The French Counterrevolutionary Theorist Louis de Bonald (1754-1840) by David Klinck (review)

book reviews125 should not ignore such central, crucial debates if he wishes his book to be taken seriously. There are other weaknesses.The use of the term "middle-class education" is not carefuUy defined, and the varied nuances embraced by that classification need fuUer recognition. There is but slight treatment of the contribution of other coUeges and communities to this field of educational provision (St. Charles CoUege had itseU educated over 1200 pupils by 1887).There is lack of analysis of the impact of the London University connection with the CathoUc coUeges as part of an overaU educational thrust forward for the CathoUc community . In technical matters, a better understanding of Manning's role m his relationship with the Society of Jesus could have been arrived at if the author had examined the extant Manning coUections Ui Rome, the United States, France, and the United Kingdom and U he had also made appropriate use of recendy pubUshed material, such as Newsome's The Convert Cardinals (1993). In fact, the bibliography is very dated. Only about ten relevant books pubUshed since 1980 are Usted.There is also an absence of scholarly 'distance' from the subject, and, in the process ofwriting and presentation, there is a want of graciousness toward scholars and other views at odds with the author's own.The quaUty of the photographic reproductions between pages 137 and 138 is poor. V Alan McClelland University ofHull The French Counterrevolutionary Theorist Louis de Bonald (1 754-1840). By David Klinck. [Studies in Modern European History, Vol. 18.] (New York: Peter Lang Publishing. 1996. Pp. viii, 301. $5395) Until now there has not been a full-length treatment of Louis de Bonald's career and thought in English. This seems strange. Bonald, a minor nobleman raised in the Rouergue and educated by the Oratorians at Juilly, was the foremost ideologist of reaction in post-Revolutionary France (Joseph de Maistre was actuaUy a Savoyard). Returning to France under Napoleon, he served as both a Deputy and a Peer during the years of the Bourbon Restoration. But his ideas, though at war with a good deal of modernity, exerted considerable influence long after his death. In fact, Bonald's weighty treatises and polemical essays were not only admired by diehard Legitimists. They also came to be selectively appreciated by minds more modern—by the founder of sociological positivism, Auguste Comte, by one of the first practitioners of survey-based sociology , Frederic Le Play, and by the leader of the fascistic Action Française, Charles Maurras. In short, Bonald was not only a royalist and a theocrat but a thinker whose condemnation of the deracinating effects of individualism anticipated EmUe 126BOOK reviews Durkheim's notion of "anomie." The inherently social character of the seU, of language, and of civilization's greatest achievements are stressed in his writings. The unyielding champion of a somewhat imaginary Old Regime, he was much impressed by the kind of Christian rationalism associated with Malebranche and Leibniz.At the same time, Bonald was a Cassandra, a prophet not only of a virtuous past but of the tumultuous change whose pace would only accelerate as the twentieth century approached. He made dire, often germane, predictions about Europe's social UIs après le déluge, including the poverty exacerbated by laissez-faire economics, the bUght spread by rapid urbanization and industrialism , the rising incidence of divorce, and the weakening oftraditional famUy patterns . On a theoretical level, he advanced criticisms of empiricist epistemology and democratic poUtics that on occasion scored direct hits. His obvious bias notwithstanding, Bonald articulated fears and insights about the modern world that are as much akin to radical as to conservative perspectives. Klinck's monograph is most welcome, therefore. Based on archival research in famUy papers and archives in Paris and the Midi, its evidence adds to what is known about Bonald's background and reading and about his mayoral poUcies in MiUau before 1793. It is perhaps less impressive in its analyses of the structure , nuances, and relevance of Bonald's thought than in its fresh information concerning his Ufe, relationships, and poUtical activities. Yet even Klinck's labors have not uncovered a complete explanation for why...