Analysis Of Louis Xiv's Absolutist Reign In France

Introduction
A study of European monarchy can often be distorted by rose-tint due to over-romanticised portrayals or the simple blurring of facts and fiction over time. Therefore, in the endeavour to gain a rigorous understanding of Louis XIV’s absolutist reign in France, the memoirs of the Duc de Saint-Simon provides a unique account of the Sun King’s tenure, one from a detractor’s perspective. His memoirs present an honest and stripped-down account of Louis’ court that does away with romantic fiction and exposes its imperfect rawness. This essay aims to assess the strengths, weaknesses and historical value of the nobleman’s memoirs.
Strengths
The main strength of the document is its balanced narrative. Even though the author is primarily a critic of the sovereign, he was able to acknowledge the talents and successes of King Louis. Saint-Simon remarked that Louis was brilliant at court strategy and personal politics, noting that ‘the secrets of others he kept as religiously as his own’. However, as a member of the old nobility, he was unapologetic in decrying Louis’ character by painting the King as frivolous, vain, cruel and intellectually ‘beneath mediocrity’. Louis is depicted as a King who went to great lengths to control people’s perception of him, deriving pleasure from adulation and praise. The author also expressed his disdain for the new court culture Louis XIV ushered in. This derision can be seen through his criticisms of Louis’ ministerial appointments and of Versailles.
Limitations
Shaped by his experience as a sidelined nobleman, Saint-Simon’s perspective definitely suffers bias predisposition against Louis’ new order.
This can be seen through his vicious attacks on the King’s ministers whom he ridicules as being unintelligent and
incompetent.
Furthermore, the document might only portray his opinions on events, casting doubt on its accuracy and thoroughness. He could have also been factually selective as well. For instance, contrary to Saint-Simon’s view that the appointment of Nobles of the Robe like Jean-Baptise Colbert were due to Louis’ inferiority complex, the appointments could also be construed as a successful and effective means of introducing meritocracy into the feudal-monarchic system.
As a beleaguered party, he might have allowed emotion to distort his perception of reality and to justify his arguments. For instance, his portrayal of Versailles as the ‘dullest and most ungrateful of all places’ is unnecessarily emotive and subjective.

Value as a source of historical knowledge
These memoirs are undeniably valuable as the author was an eyewitness present at court, within the Sun King’s orbit. Throughout Saint-Simon’s life, he has spent time within and without Louis’ court, endowing him with the insights of both an insider and outsider. This lends tremendous balance to his writings.
Saint-Simon also wrote his memoirs in private and with great discretion – for fear of royal reprisal. He did not personally publish the memoirs during his lifetime nor did he instruct any family members or friends to do so after his death. The writings were seized upon Saint-Simon’s death, kept hidden by the authorities and only fully published in 1829, 114 years after the death of King Louis XIV. Therefore, it can be inferred that his memoirs were probably never intended to serve as anti-royalist apologia.