Picture, so you can pair the face to the name.

Born in Paris (1613) to an old and prominent noble family; died in Paris (1680).

Married in 1628, eight children by his wife.

Through the years he had four mistresses, at least one of whom bore him a son “for whom he had great affection.” That son died two years before his father in the crossing of the Rhine (a battle?), as did one of his legitimate sons. Another was wounded.

For twenty-five years his life was taken up with war and political intrigue, in most of which he assumed no great leadership.

Stanley J. Kunitz and Vineta Colby. European Authors 1000-1900. The H.W. Wilson Company, New York. 1967.

As is almost always the case, these old biographical volumes are far superior to that infallible source, and I’m finding more and more to the online Britannica, too. The editor of Rochefoucauld’s Reflections provides a lengthy sketch of his life, especially the “political intrigue” aspects, and his role in various battles of these religious v. monarch wars, including description of the injuries he sustained. Rochefoucauld was not lucky in war.

In 1652 he returned to his lands in Angoûmois and began work on his Memoirs (1662), which was popular in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

But his great literary reputation rests upon his Maxims [Reflections; or Sentences and Moral Maxims]…. La Rouchefoucauld turned these observations of life and character into short, piercing “sentences,” often epigrams, and gave them a philosophy which readers were bound to find challenging.

ibid.

Among the subjects treated are reason, self-interest, love, friendship, jealousy, conversation, pride, fortune, and gratitude. The book met with universal admiration but few could acceptance its picture of man’s corruption and helplessness. Those who approved of the Maxims on religious grounds, thinking to see in them confirmation of men’s desperate need for divine guidance, were certainly mistaken as far as La Rochefoucauld himself was concerned. Such scant reference to God, original sin, or Providence as appeared in the first edition of the Maxims were totally eliminated by the author in subsequent editions.

ibid.

The entry in European Authors then goes onto to talk about the pessimism of the Maxims, calling it “a kind of moral Machiavellianism.” But he concludes his critique with this question:

Yes the Maxims are not totally negative. Many discerning readers have seen a positive message in them, for in exposing false and easy virtue based on self-love, was not La Rochefoucauld pointing to the possibility of a sterner and more worthwhile morality based on self comprehension and honesty, on independent self-assertion free of intimidation or other forms of subservience?

ibid.

According to the editor of my (1888) edition, there is an underlying structure to the work as a whole, though if he discusses what it was I missed it. So we’ll just keep plodding our way through. There are 504, so obviously I’m not going to go through all of them, just the ones that catch my attention. Here are the search for the Maxims in English at Archive.