Ok

En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

dimanche, 29 août 2010

L'Europe en dormition

L’Europe en dormition

Depuis la fin des deux guerres mondiales et leur débauche de violences, l’Europe est « entrée en dormition » (1). Les Européens ne le savent pas. Tout est fait pour leur masquer cette réalité. Pourtant cet état de « dormition » n’a pas cessé de peser. Jour après jour, se manifeste l’impuissance européenne. La démonstration en a été assénée une nouvelle fois durant la crise de la zone Euro au printemps 2010, prouvant des divergences profondes et l’incapacité d’une volonté politique unanime. La preuve de notre « dormition » est tout aussi visible en Afghanistan, dans le rôle humiliant de forces supplétives assigné aux troupes européennes à la disposition des États-Unis (OTAN).

L’état de « dormition » fut la conséquence des catastrophiques excès de fureur meurtrière et fratricide perpétrés entre 1914 et 1945. Il fut aussi le cadeau fait aux Européens par les États-Unis et l’URSS, les deux puissances hégémoniques issues de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Ces puissances avaient imposé leurs modèles qui étaient étrangers à notre tradition intellectuelle, sociale et politique. Bien que l’une des deux ait disparu entre-temps, les effets vénéneux se font toujours sentir, nous plongeant de surcroît dans une culpabilité sans équivalent. Suivant le mot éloquent d’Elie Barnavi, « La Shoah s’est hissée au rang de religion civile en Occident » (2).

Mais l’histoire n’est jamais immobile. Ceux qui ont atteint le sommet de la puissance sont condamnés à redescendre.

La puissance, d’ailleurs, il faut le redire, n’est pas tout. Elle est nécessaire pour exister dans le monde, être libre de son destin, échapper à la soumission des impérialismes politiques, économiques, mafieux ou idéologiques. Mais elle n’échappe pas aux maladies de l’âme qui ont le pouvoir de détruire les nations et les empires.

Avant d’être menacés par divers dangers très réels et par des oppositions d’intérêts et d’intentions qui ne font que s’accentuer, les Européens de notre temps sont d’abord victimes de ces maladies de l’âme. À la différence d’autres peuples et d’autres civilisations, ils sont dépourvus de toute conscience de soi. C’est bien la cause décisive de leur faiblesse. À en croire leurs dirigeants, ils seraient sans passé, sans racines, sans destin. Ils ne sont rien. Et pourtant, ce qu’ils ont en commun est unique. Ils ont en privilège le souvenir et les modèles d’une grande civilisation attestée depuis Homère et ses poèmes fondateurs.

Les épreuves lourdes et multiples que l’on voit poindre, l’affaiblissement des puissances qui nous ont si longtemps dominés, les bouleversements d’un monde désormais instable, annoncent que l’état de « dormition » des Européens ne saurait être éternel.

Dominique Venner

Notes:

1. J’ai développé cette interprétation historique dans mon essai Le Siècle de 1914
(Pygmalion, 2006).
2. Réponse d’Elie Barnavi à Régis Debray, À un ami israélien, Flammarion, 2010.

Source : Dominique Venner [1]


Article printed from :: Novopress Québec: http://qc.novopress.info

URL to article: http://qc.novopress.info/8860/leurope-en-dormition/

Henry Williamson: Nature's Visionary

Henry Williamson: Nature’s Visionary

The fact that the name of Henry Williamson is today so little known across the White world is a sad reflection of the extent to which Western man has allowed himself to be deprived of his culture and identity over the last 50 years. Until the Second World War Williamson was generally regarded as one of the great English Nature writers, possessing a unique ability to capture the essential essence and meaning of the natural world in all its variety and forms.

His most famous Nature book, Tarka the Otter, was published in 1927 and became one of the best-loved children’s books of all time, with its vivid descriptions of animal and woodland life in the English countryside. It was publicly praised by leading English literary figures such as Thomas Hardy, Arnold Bennett, and John Galsworthy. Hardy called Tarka a “remarkable book,” while Bennett declared it to be “marvelous.” Even T. E. Lawrence, also known as Lawrence of Arabia, admitted that “the book did move me and gratify me profoundly.”

Tarka was awarded the coveted Hawthornden Prize for literature in 1928 and eventually attracted the interest of Walt Disney, who offered a small fortune for the film rights. Williamson, however, was concerned that such an arrangement might compromise his artistic integrity, and he rejected the offer.

Seventy years later, however, Tarka, like the majority of Williamson’s books, is relatively unknown and has only just become available in print again. The reason: Like several other leading European authors, Williamson was a victim of the Second World War. Not only did his naturalistic message conflict with the materialistic culture that has pervaded the Western world since 1945, but he himself was a political fighter who actively opposed the war on ideological grounds.

Born in Brockley, southeast London, in December 1895, Williamson was educated at Colfe’s Grammar School, Lewisham. He spent much of his early life exploring the nearby Kent countryside, where his love of Nature and animals and his artistic awareness and sensitivity were first stimulated. Never satisfied unless he had seen things for himself, he always made sure that he studied things closely enough to get the letter as well as the spirit of reality. This enabled him to develop a microscopic observational ability which came to dominate his life.

Williamson joined the British Army at the outbreak of war in 1914 and fought at the Battle of the Somme and at Passchendaele, where he was seriously wounded. It was this experience as a frontline soldier which was the redefining moment in his life and artistic development, stimulating in him a lifelong Faustian striving to experience and comprehend the “life flow” permeating his own, and all, existence.

His spiritual development continued after the war. In 1919 he read for the first time the visionary The Story of My Heart, which was written by the English Nature writer Richard Jefferies and published in 1893. For Williamson, discovering Jefferies acted as a liberation of his consciousness, stimulating all the stored impressions of his life to return and reveal a previously smothered and overlaid self. It was not just an individual self that he discovered, however, but a racial self in which he began to recognize his existence as but a link in an eternal chain that reached back into the mists of time, and which — if it were permitted — would carry on forever.

Williamson sensed this truth in his own feeling of oneness with Nature and the ancient, living, breathing Universe as represented by the life-giving sun. It also was reflected in his idea of mystical union between the eternal sunlight and the long history of the earth. For Williamson the ancient light of the sun was something “born in me” and represented the real meaning of his own existence by illuminating his ancestral past and revealing the truth of redemption through Nature. Like Jefferies before him, Williamson “came to feel the long life of the earth back in the dimmest past while the sun of the moment was warm on me … This sunlight linked me through the ages to that past consciousness. From all the ages my soul desired to take that soul-life which had flowed through them as the sunbeams had continually found an earth.” [1]

After the war Williamson became a journalist for a time while beginning work on his first novel, The Beautiful Years (1922). Finally he decided to break all contact with London and in 1922 moved to an ancient cottage in Georgham, North Devon, which had been built in the days of King John. Living alone and in hermit fashion at first, Williamson disciplined himself to study Nature with the same meticulous observations as Jefferies, tramping about the countryside and often sleeping out. The door and windows of the cottage were never closed, and his strange family of dogs and cats, gulls, buzzards, magpies, and one otter cub were free to come and go as they chose.

It was his experiences with the otter cub which stimulated Williamson to write Tarka. He had rescued it after its mother had been shot by a farmer, and he saved its life by persuading his cat to suckle it along with her kitten. Eventually the otter cub was domesticated and became Williamson’s constant companion, following him around like a dog. On one walk, however, it walked into a rabbit trap, panicked, and ran off. Williamson spent years following otters’ haunts in the rivers Taw and Torridge, hunting for his lost pet.

The search was in vain, but his intimate contact with the animal world gave him the inspiration for Tarka: “The eldest and biggest of the litter was a dog cub, and when he drew his first breath he was less than five inches long from his nose to where his tail joined his back-bone. His fur was soft and grey as the buds of the willow before they open up at Eastertide. He was called Tarka, which was the name given to the otters many years ago by men dwelling in hut circles on the moor. It means Little Water Wanderer, or Wandering as Water.”

Williamson never attempted to pass any kind of moral judgment on Nature and described its evolutionary realities in a manner reminiscent of Jack London:

Long ago, when moose roamed in the forest at the mountain of the Two Rivers, otters had followed eels migrating from ponds and swamps to the seas. They had followed them into shallow waters; and one fierce old dog had run through the water so often that he swam, and later, in his great hunger, had put under his head to seize them so often that he dived. Other otters had imitated him. The moose are gone, and their bones lie under the sand in the soft coal which was the forest by the estuary, thousands of years ago. Yet otters have not been hunters in water long enough for the habit to become an instinct.

Williamson actually rewrote Tarka 17 times, “always and only for the sake of a greater truth.” [2] Mere polishing for grace and expression or literary style did not interest him, and he strove always to illuminate a scene or incident with what he considered was authentic sunlight.

He also believed that European man could be spiritually healthy and alive to his destiny only by living in close accord with Nature. Near the end of Tarka, for instance, he delightfully describes how “a scarlet dragonfly whirred and darted over the willow snag, watched by a girl sitting on the bank … Glancing round, she realized that she alone had seen the otter. She flushed, and hid her grey eyes with her lashes. Since childhood she had walked the Devon rivers with her father looking for flowers and the nests of birds, passing some rocks and trees as old friends, seeing a Spirit everywhere, gentle in thought to all her eyes beheld.”

Williamson’s sequel to Tarka was Salar the Salmon, which was also the result of many months of intimate research and observation of Nature in the English countryside. Then came The Lone Swallow, The Peregrine’s Saga, Life in a Devon Village, and A Clear Water Stream, all of which, in the eyes of the English writer Naomi Lewis, displayed “a crystal intensity of observation and a compelling use of words, which exactly match the movement and life that he describes.”

To Williamson himself, however, his Nature stories were not the most important part of his literary output. His greatest effort went into his two semi-autobiographical novel groups, the tetralogy collected as The Flax of Dreams, which occupied him for most of the 1920s, and the 15-volume A Chronicle of Ancient Sunlight, which began with The Dark Lantern in 1951 and ended with The Gale of the World in 1969.

Williamson’s experiences during the First World War had politicized him for life. A significant catalyst in this development was the Christmas truce of 1914, when British and German frontline soldiers spontaneously left their trenches, abandoned the fighting, and openly greeted each other as brothers.

Williamson later spoke of an “incoherent sudden realization, after the fraternization of Christmas Day, that the whole war was based on lies.” Another experience that consolidated this belief was when a German officer helped him remove a wounded British soldier who was draped over barbed wire on the front line. He was thus able to contrast his own wartime experiences with the vicious anti-German propaganda orchestrated by the British political establishment both during and after the war, and he was able to recognize the increasing moral bankruptcy of that establishment. In Williamson’s view the fact that over half of the 338 Conservative Members of Parliament who dominated the 1918 governing coalition were company directors and financiers who had grown rich from war profits was morally wrong and detestable.

This recognition, in itself a reflection of an already highly developed sense of altruism, meant that Williamson could never be content with just isolating himself in the countryside. He had to act to try to change the world for the better. Perhaps not surprisingly he came to see in the idea of National Socialism a creed which not only represented his own philosophy of life, but which offered the chance of practical salvation for Western Civilization. He saw it as evolving directly from the almost religious transcendence which he, and thousands of soldiers of both sides, had experienced in the trenches of the First World War. This transcendence resulted in a determination that the “White Giants” of Britain and Germany would never go to war against each other again, and it rekindled a sense of racial kinship and unity of the Nordic peoples over and above separate class and national loyalties. [3]

Consequently, not only was Williamson one of the first of the “phoenix generation” to swear allegiance to Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists, but he quickly came to believe that National Socialist Germany, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, pointed the way forward for European man. Williamson identified closely with Hitler — “the great man across the Rhine whose life symbol is the happy child,” seeing him as a light-bringing phoenix risen from the chaos of European civilization in order to bring a millennium of youth to the dying Western world. [4]

Williamson visited Germany in 1935 to attend the National Socialist Congress at Nuremberg and saw there the beginnings of the “land fit for heroes” which had been falsely promised the young men of Britain during the First World War by the government’s war propagandists. He was very impressed by the fact that, while the British people continued to languish in poverty and mass unemployment, National Socialism had created work for seven million unemployed, abolished begging, freed the farmers from the mortgages which had strangled production, developed laws on conservation, and, most importantly, had developed in a short period of time a deep sense of racial community. [5]

Inspired to base their lives on a religious idea, Williamson believed that the German people had been reborn with a spiritual awareness and physical quality that he himself had long sought. Everywhere he saw “faces that looked to be breathing extra oxygen; people free from mental fear.” [6]

Through the Hitler Youth movement, which brought back fond memories of his own time as a Boy Scout, he recognized “the former pallid leer of hopeless slum youth transformed into the suntan, the clear eye, the broad and easy rhythm of the poised young human being.”

In Hitler’s movement Williamson identified not only an idea consistent with Nature’s higher purpose to create order out of chaos, but the physical encapsulation of a striving toward Godhood. Influenced by his own lifelong striving for perfection, Williamson believed that the National Socialists represented “a race that moves on the poles of mystic, sensual delight. Every gesture is a gesture from the blood, every expression a symbolic utterance … Everything is of the blood, of the senses.” [7]

Williamson always believed that any spiritual improvement could only take place as a result of a physical improvement, and, like his mentor Richard Jefferies, he was a firm advocate of race improvement through eugenics. He himself was eventually to father seven children, and he decried the increasing lack of racial quality in the mass of the White population. He urged that “the physical ideal must be kept steadily in view” and called for the enforcement of a discipline and system along the lines of ancient Sparta in order to realize it. [8]

In 1936 Williamson and his family moved to Norfolk, where he threw himself into a new life as a farmer, the first three years of which are described in The Story of a Norfolk Farm (1941). But with the Jews increasingly using England as a base from which to agitate for war against Germany, Williamson remained very active through his membership in the British Union of Fascists in promoting the idea of Anglo-German friendship. Until it was banned in 1940, Williamson wrote eight articles for the party newspaper Action and had 13 extracts reprinted from his book The Patriot’s Progress. He called consistently for Hitler to be given “that amity he so deserved from England,” so as to prevent another brothers’ war that would see the victory only of Asiatic Bolshevism and the enslavement of Europe. On September 24, 1939, for instance, he wrote of his continuing conviction that Hitler was “determined to do and create what is right. He is fighting evil. He is fighting for the future.”

Williamson viewed the declaration of war on Germany by Britain and France as a spiteful act of an alien system that was determined to destroy the prospect of a reborn and regenerated European youth. And his continued opposition to it led to his arrest and internment in June 1940, along with Mosley and hundreds of others. His subsequent release on parole was conditional upon his taking no further action to oppose the war. Silently, however, Williamson remained true to his convictions. Visiting London in January 1944, he observed with satisfaction that the ugliness and immorality represented by its financial and banking sector had been “relieved a little by a catharsis of high explosive” and somewhat “purified by fire.”

National Socialism’s wartime defeat, however, dealt Williamson a heavy blow. Decrying the death struggle of “the European cousin nations” he lamented that “the hopes that have animated or agitated my living during the past thirty years and four months are dead.” [9]

Consequently, his first marriage broke up in 1947, and he returned to North Devon to live in the hilltop hut which he had bought in 1928 with the prize money from Tarka.

But it was not in Williamson’s character to give up on what he knew to be true and right, and, as his most recent biographer makes clear, he never recanted his ideas about Hitler. [10]

On the contrary, he continued to publicly espouse what he believed, and he fervently contested the postwar historical record distorted by false Jewish propaganda — even though his effort resulted, as he realized it would, in his continued literary ostracism.

In The Gale of the World, the last book of his Chronicle, published in 1969, Williamson has his main character Phillip Maddison question the moral and legal validity of the Nuremberg Trials. Among other things, he muses why the Allied officers who ordered the mass fire bombing of Germany, and the Soviet generals who ordered the mass rape and mass murder during the battle for Berlin, were not on trial; and whether it would ever be learned that the art treasures found in German salt mines were put there purely to be out of the way of the Allied bombing. He also questions the official view of the so called “Holocaust,” stating his belief that rather than being the result of a mass extermination plan, the deaths in German concentration camps were actually caused by typhus brought about by the destruction of all public utility systems by Allied bombing.

In the book Williamson also reiterates his belief that Adolf Hitler was never the real enemy of Britain. And in one scene Phillip Maddison, in conversation with his girl friend Laura, questions whether it was Hitler’s essential goodness and righteousness that was responsible for his downfall in the midst of evil and barbarity:

Laura: I have a photograph of Hitler with the last of his faithful boys outside the bunker in Berlin. He looks worn out, but he is so gentle and kind to those twelve- and thirteen-year-old boys.

Phillip: Too gentle and kind Laura … Now the faithful will be hanged.

Williamson also remained loyal in the realm of political ideas and action. When Oswald Mosley had returned to public life in Britain in 1948 by launching the Union Movement, Williamson was one of the first to give his support for an idea which he had long espoused: the unity of Western man. Contributing an article to the first issue of the movement’s magazine, The European, he called for the development of a new type of European man with a set of spiritual values that were in tune with himself and Nature.

Such positive and life-promoting thinking did not endear Williamson to the powers that be in the gray and increasingly decadent cultural climate of post-Second World War Britain. His books were ignored, and his artistic achievement remained unrecognized, with even the degrees committee at the university to which he was a benefactor twice vetoing a proposal to award him an honorary doctorate. The evidence suggests, in fact, that Williamson was subject to a prolonged campaign of literary ostracism by people inside the British establishment who believed he should be punished for his political opinions.

For Williamson, however, the machinations of trivial people in a trivial age were irrelevant; what was important was that he remained true in the eyes of posterity to himself, his ancestors, and the eternal truth which he recognized and lived by. In fact, as one observer described him during these later years, he remained a “lean, vibrant, almost quivering man with … blazing eyes, possessing an exceptional presence [and a] … continued outspoken admiration for Hitler … as a ‘great and good man.’” [11]

Certainly, Williamson knew himself, and he knew what was necessary for Western man to find himself again and to fulfill his destiny. In The Gale of the World he cited Richard Jefferies to emphasize that higher knowledge by which he led his life and by which he was convinced future generations would have to lead their lives in order to attain the heights that Nature demanded of them: “All the experience of the greatest city in the world could not withhold me. I rejected it wholly. I stood bare-headed in the sun, in the presence of earth and air, in the presence of the immense forces of the Universe. I demand that which will make me more perfect now this hour.”

Henry Williamson’s artistic legacy must endure because, as one admirer pondered in his final years, his visionary spirit and striving “came close to holding the key to life itself.”

He died on August 13, 1977, aged 81.

Notes

[1] Ann Williamson, Henry Williamson: Tarka and the Last Romantic, (London, 1995), 65.

[2] Eleanor Graham, “Introduction” to the Penguin edition of Tarka the Otter (1985).

[3] Higginbottom, Intellectuals and British Fascism , (London, 1992), 10.

[4] Henry Williamson, The Flax of Dreams (London, 1936) and The Phoenix Generation (London, 1961).

[5] Henry Williamson, A Solitary War (London, 1966).

[6] Higginbotham, op. cit., 41-42.

[7] J. W. Blench, Henry Williamson and the Romantic Appeal of Fascism , (Durham, 1988).

[8] Henry Williamson, The Children of Shallow Ford, (London, 1939).

[9] Higginbotham, op. cit., 49.

[10] Ann Williamson, op. cit., 195.

[11] Higginbotham, op. cit., 53.

National Vanguard, 117 (1997), 17-20.

http://library.flawlesslogic.com/nv.html

Jean Mabire: La maîtrise des mers

La maîtrise des mers

Jean Mabire

Ex: http://www.centrostudilaruna.it/

L’Angleterre l’avait compris. La possession de colonies et la liaison avec l’Amérique supposent la maîtrise des mers, donc une puissante marine. Avec ses Normands, ses Bretons ou ses Basques, la France ne manquait pas de marins. Mais les marins ne font pas une marine.

La traversée de l’Atlantique pour rejoindre “les Amériques” fut longtemps une grande aventure. Les histoires de la marine, en privilégiant la Royale, c’est-à-dire la flotte de guerre, restent assez lacunaires – une fois passée la période des grandes explorations – sur les bâtiments armés pour le commerce ou la pêche. Pourtant l’épopée de Terre-Neuve est demeurée très présente dans l’imaginaire des gens de nos côtes jusqu’au début de ce siècle.

Pour se rendre outre-Atlantique, il fallait donc des bâtiments, des capitaines, des équipages.

Une fois les grandes lignes maritimes inaugurées, un mouvement continuel de navires devait amener sur les terres du Nouveau Monde des soldats, des missionnaires, des négociants et aussi des émigrants, hommes et femmes.

L’histoire océanique de la France américaine est étroitement liée à l’évolution de ce qu’on appellera un jour notre empire colonial, dont les possessions canadiennes ou acadiennes sont sans doute moins pittoresques que les multiples comptoirs antillais, avec leur arrière-plan de flibuste, de violence et de plaisirs.

L’époque des grandes explorations, qui va tant marquer le XVI siècle européen, voit la France occuper une place singulière. Elle arrive après les Espagnols, certes, mais elle précède les Britanniques et les Hollandais. Sur la façade maritime du royaume, de Dieppe à Bayonne, on retrouve les héritiers de ces populations dont la naissance et l’activité sont étroitement liées au monde maritime: au nord, les Normands qui n’ont jamais coupé tout à fait les liens avec les Vikings; en proue avancée du continent, les Bretons qui se souviennent d’être arrivés outre-Manche; ensuite, au-delà de la Loire, vers le sud, les Poitevins, qui furent à la fois gens de terre et gens de mer, navigateurs et colonisateurs; enfin les Basques qui, même dans leurs expéditions lointaines, gardent quelque chose de mystérieux toujours lié à leur énigmatique identité.

Mais il n’est pas de tradition navale sans construction navale. Une flotte, ce n’est pas seulement le désir de l’aventure, appel irrésistible vers quelque inconnu situé au-delà de l’horizon. C’est aussi et c’est d’abord un chantier naval.

La technique prime et impose sa loi. Les historiens expliquent avant tout l’épopée viking par ces longs serpents à proue et poupe identiques et dont les bordés sont assemblés “à clin”. Ce sera une révolution du même genre – en sens exactement contraire – qui va imposer, dès la fin du XV, siècle, le bordage “à carvel”.

Quant au nombre de mâts, il passe d’un seul à deux et même, plus souvent, à trois. Un “château” à l’avant, un autre à l’arrière. Entre les deux, s’étagent les ponts où l’on trouve parfois des canons. La voilure se complique. On commence à jouer habilement d’une garde-robe fournie où voiles triangulaires et voiles carrées s’harmonisent pour régler l’allure de navires auxquels on demande, autant que possible, de remonter au vent, même si cela tient encore de l’acrobatie.

Ces navires du XVIe siècle, à l’heure des grandes navigations transocéaniques sont encore de petite taille. Armés pour la guerre, le commerce ou la pêche, ils ne dépassent guère une centaine de tonneaux. Peu à peu, ce tonnage va monter en puissance. On verra même au Havre-de-Grâce, fondé par François Ier à l’embouchure de la Seine, des vaisseaux de mille tonneaux et même davantage.

En remontant la Seine, on arrive à Rouen et on découvre, sur les berges du grand fleuve, un des plus singuliers hauts-lieux de la technique marine: le “Clos des galées” , chantier de construction à l’inlassable activité. Il s’agit de construire les bâtiments qui partiront des ports voisins de Fécamp ou de Honfleur pour tenter l’aventure au Nouveau Monde.

Quelques hectares de bois pour construire un navire

Les Bretons, bien entendu, ne sont pas en reste sur les Normands. Mais ils construisent et utilisent des bâtiments d’une taille généralement inférieure à ceux de leurs voisins d’outre-Couesnon. Ces navires y gagnent en maniabilité et un plus faible tirant d’eau va leur permettre de remonter profondément les fleuves américains sans crainte d’échouage. Après viendra l’emploi des canots, sur le modèle des légères embarcations indigènes.

Un chantier ce n’est pas seulement des scieries qui débitent les troncs abattus dans la région ou venus des pays du Nord, ce sont aussi des voileries, des corderies, des entrepôts, des magasins. A Rouen, le fameux Clos occupe toute une partie des berges de la Seine. En Bretagne, les chantiers se dispersent, au hasard des abers, en de petites entreprises vivantes et familiales où la tradition s’accompagne de ces multiples initiatives auxquelles se reconnaît la main du maître charpentier.

Tout cela coûte cher. D’où l’importance des armateurs qui constituent de véritables dynasties et qu’on verra, les poches pleines, s’intéresser à la course… comme au commerce du “bois d’ébène”.

Les écoles d’hydrographie, à commencer par celle de Dieppe, où enseigne le fameux abbé astronome Descellers, forment les pilotes à la navigation hauturière. La science de la navigation ne fait que s’affiner et arrive en renfort d’un sens marin que rien ne saurait remplacer. Du grand explorateur au moindre patron de pêche qui ose affronter l’océan, la qualité des maîtres des navires s’affirme.

Encore faut-il des équipages pour mener leurs bâtiments. Le recrutement obéit à certaines règles, souvent empiriques. Ainsi l’historien Philippe Bonnichon précise: “Un homme par tonneau, c’est un ordre de grandeur, variable du simple à la moitié et loin d’être une règle fixe. Mousses et novices embarquent jeunes, souvent avec des parents, pour se former, devenir mariniers et servir jusqu’à la cinquantaine. Communautés de famille et de paroisse se retrouvent à bord et, de retour, travaillent la terre après avoir bourlingué. Les salaires sont peu élevés, proportionnels à la compétence technique”.

Malgré les expéditions des Normands, des Bretons, des Poitevins ou des Basques, le royaume de France n’en reste pas moins une puissance terrienne, peu tournée vers la mer, malgré l’extraordinaire variété de ses côtes. C’est un handicap qui ne va guère cesser tout au long de son histoire.

La liaison avec l’Amérique suppose ce qu’on nommera un jour “la maîtrise des mers”. Faute d’être soutenues par une imposante flotte de guerre, bien des aventures coloniales sont vouées au dépérissement et à l’échec.

 

Construction d'un navire pour la navigation en haute mer au XVIe  siècle
Construction d’un navire pour la navigation en haute mer au XVIe siècle

Finalement, les périodes favorables aux entreprises maritimes d’envergure sont rares. On cite la première moitié du XVIe siècle, la première moitié du règne de Louis XIV, la fin du règne de Louis XV et le règne de Louis XVI.

Faute de soutien de l’État, les entreprises lointaines sont souvent individuelles ou pour le moins privées. D’où le rôle des fameuses “compagnies”. Mais que peut le commerce seul sans le renfort de la Royale et de ses canons?

Ce royaume qui tourne le dos à la mer et a toujours considéré comme “étrangers” les peuples maritimes qu’il devait subjuguer, à commencer par les Normands et les Bretons, eut la chance de posséder quelques grands hommes d’État qui comprirent que les rivages du nord-ouest de l’Hexagone n’étaient pas des limites mais au contraire des aires d’envol d’où allaient partir caravelles et vaisseaux. Trois grands noms: Richelieu, Colbert et Choiseul.

Au lendemain des guerres de religion, une patrie réconciliée pouvait renaître outre-mer. Sur la terre d’Amérique, la Nouvelle-France devenait plus vaste et plus jeune que celle du Vieux Monde. Ainsi vit-on les étendards fleur de lysés battre au Canada et en Acadie, aux Antilles ou en Guyane.

Techniciens dieppois, malouins et olonnais

Les grands ministres qui furent, de leur bureau continental, de véritables “seigneurs de la mer” n’hésitèrent pas à s’inspirer des expériences septentrionales en matière de construction navale. Des ingénieurs et des ouvriers furent même recrutés en Hollande et au Danemark, en Courlande ou en Suède.

Ces remarquables techniciens, aidés par le vieux savoir-faire des Dieppois, des Malouins ou des Olonnais amenèrent le bâtiment de ligne à une quasi-perfection technique. On n’avait pas vu une telle science nautique depuis les “esnèques” scandinaves du Haut Moyen Age!

Claude Farrère, qui fut aussi bon historien de la mer qu’il fut bon romancier, a laissé une belle description de la construction d’un vaisseau aux temps les plus splendides de la marine à voile.

“Un vaisseau, au temps de Louis XIV, est d’ores et déjà l’un des chefs-d’œuvre de l’industrie humaine. Voyons un peu ce qu’est un vaisseau. Cela peut mesurer quelque soixante ou soixante-dix mètres de long, sur quinze ou vingt mètres de large. Cela déplace de mille à cinq mille tonneaux. La coque comporte une quille, laquelle joint l’étrave à l’étambot, c’est-à-dire la proue à la poupe, -puis des couples, c’est-à-dire de robustes côtes taillées en plein cœur de chêne, et courbées comme il faut; ces couples prennent appui de part et d’autre sur cette façon d’épine dorsale qu’est la quille, et montent du plus profond de la bâtisse jusqu’au plus haut, jusqu’au tillac, dit aussi pont des gaillards. Une charpente horizontale, – les lisses, des préceintes, doublées d’un bordé, qu’on assemble à clins ou à franc-bord, – lie les couples entre eux. Et les ponts et les faux-ponts, régnant de tribord à bâbord, et d’arrière en avant, achèvent la solidité merveilleuse de l’ensemble. Au-dessus de la flottaison, deux ou trois entreponts s’étagent vers les gaillards, – gaillard d’avant ou château, gaillard d’arrière ou dunette. Ces entreponts vont du faux-pont, qui est juste au-dessous des gaillards. Et, plus haut, il n’y a que les mâts”.

Quatre mâts. Trois verticaux, l’artimon, le grand mât, la misaine. Un quatrième oblique, le beaupré, à l’avant. Deux de ces mâts, le grand mât et le mât de misaine, servent principalement à la propulsion. Les deux autres, beaupré et artimon, principalement à l’orientation du navire, ce pourquoi chaque mât porte des vergues, et chaque vergue sa voile. Le tout fait une montagne de toile blanche, haute de soixante mètres environ, chaque basse voile étant large d’au moins vingt-cinq. Rien de plus majestueux qu’un vaisseau de l’ancienne marine sous ses voiles.

Ce qui va le plus manquer à la marine royale – qu’elle soit de guerre ou de commerce – c’est la persévérance. Certes, au temps des grandes compagnies maritimes, les Français porteront leur flotte marchande de trois cents à mille vaisseaux. Mais les Britanniques vont en aligner quatre mille et les Hollandais seize mille! Dans cette disproportion se trouve déjà inscrite la perte de la plupart des possessions américaines, malgré les exploits des capitaines corsaires ou des flibustiers.

Il n’est pas d’empire sans maîtrise des mers. L’infortuné Louis XVI devait le comprendre, alors que tout était déjà joué depuis le funeste traité de 1763 – dont certains ont voulu faire une date aussi significative que celle de 1789.

Claude Farrère devait parfaitement tirer la leçon de près de trois siècles d’aventure navale à la française, une histoire en tragiques dents de scie, où l’héroïsme des équipages n’a que rarement compensé l’impéritie des gouvernants.

“C’est une criminelle erreur d’avoir cru qu’on peut avoir des colonies en négligeant d’avoir une marine”.