We have abundant documentation on the life of Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet due to the important role he played at the court of Louis XIV, the Sun King, in which he became the tutor of the Dauphin. Bossuet was born on September 27, 1627, in Dijon, into a well-connected, bourgeois family. His father moved to Metz to be part of the newly created Parliament of this city. The first years of his life were spent at the Jesuit college in Dijon, where he already showed his precociousness and enormous intelligence. According to his own account, when he was a child, a Latin Bible came to him by chance, the reading of which made a deep impression on him.
At the age of fifteen he entered the College of Navarra where he had Nicolas Cornet as a teacher. He studied Greek, philosophy and humanities although his main occupation was the study of the Holy Scriptures. In 1648 he defended his first thesis, on glory in this world and that which lies ahead in the next, before a solemn spectator, Prince Condé, to whom he was dedicated. The disturbances in the Fronde caused him to abandon his studies and retire to Dijon and Metz. After being appointed deacon in 1649, that same year he returned to Paris to continue his training. During these years he maintained a close relationship with the Company of the Holy Sacrament and especially with Saint Vincent de Paul.
In 1652 he was made a priest and received a doctorate in theology. He was asked to replace his teacher, Nicolas Cornet, at the head of the College of Navarra but he turned it down to focus on his post as canon at Metz. Already then he combined an intense religious activity (he rose in the ecclesiastical hierarchy until he was archdeacon of the cathedral), a polemicist (he was commissioned to refute the theses maintained by Paul Ferri), oratory (the funeral speech made after the death of the Queen mother stands out, Anne of Austria) and literary (with the writing of numerous panegyrics of saints).
During these years his prestige in France increased and the recognition of the King reached him in the late sixties and early seventies. In 1669 he is named bishop of Condom, in 1670 appointed tutor to the Dauphin and in 1671 he enters the French Academy. Of these honors, the one that will take the most time and dedication will be that of instructor to the monarch's heir. His goal was not to train a learned man but to instruct a balanced, reasonable, capable and worthy representative of God. With this purpose he will elaborate the three works, which in the end, have been his most recognized works: The Discourse on Universal History , Politics taken from the Holy Scriptures and The Treatise on the Knowledge of God and Oneself . He failed in his didactic purpose because, apparently, the student was not very intelligent, but still he was rewarded with the bishopric of Meaux.
In the last years of his life he will play an active role in French politics and diplomacy. He acted as a mediator in the dispute that arose between Louis XIV and Pope Innocent XI and sought rapprochement with the Protestants, without neglecting his apostolic work and funeral speeches. From 1692 he held the highest positions in the French administration (Counselor of State, Grand Master of the Colegio de Navarra, conservator of the privileges of the University, to name just a few).
At the end of his life, when he was 57 years old, the dispute between the mystics broke out, involving Fenelon, his disciple, and Bossuet himself. After a series of harsh confrontations, the master emerged victorious, largely with the help of the King, and managed to have Fenelon's work condemned by Rome in 1699. His last years were spent between his diocese and Versailles, dying on April 12. from 1704.
To speak of Bossuet is to speak of a multifaceted man of great learning, whose high position in the French Church allowed him know and participate in the most important affairs of the kingdom. His work is very extensive and heterogeneous. He wrote on politics, theology, and history, in addition to composing numerous funeral orations that were also published.
From the point of view of his historical work, his most important work is the Discourse on Universal History whose initial purpose was to serve as a manual for the future king of France. The preparation of the first edition took him a decade (between the years 1670-1681) and covered from the origin of the world to the reign of Charlemagne. The second part, not included in the initial edition, included from Charlemagne to Louis XIV. After the second edition, the work was completed and abandoned the didactic character to become a true history book.
Bossuet's conception of history is highly conditioned by his religious fervour. He maintains that, despite the negative image that a first impression of historical events might arouse, if we move away from them enough to have a broader perspective, we will obtain a clearer and more positive vision. For Bossuet, history is revealed as an ordered set that runs between apparent contradictions towards an already determined end. History is nothing other than the work of Providence. The rise and fall of empires happen without the will of man being able to prevent or influence them. The chance that seems to direct the actions of man is only apparent since behind it is the hand of Providence.
The divine will plays a special role in Bossuet's work. The fulfillment of God's plans is the goal and purpose of history and the Christian can only trust and wait, because whatever he does, he will not be able to modify the destiny foreseen for humanity, whose fulfillment is inexorable. In this way God directs men and uses his qualities and defects to carry out his eternal plan. This conception of history will also be reflected in his political approaches:he extols the Holy Scriptures as an example of the direct government of God over men, a reasoning that, at the same time, is closely linked to the philosophy of Hobbes to justify power. monarch's absolute.
Despite Bossuet's erudition, his work contains gross errors and gaps, largely due to the fact that his main source was the Bible and the limited knowledge of history that at that time they had. He cannot be blamed, however, since his intention was to create a serious and objective work, to which end he discusses the sources, observes the phenomena with a critical spirit and requests the help of experts to advise him on specific questions (such as asking ambassadors or pilgrims who obtain information on their travels).
The Speech it is written with a simple and neutral language, except on some occasions when it introduces almost poetic images to describe the events. It gives priority to the narration of the facts and is less interested in the causes that originate them (always conditioned by providence) and in the characters of the characters. The result is a work made by a man of action who seeks to convince and teach.