READING REPORT

The Great Plunder

Volume I — The Birth of the System (1794–1798)

Flanders and Italy — Preparation for the Egyptian Campaign

Historical Novel

Robert Casanovas

Complete analytical reading

1. General Overview

Full title

The Great Plunder, Volume I: The Birth of the System (1794–1798)

Author

Robert Casanovas

Genre

Historical Novel (fiction historique basée sur des recherches réelles)

Publication

Length

Approx. 80,000 words — Prologue + 4 chapters, 28 sections

Time frame

June 1794 (Grégoire’s report to the Committee) — 27 March 1796 (Bonaparte takes command in Nice)

Setting

Paris (Committee of Public Instruction, Central Museum, École des Mines) — Belgium (Ghent, Antwerp, Brussels, Mechelen) — Flemish roads and Valenciennes — Northern Italy (Milan, Parma, Modena, Bologna, Rome) — Alps (Splügen Pass)

Place in the saga

Volume I of a tetralogy: preceding The Egyptian Campaign (Volume II) and Volumes III and IV devoted to the German and Austrian campaigns

2. Structure of the Work

2.1 General Architecture

Volume I is structured around a prologue and four chapters covering the first phase of French cultural spoliation policy: the invention of the system in Flanders, its extension into Italy, and the preparation for the Egyptian campaign. The dramatic progression moves from theory (Grégoire’s report) to experimentation (Flanders) and then to the industrialisation (Italy) of the seizures.

Chapter

Title & sections

Period & main issue

Prologue

Paris, June 1794: Grégoire signs the founding report

Founding moment: intellectual birth of the system

I — The Flemish Seizures (1794)

8 sections: Commission of Plunder · Ghent and Antwerp · Brussels / Coudenberg Palace · Mechelen · The Flanders Convoy · Arrival in Paris · Museum and Committee · The Interlude

August–October 1794. First expedition: Van Eyck, Rubens, Van Dyck, Jordaens. Birth of the system.

II — The Rush on Italy (1796)

8 sections: Map of Italy · What Can Be Transported · The Question of Rome · Bonaparte Takes Command · Milan: the Inventories · The Alpine Convoy · Parma: the Correggios · Modena and Bologna

March–August 1796. Italian Campaign: Codex Atlanticus, Correggio, Titian, Carracci, etc. Industrialisation of the system.

III — Rome and Venice (1797)

7 sections: Rome · Vatican · Apollo and Laocoön · Roman Private Collections · Venice · San Marco and the Marciana Library · Return and Assessment

February–1797. Symbolic targets: Vatican, Borghese Palace, Farnese, San Marco. Paradoxes of works wholly impossible to transport.

IV — The Egyptian Project (1796–1798)

5 sections: Formation of the scholarly commission · Recruitment of Denon, Monge, Berthollet · Logistical Preparation · The Final Parisian Months · Departure from Toulon

1796–1798. Transition: from organised spoliation to scientific expedition. Introduces the characters of Volume II.

3. Chapter-by-Chapter Summary

Prologue — Paris, June 1794

Abbé Grégoire signs alone, at night, his report to the Committee of Public Safety on the fate of the artistic treasures of the conquered territories. This founding gesture raises the central question: what does one do with a military victory when it comes accompanied by an unparalleled cultural heritage? Grégoire knows the document is “merely a recommendation” but is very likely to be followed. The opening establishes the moral tension that structures the entire novel.

Chapter I — The Flemish Seizures (August–October 1794)

Paris, August 1794. Seven commissioners gather around a table cluttered with maps. Grégoire presides, David dictates, Lebrun inventories, Hassenfratz calculates, Thouin frets about logistics, Levesque catalogues the manuscripts. The founding debate on the legitimacy of the seizures opens at once: “You call this culture? It’s plunder!” says Canon De Vos in Ghent.

The Flemish operation unfolds on three simultaneous fronts. In Ghent, Grégoire and Thouin remove the three central panels of the Ghent Altarpiece by the Van Eyck brothers: three days of meticulous work, one incident involving a fall, the arrest of Canon De Vos on David’s orders, and the departure amid the tears of the kneeling population. In Antwerp, Lebrun unhooks Rubens’ Descent from the Cross and Elevation of the Cross, requiring the panels to be cut into sections. In Brussels, Hassenfratz and Levesque work alongside Van Reyn, a curator who systematically documents everything being taken from him — a figure of silent resistance through testimony.

The convoy of nineteen wagons crosses Belgium and reaches Valenciennes, then Paris. The Central Museum of Arts opens its new galleries on 18 Vendémiaire Year III. Artists and the public discover the Flemish masters. Lebrun spends the night in the warehouse “to verify that everything is there.” The episode closes with David’s arrest after Thermidor and the report Grégoire drafts alone, at night, at the Museum.

Chapter II — The Rush on Italy (1796)

Sixteen months of Parisian preparation — Lebrun compiling eighteen months of files on Italian collections in his small Museum room — culminate in Bonaparte’s campaign. The scholarly commission expands: Monge, Berthollet, Denon, Thouin, Hassenfratz. Bonaparte takes command at Nice on 27 March 1796 and, within eighteen days, separates the Piedmontese and Austrian armies (Montenotte, Millesimo, Dego).

Milan falls on 15 May. The Ambrosiana yields Leonardo da Vinci’s Codex Atlanticus (twelve volumes, one thousand one hundred and nineteen folios), the Bruegels from the Borromeo collection, and works by Luini. The curator Argelati says: “Here is what you came to steal.” The sarcophagus of Sant’Ambrogio (4th century, nine hundred kilos) is removed from its crypt by sixty men. The Last Supper remains: untransportable.

The alpine convoy crosses the Splügen Pass (2,113 m) with crates of paintings and the sarcophagus carried by hand along a kilometre of slope. Parma yields six Correggios including The Day, an absolute masterpiece. Modena yields three Titians, works by Dosso Dossi, and forty-five illuminated manuscripts. Bologna yields the Carraccis, Guercino, Guido Reni, and Galvani’s physics instruments.

Chapter III — Rome and Venice (1797)

Rome (February 1797). The Pio-Clementino Museum, the Belvedere. The Apollo Belvedere (2.24 m, Parian marble), the Laocoön (group of three figures, 2.42 m), the Belvedere Torso (a torso without head or limbs, which had nourished Michelangelo) are seized from the Vatican. The Raphael Rooms remain: the frescoes cannot be transported. The Sistine Chapel remains. The question Grégoire had raised earlier (“if we go to Rome, we must accept that Paris will never have everything”) is confirmed point by point.

Venice (May 1797). Following the treaties of Leoben, Venice pays its tribute. The four bronze horses of the Basilica of San Marco (first plundered by the Byzantines from the Hippodrome of Constantinople), the paintings by Titian and Bellini, and the manuscripts of the Marciana Library all depart. The irony of history is made explicit: Venice had itself plundered Constantinople; now France plunders Venice.

Chapter IV — The Egyptian Project (1796–1798)

Bonaparte and the Directory conceive an expedition that is not purely military. Scholars are recruited: Denon again, Monge and Berthollet for the sciences, Jomard, Fourier, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Conté. The scholarly commission changes in nature: no longer merely seizing transportable paintings, it undertakes a systematic documentation of an entire civilisation. The final chapter prepares the reader for Volume II without revealing it: the Orient, terra incognita.

4. Characters

4.1 Main Characters

Hassenfratz — The Cold Coordinator

Chemist and engineer, Hassenfratz is the focal character of Volume I. His self-definition: “I have a habit of constant, involuntary calculation, which comes from my training. Everything I see, I transform into dimensions, weights, resistances. It’s a way of keeping the world at a safe distance.” Logistical coordinator of both missions (Flanders and Italy), he is the man who makes the system work without ever questioning whether he finds it just. His visit to the Museum, a week after the Flemish inauguration, shows him standing transfixed before Van Eyck’s Enthroned Deity: he thinks of Ghent, of Canon De Vos, of the kneeling crowd; but also of the child behind him asking “why does the man have a crown?”. Both realities are simultaneously true. He does not resolve the contradiction.

Grégoire — The Conscience of the System

A conventional abbé and author of the founding report, Grégoire is the character of lucid complicity. He knows what he is doing, he tries to mitigate it, he fails to prevent it. “I believed that by being there my presence could sway things. That was presumptuous.” His night at the Museum (All Souls’ Day), alone with a lantern before the Flemish panels, is one of the great moments of the novel: he understands that the shame of having failed to protect Canon De Vos cannot be set down in a report; yet he continues writing the report anyway. His late debate with David (“What beauty does is erase its own history”) constitutes the novel’s metapoetics.

Lebrun — The Expert Eye

An art dealer, Lebrun possesses the expertise that makes the spoliation possible and the sensibility that makes it painful: “I look where one perhaps ought to close one’s eyes.” His night in the warehouse after the Parisian unloading (“I verify that everything is there”) is the most accurate image of the character: guardian of what he himself has taken. In Mechelen, before Van Dyck’s Christ on the Cross, he says: “I will return one day to Mechelen. When it is back.” — he does not say “if.”

Thouin — The Care for Detail

Botanist and chief packer, Thouin embodies the technical conscience. He is the one who imposes the timelines David would like to cut short, who checks the Van Eyck panels at every halt of the convoy, who, arriving in Valenciennes, jumps from the wagon and places both hands on the tarpaulin before even looking at the others. He does not philosophise. He protects. That is his way of resisting.

Van Reyn — The Spoliated Curator

Curator of the Coudenberg Palace in Brussels, Van Reyn is the most restrained character in the novel. He documents everything, systematically — sixty-eight pages of dense handwriting, without a single correction. When Hassenfratz asks what he thinks of what they are doing: “I have expressed myself through official channels.” And when Lebrun asks whether the documents will suffice: “No. But I cannot do more.” Levesque concludes: “A man who documents what is being taken from him. It’s a form of resistance that gives us no purchase.”

David — The Political Imperative

Painter and member of the Committee of General Security, David is the character of ideological certainty: “We are accomplishing a republican work, a work of progress. History will judge us, not God.” He is the one who has Canon De Vos arrested, who imposes speed, whose arrest after Thermidor paradoxically relieves the commission of a burden. His final sentence (“Beauty makes one forget its history”) is the novel’s most lucid line on its own complicity.

Bonaparte — The Pragmatic Genius

Introduced in Chapter II, Bonaparte is painted with an economy of strokes that says what is essential: “I don’t care about your technical problems. Make up for it with the portable paintings.” He understands the political value of the seizures better than David (“these works will be seen by two thousand people a day”), but with the same immediacy that reduces nuance to an obstacle. His letter to the Directory from Milan — “We will soon have everything beautiful in Italy” — summarises the programme without euphemism.

4.2 Notable Secondary Characters

Character

Role and narrative function

Denon

Diplomat, draughtsman, traveller: the commission’s first Italian eye (Italy of 1788). He negotiates with Bonaparte and prepares the conditions for his own central role in Volume II.

Abbé Huysmans (Mechelen)

Dean of Saint Rombout’s. Resists through the question: “Will it be returned?” and withholds judgement until he learns whether Lebrun believes what he says.

Van der Noot (Antwerp)

Dean of the cathedral. Protests: “You are sowing hatred, Monsieur Lebrun. And one day, you will reap what you have sown.”

Canon De Vos (Ghent)

An elderly priest arrested on David’s orders: the embodiment of the direct violence of spoliation. His shame at not having protested haunts Grégoire to the very end of the novel.

Argelati (Milan)

Curator of the Ambrosiana. Receives them in silence: “Here is what you came to steal.”

Affò (Parma)

Curator of the ducal gallery. Lays his hand on the frame of The Day at the moment it is unhooked.

Tiraboschi (Modena)

Curator of the Este gallery. Documents and writes his own registers night after night.

Oretti (Bologna)

Director of the Pinacoteca. Notes the exact time of each removal.

Galvani (Bologna)

Inventor of animal electricity. His scientific instruments are also taken.

Lakanal

Member of the Committee of Public Instruction. Survives every regime through the same discreet immobility.

5. Themes and Issues

5.1 The Birth of a System

The title of Volume I (“The Birth of the System”) announces its central object: to show how a policy of organised seizure is constituted progressively, from a report to the Committee (June 1794) to regulated alpine convoys (1796). The author describes the incremental logic of the system: each stage legitimises the next, each excess becomes the norm for the following operation. Flanders is “the experiment,” in Phillipeau’s words to the Committee; Italy must be “an organised operation.”

5.2 Legitimisation through Culture

The tension between different legitimising discourses runs throughout the novel: educational legitimisation (“these works will be seen by two thousand people a day”), nationalist legitimisation (“Paris deserves to be the capital of the arts”), humanist legitimisation (“these treasures belong to humanity”), relativist legitimisation (“Rome took the Greek statues; we take what the Holy Roman Empire had assembled” — Lebrun). The novel does not adjudicate between these discourses but shows that they coexist and serve one another.

5.3 Testimony as Resistance

Van Reyn, Huysmans, Affò, Oretti, Tiraboschi, Galvani: each of the spoliated curators develops the same strategy — documentation. Their registers, mirroring the official French ones, constitute a counter-memory. The novel makes of this gesture the most durable form of resistance: “When circumstances change — and they always change — the documents will exist” (Van Reyn). Grégoire echoes this by drafting his own report from within the commission.

5.4 The Physical Integrity of Works vs. Their Contextual Integrity

The novel raises a question that is not one of theft in the ordinary sense: Rubens’ Descent from the Cross arrives intact in Paris, restored, visible. But it is no longer in Antwerp. The Van Dyck from Mechelen is “on a visit,” not “at home” (Huysmans). This distinction between material integrity and contextual integrity (the work in its space, its community, its use) is one of the novel’s most original intellectual contributions to this debate.

5.5 The Untransportable Works

La Cène, l’Assomption de Parme, les Chambres de Raphaël, la Sixtine : le roman dévoile avec précision ce que le système ne peut pas faire. « Si nous allons jusqu’à Rome, Paris n’aura pas tout » (Grégoire). C’est la limite physique de l’ambition universaliste. Le Volume I, contrairement au Volume II (Egypt), est le tome des œuvres qui restent là où elles sont parce qu’on ne peut pas les déplacer — et c’est précisément ce qu’elles conservent de plus précieux.

5.6 The Question of Restitution: Already Raised

Hassenfratz delivers the key line in Mechelen, in 1794: “The European powers will not indefinitely accept that Paris concentrates what the entire continent has produced. A congress will have to take place. Restitutions will be demanded.” His analysis proves correct: the Congress of Vienna (1815) restored a large portion of the Flemish and Italian works. The novel inscribes the question of restitution from the very origin of the system.

6. Writing and Poetics of the Novel

6.1 Focalization and Point of View

The dominant point of view is that of Hassenfratz, the logistics coordinator who processes what he sees into measurable data. This choice creates an effect of distance that is not coldness but realism: this is how the system functions, seen through the eyes of the one who makes it work. The focalization shifts regularly to Grégoire (moral conscience) and Lebrun (aesthetic eye), creating a polyphony without an omniscient narrator.

6.2 The Role of the Spoliated Curators

One of the distinguishing features of Volume I compared with Volume II is giving comparable weight to the characters of the Italian and Flemish curators and religious figures. Van Reyn, Huysmans, Affò, Tiraboschi, Oretti are not mere silhouettes: they have their own method, their own language, their own way of bearing witness that counterpoints the commissioners’ discourse. The novel thus avoids being confined to the sole viewpoint of the despoiler.

6.3 Technical Precision as a Literary Device

The dimensions of works, the weight of crates, the load-bearing capacity of bridges, the gradients of alpine passes: the author uses technical precision as one of his principal narrative devices. This is not gratuitous erudition; it is the very substance of what the novel is about. A sarcophagus of nine hundred kilos carried by hand along a kilometre of twenty-per-cent slope: the difficulty is the subject.

6.4 Scenes of Intense Literary Density

Several moments achieve the junction between history and literature: Grégoire’s night alone at the Museum with his lantern (he “understands” by looking at the panels what he could not write during the day); Hassenfratz’s visit to the Museum after the inauguration (the mother and child; the crowd from Ghent; both realities together); Lebrun kneeling before Van Dyck’s Christ on the Cross; the sarcophagus of Sant’Ambrogio (the empty space in the masonry, “a clean, hollow absence that would remain there”).

6.5 The Personal Notebook as Ethical Space

Lebrun keeps a personal notebook distinct from the official register. The last entry, in Mechelen, is the most honest formulation in the novel : “Huysmans says I calculate where I ought to feel. Van Reyn documents where he ought to protest. I look where perhaps I ought to close my eyes. We are three men doing what they can with what they have. I do not know whether that absolves us of anything.” Ce registre-là n’est pas celui des inventaires officiels.

7. Documentary and Historical Dimension

7.1 Factual Accuracy

The novel scrupulously respects verifiable historical dates and facts: the composition of the 1794 artistic commission, the Flemish operations of August 1794, the arrest of David on 2 Brumaire Year III (23 October 1794), Bonaparte’s Italian lightning campaign (Montenotte 12 April 1796, Lodi 10 May, Milan 15 May), the Parma armistice of 9 May, the fall of Bologna on 19 June. The dimensions of the seized works (Van Eyck altarpiece: 5.20 m × 3.75 m; Rubens’ Descent from the Cross: 4.20 m × 3.10 m; Belvedere Torso: 1.59 m; Apollo: 2.24 m) are accurate. The Armistice of Cherasco of 28 April 1796 is correctly situated.

7.2 Novelistic Freedom

In keeping with the preliminary note, certain scenes, dialogues, and characters have been imagined. Lebrun’s night in the warehouse, Grégoire’s solitary visit to the Museum, and the personal notebooks of Hassenfratz and Lebrun are narrative inventions. The exchanges between Hassenfratz and Denon outside the Committee are fictional. By contrast, the reactions of the curators (Argelati, Huysmans, Van Reyn) are grounded in documentary sources and demonstrated practices.

7.3 The Question of the Congress and Restitutions

Hassenfratz’s words in Mechelen (“A congress will have to take place. Restitutions will be demanded.”) inscribe as early as 1794 what would come to pass: the Congress of Vienna (1815) demanded and obtained the restitution of a large proportion of the Flemish works (the Van Eyck altarpiece returned to Ghent, the Rubens to Antwerp) and part of the Italian collections. The author, president of the NGO International Restitutions, knows the contemporary debate from the inside: his novel does not plead a case; it presents the founding arguments in their original context.

8. Literary Assessment

8.1 Strengths

Construction of the bureaucratic machine: the novel is one of the rare works to show how a system of spoliation is invented, runs itself in, and becomes institutionalised. This is not a novel of individual excess but of collective logic.
Balanced polyphony: the equal presence of the voices of the spoliated curators and the French commissioners prevents the novel from becoming a thesis novel. The moral question is raised, not resolved.
Integrated technical precision: the dimensions of works, the difficulties of transport, the alpine logistics are not incidental — they are the very substance of the novel. The physical difficulty speaks to the value of what is seized.
Scenes of high literary density: Grégoire’s night at the Museum, Hassenfratz’s visit (the mother and child), the last page of Lebrun’s notebook in Mechelen, the sarcophagus carried by hand through the Splügen.
Anticipation of Volume II: the final chapter prepares the reader for the Egyptian Commission without revealing the next book, while already conferring its distinctive colour upon it.

8.2 Some Points of Tension

The density of the Italian chapters (II and III) is at times high: the accumulation of cities and collections can exhaust the non-specialist reader, even if each city brings a specific dimension to the system.
Venice (Chapter III) is treated more briefly than the other stages, whereas its historical irony — Venice the despoiler of Constantinople, itself in turn despoiled — would merit a longer treatment.
Bonaparte, in Chapter II, is sketched rather than constructed: this is a deliberate choice (he will assert himself in the following volumes), but the passage in Chapter IV where he receives the Italian commission is one of the least developed in the novel.

8.3 Overall Assessment

Volume I of The Great Plunder achieves the feat of turning an erudite and administrative subject — the bureaucracy of cultural spoliation — into a historical novel driven by rare narrative conviction and documentary precision. It lays the intellectual foundations of the saga with a rigour that foreshadows Volume II while remaining entirely self-contained. The narrative voice is constructed, economical, and makes no concession to popular fiction.

9. Notable Quotations

“Perhaps. But I hope History will be lenient.”

— Grégoire, in Paris, before departure for Ghent

“You call this culture? It’s plunder! Pure and simple theft!”

— Canon De Vos, Ghent

“I was not appointed curator to feel. I was appointed to preserve. Since I can no longer preserve, I document. That is what will remain when you are gone.”

— Van Reyn, Brussels

“Huysmans says I calculate where I ought to feel. Van Reyn documents where he ought to protest. I look where perhaps I ought to close my eyes. We are three men doing what they can with what they have. I do not know whether that absolves us of anything.”

— Lebrun, personal notebook, Mechelen

“In Paris, it will be in exile. That is not the same thing.”

— Abbé Huysmans, Mechelen

“You have taken everything, but everything is written down.”

— Hassenfratz, to Van Reyn

“What beauty does is erase its own history. Beauty has that quality: it makes one forget how it came to be there. That may be why men are so determined to possess it.”

— David, to Grégoire, February 1795

“Doing the same things with less arrogance. That is the available progress.”

— Hassenfratz, to Grégoire

“This piece of stone is fourteen hundred years old. It was sculpted in the 4th century by an artist whose name we do not even know. And today it too has crossed the Splügen.”

— Thouin, to the wounded soldier Dupont

10. Critical Perspectives

10.1 Place in the saga

Volume I occupies the genetic position of the tetralogy: it invents the system that the subsequent volumes deploy and complexify. In relation to Volume II (Egypt), it establishes the characters (Denon, Monge, Berthollet), defines the logic of the commissions, and draws the fundamental distinction between transportable works and works integrated into their space. Flanders is present in Volume II through the characters’ memories.

10.2 Comparison with Volume II

Dimension

Volume I (Flanders & Italy)

Volume II (Egypt)

Character focal

Hassenfratz (logistician)

Denon (draughtsman-collector)

Nature of the works

European paintings, sculptures, manuscripts

Egyptian antiquities, Rosetta Stone, frescoes

Mirror inventories

Van Reyn, Huysmans, Affò, Oretti

Hassan (the Egyptian interpreter), Hamilton (British)

Untransportable works

The Last Supper, the Raphael Rooms, the Sistine Chapel

The Luxor Obelisk, the hypostyle hall at Karnak

Relationship to restitution

Raised as early as 1794 (Hassenfratz: “a congress”)

Formulated as a paradox in the epilogue

Relationship to the local population

Kneeling but silent

Living, named, represented by Hassan

10.3 Contemporary Resonances

The novel engages directly with current debates on the restitution of cultural property seized during the Napoleonic conquests. The author — president of the NGO International Restitutions — knows these arguments from the inside. The strength of Volume I is to reinstall the debate at its very genesis: this system was invented in June 1794, in a room that smelled of “dust and ink,” by seven commissioners who knew exactly what they were doing and justified it with the same arguments employed two centuries later.

Reading report compiled from the complete reading of the manuscript. June 2026.

​