamentary freedom.

A warning shot! Some deputies are poised to coalesce around this program, forming a ‘third party”—a play on words for Thiers’ party. Simultaneously, the Empire encountered significant setbacks in foreign policy: challenges in Italy, where the populace clamored for Rome as the capital; the collapse of a bold expedition to Mexico; and the inexorable advancement of German unity centered around Prussia.

Political concessions were necessary; in 1867, the right of interpellation was restored to deputies; in 1868, a law significantly relaxed the press regime, and another law authorized public meetings during electoral periods. “Public opinion” can now express itself.

Radically contesting the regime’s existence, the Republican Party launched a vigorous offensive on the public stage. Led by a new generation of activists like Gambetta and Ferry, it particularly advanced in urban areas. However, the working class refused to respond to the advances of the “emperor of the workers.”

Social tensions intensified with an increasing number of strikes and the proliferation of workers’ trade unions, most of which joined the International Workers’ Association with the motto, “The emancipation of workers will be the work of the workers themselves.” Indeed, they placed their hopes in an imminent revolution to establish a democratic and social republic.

The Liberal Empire: End or Beginning Again?

In the 1869 elections, government-backed candidates received only 4.4 million votes, while the opposition, encompassing all tendencies, secured 3.3 million. A majority, consisting of moderate opposition and liberal government members, now emerges in the Legislative Corps, demanding a return to a parliamentary regime. This transition becomes imperative.

Through two Sénatus-consulte decrees on September 8, 1869, and April 20, 1870, the powers of both chambers were expanded, establishing ministerial responsibility. The liberal third party emerged victorious, although without Thiers, who was considered too formidable of an adversary. On January 2, 1870, the emperor assigned the task of forming a ministry that would ‘be homogeneous and faithfully represent the majority of the Legislative Corps’ to Émile Ollivier, a repentant republican.

Advocates propose a return to the parliamentary regime that had pleased the bourgeois political class since 1830. Does this signal the end of the Empire? “Patching up” doesn’t seem unfavorable; could a parliamentary empire not be viable? Did the emperor not promise to restore freedom, the “crowning achievement” of the system, when the time came? Indeed, Napoleon III skillfully rebalances the situation in his favor.

On May 8, 1870, he requested the nation’s approval for the significant reforms he had just undertaken through a plebiscite. Universal suffrage overwhelmingly supported the reforms, with 7.3 million yes votes and 1.5 million no votes, affirming that the emperor’s popularity remained intact, if not strengthened. While the executive was no longer entirely sovereign, it retained both its aura and prerogative. Despite deep disappointment, the Republicans realized that converting the country would require at least another generation of propaganda, education, and efforts.

Legacy of the Second French Empire

And it is not, in fact, from this crisis, ultimately well overcome, that the Empire dies. It found, as it were, a second wind when, imprudently—”with a light heart,” says Émile Ollivier—on July 19, it engaged in the 1870 war against Prussia, which was becoming decidedly too arrogant at our Rhine border. Victory would have been easy, further consolidating the regime.

However, the Prussians breach the borders of Alsace immediately; the bulk of the army, with Bazaine, becomes trapped in Metz. A relief army, led by Mac-Mahon and the emperor himself, faces a cruel defeat at Sedan on September 1, resulting in Napoleon III becoming a prisoner. Upon receiving the news in Paris, a provisional government of the Republic was established, marking the end of the Second Empire.

Despised by republican historiography, which one might argue is biased, the Second Empire appears as a hybrid regime. Simultaneously a reissue of the first and not, it maintains its democratic essence: the Constitution replicates the terms of that of the Year VIII and reaffirms and safeguards the fundamental principles of 1789. Most notably, universal suffrage is upheld, marking a lasting acquisition of a right that can no longer be revoked.

Its popularity, spanning almost twenty years, serves as a guarantee. Initially authoritarian, it eventually underwent a process of liberalization. While it began as such, it was never truly totalitarian. The country inherits from this empire an original tradition that doesn’t align strictly with either the right or the left—a trend that sporadically resurfaces in French political life.

In the early 16th century, a German religious figure named Martin Luther challenged the Catholic Church, initiating the Reformation. Swiftly, the Protestant revolutionary movement spread across Europe. In France, the Reformation was propagated by Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples before being significantly influenced by the ideas of Calvin. However, as the movement gained momentum, the reformists soon became the target of persecution.

Divided, France descended into a series of civil wars continually fueled by the country’s political context—these are known as the Wars of Religion. Born in a conducive atmosphere, the armed conflicts persisted for over 30 years, concluding only with the reunification efforts of Henry IV. Consequently, the eight Wars of Religion inexorably paved the way for French absolutism.

What Were the Origins of the French Wars of Religion?

During the reign of Francis I in France, the Protestant Reformation initially faced little opposition. Despite being a Catholic, the king demonstrated tolerance towards Protestants. However, their determined efforts to spread their faith eventually exasperated him. In 1534, for instance, hostile placards against the Mass were posted throughout the country, even in the royal chamber. This proved too much for the offended king, who immediately initiated a series of persecutions to expel the “heretics” from the country.

• Affair of the Placards: Iconoclasm in France

The repression continued under King Henry II, a less resolute Catholic who allowed the power of the Guise family, fervent Catholics hungry for power, to flourish during his reign. His death presented an opportunity for Protestants, as his inexperienced young son, Francis II, succeeded him. Exploiting the political vulnerability of the country, they organized the Amboise conspiracy in 1560 to influence the young monarch, but their plan failed.

Upon the king’s death, his brother, Charles IX, ascended to the throne at not even 10 years old. His mother, Catherine de’ Medici, assumed the regency. Despite her late husband’s behavior and the Amboise conspiracy, she aimed for reconciliation between the two religious factions. With the assistance of her new chancellor, Michel de l’Hôpital, she persuaded her son to sign the January Edict, which was relatively favorable to Protestants. However, Francis, Duke of Guise, was ousted from power due to his rigid pro-Catholic stance, disagreed, and organized the Massacre of Vassy in 1562. This tragic event immediately triggered the first of the eight French Wars of Religion.

How Were the Eight Wars of Religion Fought?

The First War of Religion, 1562-1563: The royal power’s policy of tolerance ended in failure, leading to the First War of Religion. The royal family appeared to be unable to control the situation. This war, which started with the Massacre of Vassy, sees Francis, Duke of Guise, and the Constable of Montmorency on the Catholic side, opposing the Prince of Condé and Gaspard II de Coligny on the Protestant side. It concludes with the assassination of Francis, Duke of Guise, and the Edict of Amboise. Despite a defeat at Dreux, the Protestants emerged from the conflict with significant advantages.

The Second War of Religion, 1567-1568: However, after only four years, the Second War of Religion erupted when the Prince of Condé attempted to kidnap the young King Charles IX. It ended with the Peace of Longjumeau in 1568, but it took only a year for both parties to resume hostilities.

The Third War of Religion, 1568-1570: Catherine de’ Medici’s decision to arrest the Prince of Condé led to the battles of Jarnac in 1569 and Moncontour. Both ended in defeat for the Protestants against the troops of the Duke of Anjou, the king’s brother and future Henry III. Yet, once again, a peace treaty signed at Saint-Germain-en-Laye (1570) grants them new privileges.

The Fourth War of Religion, 1572-1573: After the Third War of Religion, France was about to witness one of the worst massacres on its territory. Gaspard de Coligny, increasingly influential with the king, plans to take up arms to support William of Orange against the Spanish king’s forces. This displeases both Catherine de’ Medici and the Guise family, who take action: on August 22, 1572, Coligny narrowly escapes an assassination attempt. The wheels of the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre were set in motion.

What Happened During the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre?

—>The Queen Mother convinces her son that the Protestants, gathered in the capital for the marriage of Margaret of Valois and Henry of Navarre, are conspiring against him. She also fears that the Guise may turn against royal authority, hence her preference to align with them. In panic, the king approves the execution of Protestant leaders. The St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre resulted in 3,000 deaths in the capital on August 24, 1572. The Prince of Condé and Henry of Navarre, future Henry IV, are compelled to convert and are held at the court. This dramatic fourth war concluded with the Edict of Boulogne in July 1573. From that moment on, Protestants lost all trust in the monarchy and organized themselves. They raise an army and impose taxes on their territory.

The Fifth War of Religion, 1574-1576: Despite various treaties, the situation remains stagnant, inevitably leading to another conflict. This time, the Fifth War of Religion takes place in the first year of Henry III’s reign. It is triggered by the rebellion of his brother, the Duke of Alençon, who is joined by Henry of Navarre, having successfully escaped the Court. Notably, Henry of Navarre promptly renounced the Catholic faith. With him, the Protestants now have a capable leader to guide them to victory. The conflict concludes with the Peace of Monsieur, also known as the Edict of Beaulieu, which proves particularly favorable to the Protestants.

The Sixth War of Religion in 1577: These new favors granted to the Protestants were too much in the eyes of the Guise, who established the League, a military and political organization ready to ardently fight against the Reformists. Faced with the power of the Guise, Henry III had no choice but to align himself with the League. The sixth war concluded in a few months with the Treaty of Bergerac. This treaty deprived the Protestants of most of the advantages they had gained with the Edict of Beaulieu the previous year.

The Seventh War of Religion (1585-1588): In an attempt to appease tensions, the French king concedes fifteen secure locations to the Protestants for six months in the Treaty of Nerac (1579). However, after six months, conflict resumes as the Huguenots refuse to relinquish control of these locations. The Peace of Fleix in 1580 concluded the hostilities, granting the Protestants control of the fifteen secure locations for six years.

The Eighth War of Religion (1585-1588): In 1584, France teeters on the brink of a significant religious conflict. The king’s brother dies, leaving Henry III without an heir. Succumbing to pressure from the Catholic League, Henry III banned Protestant worship in 1585, sparking a war between Catholics and Henry of Navarre, the presumptive heir to the French crown. In a turn of events in May 1588, Parisian citizens revolted under the leadership of Henry I, Duke of Guise, forcing the king to abandon the capital and align with Henry of Navarre. Together, they attempt to reclaim Paris, but the king is assassinated shortly after choosing his ally as his successor.

Henry of Navarre, the future Henry IV, faced rejection from the Catholics, who continued to receive military support from Philip II of Spain. France descends into a significant political disorder. While Henry IV sought to secure the crown, some nobles exploited the situation, striving to establish autonomous territories, as seen with the dukes of Mercoeur and Épernon. Others, like the dukes of Savoy and Lorraine, aim to expand their territorial boundaries.

How Did Henry IV Put an End to the Wars of Religion?

Henry IV’s sole means of ascending to the throne of France was renouncing Protestantism and converting to Catholicism. Subsequently, the king underwent coronation in Chartres and finally entered Paris. His imperative task was to reunify France under the crown and to preempt a Protestant uprising, he enacted the Edict of Nantes in 1598. This edict granted Protestants significant religious freedom and civil equality.

Nevertheless, the challenge persisted; neither faction was genuinely content. The weariness of the populace, however, played a pivotal role in the cessation of armed conflicts. Henry IV managed to restore a semblance of equilibrium, albeit a precarious one, as evidenced by his assassination by François Ravaillac in 1610.

How Many People Died in the Wars of Religion?

The Wars of Religion concluded in 1598 after over 30 years of nearly uninterrupted conflict. During this period, France experienced a demographic decline, with the population decreasing by one to two million inhabitants between 1560 and 1600. It is challenging to attribute all these deaths solely to the Catholic-Protestant conflict. The casualties resulted not only from wars but also from famines, the plague, and unfavorable weather events, all of which are significant factors not to be overlooked.

Historians, on the other hand, put the death toll for the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre alone, which spread across the whole of France in 1572, at around 30,000 (and 20,000).

How Did the Wars of Religion Lead to French Absolutism?

Despite the Edict of Nantes, religious conflicts did not vanish. During the reign of Louis XIII, Protestants revolted again, fearing renewed repression. However, under Richelieu’s policy, following the Siege of La Rochelle, the Peace of Alès was signed, stripping Protestants of all military and political power. Henry IV, Cardinal Richelieu, and Louis XIII paved the way for absolutism, fully established under Louis XIV. To reunify and consolidate France, the king believed in imposing a single religion on all, leading to the revocation of the Edict of Nantes by Louis XIV in 1685.

Emerging in a context of monarchic fragility, the Wars of Religion often eluded royal authority, which alternated between conciliation and repression. The feudal powers, capable of destabilizing the kingdom at any moment, added to this fragility. Consequently, France descended into anarchy until Henry IV seized power. The king’s attempts at reconciliation and compromise ended in failure, as after his death, Protestant revolts and repression resurged. Tolerance was not yet embraced. Faced with this tumultuous past, the French kings opted for absolutism. Peaceful coexistence between the two Christian confessions would only materialize in the Enlightenment and the 19th century.

Chronology of the French Wars of Religion

• 1560: Protestant conspiracy at Amboise. Execution of conspirators.

First War (1562–1563)

• 1562: Massacre of Vassy (March); the “triumvirate” (Guise, Saint-André, Montmorency) seizes Rouen (October).
• 1563: Death of Francis, Duke of Guise, at the Siege of Orléans (February); Edict of Amboise (March).

Second War (1567–1568)

• 1568: Peace of Longjumeau (March).

Third War (1569–1571)

• 1569: Invasion of Béarn; victory of the Duke of Anjou and death of Condé at Jarnac (March); Francis, Duke of Anjou’s victory at Moncontour (October).
• 1570: Peace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye granting freedom of conscience and four strongholds to the Protestants (August).
• 1572: St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre (August 24).

Fourth War

• Failure of the Duke of Anjou before La Rochelle (February–June); Treaty of La Rochelle, giving the city, Nîmes, and Montauban to the Protestants (July).

Fifth War (1574–1576)

• 1575: Victory of the Henry I, Duke of Guise, (Scarface) at Dormans (October).
• 1576: Edict of Beaulieu (May) granting freedom of worship to Protestants everywhere except in Paris and eight safe places; birth of the League (June).

Sixth War

• Uprising of Henry of Navarre: the Duke of Anjou seizes La Charité (May); Peace of Bergerac (September), restricting the Edict of Beaulieu.

Seventh War (1579–1581)

• 1579 Peace of Nerac, giving fifteen strongholds to Protestants (February).
• 1584: Alliance of Guise and Philip II of Spain (Treaty of Joinville).
• 1585: Henry III allies with the League (July). Henry of Navarre, heir to the throne, is deprived of his rights (September).

Eighth War (1585–1588)

• 1587: Victory of Henry of Navarre at Coutras (October).
• 1588: Day of the Barricades in Paris and Henry III’s escape to Chartres (May); Estates General in Blois (October); assassination of the Duke of Guise in Blois (December).
• 1589: Alliance of Henry III and Henry of Navarre (Plessis-lez-Tours, April); siege of Paris by the two Henrys (July); assassination of Henry III (August); victory of Henry IV at Arques (September).
• 1590: Victory of Henry IV at Ivry (March), but he cannot take Paris (May).
• 1593: Henry IV abjures Protestantism (July).
• 1594: Henry IV enters Paris.
• 1595: Victory of Henry IV over the Spanish at Fontaine-Française (June); submission of the Duke of Mayenne, a Catholic claimant to the throne of France.
• 1598: Edict of Nantes (April); Peace of Vervins with the Spanish (May).