Divine Fury (62 page)

8
. For a careful analysis of the legislation on intellectual property, see Carla Hesse,
Publishing and Cultural Politics in Revolutionary Paris, 1789–1810
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), chap. 3.

9
.
Rapport fait par Marie-Joseph Chénier, sur la translation des cendres de René Descartes au Panthéon
, séance du 18 floréal, l’an 4 (Paris: De l’imprimerie national, Messidor, an 4 [1796]), 2. On the association of liberty and genius in the Revolution, see Paul Bénichou,
Le sacre de l’écrivain, 1750–1830: Essai sur l’avènement d’un pouvoir spiritual laïque dans la France moderne
(Paris: José Corti, 1985), 45. On the use of Longinus in apologies for the Glorius Revolution, see Jonathan Lamb, “The Sublime,” in
The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism
, vol. 4,
The Eighteenth Century
, eds. H. B. Nisbet and Claude Rawson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 396. The line in question is from Longinus,
Peri hypsous
, 44.2. See also “Genius,”
The Encyclopedia of Diderot & d’Alembert: Collaborative Translation Project
, trans. John S. D. Glaus (Ann Arbor: Scholarly Publishing Office of the University of Michigan Library, 2007), accessed August 19, 2010,
http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.did2222.0000.819
. On the widespread interpretation of the French Revolution as a sublime event, see Mary Ashburn Miller,
A Natural History of Revolution: Violence and Nature in the French Revolutionary Imagination, 1789–1794
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2011), esp. 39–40, 117–121, 169–170.

10
. Immanuel Kant,
Critique of Judgment
, intro. and trans. Werner S. Pluhar (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1987), 174. Reverence, terror, awe, and the fear of death were passions directly associated with the sublime, according to the celebrated analysis (much criticized by Kant) of Edmund Burke in his
A Philosophical
Enquiry into the Origin of Our Idea of the Sublime and the Beautiful
(1757). Robespierre’s comments are from the séance of October 24, 1793 in
Archives parlementaires
, 77:508. For good measure, Robespierre made the same point with reference to the classical republican hero Brutus and the author of a celebrated modern play about him, Voltaire. “The author of
Brutus
had genius,” Robespierre noted, “but Brutus was worth more than Voltaire” (ibid.).

11
.
Archives parlementaires
, 77:508. The speaker was Claude Bazire, who sat with the Mountain. The conviction that “true genius” was of the people was given a pointed articulation in the Jacobin phrase “true genius is almost always
sans culotte
.” See the reference in Simon Schaffer, “Genius in Romantic Natural Philosophy,” in
Romanticism and the Sciences
, eds. Andrew Cunningham and Nicholas Jardine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 82–98 (85). For Condorcet’s thoughts about genius, merit, and equality, see his
Esquisse d’un tableau historique des progres de l’esprit humain
, ed. Alain Pons (Paris: Flammarion, 1988), 229. See also John Carson,
The Measure of Merit: Talents, Intelligence, and Inequality in the French and American Republics, 1750–1940
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007), 32–35.

12
. Carson,
Measure of Merit
, esp. chaps. 1–2. The citations are from Joseph de Maistre’s
Considérations sur la France
(1797), and may be found, along with an analysis of Maistre’s thinking about genius and its evils, in my article “The Genius of Maistre,” in
Joseph de Maistre and the Legacy of the Enlightenment
, eds. Carolina Armenteros and Richard A. Lebrun (Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2011), 19–30.

CHAPTER 4

1
. Alexander von Humboldt, “The Vital Force; or, The Rhodian Genius,” in
Aspects of Nature, in Different Lands and Different Climates, with Scientific Elucidations
, trans. Mrs. Sabine (Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1850), 402–410. All subsequent citations from the piece are taken from this translation in consultation with Humboldt’s original German, “Die Lebenskraft oder rhodische Genius: Eine Erzählung,” in
Ansichten der Natur: Mit wissenschaftlichen Erläuterungen
(Stuttgart: J. G. Cotta, 1874), 317–321.

2
. Richard Holmes,
Age of Wonder: How the Romantic Generation Discovered the Beauty and Terror of Science
(New York: Pantheon, 2009). Fisher Ames is cited in Edward Cahill, “Federalist Criticism and the Fate of Genius,”
American Literature
76, no. 4 (2004): 687. See also William Hazlitt, “Lectures in English Philosophy,” in
Complete Works of William Hazlitt
, ed. P. P. Howe, 21 vols. (London: Frank Cass, 1967), 2:153; Lucy Delap, “The Superwoman: Theories of Gender and Genius in Edwardian Britain,”
Historical Journal
47, no. 1 (2004): 101–126, esp. 104–105.

3
. On the genius as an “archetype” of the “Romantic mind,” see Warren Breckman,
European Romanticism: A Brief History with Documents
(Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2008), 12. And on Napoleon as its prime illustration, see Howard Mumford Jones, “The Doctrine of Romantic Genius,” in
Revolution and Romanticism
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974), 294; J. W. Goethe,
Conversations with Eckermann (1823–1832
), trans. John Oxenford (San Francisco: North Point Press, 1984), 199 (Conversation of Tuesday, March 11, 1828). The last line of this paragraph is a paraphrase of Natalie Petiteau,
Napoléon, de la mythologie à l’histoire
(Paris: Editions de Seuil, 2004), 75.

4
. One of Napoleon’s foremost biographers, Steven Englund, observes that, while the French of this period “were not short on smart statesmen and generals,” Napoleon “stood out for the impression he made on people for his brains.” See Steven Englund,
Napoleon: A Political Life
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004), 146, and also 104. Rémusat is cited in Englund,
Napoleon
, 319.

5
. Kléber is cited in Englund,
Napoleon
, 129.

6
. Paul Metzner,
Crescendo of the Virtuoso: Spectacle, Skill, and Self-Promotion in Paris During the Age of Revolution
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998); Tia DeNora,
Beethoven and the Construction of Genius: Musical Politics in Vienna, 1792–1803
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995). Metzner describes Napoleon as the “archetypal performer-genius of the Age of Revolution,” for whom “winning battles became an end in itself” (Metzner,
Crescendo
, 294).

7
. Petiteau,
Napoléon
, 25; Jean Tulard,
Le mythe de Napoléon
(Paris: Collin, 1971), 31 (
Courrier de l’armée
quotation); Annie Jourdan,
Napoléon: Héros, imperator, mécène
(Paris: Aubier, 1998), 109–110; [Louis Dubroca],
Histoire de Bonaparte, premier consul, depuis son naissance jusqu’à la paix de Lunéville
. . . , 2 vols. (Paris: Brasseur, 1801), 1: xiv. The mayor of Feurs’s remarks may be found in the Archives départementales de la Loire, 1M593, PV du maire de Feurs, le 20 germinal an IX (April 10, 1801). I am extremely grateful to Cyril Triolaire for sharing this reference with me, along with those that follow in this paragraph, which are drawn from his fine dissertation, “Fêtes officielles, théâtres et spectacles de curiosités dans le Massif Central pendant le Consulat et l’Empire-Pouvoir, artistes et mises en scène” (PhD diss., University of Clermont-Ferrand II, 2008). The local priest’s comments may be found in the Archives nationales, Series F1CIII Loire 7, Discours du curé d’Yssingeaux, August 15, 1806. On addresses to Napoleon as “the genius,” see the close analysis in Triolaire, “Fêtes officielles, théâtres et spectacles de curiosités,” Part 2, “Discours à la fête.” The “Omniscient, omnipotent,” quotation is cited in Jourdan,
Napoléon
, 109–110. On Napoleon’s “star,” see my article “Die Kometenbahn eines Genies: The Case of Napoleon Bonaparte,” forthcoming in
Wahsinn und Methode: Zur Funktion von Geniefiguren in Literatur und Philosophie
, eds. Hans Stauffacher and Marie-Christin Wilm (Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag, 2014).

8
. Jacques-Olivier Boudon, “Grand homme ou demidieu? La mise en place d’une religion napoléonienne,”
Romantisme: Revue du dix-neuvième siècle
, no. 100,
Le grand homme
(1998): 131.

9
. On the “epiphany of the ancients,” see Luigi Mascilli Migliorini,
Le mythe du héros: France et Italie après la chute de Napoléon
(Paris: Nouveau Monde, 2002), 10.

10
. Max Weber,
Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology
, eds. Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, 2 vols. (Berkeley: University of California Berkeley Press, 1978), 1:241–246 (“Charismatic Authority”).

11
. Edward Berenson and Eva Giloi, eds.,
Constructing Charisma: Celebrity, Fame, and Power in Nineteenth-Century Europe
(Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2010); Weber,
Economy and Society
, 1:244, 249; Goethe,
Conversations with Eckermann
, 200, 317 (March 11, 1828, and March 2, 1831).

12
. Claude-Henri de Saint-Simon, “Introduction aux travaux scientifiques du dix-neuvième siècle,” in
Œuvres de Claude-Henri de Saint-Simon
, 6 vols. (Paris: Éditions Anthropos, 1966), 6:201–202.

13
. On Napoleon’s youthful dream of becoming another Newton, see the account in Michel Foucault,
Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison
, trans. Alan Sheridan (New York: Vintage, 1977), 140–141. Saint-Hilaire’s anecdote is recounted in Englund,
Napoleon
, 146. Saint-Hilaire referred to Napoleon as the “four-thought Caesar” in reference to his ability to maintain multiple lines of reflection simultaneously. For Carl von Clausewitz on Napoleon, see his
On War
, trans. and eds. Michael Howard and Peter Paret (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976), 112.

14
. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel,
Lectures on the Philosophy of World History: Introduction
, trans. H. B. Nisbet, intro. Duncan Forbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 84–85. I cite from the second draft of Hegel’s lectures of 1830, though they were first delivered in 1822.

15
. Kim Wheatley, “‘Attracted by the Body’: Accounts of Shelley’s Cremation,”
Keats-Shelley Journal
49 (2000): 162–182; Trelawny gives a detailed, if much stylized, account of the cremation in his
Recollections of the Last Days of Shelley and Byron
(London: Edward Moxon, 1858).

16
. Trelawny,
Recollections
, 137; Shelley,
Adonais
, 1.8–9; On the posthumous fate of Shelley’s body parts, including his ashes and heart, see Sylva Norman,
The Flight of the Skylark
(London: Max Reinhardt, 1954), esp. 182–183, 262–267.

17
. Norman,
Flight of the Skylark
, 264. On the fate of Byron’s remains, see Brian Burrell,
Postcards from the Brain Museum: The Improbable Search for Meaning in the Matter of Famous Minds
(New York: Broadway Books, 2004), 59–79.

18
. See Russell Shorto’s lively
Descartes’ Bones: A Skeletal History of the Conflict Between Faith and Reason
(New York: Doubleday, 2008), 107. On the other episodes of reliquary fascination, see chaps. 5 and 6 below, as well as my article “Relikwieen van genieën” [Relics of Genius], trans. Jan Willem Reitsma,
Nexus
52 (2009): 149–161.

19
. Shelley, “A Defence of Poetry,” in
Shelley’s Poetry and Prose
, eds. Donald H. Reiman and Neil Fraistat (New York: Norton, 2002), 535, 512. On Shelley’s use of the term “poet,” see Richard Holmes,
Shelley: The Pursuit
(London: Weidenfield and Nicolson, 1975), 642.