^{Note 1 in page 339} The fifteen are: (1) Gustave Lanson, Voltaire, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1910), p. 151, and L'art de la prose, 13th ed. (Paris, n.d.), p. 184; (2) André Morize, Candide ou l'optimisme (Paris, 1913), p. Ill, n. 1; (3) Pietro Toldo, “Voltaire Conteur et Romancier,” Zeitschrift fur franzosische Sprache and Lilteralur, XL (1913), 173; (4) Daniel Mornet, Histoire de la littérature et de la pensée française (Paris, 1924), p. 145, and Histoire des grandes œuvres de la littérature française (Paris, 1925), pp. 171, 173; George R. Havens, “The Nature Doctrine of Voltaire,” PMLA, XL (Dec. 1925), 857; Candide, ou l'optimisme (New York, 1934), pp. lii, 125, and The Age of Ideas (New York, 1955), p. 201: (6) André Bellessort, Essai sur Voltaire (Paris, 1925), p. 262; (7) Philippe Van Tieghem, Contes & “romans (Paris, 1930), i, xx; (8) Louis Flandrin, Œuvres choisies (Paris, 1930), p. 724; (9) Dorothy M. Mc-Ghee, Voltairian Narrative Devices as Considered in the Author's Contes Philosophiques (Menasha, 19,33), pp. 70-71; (10) Norman L. Torreyi The Spirit of Vollaire) (New York, 1938), p. 49; (11) Raymond Naves, De Candide à Saint-Preux (Paris, 1940), p. 17; (12) Roger Petit, Contes (Paris: Clas-siques Larousse, 1941), i, 9, and n, 6; (13) F. C. Green, Choix de contes (Cambridge, Eng., 1951), p. xxix; (14) William F. Bottiglia, ”Candide's Garden,“ PMLA, LXVI (Sept. 1951), 722, 727; (15) Rita Falke, ”Eldorado: Le meilleur des mondes possibles,“ Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century, ed. Theodore Besterman, ii (Geneva, 1956), 25-41, passim. References 2, 5 (Candide), 7, 8,12, and 13 involve editions of works by Voltaire.

The three critics with divergent interpretations are: (1) Friedrich-Melchior Grimm, Correspondance littéraire, philosophique et critiqtte (by Grimm, Diderot, Raynal, Meister, etc.), ed. Maurice Tourneux, rv (Paris, 1878), 86 (1 March 1759); (2) William R. Price, The Symbolism of Voltaire's Novels with Special Reference to “Zadig” (New York, 1911), pp. 209, 211; (3) Ludwig W. Kahn, “Voltaire's Candide and the Problem of Secularization,” PMLA, LXVII (Sept. 1952), 886-888.)

Quotations from the text of Candide will follow the spelling and punctuation of the Morize edition.

^{Note 2 in page 339} The five who roughly agree are Mornet, Naves, Green, Miss Falke, and I. The divergent critic is Toldo.

^{Note 3 in page 339} For the elements of Voltairean deism, see Georges Pel-lissier, Voltaire philosophe (Paris, 1908), pp. 67-68; Lanson, Voltaire, p. 178; Havens, “The Nature Doctrine of Voltaire,” p. 857, and Candide, p. 126; Torrey, pp. 227 ff.

^{Note 4 in page 340} Voltaire, Œuvres complètes, ed. Louis Moland (Paris, 1877-85), xxxix, 58, 236, 262, 291, 418—hereafter referred to as “Moland,” with citations from Vol. xxxix only.

^{Note 5 in page 340} E.g.: “The trouble with any ‘perfect’ or ‘best’ world is precisely that it does not leave any room for amelioration or for activity, social or otherwise” (p. 887); “Paradise, Eden, the City of God are places of rest, not to say of otiosity, because they are perfect” (p. 888); “When Candide inquires how people pray to God in Eldorado, the sage answers: ‘Nous ne le prions point, nous n'avons rien à lui demander.‘ Can this be an ideal? A world where there is nothing to pray for is also a world where there is nothing to work for, nothing to live for” (p. 888).

^{Note 6 in page 340} Voltaire (London, 1935), p. 164. See also “Candide's Garden,” p. 732.

^{Note 7 in page 341} Ira ?. Wade, “The Épttre à Uranie,” PMLA, xlvii (Dec. 1932), 1066, 1076, 1111-1112.

^{Note 8 in page 342} See also Bellessott (p. 262), Havens (Candide, pp. lii, 125, 126, and The Age of Ideas, p. 201), and Miss Falke (p. 31) for variations on this theme of contrast.

^{Note 9 in page 342} Miss Falke accordingly distinguishes between Pan-gloss's “meilleur des mondes possibles,” which is a sham calling for refutation, and Eldorado, whereby “Voltaire a complété sa critique par sa propre thèse” (p. 38).

^{Note 10 in page 342} There is, to be sure, an element of abrupt contrast between the uncultivated and the cultivated as Candide and Cacambo emerge from the country of the Oreillons into Eldorado. But the “cultivé” looks forward as well as backward. It is indissolubly linked with the phrase “pour le plaisir comme pour le besoin,” and thereby not only leads into Voltaire's depiction of the ideal but also projects beyond it to the optimum present reality of the garden, where the “petite société” works toward the ideal envisaged as a blend of “le besoin” and “le plaisir” (“Candide's Garden,” pp. 722, 732-733).

^{Note 11 in page 343} Both Green (p. xxix) and Miss Falke (p. 38) make the general point that Candide errs in leaving Eldorado to pursue a happiness purchasable by material means, hence inferior and, of course, illusory. In specific connection with the first reason for departure, it is necessary to distinguish between the object of Candide's hope, which is unworthy, and the act of hope, which is salutary. Cf. Martin's comment (Ch. xxv) : “C'est toujours Hen fait d'espérer.” In connection with the third reason, it is interesting to note that Candide, lovesick and impecunious, drifts into Eldorado urged on by Cacambo, who, as always, is seeking “des choses nouvelles”; but does his own urging, once he has found the financial means to revive his hope of happiness with Cunégonde. Thus, in the presence of a genuine perfection he cannot yet fully grasp, he longs for something different which only the ripeness of time will prove unworthy.

^{Note 12 in page 344} Emile Littré, Dictionnaire de la langue française, I (Paris, 1885), 278. The Encyclopédie, moreover, in volumes published in 1765, applies the colors rougeâlre (ix, 177, s.v. “Laine”) and roux (x, 827, s.v. “Mouton”) to the fleece of sheep.

^{Note 13 in page 344} Voltaire states at this point that “Candide eut plus de joie de retrouver ce mouton qu'il n'avait été affligé d'en perdre cent tous chargés de gros diamants d'Eldorado.” Havens (Candide, p. 130) has pointed out the similarity with the Biblical parable of the lost sheep, which is found both in Matthew (xviii. 12-14) and in Luke (xv.3-7). He adds that this similarity may be “purely fortuitous.” If not, then it may be a parody invented in passing by association.

^{Note 14 in page 346} Miss McGhee sees a specific instance of irony in the two travelers' incongruously “undignified” response “to the formal directions for greeting a monarch” (“Candide & Cacambo sautèrent au cou de Sa Majesté …” [p. 131]). Voltaire, however, appears to be mocking, not their delighted response, but the complicated and degrading formulas of obeisance demanded by earthly rulers.

^{Note 15 in page 346} Morize comments as follows on Voltaire's later expansion of the phrase describing the physics gallery in the “Palais des Sciences” to include mathematical instruments: “Il ne me semble pas qu'il faille chercher le motif de cette addition ailleurs que dans le souci artistique d'améliorer le rythme de, la phrase et sa cadence un peu sèche: je ne vois pas Voltaire, à la fin de 1760, particulièrement occupé de mathématiques” (p. 122, n. 1). In addition to a concern with stylistic rhythm, Voltaire, as a Newtonian of long standing, may have decided to revise his sentence so that it would associate in an ideal partnership the two foundation sciences of the Enlighten-ment. (For further observations on this revision, cf. Petit, ii, 36, n. 2.)

^{Note 16 in page 347} Le roman au dix-huitième siècle (Paris, 1898), p. 212.

^{Note 17 in page 347} Voltaire (Paris, 1895), pp. 194-195.