Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In recent years, the concept of “popular royalism” has gained popularity in the historiography of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. The author of the article analyses the main tenets and criticisms of this concept based on the writings of the three main theorists, Paul Choplin, Álvaro Paris, and Andoni Artola. The term “popular royalism” appeared as a result of an incomplete discussion about the essence of counter-revolution in European countries in the late 18th – early 19th centuries. According to the authors of the concept, royalist and counter-revolutionary movements were not retrograde in nature and met the actual demands of different layers of society in the situation of civil war. The counter-revolution gave rise to an alternative way of politicization of the masses and contributed to the emergence of new models of their political participation. The royalists monopolised old sources of political legitimacy and adapted familiar discourses and images to new challenges. Drawing on the idea of legitimacy, they put forward a wide range of demands that were not only conservative but also innovative. Nevertheless, specific regional casess, especially from Italian history, show that the cross-class alliances led by the royalists were temporary and unsustainable. These alliances contributed to the Restoration, but only with foreign military intervention. Yet, since the national historiographical traditions are still very stable, the proposed new concept of popular royalist movements requires substantial clarifications, taking into account the specifics of the historical development of different countries and regions.
Andrey Mitrofanov (Mon,) studied this question.