<<

. 40
( 52 .)



>>

picture of the rise of commercial civilisation in Europe. Yet, as we have
seen, the pan-European identity promoted in the Scottish Enlightenment
was not out of step with existing features of English political culture.


The limits of Francophobia
A strong sense of Gothic kinship with the Franks overlay and cut across
the Francophobia which was such a deWning feature of late seventeenth-
and eighteenth-century English political identity. There is a powerful
historical consensus that anti-French sentiments were at the heart of
British political culture during the era of the ˜Second Hundred Years™
War™.”“ Michael DuVy has argued that ˜a peak of Francophobia™ was
attained in late seventeenth- and eighteenth-century England. In every
popular medium “ prints and caricatures, literature and the theatre “ he
”À Robertson, Charles V, Note xlv, in Robertson, Works, p. 432.
”à Forbes, Hume™s philosophical politics, pp. 187, 311“12.
”• D. Forbes, ˜The European or cosmopolitan dimension in Hume™s science of politics™,
BJECS 1 (1978), 57. See also Forbes, Hume™s philosophical politics, pp. 142“50, 152
(where even Hume himself falls for the stereotype), and p. 299 (for the recognition that
vulgar whiggism was based upon a wider European history of declining Gothic liberties).
”’ Hume, ˜Of civil liberty™ and ˜Of the rise and progress of the arts and sciences™, in Hume,
Essays.
”“ M. DuVy, ˜˜˜The noisie, empty, Xuttring French™™: English images of the French, 1689“
1815™, History Today 32 (September 1982), 21.
234 Points of contact

detects a prevailing consensus that the French were quite ˜alien™, ˜a
monkey race™, ˜unnatural™ and ˜un-English™.”“ Francophobia, as Colin
Haydon notes, also Wgured prominently in the anti-Catholicism of the
Wrst half of the eighteenth century, with English commentators critical
not only of Popish“French militarism, arbitrary rule, poverty, supersti-
tion and slavishness, but also of the horrendous treatment meted out to
the Huguenots, many of whom had since resettled in London (however,
as Daniel Statt points out, the English response to Huguenot refugees was
complex, fed not only by sympathy for Protestant co-religionists, but also
fears about their Calvinism, anxieties over economic competition, stock
Francophobia and “ ironically “ suspicions that some Huguenots might
be crypto-Jesuits).”” Jeremy Black has also established a general picture of
mutual antagonism, though he concedes that the prevailing xenophobia
was qualiWed by several countercurrents in English culture, including the
recognition that French autocracy had a late medieval or even early
modern provenance.¦»» Duncan Forbes has identiWed ˜chauvinistic Fran-
cophobia™ as a central feature of vulgar whiggery.¦»¦ A contemporary
French observer, Fougeret de Montbron, held similar views of eight-
eenth-century English values: ˜Before they learn there is a God to be
worshipped™, he expostulated, ˜they learn there are Frenchmen to be
detested.™¦» 
There were indeed numerous critics of France among the ranks of
historians and political pamphleteers. British culture abounded in cliched
´
comparisons between English freedoms and French tyranny, and be-
tween the plenty of roast beef and plum pudding enjoyed by the tenant
farmers of England and the scrawniness of the impoverished clog-shod
peasantry of France. Henry Care compared the arbitrary tyranny of the
”“ Ibid., 21“6.
”” C. Haydon, Anti-Catholicism in eighteenth-century England (Manchester, 1993), pp. 24“6,
47, 57, 127, 129, 136, 179, 253; D. Statt, Foreigners and Englishmen: the controversy over
immigration and population, 1660“1760 (Newark, DE, 1995), pp. 19“20, 168“72, 189“
91, 193; G. Gibbs, ˜The reception of the Huguenots in England and the Dutch republic,
1680“1690™, in O. Grell, J. Israel and N. Tyacke (eds.), From persecution to toleration: the
Glorious Revolution and religion in England (Oxford, 1991), esp. pp. 277“81.
¦»» J. Black, Natural and necessary enemies: Anglo-French relations in the eighteenth century
(London, 1986), esp. pp. 187, 192“3; Black, ˜Ideology, history, xenophobia and the
world of print in eighteenth-century England™, in Black and J. Gregory (eds.), Culture,
politics and society in Britain 1660“1800 (Manchester, 1991), pp. 203“4.
¦»¦ Forbes, Hume™s philosophical politics, pp. 142“50, 312.
¦»  Quoted in R. Porter, English society in the eighteenth century (Harmondsworth, 1982),
p. 21. See also M. DuVy, The Englishman and the foreigner (Cambridge, 1985). But for a
nuanced approach to the values of the elite, see P. Langford, A polite and commercial
people (Oxford, 1989), p. 321. R. Gibson, Best of enemies: Anglo-French relations since the
Norman Conquest (London, 1995), ch. 3, plausibly depicts the eighteenth century as an
era of both ˜cosmopolitanism and xenophobia™; but, as we shall see, Gallicanism and
Gothicism further complicate this picture.
Mapping a Gothic Europe 235

king of France to that of the grand Turk.¦»À Anglo-French commercial,
strategic and colonial rivalries found expression in hostile caricatures of
the French, such as Hogarth™s ˜Calais Gate, or the Roast Beef of Old
England™. It was a commonplace that contemporary French values were
poisonous to the English. Social commentators such as the Reverend
John Brown (1715“66) in his Estimate of the manners and principles of the
times (1757) or John Andrews (1736“1809) in A comparative view of the
French and English nations, in their manners, politics, and literature (1785)
aroused fears about the eVects of a foppish and eVeminate Gallic con-
tagion on the virtuous libertarian manners of the English people.¦»Ã
Francophobia even had a purchase on popular Gothicism. Colley can
point to examples of Francophobic Gothicism, such as the Saxonist
sermons delivered in the 1750s by John Free to the Society of Anti-
Gallicans.¦»• One poetaster declaimed that the French were ˜by Nature
design™d as a Foil / To the bright Saxon look, the great claim of our
Isle™.¦»’
Francophobia was a pronounced component of popular culture and a
vital ingredient of national identity. However, while antagonism based on
conXicting foreign policies, imperial ambitions, dynasticism and confes-
sionalism was reinforced by popular xenophobia, the ˜universal Franco-
phobia of the media™¦»“ was mitigated within the political and cultural
elite by a good measure of ambivalence. Popular anti-Gallicanism has to
be set against the sophisticated Gothicist accounts of the history of liberty

¦»À Henry Care, English liberties: or, the free-born subject™s inheritance (London, 1680?), p. 1.
¦»Ã Newman, Rise of English nationalism, esp. pp. 82“3; Colley, Britons, p. 88; K. Wilson,
˜Empire of virtue: the imperial project and Hanoverian culture, c. 1720“1785™, in
L. Stone (ed.), An imperial state at war (London, 1994), p. 137. See also J. Sekora,
Luxury: the concept in western thought from Eden to Smollett (Baltimore, 1977), ch. 2.
¦»• L. Colley, ˜Radical patriotism in eighteenth-century England™, in R. Samuel (ed.),
Patriotism (3 vols., London and New York, 1989), I, p. 173.
¦»’ ˜The illustrious modern™ (1718), quoted in H. Weinbrot, ˜Politics, taste and national
identity: some uses of Tacitism in eighteenth-century Britain™, in Woodman and Luce,
Tacitus and the Tacitean tradition, p. 177.
¦»“ DuVy, ˜˜˜Noisie, empty, Xuttring French™™™, 24. Despite this ˜universal Francophobia™,
the Denmark of Molesworth remained a byword for rottenness: see Northern revolutions:
or, the principal causes of the declension and dissolution of several once Xourishing Gothic
constitutions in Europe (London, 1757); Edward Wortley Montagu Jr, ReXections on the
rise and fall of the antient republicks, adapted to the present state of Great Britain (London,
1759), pp. 363“6. For sceptical modern whigs such as Tucker, Poland with its stagnant
Gothic constitution and untrammelled nobility was Europe™s worst tyranny: Tucker,
Treatise, pp. 62, 65, 165, 336; Gunn, ˜Civil polity of Paxton™, 57. For Turkey and
Brandenburg as the blots on European political civilisation in the late eighteenth
century, see E. Gould, ˜American independence and Britain™s counter-revolution™, P+P
154 (1997), 128“9. For Russia as an oriental despotism lacking countervailing feudal
institutions, see F. Venturi, ˜From Scotland to Russia: an eighteenth-century debate on
feudalism™, in A. G. Cross, Great Britain and Russia in the eighteenth century (Newtonville,
MA, 1979), esp. pp. 12“20.
236 Points of contact

commonly found in the higher echelons of English political culture from
the middle of the seventeenth century onwards. Many eighteenth-century
Englishmen recognised that national characters were not immutable, and
were happy to acknowledge that their arch-enemies were not altogether
diVerent from themselves, the French having formerly enjoyed Gothic
liberties.
The English critique of French despotism purveyed in historical treat-
ises was quite speciWc, and did not extend to a blanket condemnation of
the French people as a nation incapable of sustaining the burdens of
freedom and self-government. Rather the French as the descendants of
the Franks were considered a kindred people of the Anglo-Saxons, who
had been unfortunate largely through the vicissitudes of late medieval and
more recent European history “ and not through any defect in their ethnic
composition “ to lose their Gothic birthright. There is a tone of elegy
rather than hostility to most seventeenth- and eighteenth-century histori-
cal treatments of French constitutional history. Niggling concern about
the fate of France shaded English hubris. John Oldmixon encouraged
Englishmen to read widely in European history so that, by comparing ˜the
happiness of our constitution with the misery of other nations™, they
might become ˜more tenacious in preserving it™: ˜France was once as
happy as we are, if Mezeray, one of the best historians among the
´
moderns, knew the history of his own country.™¦»“
Anglo-French aYnities did not rest solely upon the notion of a shared
Gothic ancestry. Gothicism was supplemented by a perception of other
shared values. Not only had the Franks and Anglo-Saxons been kindred
liberty-loving peoples, so too were the aboriginal Gauls and Britons,
closely related libertarian Celtic populations, upon whom they imposed
themselves.¦»” The British origins of the Church of England shared com-
mon features with the early Gallican church. ˜We must search among the
Gauls for the ecclesiastical polity of the ancient Britons™, argued Fer-
dinando Warner in the midst of the eighteenth-century Anglo-French
wars.¦¦» Both churches had subsequently been corrupted by medieval
Catholicism. Having succeeded in restoring the historic ecclesia anglicana,
the English Reformation provided a model for her wayward Gallican
sister-church. In the late seventeenth century the estrangement of an
assertively Gallican church from the papacy lent a degree of credibility to
the hope that another historic church might yet be reclaimed from the
clutches of Rome.¦¦¦ The anti-Catholicism which did so much to fuel

¦»“ John Oldmixon, The critical history of England, ecclesiastical and civil (2 vols., London,
1724“6), I, pp. 11“12. ¦»” Rymer, General draught, pp. 13“15, 73.
¦¦» Ferdinando Warner, Ecclesiastical history of England (2 vols., London, 1756), I, p. 3.
¦¦¦ See William Cave, A dissertation concerning the government of the ancient church, by bishops,
Mapping a Gothic Europe 237

English Francophobia was mitigated by Anglican“Gallican sympathies.
Throughout the Second Hundred Years™ War the English elite remained
conscious of several threads which linked England, however tenuously at
times, with the enemy.¦¦ 
Even during the reign of Louis XIV, a period when Englishmen Wrst
began to worry seriously about the expansionist ambitions of the Bourbon
monarchy, elements of the English elite displayed a keen awareness of a
wider identity in which the French Wgured largely. It was clear that Louis
wished to roll back the frontiers of the European Reformation. Some
commentators feared that he wished also to establish a universal mon-
archy, a personal dominion over the whole of western Christendom.
Andrew Marvell described Louis XIV as the ˜presumptive monarch of
Christendom™.¦¦À However, strategic concerns about the dangers of
French expansionism did not extinguish all sense of those Gothic aYn-
ities shared by the English and the French. As we have seen already,
Charles Davenant, a vigorous critic of French aspirations to universal
monarchy, did not allow Francophobia to cloud his evaluation of
France™s legitimate place within the history of European liberties.¦¦Ã
Religious aYnities reinforced the sense of a common Gothic heritage.
Bruno Neveu notes that this era was a golden age of Anglo-Gallican
reconciliation and intellectual cross-fertilisation.¦¦• On one side of the
Channel, the works of William Wake and Wilkins on medieval concilia
drew upon French learning, while on the other George Bull™s Defensio
Wdei Nicaenae was warmly received by French clerics.¦¦’ Similarly, French
patristic scholarship, such as the work of Louis Ellies Du Pin (1657“
1719), became an integral component of Anglican culture. Du Pin™s
Nouvelle bibliotheque de tous les auteurs ecclesiastiques was quickly translated
` ´
into English (1696“1706) to become ˜a staple work on the shelves of the

metropolitans and patriarchs (London, 1683), p. 219; John Inett, Origines Anglicanae (2
vols., London and Oxford, 1704“10), II, pp. vii“x. For the earlier appeal of Gallican
jurisdictionalism to Laudians, see A. Milton, Catholic and Reformed: the Roman and
Protestant churches in English Protestant thought 1600“1640 (Cambridge, 1995),
pp. 265“8.
E.g. the patriotic anti-Catholicism of George Smith, The Britons and Saxons not converted
¦¦ 
to Popery (London, 1748), also comprehends, p. 265, praise for ˜those learned assertors
of the liberties of the Gallican church™, carefully distinguished from Jesuits and ˜high
papalians™. In addition to the roles played by Gallicanism, enlightened cosmopolitanism
and Gothicism, Francophobia was also mitigated by the widespread antiquarian ac-
knowledgement of the shared customs and institutions of the ancient Gauls and Britons.
Andrew Marvell, An account of the growth of Popery and arbitrary government (Amsterdam,
¦¦À
1677), p. 16. See also S. Pincus, ˜From butterboxes to wooden shoes: the shift in English
popular sentiment from anti-Dutch to anti-French in the 1670s™, HJ 38 (1995), 333“61.
Davenant, Essays.
¦¦Ã
B. Neveu, ˜Mabillon et l™historiographie Gallicane vers 1700™, in Neveu, Erudition et
¦¦•
religion aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siecles (Paris, 1994), pp. 223“4.
` ¦¦’ Ibid., p. 223.
238 Points of contact

more enlightened of the English clergy during the reign of Queen
Anne™.¦¦“
The rise of Gallicanism drew attention to ominous cracks in the mono-
lith of Counter-Reformation orthodoxy. The Four Gallican Articles of
1682 variously liberated sovereigns from the temporal claims of the
papacy, reinforced the allegiance of the subject to the immediate sover-
eignty of the temporal monarch, highlighted the limitations on papal
authority inherent both in General Councils of the Church and within the
Gallican church, and emphasised that even in questions of faith the
leading authority of the papacy was qualiWed by the consensus of the
church. Anglican ecclesiology of the Restoration era drew on the work of
Jean de Launoy, Etienne Baluze (1630“1718) and other Gallican apolo-
gists.¦¦“ Du Pin™s popularity in England owed something to the uncom-
promising Gallicanism of his Dissertationes historicae de antiqua Ecclesiae
disciplina (1686), a treatise which found its way on to the Index librorum
prohibitorum in 1688 where it joined other defences of Gallican liberties,
such as the work of Jean Gerbais (1629“99), condemned by Innocent XI
in 1680.¦¦” To a considerable extent, Anglicans and Gallicans shared a
similar interpretation of the historic institutions of the early church.
Anglicans and Gallicans both insisted on the primacy of the episcopacy in
their respective ecclesiologies. Indeed, the argument for the historic
autonomy of the Church of England from the patriarchal claims of Rome
based on the sixth canon of the Council of Nicaea was also an important
component of the case for the independent privileges of the Gallican
church.¦ »
French relations with the papacy became increasingly strained by
Gallicanism, and by the issue of Jansenism, a strictly Augustinian ap-
proach to Catholic theology. The death of the orthodox “ albeit pragmati-
cally Gallican “ Louis XIV opened a signiWcant window of opportunity
for Anglican“Gallican reconciliation. Negotiations began between lead-

¦¦“ J. W. Thompson, A history of historical writing (2 vols., New York, 1942), II, p. 31.
¦¦“ Joseph Bingham, Origines ecclesiasticae (1708“22: 2 vols., London, 1878), I, pp. 348“9.
¦¦” Neveu, Erudition et religion, p. 208. See also the Gallican exile, Oxford DD and client of
Queen Caroline, Pere Le Courayer, author of Dissertation sur la validite des ordinations
` ´
anglicanes (1723) and of an English translation of Paolo Sarpi™s History of the Council of
Trent (1736): see R. Shackleton, Montesquieu (Oxford, 1961), pp. 132“3; S. Ollard,
˜Reunion. 1. with the Roman church™, in Ollard, G. Crosse and M. Bond (eds.), A
dictionary of English church history (1912: 3rd edn, London, 1948), pp. 522“3. For the
constitutionalism of Nicolas Le Gros, Renversement des libertes de l™eglise gallicane (1717),
´ ´
see D. Van Kley, ˜The Jansenist constitutional legacy in the French prerevolution™, in
K. Baker (ed.), The French Revolution and the creation of modern political culture, vol. I, The
political culture of the Old Regime (Oxford, 1987), pp. 173“4.

<<

. 40
( 52 .)



>>