I took up History for my undergraduate studies because I love the subject. But in the last two and half years I have not written almost anything related to my subject, despite Baba urging me time and again to do so, and even supplying me with ideas about what I could write on. Hopefully I will get around to working on one or two of them before I wrap up my formal education in History. Today though, I want to post something rather special and very dear to me.
Term papers and regular written assignments should be a part of every academic curriculum. It isn't in my college though, particularly in our department, adding to an ever-growing list of complaints that many of us have against the department. But I don't want to gripe today. We did finally get a chance to try our hands at writing a term paper this semester for one of our papers on Modern Europe. The paper spans the time period between 1789 and 1848, a time of epoch making changes that the historian Eric Hobsbawm so rightly termed the Age of Revolutions. Our professor asked us to submit a paper on any event or aspect that would fall within the purview of our course.
The task was as daunting as it was thrilling. It was quite difficult narrowing down on any one topic from a period as intense and diverse as this. On top of that there were constraints of practicality - as an undergraduate student trying her hands at her first term paper with limited access to source material, and more importantly, time, there was only so much that could be done. Many of us came up with grandiose paper ideas in the initial excitement of the task and our race to impress the professor with originality, but these were quickly dashed when the paucity of time and resources as well as expertise dawned on us.
How I came about writing on this topic is itself a funny story. This was in fact the first paper idea that had sprung to my mind; I have a distinctly easier time working with literature-oriented ideas, so this is hardly surprising. But my seniors warned me that the professor had a reputation for actively disliking the use of literature as source. I reluctantly gave up my plan and set about planning a paper with a rather convoluted theme involving deep history, environment and colonialism. I did not understand the idea very clearly - it was suggested by a senior - and went on postponing the work. So imagine my delight when the professor made a casual remark in class one day about how nobody in my batch seemed interested in working on literary topics. I literally jumped up from my seat with my hand in the air, and within five minutes it was fixed; I was going to work on Brigadier Gerard after all. Talk about lucky breaks!
For the next three days I worked harder than I had in the previous two years combined, and by the fourth day I was done, and in the nick of time too.I am rarely completely satisfied with my writings, but this one is an exception. I feel this is one of the best essays I have ever written. I was so pleased when I went through it, I realised that it did not matter to me whether or not the professor liked the paper and graded it well. He did in fact like it though, and while I generally find self aggrandizement distasteful, for one I will say that getting the highest marks in class was well deserved.
I hope some people will enjoy reading this as much as I enjoyed writing it. Baba has to be thanked of course, not merely because I consulted him constantly while writing the paper, but also because my love for literature as well as my inheritance of books comes from him.
Also, it is Baba who suggested I put this one up on the blog. Thank God he is constantly after me about keeping this blog alive!
History
Through the Lens of Literature:
The
Napoleonic Era as portrayed in Arthur Conan Doyle’s Exploits and Adventures of
Brigadier Gerard
There
is much debate among scholars over the appropriateness of treating literature
as a historical source. Historians of the realist imperialist school of thought
refuse to accept literature as a valid source, while liberal post-modernists
are more open to the idea. However, sometimes the best practice may be to draw
one’s own conclusions about such matters. For that, making a study of a famous
piece of literature in terms of its historical validity is a useful step.
Napoleon
Bonaparte once commented “what a novel my life is”. Indeed, the Napoleonic era
continued to colour the brightest minds of the world throughout the nineteenth
century. The Exploits and Adventures of
Brigadier Gerard by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is a wonderful example of Napoleon’s
impact on literature. Based at the time of the Napoleonic Wars, these are tales
of adventure as narrated by the protagonist Etienne Gerard, now an old man
living in Paris, about his days in the Emperor’s army. Across seventeen short
stories, Conan Doyle, claimed by many to be the greatest storyteller in English
literature, brought to life a period of great turmoil and flux making use of
one of the most quintessential aspects of war: the soldier who tells tales to
the enthralled civilians back home. The
tales work as a reflection of real battles fought by Napoleon’s army across
Europe. Etienne Gerard, a Hussar in the Grande Armée during the Napoleonic Wars,
originally from Gascony like Dumas’s d’Artagnan, spent the most glorious days
of his soldiering life with the Hussars of Conflans. The young and dashing
Gerard was the bravest soldier and the most gallant gentleman in all of France,
or so he believed. The most outstanding quality about Gerard was his vanity,
but his courage made a close second. Brigadier Gerard is probably the most
loveable character created by Conan Doyle, and his astonishing conceit and
remarkable thick headedness is not only forgivable but even enjoyable for the
reader who savours a jolly good yarn based in one of the most exciting periods
of human history.
The
concern of this paper, however, remains the validity of the book in terms of
its historical accuracy and content. And this is evident in almost every individual
story in varying degrees. We learn about how Brigadier Gerard came to be a part
of the Hussars in the story ‘How the Brigadier Joined the Hussars of Conflans’.
The war having come to a halt in Germany but raging fiercely in Spain, Napoleon
sent Gerard from the Hussars of Chamberan to serve ‘as senior captain to the
Hussars of Conflans, which were at that time the 5th Army Corps under Marshal
Lannes’1 as reinforcement for the army in the Pyrenees. Here, Conan
Doyle gives a very realistic picture of the second siege of Saragossa under
Marshal Lannes, Napoleon’s personal friend about whom the Emperor commented
that he had found the man a pygmy and left him a giant! The siege of Saragossa
was symbolic of conditions throughout Spain. Doyle’s description of the city
filled with hordes of Spaniard ‘soldiers, peasants, priests – all filled with
the most furious hatred of the French, and the most savage determination to
perish before they would surrender’ and the difficulties that the French
soldiers faced in overpowering the city2 is as accurate as any historian’s.
Napoleon’s peninsular conquest is considered by many scholars as one of the
early signs indicating his eventual downfall. As Gunther Rotherberg points out,
the great general failed to take into account the potential of a popular
resistance supported by the armed forces with a secure supply route, while also
being deluded about the precarious food supplies for his own army and the
difficulty in movement and communication in Spain3. Ultimately,
Napoleon’s ‘Spanish Ulcer’ played a significant role in his inevitable demise.
The
same story also brings to light other factors of interest to the historian. In
describing his adventures, Brigadier Gerard made repeated mention of the
reputation of the Spaniards as cruel and prone to torture and mutilation. It is
significant that of all the various reconnaissance missions that the brigadier
carried out, this was the only one where he was given a vial of poison which he
could use in case of capture. The Spanish reputation was borne out when Gerard found
Monsieur Hubert, the French soldier whose mission Gerard had been instructed to
complete, crucified to the walls of a house. The stories based on the Emperor’s
peninsular conquests bring out various aspects of war as a whole, particularly
the dark and inhuman sides of it, the side that the protagonist remained
blissfully unconcerned about in the most part, focusing rather on the glory and
honour of war. In Spain Gerard met some opportunists of the lowest order, ‘bandits,
who embody atavistic values that enlightened Europeans thought they had seen
the last of, and which can be seen in Goya’s paintings, the Disasters of War.’ In Spain he met El Cuchillo or ‘The Knife’, an ordinary
man whose inner monster had been awakened by war, who was now a notorious
guerrilla chief who found pleasure in blank verse and torture, such as burying
French soldiers alive.4 Characters and events remained close enough
to the reality to be an honest reflection of the experience of the Grande Armée in its peninsular
encounters.
Throughout
his stories, Conan Doyle placed his brigadier in battles and events the
accuracy of which would make the historian proud. In ‘How the Brigadier Took
the Field Against the Marshall Millefleurs’ Gerard was seen taking orders from
Marshal Massena after his 1810 offensive was stopped by the English army at the
Lines of Torres Vedras, lines of forts built in secrecy on the order of the
Duke of Wellington to defend Lisbon from French conquest. The Marshal’s
frustration at having to retire from a failed conquest is likely to have been
very close to what the real Marshal must have experienced.5 It was
to Torres Vedras that Gerard was sent by Massena to ascertain the distribution
of Wellington’s troops in ‘The Crime of
the Brigadier’, and in ‘How the Brigadier Saved the Army’, he saved the troops
of General Clausel from annihilation by lighting up the signal beacon for the
general to fall back upon the main army, while himself coming face to face with
the infamous guerrilla chief named Manuelo,‘ The Smiler’, and just about
escaping with his life.
The
Brigadier Gerard stories are a fascinating study of the prevalent view of the
French and the English of each other, particularly to a student of cultural
history. What is interesting to remember is that the author himself was an
Englishman, and yet his hero belonged to the opposing camp. Gerard was
excessively vain and conceited, a perception that Christopher Coker calls ‘a
stock trope for a Frenchman in English literature, particularly in the late
nineteenth century’6, and yet the Englishmen found in him a greatly
loveable hero. Throughout his adventures, Gerard displayed admiration towards
the English in various ways, particularly to individuals who he found
honourable and came to consider as friends. In ‘How the Brigadier Held the
King’ Gerard was rescued from the murderous El
Cuchillo by ‘Milor the Hon. Sir Russell, Bart.’ with whom he struck up an
easy camaraderie, a camaraderie that turned to partnership in the adventure of
trying to capture Marshal Millefleurs, where the Bart had come with the same
orders from Wellington as Gerard had from Massena: to hang the troublesome
marshal. His disposition towards the English continued to stay unchanged even
when he was captured by Wellington and sent as a prisoner to Dartmoor, from
where he broke out and tried to escape before being recaptured and informed
that he was in fact to be released and sent back to France in exchange of a
Colonel Mason (How the King Held the Brigadier). The brigadier was particularly
appreciative of the Englishman’s ‘sportsmanship’ even though his complete
inability to understand English customs made him a source of extreme irritation
to the English; in ‘The Brigadier in England’ he injured his English hosts
while playing cricket and boxing through his misinterpretation of the rules of
the games, and in ‘The Crime of the Brigadier’ he inadvertently destroyed a
traditional English fox-hunt by killing the fox, earning for himself ‘a deep,
steady and unchangeable hatred’ from Wellington’s army! And yet he
earned the begrudging respect of several Englishmen for his heightened sense of
honour.7 In the study of war, literature can sometimes be the best
instrument to bring out the nuanced and contradictory interplay of human
emotions between opposing camps, usually through the interaction of
individuals.
The
Brigadier Gerard stories are surprisingly accurate in the placing of some of
Napoleon’s greatest Marshals. One learns about the various charismatic leaders
from Gerard’s eloquently expressed admiration for them. There is repeated
mention of Marshal Massena, ‘a thin, sour little fellow’ who was not a
favourite with his men or his officials for he was a miser, who ‘clutched on to
his positions as he did to his strong box, and it took a very clever man to
loosen him from either.’8 Of Marshal Ney’s bravery in the Russian
conquests Gerard said with great respect ‘one man above all rose greater as the
danger thickened, and won a higher name amidst disaster than he had done when
he led our van to victory’, calling him ‘Ney, the red-maned Lion’.9
Of Marshal Lannes he spoke highly in context of the siege of Saragossa. And yet
despite the ample praise for their courage, there is sneaking criticism where
it is due, worthy of any self-respecting historian. About the failed attack on
the Lines of Torres Vardes, the brigadier made no bones about admitting that
internal feud between Napoleon’s marshals led to missed opportunities. In his
words, ‘Ney hated Massena, and Massena hated Junot, and Soult hated them all.’10
Of others one finds scattered references throughout the stories: Murat and
Berthier and Mortier and Grouchy to name a few.
With
the Emperor himself the brigadier had few encounters, but they were enough to
set in stone his love and loyalty for Napoleon. Napoleon Bonaparte was a
charismatic leader who had the power to draw the allegiance of the French not
merely to the state but to him personally, through the Imperial Catechism,
creating an almost cult status among his followers. He issued grandiloquent
statements before and after battles, paying little heed to the truth and often
fudging facts and figures to suit his conveniences. In the words of Gregory
Fremont Barnes, ‘Napoleon was an unashamed self-publicist whose power rested on
his extraordinary capacity to captivate his soldiers with his undoubted
charisma and to win the hearts of the French people at large by feeding them on
that heady diet whose appeal the revolutionary generation could scarcely
resist: la Gloire - glory achieved on the battlefield’11This
feeling of absolute loyalty is evident in Brigadier Gerard, who considered
laying down his life for the Emperor a matter of great honour. Napoleon himself
chose Gerard for certain mission because of his unquestioning loyalty, such as
in ‘How the Brigadier Slew the Brothers of Ajaccio’, where the Emperor needed
to assassinate in secret some men from his Corsican past who had come back to
haunt him, and in ‘How the Brigadier was Tempted by the Devil’ where Napoleon
decided to test the loyalty of his men before setting them on a very delicate
and dangerous mission. And yet the unequivocal devotion of the soldier to the Emperor
remained unfortunately lopsided in its depth of emotion. There is an evidence
of Tolstoyean irony in Gerard’s stories, in his lifelong faith and service to
an Emperor who had little respect for him.12 Napoleon chose Gerard
for some of the most sensitive missions because
he perceived the latter to be simple minded despite his enormous courage, even
awarding him the special medal of honour along with the dubious honour of
calling him the man with the thickest head and the stoutest heart in his army.13
Napoleon was callous towards the suffering and losses his army faced for him,
and remained unmoved by the fact that his conquests cost France the flower of a
generation.
Napoleon’s
Russian invasion of 1812 was the beginning of the end of the great French
empire that he had envisioned. The invasion was riddled with various problems
from the start. The most prominent were the lack of supply lines; nine large
depots had been laid from Konigsberg to Warsaw, but available means of
transportation could not keep up with the advancing army. Also, the massive size
of the army and its frontage required the creation of new command structures
and army groups. The technical limitations of the era prevented either problems
from being resolved.14 Brigadier Gerard and his Hussars never went to
Moscow, staying back at the communication lines of Borodino. In ‘How the
Brigadier Rode to Minsk’, Gerard spoke in sorrow and resignation of the squalor
and devastation he witnessed all around. Conan Doyle used a Tolstoyean eye to
describe the long, black lines of retreating soldiers, snaking their way across
the white plain.15 It was in Russia that the French army faced the
ruthless Cossacks, who laughed at them in their misery and hung around them
like wolves, ready to pounce at the slightest sign of weakness. This air of gloom
makes this one of the saddest stories of the collection, with Gerard’s own
despondency almost a signal to the imminent downfall of his beloved emperor.
It
is a fitting end to the adventures of the brave brigadier that he would be
given an important mission in that final hour, the Battle of Waterloo – a
mission that he failed to carry out due to fateful turn of events – eventually
bringing a close to his glorious days in the Grande Armée
with a final valiant effort to protect his Emperor from capture at the hour of
defeat by impersonating him to detract his English pursuers. Though history
dictates that this effort had to be in vain, the brigadier earned what was
possibly the greatest compliment of his life from his enemies; the Englishman
failed to realise he was an imposter and exclaimed in admiration that the
French Emperor was “such a horseman and such a swordsman I have never seen.”17
By the time of Waterloo, Napoleon was well past his prime. He was wearied from
years of campaigning and a year of exile, and ill on the very day of the
battle. Waterloo led to Napoleon's final downfall, restored the balance of
power in Europe and ushered in an era of nearly four decades of peace on the
Continent, unquestionably qualifying the battle as one of history's most decisive.16
The
last of the Brigadier Gerard stories holds that poignant note marking the end
of something great. In ‘How Etienne Gerard Said Good-Bye to His Master’, we
read of an attempt by an old faithful servant of the Emperor, with Gerard’s
help, to rescue Napoleon from his exile in St. Helena, only for Gerard to
arrive at the moment of his master’s death. It is the last tale that the old
soldier told his eager audience before going back to Gascony in his twilight
years. This is the condition of many soldiers spanning age and space, veterans
unable to let go of the past, civilians but ‘with an air and manner’, relics of
a time long gone. In his closing chapter, Conan Doyle successfully brought to
light the human cost of war, not merely in terms of those who die, but those
who are forced to reintegrate into civilian society, a mere shadow of their
battlefield selves.
Like all works of literature, The Exploits and Adventures of Brigadier
Gerard was essentially written to provide hours of enjoyable reading to the
lay person, not to serve as a tool for scholarship for the historian. The tales
are not a fair and balanced exposition of the Napoleonic wars or the French
society of the time. The chronology is not linear, and there are so many
fictitious incidents that sieving out fact from fiction is a tedious exercise.
One glaring shortcoming of the stories is that the human cost of the Napoleonic
epic is completely ignored. In his blind devotion to his master, the brigadier
overlooked the fact that Napoleon, having extinguished liberty by enslaving
half of Europe and fraternity by declaring war on the other half, had only just
paid lip service to equality, even in his army.17 The stories are
fundamentally action packed adventures of one soldier and not a representation
of the army as a whole.
However,
a student of history may yet do well to pay some attention to such works of
literature in one’s studies. As has been adequately illustrated in this paper, Brigadier Gerard is an excellent example
of all that literature has to offer to history, if only one knows how to
extract reality from the generous coating of imagination that is any good work
of fiction.