The Recollections of Alexis de Tocqueville — Themes and Context

(1 User reviews)   234
In Category - Modern Nations
Tocqueville, Alexis de, 1805-1859, Teixeira de Mattos, Alexander, 1865-1921 [Translator] Project Gutenberg 2011 Not confirmed
France -- History -- February Revolution, 1848 Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 106,610
Reading time 464 min
Text sections 12

The source record for The Recollections of Alexis de Tocqueville — Themes and Context measures this digital text at 106,610 words, 7 hr 44 min estimated reading time, and 12 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 24.1 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “France -- History -- February Revolution, 1848,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

Tocqueville's eyewitness account of the 1848 French Revolution, written with a politician's insight and a historian's detachment, focusing on the February uprising and the June Days through precise observation of character, speech, and setting.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.8/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated
  • Description quality20 pts
  • Title & short description10 pts
  • Source metadata20 pts
  • Text length15 pts
  • Chapters / structure15 pts
  • EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

Read the Text

We are to-day well able to judge the period described in these Recollections, a period which seems still further removed from us by the revolutions, the wars, and even the misfortunes which the country has since undergone, and which now only appears to us in that subdued light which throws the principal outlines into especial relief, while permitting the more observant and penetrating eye to discover also the secondary features. Living close enough to those times to receive evidence from the lips of survivors, and not so close but that all passion has become appeased and all rancour extinguished, we should be in a position to lack neither light nor impartiality. As witness, for instance, the impression retained by us of the figure of Ledru-Rollin, which nevertheless terrified our fathers. We live in a generation which has beheld Raoul, Rigault and Delescluze at work. The theories of Louis Blanc and Considérant arouse no feeling of astonishment in these days, when their ideas have become current coin, and when the majority of politicians feel called upon to adopt the badge of some socialism or other, whether we call it Christian, State, or revolutionary socialism. Cormenin, Marrast and Lamartine belong to history as much as do Sièyes, Pétion or Mirabeau; and we are able to judge as freely of the men and the events of 1848 as of those of 1830 or 1789.

Alexis de Tocqueville had the rare merit of being able to forestall this verdict of posterity; and if we endeavour to discover the secret of this prescience, of the loftiness of sight with which he was so specially gifted, we shall find that, belonging to no party, he remained above all parties; that, depending upon no leader, he kept his hands free; and that, possessed of no vulgar ambition, he reserved his energies for the noble aim which he had in view--the triumph of liberty and of the dignity of man.

Interest will doubtless be taken in the account contained in these Recollections of the revolutionary period, written by one of the best-informed of its witnesses, and in the ebbs and flows of the short-lived ministry which was conducted with so much talent and integrity. But what will be especially welcome is the broad views taken by this great mind of our collective history; his profound reflections upon the future of the country and of society; the firm and conscientious opinions which he expresses upon his contemporaries; and the portraits drawn by a master hand, always striking and always alive. When reading this private record, which has been neither revised nor corrected by its author, we seem to approach more closely to the sentiments, the desires, the aspirations, I was almost saying the dreams of this rare mind, this great heart so ardently pursuing the chimera of absolute good that nothing in men or institutions could succeed in satisfying it.

Years passed, and the Empire foundered amid terrible disaster. Alexis de Tocqueville was no more; and we may say that this proved at that time an irreparable loss to his country. Who knows what part he might have been called upon to play, what influence he could have brought to bear to unmask the guilty intrigues and baffle the mean ambitions under whose load, after the lapse of more than twenty years, we are still staggering? Enlightened by his harsh experience of 1848, would he have once again tried the experiment, which can never be more than an eternal stop-gap, of governing the Republic with the support of the Monarchists? Or rather, persuaded as he was that "the republican form of government is not the best suited to the needs of France," that this "government without stability always promises more, but gives less, liberty than a Constitutional Monarchy," would he not have appealed to the latter to protect the liberty so dear to him? One thing is certain, that he would never have "subordinated to the necessity of maintaining his position that of remaining true to himself."

We have thought that the present generation, which so rarely has the opportunity of beholding a man of character, would take pleasure in becoming acquainted with this great and stately figure; in spending some short moments in those lofty regions, in which it may learn a powerful lesson and find an example of public life in its noblest form, ever faithful to its early aspirations, ever filled with two great ideas: the cult of honour and the passion of liberty.

COMTE DE TOCQUEVILLE.

Origin and Character of these Recollections--General aspect of the period preceding the Revolution of 1848--Preliminary symptoms of the Revolution 3

The Banquets--Sense of security entertained by the Government--Anxiety of Leaders of the Opposition--Arraignment of Ministers 19

Troubles of the 22nd of February--The Sitting of the 23rd--The New Ministry--Opinions of M. Dufaure and M. de Beaumont 33

The 24th of February--The Ministers' Plan of Resistance--The National Guard--General Bedeau 44

The Sitting of the Chamber--Madame la Duchesse D'Orléans--The Provisional Government 56

My Explanation of the 24th of February, and my views as to its effects upon the future 79

Paris on the morrow of the 24th of February and the next days--The socialistic character of the New Revolution 90

Vacillation of the Members of the Old Parliament as to the attitude they should adopt--My own reflections on my mode of action, and my resolves 102

My candidature of the department of la Manche--The aspect of the country--The General Election 114

The First Sitting of the Constituent Assembly--The appearance of this Assembly 129

My relations with Lamartine--His Subterfuges 145

The 15th of May 1848 156

The Feast of Concord and the preparations for the Days of June 174

The Days of June--(_continued_) 215

The Committee for the Constitution 233

My return to France--Formation of the Cabinet 263

Aspect of the Cabinet--Its first Acts until after the insurrectionary attempts of the 13th of June 278

Our domestic policy--Internal quarrels in the Cabinet--Its difficulties in its relations with the Majority and the President 301

Gustave de Beaumont's version of the 24th of February 379

Barrot's version of the 24th of February (_10 October 1850_) 385

Some incidents of the 24th of February 1848 389

M. Dufaure's efforts to prevent the Revolution of February--Responsibility of M. Thiers, which renders them futile 389

Dufaure's conduct on the 24th of February 1848 392

My conversation with Berryer, on the 21st of June, at an appointment which I had given him at my house. We were both Members of the Committee for the revision of the Constitution 394

_Written in July 1850, at Tocqueville._

ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE

ORIGIN AND CHARACTER OF THESE RECOLLECTIONS--GENERAL ASPECT OF THE PERIOD PRECEDING THE REVOLUTION OF 1848--PRELIMINARY SYMPTOMS OF THE REVOLUTION.

Removed for a time from the scene of public life, I am constrained, in the midst of my solitude, to turn my thoughts upon myself, or rather to reflect upon contemporary events in which I have taken part or acted as a witness. And it seems to me that the best use I can make of my leisure is to retrace these events, to portray the men who took part in them under my eyes, and thus to seize and engrave, if I can, upon my memory the confused features which compose the disturbed physiognomy of my time.

In taking this resolve I have taken another, to which I shall be no less true: these recollections shall be a relaxation of the mind rather than a contribution to literature. I write them for myself alone. They shall be a mirror in which I will amuse myself in contemplating my contemporaries and myself; not a picture painted for the public. My most intimate friends shall not see them, for I wish to retain the liberty of depicting them as I shall depict myself, without flattery. I wish to arrive truly at the secret motives which have caused them, and me, and others to act; and, when discovered, to reveal them here. In a word, I wish this expression of my recollections to be a sincere one; and to effect this, it is essential that it should remain absolutely secret.

I intend that my recollections shall not go farther back than the Revolution of 1848, nor extend to a later date than the 30th of October 1849, the day upon which I resigned my office. It is only within these limits that the events which I propose to relate have any importance, or that my position has enabled me to observe them well.

My life was passed, although in a comparatively secluded fashion, in the midst of the parliamentary world of the closing years of the Monarchy of July. Nevertheless, it would be no easy task for me to recall distinctly the events of a period so little removed from the present, and yet leaving so confused a trace in my memory. The thread of my recollections is lost amid the whirl of minor incidents, of paltry ideas, of petty passions, of personal views and contradictory opinions in which the life of public men was at that time spent. All that remains vivid in my mind is the general aspect of the period; for I often regarded it with a curiosity mingled with dread, and I clearly discerned the special features by which it was characterized.

Our history from 1789 to 1830, if viewed from a distance and as a whole, affords as it were the picture of a struggle to the death between the Ancien Régime, its traditions, memories, hopes, and men, as represented by the aristocracy, and New France under the leadership of the middle class. The year 1830 closed the first period of our revolutions, or rather of our revolution: for there is but one, which has remained always the same in the face of varying fortunes, of which our fathers witnessed the commencement, and of which we, in all probability, shall not live to behold the end. In 1830 the triumph of the middle class had been definite and so thorough that all political power, every franchise, every prerogative, and the whole government was confined and, as it were, heaped up within the narrow limits of this one class, to the statutory exclusion of all beneath them and the actual exclusion of all above. Not only did it thus alone rule society, but it may be said to have formed it. It ensconced itself in every vacant place, prodigiously augmented the number of places, and accustomed itself to live almost as much upon the Treasury as upon its own industry.

No sooner had the Revolution of 1830 become an accomplished fact, than there ensued a great lull in political passion, a sort of general subsidence, accompanied by a rapid increase in the public wealth. The particular spirit of the middle class became the general spirit of the government; it ruled the latter's foreign policy as well as affairs at home: an active, industrious spirit, often dishonourable, generally sober, occasionally reckless through vanity or egoism, but timid by temperament, moderate in all things, except in its love of ease and comfort, and wholly undistinguished. It was a spirit which, mingled with that of the people or of the aristocracy, can do wonders; but which, by itself, will never produce more than a government shorn of both virtue and greatness. Master of everything in a manner that no aristocracy had ever been or may ever hope to be, the middle class, when called upon to assume the government, took it up as a trade; it entrenched itself behind its power, and before long, in their egoism, each of its members thought much more of his private business than of public affairs, and of his personal enjoyment than of the greatness of the nation.

Posterity, which sees none but the more dazzling crimes, and which loses sight, in general, of mere vices, will never, perhaps, know to what extent the government of that day, towards its close, assumed the ways of a trading company, which conducts all its transactions with a view to the profits accruing to the shareholders. These vices were due to the natural instincts of the dominant class, to the absoluteness of its power, and also to the character of the time. Possibly also King Louis-Philippe had contributed to their growth.

This Prince was a singular medley of qualities, and one must have known him longer and more nearly than I did to be able to portray him in detail.

Nevertheless, although I was never one of his Council, I have frequently had occasion to come into contact with him. The last time that I spoke to him was shortly before the catastrophe of February. I was then director of the Académie Française, and I had to bring to the King's notice some matter or other which concerned that body. After treating the question which had brought me, I was about to retire, when the King detained me, took a chair, motioned me to another, and said, affably:

"Since you are here, Monsieur de Tocqueville, let us talk; I want to hear you talk a little about America."

I knew him well enough to know that this meant: I shall talk about America myself. And he did actually talk of it at great length and very searchingly: it was not possible for me, nor did I desire, to get in a word, for he really interested me. He described places as though he saw them before him; he recalled the distinguished men whom he had met forty years ago as though he had seen them the day before; he mentioned their names in full, Christian name and surname, gave their ages at the time, related their histories, their pedigrees, their posterity, with marvellous exactness and with infinite, though in no way tedious, detail. From America he returned, without taking breath, to Europe, talked of all our foreign and domestic affairs with incredible unconstraint (for I had no title to his confidence), spoke very badly of the Emperor of Russia, whom he called "Monsieur Nicolas," casually alluded to Lord Palmerston as a rogue, and ended by holding forth at length on the Spanish marriages, which had just taken place, and the annoyances to which they subjected him on the side of England.

"The Queen is very angry with me," he said, "and displays great irritation; but, after all," he added, "all this outcry won't keep me from _driving my own cart_."[2]

[2: "_Mener mon fiacre_": to drive my hackney-coach.--A.T. de M.]

Although this phrase dated back to the Old Order, I felt inclined to doubt whether Louis XIV. ever made use of it on accepting the Spanish Succession. I believe, moreover, that Louis-Philippe was mistaken, and, to borrow his own language, that the Spanish marriage helped not a little to upset his cart.

After three-quarters of an hour, the King rose, thanked me for the pleasure my conversation had given him (I had not spoken four words), and dismissed me, feeling evidently as delighted as one generally is with a man before whom one thinks one has spoken well. This was my last audience of the King.

Louis-Philippe improvised all the replies which he made, even upon the most critical occasions, to the great State bodies; he was as fluent then as in his private conversation, although not so happy or epigrammatic. He would suddenly become obscure, for the reason that he boldly plunged headlong into long sentences, of which he was not able to estimate the extent nor perceive the end beforehand, and from which he finally emerged struggling and by force, shattering the sense, and not completing the thought.

In this political world thus constituted and conducted, what was most wanting, particularly towards the end, was political life itself. It could neither come into being nor be maintained within the legal circle which the Constitution had traced for it: the old aristocracy was vanquished, the people excluded. As all business was discussed among members of one class, in the interest and in the spirit of that class, there was no battle-field for contending parties to meet upon. This singular homogeneity of position, of interests, and consequently of views, reigning in what M. Guizot had once called the legal country, deprived the parliamentary debates of all originality, of all reality, and therefore of all genuine passion. I have spent ten years of my life in the company of truly great minds, who were in a constant state of agitation without succeeding in heating themselves, and who spent all their perspicacity in vain endeavours to find subjects upon which they could seriously disagree.

On the other hand, the preponderating influence which King Louis-Philippe had acquired in public affairs, which never permitted the politicians to stray very far from that Prince's ideas, lest they should at the same time be removed from power, reduced the different colours of parties to the merest shades, and debates to the splitting of straws. I doubt whether any parliament (not excepting the Constituent Assembly, I mean the true one, that of 1789) ever contained more varied and brilliant talents than did ours during the closing years of the Monarchy of July. Nevertheless, I am able to declare that these great orators were tired to death of listening to one another, and, what was worse, the whole country was tired of listening to them. It grew unconsciously accustomed to look upon the debates in the Chambers as exercises of the intellect rather than as serious discussions, and upon all the differences between the various parliamentary parties--the majority, the left centre, or the dynastic opposition--as domestic quarrels between children of one family trying to trick one another. A few glaring instances of corruption, discovered by accident, led it to presuppose a number of hidden cases, and convinced it that the whole of the governing class was corrupt; whence it conceived for the latter a silent contempt, which was generally taken for confiding and contented submission.

The country was at that time divided into two unequal parts, or rather zones: in the upper, which alone was intended to contain the whole of the nation's political life, there reigned nothing but languor, impotence, stagnation, and boredom; in the lower, on the contrary, political life began to make itself manifest by means of feverish and irregular signs, of which the attentive observer was easily able to seize the meaning.

I was one of these observers; and although I was far from imagining that the catastrophe was so near at hand and fated to be so terrible, I felt a distrust springing up and insensibly growing in my mind, and the idea taking root more and more that we were making strides towards a fresh revolution. This denoted a great change in my thoughts; since the general appeasement and flatness that followed the Revolution of July had led me to believe for a long time that I was destined to spend my life amid an enervated and peaceful society. Indeed, anyone who had only examined the inside of the governmental fabric would have had the same conviction. Everything there seemed combined to produce with the machinery of liberty a preponderance of royal power which verged upon despotism; and, in fact, this result was produced almost without effort by the regular and tranquil movement of the machine. King Louis-Philippe was persuaded that, so long as he did not himself lay hand upon that fine instrument, and allowed it to work according to rule, he was safe from all peril. His only occupation was to keep it in order, and to make it work according to his own views, forgetful of society, upon which this ingenious piece of mechanism rested; he resembled the man who refused to believe that his house was on fire, because he had the key in his pocket. I had neither the same interests nor the same cares, and this permitted me to see through the mechanism of institutions and the agglomeration of petty every-day facts, and to observe the state of morals and opinions in the country. There I clearly beheld the appearance of several of the portents that usually denote the approach of revolutions, and I began to believe that in 1830 I had taken for the end of the play what was nothing more than the end of an act.

A short unpublished document which I composed at the time, and a speech which I delivered early in 1848, will bear witness to these preoccupations of my mind.

A number of my friends in Parliament met together in October 1847, to decide upon the policy to be adopted during the ensuing session. It was agreed that we should issue a programme in the form of a manifesto, and the task of drawing it up was deputed to me. Later, the idea of this publication was abandoned, but I had already written the document. I have discovered it among my papers, and I give the following extracts. After commenting on the symptoms of languor in Parliament, I continued:

Tocqueville's Recollections opens with a preface that frames the work as notes jotted on odds and ends of paper, written during a period of political exile in Sorrento. The authorial voice is immediately distinctive: analytical yet personal, blending the perspective of a participant with the distance of a retrospective observer. The text does not simply narrate events; it dissects them, often pausing to scrutinize the motives and mannerisms of those around him.

From the outset, Tocqueville establishes a pattern of embedding political analysis within vivid, character-driven scenes. His description of the President of the Assembly, Sénard, is a case in point: a man of courage who had contracted a 'deep-seated theatrical habit' from the bar, unable to report facts without adding 'turgidity' and a 'tragic hiccough.' This attention to the gap between reality and performance recurs throughout the recollections.

The Diction of Disillusionment

Tocqueville's word choices often convey a weary, clear-eyed skepticism. He describes the revolutionary fervor with phrases that undercut heroism: the insurrection's early successes 'brought him to a state of exaltation'—a clinical term that distances the narrator from the emotion. When recounting the porter who threatened to kill him, Tocqueville notes the man was 'a Socialist by birth, or rather by temperament,' a dry qualification that dismisses ideological labels as mere temperamental accidents. His language is precise, almost legalistic, yet capable of sudden, sharp judgments: the porter was 'not quite in his right mind, a drunkard, and a great good-for-nothing.' The accumulation of blunt descriptors reveals a narrator who sees through pretensions, whether of revolutionaries or of parliamentary orators.

Voice and the Theatricality of Politics

Tocqueville repeatedly draws attention to how people speak—their tone, their affectation, their failure to match words to reality. Sénard's 'hollow tones' and 'trembling voice' are mocked as a 'sort of tragic hiccough' that reminded him of an actor. The juxtaposition is explicit: 'Never were the sublime and the ridiculous brought so close together: for the facts were sublime and the narrator ridiculous.' This focus on vocal performance extends to the insurgents. When an old white-haired man appears with a 'white linen bandolier,' Tocqueville is 'touched to tears'—but he records the man's exact, practical reply to an invitation to dine: 'No, no; what would these good folk who are with me... say if they saw me leaving them to take it easy?' The dialogue is plain, unheroic, and all the more affecting for its ordinariness.

Structure as a Mirror of Chaos

The narrative structure mirrors the disjointed, piecemeal nature of the events. Tocqueville describes the Assembly's sittings as 'infrequent' and short, because 'assemblies are like children, and idleness always makes them say or do a number of foolish things.' His own account jumps between scenes: the bivouac, the Assembly floor, the porter's threat, the return home. Time markers are vague ('I believe at about three'), and the narrative is punctuated by the arrival of news—'each moment produced its event and its piece of news.' This fragmented structure, with its rapid shifts between intimate detail and broad report, conveys the sensory overload of a city in insurrection. The reader experiences the same 'listlessness that follows upon any prolonged excitement' that Tocqueville confesses to feeling.

Recurring Details: The Body and the Barricade

Throughout the excerpts, Tocqueville anchors political upheaval in physical, bodily details. The porter's knife, the old man's bandolier, the 'provision of bread' that had not arrived since morning—these concrete objects ground abstract conflict. The description of the porter is particularly vivid: 'an old soldier, not quite in his right mind, a drunkard, and a great good-for-nothing, who spent at the wine-shop all the time which he did not employ in beating his wife.' The specificity of this portrait—the wine-shop, the beating, the large knife—makes the threat visceral. Yet Tocqueville undercuts the drama with his own fatigue: 'I had not the energy to carry out my intention.' This interplay between external danger and internal exhaustion is a recurring motif, reminding the reader that the memoirist is not a heroic chronicler but a tired, fallible participant.

Readers approaching these recollections should attend to the gaps and silences as much as to the set pieces. Tocqueville writes as a man who knows the outcome but refuses to impose retrospective order on the chaos he experienced. His eye for the absurd—the theatrical president, the drunken porter—does not diminish the gravity of the events; rather, it makes them more human. The Recollections reward a slow reading that savors the precise, often ironic, observations of a mind trained on the mechanics of power and the frailties of those who wield it.

Outside, the rain kept time with Tocqueville’s measured sentences, his careful watch of men undone by their own certainties. That same unsettling patience—waiting for a trench to settle, for a cry to fade—stayed with me long after. It led, quietly, to Huts in Hell — Reading Notes, where witness becomes its own kind of solitude. Some pages simply hold still.

Anthony Harris
1 month ago

5
5 out of 5 (1 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
  • ...
    Penny Hawkins - 1 month ago
    A fascinating firsthand account from a keen observer of politics and society. De Tocqueville's insights are as relevant today as they were in his time, offering a unique window into the French Revolution and the nuances of democratic governance. His sharp wit and analytical mind make this collection both entertaining and enlightening. A must-read for history buffs and political thinkers alike.

  • ...
    Ashlee Calhoun - 3 weeks ago
    Despite its historical significance, this memoir feels disjointed and lacking in coherent structure. De Tocqueville's elitist biases permeate the narrative, and his self-importance often overshadows the events he describes. Overall, it's a tedious read that fails to deliver the engaging analysis promised. Only for the most devoted scholars.

  • ...
    Brandon Valencia - 1 week ago
    The recollections provide a valuable personal perspective, but the prose is dense and occasionally dry. Some passages are captivating, while others require patience. Nevertheless, De Tocqueville's commentary on the revolution offers a thought-provoking contrast to modern interpretations. Recommended for dedicated readers of political history who can wade through the heavier sections.


Reader reflection

Your personal reading reflection

Build a private reading journal entry for this title.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

Where are you in your reading?

2

Was reading this book enjoyable?

3

Would you encourage someone else to read it?

4

What was the reading difficulty like?

Related eBooks