Download Richelieu djvu

There are those who have taken the position that this is best of Belloc's many great books. Certainly, that is a bold statement, as this peerless and prolific historian wrote countless excellent and important books. In any case, this particular work is certainly unique.

Within the pages of his aptly styled study, Belloc describes the character of the Cardinal, the scene on which he played out his particular part in the powerful play, and the huge impact that Richelieu had. It is this impact, which is most important to the student. For Belloc argues conclusively that Richelieu was largely responsible for the shaping of modern Europe, in the shape that Belloc percieved it in the first half of the twentieth century.

Richelieu succeeded in elevating the French crown to primacy in Europe in an era where her supremacy was greatly threatened by the bicephalous realms of Hapsburg Austria and Spain. In this, Richelieu can be seen as the consummate politician and strategist, yes, even in the military sense of the word. Richelieu was not, as Warren Carroll styled him, a "Cardinal Against the Church". He was, rather, a most effective advocate of French policy and polity, who left as dramatic a mark on Europe as any actor until at least the time of Bismarck.

Is this Belloc's best work? We can hardly venture to assess that. It is, in any case, hugely worthwhile and a rip-roaring fun ride through the pages of history with "Old Thunder". Pick it up, and give it a read.

I have just finished this and will read it again and again.
It's my first Belloc history and I will read as many as I can get my hands on.
I brought my long suffering kids up on Belloc's "Cautionary Tales for Children."
" There was a boy whose name was Jim whose friends were very good to him,
they gave him tea and toast and jam and slices of delicious ham etc etc."
My previous exposure to Richelieu was through various general histories of Europe, Alexander Dumas and of course, Hollywood.
He is a million times more complex than even any of these aforementioned fantasists could portray him.
Despite being devoutly Catholic he wasn't prone to taking bites out of stone walls when it came to realpolitik and best serving France and his King at the expense of his Catholic co-religionists in Germany, helping Gustavus Adolphus lay waste to Europe thus thwarting Hapsburg hegemonic aspirations emanating from both Spain and Austria.
We can thank him for saving France and European Catholicism and culture generally from the ravages of the Huguenots, Calvinist and Luthern Johnny Jumpup squireens and Protestant Taliban who used the Reformation to grab as much confiscated church land as they could, at the expense of their religion, Kings and peasantry.
Richelieu created the Europe we see today and Belloc's comparison with the terrible and redoubtable Bismark gives food for thought.
I loved this and will read it again and again.

Belloc's biography of Richelieu is about as much a biography as his friend G. K. Chesterton's Autobiography is an autobiography (i.e. it isn't). And that is very much a good thing. What we get instead is a wonderful panoramic view of Europe in the first half of the 17th century. Belloc goes far deeper than the mystery of the person of Richelieu and focuses instead on the tremendous impact that Richelieu had on the subsequent history of Christendom. Along the way he does get around to analyzing Richelieu himself, though this often seems to be done for the purpose of illustrating some point he is making about some other matter. In short, this book is not about Richelieu so much as it is about the importance of studying Richelieu. As such, it succeeds brilliantly.

Belloc's claims concerning Richelieu are enormous, and, at first glance, monstrously unbelieveable. Belloc argues that Richelieu nearly single handedly brought about the victory of Protestantism over Catholicism (at least the temporary victory, as Belloc saw it) in Europe. If this were not enough, Belloc argues that Richelieu is the man responsible for the surge of nationalism dominating the West over the past several centuries and, most importantly, the utter destruction of that peculiar phenomenon we called Christendom. That any single man, let alone a Cardinal in the Catholic Church such as Richelieu (given that most of the accomplishments Belloc credits Richelieu with were severely detrimental to the Catholic Church), should be responsible for so much stretches credulity, but Belloc is very convincing. His main claim is that Richelieu's primary motivation was the elevation of the power of his King, even above his motivation to aid the Catholic cause against the growing Protestant threat. As such, Richelieu chose to bring power to his king even when doing so involved doing things which helped the Protestants gain the upper hand. He supported his individual nation as opposed to other nations, rather than viewing himself as a part of Christendom (Belloc seems to define Christendom as being inherintly Catholic) opposed to Protestantism. This led him not only to fight against the sole hope for a unifying Cathoic leader in Europe, the Hapsburg Dynasty which controlled both the Holy Roman Empire and Spain, but to actually fund Gustavus Adolphus in his Protestant war against the Holy Roman Empire which so crippled it that it never fully recovered. He also brought peace between the French Catholics and the French Huguenots in order to strengthen France, despite the fact that he could have made France a decidedly and firmly Catholic nation had he so chosen. The cost, however, would have been a weakening of the French nation, which Richelieu would not abide. In other words, Richelieu made France his priority even above his Catholic religion, and this was an innovation which led both to nationalism and the destruction of Catholic claims to universatily in Europe. Protestantism might very well have been reduced to a significant minority had Richelieu not chosen to fight alongside Protestantism against the Hapsburgs in order to bring more power to France.

Despite Belloc's extreme regret that Richelieu allowed/caused such things to happen (Belloc was decidedly Catholic, and pined for the good old days of a united Catholic Christendom), he is not very critical of Richelieu. In fact, he regards him as one of the greatest geniuses of the past age. I believe at some point in the book he identified Richelieu as the single greatest politician in human history. Belloc is obviously in awe of Richelieu's political aptitude, and treats Richelieu with great fairness. He even attempts to justify many of Richelieu's decisions which have been questioned by others, and seems intent on preserving Richelieu's claim to political greatness. He frequently compares Richelieu to Otto Von Bismark, referring to them as the two great shapers of the modern (early 20th century) political landscape, but he clearly thinks Richelieu is the greater of the two.

This is definitely a book worth reading, even if you don't agree with Belloc's devotion to Catholic Christendom. He does like to bring up the evils of Protestantism, but a lot of the time he's right in his claims. Protestantism gained a good deal of political power through the reluctance of the nobles to give back church property which had been confiscated during anti-Catholic periods. Protestantism also splintered Christianity, allowing Christendom to dissolve and be replaced by thoroughly secular nations. Unfortunately, while Belloc is quick to point these things out, he is slow to recognize Catholic failings. On the whole, however, Belloc is seems very accurate in his descriptions and is usually attempts to be fair to all parties in his discussions. I'd pick up a copy if you get the chance, because you won't find a book that sums up the importance of Richelieu as well as Belloc does anywhere else.