to each a reward exactly proportionate to what he had accomplished; this was the Saint-Simonian principle already coming into practice, and every officer was encouraged to bring himself forward. Charlatanism[1] exhausted the moral forces of the nation whilst its material forces were still very considerable. Napoleon formed very few distinguished general officers and carried on the war principally with those left him by the Revolution; this impotence is the most absolute condemnation of the system.[2]
The scarcity of the information which we possess about the great Gothic artists has often been pointed out. Among the stone-carvers who sculptured the statues in the cathedrals there were men of great talent who seem always to have remained anonymous; nevertheless they produced masterpieces. Viollet-le-Duc was surprised that the archives of Notre Dame had preserved for us no detailed information about the building of this gigantic monument and that, as a rule, the documents of the Middle Ages say very little about the architects; he adds that "genius can develop itself in obscurity, and that it is its very nature to seek silence and obscurity."[3] We
- ↑ The charlatanism of the followers of Saint Simon was as disgusting as that of Murat; moreover, the history of this school is unintelligible if we do not compare it with its Napoleonic models.
- ↑ General Donop strongly insists on the incapacity of Napoleon's lieutenants who passively obeyed instructions that they never tried to understand, and the fulfilment of which was minutely overlooked by their master (op. cit. pp. 22–29 and 32–34). Napoleon's armies were valued in proportion to the exactitude with which they carried out the orders of their master; initiative being little valued, it was possible to estimate the conduct of the generals like the ability of a good pupil who has learnt his lessons well; the Emperor gave pecuniary rewards to his lieutenants, proportionate to the measure of merit he recognised in them.
- ↑ Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire raisonné de l'architecture française, vol. iv. pp. 42–43. This does not contradict what we read in the article "Architect." From that we learn that the builders often inscribed their names in the cathedrals (vol. i. pp. 109–111); from that it has been concluded that these works were not anonymous (Bréhier, Les
