A is a political pamphlet or book that libels a public figure.In late Middle English and Early Modern English, retained its aboriginal significance of a "little book": The Libelle of Englyshe Polycye (1435–1438), for example, was a short poetical tract concerning England's maritime power, with nothing libellous in its content. held particular significance in France under the , especially during the eighteenth century, when the pamphlets' attacks on the monarchy became both more numerous and venomous. In recent years, cultural historian Robert Darnton has written on the , arguing for their subversive power of the late eighteenth century exercised in undermining monarchical authority.
Etymology The French word is derived from the Latin , for "small book".Darnton 1995, p.199. Although originally it was used to describe pamphlets in general, it became primarily applicable to the genre of brief and defamatory attacks on pre-revolutionary French public figures. The 1762 edition of the dictionary published by the defines the as an "offensive work". The publishers of were known as .
Format and style Libelles varied widely in format and style, with some early consisting of either a half-sheet or a single sheet in octavo format.Darnton 1995, p.204. Some later , published in the eighteenth century for example, were book-length, or even ran into multiple volumes. Regardless of their format, the were cohesive in their overblown and sensationalist style; they were full of wordplay, and often employed literary techniques such as metaphor.Darnton and Roche 1989, p.167. The were defiant against authority, and spoke out against prominent individuals.Darnton 1995, p.216.
History were invariably of a political nature, both defamatory and subversive. They proliferated during times of political crises, from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries.
Religious conflict: the 1580s In the 1580s, during the French Wars of Religion, flourished, with an average of about one published per day in Paris. were published in support of both the Catholic and the Protestant points of view. Catholic were typically pointed at the King, attacking primarily his weak religious beliefs and portraying him as not only godless, but evil. The Protestant accused the Catholic League of treasonously supporting the pope.
La Fronde: 1648–1653 During the civil war known as the Fronde, proliferated in France, numbering around 5,000 in the years 1648–1653.Darnton 1995, p. 206. During the Fronde, the majority of were directed against Cardinal Mazarin, the chief minister of France. These were referred to as . They ridiculed Mazarin for a wide variety of things, including his low birth, his luxurious proclivities and speculated on his erotic liaison with the Queen Mother, Anne of Austria.Darnton 1995, p. 207. One of the most famous of these characterized Mazarin as follows:
These excited concerns on the part of the government. Presumably alarmed by the seditious possibilities of the , the Parlement of Paris issued an ordinance against , declaring that anyone caught producing such pamphlets would be hanged.Darnton 1995, p. 200. This ran the business of underground, and many relocated to Holland—or affected to on the title pages; there they continued to publish their slander.
Pre-Revolution: 1770s–1780s
Perhaps the most numerous and scathing came out of the two decades prior to the French Revolution. Darnton lists five ways in which the of the 1770s and 1780s differed from their ancestors.
First, the later differed in their scale. Eighteenth-century were much heftier volumes than their single (or half) sheet predecessors. Some of this period ran as large as thirty-six volumes.Darnton 1995, p. 212. The fact that such pamphlets were beginning to be compiled into books increased the longevity of the . Second, the system which distributed the had changed. The publishing industry which circulated eighteenth-century was increasingly vast, and no longer localized. Third, the way in which the attacked public figures had advanced. In eighteenth-century , the sex lives of the public figures who were attacked were contextualized as contemporary history. Fourth, the way that conceptualized their victims had changed. Even when earlier attacked Louis XIV, a sense of respect and even deference was implied in the writings. By the 1770s, the way that the conceptualized Louis XV was much less respectful, and implied that the monarch was a mere womanizer, with no interest in state affairs.Darnton 1995, p. 213. Marie Antoinette fared even worse, as the number of pornographic that involved her proliferated into the revolutionary era.Darnton 1995, p. 226. Fifth, later seemed to criticize monarchy as a system, whereas early only attacked individual figures. It was implied in the earlier pamphlets that individual figures, such as Mazarin, were responsible for the State's problems. With the of the later years, however, the attack was focused against the entire governmental system, and monarchy as a whole.
Notes
References
Further reading
External links "Libelles and political pornography" (Alpha History)