The French Second Empire: An Anatomy of Political Power (review)

This book synthesizes a vast range of primary and secondary sources about the origins, transformation, and collapse of the French Second Empire. Its theme of "regime transition" from the authoritarian empire of the 1850s to the liberal empire of the later 1860s combines a familiar narrative about constitutional change with a richly contextualized analysis of Louis Napoleon's personal authority, the administrative institutions and public policies of his regime, socioeconomic and cultural changes, and forms of political opposition. Most of the chapters span the entire period from 1852 to 1870, each from a distinct analytical perspective. Thus, successive chapters in Part II cover Napoleon III's personal role as emperor; the system of government involving Napoleon's ministers, legislative institutions, and the prefectoral administration; the management of elections; the preservation of public order; the construction of moral order; and economic policies designed to create prosperity. Similarly, Part III consists of chapters about the context for opposition, about legitimism, and about liberalism throughout the period, followed by a chapter about republicans in the aftermath of Louis-Napoleon's coup d'état and a chapter about the republican revival of the 1860s. These analytical chapters are preceded in Part I by a concise account of Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte's rise to power during the Second Republic, and followed in Part IV by a superb analysis of the crisis of war and revolution in 1870 that ended his regime.

The overlapping chronology and interrelated themes addressed in the central parts of the book result in considerable repetition about the reasons for Napoleon III's constitutional changes, the administration's loss of control over electoral management, elite disillusionment with Napoleon III's foreign and domestic policies, and the rise of political opposition. Nonetheless, the many strands of analysis are woven into a coherent argument about the dynamics of liberalization: It expressed the disaffection of social elites from the personal rule of Napoleon III and involved concessions by the emperor to liberal demands for greater public liberties and parliamentary power. Liberals were the main architects and beneficiaries of regime transition.

The counterpoint of Price's argument about liberalization concerns the limits of democraticization at the end of the Second Empire. How stable was a liberal empire that continued to be opposed by republicans who were inspired by the democratic ideals of the French Revolution? Unlike historians who have emphasized the strength of the republican movement at the end of the Second Empire, Price highlights divisions between moderate republicans, radicals, and revolutionary socialists, and he interprets the plebiscite of May 1870 as an overwhelming defeat for republican opponents of the regime. Furthermore, Price points out that protests and riots in Paris, where republican candidates had triumphed in the legislative elections of 1869, sparked a backlash among voters in the provinces that the government skillfully encouraged. An incipient "party of order" rallied support for the regime from a broad spectrum of opinion, ranging from moderate republicans, liberal Catholics, and liberal Bonapartists to Legitimists and authoritarian Bonapartists. Thus, Price concludes that liberalization had stabilized the regime.

But what would have happened to this coalition if radical republicans had succeeded in extending their political base from Paris and other cities into the countryside, as their predecessors in the "Democ-Soc" movement had done during the Second Republic? Price's excellent analysis of the social context of politics shows that liberalism was an elitist movement. Authoritarian Bonapartists had a mass base in the countryside, especially in southwestern France, and radical republicans were developing a mass base in the cities, especially in Paris. Would liberal Bonapartists have been able to maintain the political influence that they achieved in the elections of 1869, or would they have been outflanked by authoritarian Bonapartists on the right and radical republicans on the left?

This question is hypothetical because the liberal Empire collapsed in military defeat less than four...