No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
Given an individual with Du Bellay's reverence for the intellectual and cultural achievements of classical antiquity, but a painful consciousness of the deficiencies of his own education, especially in the field of Hellenic studies; possessing, in addition, an almost religious worship of his native language and a zealous ardor to vindicate its intrinsic capacity for every form of expression,—given conditions which are mutually so discordant—what must result? An adumbration in parvo, and within the limits of a single personality, of the quereile des anciens et modernes. This is what we witness in the writings of Du Beilay, and especially in the pages of the Deffence. We must make an effort, however, to discover whether between the apparently contradictory positions adopted by Du Beilay there is not some central ground upon which he really meant to take his stand.
1 Our study of the relationship between Du Beilay and Pindar (PMLA, lvi, 1007–19) has led us to believe that Du Bellay's abilities as a student of Hellenic culture were probably considerably greater than scholars have hitherto imagined, and to surmise that his handling of certain passages from a number of Greek authors reveals that he possessed some competence in the Greek language. This view has imparted a prevailing tendency observable in the following pages: at every valid opportunity to indicate our reasons for suspecting that that relationship was based in certain instances upon the French poet's knowledge of the original Greek texts.—Where volume and page numbers are not accompanied by the name of the editor, the references are to Henri Chamard's edition of the Œuvres poétiques de Joachim Du Bellay, 6 vol. (Paris: Cornély, 1908–31). The following abbreviations will be employed: Def. for Henri Chamard's critical edition of La Defence et Illustration de la Langue Francoyse (Paris: Fontemoing, 1904); JB for the biographical and literary study by M. Chamard entitled Joachim du Bellay (Lille: au siège de l'Université, 1900).
2 Du Bellay uses the word doctrine to mean philosophy. Def, 130 f, and 131, note 1.
3 Def. 327.
4 Def. 133.
5 Loc. cit.
6 From the context it is clear that Du Beilay is referring to the classical languages, rather than to foreign languages generally.
7 Def. 144 f.
8 Def. 66 f.
9 Def. 98 f.
10 Def. 129 f.
11 Def. 233 f.
12 93 f.
13 Def. 147, and see note 3, where Chamard gives a very similar quotation from Peletier's Art Poëtique. Cf. Def. 84.
14 See the strictures of Barthélemy Aneau in Le Quintil Horatian (Lyon, 1550). Chamard has reproduced them, passim, in the notes of his edition of the Def.
15 We do not propose to discuss here Du Bellay's general theory of imitation. This has been done more than adequately by Chamard in JB 124 f. We wish merely to place in a clear light those aspects of his theory which reveal his attitude toward the imitation of the Greek poets.
16 Def. 193 and 199.
17 iii, 97. The legend alluded to is, of course, that of Icarus. Cf. iv, 172, v, 258.
18 156 f. Cf. the second preface of the Olive i, 11.
19 Def. 201. Cf. Horace, Ars Poetica, 268 f.
20 Def. 108.
21 Def. 171. Cf. pp. 103 and 194.
22 Def. 228.
23 Def. 215 f. Du Bellay did not value the epistle very highly as a literary genre, but he apparently made an exception in favor of the superior style of Horace and Ovid, who he thought had treated the form successfully. We need hardly repeat that he was fully cognizant of the importance of Horace as a lyric poet.
24 Def. 237 f.
25 Def. 225 f.
26 Def. 208 f.
27 Def. 337 f.
28 Def. 55.
29 Def. 255.
30 Def. 270. See Chamard's learned comments, and the parallel passages which he quotes from Peletier, Ronsard and Sibilet, from whom Du Beilay probably borrowed the word μιτλ∊υτν.
31 Def. 271, note 2.
32 Def. 276 f.
33 Def. 277.
34 Def. 284, and see note 1, where Chamard indicates that this remark of Du Beilay is an anticipation of the position taken by Henri Estienne in his Traicté de la conformité du language françois avec le grec (Geneva, 1565).
35 Le Sympose de Platan, ou de l'Amour et de Beauté, traduit de Grec en François avec trois livres de Commentaires … par Loys Le Roy, dit Regius (Paris: Jehan Longis et Robert le Mangnyer, 1558 et 1559).
36 Cham. vi 413, Od. xi, 305–320.
37 Cham. vi 414, Il. xix, 91–96.
38 Lines 318 f. But the son born to Zeus by Leto of the lovely hair destroyed them both before the down bloomed upon their cheeks or the soft hair grew close upon their chins.
39 Cham. vi, 4, 13, 17 f.
40 Lines 311 f. For at the age of nine they were already every bit of nine cubits in breadth.
41 Loc. cit., 9 f.
42 Loc. cit., 315 f. They strove to place Ossa upon Olympus, and upon Ossa Pelion with its swaying foliage, so that they might have a path to the sky.
43 Loc. cit., 12 f.
44 xix 94 … doing harm unto men; for she binds in fetters at least one of the parties to a quarrel.
45 vi, 414, 5.
46 Lyon, Giunta, 1538, p. 213, v°.
47 [Antwerp?], Grapheus, 1528, p. 211, r°.
48 If the evidence which we have presented should be thought sufficient to open the question of the extent of Du Bellay's education in Greek, would it not appear almost as an obligation upon those students of the French Renaissance, who have hitherto inclined to decide the same question negatively in the case of Ronsard, to reconsider that decision? For if Du Bellay, who was much less studious than Ronsard, and had been a much shorter time under the humanist influence of Dorat, had acquired this modest competence in Greek, we may be confident that Ronsard, after his ardent studies in the home of Lazare de Baif and at Coqueret, might well have been able to stand without trembling before Pindar's craggy Greek. In connection with this problem the reader may consult S. Etienne, “Ronsard a-t-il su le grec?” in Mélanges offerts à Paul Laumonier (Paris: Droz, 1935) and The Pindaric Odes of Ronsard (Paris, 1937, p. 5 f.), by the present writer. M. Pierre Champion, in a letter dated May 7, 1940, has been kind enough to communicate the following information, which has some bearing on the discussion: “J'ay publié un facsimilé de l'écriture grecque de Ronsard. Si vous ne possédez pas cette notice je veux la retrouver dans ce tumulte pour vous l'addresser.” By the time this letter arrived, the tumult was rapidly deteriorating toward catastrophe, and the facsimile was never received, nor have I been able to discover where it was published.