UC-NRLF B M D57 STT THE LITERARY CRITICISM OF PIERRE BAYLE By HORATIO E. SMITH A DISSERTATION submitted to the board of university studies of the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy ALBANY. N. Y. THE BRANDOW PRINTING CO. 1912 Maim TO MY MOTHER 263334 PREFACE SCOPE OF THE PRESENT STUDY No examination, in any sense complete, has ever been made of the literary criticism of Pierre Bayle. Histories of literature give him only passing mention and make hardly any comment on the significance of his opinions about letters. The study of Betz, Pierre Bayle und die 'Nouvelles dc la Republique des Lettres,' takes up the question at more length and gives an excellent general estimate of Bayle as a literary critic. But Betz' treatment is almost exclusively restricted to a single one of the numerous products of Bayle's pen, and since he discusses the several different aspects of the Nouvelles, his analysis of Bayle's literary criteria is by no means detailed. Although Lenient, in his Etude snr Bayle, makes some just and accurate comments in the section which he devotes to the Sccpticisme Litteraire of the Rotterdam free-thinker, these, too, are brief and incomplete. The book on Pierre Bayle by Cazes contains a series of selections from Bayle's works, and one group of these has been chosen to illustrate the distinctive qualities of his literary criticism. But Cazes, in his own discussion, pays no attention to these qualities. In the various essays that have been written on Bayle, the remarks concerning his literary criti- cism are decidedly meagre. It is the purpose of the present study to investigate this particular feature of his activity, to establish with whatever documentary evidence can be collected the exact character of Bayle's attitude toward literature. He does not give any formal treatment of literary subjects, and none of his works may be termed, in any technical sense, literary. Yet, scattered through the nine folio volumes there are manifold remarks that have a more or less direct bearing on books and authors. Bayle was not primarily a man of letters, but since his interest in this field was considerable, and since he occupies an important place in the history of French thought, and plays a significant role in 6 Preface the intellectual development of Europe, it seems worth while to try to determine accurately the nature and value of his expressed opinions on literature. To do so is the aim of this study. ^ ^ Three less important chapters of the dissertation as submitted to the Johns Hopkins University are not included in the work as here presented. The omitted sections are : an introductory chapter entitled : Life of Bayle; his general characteristics as thinker and tnan, andl two chapters of Part I, entitled: Panegyrics, Libels, Letters, etc., and Indi- vidual Authors. Of these last two, part of the first has been incor- porated in the chapter on History. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Preface: Scope of the present study Part I : Bayle's Criticism as applied to : Books and Authors Fiction . Poetry . Drama . Oratory . History . Scholarship Style Ancients and Moderns Part II: The Precepts which Bayle advocates in Criticism. The Function of the Critic ...... X Part III: Conclusion. Summary of Bayle's Opinions ; his rank and character- istics as a critic Influence of Bayle Bibliography Vita I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX PAGE 5 9 i6 22 28 34 39 63 78 95 XI 113 XII 126 ^33 136 BOOKS AND AUTHORS^ A few remarks that Bayle advances in regard to the charac- teristics of authors, as to what they are and what they should be, suggest the general attitude which he takes towards the profession of authorship. It therefore seems worth while to mention these here before proceeding to an outline of his opinions concerning particular genres, concerning the various expressions of the waiter's activity. Values in the Republic of Letters are not judged by money standards. Writers should be impelled by higher motives than a mere desire for gain. Consequently the mercenary spirit of many authors reflects much discredit upon their kind. C'est ce qui fait un grand tort aux muses, c'est ce qui les prive de la gloire dont elles devraient jouir d'inspirer a leurs sectateurs un veritable desinteressement, et un genereux mepris des richesses et des recompenses publiques. lis ressemblent aux autres hommes, dit-on, ils ne sont pas moins sujets que les autres a I'ambition et a I'avarice, les deux maladies populaires du coeur humain.'' These grasping waiters have in view not solely the money ; they imagine that the rewards they may reap w'ill not only be desirable as such, but will add to their reputation and stamp them as great authors. Rut this is nonsense. A good book is good, even though the author may have died of starvation, and a bad book is not redeemed by the fact that its composer was a marquis or a millionaire. A writer who, scorning wealth and devoting all his energy to the composition of good books, dies poor, has earned a title of nobility in the Republic of Letters.' Bayle advocates moderate compensation for men of letters : liberal pay inclines them to idleness, for they feel secure in their opulence ; scanty pay inclines them to hasten their productions ^ For the abbreviations used in the foot-notes of this and the following chapters cf. infra, p. 133, notes i and 2. 'D. VII. 477, Hainan, M. ' Ibid. Bayle goes on to commend the disinterestedness of Descartes. I o TJie Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle and to give them to the pubHc in a form far from perfect — the less each piece brings in, the more of these they must write.* Carelessness and haste in writing are to be avoided ; an author should resist the temptation to see himself continually in print. He should not begin publishing too early in life, and he should compose a pas comptes.^ The number of excellent writers would be larger if those who have acquired a certain reputation by their productions should content themselves with publishing only one work in every four years. But they do not do this ; they go ahead rapidly and depend too much on the fame already acquired.*' A similar abuse occurs in the case of authors who seek to publish what they have written in their early days. It * D. XII. 576, Ronsard, K. Though it may be better to have these mediocre works than none at all, the public may be more benefited when the author is too poor than when he is too rich. Cf. Gigas, pp. 59-63. For passing remarks against the mercenary spirit of authors cf : D. V. 395, Dassouci, F; D. VI. 129, Elizabeth, O; D. VIII. 564, Kirstenius, B; D. XIII. 305, Simonide (2), N; cf. also O. D. I. 610, xii; D. V. 432, Decius, D; D. I. iii, Accarisi, A: Bayle deplores the mercenary spirit of many professors. When authors are needy and have to support large families Bayle is inclined to excuse their efforts to secure patrons. D. XII. 461, Rangouze, A; cf. O. D. I. 476, ix. For a vigorous objection to the introduction of money standards in the Republic of Letters cf . D. I. 386-7, Alciat, G : " Quand vous pretendez que, si Ton vous donne une plus grosse pension pour ce que vous direz en chaire, c'est une preuve qu'on vous estime un plus grand predicateur ou un plus savant professeur, ne jugez-vous pas de votre metier comma Ton juge de celui d'un cordonnier ou d'un chapelier? Cela est fort propre a decrier les sciences et a faire mepriser ceux qui les professent; . . . C'est assijrement mettre son erudition a I'encan, et faire savoir au public qu'on ne se livrera qu'au plus ofFrant et dernier encherisseur." It is a shame to decry such sciences as physics and mathematics because they do not enrich their devotees. O. D. I. 697, viii ; cf. also D. II. 25, Anaxagoras, A : " Voila le gout d'une infinite de gens : ils condamnent toutes les occupations qui ne servent pas a faire fortune." Apropos of philosophers. Note the reference here to D. XV. 236, Projct de ce Diet. " D. X. 337, Marsus, B. Cf. the ref. here to D. XV. 102, Zuerius, B. . •D. VI. 523, Forbes (3), B. Cf. O. D. II. 161. Avis au Lectcur for the Nouvellcs Lcttres . . . de I'Histoire du Calvinisme. Bayle, referring to his own work, says a writer is apt to spend all his energies on his first book and if he tries to write again on the same subject he makes many repetitions of what has already been said, and perhaps relies too much on the reputation that the first work may have made for him. Books and Authors ii is judicious indeed for them to wait until they have ac(|uired a solid reputation, and when they have done so they may venture with a certain degree of safety to bring forth their youthful efforts." But they must not build too much on their reputation and too little on the merits of such compositions.* Bayle deplores the vanity of men of letters who cry out against the ingratitude of the public. Ce defaut est presque une maladie epidemique dans la republique des lettres : il n'y a guere d'auteurs qui ne se plaignent de I'ingratitude de leur siecle. Ceux qu'on appelle beaux-esprits se signalent par dessus les autres dans cette espece de plainte. II leur semble que ce ne serait pas se donner des airs, que de convenir que la fortune les a regardes d'un bon ceil. On dirait qu'ils craignent que s'ils paraissaient contens de ses faveurs, le public ne prit cela pour un aveu qu'ils sont sans merite ; car il y a un lieu commun fort ancien qui nous apprend qu'elle est aveugle, et qu'elle choisit tres-mal les objets de son amour. . Ainsi tous ces lieux communs que nos beaux-esprits, et tant d'autres ecrivains, poussent contre la Fortune, sont dans le vrai un pompeux eloge des grandes et des belles qualites dont ils s'imaginent etre remplis. II y a done la-dedans un peu trop de vanite." ^ Bayle states that in general the excellence of a writer's production varies directly according to his experience : D. XII. 174, Plotin, E. But he is inclined to admit exceptions to this, and elsewhere cites La Bruyere — though indeed in an argument de circonstance — as an example of an author whose coup d'essai was a masterpiece : O. D. II. 643 ; cf. D. V. 353, Daille, H. ' D. XIV. 130-1, Thomaeus, D. Apropos of a savant. There are various references to the superabundance of books in Bayle's own day. Cf. O. D. I. 388, iii : "jamais le maladie de faire des Livres n'a ete plus generale que dans ce siecle ... si Ton pent croire que la demangeaison de faire des Livres est une fievre continue avec des redoublemens. Ton peut croire aussi que la generation presente s'est rencontree dans le retour de I'acces." Cf. O. D. I. 383, i ; O. D. I. 715. Cf. also O. D. I. 745 i : Bayle refers to the multitude of books which are being published. One reason for this torrent de livres is that when a man gets hold of some small idea he feels the need of writing a book around it so that he may present it to the public. Cf. also O. D. IV. 529, iv : " J'ai om dire a des gens qui en avoient senti quelque chose, qu'il n'y avoit rien de plus chargeant que I'envie de se faire imprimer, et que des le moment qu'on a les matieres toutes pretes, on se fait un pretexte de batir, si on ne le trouve pas tout fait." • D. XI. 333-4, Pays, H. Bayle refers to Balzac as an example of this type of author. Balzac had plenty of the comforts of life, yet he was always complaining of fortune. Certainly he was not over-modest. 1 2 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle Often enough it is the authors who are guilty of ingratitude, not the pubHc. Bayle makes one or two other remarks concern- ing the high opinion which authors have of their own produc- tions." The writing of books is not a very practical business, and authors are not apt to be men who would succeed in the affairs of every-day life. It often happens that a man who is good at writing books is good at nothing else ; outside of his study he is a dunce.^^ And certainly a bel-esprit, who devotes his energies to the polishing of a sonnet, is not likely to prove a splendid financier, however he may prosper in Love.^* So much then for the characteristics of men of Letters, and especially their faults. Evidently Bayle sets a high standard for the citizens of this Republic of Letters. Their calling is a dignified one, and they are not to debase it by seeking mere material rewards, nor by composing hurriedly and carelessly, nor by giving way to their vanity. They are outside of the ordinary world of affairs, and, in a measure, above it.^^ ^^ Cf. D. V. 555, Dolet, C : Bayle remarks on the indignation of a savant when another writer takes up the lance to defend some particular cause which he, the first man, believes he has already successfully dis- puted. Cf. D. VII. 568, Heloise, R; cf. also O. D. I. 477, i: "On fait ordinairement un miserable personnage, lorsqu'on parle soi-meme de ses Ecrits." Bayle is referring to his own Reponse . . . a I'Avis sur ce qu'il a dit en faveur du P. Malebranche. " O. D. I. L. 140, xciv : " Quand vous aurez plus d'experience, et que vous aurez connu personnellement plus de personnes celebres par leurs ecrits, vous verrez que ce n'est pas si grande chose que de composer un bon livre, et qu'il n'y a souvent rien de si sot ni de plus incapable d'une affaire hors du cabinet qu'un bon Auteur." Cf. D. III. 219, Beaucaire, G; D. III. 497, Boccalin, B; D. IV. 436, Carbon. A ; O. D. I. 284, iv; O. D. I. L. 146: "Autre chose est d'ecrire, autre chose est d'agir," etc. " D. XI. 334, Pays. H. "For other remarks on authors, their ways and characteristics, cf: On Plagiarists: O. D. I. 307 iv: " des gens dont la race ne perit point parmi Ics Auteurs. quoi qu'on les expose souvent a Tinfamic publique." D. V. 561, Donaldson, B; D. VI. 67, Duaren, H; D. VI. 165. Ephore, C ; Gigas, p. 68. On the contradictions of Authors: O. D. II. 166-184, Lcttres II, III. In the Nouvclles Lettres Critiques sur rHistoire du Calvinismc. The emphasis is wholly on the contradictions which come up in controversial and especially religious-controversial writings. Bayle tabulates the causes of such contradictions. He cites Cicero as an example, in maintaining Books and Authors 13 There is some discussion of the question as to uiiether an author is revealed in his work. Bayle would perhaps grant that the general characteristics of authors as a class are evident enough in their writings. But at any rate he is not inclined to think that the intimate personality of the individual may be discovered. In the first place an author is apt not to be frank enough to make himself known to the public as he really is. Although it is claimed that a writer paints himself in his books, it is certain that he does not give a faithful portrait. He dis- guises himself as he may see fit, and whoever would take the mask for the real man would be much deceived. Even the Letters of an author are not trustworthy ; they may come nearer to the truth than other productions, mais apres tout, on n'ecrit pas aux gens tout ce que Ton pense ; on auroit trop de honte de se montrer a eux tel qu'on est, et trop de peur de se faire des ennemis par son ingenuite." It is also true that what an author writes may be merely a jeu d'csprit, and for this reason not reflect in any way the real qualities of the composer. It is quite possible for a man of great moral excellence to write verses which abound in obsceni- ties. He may introduce salctcs not because they have any attraction for him as such, but because they offer a good oppor- that one of the causes is flattery; he points out how Cicero praises Cccsar in one case and blames him in another. Of the frequent obscurity of the ancestors and descendants of the heroes of the Republic of Letters: D. VII. 69. Gentilis (3), B. Cf. also the reference to " cette humeur bizarre et capricieuse que Ton voit assez souvent dans les artistes les plus consommes.'' Apropos of Apelles: D. II. 165, Apelles. D. Cf. D. II. 183, Apollodore (2), C. " O. D. I. 23. Apropos of the Letters of Gui Patin, which. Bayle says, are an exception to the rule and which do reveal the man clearly. Cf. D. VIII. 221, Hortensius (2), H: Bayle comments on the unreliabil- ity of remarks on other men which authors make in their published works, an unreliability due to the author's unwillingness to disclose his real sentiments. In this case, however, he is inclined to admit that authors speak frankly in letters to their friends. Cf. the ref. given here to D. VII. 283, Grotius (2), M. Cf. O. D. III. 6. Pref. de la le. Ed. des Pensees Divcrses, etc : " Cet air libre que Ton se donne quand on ecrit a un Ami, mais non pas quand on veut se faire imprimer. . . . Ceux qui ecrivent dans la vue de pubher leurs pensees s'accommodent au terns, et trahissent en mille rencontres le jugement qu'ils forment des choses," etc. 14 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle tunity for him to give play to his ingenuity and earn the applause of those who find a particular charm, a particular scl, in such subjects. ^^ Similarly in fiction the character of a novel hardly throws any light on the character of the individual who composes it; here again we have an author exercising his in- telligence and imagination, without putting his personality into the composition. Alany of the best ronians are being written by women, but there is no reason to believe that they are telling their own love stories, or that they approve the extremely amorous tendencies of their heroines. Indeed it is certain that the only object is to display their ability, their art in the depict- ing of character and passion.^*' Finally it is true that a writer whose own morals are exceedingly flimsy may express in his books the noblest sentiments of virtue and decency.^" This is another case where it would be nonsense to judge from an author's compositions what kind of a man he really is.^* " D. XIV. 291, Vayer, D. Bayle adds several other remarks on this question of whether obscenities in a poem indicate the moral perversity of the poet. There are some poets, like Catullus, Ovid and Martial, in whose case the obscenities come from the natural inclination of the writers to such wickedness — there is no excuse for these. But Bayle's general attitude is the one noted in the text. Cf. D. XIV. 425, Virgile, A: It is quite possible for poets, editors of poetical texts, etc. to acquire a viewpoint from which they may regard such dangerous objects with impunity, since their attitude is merely impersonal and professional; cf. D. XIII. 81, Sanchez, C. Cf. D. XIV. 292, Vayer, D : Some writers are all the more careful in avoiding obscenities, lest any slip should justify the reports which are current as to their bad moral character. Cf. D. X. 319, Marot, H : There is no reason why a poet who was a rascal should not translate well the Psalms of David, just as there is no reason why the good statue of a wicked sculptor should have no place in a church. "D. XIV. 424, Virgile, A. " D. XIV. 290, Vayer, D. Two cases are possible : a rascal may write virtuously, or a man of excellent moral worth may write books that are far from edifying. Bayle cites Sallust and Clodius, on the authority of Lc pcre Lemoinc; Discours dc I'Histoirc, and Cicero: Orat. de Haruspicum Responsis, respectively, as examples of men of utccurs dereglecs whose writings were serious and admirable. Cf. O. D. III. 87, cxxxv ; Gigas, 42. " On this question as to whether an individual is reflected in his book cf. O. D. I. 259: " C'est une grande illusion que dc juger dc I'ame d'un Homme par ses Kcrits." — apropos of a man who wrote a vigorous defense of polygamy but had taken unto himself not even a single wife. Books and Authors 15 In a word authorship does not ever mean to Bayle an emi- nently personal thing; it is almost always an objective afifair in which the brains and imagination of the man are concerned, but hardly his real self. Bayle's comments on the various kinds of literature will bring out the fact that this attitude is a constant one, that he rarely looks at a book as an expression of a writer's whole individuality, but as an indication of his caliber as impersonal artist or thinker. II FICTION Occasional references to works of fiction indicate that Bayle takes a certain interest in this kind of literature. He mentions the writings of Mile, de Scudery/ La Princesse de Clcvcs,- Telemaque,^ Francion,* the Roman de la Rose,^ Daphnis et Chloe,^ and various other productions.' Novels awaken his curiosity and often they are mentioned as diverting.® From time to time his interest prompts a critical remark, but there are few cases where Bayle devotes himself to the task of analysing care- fully the merits of a novel, and apparently he hardly thinks such an efit'ort worth while ; with the exception of one or two short reviews dealing with particular remans^ the observations which he makes on fiction are introduced apropos of some other matter. When Bayle does indulge in criticism, the general character of his remarks shows what features attract him. He does not ask whether a novel has any value as an appeal to the imagina- ^D. IV. 183, Brutus; D. XI. 329, Pays; O. D. I. L. 15, 75-6. 125, Ixxx. In the first and fourth of these references the Clelic is attributed to M. de Scudery. ^ O. D. I. L. 92, 98, Ixiv, loi, Ixvii. 'D. XII. 75, Pygmalion. *0. D. I. 632. °D. VII. 563, Heloise, F. ° D. IX. 352, Longus. ' O. D. I. L. 49: "On m'a dit qu'il y a un Roman nouveau intitule 'la Citerie,' ou ' I'Asterie ' . . . Je croi qu'il est de la fagon de Mademoiselle de la Roche, qui a compose I'Arioviste autre Roman ;" 81 : "II y a une maniere de Roman qu'on appelle I'Histoire des Sevarambes;" 125, Ixxx : " M. de Vaumoriere vient de donner au public un Roman en quatre petits volumes intitule 'Adelaide de Champagne,' et Mademoiselle Bernard, jcunc fille de Rouen, agee de 17 ans et de la Religion, fait aussi un Roman intitule ' Frideric de Sicile';" 166, cxviii : '' II y a une Dame a Paris nominee Daunoi qui compose plusicurs Romans ingeni- eux. . . ." 'D. XI. 40, Navarre; O. D. I. L. 114; O. D. IV. 528. iii; 574. xxxii. •O. D. I. 157, viii; 195, iv ; 651, i. Fiction 17 tion, any merit as an idealization. It is natural enougli that the positive, unromantic Bayle should not be aroused by the coloring of fiction, especially in view of the inferiority of most of the novels which he had a chance to peruse. What occupies him is fact. Beyond one or two incidental remarks on the proper subjects for novels, the questions he considers are : whether a novel is true to life, whether it introduces a combination of romance and history, whether its practical effect on tiie reader is moral or otherwise. The natural subject for a novel is love; the romancers have set that up for themselves as a law.^" But it is the courtship alone that is to be related, for to write of married life is absurd. Longus may be criticised in this regard." Bayle does not believe that novelists will again introduce the pastoral romance; the pastoral will henceforth belong to poets alone. ^- In order to maintain the illusion of the reader there should be vraisemblance. The true pleasure of fiction comes when the reader persuades himself that he is learning of something which actually happened. If incongruous and improbable elements are introduced the spell is broken and he realizes that it is only a story after all.^^ The rules of probability are upset by the excessive prudery which romancers attribute to their heroines. La vertu va beaucoup plus loin en ce pay-la, que dans notre monde : c'est apparemment une des principales raisons qui ont fait qu'on s'est degoiite de ceUe sorte d'Ouvrages." The seventeenth century writers are guilty in this regard. Mile. de Scudery and her contemporaries would represent a heroine as resisting too valiantly and too successfully the seductions of a lover who has kidnapped her. These novelists observe the demands of vraisemhlance when they portray a heroine as strug- gling at the start against such abduction, for of course she realizes that she will be compromised. But a long-continued "D. XI. 41, Navarre, note (i). ^^D. IX. 355, Longus. B: "Une heroine de roman grosse et accouchee est un etrange personnage." Note that in his comments here Bayle merely echoes and enlarges on the opinion of Huet. Elsewhere he advances the same statement independently: D. VII. 552, Heliodore. "O. D. L 651. " O. D. I. L. 142. xcvi ; of. O. D. I. 650, i. " O. D. I. 195, iv. 1 8 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle resistance is not likely, and to hold that a lover would undertake such a hazardous affair without being reasonably sure of suc- cess is absurd. Furthermore it is nonsense to picture a lover sueing ardently for the hand of a lady who has already been kidnapped by rivals; it is not probable that her char- acter is above reproach. Bayle's criticisms are doubtless tinged by the fact that his conception of love is far from romantic.^^ Authors have finally recognized this lack of probability in their stories and have begun to improve matters. The novel entitled Les Dames Galantcs on la Coniidence reciproque shows that a change is taking place. Here two women of easy morals relate to each other their adventures with a frankness that is refreshing.^" Other contemporary novels indicate the same regard for truth, the same freedom from the prudery which had characterized the genre. The heroines in Ariane act like ordinary women of the time. La Duchesse de Montpensier and the novels of Allle. des Jardins show that attention is being paid to writing stories which shall be natural and probable.^^ Yet Bayle does not dwell on the need for vraisemhlance with any particular insistence. He believes it desirable and once or twice, as has been noted, he speaks with a momentary vigor on the subject. But apparently he does not think it worth while to lay down many hard and fast rules in regard to a kind of literature which at best has no very serious purpose and no particular claims to consideration. The tales of fiction are idle, "D. VII. 530, Helena, E. Cf. D. VI. 312, Etampes. L; D. VII. 390, Guise, sub-note z^; D. VII. 535, Helene, L; D. IX. 355. Longus, C, (where the unnatural virtue of heroes is blamed); O. D. I. 650, i; O. D. I. 735 ; O. D. Ill, 75, cxii. O. D. II. 303-8, Letter XXI of the Noiivelles Lcttres Critiques sur I'Histoire du Calvinismc. This also contains a criticism of the excessive and improbable virtue of the characters of fiction. This letter is undoubt- edly written by Bayle, but he represents it as written by a certain M. Crisante, who is disputing with him about the marriage of the clergy, and who advances these remarks on vraisemhlance in connection with one of his arguments. The single point made by M. Crisante is the one noted above as Bayle's own : fiction writers are to be censured for endow- ing their heroes and heroines with unheard-of prudery. Among other novels criticised for lack of vraisemhlance in this particular is La Prin- cesse de Cldves. "O. D. I. 195, iv. " O. D. II. 323- Cf. O. D. I. L. 59- Fiction ig grotesque, tiresome, decidedly inferior to writings in which facts alone are dealt with and in which there is no attempt to embroider the truth. ^'* One must not ask much of such stories. Many references to the anachronisms, extravagances and chimerical adventures found in romans indicate that Bayle looks on these as typical.^" He does not expect that the characters of a novel be made subject to the restrictions of ordinary existence; it is a simple matter, he says, to credit them with this or that remark- able quality according to the exigencies of the case: lorsqu'on se fait des personnages de rimagination ... on leur fait coniprendre tout ce que Ton veut ; on nage en pleine mer, on dispose a sa fantaisie de leur coeur et de leur esprit. On fait toutes ces choses bien plus aisement que la Nature ne les produit dans des sujets tres reels.'" The practice of mingling history and fiction is prevalent in Bayle's time. Such a compound is frequent in court memoirs, and in romances which purport to reveal the secret loves of some member of royalty. The authors and publishers under- stand that such tales are more popular when they are supposed to have a foundation in fact, hence they do their utmost to persuade the reader that their books contain an element of truth.2i The custom is unpardonable.^^ A romancer must not take historical facts as a basis for his tale and embellish them as may happen to suit the whim of his imagination ; he must not ''D. I. 329, Aimon; D. VIII. 486-7, Junius, F; D. XI. 41, Navarre; O. D. I. L. 49; O. D. III. 708; O. D. IV. 729, clxxxiv. '"D. IV. 569, Castille, A; D. V. 229. Claude, G; D. V. 234, Cleonyme, B; D. V. 393, Dassouci, D; D. VI. 280, Esope, C; D. VI. 498, Flora, F; D. VII. 405, Guise; D. XI. 255. Origene, E; D. XII. 150, Pytheas, C; D. XII. 478, Rauber, D; D. XIII. 7, Sadeur; O. D. I. 426; O. D. II. 651; O. D. III. 639, Ixix. Cf. D. VII. 323, Guevara, B : " Ceux-ci (writers of romans) ne trompent personne ; car ils ne demandent pas qu'on prenne pour vrai tout ce qu'ils debitent ; ils n'aspirent qu'a la gloire de faire approuver leurs fictions comme des choses ingenieusement forgees ; . . ." ^°0. D. I. 547. Cf. D. XV. 274, Eclaircissement stir les Athces, Section IX; O. D. I. 157. "D. XL 152, Nidhard, C. ^ Cf. D. XIII. 273, Sforce (3), E: a reference to novelists who write "tant de mauvais ecrits qui paraissent tous les jours, 011 Ton ente sur les faits reels cent fables et cent chimeres." 20 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle give his characters the names of historical personnages and then make them act according to the requirements of his inven- tion. By this pernicious habit the romancers poison even the most recent facts of history, as in the case of the story which claims to relate the life and death of Kara Mustapha, Grand Vizier of Turkey, who besieged Vienna in 1683.^^ Bayle's ire is aroused by the thought that a writer of fiction should trifle with such a subject. His interest in facts and his contempt for petites pieces de galanterie are brought out here.-* It is impor- tant, he says, that this historical event should be understood, that the circumstances should be well known ; a novelist has no business to dabble with such an affair and confuse it by his fictions. Moreover it is disgraceful to attribute to royal char- acters, still in active life — even if they are Turks — gallantries of such compromising nature as this particular writer introduces. It would be best that authors devote themselves either wholly to fiction or wholly to history. Or at least, if they do introduce history into a romance, they should make it clear what is fact and what is not.^^ Bayle commends the practice of Mile, des Jardins in stating at the outset that the story she is to relate is merely a product of her imagination. -*"' The moral effect of novels is not to be disregarded. Fictitious accounts of love-affairs of doubtful character may be harmful in the extreme,^'' and the delicacy and subtlety of some of the recent fiction make it all the more pernicious, for the poison ^' O. D. I. 157, viii. The roman is entitled : Cara Mustapha Grand Visir. Histoire contenant son elevation, ses amours dans le Serail, ses divers emplois, le vrai sujet qui lui a fait entreprendre le Siege de Vienne, et les particularites de sa mort. The author writes that a love affair of the Grand Vizier was the cause of the war. °* Bayle is inconsistent once or twice, stating that the element of history in a particular novel interests him. Facts please him so that perhaps he forgets for a moment the mistake of presenting them in such a form. Cf. O. D. I. L. 15, 22-3; O. D. I. 405- "D. XI. 152, Nidhard, C. Cf. D. XII. 18. Pheron. B ; O. D. I. 381, vi ; O. D. I. 406. i ; O. D. III. 737. "D. VIII. 332-3. Jardins, A. And yet even this lady is to be blamed, says Bayle, for the deplorable way in which she confuses fact and fiction. Note that he gives Mile, des Jardins the credit for bringing into fashion the petites Iiistoricttcs (/alantcs which succeeded such novels as the Ch'o- patrc and the Cyrus. "O. D. III. 640-50. Cf. O. D. IV. 186: "les Romans ... les Fiction 2 1 is disguised by a sugar coating.-" Un the other hand, a novel may exert a beneficial influence, and the attempt to point a moral is praiseworthy.-*' It will not do to distort historical facts in this effort, for a combination of history and romance in which a familiar character is connected with events which the reader knows never happened has little power to convince him.^*' But a roman which twists the facts of everyday existence and represents a heroine as endowed with superhuman virtue is less reprehensible than one which follows unpleasant realities too strictly. ^^ This inconsistency — for Bayle has dwelt elsewhere, as has been noted, on the need of not endowing heroines with unusual virtue — is characteristic of his general attitude towards fiction. Another contradiction, w^hich has been referred to, is that on several occasions he protests vigorously against introducing history into fiction, but declares in other places, though only in passing, that what attracts him in certain novels is the element of chronicled fact.^^ In a word, Bayle is not free from contra- dictions on the two points which seem to occupy him the most in his criticisms of novels. He does not consider this kind of literature seriously, and is a little inclined to waver in his views; his opinions lack the definiteness of his criticisms on a genre such as history, which he esteems highly. The fact, however, that Bayle comments so frequently on fiction in its relation to truth lends a certain unity to his remarks. Ouvragcs de galanterie, qui ne peuvent que corrompre les bonnes moeurs des jeunes gens." ''O. D. III. 648-9. Cf. O. D. I. 650, i. Bayle is speaking of a roman which copies nature with some faithfulness and he says : " phisieurs personnes de bon sens sont persuadees qu'un Roman tel que celui-ci n'est pas aussi pernicieux que les autres, oil Ton voit des gens de I'un et de I'autre sexe qui s'aiment le plus galamment et le plus tendrement du monde, sans prejudice de la chastete. Cela fait croire aux jeunes personnes que I'amour n'est point a craindre, et qu'on peut s'y engager impunement. On s'y engage done sur cette esperance et souvent Ton ne s'en tire qu'avec honte. Si Ton avoit vii, comme on le voit dans ce Livre, que cette passion fait tomber dans les infidelitez les plus fletrissantes, peut-etre qu'on s'en seroit defie." "O. D. I. 381, vi. *> O. D. I. 406, i. •*D. VIII. 156-7, Hypsipyle, C. Cf. D. Yl. 339, Eve. L. *" Cf . supra, p. 20, note 24. Ill POETRY The fact that Bayle does not have a very high esteem for poetry may be gathered from the shghting remarks which he makes about writers of verse, as a class. They are jealous,^ frequently impecunious,- inclined to exaggerate their poverty in order to get help from their patrons,^ and given to flattery.* They make themselves ridiculous by their importunities ; they insist upon reciting their verses to all comers, and they stop at every word to discuss details until lines that might otherwise be pleasing are utterly spoiled. Bayle thanks Heaven that he is not as one of these, and claims that being only a writer of prose he is less of a burden to his friends.^ The laments of poets must not be taken seriously when they cry out against 'D. VI. 358, Euripide, K; cf. D. XL 649, Perse (2) ; ibid. 652, D. ''D. I. 403, Alcman; D. VII. 117, Gombauld, B; cf. D. XIV. 253-9, Tristan (2), B. C. : Railers often exaggerate the poverty of poets, though it is indeed great. Bayle suggests that the carelessness and dissipations of poets often make them lose what they have. 'D. III. 319, Benserade, E; D. III. 440, Billaut, B. *D. I. 486, Amboise; D. I. 529, Ammonius; D. II. 459, Artavasde II. A; D. III. 125, Barleus, A; D. IX. 340, Lollius, F; O. D. II. 348. Cf. D. VI. 51, Drusus (3), C: " un poete qui chante les victoires et les triomphes d'un prince, ne renonce a I'hyperbole fabuleuse que lorsqu'il n'en a point de besoin. Ceux qui lisent les poesies modernes conviendront de ceci, et croiront sans peine que les poetes de la cour d'Auguste etaient animes du meme esprit que les poetes du temps present." Cf. infra, p. 93, n. 30. " O. D. IV. 538: "En effet un roete ne niarche jamais qu'a cheval : un Auteur en prose jamais que sur ]e Haquenee des Cordeliers. Or il est bien plus commode de loger un homme seule, qu'un homme avec son cheval, surtout quand on n'a point d'ecurie." On the affection of poets for their verses cf . D. IV. 272, Rusbec, H ; D. IV. 596. Catullc, E; D. IX. 381, Lotichius (2), G; D. XI. 65S, Perse (2), F. Poetry 23 their lack of success in love," for as a matter of fact the esprit of these gentlemen gives them great power over the fair sex.^ Writing poetry is only a jeii d'esprit. This may be recognized whatever subject a poet takes up. How many love verses there are in writing which the bard is inspired, not by deep passion, but by a wish to exercise his poetic invention !® A poet who is only slightly aftected by the charms of a lady will strive and strain in order to give some new turn to his verse and thus flatter her and gain applause from his fellows. And there are some who indulge in such compositions without being in the least in love. A poet may touch upon the most lofty themes of religion and yet not be inspired by any divine faith.® It is likely enough that he chooses the subject merely because it gives him a chance to show ingenuity, command of language, power of literary expression. Another day he is quite as apt to choose a subject of a very different nature provided it fits the require- ment of the moment. So that lofty sentiments, expressed in this way, have no authority. On the other hand, one must not censure a poet too severely for introducing remarks which are against the principles of religion or morals. Here again he is only giving rein to his imagination ; it is not serious." 'O. D. II. 22,2, xii. ' O. D. II. 290-1. This was especially true, says Bayle, at the time of Marot, when writers of ingenious and gallant poetry were rare, but it holds good even in the brilliant seventeenth century. Cf. D. VII. 393, Guise, O; O. D. II. 326. ' D. IX. 378, Lotichius, F. Bayle states here that he does not think a poetic temperament makes a man especially susceptible to love. •D. VII. 28, Garasse, I. Cf. O. D. III. 923, sections III and VI. "D. VII. 27, Garasse, I. Cf. supra, p. 14, n. 15, ref. to D. XIV. 291-2, Vayer, D. On the light, irresponsible character of poetry in general cf. D. II. 39, Anaxagoras, F; D. IV. 583, Catius, C; D. VI. 554. Frangois, K; D. VIII. 4. Renault, D; D. VIII. 444, Jules II. F ; D. V 246, Colonna : " une de ces protestations poetiques, dont il ne faut pas tenir plus de compte que des parjures des amans ;" O. D. I. 715. On the follieg and extravagances found in poetry cf: D. I. 201, Adam, E; D. I. 423, Aleandre, F; D. I. 538, Amphiaraus, C; D. II. 485. Asty- anax, B; D. II. 545, Averroes, P; D. III. 409, Beze, S; D. III. '518, Bodin, N; D. V. 169-170, Chrysippe (2), H; D. VIII. 509, Junon, M; D. X. 149, Majus, C; D. X. 374, Melampus, H; D. XIV. 65, Teleboes, D; O. D. I. L. 87; O. D. III. 18; O. D. III. 343. If a poem is avowedly dogmatic in nature, if it advances a definite 2 4 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle Bayle is impressed by the wholesale fashion in which a poet exercises his power of invention. ^^ The imagination is most important. \'ersifiers are in the habit of following the dictates of fancy, describing things which they never saw and which never existed. Sometimes a poet believes himself inspired ; he has a dream, wakes up with the impression of it still fresh and hastens to record what he considers a marvel. But it is likely enough that the conception his dream presents is one that has been in his mind during the waking hours. There is a particular strain on the imagination when it is used so much, and a poet should retire from the service of Apollo before his inspiration is exhausted and he becomes insipid. ^^ Poetry then is not a very serious occupation. The poet works his imagination hard, exercises his wits, and produces some- thing clever. As in the case of fiction, poetry writing is not important enough, from Bayle's point of view, to make him think it worth while to lay down precepts for the art with any insistence. Indeed, it has been noted^^ that he has countenanced loose moral and religious ideas in poetry. But on this score he philosophical system in verse, the author is as responsible as though he wrote in prose. D. IV. 177, Brunus, D. "D. IX. 382, Lotichius (2), G. " D. V. 426, Daurat, O. " Le service des muses sympathise en bien des choses avec le service des dames ; il vaut mieux s'en retirer trop tot que trop tard." Cf. D. III. 581, Borgarutius, A; a mention of the reluctance of poets to retire; O. D. I. 716. Elsewhere there is a statement about the retirement from activity of authors in general : " chacun devroit . . . se faire des bornes pour la production des livres qui est une maniere de generation a quoi tout age n'est nullement propre." D. I. 239, Afer, B. On the inspiration of poets, cf . O. D. IV. 37 : " Vous n'ignorez pas quels sont les effets de la fureur poetique. Elle donne des pensees et des expressions qui rendent un homme aussi superieur a lui-nieme qu'il est superieur aux hommes vulgaires dans son etat naturel." Bayle adds : " Or vous savez que la prose a sa veine, sa verve, ses enthousiasmes." Cf. also D. XI. 336-7, Pays, H: "Les muses d'un homme ne sont jamais plus eloquentes, ni plus vives, ni plus f econdes en pensees, que dans de • semblables occasions." (When he is indignant at an attack.) The pre- ceding sentence is worth quoting: "II est permis. je m'assurc, de con- jecturcr qu'un poele, qui a si bien reussi a faire I'eloge du tabac. cxprime tres-bien dans Ic meme tome son chagrin contre I'injusticc d'un cruel arret." " Cf . supra, p. 23. Poetry 25 is by no means always lenient — at times, in fact, lie takes a very definite stand on the other sitlc. Baylc points out the particularly bad influence which writers of verse may have on morals from the fact that they are able to give an insidious charm to their remarks by the attractive form in which they present them.^* Modern poetry has been attacked with justice in the matter of immorality.^'' Poets pro- fane Christianity, even though they do it unwittingly, by the absurd extravagances which are supposed to bring honor to the Holy \'irgin and tlic Saints of Paradise,^" and their effrontery in other cases is detestable •}'' il est certain que les Poetes se sont mis en possession de falsifier tout, et que si Ton examinoit a la rigueur les vers de nos Poetes Chretiens sur d'autres matieres que sur des sujets pieux, a peine leur resteroit- il un Sonnet, une Ode ou une Chanson, qui ne fussent pas infectez d'heresie, d'inipiete ou de flateries profanes. '' In view of these various remarks it would seem that Bayle's attitude towards poetry was one either of indift'erence or of disapproval. While it does not occur to him that the poet's power of imagination may be used to serve many noble ends, that it may enable him to tell what others only feel, and give expression to aspirations which others only dimly conceive, he does see the value of this power in one instance. The under- standing of poetry and the ability to write poetry are useful to a man who sets out to compose a history.^® A historian who is "D. VII. 27, Garasse, I. "D. VII. 441, Hadrien VI. D. For short comments against immoralities in poetry, cf. D. II. 436, Arodon, A; D. III. 298, Bembus ; D. III. 396, Beze ; D. VI. 326, Eve; D. XIV. 293, Vayer, E; O. D. III. 81, cxxvi. On the tendency of poets to be obscene, cf. D. X. 321, Marot, M. " O. D. III. 80, cxxv : Furthermore it is not fair to attack the pagan religion of the ancients on the basis of the poetic representations of their gods, for the poets lightly attributed to their divinities every vicious and ridiculous weakness. Cf. D. VI. loi, Egialee, C. Although such poems are deplorable, there may be cases where sacred poetry is at least preferable to profane. D. II. 381, Arius, L; D. XIV. 341, Vegius. Bayle objects to introducing profane characters into sacred poetry. D. III. 321, Benserade, G. "Cf. D. III. 319, Benserade, E; D. VI. 500 Fontarabie, C. " O. D. III. 80, cxxv. "0. D. III. 191-2. 26 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle fortunate enough to possess this poetic feehng and, at the same time, the orator's power of rhetorical expression, may thereby add greatly to the dignity and vividness of his writings, though he must hold himself in check and not be carried away by his poetic vein or by any tendency to declaim.^^ si la vigilance de rEcrivain lui fait prevenir la contagion de la Poetique et' de la Rhetorique, il peut esperer un grand avantage de la connoissance de ces deux arts, puisque d'un cote il se garantit de tout ce qui ne conviendroit pas assez a la gravite de I'histoire, et que de I'autre il communique a ses narrations les nerfs, la vivacite, la noblesse et la majeste qu'elles demandent et sans quoi elles seroient tres- defectueuses.'^ It is striking for Bayle to concede that the spirit of poetry lends dignity to a history,^- in view of the way he has branded poetry as frivolous. Note that the case in which he does grant any merit to this kind of literature is where it has a certain relation to matters of fact. Bayle does not devote much attention to details of style and technique in poetry.^^ He does not set himself up as a judge of the merit of poems and often he is content to rely on the opinions of others.-* What criticisms do occur are miscel- laneous in character. There are one or two references to points of versification,-'' occasional comments on the use of a figure or fable,^* on the force or clearness of a particular expression.-^ Bayle recognizes that the melody of a poem, the eflfect on the ^ Young and immature writers, Bayle adds, are especially apt to lack this necessary self-control. ^ O. D. III. 192, ii. ''Ci. O. D. III. 191, ii. " Bayle urges his younger brother when he translates Latin poetry to study each expression carefully, to grasp the exact significance of every phrase, to understand all references to mythologj'. to appreciate the figures used. But the object here is scholarship, not a sympathetic under- standing of good poetry. O. D. I. L. 32. "D. III. 443, Bion; D. VII. 119-20, Gombauld, E; O. D. I. 44^. ii ; O. D. I. L. 85, Ivi. "D. VII. 166, Goudimel. F; D. VIII. 380, Jodelle ; O. D. I. L. 39- "D. I. 152, Achille (2), A; D. I. 231, Adonis, K; D. I. 546, Amphiaraus, K; D. VII. 14, Gambara. " O. D. IV. 642-3. Cf. D. II. 560, Augustin, I : Bayle says that poets and orators do not use words with the same care for their exact meaning that philosophers display. Poetry 2 7 ear, is imjiortant.-*' He protests against the custom of over- loading poetry with minute references to fable and anticiuity in the desire to make a show of erudition.^" Anachronisms in poetry may generally be excused,^" but there is a limit to this indulgence and poets must not take liberties with ciironology which result in absurd falsehood. ^^ It is taken for granted that poetry will abound in allusions to the supernatural and to the marvellous. Poets sont si entetez de scmer dans leurs Ouvragcs plusicurs descriptions pompcuses, comme sont celles dcs prodiges, et de donner du niervcilleux aux avantures de leur Heros : que pour arriver a leurs fins ils suposent mille choscs elonnantes.^ A man w-ho starts to write poetry has all nature at his com- mand ; tempests, eclipses, comets, monsters, demons and angels, may be introduced to meet the needs of the occasion. Bayle accepts the pastoral manner as it is ; he sees the artificial side of it, but seems to think one may as well yield to the conven- tion. •'■'' It does not enter his head that the pastoral is ever a graceful ideal, and he fails to understand why such a conceit should have been handed dow-n from Theocritus through Virgil to modern times. There is very little vraisernhlan^e in the pas- toral verses that modern poets produce — but vraisemhlancc would not do here. In ancient times shepherds were a superior class and might indeed be taken as models for gallantry ; at present, however, such swains and their loves as they are found in real life are crude rustics w-hom it would not do to depict in poetry. ''D. XIV. 437, Virgile. L; cf. O. D. I. 164, ii. -"D. X. 371, Melampus, B ; O. D. IV. 546-7. *»D. IV. 582-3, Catius. C. "D. IV. 597, Catulle. I. ""O. D. III. 10, iv. Cf. D. XII. I, Phaon. ^O. D. I. 634. In the letter which Bayle presents as written by a M. Crisante (O. D. II- 303-8: cf. supra, p. 18, n. 15), poets as well as romancers and dramatists are accused of depicting women as unnaturally cold and prudish. Cf. the following precept as to the hero and heroine of a poem : " Ulysse etait le heros du poeme ; il fallait done necessairement que son epouse y pariit comme une heroine ou pour le moins en honnete femme. Ce serait pecher contre les regies les plus essentielles. que de ne point supprimer toutes les actions honteuses de la femme de son heros." D. XI. 542, Penelope, K. IV DRAMA The stage productions of Bayle's own time interest him,^ and he makes some comment on dramatic writing in general. He refers in one case to Les Fcmmes Savantcs and to Psyche, a tragedy-ballet, and states that he could hardly say which piece pleases him most.^ He is interested in the opera, and individual works are occasionally praised.^ He does not speak highly of dramatic poets and actors, suggesting even that they are insignificant,* and mentioning them as flatterers.^ The standards for dramatic production, the rules according to which plays should be written, are determined by the fact that the theatre has a single and a well defined object : to please. A playwright composes a piece to amuse the people, and if he succeeds in giving them any moral instruction it is accomplished through pleasing them." If there is any case where it is true that the majority should rule, says Bayle, it is here. A dramatist must try to suit everybody, but, since this is naturally difficult, he will do well to adapt himself to the demands of the crowd ^For mention of various productions cf. D. I. 371, Albutius (2), G; D. VIII. 130, Hierophile, A; D. VIII. 314. Hutterus, C; O. D. I. L. 76, xlviii, 78, xlix ; O. D. IV. 554 ; O. D. IV. 834, ccxcv. 'O. D. I. L. 22. "O. D. I. L. 49, 116. The music and the machines please him especially : O. D. I. L. 67. Without these the opera is " pitoyable : " O. D. I. L. 65-66, 75, 78, xlix. Bayle's comment on music is worth noting. He writes to his younger brother: " je suis bien-aise que vous aiez du gout pour la musique. c'est un talent qui est d'usage dans le monde." O. D. I. L. 75. Cf. O. D. I. 114, vii: On the difficulty of understanding the words sung in opera. Cf. O. D. I. 651, i: a ref. to opera as "la maladie a la mode." *0. D. I. 504, i; O. D. IV. 585, xli. Parts of this letter are identical with a letter to Basnage published by Gigas, 74-85. under tlic date, 17 November, 1674. "D. II. 266, Archelaus (3), H. 'O. D. III. 200-203, X. Drama 29 and not be troubletl by the censure of the cultured few who insist on adherence to set rules. On doit considercr la Comedie comme un repas donne au pcuple, rimportance est done que Ics viandes paroissent bonnes aux conviez, et non pas qu'elles aient ete apretees selon les regies de I'art de Cuisine.' Among those dramatists who preferred the judgment of the people to that of the critics Bayle names Terence, Pomponius Secundus, Lope de \'ega, Aloliere and Corneille. The moral instruction which a drama gives may be consider- able. Bayle doubts if a playwright can make any headway against the capital vices, such as illicit love, envy, avarice, and downright rascality ; but he holds that the theatre may attack, with great effectiveness, petty weaknesses. ** Moliere has suc- ceeded in overwhelming with ridicule fops and prudes, devotees of prcciositc, would-be marquises, and importunate versifiers." Bayle refers to a comedy^" where the trickery of a procurcnr is ridiculed, and admits the moral good sometimes gained by such subtle raillery.^^ Tragedy as well as comedy may point a moral. ^^ Yet in the case of both these kinds of drama the opposite effect must be guarded against. Aloliere has laid himself open, in some of his pieces, to the charge of encouraging coquetry.^^ Euripides is blamed for setting a bad example before his audi- ence in the case of Phccdra}^ Bayle objects to the profanities which were introduced in early French dramatic productions. To point out the standards in the sixteenth century he cites selec- tions from the Mystcrc dcs Actes des Apotres}'^ He states that the quotations he gives suffiront a nous apprendre que pendant que Ton defendait au peuple de voir les histoires saintes dans le Hvre qui les contient purement et ' O. D. III. 202, X. 'O. D. I. 40, vii. * On the power of comedians and of Moliere in particular of. Gigas, 71-72. ^'' Arlequin Procureur. O. D. I. 40, vii. " Cf. Gigas, 69. Here Bayle is speaking of such satirists as Moliere and Boileau. " Cf. D. XII, 476. Rataller, A. "O. D. I. 40, vii. "D. VI. 366, Euripide, Y. " D. V. 149, Chocquet, A. Bayle makes a mistake in attributing the Mystere des Actcs des Apotres to Louis Chocquet. Cf. O. D. IV. 829, 30 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle fidelement on lui permettait de les voir sur le theatre souillees de mille inventions grossieres, dont on exprimait la plupart d'une fagon basse et en style de farceur.^' In regard to the responsibility of a dramatist for the morals of his play, Bayle grants that it is absurd to hold an author answerable for all the opinions which he makes his characters profess." Yet a dramatist may go to such extremes that he lays himself open to censure. II est bien certain que I'auteur d'une tragedie ne doit point passer pour croire tous les sentimens qu'il etale, mais il y a des affections qui decouvrent ce qu'on pent mettre sur son compte; et quoi qu'il en soit, on pent justement interdire le theatre a certaines pieces, soit que I'auteur y debite, soit qu'il n'y debite pas ses sentimens." Vrai^emblance is often upset in the drama, and the concep- tions of life seen in certain comedies, romans, and scmblahles petits Livres, are sometimes the result of pure invention.^* But, if discernment is exercised, it will be noted that many of the portrayals of dramatists are based on actual conditions. Bayle points out Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme as an example.^" Moliere would never have conceived such a piece if he had not been quite familiar with the type of new-rich individual who feels that his wealth gives him rank, and who affects the manners of a noble gentleman. The exaggerations in the piece are patent ; if such a man existed in real life, he would be assigned a guardian — but the railleries are based on fact. The likeness to real conditions is especially evident in the case of comedies which attack the absurdities of married life.-^ There is, moreover, an excuse for the exaggerations of dramatists; a comedian who wishes to cure some absurdity of manners or note by Desmaiseaux, and Michaund, Biographic UnizrrsclU-, article Louis Chocquet. " D. V. 149, Chocquet, A. On the immoralities in the drama cf . D. VI. 491, Flora, C, sub-note 12; D. VII. 27, Garasse, I; D. IX. 305-6, Loyer, E; D. IX. 566. Luther, S. "D. VI. 350, Euripide; O. D. II. 712. "D. VI. 265, Eschyle, F. Cf. D. VI. 236, Erasme, Q. Bayle is object- ing to profane and impious sentiments expressed on the stage. '"O. D. II. 322-3. "O. D. II. 322. " O. D. II. 323. Drama 31 morals must draw things out of their normal proportions in order to emphasize the weakness attacked and drive his idea home.-* It is noteworthy that the slight criticism which Bayle offers in regard to particular plays is concerned with matters of fact, with the question of adherence to probable or actual happenings. He commends Racine for following the traditional facts in his Berenice.'-^ The dismissal of Berenice is in accordance with the historical facts, and our author thinks that Racine represents the love of Titus as less strong than that of Berenice in order that it may be natural for him to dismiss her. Bayle criticises, in tiie Agamemnon of Seneca, Ajax' long continued and extravagant resistance of the gods, an exaggeration which would not be tolerated in the modern theatre.-* There is lack of z-rai- scmhlancc in the abominable passion of Chimene. who becomes affianced to the murderer of her father on the day of the crime. ^' A pagan poet could have treated the subject better, for he might represent Chimene as maddened by Venus. But Comeille is wrong in writing in such a way, and he has been censured with justice by M. de Scudery. The Amphitryon of Plautus meets with criticism on several points.-^ Bayle objects to treating the war against the Tele- boans as though it were waged by Amphitryon in behalf of the Theban king, Creon, instead of being carried on in his own "O. D. I. 570; cf. O. D. III. 973- For references to lack of vraisemhlance in the drama cf. D. VII. 535, Helene. K; D. XII. 114. Pyrrhus, E; O. D. I. 7i. In the letter from M. Crisante (O. D. II. 308; cf. supra, p. 18, n. 15) Bayle speaks vigorously against the lack of vraisemhlance in comedy. Among other things he objects to " laquais qui fissent un message en vers,'' to Kings and Queens who '' accusent la Fortune par des sentences bien rimees et bien cadencees." He censures the Misanthrope because the hero shows a weakness and a stubborness in his love affair which are beyond all reason. The sincerity of the opinions expressed in this letter is doubtful. It is unsafe to credit Bayle with a view which he assigns to his opponent. As a matter of fact the opinions on things literary do not vary essentially from those we know as Bayle's own. "D. III. 351, Berenice (5). D. »*D. I. 313. Ajax, B. "O. D. III. 201. " D. XIV. 65-7, Teleboes, D, E. F. 3 2 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle interests. This diminishes the importance of Amphitryon in the drama. Plautus should have taken advantage of tradition, which asserts that Amphitr}'on was the instigator and director of the war ; he should have used the situation to the credit of his hero.^^ The geography of the play is absurd, for the The- bans are made to embark at the Eubean port when they start out for the Echinades Islands.-"* Plautus shocks vraiscmblance and decency too when he represents Jupiter as embracing Alcmena the night before she gives birth to twins. The dra- matist should have followed tradition and dwelt on a visit which Jupiter paid her some months before and should have made capital out of that ; he should not have supposed a second visit on la veille de l' accouchement.^^ That Plautus represents Alcmena as being delivered without pain is excusable, for here he does not upset tradition in any essential, and the incident helps in the denouement of the drama. It is wrong to accuse Plautus of an anachronism when he represents Amphitryon as "As a matter of fact there are only casual references to Creon in the play ; and the king in no way makes Amphitryon less important. ^ D. XIV. 67, Teleboes, F. " Quel circuit, bon Dieu ! ne faut-il point faire pour aller la, si Ton s'embarque a I'ile d'Eubee." -" Bayle asserts here, D. XIV. 67. Teleboes, F, that Plautus observes unity of time — which is true. But elsewhere. D. I. 408, Alcmene, D, his words imply that Plautus did not observe unity of time. " Dans la comedie de Plaute . Amphitryon y laisse sa femme grosse en s'en allant a la guerre. Grand ragoiit pour Jupiter ! Ce serait bien pis, si Plaute avait observe I'unite de temps comme le veut Mademoiselle le Fevre. II faudrait dire en ce cas-la, qu'en arretant le soleil Jupiter interrompit tout le cours de la nature, afin de se divertir plus long-temps avec une femme grosse de deux enfans, et si proche de son terme, que pour peu qu'il eiit diflfere sa retraite, la sage femme aurait ete obligee de lui dire, ' cedez-moi la place.' C'est une facheuse alternative pour Plaute : il faut, ou que sa piece dure plusieurs mois, ou qu'il fasse d'une femme toute prete d'accoucher de deux jumeaux, un des plus friands morceaux du monde pour le plus grand de tous les monarques ; et cela en supposant que ce maitre des Dieux et des hommes a deja produit I'un' de ces jumeaux." Either Bayle's manner of expression or his ideas on the subject are confused. Especially since he goes to say: " Prenez bien garde que ce poete ne feint pas que Jupiter se deguisa en Amphitryon, pour venir en bon mari au secours d'Alcmenc pendant le travail d'enfant: c'etait la visite d'un homme bien amoureux." Drama 33 killing Ptcrclaus. for he had historical authority in making the two men contemporaries. And in any case a poet does not have to adhere strictly to facts.'" *" Note that in another detail in the same piece Bayle is less lenient. He objects to speaking of the Eubcan port as the Persian port, " par une anticipation trop liccncieuse." D. XIV. 67, Teleboes, E. Bayle censures the " mauvais poetes qui, dans une piece de theatre, se servaient d'un dieu de machine pour denouer un tres-petit embarras." D. XI. 296, Ovide, G; cf. D. II. 44, Anaxagoras, G. ORATORY Our author is not over-familiar with the eloquence of the Greeks and Romans, nor is he well acquainted with the pulpit eloquence which represents the most important oratory of his own time. The masterpieces which the Roman Catholic Church produced in France in the seventeenth century are little known to the refugee at Rotterdam. He is better acquainted with Protestant sermons, but confesses he does not like them. His inability to appreciate the rhetoric of the Protestant ministers provokes the remark, in a letter which gives evidence of bitter- ness and discouragement : II faut que je n'aye pas le gout de I'eloquence de la Chaire, et il est bien plus juste de penser cela, que de revoquer en doute la capacite de ces Messieurs.^ Doubtless Bayle's failure to value the efforts of the Protestants of his day is excusable. In any case he shows little enthusiasm about any kind of eloquence. Once or twice he refers to a subject as a good one for an orator, as offering opportunity for a display of rhetoric.^ But such interest is only momentary'. He admits that oratory can be made use of with considerable effect ; public speakers have power to do much good or much harm — particularly the latter.^ There are a few comments on general features of eloquence, and some remarks on details of the art. Oratory appeals to 'O. D. I. L. 43- »D. I. 206, Adam, L; O. D. I. 188, viii ; O. D. I. 741, iii ; O. D. I. L. 44-S- 'D. IV. 11-12, Bossu; D. V. 285, Conon (2), D; D. XL 408, Parthenai, A; D. XI. 621, Pericles. It should be noted that in two of these references, the first and third, Bayle is attacking a Catholic. Of the peculiarities of orators as a class Bayle has almost nothing to say. He refers to their jealousies: D. II. 69, Ancillon, B; D. II. 504, Atticus, B; cf. D. VIII. 220, Hortensius, II. Oratory 3 5 the passions, not to tlie understanding. Of the methods of men who seek to sway an audience, Bayle says : Ces Messieurs-la ne sc soucient gueres d'eclairer I'esprit ; ils se con- tentent de persuader par rcntreniise des passions ; ils vont droit au coeur et non pas droit a I'entendement ; ils tachent d'exciter Tamour, la haine, la colere ; . . .* He suggests that a man who is hot-blooded is apt to succeed in declamation.^ Certain conceptions that are not capable of any proof may be used most effectively by a speaker. The idea, for instance, that the appearance of a comet has some mystic import may be so developed by an orator as to impress his audience profoundly and win him much more credit than any mere logical discourse." An orator wants above all to affect his hearers ; to this he devotes more attention than to truth. ^ In the heat of declama- tion these spell-binders do not hesitate to exaggerate, they emphasize such details of a question as suit their purpose, and they suppress whatever may harm their particular cause.* Law^- yers are especially inclined to say in their speeches whatever meets the need of the moment, and resulting contradictions are frequent.-' Oratory, then, is generally characterized by a faux eclat, ^'^ both in the style of reasoning employed and the amount of considera- tion paid to fact. Bayle objects to this. A sermon which has false brilliancy may be most effective in the pulpit, *0. D. III. 178; cf. D. VI. 63. Duaren, B; cf. D. XII. 155, Pitiscus, A : " L'eloquence armee de pompe, et de figures, est necessaire aux predicateurs: un raisonnement sec et precis a la mathematicienne ne leur convient pas, et ne ferait point sur les auditeurs les impressions que I'etat de rhomme demande." "D. I. 208, Adam (3). •O. D. III. 10. iii. ' D. IV. 192, Brutus (2), K: ". . . un orateur se soucie peu que de tels faits soient certains : il se contente qu'une partie du peuple les croie." Cf. D. IV. 492, Cassius, B; D. IX. 431, Louis XII, D; D. X. 356. Mausole, C. 'O. D. III. 178; cf. D. IV. 408, Capisucchi (2), B ; D. V. 194. Cimon, D; D. V. 285, Conon (2). E; D. VI. 548, Frangois. E; D. IX. 333, Loyola, X ; D. X. 393, Melanchton, O ; O. D. I. L. 118; O. D. II. 109. "D. IT. 135-7, Antoine (2), B, C. '" O. D. I. 645, vi. 36 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle but on paper, without the fire and enthusiasm which the preacher has put into it, a reader is apt to find it insipid." The utterances of a preacher should be based on truth ; they should not consist of exaggerations which, however they may glitter, are unreliable and misleading.^^ Bayle protests against subtleties and paradoxes in a sermon. ^^ He criticises severely an extreme compliment paid Louis XIV in a sermon by the Abbe Denise, Chanoine dc Troycs; it may have been brilliant and effective, but it was only an amas dc fausscs pcnsccs}* It is true that sometimes Bayle seems to accept the fact that orators pay slight attention to logic, and that mathematical rea- soning is not necessary in an oration. But he regrets this state of affairs.^" In several cases where he does find solid reasoning in a speech he indicates his approval.^^ Since eloquence makes its appeal to the heart rather than to the brain, an orator has little need of profound scholarship. As a matter of fact a man gifted as an orator is not apt to have the talent for great learning — but his weakness in this particular does not matter. Of preachers Bayle says : le but des Predicateurs etant de toucher leur Auditoire. et de le tenir attentif, ils ont plus de besoin d'eloquence, d'imagination," de pensees probables et populaires, d'ornemens et de moralitez, que de raisonnements profonds et solides ... ils employent tout leur temps a chercher les finesses de I'eloquence et . . . ils renoncent a la profonde erudi- "O. D. I. L. 86. Cf. D. IV. 524, Cassius (7), O, on the difference " entre le succes d'une harangue recitee et le succes d'une harangue publiee." '-0. D. II. 299. ^' O. D. I. L. 86. Cf. O. D. I. L. 56. Note that Morus, though Bayle names him as the man who introduced such subtleties into sermons, is given credit for a certain adroitness. "O. D. II. 298-9, iv. " Cf. O. D. II. 299: "les personnes dc bon gout souhaiteroient pas- sionement que les Predicateurs se pussent guerir une bonne fois de la maladie de mal raisonner." Cf. D. VI. 2<77' Experiens, A : " Les logiciens se servent trop de I'art du distinguo : les orateurs ne s'en servent pas assez." "D. VII. 124, Gontaut, C ; D. X. 408, Mcstrczat. F; O. D. I. 500. iv. " Cf. D. I. 239, Afer, B : Bayle says that, since orators draw so heavily on their imagination, they should retire before their fire is exhausted. They are inclined, however, to persist in their activity to the end. Cf. supra, p. 24 (of the imagination of poets). Oratory 3 7 tion qui generalement parlant ne leur serviroit pas de bcaucoup en Chaire." Learning ordinarily makes a sermon dr}' and diminishes its grace and effectiveness.^" On the other hand a preacher must have a grasp of the essentials in things erudite and theological ; otherwise he is at a considerable disadvantage and cannot hope to influence his audience.-'' Evidently Bayle believes in a happy medium ; a preacher need not be a savant, but he must have a fairly well furnished mind.-^ There are a number of miscellaneous criticisms concerning various details of oratory. Some languages are richer than others in the terms and expressions which an orator may use to good effect.-- Eloquence is especially developed in a country where there exist portentous political questions.-^ A man who has a good memory and who can imitate the manners of some great speaker may readily make himself an orator.-* This ques- tion of manners, of delivery, is important.-^ The personal ap- "O. D. II. 297, XX ; cf. D. XII. 288-9, Porcius. U. Here Bayle says: " les talens de I'eloquence sont pour I'ordinaire separes de la vaste erudi- tion." He refers to lawyers, orators and preachers ; cf . O. D. II. 20. Cf. D. VII. 22, Garasse : Bayle tells how Garasse had the brilliancy and power of imagination which made him a good orator, but was unfitted for writing, especially on subjects which demand dignity, careful reason- ing and careful scholarship. ^* O. D. II. 297, XX : '■ Un homme qui a beaucoup d'esprit et de juge- ment se pent servir aVec avantage de la science : par rapport aux Predica- tions, mais pour I'ordinaire la profonde science nuit plus a un Predicateur, qu'elle ne lui sert." "" O. D. II. 299. Bayle remarks on the injustice of the common people, who are prone to judge a sermon poor if it is entirely clear, if the preacher does not put in a few remarks which are too deep for them. ^ Cf. D. IV. 31-2, Bouchin, B: Bayle objects to the attempt on the part of preachers and lawyers to display learning in their speeches. He protests against the former practice of filling a sermon or a plea with allusions to literature, to the ancients, etc. He adds that modern lawyers have gone to the opposite extreme ; their erudition is too slight. "O. D. I. 163-4. =^0. D. I. 113. " D. X. 596, Musso, B. ** D. X. 596, Musso, C : '' Que la bonne mine est un favorable pre- curseur pour celui qui parle en public! elle dispose I'assemblee a bien ecouter, elle ebranle les suffrages avant qu'il ouvre la bouche." Cf. D. 38 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle pearance of an orator, and his voice, may make or mar him. It is desirable that he give the impression of speaking readily and freely, without long preparation, and without recourse to the little tricks of the profession.-*^ In other words, let him seem easy and frank. A skillful orator will know how to attack an opponent at a weak point, and will make use of every chance to exercise his power of satire.^' In the pulpit a serious and dignified tone is to be insisted upon.^* Bayle speaks of the dignified utterances which the Huguenots demand in the pulpit, and adds : Ceux de la religion ne font nul cas de ces ornemens mondains, et de cette rhetorique effeminee dont les predicateurs de I'autre parti se parent.^ A preacher should stick to his text. It is possible to please a congregation by shifting from one subject to another and intro- ducing clever ideas which the variety of topics suggests. There are many who like such a sermon — but it is poor taste. ^*^' Bayle praises the text of a funeral oration of I'Abbc de la Chamhre for its simplicity and epigrammatic force. ^^ He does not have much to say about funeral orations in general, but refers to the fact that the fair words of commendation on such occa- sions are apt to be unreliable, •'*- and makes the following comment on the practice of giving a full account of the last illness of the deceased: dans les oraisons funebres des professeurs, on volt ordinairement une description fort exacte de tous les symptomes de leur derniere maladie ; si un tel jour ils suerent, s'ils furent constipes ou presses d'un diarrhee. etc.»» IV. 4, Bosc (3); D. VIII. 43, Henry III. P; D. VIII. 222. Hortensius (2), K; D. X. 562, Morus, I; D. XI. 592-3, Pericles. D. ="0. II. 137, Antoine (2), D. ^D. VI. 616, Fulvie (2), F; cf. ibid, 623. L. "* D. III. 121, Barlette ; O. D. II. 23, 29. Note that in each of these three passages there is a suggestion of an argument dc circonstance. =*D. V. 229, Claude (2), G. ""O. D. III. 517. '' O. D. I. 188, viii. "'D. III. 413, Beze, v; D. IX. 405, Louis XI. F. •*D. XI. 439, Pasor, C. Cf. D. I. 175. Acidalius. C: "II n'y a peut- etrc rien sur quoi la fabuleuse renommee debite plus de mensongcs que sur les maladies et sur la mort des hommes illustres : c'est pourquoi les predicateurs. ct en general tons les moralistcs, devraient otrc extrenienicnt reserves a faire des reflexions la-dessus." VI HISTORY History, with Rayle, is quite a different thing from poetry and fiction and other light hterature. When he talks about history his tone is grave. He discusses earnestly the needs of the genre and advocates high ideals. Certain comments throw light on his general conception of history. A bare narration of external facts is by no means sat- isfactory. It is important to get at the causes which underlie various historical events, to comprehend the motives which impel the various actors. A history which takes these factors into account is not only more pleasing, more interesting, but also more instructive : il est mille fois plus avantageux en lisant I'Histoire d'acquerir ce dis- cernement sans se charger que d'un petit nombre de faits, que de se remplir d'un nombre innombralile d'evenemens et de noms, sans bien penetrer la cause de chaque chose.^ Care, indeed, is necessary in analysing the thoughts of historical characters. If a historian occupies himself with such questions, he must limit his assertions to what can be shown to be probable, and he must specify clearly that he is only presenting his ow^n inferences.- Furthermore he must not impute to his character his own thoughts and passions.^ And he must be sure that he 'O. D. I. 148. viii. Cf. D. XIV. 104-5. Theopompe. Cf. O. D. I. 32; cf. the reference to this article of the Noiivelles in Gigas, 691. J. Le Clerc, note i ; cf. O. D. I. L. 33. Cf. O. D. I. 28: Bayle commends Maimbourg's account of the causes of the Ligue and says: "En lisant ces choses le Lecteur devine presque par avance ce qu'il va lire, et c'est la le grand secret d'un Historien ; il faut qu'il prepare I'esprit aux evenemens, mais il ne lui est pas permis pour cela de preter a ceux dont il parle, toutes les passions et toutes les reflexions qu'il imagine dans son cabinet. On ne sgauroit assez blamer la license que les Italiens se sont donnee a cet egard." ' D. X. 603, Musurus. D. Bayle criticises Varillas on this point. 'Cf. supra, n. i, ref. to O. D. I. 28. Cf. also O. D. II. 527: " Quel- quefois un Roman semble plus vraisemblable que I'Histoire la plus sin- 40 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle has the facts straight ; otherwise he may work cut a clever analysis on a false basis.* But attention to underlying causes, provided these precautions are taken, is valuable. Here, then, is part of Bayle's definition of history : a record of human events, but not a mere chronicle, for it must deal not only with results but with causes. Another remark explains still further Bayle's conception. A historian does well, he says, not to attempt to write about a period which has already been treated by many authors.' If he has discovered a few new facts he had better publish them separately, rather than incorporate them in a general work which would repeat a thousand details already known. New histories on time-worn subjects displease the public. He who undertakes such a work copies others and is open to the accusa- tion of plagiarism ; he gets little glory for making a good copy and he exposes himself to sharp criticism when his work is compared with the previous writings. There may, indeed, be particular instances where a writer is justified in reworking a much treated subject. If he has new material with an important cere, et rien quelquefois ne nous semble plus naif, et plus assure, que les motifs qu'un Historien fait avoir aux Princes, lesquels motifs ne sont qu'une fiction de I'Historien tres-eloignee de la verite, laquelle, s'il I'avoit raporte fidelement, les Lecteurs eussent trouvee quelquefois plate, absurde, contraire a toute vraisemblance et raison." * D. VI. 309, Etampes (2), K. Bayle criticises Varillas on this point. Cf. D. XV. 176, Dissert, sur les Libelles Diff., A. Bayle is speaking of a certain class of historians who take particular pleasure in prying out new bits of information. " lis aiment a dire ce qui ne se trouve point dans les histoires ordinaires : ils aspirent a la louange d'avoir deterre des anecdotes, et les qualites occultes des premiers ministres, avec le secret des intrigues, et des negociations que personne n'avait su. Qu'une chose ait ete abandonnee a I'oubli de tout le monde, c'est assez pour eux afin de la publier. Ils vont plus avant ; ils batissent la-dessus tout un systeme : cela leur sert de clef pour ouvrir le cabinet des souverains ; ils donnent raison par-la de plusieurs mysteres, si on les en croit." The zeal of such writers in getting hold of these details is praiseworthy enough, but their readiness to accept the information as reliable is to be deplored. Bayle refers to Varillas as a historian of this kind. " O. D. III. 1023, iv. Note that in this case Bayle refers to the reign of Henri IV, and seems quite satisfied with the works on that period already written. He names, as historians of the period, Julien Peleus, Pierre Mathieu, Baptiste le Grain. Scipion Du-pleix, Mezerai, etc. Cf. D. VII. 465-6. Hainan, E. History 4 1 bearing upon the events of a period, it is quite right fur him to embody his discoveries in a fresh history of the whole period. And a writer does real service to the public when he gathers in a general account of an epoch historical facts, already known, but scattered in various books, or when he writes of an age which is described only in archaic works, for whose style the public has no liking. In general, however, Bayle would say that there is no justification for composing a history of events which have already been carefully described. He evidently looks on history as a collection of facts, not merely the externals which first strike the attention, but nevertheless facts, of the kind that can be put on record, once and for all time. It does not seem to occur to him that a new historian, big in brains and imagination, might do much to illuminate the history' of a period of which the " facts " are already known in great detail. There is little in Bayle's comments to indicate that he had any definite notion of what the lessons of history might be, of the use man might make of the records of the past.'^ He is particularly impressed with the fact that, on account of the general corruption of man, a history which contains a faithful narration of events is bound to take on the appearance of a satire against the human race," and he grants that a waiter may safely venture a few personal comments on this general cor- ruption which he presents.^ Yet the historian must be sparing with such remarks. II suffit done de bien exposer les faits : les sentences en ce genre-la doivent etre menagees tout comme celles qu'on nomme maximes : elles ne doivent pas se montrer hors d'ceuvres ou en relief, 11 faut les incorporer dans la narration, comme on I'a dit ci-dessus." Bayle objects especially to authors who introduce puerile moral reflections in connection with events.^*' In one case "Cf. supra, p. 39, n. i. ref. to O. D. I. 32, O. D. I. 148. ' D. IV. 181, Bruschius, D ; cf . D. X. 196-7, Manicheens, D : " L'Histoire n'est a proprement parler qu'un recueil des crimes et des infortunes du genre humain." Histor}^ contains some examples of virtue, however, Bayle admits here; cf. D. XI. 270, Orose, G; D. XI. 324, Padilla. E. 'D. IV. 181, Bruschius, D. •D. XIV. 175-6, Timee, L; cf. D. XIV. 104, Theon, C. " O. D. III. II, vi : " ils (historians) poussent quelquefois si loin la moralite qu'un Lecteur mal satisfait de les voir interrompre le fil de I'Histoire, leur diroit volontiers, s'il les tenoit, ' riservate questo per la 42 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle Bayle sees that History may present a certain useful example : an account of the horrors of the religious wars in France in the sixteenth century may be valuable in warning posterity to refrain from such atrocities.^ ^ But elsewhere he suggests that the example drawn from history depends much on the prejudice of the reader. In regard to the records of the Greeks and Romans which show their love for liberty and their hatred of monarchs, Bayle says the influ- ence of these books works in two directions : devotees of democracy will find splendid examples of the virtue of a love for liberty ; those who believe in monarchical government will point out the conspiracies and political upsets which attended the efforts of the ancients, and will see therein a proof of the justice of their opinion.^- In a word, then, Bayle does not emphasize the significance of the instruction which history may be able to give. His interest seems, to some extent, the interest of a savant who gathers facts for the love of having them. It is granted that history writing is difficult, more difficult perhaps than any other task which an author might under- take.^^ The best historians are perplexed by the difficulties they predica.' " Cf. O. D. III. 192, ii : " lis (some historians) feroient bien d'en oter (from their books) tant de reflexions devotes que Ton y a repandues, et qui auroient dii etre reservees pour des sermons, ou pour des Livres de piete." Cf. O. D. II. 84: Bayle refers to a comment of Maimbourg on the downfall of the Prince de Conde as a sign of God's wrath against those who oppose the Roman Church. His attitude is distinctly partisan here, and he refers not only to froidcs moralitcz but to z'ains orncmcns de pensees fausses. " D. X. 35-7, Macon. C. Although Bayle grants here that " ceux qui semblcnt trouver mauvais que Ton fasse des histoires. parce, disent-ils, qu'elles n'apprenent aux lecteurs que toutes sortes de crimes, ont a certains egards beaucoup de raison par rapport a I'histoire des guerres sacrees." Cf. also D. XIII. 273, Sforce (3), E: In speaking of a his- torian who left out a detail which brought discredit to Catherine Sforza, Bayle says: " Et si tous les historiens imitaient celui dont je vous parle," n'6terait-on pas aux hommes la crainte de la posterite, frein tres-puissant pour les contenir dans Icur devoir, et I'un des principaux fruits de I'histoire?" "D. VIII. 161, Hobbes, C. "■D. XII. 504, Rcmond, D. History 43 encounter, and make mistakes.'* It is no wonder that people insist on the uncertainty of liistory, on tlie unreliability of what are supposed to be historical facts. Yet Bayle is inclined to object to the extremes to which some go in proclaiming this. He is willing to accept the testimony of serious, careful his- torians, although he objects to doubtful evidence: selon les lois publiques, en fait de lecture d'histoire, on regoit pour bon ce qui se prouve par le temoignage des auteurs graves, et Ton rejette comme une fable tout ce qu'un moderne debite concernant I'antiquite, sans I'avoir lu dans de bons historiens." Of a writer who carried Ic pyrrhonismc historiquc to excess it is suggested that he deserves to be classed with that doubter who was sure that all Caesar had to say in his Commentaries about the Gallic Wars is false and that Caesar never reached the other side of the Alps.'^ Bayle thinks the uncertainty of history may be overcome to an appreciable extent.'" Here and there in his writings he takes up questions of impartiality, accuracy, and style, in historical composition, he indicates some of the difficulties in detail, and urges that they be met and conquered. Partiality is common in the writings of historians. Events are described from the personal point of view of the author, and he allows his individual prejudices to sway him. Bayle dwells especially on the one-sidedness of those who write of the Reformation and of Protestantism, but he does not claim that the Catholics alone are at fault in this case; he admits that both sides err. It is an easy matter so to shift the details of history as to produce the effect which the spite or passion of the writer makes him desire. A slight change in word order, the neglect or the addition of some petty incident, can make or destroy the '* D X. 518. iMopsus, E; D. XI. 90, Navarre (3). H: les mcilleurcs liis- toircs )WHS tro)nt>ent — note that Bayle refers in this case to Brantome and Mezerai. "D. VII. 324, Guevara, D. "Cf. D. XV. 241. Dissert, cont. le Projct, IX. Bayle states that many historical problems can be solved with full certainty. He is here point- ing out the difference between historical and mathematical-metaphysical truth. Note the following: " ce serait . . . passer d'un genre de choses a un autre, que de demander que Ton prouvat non-seulement qu'il a paru a toute I'Europe qu'il se donna une sanglante bataille a Senef, 44 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle reputation of a historical personage.^" Bayle states that he reads the accounts of the Catholics and Protestants, not in the hope of getting at the actual facts, but merely from a desire to find out what each side has to say and to discover what particular prejudices prompt each writer.^® He also comments many times on the partiality of historians who deal with political subjects, where there is no suggestion of religious differences. Flattery and vituperation abound. A history is frequently written for the sole purpose of venting personal malice. The author of such a work does not wait until his anger has cooled, so as to write a fair account ; he composes while his passions are still aroused, persuaded, perhaps, that his anger will give him the talent for writing which he ordinarily lacks. ^'^ It is indeed hard, to avoid being partial in writing a history. Je ne pretends pas qu'il soit facile de composer une histoire qui repre- sente avec une egale sincerite les fautes et la prudence, le tort et le I'an 1674; mais aussi que les objets sont tels hors de notre esprit, qu'ils nous paraissent." " O. D. II. 10. Apropos of Maimbourg's Histoire du Cakinisme. Cf. O. D. I. 516. "O. D. II. 10-12. Bayle grants the possibility of some degree of cer- tainty in the case of such histories. A fact may be accepted which both sides agree to, however it affects the credit of either. Discernment in weighing the evidence may also be of use. But this is no eas)' matter, for a clever historian can make the evidence, as he presents it, seem convincing. Cf. O. D. I. 462; O. D. I. 510, iv : . . . "' L'Histoire, qui est, a proprement parler, comme ces tableaux et ces Medailles, ou Ton ne cherche pas la ressemblance, mais I'habilite de I'Ouvrier." "D. XIV. 175, Timee, L. For passing remarks on the partiality of historians, cf. D. III. 258, Bellai (2), F; D. III. 530, Boleyn. B; D. IV. 429, Capriata. D; D. V. 70, Charles-Quint, I; D. V. 120, Chatel (2), C; D. VI. 103. Eginhart; D. VI. 323, Eudes, B ; D. X. 107, Mahomet II. D; D. X. 114. Mahomet II, X; D. XIV. 112. Theopompe, H; O. D. I. 202, iv; Gigas. 81 (ci. supra, p. 28, n. 4, the ref. to the letter published by Gigas, 74-85). Cf. O. D. I. 510: " Voila, on peu s'cn faut, le sort de I'Histoire ; chaque nation, chaque Religion, chaque Sccte prend les memcs faits tout cruds ou ils se peuvent trouver, les accommode et les assaisonne selon son gout, et puis ils semblent a chaque Lecteur vrais ou faux, selon qu'ils con- vienncnt, ou qu'ils repugncnt a ses prejugez." Cf. D. XV. 186-7, Dissert, sur les Libellcs Diff., E: "comme ce qui est orthodoxie dans une religion est une heresie dans une autre, ce qui est une bataille gagnce dans les historicns d'une nation est une bataille History 45 droit, Ics pertes et Ics avantagcs, des deux partis. II faiulrait ctre riiomme sans passions 011 le sage des stoiqucs, cct honime qu'on ne trouvera jamais, et qui ne suhsiste qu'en idee; il faudrait, dis-je, parvcnir a cette indolence, si Ton voulait s'assurcr que Ton tiendra toujours ce juste milieu en ecrivant unc histoire."" For example, a man who would write of the great Protestant Reformation has a complicated task on his hands and must make a special effort to escape religious prejudice, otherwise he has no right to undertake such an enterprise. Bayle states that there are some who wish that such a history might be written, not by a Protestant or a Catholic, but by a pagan like Thucydides or Livy, who could have looked on the whole matter from a neutral point of view and who could have estimated justly the merits of each party. He adds that here too he doubts whether impartiality could be secured, for Catholicism is more like the religion of the pagans than Protestantism and that might have prejudiced these writers.-^ It is hard for a historian to get away from his predilections even in cases where there would seem to be no occasion for personal likes and dislikes to enter. Suppose that a historian should give an account of some Indian king who had been dethroned and who died hundreds of years ago. The subject would seem too remote to affect the personal sentiments of the author in any way. Yet he may be an enemy to monarchical government, and in that case he will not fail to shift his facts so as to present the deposed king in an odious light. Or if he has the opposite political leanings, he will write his history accordingly. Again, a historian is led to take advan- tage of such a subject to indulge in criticism of his contempor- aries, under the names of the historical characters dealt with.-^ Yet whatever difficulties stand in the way of impartiality, Bayle is inclined to insist on it as the prime requisite for a historian. He deplores the practice of those who, when they inquire into the merits of a history, seek information about the judgment, the intelligence, and the style of the author, rather perdue dans les historiens de I'autre parti. C'est un abus fort ancien, et a quoi Ton ne voit pas de remede." '"D. IV. 427, Capriata, C. ^D. XII. 505, Remond, D. "D. XII. 505-6, Remond, D. 46 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle than about his honesty. A historian must subject himself to a rigid adherence to the demands of integrity : il faut avoir la conscience si ennemie du mensonge, qu'elle ne vous permette pas de mentir, non pas meme a I'avantage de votre religion, et de vos plus tendres amis, ni au desavantage d'une secte impie et de vos plus implacables persecuteurs. J'entends par mentir non-seulement I'invention entiere d'un fait faux, mais aussi la suppression ou I'addition de certaines circonstances qui peuvent servir ou a disculper les gens ou a les charger.^^ The duties of a historian are not unlike those of a judge. The judge must not let any prejudice of his own weigh in the decision of a case ; it would be eminently unfair for him to favor some particular culprit because he was under personal obligations to the man. Similarly a historian must be bound by no such ties. It is wrong to expect that he should deal gently with the weak- nesses of some public character merely because that individual has been his benefactor.^* In the deplorable partiality which historians show, Bayle sees one of the reasons for the unreliability of historical narrative, for the confusion which prevails concerning details of events.-' ='D. XII. 506-7, Remond, D; cf. D. VII. 468, Haillan, G; D. VII. 490-1, Hall (2), B; D. XIV. 516, Usson, F; O. D. IV. 863. Cf. also O. D. IV. 750: " Le comble de la gloire pour un Historien, c'est de faire justice a ses plus grands ennemis ;" D. XII. 504, Remond, D : Bayle says a historian must have : " une conscience droite, une probite achevee, . . . et, sur toutes choses, la force de resister aux instincts du zele de religion qui sollicitent a decrier ce qu'on juge faux, et a orner ce qu'on juge veritable." This remark is made apropos of a History of the Reformation by Remond. The attack which Bayle makes here is unjust, according to Le Clerc and Joly (cf. footnote 2, page 506). Cf. D. III. 194, Baudouin, A : on Moreri's account of Baudouin : " Ou est done la bonne foi historique, et la nettete de recit, qui demandent que quand tous les autres livres du monde seraient brules. la seule histoire d'un homme apprit clairement a tous les lectcurs s'il a dit ou s'il a fait une telle chose?" Cf. O. D. I. 520-1 1 " II est sur que plus on se peut defaire do I'esprit de ses prejugez, quand on prend la plume pour faire une histoire. plus on se rend propre a bien soutenir son personnage." O. D. III. 65: against the bigotry of Pellisson in writing a history of Louis XI^^ " D. XIV. 517, Usson, F. '"Cf. D. I. 77, Abimelech, C; D. V. 275, Concini, G; O. D. II. 14, ii; O. D. III. 732; O. D. II. 53: Here Bayle is speaking of the differ- History 47 Even the evidence of monuments, inscriptions and medals becomes uncertain, since partisan writers dare to falsify such testimony to suit their needs.-"^ Bayle speaks with particular acerbity of the juggling with truth and the chaos which results in the case of so-called historians who describe contemporaneous happenings. Often, for political reasons, they write false accounts, spreading them far and wide, and later, when the motives for dissimulation are no longer in force, no one is sufficiently interested to rectify these narratives. Or if there is an attempt to correct the errors, it is apt to be too late ; the false account has already too strong a hold.-' The dishonesty of those who compose such stories is criminal. Ce n'est pas assez que de comparer ces indignes ecrivains a des harpies, qui salissent tout ce qu'elles touchent: on peut dire que ce sont des bourreaux qui tordent le ecu, les bras et les jambes aux faits historiques, et meme qui les leur coupent quelquefois, et leur en appliquent des postiches ; et cela presque au moment meme qu'un evenement est sorti du sein de ses causes, et que les exploits d'une bataille ne font que de naitre . L'on a dit autrefois des Muses qu'elles se prostituaient meme a des esclaves ; c'est ce qu'on peut dire principalement de celle qui preside a I'Histoire : c'est un veritable ' scortum triobolare,' qui se tient sur les ences of Protestants and Catholics, and his attitude is distinctly partisan; O. D. III. 219, xxii : Bayle's remark in this case closes an argument de circonstance. ^ D. IV. 21, Botero. C. Apropos of a picture which was published as a faithful representation of a certain triumphal column which the pope Clement VIII erected, a colunm which, as a matter of fact, never existed, Bayle says : " Et quand on se voit attrape par la montre de ces pretendus monumens publics, on ne sait plus a qui se fier : on ne sait si les medailles, si les inscriptions, si tels autres monumens, sont plus sinceres qu'un historien a gages et a pension annuelle ; et voila une confirmation du pyrrhonisme historique." Cf. D. XV. 160, Dissert, sur les Libelles Diff., IX: '"Car si I'antiquite greque, romaine, persane, carthaginoise, etc., en avait use comme Ton en use anjourd'hui. ils auraient bien de la peine a nous prouver quelque chose, en se fortifiant meme div secours des inscriptions et des medailles, monumens que les modernes emploient impunement pour satisfaire leurs caprices, sans se fonder sur un fait reel." ''Cf. D. XV. 188, Dissert, sur les Libelles Diff., G. Bayle speaks of the need of refuting satires and libels in cases when they have been given some credence as history. 48 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle grands chemins, et qui se livre au premier venu pour un morceau de pain.^ It is well that printing is only a modern invention, for had the ancients possessed this means doubtless there would be the same multitude of varied accounts which makes modern history so confused.-" Contemporary writers not only say things which are false, but they leave out things which are true. It sometimes happens that an unusual fact is not put on record until long after the event happened, and then only in a single account.^" Bayle suggests that the omission may be intentional and that again partiality may be at the root of this evil.^^ He adds that there '' D. XV. 158, Dissert, sur les Libelles Diff., VIII ; cf. all of sections VIII and IX in this reference. ^* Ba3'le comments on the respect which the ancients showed for the dignity of history, in not allowing history to be written except by those who were equipped by their birth and merit; cf. D. XV. 159. History, he says, should be written by those whom the state chooses, not by any petty chroniclers; cf. D. XV. 157; O. D. I. 261, vii. He mentions the multitude of historical writers in his own day; '' Lucien, sans le savoir, a fait la peinture de notre siecle, lorsqui'il a parle d'une guerre qui avait produit un si grand nombre d'historiens, qu'on aurait dit que ce metier etait a la mode; " D. XV. 159. The gazettes, says Bayle, add much to the confusion of modern history. For the various journalistic publications of his own day which deal with current events he has little sympathy. Although in one place he says in reference to gazettes: " C'est une lecture qui n'est pas inutile" (O. D. I. L. 117, Ixxiii.) and although elsewhere he grants that it may be worth while to consult them on account of the public documents reproduced by them (O. D. HI. 590-2, xlvii.), and on account of the dates given, which are usually accurate (O. D. HI. 591, xlvii; O. D. I. 338, i.), yet he feels partiality dominates in these pieces, battles are reported won or lost according to the partisan interest of the writer, and the historian seeking information finds little on which he may rely (D. I. 31, Abderame, G; D. I. 253, Agesilaus (2) ; D. II. 161, Apafi, D; D. VII. 330, Guicciardin, B; D. XV. 179, Dissert, sur les Libelles Diff., B ; O. D. I. 338. i : O. D. I. L. 169, cxxiii; O. D. II. 13, iii ; O. D. III. 732. ii ; Gigas. 13-14, 18-29, 72-4). The candor of the Romans, who admitted the victories of Hannibal, brings out by striking contrast the duplicity of these moderns (Gigas, 21-2, 28-9). For a characterization of three particular gazettes cf. O. D. IV. 595, xliv; on the gazettes of Holland cf. O. D. I. L. 175, cxxxi. ""D. IV. 50s. Cassius (4), H. " Cf. D. I. 459, Alpaide, B. Bayle suggests that the silence of con- History 49 are, however, cases where contemporary writers could not sup- press certain facts with any hoi)e of keeping them from the knowledge of the world, and, on that account, cases where the silence of contemporaries about an event is good evidence that it is not authentic. There is, then, a limit to the truth-twisting of these men, but a limit that is imposed rather by the exigencies of the situation than by any desire to avoid partiality. Satire and flattery are tiie two pests of history.''''' Of these two Bayle states that the former is the more pernicious, for readers accept the remarks provoked by such a spirit with more sympathy ; flattery is base, but satire may be interpreted as prompted by a love of liberty.^'' A historian who practices flat- tery often fails to convince. Such an author by his exaggera- tions may make those he flatters ridiculous,''* and may so irritate the reader as to drive him to the opposite extreme and render him unwilling to admit any virtue in the personage described.^'* Satire more often attains its end, and so is the more to be deplored. Bayle protests vigorously against the satirical spirit, and against the particular violence which historians show when they write of events in which they have had some personal con- temporary writers in regard to a certain historic detail may be attributed to their fear of displeasing the sovereign. "^D. X. 298, Marillac (2), A: "la satire et la flatterie sont les deux pestes de I'histoire. . . ." Cf. D. XI. 598-9, Pericles, H : Bayle speaks of the deplorable effects of satire and flattery. He quotes Plutarch and points out again how this partiality results in augmenting le pyrrhonisme historique. He adds that the abuse is particularly common in his own day. Cf. D. IX. 448, Louis XIII. F. " Cf. Tacitus, Hist. Lib. I. cap. I: " Quippe adulationi foedum crimen servitutis, malignitati falsa species libertatis inest." Bayle quotes this and states that he is merely following the idea of Tacitus : D. X. 298-9, Marillac, A ; D. X. 527, Morgues, L. Cf. O. D. I. 609. ix : Bayle is quite inconsistent, for he states in this case that flattery is more enduring than satire. '' II y a je ne sgai quelle f atalite qui fait prevaloir la Flaterie sur la Satyre, generalement parlant ; de sorte que d'une infinite de Libelles qui auront paru contre les Grandeurs du monde, a peine s'en trouve-t-il un, cent ans apres, pendant que les Relations qui les flattent, ou qui les epargnent, sont entre les mains de toute la terre." ^ O. D. III. 64. xcvii. ** O. D. III. 64. xcvi. 50 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle cern. A writer who is ordinarily moderate and modest tends to give way to his feeHngs when he composes a history which touches on some one who has persecuted him, and his history then becomes unreHable on account of his bias. And the nar- rative of a man who is naturally choleric will be all the worse. A historian should leave to his readers the matter of praising or blaming; let him occupy himself solely with presenting the facts. ^"^ There is another respect in which partiality is an obstacle to the historian. He must not only strive to get away from his own prejudices, but he must cope with the prejudices of those upon whose evidence he relies, to a certain extent, for his material, those who have been eye-witnesses of events, and those who have been actually engaged in the making of history. Evi- dently it is such people who are the least inclined to give unbiased reports. The value of the testimony of actors in the historical drama and of those who have observed the drama from nearby is ^ D. XIV. 175, Timee, L. On the malice of historians, cf. O. D. I. 521. Cf. D. XIII. 135, Savonarola, H : Bayle suggests that a historian may take sides provided he has first given a faithful narration of the events. For satires proper, that is such writings as are frankly partisan in character and do not pretend to the dignity of history, various remarks by Bayle (Cf. D. II. 117, Annat, A: ihid. 119, B; D. VII. 185, Gournai ; O. D. I. 677, vi ; etc.) and particularly his Dissertation sur les Libcllcs Diffaniatoires (D. XV. 148-89) indicate that he has no sympathy. He deplores the malignity of the authors of such productions, who do not hesitate to attack the most upright (D. XV. 154), and he asserts that satires sometimes have a grievous effect in the state, causing war and sedition (D. XV. 172-3). It is nonsense to claim that satires and libels check vice because they are a menace to evil-doers, for there is no lack of writings of this sort, yet the world goes on in its wicked way (D. XV. 155, vii.). Concerning paneg>'rics, as such, Bayle is more lenient. A certain license may be granted to eulogists and they may indulge in more laudation and flourish than a historian, although positive falsehood cannot be allowed (D. III. 200, Baudouin, E; cf. D. X. 496, Montgaillard, D). The custom of leaving out dates which concern the events of the hero's life is objectionable, and the only reason for this lack of chronological accuracy is indolence (D. IV. 311, Calderinus {2), D). The flattery with which Epitres Dcdicatoires are crammed displeases our author (O. D. IV. 588; D. IV. 430, Capriata, E). History 5 1 undoubtedly great.'*' W'licn an equitable writer who has lived in the house of a princess as one of her suite gives evidence as to the character of the lady, his remarks have weight.^" A man who has lived in close touch with a tyrant can write a book, full of enlightening details, which will be of great use to the future historian.''" But the drawback in the case of such testimony is the prejudice of the witness. This same biographer of a tyrant may be trying to make a hero of him, and the intelligent reader needs to be on his guard. ^" There is danger in believing what is said by those who have belonged to households of the great, particularly if they have been favorites with their masters ; such men, out of gratitude, suppress the details which do not reflect credit on their lords.*** Statesmen, when questioned about events in which they are concerned, are inclined to suppress inconvenient truths.*^ A historian must be cautious in giving weight to the accusations which controversialists advance against their contemporaries ; such accusations must not be considered unless there is satis- factory proof that they are true."*- Even the edicts and public declarations of sovereigns are unreliable as evidence, for they are apt to contain statements which are not based in any sense on the facts of a case, but are introduced on account of the political needs of the moment. Thus, when a king is obliged to treat with rebels who have fought against him and proved their strength, he may declare in the edict of peace that these men •^'Cf. D. I. 269, Agis, D; D. X. 216-7, Marcellin; O. D. I. 80; O. D. I. 295 ; cf. Bayle's remark on a writer who had travelled much and visited various courts of Europe : " II a raison de pretendre que les lumiere* qu'on peut acquerir en voyageant sont tres-utiles a ceux qui composent une histoire." *^D. XIV. 518, Usson. F. ~D. XII. 27, Philistus, D. "D. VII. 56, Geldenhaur, K; O. D. III. 909: cf. D. XIV. 367, Vergerius (2), K. Bayle states that when a writer publishes details of the private life of a monarch which are scandalous in character, he should have proofs to present, else he should be given no credence. *' D. VII. 56-7, Geldenhaur, L. " D. III. 410-11, Beze, V; cf. especially: *' Vraiment un historien debiterait de beaux contes, s'il s"amusait a rapporter toutes les injures personnelles que les controversistes se chantent, de quelque religion qu'ils soient." 52 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle have done nothing against the interests of their ruler, but it is obvious that such a statement is made merely because the other side demands it and has the power to enforce the demand. Similarly the edicts of a court of justice may be colored by the practical needs of a situation.*^ Prejudice, also, is apt to be at the bottom of the reputed death-bed confessions of persons who have played a part in histor}\ Bayle does not believe that a man who has kept secret all his life some fact discreditable to him, will reveal it in his last moments, and he states that the reports of such confessions are frequently popular stories, in- vented for political or personal reasons.** Finally this plague of partiality presents itself in a third form. If the historian should conquer his own prejudices and should cope successfully with the biased statements which make up a part of his testimony, he still has to encounter the partiality of the readers to whom his work is presented. The public at large judge a history in the light of their own preconceived notions. They do not take the same trouble to be fair which the author may have taken and they will declare those details false which bring dishonor on their own party. *^ They are unwilling to tolerate the frankness which would impel a writer to admit some fact damaging to his own side. II y a beaucoup de gens qui souhaitent qu'un historien de leur parti imite les joueurs de piquet, qui ne gardent que les bonnes cartes, et mettent dans leur ecart les mauvaises qui leur etaient venues.*" Evidently the general public is not marked by that absence of passion which is as necessary for judging a history aright as it is for composing one*'^ — and evidently the equitable historian will not easily satisfy the people. "D. X. 306-7, Marillac, K; cf. O. D. III. 1026, vii. "D. VII. 373-5, Guise (3), F. " D. IV. 427-9, Capriata, C. Bayle states that he echoes the sentiments of Capriata on this point. Cf. D. X. 526-7, Morgues, L : On the way Patin, who is prejudiced against Richelieu, welcomes a history which abuses Richelieu. " D. XII. 506, Remond, D. *' Cf. D. IV. 429, Capriata, C: ". . . si Ion peut dire que pour com- poser une histoire il faut ctre vide de toute passion, on peut dire aussi qu'il faut I'etrc pour juger pertinemment du travail de I'histoire." On the difficulties which a historian encounters in the prejudices of the reading public, cf. D. III. 304, Bembus, O: "II y a longtemps qu'on History 53 He will experience especial difficulties in satisfying the ruling powers. An author who writes the history of contemporary kings or of those who have only recently died is liable to get into trouble with these monarchs or their followers if he tells unpleasant truths/'^ In such a case a perplexing alternative presents itself: either it is necessary to disregard truth, which is against the laws of history, or it is necessary to irritate the powers that be, which is against the laws of prudence. The better way, suggests Bayle, is to avoid the question completely by not treating such subjects.*'-' In speaking of the dangers run by a historian who injures the honor of a powerful people, he says : Rien n'est plus beau dans la theorie que les idees du legislateur des his- toriens": il leur commande de n'oser dire rien qui soit faux, et d'oser dire tout ce qui est vrai ; mais ce sont des lois impracticables, tout comme celles du Decalogue dans I'etat oil le genre humain se trouve." Even when partiality is avoided, if that ever happens, there still remain manv obstacles in the wav of the careful writer a mis entre les difficultes du metier de I'historien, la coutume qu'ont les lecteurs de prendre pour des mensonges les actions sublimes dont ils se sentent incapables." ♦'Cf. D. VII. 465, Haillan, E. *"€£. D. III. 165, Basta (2), B; D. IV. 376, Camden, K; D. IV. 428, Capriata, C; D. VII. 465, Haillan, E ; D. X. 261, Mariana, D. •* Bayle refers to Cicero. "D.'lII. 548. Bonfadius. D. Bayle refers several times to these laws of history, ne quid falsi audeat, lie quid veri noii audeat. Cf. O. D. IV. 744, cxcvii, when he mentions them in excusing himself for speaking freely in his dictionary of certain great men; and D. XII. 505, Remond, D, where he names these precepts '"les deux grands statuts du metier." Bayle even yields a point as to truth-telling in the case of histories of contemporary rulers. Cf. O. D. I. 114, viii : '" Mille raisons veulent que pendant la vie des Souverains on ne publie pas leurs defauts, et Ton seroit trop farouche et d'une humeur trop critique si Ton ne souffroit pas sans murmure qu'on les flattat." He suggests in one case, O. D. I. 158, viii, that the sacred name of monarch should prevent historians from delving into the gallantries of a royal family, at least until long after their time ; but elsewhere. D. XIV. 517, Usson, F, he excuses a historian for divulging a scandal con- cerning a contemporary princess — a scandal which was, however, notori- ous — and he also suggests here that there is no reason why the dignity of princes should save them from injurious truths. 54 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle who wishes to produce a history that is accurate and complete. History is complicated. There are innumerable facts to be con- trolled and it is by no means easy to get at them.^- Bayle refers frequently to the need of exactness and completeness."^ He has hot w^ords of blame for those who allow their imagination to make up for the documentary evidence which they are too care- less to seek. He attacks fiercely a certain historian, Guevara, who dared to invent historic details out of whole cloth and use them as authentic, and who later excused himself on the basis Of precautions taken by rulers in the eflfort to guard against the publication of historic facts which reflect discredit on them, Bayle says that, after all. they are useless. Time is sure to lay bare the flatteries of historians and to prove the futility of the monarch's attempt to deceive posterity. It is also true that time may free historical characters from calumny. O. D. I. 397-8; cf. O. D. I. 279. "'D. V. 449, Dejotarus, O; D. VIII. 205, Horace, A; D. IX. 295, Loges, F; D. X. 186, Mancinellus, B; D. XI. 280-1, Othon III, B. D; O. D. I. 185-6. °^D. I. 260, Agesilaus (2), L; D. I. 463, Altaemps, A; D. IV. 540, Castalion, L; D. V. 283-4, Conon (2), A; D. VI. 248, Erfort, C; D. VIII. 344, Jean, A; D. X. 432-4, MicraeHus, D; D. XV. 317-8, Eclair- cissemcnt sur les Pyrrhoniens, V; O. D. I. 12; O. D. I 674; O. D. I. 92, V; O. D. III. 547, xxvii, 549; cf. D. XIV. 440, Virgile (2), A: on the boldness of historians in confirming what is doubtful. Cf. O. D. I. 677, vi, where Bayle commends a book which gives details concerning the history of the Middle Ages. This subject, he adds, is so hard and there is such difficulty in handling the documents that his- torians neglect it far too much. There are passing comments on the need of exactness and complete- ness in biographies. Cf. D. II. 568, Aurelien, A; D. III. 439, Bigot (2), G; D. V. 124, Chatel (2), G; D. VII. 461, Haillan; D. X. 316, Marot, E; D. XVI. 25-6, Avert, sur 2« Ed. There are no remarks worth noting on biography as a literary genre. Bayle mentions a number of documents of miscellaneous character which may offer material that is useful to a historian; O. D. I. 221: he suggests that a poem may contain valuable details of fact : " Cela rappelle dans ma memoire ce que j'ai oui dire a des gens de fort bon sens, qu'un Recueil de Chansons est une Piece tres-utile a un Historio- graphe ; " D. II. 506-7, Atticus, H: A genealogy of the Roman magis- trates would be useful, Bayle says, but he does not apply the remark- directly to history; D. V. 313, Craterius, A: a collection of the decrees of the people of Athens would have settled many questions if it had not been lost; O. D. I. 605: A collection of the lives of the favorites of various rulers might contain considerable information, if such a book should be written. Cf. O. D. IV. 736. History 55 that history was so uncertain that a Htllc extra invention did no harm. La licence qu'il sc donna dc falsifier tout ce que bon lui semblait, et de debiter comme des fails veritables, ce qui n'etait que Ics inventions de son cervcau creux, approche de celle des faiseurs de romans. . C'etait done un empoisonneur public et un seducteur ; et, dans le tribunal de la republique des lettres, il meritait le chatiment des profanes et des sacrileges, car il violait ce qu'il y a de plus sacre dans I'art historique." Historians who have succeeded in niaking a reputation for themselves must be especially careful, for their authority is con- siderable and many writers depend upon them for their facts. '^'^ From time to time Rayle discusses some of the problems which come up in connection with this matter of accuracy. When a historian treats of a period earlier than his own he may derive valuable infomiation from historians of that period. Even if these writers are rough and ignorant men they can be relied upon to furnish useful material, for the very fact that they are describing what happened in their ow^n day means that they have recorded many details which would occur only to those who have the events fresh in mind.^** Bayle points out the fact that certain histories of current events in his own day offer valuable data for a historian and collect fugitive documents worth having.^^ Popular tradition offers a perplexing problem to the historian who is searching for facts. As soon as events take place a multitude of stories concerning them spring up among the people. Often false reports are spread at the same time as the true ones and sometimes the false precede the true, so that a mass of "D. VII. 322, 3, Guevara, B; cf. ibid. D. On historians who permit their imagination — and partiality — to sway them, cf. O. D. III. 758: " Voila. Monsieur, les illusions a quoi s'exposent les Historiens en mille rencontres, lorsqu'au lieu de consulter les pieces originales, les actes publics, les preuves certaines des faits. ils s'abandon- nent a leur imagination, et aux jalousies nationales." "D. XII. 375, Quellenec, A. Apropos of Mezerai. °* Cf. O. D. I. 222, ii ; O. D. I. 22 ; cf. ref. to this art. of the Nouvelles in Gigas, 691, J. Le Clerc, note i ; cf. also D. XI. 359, Papesse. A. *'0. D. I. 588, vii. Here Bayle refers to a Relation Historique de ce qui s'est fait par tout le monde, depuis le mois de Juin, 1685, (a bc^'ok published in 1686), and, O. D. I. 628, i, to a Histoire abregee dc f Europe pour le mois de Juillct, etc. (published in 1686). 56 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle tradition is handed down where the fictitious and the real facts are mingled together and where the one kind has just as much the authority of age as the other. Sometimes the false report is spread and is never followed by the true one.^® Bayle com- ments especially on the extreme difficulty of getting at the facts of a tradition concerning some miraculous happening and on the futility of conjectures in cases where the circumstances are not well known. The reports of various authors conflict, the learned have one story, the people another, pious frauds abound. Since there are so many discrepant accounts about contemporary events of the sort, it is not surprising that it should be hard to clear up a tradition of this kind concerning an earlier period.^® Reports are exaggerated more and more as they are spread about ; le dernier qui parle est presque toujours le plus decisif et le plus charge de faits. II semble qu'il s'agisse d'une emplette d'encan, oi Ton encherit les uns sur les autres, parce que la marchandise n'est adjugee qu'au plus oflfrant et dernier encherisseur.'" There is, naturally enough, little evidence of which a historian can make use in such traditions. It is certain that the fact that a majority of the people believe in a story proves nothing as to its authenticity.**^ A careful man who has a tradition called to his attention will find out whether it has ever been put into writing or whether it is merely a report which has come down orally for generations, and if the latter is the case he will dis- regard it."^ The authority of traditions which attack those who have incurred popular hatred on account of their oppressions is particularly "cloubtful. Here the question of partiality comes up once more. The people welcome any report which reflects dis- credit on such persons, and do not investigate its source. Then, as generations pass, these traditions shift until they become abso- ''D. XIV. 518, Usson, F. ''" D. IV. 577-80, Cataldus, B. C. Bayle protests against the audacity of a man who wrote an extravagant account of a certain miraculous event and claimed the account authentic. •»D. VIII. 50, Henri III. S. "O. D. III. 205, xii. ""Cf. D. VI. 279, Esope (2), B. Of traditions " touchant la vie d'un particulier." History 5 7 lutely unreliable.®^ There are only two cases in which the reports that spread among the people call for consideration. II ne faut jamais faire cet honneur a de tels bruits qu'en ces deux cas : I'un. lorsqu'ils sont tres-vraisemblables; I'autre, lorsqu'on les veut charger d'une note de reprobation, c'est-a-dire, les refuter et les siffler. En ce dernier cas, il est tres-utile de rapporter ces sortes de traditions, parce que rien n'est plus propre a inspirer de la defiance contre les rapports de la renommee, que de faire voir a son siecle la sotte et ridicule credulite des precedens.** There may be instances where a historian is under obligation, in the interest of completeness, to narrate events which he him- self believes false.*'^ Bayle states that it may become the his- torian's duty to give an account of certain prodigies or miracles which are generally reputed to have accompanied some event. If the best authorities and the best historic monuments attest the authenticity of such a marvel the new historian must record it faithfully. The record of such superstitions is curious and instructive : un Historien qui raconte la terreur qu'une Comete, qu'une eclipse, qu'une inondation exciterent dans un pais, a cause qu'on les prenoit pour des presages sinistres, et qui n'oublie pas les processions, et les autres ceremonies religieuses qui furent ordonnees pour detourner ces presages, ne sort nullement de la sphere d'Historien, car ce sont des faits, aussi curieux, aussi instructifs que les batailles, que les sieges, que les traitez d'alliance." The historian is of course at liberty to state that he believes the prodig>' utterly false. A writer who announces his skepticism does well, for he sometimes saves his readers from being mis- led.^' Xo harm w^ould come of his expressing his unbelief every time that such a case is referred to. But on that Bayle does "D. XI. 473. Paul II. D. " D. III. 51-2, Balde, C Cf. D. VI. 157, Eucolpius, B. " Cf. O. D. III. 280: " les plus celebres Historiens de I'antiquite ont reconnu qu'il y avoit certaines choses qu'ils n'avoient nul droit de suprimer quoi qu'ils ne les crussent pas." •"O. D. III. 282. Ixiii. " Cf. the following remark apropos of the same question: "Tout bon historien qui raconte ce qu'il juge fabuleux, y joint un on dit ou quelque clause qui temoigne encore plus nettement ce qu'il en pense ;" etc. D. VII. 2^2, Gregoire I^r, R. 58 TJie Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle not insist, and he is inclined to be satisfied with a general state- ment at the outset that the writer does not vouch for all the traditions which he thinks it worth while to set forth.**^ Although these stories of miracles must be heeded when they are widespread, the demand for completeness in history-writing does not require treating them if they are little known. Tradi- tions concerning miraculous or other events having no authentic basis and preserved in no written record may well be ignored. Yet even where there is no written account of a prodig>% the absence of a more authoritative basis may be due to the reluc- tance of contemporary writers to mention a detail which would bring them into disrepute with the ruling powers. On such an instance the historian must w^eigh the evidence and, if he thinks it worth while, present the tradition, explaining the circum- stances.^* But while the narration of prodigies is allowable and even to be recommended under some conditions, historians are inclined to carry the practice much too far. Much untruth has been brought into history by their extreme readiness to record and affirm marvellous happenings. '^° Historians seem to have a par- ticular weakness for such tales. Je ne sai s'ils cro'ient que leurs Histoires paroitroient trop simples, s'ils ne meloient aux choses arrivees selon le cours du moncle, quantite de prodiges et d'accidens surnaturels : ou s'ils esperent que par cette sorte d'assaisonemens, qui reviennent fort au gout naturel de rhomme, ils tiendront toujours en haleine leur Lecteur, en lui fournissant toujours de quoi admirer ; ou bien s'ils se persuadent que la rencontre de ces coups miraculeux signalera leur Histoire dans le tems a venir; mais quoi qu'il en soit, on ne peut nier que les Historiens ne se plaisent extremement a compiler tout ce qui sent le miracle.^ This tendency has a bearing on the question of the relation of poetry and history. Those who claim that the relation is a "* O. D. III. 281. Bayle adds that a discussion of how much fact there is in such traditions is permissible, but that the discussion must not turn into partisan controversy, where the tradition is supported or opposed according to the prejudice of the writer. "O. D. III. 280. '" Ibid. "O. D. III. 10, II. History 59 close and a desirable one, and that to be a historian one must be a poet, are exposed in this case to the attacks of critics who may say that here indeed these two genres have a common char- acteristic since they both display this weakness for the mar- vellous.'- History should not be so characterised. The intro- duction of marvellous and supernatural elements such as a reader has a right to expect in a piece of poetry, has no place in histor}' ; it conflicts with the simplicity and naturalness which must be found in historical writing. Bayle criticises Herodotus for not recognising this distinction between poetry and history and for bringing the miraculous into his work.'-' A history should be written in a style that is clear and natural ; les veritables regies de I'art Historique . . . demandent beaucoup d'ordre, un stile net, court, simple, sans affectation, sans figures, ni autres ornemens oratoires . ."* Various references show that Bayle is inclined to insist on clear- ness as a prime requisite. ^^ It is necessary to bring out the " O. D. Ill, II, V. On the love of historians for the marvellous, cf. O. D. Ill, 62, xciv, 64. xcvi. 66; O. D. I. 626, vii. Cf. O. D. I. 531, ii. where Bayle speaks of the complaint that there are no longer any prodigies and marvellous happenings in his day as there were in the ages gone by, and says that future historians will supply the want and credit the seventeenth century with as many marvels as the previous centuries. " D. XII. 358, Psammitichus, B. On the unreliability of historians who report prodigies, cf. D. VI. 160, Ephore, A. Bayle quotes Seneca here. '* O. D. I. 202, iv. "Cf. D. IV. 426. Capriata: Bayle praises Capriata as a historian and says : " II expose les f aits avec une grande nettete, il en developpe les motifs, et les instrumens, et les suites . . ." D. XII. 504, Remond, D: " Elle (history) demande un homme qui ait . . . un style noble, clair et serre . . ." D. X. 433, Micraelius, D: " Un historien exact choisit ses paroles avec tant de soin, qu'il ne donne pas a deviner a ses lecteurs si les assiegeans se retirerent d'eux-memes, ou s'ils attendi- rent qu'on les attaquat."' O. D. I. 588, vi : " L'abdication de cette Reine (Christine) se voit ici narree fort nettement ; c'est une des bonnes qualites de cet Auteur (Pufendorf) que la nettete d'esprit: son style est noble, grave, et coulant, et n'a point d'affectation." O. D. I. L. 24. "II (Duverdier) conserve fort le caractere d'un Historien, enchainant bien les matieres en decouvrant les motifs, et ecrivant avec beaucoup de nettete et de clarte. 6o The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle striking traits of the personages described, in such a way as to give the greatest enlightenment to the readers."*^ As to concise- ness, Bayle suggests in one place that a historian who is notably concise affords less instruction than one who is blameworthy for being prolix ;' ^ but elsewhere he suggests that too many details may obscure the really important facts. "^ There is a knack of indicating details briefly, so that valuable information is given without lengthiness.'^" The desire of historians to appear learned sometimes makes them indulge in long digressions which intro- duce a multitude of details having little relation to the text. Such, for example, would be the remarks of one who reports the appearance of a comet, and goes on to discuss the influence of the heavenly bodies on human events. The practice is repre- hensible. Furthermore, the weight of these writers as chron- iclers of historical facts which they are supposed to have inves- tigated does not give authority to the statements made in digressions concerning other spheres of knowledge.*" Since Bayle demands simplicity and lack of affectation he naturally does not demand polish. But he seems to think that attention to details of euphony, the kind of attention paid by an orator to such matters, is permissible, provided it is not extreme.*^ Although simplicity is so desirable in a historian's style, a reasonable effort to produce vivid and striking narrative is to be recommended. The power of expression which belongs to an orator or a poet may be most useful here, provided, of course, " D. V. 559, Domitia Longina, A. Cf. ibid., C. "D. XV. 150, I. Dissert, sur les LibcUes Diff. III. The ancient his- torians were too concise, says Bayle. Cf. D. II. 271, Archelaus (4), K. '' D. XII. 38, Phlegon, A. "D. II. 271, Archelaus (4), K. ""O. D. III. II, vi. Cf. D. XIV. no, Theopompe, F. where Bayle objects vigorously to a criticism of Tacitus and declares the attack on his digressions unjust and extravagant. " D. XIV. 107, Theopompe : Concerning care as to euphony and har- mony in style Bayle says: " il y a sans doute je ne sais quelle petitesse dans ces sortes d'affectations, lorsque la grandeur et la majeste du sujet doit attirer toute I'attention de I'ecrivain." But he adds that a moderate care in avoiding " la rencontre des voyelles " is allowable. History 6x that flourish and pomp are avoided.**- Bayle has considerable praise for Maimbourg on the score of the interesting way in which he writes history. He states that it would be a great boon to the repubhc of letters if those who have much more learning and exactness than Maimbourg should be able to give their writings the same attractiveness.*^ It is true, of course, that the vividness which a writer is able to put into his account depends much upon the subject matter he has to deal with. War, battles, revolutions, brilliant and stirring events — ^such are the themes which awaken the eloquence of the author and the interest of the reader. Un historien qui n'a point de grands evenemens a decrire s'endort sur son ouvrage, et fait bailler ses lecteurs; mais une guerre civile, deux ou trois conspirations, autant de batailles. les memes chefs tantot abattus, tantot releves, aiguisent sa plume, echauffent son imagination, et tiennent toujours en haleine ceux qui lisent. Je crois franchement que si on lui commandait de faire I'histoire d'un regne pacifique, et. tout d'une piece, il se plaindrait de son sort a peu pres comme Caligula se plaignit de ce que sous son empire il n'arrivait pas de grands malheurs Son ouvrage est un vaisseau qui ne vogue jamais mieux qu'en temps de tourmente : la tempete est son bon vent : le calme lui est aussi contraire qu'a un vaisseau effectif.^ "' Cf. supra, pp. 25, 26. Cf. D. XIV. 106, Theopompe, C: in this case Bayle brings up the question whether orators and poets are fitted to be historians, but adds no comment of his own except to suggest there is considerable danger of a flowery style in histories written by such men. '"D. X. 137, Maimbourg, D; cf. O. D. II. 19, iv. Cf. O. D. I. 27, iii. Here Bayle suggests that perhaps Maimbourg has found " le secret de donner a I'Histoire I'air du Roman, et au Roman I'air de I'Histoire, ce qui n'est pas un don mediocre . . ." ^D. VIII. 92, Hercule, R. Bayle adds that the taste which prefers accounts of military prowess to descriptions of the virtues men show in time of peace is depraved, but very wide spread. He deplores the same tendency to prefer the brilliant to the solid in the case of poets and orators and in the case of the public to whom these writers appeal. Cf. O. D. I. 587, vi, where Bayle says the exploits of the great Gus- tavus Adolphus make a fine subject for a history. On the question of how a historian may be helped by the nature of the subject he deals with, cf. D. VI. 628, Furius, D: "II arrive aux historiens la meme chose qu'a un voyageur : ils rencontrent de temps en temps certaines matieres qui sont comme des bourbiers, ou comme 62 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle But, however much a writer is helped or hindered by his subject matter, Bayle evidently thinks that he must devote attention to the vividness of his narrative.-' un chemin uni, large, bien pave, etc." But here Bayle refers to a case where a certain event is useful to a partisan historian in enabling him to reflect credit on the historical personage whom he favors. The same event is, of course, awkward for the writers on the other side. " It does not strike Bayle that the speeches attributed by historians to generals whose exploits they narrate, Thucydidean speeches, that is, lend any vividness to an account. His only comment on such harangues is as to their unreliability. D. IV. 507, Cassius (4), L. VII SCHOLARSHIP For the writer of the Dictionnaire Historiquc ct Critique scholarship is of course a matter of extreme importance. Bayle has a high regard for learning, and for the erudite critic who is occupied with collating facts and eliminating errors in the world of things learned. He is alert to defend the enthusiasms of scholars for the fine points of their trade, and he has a variety of comments to make as to how scholars shall maintain a standard of excellence commensurate with the dignity of their calling. It is in the advance notice published by Bayle concerning the aims of his own dictionary that he takes up the question of the utility of that critical research work in which so much attention is paid to a minute exactness. He grants that such labors are eminently impractical, that they have no value in supplying daily bread. Indeed were man an entirely reasonable creature he would concern himself only with the salvation of his soul and with procuring the amount of nourishment neces- sary to keep the soul allied to the body during his allotted days. But. things mundane being as they are, it is a fact that man find? interest and pleasure in study, as well as in Belles Lettres and the arts. II faut done, malgre qu'on en ait, que Ton m'accorde qu'il y a une infinite de productions de I'esprit humain qui sent estimees, non pas a cause de leur necessite, mais a cause qu'elles nous divertissent ; et sur ce pied-la n'est-il pas juste de remarquer les faussetes des auteurs, puisqu'il y a tant de gens qui se plaisent a savoir la verite, jusque dans les choses ou leur fortune est la moins interessee? N'est-il pas certain qu'un cordonnier, qu'un meunier, qu'un jardinier, sont infiniment plus necessaires a un etat que les plus habiles peintres ou sculpteurs, qu'un Michel Ange, ou qu'un cavalier Bernin? N'est-il pas vrai que le plus chetif magon est plus necessaire, dans une ville, que le plus excellent chronologue ou astronome, qu'un Joseph Scaliger ou qu'un Copernic? On fait neanmoins infiniment plus de cas du travail de ces grands hommes, dont on se pourrait fort bien passer, que du 64 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle travail absolument necessaire de ces artisans. Tant il est vrai qu'il y a bien des choses dont on ne regie le prix que par rapport a un honnete divertissement, ou a un simple ornement de I'ame.^ The utility of learning, then, is nil. as far as practical consid- erations go. But it is in the nature of man to take an interest in the details of erudition, his truth-seeking instinct makes him want to know things that have no material effect on his daily life. Certainly Bayle believes this instinct worth catering to, certainly he approves this high ideal of Veritas. He adds, in the same dissertation, that critical work is of real moral benefit. ]\Ian is humbled when he is brought face to face with the vanity of the human intelligence, when his attention is called to the innumerable faults of men of learning.^ The value our author places on things erudite is evident from the emphasis with which he deplores the lack of interest in learning in his own time.^ A savant who has a vast collection of facts concerning chronology, geography, mytholog}-, who can elucidate difficult passages in the ancient writers and explain grammatical points — such a man is no longer esteemed. It is the practice to stigmatize as pedantry the study of such details. Hence young men who have the gifts that would enable them to do scholarly work, turn away from an occupation which ' D. XV. 239, Dissert, cont. le Pro jet, viii ; cf. ibid. 238: "II faut avouer, d'autre cote, n'en deplaise a Ciceron, que toutes les beautes de la peinture, de la sculpture, de I'architecture, ne servent qu'au plaisir des yeux , et a donner une agreable admiration aux connaisseurs." Cf. D. XVI. I, 2, Pref. de la i« Ed; especially : " II est . . . certain que la decouverte des erreurs (in fact) n'est importante ou utile ni a la prosperite de I'etat, ni a celle des particuliers." Cf. O. D. I. 125, iv ; especially: " Ce n'est done point par rapport a I'utilite publique qu'il faut juger si un Auteur merite des loiianges. Quelles que soient ses occupations, il faut regarder s'il a ete necessaire d'employer beaucoup d'esprit, pour arriver au point ou il est venu. C'est a cette regie que nous devons proportionner notre admiration et les loiianges que nous donnons a la beaute du genie." ^ D. XV. 241-3, Dissert, cont. le Pro jet, ix. Bayle also adds, ibid. p. 240, that the attention paid to the minute details of erudition concerning the ancients has had a fortuitous but most happy result. This kind of study inspired a certain veneration for the ancients, and on account of this spirit of reverence the splendid maxims of the ancients are received with particular respect. =" D. X. 427, 8, Meziriac, C. Scholarship 65 offers no chance of honor or renown. Certain baui.v-csf^rils or would be bcaux-csprits condemn the introduction into the writings of an author of citations from the ancients and oi other comments which suggest learning. They even attack this prac- tice in the case of polished writers like Costar and Voiture. There is an excellent pretext for taking this position ; it is easy to claim that there is more credit in thinking for oneself than in accumulating the thoughts of others.'' Bayle admits the truth of tlie statement, but ho liolds that it is used as an excuse by men who are too superficial and indolent to devote themselves to learning, men who would be glad to make use of erudition if they possessed it. It is a shame that the condition of learning has fallen so low.^ Bayle's sympathy with the efforts of scholars and with their mode of life is apparent. He understands how a man of learn- ing may desire to lead a life of seclusion and how he may get a maximum of satisfaction out of devoting himself wholly to study." Those savants are indeed fortunate, he says, who can work fourteen or fifteen hours a day without injuring their * It is just enough to protest against such citations, says Bayle, when they are inapt and when they are introduced to prove what every one knows. ° In this same reference (cf. supra, p. 64, n. 3) Bayle cites three instances of the unpopularity of things erudite. His remarks on the subject are provoked by the slight interest shown in a commentary on Apollodorus by Meziriac. He also refers to the publication of a translation of Homer to which the original is not added apparently because the Greek characters would turn away the reader, and he speaks of the small favor with which the public received a book treating the mistakes in erudition found in Telemaque. As to what the condition of learning is in his own day, Bayle is by no means consistent. He comments elsewhere, O. D. I. 180, ii, on the great interest that is being taken in archeological studies, and in the notice concerning his Dictionary, D. XV. 237-8, he claims that never before has more attention been paid to the correction of facts in things of erudition. This notice is dated May 5. 1690. The remarks in note 3, p. 64, were evidently written in 1700, for there is a reference to the Nouvelles de la Republique des lettres du mois dernier and a foot note states that this number of the Nouvelles is the one for No- vember 1700. "D. VIII. 494. Junius (3), C Cf. D. III. 304, Bembus, U. 66 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle health/ And he indicates his own preference for that kind of existence which a true cruditus finds so attractive.* The advice which Bayle gives concerning the studies of his younger brother indicates his ideas as to what should be the training of a scholar and as to what should be the characteristics of the finished product.'' This matter of training he considers to be of the utmost importance ; the education which a youth receives, in the fonnative period of his life, stamps him for- ever.^'^ The method to be followed in education should be determined in every case by the needs of the individual ; a teacher should understand the mentality of the student and his special requirements and direct him accordingly. For that reason there must not be a rigid observance of set rules — but a few general principles are worth mentioning. Careful scholarship and ability to make intelligent use of one's learning are the essentials. Bayle writes his brother to devote himself to Latin, Greek and History, and emphasizes the need of exactness in this work. In the study of languages the brother shall busy himself with the technicalities of grammar until he has thoroughly mastered the details, and he shall pay careful attention to literary expression, to allusions, to the exact mean- ing of each sentence. In this w^ay he will attain two objects at once : he will learn the language, and he will come to appre- ciate and understand the thoughts of the author. He shall be as rigidly exact in getting the full significance of what he reads in these languages as though he had to come before examiners who would compel him to explain the slightest details of thought and expression. The habit of thinking about what is read, and answering such imaginary questions, accustoms the mind to ' D. VII. 482, Hall, B. As for the rest, Bayle adds, who are not blessed with such robust constitutions, they do well to take care of themselves ; they will accomplish more in the long run and be more useful to the Republic of Letters by producing a little each day and keeping well. If they devote themselves with too much zeal to their labors they break down, and lose time in the end. " D. XVI. 8, Preface de la i^ Ed., II. Cf. D. XV. 224, Dissert, cottt.. le Projet. •O. D. I. L. 32-5. "O. D. I. L. 26, X. Cf. O. D. IV. 583, xl. Bayle regrets that he did not have more guidance in his own educa- tion. O. D. I. L. 37. Scholarship 67 form clear conceptions, to make use of its knowledge. This is vital, car ce n'est pas ctre savant que de ne se savoir pas servir de sa science, tout de meme qu'un soldat qui est si embarasse de ses arnies qu'il ne peut se remuer, n'est pas un veritable soldat." History is to be studied with the same care for details and with the same attention to intelligent thinking. Maps and chronological tables are important in helping to establish events in their relationships one to another. The exact understanding of the facts of history is essential, but this is not all. Events must be considered carefully as to causes, as to the fundamental reason for this or that particular development ; historical per- sonages must be studied as to the important traits of their char- acters, as to what motives prompted their actions, why they failed in some enterprises and succeeded in others. Get the facts and then think about them. Do not try to run through many books ; read less and retain more.^- W'hile the young scholar is learning how to read and how to turn his reading to account there is another consideration for him to bear in mind constantly. He must avoid pedantry," "O. D. I. L. 32. Bayle does not believe in methods which purport to teach four or five languages at the same time. These methods are either worked out by charlatans who seek advertisement, or by savants who are particu- larly keen in perceiving the fundamental relations of things. The quacks are ridiculous, the scholars are too erudite for youthful minds. O. D. I. L. 37- '-0. D. I. L. 33. Cf. supra, pp. 39. 40- On the matter of getting the right habits as a reader, cf. O. D. I. 678, i : '■ C'est deja beaucoup que d'avoir une bonne Bibliotheque, mais le principal est de s'en bien servir, soit par I'assiduite au travail, soit par les talens que Ton a regus de la Nature." O. D. I. L. 47, xxviii : " J'appelle voyages d'esprit une lecture vaste et illimitee de toutes sortes de Livres. Si on les entreprend ces voyages-la avant que les forces soient venues, c'est-a-dire, avant que d'avoir pose un bon fondement pour les materiaux que Ton va chercher de tous cotes, on risque de voir bien-tot son batiment renverse." O. D. IV. 863 : " Ceux qui ont lu d'une fagon vague toutes sortes de Livres, savent un peu de tout, et ne possedent rien a fond," etc. "O. D. I. L. 34- Bayle indicates a number of times his objection to pedantry: D. II. 181. Apollinaris. D: D. IV. 481, Cateromachus, B; O. D. I. 144, v; O. D. IV. 729, clxxxv. 68 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle he must not publish the fact that he is a student or try to air his learning. A\'hen he is out among his fellows he must adapt himself to their conversation and refrain from obtruding his own remarks on things learned. It is a good thing for him not to stick too closely to his books, for him to take an interest in social activities ;^* in that way he will come to know the world. Such are Bayle's counsels to his brother. The theme dwelt on with the most insistence here, the need of absolute accuracy, is one that is repeated again and again throughout his writings. There are many general comments on the subject and various remarks on the demand for accuracy in particular kinds of scholarly work. A savant must have complete and exact control of the facts of the case with which he is dealing. Apropos of this Bayle says: Le maxime de Descartes est la plus raisonnable du monde, que pour eviter de se tromper il n'est rien tel que de suspendre son jugement jusqu'a ce qu'on ait examine les choses avec la derniere exactitude, et qu'il n'y a point de source d'erreurs plus feconde que la precipitation de juger . . ."" He refers many times to the necessity of consulting sources in order to get these facts. ^*^ And when a scholar has control of the facts he must use them absolutely as he finds them, and not remodel them to suit his own requirements.^^ Exactness is " Cf . D. IX. 302, Loyer. Bayle states that it is possible and desirable to be both learned and polished: O. D. I. L. 75; cf. O. D. I. L. 38, 67. Cf. O. D. I. L. 175: Bayle advocates science du monde for stu- dents; D. V. 321, Cremonin, A: Bayle approves of a professor whose conversation outside of the class-room was more polished and pleasant than learned; O. D. III. 505, 6: " Une erudition mediocre accom- pagnee de politesse, fait souvent beaucoup plus d'honneur qu'une erudi- tion profonde sans politesse. Ce goCit-la regne assez en France presente- ment, et Ton s'appergoit que les gens de Lettres s'y conforment." "O. D. I. L. 99, Ixvi. Cf. O. D. I. 300: "rien ne fait plus de tort aux Critiques, aussi bien qu'aux Philosophes que de se hater a prendre leurs conclusions." " D. I. 404, Alcman, A; D. II. 49, Anaxagoras, K; D. II. 443, Arsenius (3), A; D. VI. 171, Epicure, C; D. XVI. 8, Prcf. dc la v lid. Ill: O. D. III. 729, 30. " D. I. 3, Aaron, C; D. I. 200, Adam, D; D. III. 237, Boaumoiu, I; D. XII. 7, Phasis, A. Scholarship 69 demanded in the finest points. The minutest details concerning manuscripts.'^ different editions,'" the spelling of proper names,'-'^ dates,-' the titles of books referred to,-- typographical errors-^ — all these have their importance and must be given attention. The remarks made by Bayle in the Preface which he writes for Furetiere's Dictionary show the important place he gives to exactness in the case of lexicography.-'* In commending Fure- tiere's work he mentions especially its completeness, the variety of subjects treated, the excellence of the examples given, the remarks on the different arts and sciences. ^^ These details, he adds, make the book interesting as well as complete and exact. One very praiseworthy feature is the accuracy of the definitions. These careful definitions are not only good as such but they give valuable training to the reader by getting him into the habit of thinking clearly and justly.-*^ It is to be expected that many corrections will have to be made in Furetiere's work, for a dic- tionary is always open to improvement ; it could hardly be other- wise in the case of a book where there is such a demand for ''D. II. 476, Artemise (2), C. '"D. I. 432, Alegambe, B; D. IX. 577, Luther, GG. ="0. I. 214, Adam (3), H; D. III. 385, Berulle, note 12; D. VI. 163. Ephore, B; O. D. I. 375. "D. I. 99, Abulfeda, B ; D. X. 338, Marsus, C '^D. II. 119, Annat, C. "^D. III. 88, Barbarus (2), A. Apropos of accuracy in regard to various points cf. D. XV. 236, Dissert. Cont. le Projet; D. XV. 380, Preface sur Diet, de Moreri; D. XV. 384, Preface sur Diet, de Moreri; D. IV. 425, Cappadoce, K ; O. D. I. 102, Avertissement; O. D. III. 523-4, xv ; cf. also D. II. 103. .^ndroni- cus, B : Bayle grants that great exactness is frequently tiresome for the reader; cf. also D. III. 159, Basnage, C: " Les fautes sont comme les etincelles : ce qui n'est d'abord que le changement d'une lettre, devient quelquefois une complication ou un amas de faussetes monstrueuses." "O. D. IV. 188-93. "O. D. IV. 189. ^ O. D. IV. 190. " C'est un mal peu reel pour la Societe civile, que d'ignorer la propriete de plusieurs termes ; mais il n'est point de pro- fession, oil la justesse d'esprit ne soit d'un usage merveilleux ; et c'est une grande preparation pour I'acquerir, que de s'accodtumer de bonne heure a parler des choses de son ressort selon les notions qu'un bon Dictionnaire en fournit." 70 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle precision and fullness.^^ Bayle recommends attention, in writing a dictionary, to archaic words and their meanings as estabhshed by passages from the old writers, to dialects, and to etymology.** He also speaks, in this same Preface, of the usefulness of dic- tionaries and the favor with which they are received in his own day, and he claims that the French have done particularly good work in dictionary-making, although their temperament would seem to fit them for work that required more esprit and less patience.-** In critical editions and in the commentaries of savants on the writings of the ancients Bayle insists again on exactness and attention to details. He approves highly of the effort to have a text that is reliable and correct. The numberless commen- taries on text variants, which resulted from the revival of knowledge in Western Europe and the consequent attention to Latin and Greek, are for the most part unsatisfactory. It re- quires much discrimination to be a good commentator. An editor " O. D. IV. 192 : " Un Dictionnaire est un de ces livres qui peuvent etre ameliorez a Tinfini . . . ;" cf . D. IV. 367, Camden, D ; O. D. I. 60, iii, O. D. IV, 688. ^O. D. IV. 192, 3. *" O. D. IV. 188, 9. Bayle cites Robert and Henri Estienne and Du Cange as excellent lexicographers. For another reference to Furetiere's Dictionary cf. O. D. IV. 801. Cf. the remark : " II seroit done necessaire, qu'il y eut des explications de toutes sortes de mots dans cette espece d'Ouvrages ; f aute de-quoi, il faut passer, en lisant, sur des mots, sans les entendre." The Dictionary of Furetiere is quite different from that of the Acad- emy. The object of the latter, as well as of the Academy itself, is to polish the French language so as to make it a ready instrument for literary expression. Furetiere on the other hand pays much more attention to general information concerning the terms used in the various arts and sciences and professions ; the question whether a term is poll or not does not especially concern him. Bayle expresses the hope that the Academy will cease to be antagonistic to Furetiere's Dictionary, though he grants that Furetiere indulged in severe satire against its members. O. D. IV. 191, 2. The above characterization of Furetiere's Dictionary applies only to the first edition, as the editor of Bayle's CEuvrcs Diverses explains in a note (p. 191). Bayle speaks of the slow- ness with which the Academy produced its Dictionary, in one case, O. D. IV. 191, to excuse this, in another, O. D. II. i6g, to blame it. Cf. O. D. TV. 756, Reflex, sur un Imprimc, etc; Bayle says of the Academy Dictionary : " il vogue a pleines voiles vers rimmortalite." Scholarship 7 1 must be familiar with the original manuscripts, must give a full account of all previous textual criticism, and must add, finally, the results of iiis own study.''" The notes of an editor may be most helpful in explaining the meaning of a text. In the case of an edition of Cicero's orations Bayle praises the plan of placing at the head of each an account of the circumstances under which the oration was delivered, the time, the place, the cause, the judgment given, and an outline of the oration, with the reasoning, the proofs, and the various figures of speech, pointed out.'" Details of this kind about the circumstances under which a text was written,^- explanations of the meaning of the text,^^ citations from other authors whose remarks have some relation to the text — this kind of information is worth having.^* The dedications and prefaces which accompany vari- ous editions should be given. ^* But Bayle objects to the useless digressions which sometimes overwhelm editor and reader alike. ^'^ Whatever is his zeal and enthusiasm for fine details, he does not forget to be practical, and he insists that a text must be prepared with a view to the public for whom it is destined. Extreme niceties of erudi- tion have their place, but not in a commentary prepared for the general reader or for the education of youth. To the average reader a multitude of minutiae concerning text variants have little value; he skips them." Historical and geographical notes and grammatical comments which bring out the force of the author's expressions are more useful to the general public.^® In the case of editions which are being prepared for young people care should be taken to make clear the constructions used in the text, to explain the points which are simple to the savant but which puzzle the novice. Bayle advocates paraphrasing a '"O. D. I. 54. vii. =• O. D. I. 169, vii. *=€£. O. D. I. 155, xiv. « Cf . O. D. I. 634. "Cf. O. D. I. 175. X, 481. xi; D. IV. 369, Camden. E. ** D. I. 444. Alexander ab Alexandre, F; cf. D. II. 72, Ancillon, D. "O. D. I. 169, vii. "O. D. I. 241, iii; cf. O. D. I. 67, iv. ■^O. D. I. 241, iv; O. D. I. 67, iv. 7 2 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle Latin text so that the constructions and word order may not overwhelm a young student. ^^ Translation calls for the same attention to accuracy. A trans- lator must try to be absolutely correct, and must produce a faithful and clear reproduction of the original text.''" He should himself add nothing. Any personal comments must be placed elsewhere.*^ Our author has no sympathy for a trans- lator whose religious zeal moves him to change the text where it reflects discredit on his particular faith.'*^ He approves highly of a translator of poetry who is able to be scrupulously accurate and yet produce a work pleasing and free from the dryness that usually characterizes a literal version.*^ Here, and in various cases, Bayle is impressed with the difficulties involved.'*^ '"O. D. I. 142. iv. It is quite possible to have too much cleverness and too much learning to be a good commentator. Scaliger is an example of this : " a force d'avoir de I'esprit, il trouvoit dans les Auteurs qu'il commentoit, plus de finesse et plus de genie qu'ils n'en avoient effectivement ; et sa pro- fonde litterature etoit cause qu'il voyoit mille rapports entre les pensees d'un Auteur, et quelque point rare d'antiquite ... les Commentaires qui viennent de lui, sont pleins de conjectures hardies, ingenieuses et fort sgavantes ; mais il n'est gueres apparent que les Auteurs ayent songe a tout ce qu'il leur fait dire." O. D. I. 67, iv ; cf. O. D. II. 527; D. II. 64, Anchise, E : "Si les anciens ecrivains revenaient au monde, ils seraient bien etonnes de voir dans leurs livres tant de choses auxquelles ils ne songerent jamais;" cf. O. D. I. 143, v: On the other hand the com- mentator does not alwrays give his author the credit that is due for the excellence of some thought. *''D. II. 31, Anaxagoras, C; D. II. 445, Arsinoe (2), C; D. IX. 154, Leon X. K; O. D. III. 517. Cf. D. XII. 332, Priole, G; O. D. IV. 177: Bayle criticises particular translations for inaccuracy. " D. III. 451, Bion, H. " D. IX. 574, Luther, BB. Bayle criticises a Protestant. "O. D. I. 170, viii. Cf. O. D. I. 633; cf. O. D. I. 375: Approval of a translation of works of Demosthenes, Plato and Cicero where dryness is avoided. " Cf. O. D. I. 141, ii ; Especially: "II ne suffit pas de sgavoir les Langues pour bien traduire, il faut aussi sgavoir les choses:" cf. D. XIV. 269, Tullie, L: " il est extremement difficile de bien traduire; car quoiqu'on prenne les expressions de I'original dans le sens le plus vraiscmljiable, on ne laissc pas quelquefois de s'cgarer : la coniiaissance de cent faits particuliers est necessaire pour choisir le seni veritable." Cf. D. XII. 528, 9, Ryer (2), A. B. Scholarship 7 3 Indeed, exact scholarship in any of these fields is as difficult as it is desirable ; the most learned writers like Scaligcr, Vossius and Saumaise, make slips.*"' Often the mistakes of clever men are enough to discourage a scholar.*" Bayle makes several remarks as to the reasons which make research work so complicated and uncertain. Many mistakes come from studying the past without sufficient documentary evidence. A modern instance brings out strikingly the compli- cations liable to arise in parallel cases. In speaking of a book which claimed to give the true story of the loves of Gregory \'II, Riciielicu and others, Bayle suggests what might happen if between the eighteenth and twenty-eighth centuries a recur- rence of the Dark Ages should be followed by another Renais- sance of letters.*' Perhaps this book, which is full of lies, would be preserved, while a thousand useful ones disappeared. It would be discovered and made to pass for reliable evidence of the amours of these gentlemen. On a ete le dupe d'une fois de pareils ouvrages : on le sera apparem- ment dans les siecles a venir. Patience."" In another case Bayle suggests what might occur if French ''D. II. 33, Anaxagoras, D; D. II. 264, Archelaus (3), F; cf. D. II. 95, Andrinople, B ; D. II. 132, Antoine, B ; D. V. 453, Demetrius Magnes, A; D. XV. 226. Dissert, cont. le Pro jet. The mistakes of great scholars offer some consolation to lesser lights. D. XV. 227, Dissert, cont.. le Projet, II. Indeed, great scholars are espe- cially liable to error. D. XV. 227, Dissert, cont. le Projet, II; D. III. 212, Bautru, B. Among other reasons for this Bayle suggests that the very bigness of these superior geniuses makes them ignore details. He cites Longinus and others on the subject: O. D. II. 170, i. ''D. IX. 541, Lupercales, C. On the mistakes of savants cf. D. XV. 131, Dissert, sur le Livre de J. B. VII. "Les savans sont d'etranges gens; ils courent apres les choses eloignees et qui les fuient, et laissent ce qu'ils ont comme sous la main." Cf. D. III. 399, Beze, E: Bayle says, of the complaints of those who object to the corrections made in successive editions of the New Testa- ment of Beze : " se facher de cela, c'est se facher contre la nature, qui a voulu que nos lumieres fussent tres-bornees, et qu'elles s'augmentassent peu a peu." " D. VII. 254, Gregoire VII. T. Cf. D. II. 497, Athenee (2) : " C'est ainsi qu'il y a tel compilateur, dont notre siecle ne fait nul cas, qui serait admire d'ici a mille ans, s'il arrivait dans la republique des lettres les memes revolutions qui ont fait perir la plupart des livres des anciens auteurs grecs et romains;" i.e. supposing this compiler's work were pre- 74 T^^^ Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle should meet the fate of Latin, and if French Hterature should go through a period of obscurity as the Latin did in the Dark Ages.*^ Suppose that among the works preserved should be the writings of Boileau and the expression in the Lutrin*^ le moelleux Ahelly, where the epithet refers to a book, Medulla Thcologica, written by Abelly. Suppose this latter book were destroyed and its existence forgotten. What chimerical, ex- travagant comments the critics would hazard as to the meaning of the adjective in this application! Doubtless some one would see in moelleux Ahelly an allusion to the fact that Abel ofifered up to the Lord the fat of the firstlings of his flock. ^'^ Evidently the lack of documents is liable to be the source of innumerable errors in scholarly work. Another cause of mistakes is poor memory. Memory is most important in the Republic of Let- ters,^^ but it behooves savants to be careful how they rely on it.^^ The difficulties of scholarship are particularly evident in the contentions which come up among savants. None are harder to settle.^^ Not only the first arguments of each side must be studied, but the successive answers which accumulate as one man replies to the other. In the rebuttals it is likely enough that a disputant will condemn what is good and fail to censure what is bad, so that new errors are added to those already existing. Sometimes it is possible for a critic to discover, at the very beginning, the essential errors in such a dispute, some- times the truth escapes him altogether. The matter may be compared to hunting: a la verite ceux qui cherchent les fautes des auteurs trouvent bien served from the general destruction of books. Therefore, do not despise compilers, says Bayle. ^^D. I. 69, Abelly, A. Cf. D. V. 521, Dinant, A : on a third case where such mistakes might arise. ^-Lutrin, Chant IV. ^" Cf . Genesis, IV, 4. " D. VII. 210, Gratarolus, B. The most agreeable feature of erudition, says Bayle, in one place, O. D. I. 300, is to be able to remember things. But the pleasure is fleeting; a man's memory weakens as he grows older. On the tremendous memory of Montmaur and the advantage it gave him in conversation, cf. D. X. 506, Montmaur, G. "" D. XIV. 485, Urgulanilla, A; cf. D. I. 444, Alexander ab Alexandro, E. "'D. XV. 228, Dissert, rout. Ic Projct. HI; cf. O. D. I. no, v. Scholarship 75 quelquefois la bete toute tuee ou aux abois, mais . . . ils la trouvent aussi quelquefois qui donne le change, ou qui csquive le coup, ou mcme qui se defend encore vigourcuscment quoique percee de cent traits. Lts chicanes que la vanite et la mauvaise honte inspircnt aux ecrivains critiques, ne rendent que trop juste I'application de la metaphore. Cependant cela nous montre qu"il ne suffit pas de savoir copier, pour aller heureusement a cette chasse, et que I'abondance des materiaux n'empcche pas que la construction de I'edificc ne coiite beaucoup." Although such stress is laid on the need of exactness and completeness in all scholarly efforts and although Bayle urges so vigorously that the difficulties in the way be overcome, it must be added that he does not think this kind of accuracy, by itself, enough to constitute an eminent scholar. He recog- nizes two kinds of savants. There are some fitted by their memory, their patience and their industry, to accumulate vast compilations of fact.^"' This type of cruditiis, whose work is distinguished more than anything else by its accuracy, has indeed a place. But there is a higher order of scholarship represented by men of superior critical faculties who can grasp the funda- mental principles of things and who are capable of exploring new fields.^® Bayle refers to the ancient scholiasts as being commendable only for the material found in their commen- taries.^' The German men of science are praiseworthy both for their industr}' and their genius.'® Aside from this varied treatment of the question of accuracy and completeness, there is one other feature of scholarship on which Bayle dwells especially. This is the matter of the rela- tions of savants among themselves. How shall they treat each ** D. XV. 229, Dissert, cottt. le Pro jet, III. Bayle goes on, in the fol- lowing section, 229-30, IV, to explain the great usefulness of a work like his Dictionary, where these disputes are carefully studied and a judgment rendered for the benefit of the reader. "Cf. D. XV. 223, Dissert, cout. le Projet; D. XV. 375. Prcf. de M. Bayle. ""D. I. 453, Allatius; D. X. 215, Marca. N: D. XII. 495, Reinesius. Cf. O. D. IV. 131; cf. O. D. I. 189, ix: Bayle commends a chemist who seeks the principles of chemical phenomena rather than devoting himself to long series of experiments without reference to causes. "O. D. I. 505. ■^O. D. I. 389. iv: cf. D. II. 414, Arnauld (4). O: Bayle speaks of the activity of the savants of Leipsic, and says the city may be named the Athens of Germany. 76 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle other in the disputes which are bound to arise concerning various points of erudition? In point of fact, they treat each other rather shamefuhy. Wrangling is very common among men of learning. Their hves and their writings give evidence of in- numerable quarrels, characterized by spite, jealousy, calumny and other evil passions. ^^ It is rare for them to engage in a dispute without maltreating each other. They may be gentle- manly at the start, but, in any case, they soon change, they let loose their malice, and attack each other with more and more bitterness as the dispute proceeds.*^" There may be various rea- sons for this violence which is so characteristic. N'est-ce pas que le temperament qui fait les grands hommes est semblable a ces terres fortes, qui produisent de bonnes et de mechantes herbes abondamment? Ou bien n'est ce pas que la bile la plus seche forme la vivacite de I'esprit, et que les veilles et les meditations, par lesquelles on devient grand homme, echauffent extremement les humeurs? Ou enfin n'est-ce pas que les grands hommes connoissent parfaitement ce qu'ils valent, s'imaginent que les moindres injures qu'on leur fait sont des crimes qu'il faut chatier exemplairement, afin d'aprendre au Public a honorer le veritable merite?"^ Besides these possible reasons it is certainly true, Bayle adds, that those who lavish praise on savants increase their self admiration and incline them to resent contradiction all the more vigorously. *^^ It is a pity that men of letters cannot rid themselves of this vice.*^ The results are deplorable. The world becomes dis- gusted with learning. It is reasonable to expect that much read- ing and erudition will give a man balance, will tend to free him from the faults and prejudices which induce a quarrelsome spirit. But experience shows that no such desirable elYect is obtained.*^ Moreover the anxiety to find mistakes in the work '^ D. XII. 497, Reinesius; cf : "II semble que les gens de lettres sont ceux qui conspirent davantage contre leur propre repos et contre celui de leur prochain;" cf. D. III. 481, Blondel (2), D: on quarrelsome pro- fessors; cf. D. XV. 226, Dissert, cont. le Pro jet; O. D. II. 320, xx. "O. D. I. 266-7. " O. D. II. 187-8. On the vanity of men of learning, which Bayle deplores, cf. D. V. 196, Cimon, D ; O. D. I. 304, ii. 327; O. D. III. 651-2. "•^D. VII. 79, Gifanius, E; D. III. 157, Basine. F. "" D. XII. 497-8, Reinesius. B. Bayle adds that there is nothing more difficult to obtain than a well-balanced mind. Scholarship 7 7 of an adversary is a dangerous guide ; it engenders other mis- takes.''^ And the disputes of savants make the general public doubt whether accurate knowledge is to be obtained.''"' Yet these disputes have a very definite advantage, provided they are not carried on in a spiteful fashion. Bayle believes, for his part, that the discussions and ditiferences of learned men do add to the general sum of knowledge."" A careful examination of facts as they are brought out in a dispute, leads to the discovery of mistakes, and that is worth while.'"' IjUt of course it is essential that these disputes be conducted in a gen- tlemanly spirit. Bayle has words of praise for savants when they enter into tlieir discussions without malice.'"''* To be a scholar and a gentleman is, then, in Bayle's opinion, a noble ambition. Scholarship does not bring very practical results, but it is inspiring to be a seeker of Truth for Truth's sake, and man's inclinations in that direction are to be encour- aged. The individual who sets out on such a career, who seeks to make himself a savant, has no easy task. But if he is suc- cessful he will find himself a member of a dignified and valu- able profession. *" D. I. 536, Amphiaraus. B. "O. D. I. 223. "* Cf . O. D. I. L. 38, xxi : Bayle refers to the benefit of intercourse among men of letters; O. D. I. L. 37; O. D. I. L. 74: A spirit of con- tradiction is to be recommended in schools and helps train thinkers, but in other places it is not good taste; D. II. 577, Aureolus, B; Gigas, 9. " O. D. I. 190, X. Apropos of a botanical discussion. Cf . O. D. I. 299. ""O. D. I. 19, 71, vi. 302, 507, ii; cf. D. II. 264-5, Archelaus (3), F; D. III. 157, Basine, F; D. XI. 553, Pereira. D; D. XIII. 54S, Suetone (2), A; O. D. I. 185, iv; O. D. I. 438, 9; D. XV. 233-5, Dissert, cont. le Projet, VI. Bayle explains the moderation which shall characterize his criticisms in the Dictionary; D. XV. 243-4, Dissert, cont. le Projet, IX : Bayle states that he will criticise all authors with equal freedom and moderation, regardless of their nationality or religion; Gigas 88-9. Bayle states that the violence of authors is more excusable when they write in Latin than when they write in French. He suggests several reasons for the fact. Those who write in Latin are as a rule men shut up in their studies and not polished by contact with the world nor by reading the modern languages. They catch the spirit of Latin litera- ture, which is so abundjmt in invectives. Furthermore an opprobrious epithet in Latin does not bring up the same vivid associations that the equivalent in the living language would arouse. O. D. II. 201-2, xii, xiii. VIII STYLE Style does not impress the editor of the Nouvelles as a matter deserving special stress. He has a few precepts to advocate, and insists with some energy on the need of attention to clear- ness and to correctness. Style for style's sake, however, means nothing to him. Apropos of his own writings he testifies to the efforts he makes to avoid negligence in certain details of composition,^ but he owns that he is inclined to pay more atten- tion to the reasoning than to the expression : j'avoue ingenuement que j'ai toujours eu plus de soin de devenir capable de bien raisonner, que d'apprendre a bien parler . . ." He suggests several times that there are cases where the excel- lence of the material found in a book may excuse the poor form in which it is presented.^ Since he has such a point of view it is not to be expected that Bayle will sympathize with those who go to extremes in polishing and correcting their compositions. A reasonable amount of care may be praiseworthy, he says, but there is a limit to the efforts a writer should make; he must not be too ^ D. XVI. 6, Prcf. de la i' and their heroic traditions are dis- tinguished especially by the hopeless confusion of the various stories, by the way in which the stories contradict each other and offer widely different tales of the same characters." It is strange that keen-witted and cultured men should have given credence to absurd fables, yet with few exceptions the ancients accepted these myths, which were merely the product of the ingenuity of certain poets. ^- Ancient mytholog}' has, for Bayle, no beauties. When he speaks of ancient literature in general, and of its • D. I. 262, Agesipolis, A ; D. IV. 485, Cassandre, A ; D. V. 203, Cinyras, C; D. VII. 520, 525, Junon, AA, DD; D. VIII. 528-9, Jupiter; D. X. 411, Metella, A; D. X. 418, Methydre; O. D. III. 308, Ixxxii ; O. D. III. 348-51. cxv. It is admitted that the ancients' conception of inexorable deity driving men on to their fate was natural and not unreasonable. Cf. D. VII. 547-9, Helene, Y; D. XI. 306, Ovide. H. 'O. D. III. 94, cxlvi; O. D. Ill, 390. ' D. I. 395, Alcinoe; D. IV. 313, Calenus, A; D. VI. 367-8, Euripide, AA; D. VII. 18, Ganymede, B; D. VII. 546, Helene, X; D. VII. 81, Hercule, B; D. IX. 14, Lais, B. »0. D. III. 381-4. '"O. D. III. 970. " D. I. 159, Achille (2). E; D. I. 170. Achillea. F; D. I. 229. Adonis, H; D. I. 315, Ajax (2) ; D. II. 336, .\ristee, C; D. VII. 504, Harpalyce, B; D. VII. 537, Helene, N. The morals of the heroes and heroines who figure in these stories are deplorable, declares Bayle ; they are as libertine as the heroes and heroines of modern fiction are proper. He does not suggest any explana- tion as to why the ancients, whose virtue he praises in some particu- lars, should tolerate such depravity in these characters. D. VIII, 156-7, Hypsipyle, C. "D. III. 579-80, Boree, G. The Greeks may indeed be called children in this regard, says Bayle. Yet their superstitions are not unlike the absurd superstitions of Cath- olics in modern times. 90 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle relation to the modern, his attitude is at times friendly and at times not. He grants that the study of the writings of the ancients and of the Greek and Latin languages is an important part in the education of a young man.^^ He states that we owe much to the ancients, that the moderns cannot he credited with any great or delicate thoughts which are not to be found in the books of the older writers.^* In speaking of Desmarets and his criticism of the classic poets he declares that for his part he is not against the ancients and thinks them, in most cases, superior.^^ But he does not hesitate to question the authority of the ancients in matters of literature. He is glad not to be carried away by extravagant prejudice in favor of antiquity: je ne suis giieres malade, Dieu merci, de cette grande prevention que Ton a pour I'Antiquite.^'' Many believe that the ancients have written nothing which does not have superior merit ; they seek a hidden meaning in things which seem flat, and which, as a matter of fact, are so. Such a point of view is nonsensical ; the ancients as well as the moderns are not impeccable. ^'^ '^O. D. I. 142, iv; O. D. I. L. 22; cf. D. I. 285. Agricola (5), I: O. D. I. L. 47-8. Bayle suggests, in one case, that the advantage of studying Greek and Latin is in the mental training of the student. He adds, speaking of Latin : " Surmontez la difificulte que vous trouverez a composer, car il y a mille occasions ovi de pouvoir faire des dissertations, dcs amplifications et des lettres en Latin, fait passer sans autre preuve pour un oracle . . ." O. D. L L. 69. Cf. O. D. L 178, iv. Bayle advocates the study of Greek. Interest in this heUe langue has declined far too much. '* D. V. 295, Corbinelli, F. It is to be noted that in pointing out the excellence of the ancients Bayle instances their metaphysics and ethics. In regard to these he suggests, apropos of Descartes, that the moderns are superior by reason of their power to select and systematize. " O. D. I. L. 60, XXXV. Bayle grants that Desmarets attains a certain success in attacking the ancient poets. "O. D. IV. 533. Cf. D. III. 572. Boree; D. XIV, 437. Virgile. L; Gigas, 28. " O. D. IV. 536. Cf . O. D. I. 143, v. Cf. O. D. I. 19: Bayle refuses to give a definite opinion of Homer: he mentions the differences of critics as to the merits of the Greek, and he goes on to say: "On I'a traduit en Frangois depuis peu fort purement, et on lui a ote plusieurs basscsses, qui sont tout a fait eloignees Ancients and Moderns 91 In the comparisons which Bayle makes concerning the literary efforts of the ancients and moderns in particular genres he gen- erally awards the palm to his contemporaries. He has some- thing to say about the poetry of the two schools, and makes a few remarks about other methods of literary expression. The epic of the ancients is far too simple and naive. Homer was a great genius and produced masterpieces, but he introduced into his work elements that are too common, too bourgeois, ele- ments that, in the seventeenth century, could be tolerated only in comedy. Doubtless if he had lived in modern times he could have written a faultless epic, but as it is, various details of his work may be censured on the score of naivete. It is naive to represent Andromache as lamenting, when Hector dies, that little Astyanax will no longer eat sheep fat and marrow while seated on his father's knee. It may have been natural for Andromache to say this, but it destroys the dignity of the epic.^^ The dignity of the epic suffers again when Achilles is repre- sented as weeping at the loss of Briseis, his concubine, and, like a little boy, carrying his tale of woe to his mother for consola- tion." The conduct of Xausicaa when Ulysses presents himself to her in Phaeacia is most ingenuous.^*' It is absurd that Phcenix, de DOS manieres: mais tous ces soins n'ont pas sauve le Prince des Poetes du mepris de nos Connoisseurs. Je me garderai bien de dire qui sont ceux qui ont le gout deprave ; car je ne veux pas subir I'Arret terrible qu'avec I'approbation de la plijpart de nos Sgavans, le jeune Casaubon a prononce sur tous ceux qui n'admirent pas Homere ; ' qui Homerum contemnunt vix illis optari quidquam pejus potest quam ut fatuitate sua fruantur.' " Bayle's leanings seem evident enough in this case. Cf. Lenient, pp. 210, 11. O. D. II. 202. xiv. The vanity which characterizes the classic writers, says Bayle. offers a bad example for the moderns. " Combien croyez-vous, Monsieur, que les Vers du troisieme des Georgiques, ou Virgile promet a Mantoue sa patrie. et a I'Empereur Auguste. de les immortaliser par ses Ouvrages, ont fait mentir de mechans Poetes, qui ont dit a I'imitation de celui-la, que leurs Vers dureroient eternellement? Parce qu'Horace et Ovide ont dit que leurs Vers dureroient plus que les marbres, et qu'ils resisteroient a toutes les injures du tems, n'y a-t-il pas eu une infinite de Poetes bons et mauvais, qui ont prophetise eux-memes I'immortalite de leurs Poesies." Bayle also refers to Cicero here. " D. II. 99, Andromaque, H. "D. I. 160, Achille (2), G. "D. XI. 104-S, Nauzicaa. 92 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle charged with an important message for Achilles, should, when he delivers that message, amuse himself with nurse's tales and stories of adventure.-^ Virgil is also open to censure in this matter of naivete. It is certain that a countess or marchioness would think it bourgeois to express such a sentiment as Dido's apropos of Aeneas : Si quis mihi parvulus aula Luderet Aeneas. . . ." The modern poetry is much more free from obscenities than the ancient. Catullus and Horace express themselves with a license found at present only in such poets as Theophile, Sigogne, Motin, and Berthelot, poets qui font I'horreur des honnetes gens, et qui ne plaisent qu'a des Soldats ou a des Laquais.^^ It may be that the seventeenth century is not actually m.ore virtu- ous than any other, but it is certain that there is more regard for outw^ard decency. The writings of some of the classic poets indicate that the ancient times, now so revered, were really rough and gross, without any suggestion of true urbanity.-^ In one case the ancient poets had particular merit : they ex- celled in depicting passion. Their theory that love is an all- powerful divinity is most acceptable, and seems to be the result of a careful study of the great book of nature. Bayle calls attention to the attitude of Lucretius, who denied the providence of the gods but accepted love as the soul of the universe.-* In another instance, however, Bayle says that the moderns are undoubtedly superior to the ancients. No Greek or Roman writer has produced anything which may be compared with the Contcs of La Fontaine. Certainly the joy of the humanists would be great if they should find an ancient author who had written anything with the grace and beauty and piquancy that characterize La Fontaine's work.-^ "D. I. 158, Achille (2), C. "D. II. 99, Andromaque, H. ^ O. D. I. 69. Even modern comedy and modern fiction, says Bayle here, are freed to some extent from the obscenity that once characterized such writings. Cf. D. IV. loi, Brachmanes, K; D. IV. 593. Catulle; D. IX. 233, Lycurgue. II; O. D. I. 504. i. "O. D. I. 634. *»0. D. I. 273. V. Ancients and Moderns 93 Bayle offers some slight cominent concerning various other literary genres. In regard to the drama he suggests that the modern public would not tolerate a frankness in calling things by their names which did not shock the delicacy of Greek and Roman ears."" In one case he compares two plays, the Amphi- tryon of I'lautus and the Amphitryon of Aloliere. The former is excellent, but if the outcome of the dispute over ancients and moderns depended on these two productions the modems would win. Molicre had to make many changes to adapt the piece to the French stage ; his raillery and finesse are much superior to that of Plautus.-'' As to memoirs, there are few supporters of antiquity so prejudiced as to declare Julius Caesar the superior of La Rochefoucauld.-'* In the matter of panegyrics, too, Bayle claims the victory for his contemporaries — or at least he claims that the moderns go to even greater extremes than the ancients in this regard. The ancients, indeed, hardly recognized any limit : II n'y a presque point de louange qu'on ne trouve dans les anciens paneg>Tistes. Peu s'en faut que Pline n'ait epuise toutes les idees de la perfection d'un souverain."* But the moderns have gone even further: les panegj'fistes modernes poussent leurs idees plus loin que ne faisaient les anciens, quoique ceux-ci eussent une plus ample matiere.^ The most ardent partisans of the ancients, says Bayle, must admit that in this kind of literature their heroes are surpassed.^^ In history also the moderns are superior. The ancient historians are inaccurate, they neglect details, they do not note carefully the events which took place under their very eyes. The moderns, given the same opportunities to control the material, could pro- duce much better histories.^- "•D. XIV. 59, Tecmesse, B. " D. I. 552, Amphitryon, B. ^D. V. 30, Cesar, G. "D. VI. 254-5, Ermite, G. ^-D. VI. 51, Drusus (3), D. Cf. O. D. I. 350; O. D. IV. 535. '^D. VI. 51. Drusus (3), C. "^D. II. 49, Anaxagoras. K; D. II. 574, Aurelien. I; D. IV. 421, Cap- padoce, J; D. IV. 425, Cappadoce, K; D. IV. 504, Cassius (4), F; D. V. 288. Conon (2), I; D. VI. 382, Fabricius, E; D. VIII. 159, Hirpius, B; O. D. I. 617, iii; O. D. I. 633. 94 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle Bayle does not bring up definitely the question as to whether there is any broad underlying principle which should determine a preference for the one school or the other. But he at least suggests, apropos of the epic, the idea that the real issue is the question of progress ; that it is not a matter of comparing the relative merits of an ancient and a modern individual, but of deciding whether the seventeenth century is a step nearer per- fection than the preceding ones. If the epics of antiquity are imperfect it is the fault of their time.^^ The license of the ancient poets is not to be blamed so much on the individuals as on the period in which they lived. ^* In a word, our author seems to think that since the time of the ancients there has been progress. Bayle also says that the inaccuracy of the ancients may be noted in their works of erudition and that their scientific skill is slight. D. I. 418, Aldrovandus; D. II. 257, Archelaus (2), A; D. III. 431, Byblos, C; D. VI. 267, Eschyle, H; D. XL 102, Naucratis, B; O. D. I. 136, xiii; O. D. IV. 731. '''D. II. 99, Andromaque, H; cf. D I. 160, Achille (2), G; D. XI. 105-6, Nauzicaa, C; O. D. IV. 534. "'O. D. I. 69. THE FUNCTION OF THE CRITIC The criticism of books is undoubtedly valuable, in Bayle's opinion. He does not take up the question directly, he does not discuss formally the functions of the critic or the services he may render to the world of letters ; but his general attitude indicates clearly that he believes the role of the literary judge to be significant. Whether he tlrinks that criticism improves public taste or plays any part in shaping this taste Bayle does not say — indeed he probably had no ideas on the subject, for in any case criticism could not mean to him what it has meant to the nineteenth century. But of the fact that it is useful to the author himself Bayle has no doubt. To be sure there are drawbacks. The author is apt to suffer when his work is brought before the tribunal. Since no book is perfect a fair judgment is certain to hurt ;^ it is always possible to find details open to censure. And, though it may be maintained that when a book is criticised it is brought before the public and given especial prominence, this is a doubtful advantage, as is seen in the case of the Cid. Certainly M. Corneille had no reason to be thankful for the remarks of Scudery and the Academy, which indeed brought his famcusc tragicomcdie to the attention of the whole reading public, but which revealed to this public serious faults.^ Yet even if criticism lays bare imperfections and so disturbs the peace of an author, it brings mistakes to his attention and enables him to correct blemishes which would otherwise have continued to disfigure his work.^ This is surely worth while. ^O. D. IV. 530. " O. D. IV. 530. Cf . " En effet il est certain que comme la reputation d'une Femme vertueuse ne se releve jamais si parfaitement des blessures de la calomnie, qu'elle n'en porte toujours la cicatrice; un savant homme qui essuye la censure d'un ennemi redoutable, ne tire jamais si bien son epingle du jeu. qu'il n'y laisse quelque chose." 'O. D. I. 601, viii. 96 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle The characteristics of Bayle himself as a reader and judge of books are shown by various remarks in his writings. These remarks are valuable, not only because they reveal his own indi- vidual traits, but also because they throw light on his opinions concerning the general attitude to be taken by a critic. It is desirable in the first place to note these, and then to proceed to the more impersonal comments which give further indication of his doctrine of criticism. The universal curiosity of our author, the interest he takes in all kinds of books, is shown by his own observations as to the character of his reading. He is omniverous. He shifts from works of erudition to the latest novel — each book interests him in turn and holds for the moment all of his attention. In a letter written in 1671 he testifies to the diversity of subjects which he covers in his reading.* Vous saurez . . . que comme je ne suis pas capable d'une forte application, ce qui fait que le dernier Livre que je vois, est celui que je prefere a tons les autres, il est arrive que j'ai fait une lecture assez vague et assez diversifiee, et que j'ai bien souvent change de tablature en peu de terns, car tantot je me suis adonne aux langues, tantot a la Philosophie, ensuite a I'histoire, aux antiquitez, a la geographic, et aux livres galans, selon que ces diverses matieres m'etoient offertes, et tout cela sans faire qu'efleurer les choses, arrivant que je suis toujours degoute d'un sujet avant que d'avoir eu le terns de le connoitre. soit qu'il ne me plaise plus du tout, soit qu'il me plaise moins que quelqu'autre dont la curiosite me prend. D'ou que cela precede, il est certain que jamais amant volage n'a plus souvent change de maitresse, que moi de livres.'"* He goes on to speak of some of the books he has read. He names first a Greek Grammar by the older Vossius, next Homer, Hesiod and Theocritus, then the Latins, Juvenal, Ovid and Cicero, and finally a variety of modern authors. The moderns, he says, seem to have attracted him more than the ancients. The list of modern writers given here includes such men as Saumaise, Morus, Milton, Spanheim, Scaliger and le Fevre. He mentions also Mile, des Jardins and Mile, de Scudery. This same universal interest of Rayle is reflected in a remark to his younger brother." When he writes to his brother concerning some book it does not *0. D. I. L. 13. ° O. D. I. L. 13. •O. D. I. L. 37. The Function of the Critic 97 mean that he recommends it, says Bayle ; simply it is a new book, or he has read it or heard of it— therefore it seems worth mentioning. I>ayle suggests that he is as superficial in this read- ing as he is catholic, that he looks into many books but that he does not give them profound thought and that they do not make a lasting impression on him.^ Doubtless he glided lightly over many subjects, but in view of his own productions and his written comments on books, this statement is to be accepted with reserve. It certainly cannot be said that Bayle did not think a1)out what he read. The editor of the i\ouvcllcs states that he is inclined to be very lenient when he judges a book. He looks on authors with particular favor, on account of the way they devote their efforts to the public good, and consequently he is always more ready to praise than to blame. On se sent un grand penchant a loiier les Livres dont on parle, et c'est la moindre reconnoissance que Ton puisse avoir pour un Auteur qui nous instruit, et qui a quelquefois travaille plusieurs annees de suite avec des fatigues accablantes, a nous faire son present.* This same readiness to criticise favorably is reflected in his remarks about the pernicious maxim that a book to be esteemed must be without fault.'' Furthermore he objects to the severity 'Cf. O. D. I. L. 13; O. D. I. L. 107. '■ O. D. I. 102 Avertissement. Cf . O. D. II. 287 : Bayle refers to his tendency to say that a book is good rather than bad. as a weakness which shows lack of penetration; cf. O. D. II. 236: "j'avoue que j'ai plus de penchant a trouver qu'un Livre est bon, qu'a trouver qu'il est mauvais ;" cf. O. D. IV. 750-1, xix : " II n'y a gueres de Livre qui ne me paroisse bon, quand je ne le lis que pour le lire. II faut que pour en trouver le foible, je m'attache de propos delibere a le chercher." The criticism which is written with a careful regard for proofs, with careful thought and meditation, is of course more valuable, says Bayle, than the criticism which consists of general praise. 'O. D. IV. 178. viii; cf. O. D. IV. 580-1, xxxvii : "II est bien vrai, que comme il y a des femmes, qui a les prendre en gros. sont mal faites, bien qu'elles ayent de tres belles parties, il peut y avoir des Harangues et des Livres dignes de consideration si on les examine piece a piece, mais dont le corps entier soit defectueux ;" cf . D. XII. 94, Pinet, D : " Pour peu qu'on soit equitable, et que Ton connaisse la difficulte de I'entreprise, on sera incomparablement plus dispose a estimer cet auteur a cause de tant d'endroits ou il a bien rencontre qu'a le mepriser a cause de ses bevues." Of a translation of Pliny. I 98 Tlie Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle of critics who have never themselves tried their hand at author- ship.^*^ They are apt to be much more exacting than critics who have been authors and who have experienced the difficulties of the metier; the latter judge with less rigor and more fairness. And there are cases where harsh criticism is particularly uncalled for; in some instances critics may be much less able to judge of the merits of a book than the author himself, although his general power of discrimination be inferior to theirs. ^^ It is possible that he has worked on a particular subject until he has an unusual amount of information as to how that subject should be treated, and in such a case his judgment is better than that of the ordinary critic. Evidently Bayle is ready to show a liberal amount of consideration for authors. The fairness of spirit recommended to a critic is seen in the various editorials, if they may so be called, which are inserted in the Nouvelles. In these Ains an Lecteur our author outlines the policy which he wishes to follow in the conduct of the journal. He may see fit, from time to time, to give a definite judgment of a book, but certainly any remarks which are introduced will be free from malice, and will be couched in such terms as not to irritate the author in question. He does not, by any means, set himself up as a final judge; whosoever sees fit may appeal from his decisions. Indeed tastes so vary that a man should show neither astonishment nor chagrin when others fail to agree with him. Any remarks which Bayle makes are subject to the corrections of the readers. If a reader convinces him of a mistake in a fact or an opinion he will be grateful and will publish the matter in the Nouvelles, provided, of course, that the censure is not vindictive and personal. He is not one who believes that the dignity of an author suffers when he shows a willingness to submit his work to the public and to be corrected by the public. "•D. Vri. 470, Ilaillan. I; D. XV. 246, Dissert, cont. le Projct, C. Cf . O. D. I. 29s, iii : It is easier to criticise another man's book than to write a book oneself which shall be as good. " D. VII. 471, Haillan, I. Bayle adds a personal note; he says he knows belter liow the Dictionar\ slumld be written tiian some of his critics. The Function of the Critic 99 In short, if Bayle sees fit to criticise a book, he will be fair and moderate, and not claim that he is tout Ic mondc.^'- This same insistence upon fairness, and upon the exactness necessary in an equitable judge, is further indicated in remarks outside of the N ouvcUcs?'^ Bayle states that when a man sets out to judge a book he should take into consideration the age and position of the writer, tiic nature of the subject which he is treating, and the kind of i)ublic he is api)ealing to in his production. ^^ Bayle dwells particularly on this need of consider- ing the purpose of the author. He speaks of this apropos of Fontenelle's Hisfoirc dcs Oracles^'' The public is apt to censure a book which is full of erudition but which is dry and unattrac- tive ; the public is equally ready to find fault with a work more distinguished for polish than for learning. In either case the public is very likely wrong. For, above all, the end which the "Cf. O. D. I. 2, loi, 196, 504. Cf. also O. D. IV. 614, Ixiii ; 620; 621, Ixxi. Cf. also D. XVI. lo-li, Pref. de la Premiere Ed, iv : Bayle says that he ventures to correct authors in the same spirit that a humble soldier might criticise his general — all the while recognizing his own inferiority. Cf also D. XV. 10, Zabarella, G: Bayle explains that he has changed opinion concerning a book which he first knew only through others, and which he has since read himself. He does not suppress his earlier opinion, already published, but admits frankly that he was wrong. Cf. also O. D. I. 440: It is suggested that a man of good sense would not try to give a final judgment of the worth of an author. " Ce seroit trop se commettre, et usurper un Empire dont on secoiieroit le joug incessamment et qui ne reiissiroit pas meme dans Rome a un Concile de Trente." Bayle holds that authors should accept his criticisms in the spirit which prompts them. He judges his own friends, he says, with par- ticular freedom, and believes they will understand his motives. Indeed it is a slur on an author to hesitate in criticising him ; it implies that he is not broad enough to accept corrections in the right way. D. VI. 603. Fronton, C; D. XV. 234-5. Dissert, cont. le Pro jet, vi ; O. D. I. 508, iii. Cf. also O. D. II. 165 : Bayle testifies to his own willingness to be corrected (apropos of the Critique Generale de I'Histoire du Calvinisme) ; cf. O. D. IV. 621, Ixx. ^' Cf . D. XII. 217, Polonus, B : " deux qualities essentielles a un bon censeur, I'equite et I'exactitude." Apropos of religious controversy. " D. III. 493. Boccace, I. "O. D. I. 750. I oo The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle author seeks to attain must be considered, and it may be that he is writing for men of science who would be content only with a work that bristles with learning, or it may be that he is catering to the popular taste and tries to choose what would be interesting and diverting for the ordinary reader.^*^ IMany would-be critics of books need to have this distinction brought before them. Exactness demands that one should be extremely careful in reporting the remarks of an author. A critic must set up for himself a hard and fast rule : let him report the statement of his author accurately, adding nothing and taking nothing away. He must not draw conclusions from an author's statement and refer to them as the author's own, unless the latter admits them as such.^^ Criticism, then, is to be carefully restricted by the demands of impartiality and accuracy. But these are the only limitations upon which Bayle insists ; indeed he dwells especially on the liberties w-hich a critic may allow himself once he has recognized these requirements. The Republic of Letters is a free state ; its citizens are on equal terms and there is no such thing as special favor. The law has no authority in this dominion. It is deplorable for a man, engaged in criticizing another in the Republic of Letters, to call upon the law to defend him against his adversary, to appeal to the authority of the magistrates to suppress the other man's books. Such an action betrays the weakness of his own position, lays him open to ridicule and increases interest in the writings of his opponent. He may derive a certain satisfaction from showing the world at large his influence in the courts, and he may convince some ignorant '" Bayle adds : " C'est un merite bien plus releve qu'on ne pense, que composer un Ecrit dont les materiaux valent moins que la fagon. .'' O. D. I. 750. " D. III. 122, Barlette, B ; cf . D. V. 6, Cerinthus, B : " quel droit a-t-on d'imputer a un auteur un detail qu'il n'expose pas?"; cf. O. D. IV. 175: a reference to " le soin de n'imputer pas aux Auteurs que Ton critique ce qu'ils n'ont point dit ;" cf. also O. D. I. 449-50 : " Car lors qu'il s'agit de rendre compte d'un Livre, j'y aporte toute I'attention dont je suis capable . . . ;" cf. also D. III. 331, Berenger : " quand on appuie trop rigidement sur certaines expressions, sans se revetir de cet esprit d'equite qui cherche le sens d'un auteur dans le but et dans les principes de scs ouvraRcs, on trouve aiseinent des propositions erronees." Of an accusation that Saint Bernard was heterodox. The Function of the Critic ini people that, since the other man's books are so condemned, they contain falsehoods ; but he is wrong to introduce law into a matter with which law has nothing to do.^** The only tribunals recognized in the Republic of Letters are those presided over by Truth and Reason. Before these each citizen of the state is on absolutely the same basis as his fellows, and before these lie has the right and duty, when occasion arises, to criticise his best friends and the members of his own family. It is just that one citizen of the Republic should refute another who has, he thinks, made a mistake; the credit of the second man may, indeed, be impaired, but his critic has to take the same chance, and it is all in the interest of truth. ^'•' With the principle established that there shall be absolute freedom of speech in the Republic of Letters within the bounds of justice, the question remains as to what standards shall be set up for judging a literary work. Is there an absolute code of tastes according to which each case may be decided? Nat- urally enough, Bayle does not give the matter any formal treat- ment. But various remarks give some indication of his ideas on the subject. He does have something to say on standards of taste, and there are some suggestions as to the possibility of variance in these standards according to time and environment. Taste is really an individual matter, and each individual has a standard of his own, based upon his own particular make-up. ''' D. XIV. 134-7, 140-1. Thomas, D. E. I. Apropos of the quarrel of Girac and Costar. Cf. D. XIV. 49, Tavernier, E: The public is the natural tribunal for judging a dispute among men of letters, but a controversial writer may indeed appeal to the courts when his personal honor is attacked in an insulting libel. '" D. IV. 584, Catius, D. Bayle speaks especially of savants. He also brings up the question of libels in the Republic of Letters and attacks the practice with some vigor; cf. O. D. IV. 529, iv : A ref. to " le genie republicain et independant du bel Esprit;" cf. O. D. II. 203, vii : Bayle characterises the Republic of Letters and speaks once more of the need of avoiding malice. He says : " II importe au bien general de la Republique des Lettres, la plus libre, et la plus independante de toutes les Societes, que personne n'entreprenne impunement sur la liberte des autres, et que Ton fasse sentir avec usure a ceux qui foulent aux pieds les regies de I'honnetete, ce qu'ils ont fait sentir a leurs Confreres;" cf. O. D. I. 444, Avcrtiss: Readers and authors in the Republic of Letters have the right to criticise each other freely. ia2 The. Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle One of Bayle's comments on the variety of ways in which differ- ent people will judge the same thing is especially interesting. Plusieurs personnes regardent un meme tableau, Chef-d'oeuvre d'un Michel Ange, et en font mille jugemens differens. Celui qui est dans le point de vue, et qui est connoisseur le trouve admirable; d'autres qui le regardent d'un autre point, et qui n'ont nul goiit, ni habilite, le meprisent. Le connoisseur pourra se moquer tant qu'il lui plaira de leur ignorance, ou en avoir pitie ; mais il seroit ridicule s'il les accusoit de mentir, et de soutenir malicieusement que le Tableau ne vaut rien, pendant qu'ils savent le contraire. Oh ! mais la beaute de ce Tableau est si visible qu'il n'y a pas moyen de ne la voir pas ! Qui vous a dit cela, et vous-meme qui la connoissez si bien, voyez-vous la bonte et la beaute de certaines pierreries qu'un Joiiaillier pretend qui doit sauter aux yeux de tout le monde? Vous trouvez peut-etre le vin de Canarie si bon, que vous croyez qu'il ne faut qu'avoir une langue pour sentir cette bonte ; mais combien y a-t-il de gens qui valent autant que vous, et qui ne boivent que de I'eau, qui ne sauroient mettre dans leur bouche le vin sans le trouver tres-mauvais. Ainsi c'est une ignorance crasse du monde, et de I'homme principalement, que de juger du gout d'autrui par le notre."" Beyond this fact of the variability of taste Bayle has only one general principle to lay down on the subject; but on this one he insists with considerable definiteness. The judgment of con- noisseurs is infinitely superior to that of the general public ; the testimony of the minority is, in many cases, much more weighty than that of the majority. ^^ It is true, of course, that a work of art which is approved both by the people and by the critics of the metier may be reckoned better than one which wins the votes of the latter only. There are certain branches of art, such as painting, music and oratory, which, appealing to the senses, often have a distinct attraction for both classes. But when it comes to a choice between the approbation of the one class or of the other, as often happens in the case of qualites de I'esprit, there is no doubt as to which is the more desirable. The drama, to be sure, is meant, above all, to please the people, and therefore a playwright is excusable for catering to their taste, but certainly the praise of those few who are well acquainted with the details of composing a piece is much surer proof of excellence than the *" O. D. II. 396. It must be noted that this is part of an argument which Bayle uses in a religious controversy. ^'O. D. III. 200-204. The Functioti of the Critic 103 commendation accorded by the general public. Oratory offers another example. If those who give public addresses had to choose between pleasing the crowd and pleasing a select few, the common weal would probably demand that they choose the first alternative. But, in any case, a speech or sermon which receives the vote of the connoisseurs is certainly superior to one approved only by the vulgar herd. Just as Bayle insists on the value of the opinions given by the elect, so he decries the importance of popular judgments. Often enough the reading public does not understand the art of reading," and the mistakes and indeed tiie unfairness of this public are manifest in a variety of ways.-"" They are careless ;^* they skip the passages which they do not understand at first glance, and label them obscure;*^ they jump at conclusions.^* Bayle declaims with particular vigor against this precipitate kind of judgment in the case of certain remarks he makes on an edition of La Fontaine's fables. Because he praises the fables in some respects the readers will at once conclude, he says, that La Fontaine is incomparable in every way. That is the habit of readers : if they see an author praised for his learning they at once conclude he is also polished, discerning and keen ; if they see his intelligence commended they immediately infer that he is also noteworthy for erudition. Certainly these people do not know how^ to discriminate.^^ Moreover, readers are vain, and it is pleasing to their self esteem, and gives them, as well, a certain malignant satisfaction, to be able to criticise a book.^® ■* Cf . O. D. I. 562, "I'art de lire, qui est une chose peu connue." " Cf. O. D. IV. 880, cccxliii : "On ne peut rien voir de plus injuste que la plupart des Lecteurs." Bayle speaks apropos of his own con- troversial writings. =*Cf. O. D. I. 290, ix. ="D. II. 264. Archelaus (3). F. » Cf . O. D. I. 264, iv ; O. D. I. 529. ii. ''O. D. I. 274, V. ^O. D. II. 161. The references to this Avis (O. D. II. 161-3) are to comments Bayle makes apropos of the publication of the NoHvelles Lct- tres sur FHist. du Calvinisme. He is arguing that a writer's second book is not apt to receive as warm a welcome as his first and he makes these statements in support of that. Cf : " Se porter simplement pour Juge de la bonte d'un Ouvrage, c'est quelque chose. Mais juger qu'un Livre est meilleur qu'un autre, c'est I04 TJie Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle They are easily dazzled with what is brilliant, and they do not attach the right significance to solid values. They are inclined to judge a book like a painting. Ceux qui ne savent pas a fond les finesses de la peinture, jugent toujours de la beaute d'un Tableau par la vivacite du coloris : ils ne sont presque sensibles qu'aux enlumineures : les manieres les plus finies qui ont toujours quelque chose de sec, ne les touchent pas. II en va de meme de la plupart des Lecteurs. Un Livre ou Ton ne s'est rien pardonne, et d'ou Ton a banni rigoureusement tous les ornemens superflus ne leur paroit qu'un squelette desagreable.""^ The taste for novelties, characteristic of all mankind, makes readers more enthusiastic about the first production of an author than about what he writes after they have become well ac- quainted with his work.^^ Here is another manifestation of the uncertainty of the judgment of the reading public: on account of this novelty-seeking their taste may be depraved ; they may fail to appreciate the merits of a book by a well-known author merely because it lacks the charm of the unfamiliar. There is perhaps a certain malignity in this case too ; a reader rather enjoys finding fault with an author whose general success has become a little wearisome. ^"^ Balzac is an example of a writer who has suffered from the caprices of the public ; his first pro- ductions are admired far more than the later ones, although decidedly inferior to them.^^ And sometimes an author is re- bien plus. Le discernement du bon d'avec le meilleur flate tout autre- ment notre vanite que le discernment du bon d'avec le mauvais. Aussi on se sent porte par I'amour propre a juger, que de deux Ouvrages composez par un habile homme, I'un est plus parfait que I'autre." More- over our malignity makes us take pleasure in seeing the reputation of an author lowered, so we are especially ready to say that his second production is not as good as his first. O. D. II. i6i. "O. D. II. 162. *° O. D. II. 162. It may be, adds Bayle, " qu'en toutes choses on soit plus dispose a faire sa cour an Soleil levant qu'au Soleil couchant." Cf. above, page 103, note 28, second paragraph. On the ups and downs of authors cf. D. VI. 265, Eschyle, G, and O. D. III. 552: "La Republique du bel esprit est comme la Cour de' Roboam, I'avis des jeunes Conseillers y est prefere a celui des vieux." Apropos of the fall of Cotin. '^ O. D. II. 162. Bayle cites Sorcl as his authority for this; cf. D. III. 73, Balzac (2), G. i The Function of the Critic i o 5 jected merely because his name does not happen to suit the ear.'* Truly the reading public is made up of strange people.'*'' But even if it is agreed that the opinions of ordinary readers are of slight value, and that the standards set by critics of experi- ence are to be followed, the matter of judging still remains complicated. The best connoisseurs do not agree among them- selves.''* The same fact of the variability of tastes and standards "O. D. II. 162-3. "Cf. O. D. I. 334. Bayle says, apropos of religious controversy: "II f aut avouer que la plupart des Lecteurs sont d'etranges gens ; on a beau les avertir de mille choses; on a beau leur recommander ceci ou cela avec de tres-humbles pneres; ils n'en suivent pas moins leur humeur et leur coutume. On a fait des Historiettes sur les precautions inutiles des Meres et des Maris. Je m'etonne qu'on n'en fasse sur celles de Messieurs les Auteurs." As to what kind of readers would be most desirable for an author, provided he could choose, Bayle says he would recommend those neither too learned nor too ignorant. The first discern faults too readily, the others have not enough discrimination to pick out the good points. Bayle agrees with Lucilius on this score and cites Cicero's expression of the same idea. D. IX. 486. Lucilius. F. Cf . however. O. D. I. 505 : Bayle approves the remark of Mile, le Fevre, where she classifies readers into three groups according to whether their taste is good, bad or indififercnt, and where she indicates her preference for the first class. Although he makes these scornful remarks about the characteristics of readers in general, Bayle indicates clearly that in his own writings he believes in catering to their various tastes. He wishes to produce works that shall please all classes of citizens in the Republic of Letters — and they are legion (O. D. IV. 753, xxx.) — by the diversity and inter- est of the material presented. He does not himself care to write merely for the select few who would have him omit such points of erudition as are already known to the learned, and who are impatient at such digressions as serve only to refresh the everyday reader after troubling his everyday brain with abstract problems of philosophy and theology. Various comments of some length show Bayle's attitude. For remarks in reference to the Dictionary, cf. D. VII. 112, Gomarus, B; D. XV. 232. Dissert, cont. le Pro jet; D. XV. 376, Preface de M. Bayle; O. D. IV. 753. xxix. Of the Noiivelles, cf. O. D. I. 101-2; O. D. IV. 615. Of Pensecs diverses a I'Occasion d'ttiic Comcte, cf. O. D. I. L. 142, xcvi. Of Notivclles Lettrcs . . . sur I'Histoire du Calvinismc, cf. O. D. II. 164. Of Repouse aux Questions d'un Provincial, cf. O. D. III. 501; O. D. III. 897; O. D. IV. 840. cccii. On the difficulty of pleasing the public, cf. O. D. II. 252, xiii. ** Cf . D. XIV. 170, Timee, G: "que les meilleurs juges des ouvrages de I'esprit ne s'accordaient guere mieux anciennement qu'aujourd'hui io6 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle is manifest in the case of the elect. In any instance, the fate which a book meets at the hands of the pubhc is more or less a matter of chance. ^^ All rules are inadequate. The Cid and Montaigne's Essais are most irregular, but have met with unusual success.^" There is only one principle which is incontestable : de gustibus non est disputandnm}' Although the Rotterdam sceptic sees so little that suggests uniformity in any aspect of the question of taste, he is inclined to grant that the standards which may prevail at any given time have enough in common to differentiate them from the standards which characterize other periods. He is ready to admit that methods of literary expression and the principles by which these methods shall be judged vary as units from age to age. Of the world in general he agrees, of course, that there is a marked difference in the manners, language, point of view, etc., of the successive centuries. ^^ He does not hold, however, to ;" cf . D. VIII. 403, Jove, F : " N'en f aut-il pas conclure que le gout des plus excellens critiques n'est pas uniforme sur une matiere qui ne devrait point partager les jugemens?" Apropos of the style of Paul Jove. ^ Cf. Gigas. 39, 40; cf. O. D. I. 714, vi. "II est sur que le caprice de I'etoile domine autant sur les Livres et sur la reputation des Ecrivains, que sur aucune autre chose, et que c'est un ressort plus puissant que les eloges ou que la censure de tels et de tels . . . ;" cf. D. XV. 212, Dissert, sur le Jour, VI : " le bonheur qui preside sur certains ecrits . . . ;" cf. also O. D. III. 204: " Vous n'ignorez point ce que I'esprit de cabale, le caprice, ou le changement de goiit, la com- plaisance interessee, contribuent quelquefois a faire avoir plus de vogue a ceux qui n'excellent pas autant que d'autres dans les beaux arts ; " cf. also O. D. I. 79, iii : " rien ne donne tant d'envie d'avoir un Livre que la difficulte de le trouver ; et c'est bien souvent par cette difficulte que des Livres qui ne valent rien, acquierent une grande reputation." Apropos of a religious controversy. ^ D. XII. 28, Philistus, E. Bayle cites La Bruyere in a passage where the latter comments on the diflference between a bel ouvrage and un ouvrage parfait ou reguUer, and takes the Cid as an example. " Cf . O. D. I. L. 146, xcviii : " on ne dispute point des gouts ; cf . O. D. I. 171; " Cela nous doit montrer que la beaute n'est qu'un jeu de notre imagination, qui change selon les pais et selon les siecles." Apropos of the taste of the ancients, who considered a petit front a mark of beauty. " O. D. II. 256: "Si les Frangois du cinquieme siecle revenoient au monde, il ne retrouveroient pas en France ni leur langue, ni lours manirs, The Function of the Critic 107 the idea that these changes point to a distinct progress. The moral development of man is nil ; his history is a history of alternate ups and downs and, at the end, he is left where he started. Le monde est un veritable jcii de bascule; tour a tour on y monte et on y descend. On doit admirer dans ce jeu-la les profondeurs dune sage providence, et Tactivite de nos passions. . . . D'ici a deux mille ans, si le monde dure autant, les reiterations continuelles de la bascule n'auront rien gagne sur le cceur humain."" In his attack on the practice of bringing the secular arm of the state to bear against those accused of heretical doctrine, Bayle speaks with particular definiteness on this. lack of progress. The world is too unsteady to profit from past weaknesses.**' And in one of his letters Bayle puts the shifting in morals and the shift- ing in matters of learning into the same classification. II en va des mocurs comme des Sciences. Celles-ci ne vent pas en augmentant. Parvenues a un haut degre, elles font place peu a peu a I'ignorance; et, a leur tour, les Siecles barbares, parvenus au comble, font place a une nouvelle naissance de I'erudition. C'est ce que I'Histoire nous apprend." On various occasions Bayle points out instances of the changes ni leurs manieres de s'habiller, de batir, d'apreter les viandes, de faire la guerre, de terminer leur proces etc. Et si Ton parcourt toutes les Nations du monde, et que Ton compare les loix, les moeurs, la Langue qu'elles ont en un certain siecle, avec les loix, les mceurs, la Langue qu'elles avoient dix ou douze siecles auparavant on y trouve des differences enormes." (part of an argurncnt de circotistance) \ cf. D. I. 242, Agar; D. IV. 104, Brasavolus, C; D. VI. 41, Drusius, B; O. D. IV. 537. "D. VI. 284-S. Esope (2), I. *" D. I. 61, Abelard, O. Bayle's attitude on religious tolerance undoubt- edly makes him speak with the more vigor here. " O. D. IV. 731 ; cf. D. I. 514, Amyraut, F: " Le pis est qu'on ne profite pas du passe." Of a certain religious doctrine; O. D. I. 72;^'. " c'est la destinee de I'homme de profiter peu du terns passe, et de laisser revenir les memes fautes, aussi-bien que l^s memes modes ; " D. V. 278. Conecte, C : " Combien les modes ont leur flux et leur reflux ;" O. D. I. 708-9 : '■ On se lasse de tout, et c'est pour cela que les modes les plus courues disparoissent tot ou tard. II y en a peu qui s'en aillent pour toujours; elles ressuscitent presque toutes apres un certain nombre d'annes. Je ne sais si les Recueils des Pieces choisies qui ont ete autrefois si a la mode, et qui ont tant fait gagner les Libraires, se releveront un jour de leur chute." io8 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle which take place in things Hterary from age to age, from gen- eration to generation, even. There is a marked difference be- tween the majestic simpHcity of style characteristic of Virgil, Cicero and the writers of their day and the dazzling but inferior brilliancy of Pliny the Younger, Seneca and Tacitus, who repre- sent a later period in Latin literature.*- The difference in the age is noticeable in the case of Lucretius. His eloquence was so excellent that if he had lived in the Augustan age he might have rivaled Virgil. But thirty or forty years may occasion a vital difference between two authors. The poets who lived at the time of Henry IV. and those who lived during the minority of Louis XIV. give irrefutable evidence of the changes which occur.*^ The seventeenth century is different from those which pre- ceded it. Contrasted with the sixteenth it may be said to be more clever, but less learned. The sixteenth century men of letters devoted themselves to erudite criticism, and gathered a vast number of facts ; their successors have a different taste and have been distinguished rather by the fineness of their dis- cernment, the nicety of their intelligence.** Bayle refers a num- ber of times to the enlightenment of his own age, but he is *==D. XII. 334, Priolo, L. *^0. D. I. 339, iv; cf. D. IX. 511, Lucrece (2), B: Bayle suggests that a writer's style does not always place him definitely in a particular period. " Combien avons-nous d'auteurs plus jeunes que Balzac, qui ecrivaient en vieux gaulois pendant que Balzac ecrivait eloquemment et poliment ? " Cf . D. IV. 141, Briseis, E : " Je sais bien que dans tous les siecles on ne juge pas des choses sur le meme pied, et que je dois consentir qu'on rabatte de men parallele ce qu'on jugera a propos; mais jamais on ne sauvera le raisonnement d'Horace; et au pis aller, nous connaitrons qu'au temps d'Homere les idees de la raison etaient encore bien confuses, puisqu'Achille, dans I'lliade, s'exprime ainsi : ' J'aimais Briseis de tout mon cceur, quoique la force des armes I'eCit fait toniber entre nics mains.' " Bayle criticises Horace for alleging the love of Achilles for Briseis to prove that it is allowable to love a servant. Briseis was a queen in. captivity, and the parallel is a poor one. Bayle merely echoes the sen- timent of Menage, but shows that he agrees with him fully. " D. I. 183, Aconce, D : Bayle quotes le pere Rapin and grants that he is merely echoing the opinion of this author as to the difference between the two centuries. The Function of the Critic 109 hardly inclined to admit that it is especially superior in this regard.^^ The literary changes which Bayle mentions seem to represent to him a mere swaying to and fro, rather than a motion which is ever steadily in one direction. This idea is brought out when he speaks of the standards of modesty maintained in novel writing. On voit regner dans cette sorte d'Ecrits Ic meme flux et reflux qui se remarque par tout ailleurs; on s'eloigne d'un certain caractere, et puis on y retourne. M. d'Urfe donna plus de modestie a ses personnages qu'on n'avoit fait auparavant. Ceux qui I'ont suivi ont ete encore plus austeres, mais voila que Ton se raprochc de I'ancienne licence." Methods of literar)' expression may be almost wholly a matter of chance, Bayle suggests, in referring to the persistence of the pastoral genre. It happened that Theocritus pleased \'irgil, and that the Occident has accepted the literary tastes of the Greeks and Romans — wherefore pastorals are still being written. This is entirely fortuitous.*' Certainly Bayle has little idea of any evolution in letters.*'^ But he thinks that the differences as to taste in different ages are worth noting, and various refer- ences indicate his belief that in judging individual authors one " D. I. 14. Abaris, I. Bayle says that for the most part " notre siecle est aussi dupe que les autres " in listening to diviners, would be prophets. etc. O. D. I. 34: "On se pique dans ce siecle d'etre extremement eclaire: cependant on n'a peut-etre jamais eu plus de hardiesse a debiter des fables visiblement contradictoires " (apropos of History). O. D. I. 555 : " Voila de ces choses ... qui oblige plusieurs personnes a dire . . . que notre siecle, avec toutes les lumieres dont il se vante, est plus fou que les precedens. . . ." Apropos of the dragonnade in France. Note, however, these cases where Bayle speaks favorably of his own age : O. D. I. L. 99, Ixv : " les lumieres de ce siecle delicat et savant," etc.: O. D. I. 41, xi : Apropos of scientific Academies Ba\le says: "Ainsi nous voila dans un siecle qui va devenir de jour en jour plus eclaire, de sorte que tous les siecles precedens ne seront que tenebres en comparaison." "O. D. I. 651. i. *' O. D. I. 634. **Cf. however. O. D. II. 201. Bayle approves a passage from VEglise Protestante justiHee par I'Eglise Romainc, wherein is a suggestion that poetic standards progress from age to age. no The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle should take into account the standards of excellence which pre- vailed during their particular periods.*^ There is another factor to be considered in the judging of a book; the question of the milieu in which the author wrote. At least Bayle suggests this, although here again he does not give any definite comment on the subject. There are various refer- ences to the curiosity of those who like to know about the lives of authors and the circumstances under which their works are written, and Bayle seems to think that it is worth while to gratify such curiosity. ^° Apparently he thinks that these data may have significance in the criticising of a book.^^ He mentions several influences which may have some effect on an author and his productions. He has nothing to say as to what may be the importance of woman in the Republic of Let- ters, but he grants that the sex a ete la principale occasion, et le meilleur instrument de la civilite et de la politesse qui s'est vue parmi les hommes. . . .^" Court life gives a certain polish and esprit, but does not develop the solid intelligence able to grapple with the problems of theology and philosophy.^^ ]\Ien of letters who can live in a big city have a very distinct advantage.^* It is there that they can count on a good supply of books, that they can hear the best teachers and draw inspiration from conversations with the most learned. There is no better place to acquire a polished correct- *°Cf. D. II. 283, Aretin, A: "II (Aretino) etait assez bon poete. II faut entendre ceci en egard a ce temps — la . . . ;" cf. D. II. 584, Ausone : " Generalement parlant, il y a des duretes dans ses manieres, et dans son style; mais c'etait plutot le defaut du siecle, que celui de son esprit." Of Ausonius. For similar remarks, cf. D. III. 24. Badius, L; D. IV. 15, Bossus; D. X. 338, Marsus, D. ^"O. D. I. 134, x; O. D. I. 140, ii; O. D. I. 601, viii; O. D. III. 508, iii. "Cf. O. D. I. 284, iv; O. D. I. 352, vii; O. D. I. 574, iv; O. D. I. 678, i ; etc. In these cases Bayle gives such details himself about the authors whose works he describes, with the implication that they may have a bearing on the criticism of the books. ■^'O. D. II. 283, vii; cf. D. IX. 215, Lycurgue, D; O. D. II. 286. xvii. "^ O. D. III. 99, cliii. This is part of an argument dc circonstancc. "O. D. III. 503-7, i, ii: cf. O. D. I. L. 47: Bayle recommends his younger brother not to come to Paris until he has attained some maturity. Tfie Function of the Critic 1 1 1 ness in speech, and an understanding of good taste. Country life, to be sure, has its advantages for those who need quiet medita- tion rather than many books and associates ; and those men are happy who can shift from city to country as they like." But writers who have been brought up in provincial surroundings labor under very considerable difficulties. Bayle mentions the fact that the beaux csprits of a capital city are inclined to lay claim to a distinct superiority over those of the provinces, and he is ready to think that there is a real basis for this claim.'*" Provincials generally retain a suggestion of their country rude- ness, however much they may have gotten away from the influ- ence of their own district. Bayle makes one or two remarks on the influence of his home life on a man of letters. There may be cases where an author, free from the cares of marriage, makes more progress than a family man, but it is quite impos- sible to lay down any hard and fast rule to this effect. Often the man with domestic responsibilities is more active and accom- plishes more when at work than the bachelor who has plenty of leisure for letters.'^ Beyond these remarks there is hardly any suggestion of the influence environment may have. Bayle lays much more stress " Bayle adds : " II f aut avoiier que la simple profession des Lettres conduit rarement a cette fortune-la : bien des Auteurs sont reduits a loiier des chambres proche du toit, et ne peuvent pas paier ponctuelle- ment le proprietaire, ni eviter I'exploit d'un Sergent : et tant s'en f aut qu'ils possedent des maisons de rechange, ils n'ont gueres qu'un habit." O. D. III. 507, ii. ■^D. XI. 330-1, Pays, B; cf. O. D. I. 305: Bayle is speaking of the accusation of patavinity made against Livy. Note the following remark apropos of this : " C'est ainsi peut-etre qu'il f audroit f aire pour bien juger des censures des Ancijns : il faudroit voir comment on traiteroit en ce siecle ceux qui se trouveroient en semblable cas." ^^ D. XIV. 502-3, Usserius, B : The remarks are made apropos of religious controversial writing; cf. D. III. 25, Baduel, A: Bayle praises a book which recommends marriage for gens de lettres. Cf. D. XVI. 8, Pref. de la \e Ed, ii. Bayle is glad, for his own writing, that he has so much leisure. Cf. O. D. I. 177, Avertissement: " il est rare de voir des (A) Tira- queaux qui se signalent egalemcnt par le grand nombre de leurs pro- ductions spirituelles, et de leurs productions corporelles." A. " Durant 30 annees Tiraqueau publia un Livre et fit un enfant a sa femme tous les ans." 112 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle upon the influence of time, upon the importance of the particular age in which an author lives. In neither case does he treat the subject formally, but it seems indisputable that he thinks these things factors to be considered by the critic. The critic's duties, then, are clear-cut. When he opens a book he shall be as nearly unbiased as is humanly possible ; he shall bend all his energies to finding out exactly what the author says ; and he shall consider the circumstances under which the book was written, and the object for which it was intended. Then he may speak with absolute freedom, assured that criticism conducted in this way is valuable. XI Summary of Bayle's Opinions; His Characteristics and Rank as a Critic It is clear that with Bayle literature is hardly a matter of art and that he is not a man of artistic discernment. He is interested in letters because he is interested in everything, and he talks about letters because, in true journalistic fashion, he has ideas to express on all subjects. His opinions enlighten us as to the kind of man he was, even in the very fact that they show a lack of c-esthetic judgment, and they are to some extent a suggestion of what the literary tastes of the following cen- tury — really Bayle's own — will be. The calling of letters is, in his opinion, a dignified and serious one, a calling which demands men of superior qualities, and which may be expected to lift them above common, earthy faults. High ideals of conduct are required. When writers disagree among themselves their disputes must be settled in the spirit of courtesy which the character of their work should develop. Those who enter this profession must not be self-seeking nor mercenary ; authorship must not be a petty occupation under- taken by little men with base aims. The whole attitude of Bayle towards authors and towards their productions shows that his curiosity is not the mere idle curiosity of a man who is concerned with the problems of philosophy and religion and who occasionally turns to literature because it is an interesting manifestation of human activity. The attraction which draws Bayle to literature is strong and well sustained. But it is that part which is least literary, least artistic — it is the part concerned with positive, tangible facts, which occupies him. A man of brains and not of feelings, whose intellectual side was highly developed and his artistic sense not at all, he cares most for letters when they touch on RcaVicn. That any one should put his whole soul into a book is an idea wholly foreign to Bayle. A book is a thing apart from the man, an expression of his 114 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle brain-power but not of his personality. Literature is imper- sonal, and not a matter of artistic expression even objective: for Bayle, as we have said, its connection with sesthetics is remote. His attitude towards the various genres brings this out clearly. Fiction is not a method of artistic idealization. At best it does not interest Bayle greatly, not enough to incline him to express any very definite opinions. All novels are alike to him; the Princesse de Cleves and Ariane awaken the same amount of enthusiasm. The possibilities of the novel as a means of presenting various phases of human, breathing life, as a means of offering to mankind studies in life which shall lead to broader, saner conceptions of existence — this is nothing to our phil- osopher. He speaks, indeed, of truth in relation to novel writ- ing; his interest in truth leads him to demand attention to vraisemhlance and to demand it with some insistence. But verity, for him, is positive and substantial and not a conception in which idealizations and things felt rather than known or fully understood, have a place. He objects to the practice of mingling fiction with historical facts. His views on this point are enlight- ening. A conception of art that is based on truth of the tangible kind, but that seeks to re-present this truth in a clearer light — such an idea is wholly absent from Bayle's scheme of things. The truth of the positive sort is too sacred to be contaminated in such a way ; this is the only kind of truth that Bayle knows. He is interested in the effect that novels may have on morals, but it is the immediate and, so to speak, the smaller effect — the directly practical one — that concerns him. Does a novel that presents immoral facts of life lead its readers to wicked- ness? He is inclined to think so. Whether a novel may havcj a wider moral significance, whether it may affect rules of right- living less directly, but more deeply, does not occur to Bayle.j For him the novel is a small thing, essentially a love story of swain and his lady. The subject is to be dropped as soon asl the pair are happily wed. Though the Princesse de Cleves in- terests him, he declares his disapproval of a romance that deals] with married folk. It would not be fair to judge Bayle simply on the basis of j what he thinks of fiction, to declare that he is not an artist merely because he fails to appreciate novels. The novel in hisj Sicnimary of Bayle's Opinions, Etc. 1 1 5 day was still in crude form ; he had little that was really good by which to form his taste. But poetry, drama and oratory were not by any means in this early stage of development, and yet his opinions on these forms of artistic expression indicate the same point of view. It has been noted that to him poetry is frivolous, a jexi d'csprit. As Sainte-Beuve^ remarks, Bayle never tried his own hand at poetic composition. Certainly the product would not have been remarkable. Bayle is absolutely without any conception of the role that a poet may play. He speaks with more scorn of this class of writers than of any other. That a poet should ever be considered worthy to guide his fellows, to give them a glimpse of the light of the world, through the power of his own vision, that a \'igny should declare the poet the far-seeing pilot who perceives directions more readily than his mates and chooses a course more wisely than they — such an idea would have astounded Bayle. The only effect which these " impudent versi- fiers " have upon their fellows is immediate and practical : their obscenities and impieties are demoralizing. The only good Bayle sees in poetry is concerned with matters of fact. A man with some of the feelings that impel the poet, and his brother the orator, may turn these to good advantage in the composition of a history, and add to his narrative dignity and vividness. Here is a glimmer of understanding. But it is rare for Bayle to admit any value in the possession of such feelings. A single remark is enough to reveal his attitude towards poetry : he states that a poet who has written a clever eulogy on tobacco may be expected to express in eloquent verse his indignation at an injustice.^ Drama interests him to the same extent as fiction and poetry. Dramatic^ poets awaken no respect. All productions attract his attention in a certain measure, but he cares as much for one as for another. Lcs Fcmmes Savantes and Psyche appeal to him equally, and he is quite as curious about Arlcqnin Procurcur. The Iphigcnie of Racine entertains him. so does the preface — he hardly knows which he likes better. He has something to say about the Amphitryon of Plautus, drawn to this especially, it may be, because the play involves details that are somewhat ^Portraits Litteraires, I. ^,76. ' Cf . supra, p. 24, n. 12. 1 16 Tlie Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle scahreux. He maintains that Amphitryon is not given an impor- tant enough place in the drama, a place fitting the role he plays. The principle here is a sound one, but Bayle's criticism is not based on the facts, for he is mistaken in his view that Amphi- tryon is overshadowed by Creon.^ Evidently Bayle is not suf- ficiently familiar with his Plautus. The artistic value of the Cid makes no appeal to him, and Chimene seems abominable. The general remarks made concerning the genre are prac- tical in character. What is the direct moral effect? It may be good or otherwise, says Bayle ; something may be accomplished in curing the petty vices of men, or impiety and crime may be promoted. What is the standard for dramatic productions ? The taste of the people. That is, the drama is a divertissement for the people ; they may be entertained, and incidentally improved in some of their minor weaknesses — a viewpoint wholly prac- tical and typical. Doubtless Bayle would see no value in a piece of dramatic writing which is not put on the stage, which does not aim to correct some particular error in maurs and which counts only as a vivid, true and moving portrayal of human passions, strivings, idealizations. The truth of which Bayle speaks in connection with the drama is once more of a positive sort. Whether there is any ideal truth in a dramatic presenta- tion he does not ask. What he wants to know is whether his- torical facts have been adhered to, or whether the facts of every- day existence have been treated with respect. The opera has only one interest for Bayle, the stage effects. Music is nothing to him. Oratory is a matter of the feelings, not of the brain. Orators work on their own passions and appeal to the passions of the audience, they do not use learning or reasoning. They strive to dazzle, they distort the vision. With such men Bayle has naturally little sympathy. He accepts this state of affairs more from indifference than from anything else ; when he makes any positive criticism it is unfavorable. The beauties of eloquence, the clan which sometimes carries away both the speaker and his hearers, the splendid enthusiasm which an orator may devote ta a noble purpose — these have no charm for the dispassionate Bayle. CI. supra, p. 32, n. 27. Summary of Baylc's Opinions, Etc. 1 17 Style is not an artistic process for him. I'cauty in style is not recommended, means nothing to him ; the ornaments of style seem trifling, lie advocates clearness, conciseness, correctness. He objects to the poverty of language, not because it limits man's power to express the beautiful, but because it cramps him in his efforts to present conceptions of things, of facts, in an absolutely clear, clean-cut way. Euphony is much less desirable than clearness. Fact is always to be given the precedence over beauty. When he speaks of individual authors it is evident once more tiiat the artistic side is not what interests Bayle.* The Dic- tionary is decidedly meagre in its accounts of men of letters ; not many are mentioned, and, when they are, the stress is laid almost wholly on the facts of their lives, or on their various activities outside of literature proper. In these articles there is hardly'' any real literary criticism. Bayle's opinions on these men have often to be gleaned from passing remarks scattered throughout his works. It becomes evident that what interests him here, as elsewhere, is the positive side. Homer is praised especially for the attention he pays to vraiscmhlancc:' Virgil is also praised for vraiscmhlancc,*^ and a good part of the criticism on this poet is concerned with the question of his doctrines on Hades and on infernal punishment.^ \^irgirs use of a certain epithet is discussed from the point of view of accuracy ; whether illaudatus was a fit and correct adjective to apply to a tyrant.* The obscenities in ^ irgil are mentioned,'* and there is some comment on the license, in a similar case, which Ovid permitted himself.^" Besides the salctcs, what occupies Bayle especially in speaking of the latter poet is the description of Chaos in the Mctamor- * The next four paragraphs contain various remarks of Bayle which were treated in the present study in the chapter on Individual Authors. Since that chapter is omitted in the dissertation as here printed (cf. supra. Preface, p. 6) the more important references in this case are reproduced in footnotes. = 0. D. III. 366; D. IV. 393. Guise (4). O: D. XI. 537. Penelope, D. 'O. D. III. 349: O. D. II. 488, ii. 'O. D. III. 962-3; O. D. III. 878. 'D. IV 274-6, Busiris, B. 'D. XIV. 424-5, Virgile, A. '"D. XI. 288, Ovide, A. 1 1 8 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle phoses;'^^ here Bayle launches into a long discussion of the ancients' conception of the beginning of the world. Of the other ancient poets there is only cursory mention. Lucretius, of course, occupies Bayle's attention for some time on account of his sig- nificance as a philosopher.^^ For Lycophron he manifests esteem, not on account of his poetic genius, but because he must have been clever to compose verse so obscure and complex." When our author does turn from matters of fact to dis- cussions of the artistic values of poetic creations, he fails utterly. He does not understand Virgil and Homer at all. He speaks with as much enthusiasm of the fables of ^sop,^* as he does of the Greek epic. The dignity and simplicity of the ancients are to him a ridiculous naivete. What nonsense to represent Ulysses, a great hero, as a hewer of wood and builder of boats !^^ How absurd for Phoenix to stop and tell nursery tales to Achilles when he is the bearer of an important message to that warrior \^*^ Here Bayle altogether misses the point, and doubtless he is not over familiar with the incident of Phoenix referring to the boyhood days of Achilles in the effort to stir the blood of that sullen hero. The adventures of Dido and .^^neas have nothing that is romantic or poetic for Bayle. He suggests that the treatment ^neas accorded the lady was abominable. ^^ And as for Dido, he sees nothing but a vulgar, bourgeois sentiment in her ex- pression : . Si quis mihi parvulus aula Luderet ^neas " Bayle is as little interested in the modern poets as in the ancient. Ronsard and Malherbe are given characteristic articles in the Dictionary: that is, literary criticism is almost absent. Marot is commented on more at length and the remarks reveal the uncertainty of Bayle's judgment. For him Marot is superior to all the sixteenth century, the Pleiad containing no poets who may be compared with him, and is hardly surpassed at all. except " D. XI. 285, Ovide. '^D. IX. 507-33, Lucrece. "D. IX. 210, Lycophron (2). "D. VI. 282, Esope (2), G. " O. D. IV. 535- " Cf. supra, pp. 91-2. "O. D. I. 92, IV. '* Cf . supra, p. 92. Summary of Bayle's Opinions, Etc. 119 by such men as Sarazin and Bcnscrade.*" The two seventeenth century poets for whom Bayle has the most esteem are Mohere*" and La Fontaine;-^ of these his high opinion is manifest, i'er- haps it is not surprising that his choice should fall on these two, who are both endowed with intensely human qualities, who are interested in real life, and are not inclined to the filmy idealiza- tions for which he could have felt little sympathy, liayle's judgment in praising these two is certainly commendable. But the freedom with which he bestows his praise betrays his lack of discernment. He names Boileau grand poctc,-'^ but is quite as willing to give that title to the obscure Pierre Fransz.--' The prose writers interest him more, but here again the same tendency to turn wholly to facts is evident. In speaking of Plutarch he does not ask what may be the value of the Lives as a series of vivid pictures of the ancients, wherein their own human selves are brought before the reader, wherein the spirit of these men and of their times is made manifest. The more tangible things are what strike Bayle, the mistakes in fact which Plutarch makes,-* the intentional distorting of facts at times,-"' a piece of reasoning that is evidently bad.-*'' Cicero is a marvellous orator. But the quality of his style which impresses Bayle most is its clearness. ^^ The work of Cicero which brings forth the most comment is the Letters,-^ and in them what interests him above all is the historical feature, the references to actual or probable occurrences. Considerable comment is given the his- torians and Bayle has a high respect for men like Livy,-" Sue- tonius'" and Tacitus. ^^ To the modern prose writers he pays much more attention than to the modern poets. His criticisms "D. X. 313, Marot. "D. XII. 252-64, Poquelin; O. D. I. L. 22; Gigas, 72. "D. VI. 283, Esope (2), G; O. D. I. 374, viii. "D. II. 419, Arnauld (4), T. "O. D. I. L. 140, xciii. '"D. VIII. 513, Junon, T; D. V. 200, Cimon, H. "D. I. 164. Achille (2), M. ^ D. IX. 22,2, Lycurgue, H. "O. D. I. 169. =«0. D. I. 55, vii. ^O. D. I. L. 33; 0. D. III. II, V. "D. XIII. 547, Suetone. '^D. XIV. 7, Tacite. I20 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle are of the stereotyped variety in many cases, but he has a genu- ine esteem for men like Balzac^- who have done much to clarify French style, and for thinkers and savants like Montaigne,^^ Fon- tenelle,^* Saint-Evremond,^^ La Mothe Le Vayer,^*^ Patin^" and Menage.^* The interest which Bayle takes in manifestations of literary activity other than those mentioned — in genres other than poetry, oratory and the like — simply brings additional evidence to prove that he was an intellectual and not an artist. History is a matter of facts for him, a chronicle of the things done by men in their various political relations. He insists, to be sure, upon investigation into causes ; with any superficial list of dates and happenings he is not content. But, in the last analysis, history is still such a list, although lengthened and completed and with the interrelations of the various facts to some extent established. Bayle has no notion of going still further, of getting at the ideas which lie back of the various groups of facts ; it does not occur to him to treat history in a broader way, to treat of the meaning of religious, philosophical, literary and humanitarian ideas in their relation to history. It does strike him indeed, as we have said above in speaking of poetry, that the artistic, idealistic sense of a poet or an orator may be helpful to a historian, may lend vividness and dignity to his writing. But he does not dwell on the idea at any length and does not explain exactly what he means ; it is not certain that he sees here anything more than a somewhat superficial advantage. He suggests that the artist's sense helps in the presentation of the historical material, he does not say whether that feeling enables him to approach a historical subject with more understanding and grasp its significance more completely. As to style, the prime requisite is clearness. Vividness is desirable — doubtless because it enables the historian to make his facts more positive and real. Certainly it is the substantial, tangible element that attracts Bayle. D. III. 67, Balzac (2). D. VI. 260, Ermite, I. ■0. D. I. 547. 'O. D. III. 535-6. 'D. XIV. 303. Vayer, K. D. XI. 444, Patin. ' D. X. 398, Menage. Summary of Bayle's Opinions, Etc. i2i For scholarship, of course, his cntliusiasni is marked. Here we are still more in the realm of facts. It is to be noted how our author's interest increases as we get away from the region of ideals and approach Rcalicn. As a scholar himself P.ayle was indefatigable. Scholarship he defends vigorously against its would-be detractors. He lays down precepts with nothing of the nonchalant manner which characterized his criticisms in fiction, poetry and like fields. Here is something really worthy of occu- pying his attention ; a calling at which a man may spend many long years with profit to himself and to his fellows. Manifestly Rayle is less interested in art than in facts. The cool, hard-thinking philosopher of Rotterdam had little enthusi- asm for the beautiful, and little understanding of it. But to say he lacks artistic sense is not to say he lacks keenness : clever and discerning he undoubtedly is. The rules for reading which he lays down for the edification of his brother are admirable ; they show that Bayle believes in a careful, thoughtful, discriminating perusal of books. It is use- less to read, he says, unless the ideas of an author are under- stood in their full significance ; a hasty, superficial examination brings no profit. In view of the enormous amount of Bayle's reading, and in view of the nature of the Nouvelles, where notices of many books were given each month, it seems likely that he himself was far from a slow reader. He had to cover ground rapidly — and un- doubtedly he was able to do so. Sainte-Beuve is eminently just in according him the quick sagacity characteristic of a journalist. The ready accuracy of the criticisms in the Nouvelles testify to Bayle's ability to pick out, in an instant, the good and the bad points of a production. His skill, too. in giving a brief summary of the contents of a book, so that every salient feature is brought before the reader, indicates the ease with which he grasped the significance of a piece of work. Few of the notices in the Nou- velles deal with books from the point of view of their artistic worth, and where they do it is evident that Bayle's comments are not particularly valuable. But the excellence of his criti- cisms where matters of fact are concerned, where it is a question of historical truth, or of positive reasoning in philosophy, religion, science — the value of these is indisputable. And when Bayle 12 2 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle takes up literary topics from the matter of fact side, the same discernment is noteworthy. In literature, as well as elsewhere, he is a keen thinker. He sees at once the clumsiness of which Plutarch is guilty in the course of his argument concerning the advantages of study to women. He understands that a dramatist needs to draw cer- tain lines with a heavy pencil in his portrayal of character, so as to call the attention of the audience to particular traits. He well understands that there is in comedy an element w^hich is universal and an element which is local, and that, in rendering judgment, this fact must not be lost sight of. He appreciates exactly the force of La Rochefoucauld's maxims, their keen- cutting quality, the esprit, the suggestion of malice and mis- anthropy which permeates them and which is apt to develop in the reader a similar spirit. Homer's description of Helen makes a particular appeal to him, the description wherein there is no attempt to portray her beauty, feature by feature, but merely a reference to the impression she makes on the Trojan counsellors. Bayle perceives the force of leaving the details to the reader's imagination, and feels that Helen must indeed have been mar- velously fair. He sees the poor taste of over-crowding a poem with minute references to fable and antiquity. He appreciates the fact that the charm of a satire lies in its subtlety, in the cleverness of the veiled allusions. He well understands that language is inadequate, a poor instrument which often fails to give to man's conceptions a clear and satisfactory expression. The precepts laid down for historical and scholarly work are sound. The thoroughness advocated is of the discriminating kind. Great attention to detail is recommended but the result is to be something more than a mass of details ; the scholar must be more than a compiler, must use his brains, exercise his power of selection, produce a piece of work that bears evidence of a careful, investigating, discerning intelligence. The scholar must know where attention to erudite minutiae is called for and where it is out of place. Bayle recognizes two kinds of scholars, and gives the higher place to those with broad sane minds, to those . who can put dry facts together and make a living structure of them, who can divine the fundamental relations of things and work out theories from them. The remarks on criticism show the same careful thinker. Sut)imary of Bayle's Opinions, Etc. 123 Bayle understands why the judgment of a few experts may be much superior to the oi)inions of a multitude of laymen who have no intimate acquaintance with the details involved in the production of some piece of work. He dwells with considerable insistence on this point — although, true to his positive and matter of fact character, he grants there may often be practical reasons for following the judgment of the people. Bayle has the his- torical point of view to a much greater extent than his con- temporaries. He has some understanding of how methods of literar>' expression may vary according to time and environment. He sets forth no formal doctrine on the subject, but he has thought about it, and his powers of perception have enabled him to see that temps and milieu are undoubtedly factors of impor- tance in the matter of literar>- production. He perceives this more than a century before Taine and Hennequin. Xo mean critic, then, is Bayle. Certainly his comments are sornetimes enlightening and sometimes reveal a fine understand- ing of what he has to criticise. Furthermore these comments bring out various characteristics which are typical of him in all fields. That he interests himself in everything, that his curiosity is universal, is apparent. The very fact that he pays so much attention to things literary proves this — so much attention to a kind of intellectual activity which would hardly be in the province of the philosopher and controversialist. The long list of indi- vidual authors about whom he has some comment to offer shows how writers of all sorts attracted his attention. And the state- ments which he makes on the subject of how many books he reads and how he skips from one to another are, in themselves, enough to demonstrate his remarkable avidity for knowledge in whatever form. It is evident, too, that Bayle is no respecter of tradition, of authority and set rules. He launches boldly into discussions of the general value of a method of literary expression, and when he thinks a genre is frivolous he speaks freely. No reverence for the great masters of verse holds him back either in discussing their art as a whole, or their individual productions. He accepts the standard judgment of Homer as the greatest of all bards, but he does not hesitate to censure him with vigor. Virgil is a great poet, but he has numerous faults w^hich Bayle bluntly brings up. 124 ^^^^ Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle Boileau is the great poet of his time, but Hke the rest has weak- nesses. In no case does Bayle set up any man as his Hterarj^ hero, in no case does tradition, reputation, reverence or anything else keep him from declaring his opinion without constraint. The ancients inspire no awe. Their ideas in many things are absurd, their mythology is nonsense. Bayle is fair towards them ; he does not hesitate to pay honor where he thinks honor due. But where it strikes him that the literary worth of some classic production is slight, he says so; he is by no means subject to the " malady " of those who think that anything found in one of the ancient authors is right. Indeed, in the differences between the Ancient and Alodern camps, he leans to the moderns ; without taking sides definitely he shows that in that direction lie his sympathies. The remarks on scholarship and on history indicate the same lack of respect for tradition, the same tendency to doubt, the same manifestation of Bayle's great characteristic, his scepticism. Facts of learning, facts of history, are not to be accepted as such, unless there is ample reason to believe in them. The names of the greatest historians do not inspire such respect that he hesi- tates on occasion to criticise them. The greatest savants make mistakes ; Bayle is not willing to take their word for a fact when he can control the sources himself. In history tradition carries no conviction, indeed it is one of the surest methods of handing down falsehoods. With Bayle no long list of authorities and great names suffices to counterbalance the weight of docu- mentary evidence. It has been pointed out by writers on Bayle that the universal scepticism which was characteristic of him resulted -in a universal spirit of tolerance equally typical. The fact is particularly evi- dent in the criticism here dealt with. This inclination to doubt which is so manifest in Bayle in matters of history and learning, is always accompaned by a readiness to be tolerant. It is per- missible, he says, for scholars to engage in disputes among themselves, indeed it is desirable, for such disputes often lead to advances in knowledge. But fairness and respect for the opinions of others must characterize such discussions ; there is no excuse for them unless conducted in a gentlemanly spirit. Nowhere does Bayle insist on tolerance with more vigor than in the remarks on history. He treats of partiality more fully Summary of Baylv's Opinions, Etc. 125 than of any other phase of the subject, he discusses the wide- spread practice of being partial and the way prejudice is mani- fested in the historian, in the witnesses on whom he has to call, and in the reading public, lie deplores every manifestaticjn of this evil, lie grants the extreme difficulty of being imi)artial and does not expect that it will be possible to avoid all bias. IJut the ert'ort to do this he sets up as the historian's First Com- mandment. No attitude could be more tolerant than that recommended by P.ayle in his remarks on criticism. A critic shall make every eft'ort to treat his author with all fairness, shall show every consideration for him, shall find out exactly his aims and the circumstances under which he writes. When this is done the critic may speak freely. And the author in question is to exercise tolerance on his side, is to recognize the fair and equitable spirit which prompts the remarks and accept them as such. Bayle is a free lance, wdiose activity carries him into all fields of literature, whose bold liberal spirit prompts him to criticise everything that comes under his hand. His keenness enables him to see the weak point in every opinion, the uncertain basis upon which all of man's ideas are founded. His innate sense of jus- tice makes him realize that it is not fair for an individual to declare false all views except his own. The opinions of one's neighbor may be quite as good, and certainly are to be respected. In literature as elsewhere Bayle is the universal doubter and the universal tolerant. XII Influence of Bayle The influence of Bayle on the following age is far-reaching. Many of the ideas of the eighteenth century may be directly traced to him. No study of the refugee at Rotterdam would be com- plete without a reference to that influence, and the present dis- sertation may well conclude with a brief mention of how his precepts, those on literature among the rest, were spread through- out Europe. In his own day the role which Bayle played was most impor- tant. His activity is astonishing. He conducted courses at Rotterdam, produced his big folios, and at the same time kept up an enormous correspondence with learned scholars. His books were published at London, Geneva, The Hague and Rot- terdam ; friends and enemies in England, Germany, France, Switzerland and Holland were interested in his work. Boileau took pleasure in reading the Dictionary,^ Saint-Evremond held its author in high esteem.- La Fontaine admired him.^ \\^illiam III considered him enough of a power to be dangerous. Christina of Sweden deigned to quarrel with him over certain of his re- marks. Eflforts were made to reconvert him to the Roman faith, for his value as an ally was recognized. Three English Lords, the Earls of Shaftsbury, of Albemarle and of Huntington offered Bayle patronage, but he was unwilling to relinquish the freedom of his life at Rotterdam and preferred to keep busily at work in his own study. The products of this assiduous labor were received by the public with unusual enthusiasm. The NouvcUcs were in demand 'O. D. IV. 772. * Cf . Cazes, 73. Cf. also CEuvres Melees de Saint-Evrcmond, Paris, Techcner fils, 1865, Vol. II, p. 513, note i. Saint-Evremond's sympathy for Bayle is evident from the sarcastic response which he imagines Bayle writing to the criticism of Renaudot. (^ihid. pp. 513-16.) 'Cf. Cazes. 71. Cf. La Fontaine, CEuzres, Paris, Hachette, 1892. Vol. IX, p. 369. (Lettre a M. Simon de Troyes.) Influence of Bayle 127 all over Europe. The Dictionary was so immediately popular that soon after it began to appear the printer had to change his plans and print many extra copies. The first edition was promptly followed by a second. In 1720, after the author's death, came a third. From 1697 to 1741, in a period of forty- four years, nine editions of the Dictionary appeared — surely an imposing list. During the Regency the Dictionary was so greatly sought after that, in their anxiety to peruse the volumes, zealous students used to form in line at the doors of the Biblio- theque Mazarine. The Pensces were hardly less popular. From 1682 to 1704, four editions were published, and that in the 1737 edition of the (Euzres Diverses is the seventh. \'arious attacks on Bayle's writings undoubtedly helped to call attention to them. The Critique Gcncrale was burned at the Place de Grdve by the Paris executioner. The proclamation against the book was written by Maimbourg himself and was couched in the most violent terms ; the three thousand copies of this diatribe spread broadcast through Paris were calculated to impel all men to inspect for themselves the pernicious work.* Public interest was whetted by further persecutions. The state's authority was brought to bear against the Pensces, and the pub- lication of the Dictionary in France was strictly forbidden. As late as 1750. certain zealots at Colmar. Germany, inspired by a Jesuit father, indulged in an auto da fe during which a number of copies of the Dictionary were consigned to the flames." If other evidence were lacking, the remarks of certain eight- eenth century writers alone would indicate the influence of Bayle and show that his ideas had taken firm hold. To Voltaire he is I'cternel honncur de la race humainc.'^ Voltaire testifies frequently to his admiration. He regrets, indeed, that the Dic- tionary should not be reduced to a single volume from which innumerable articles of little use might be omitted and wherein the style might be chastened and polished.'' He grants also that his hero knew nothing of physics and that his understanding of philosophy was deficient. But after all the Dictionar}' is inimita- * Ci. Disraeli, Curiosities of Literature, III, 142-3. ' Cf . Betz, 128, and the reference in Betz to Voltaire. 'Voltaire, CEuvres Completes, Paris, Garnier Freres, 1877, Vol. VII, P- 477- 'Id. Vol. XXXV, 288. 128 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle ble.** Furthermore, the periodical genre was perfected when the Nouvellcs were pubhshed." As a man of learning, as a keen and profound reasoner, Bayle is deserving of the highest com- mendation. He has a mighty power of exact and careful analysis and, even in the case of the most ordinary intelligence, he is able to stimulate thought." The comments of others, although not always friendly, testify to Bayle's force. Diderot does not by any means agree with all his doctrines, but there is no doubt of the respect he feels for Bayle's contribution to the development of the world's ideas. He is an astonishing man, declares Diderot, in paying him the fol- lowing tribute : Bayle eut peu d'egaux dans I'art de raisonner, peut-etre point de superieur. Personne ne sut saisir plus subtilement le f aible d'un systeme ; personne n'en sut faire valoir plus fortement les avantages ; redoucablc quand il prouve; plus redoutable encore quand il objecte: doue d'une imagination gaie et feconde en meme temps qu'il prouve, il amuse, il peint, il seduit." The encyclopedist speaks of the remarkable popularity of the Critique Generale, and says the comet of 1680 was made famous by the Pensccs. Louis Racine's attack on Bayle in the Epitrc a M. Rousseau shows that even where his influence was detested it was still potent.^- Frederick the Great was familiar with our author's works and absorbed his ideas on tolerance and on the separation of morals from religious dogma. ^'^ He himself pre- pared an Extrait du Dictionnaire dc Bayle, in which he placed those philosophic articles that he considered especially good, and for which he wrote a commendatory preface.^* Viewed then merely from the material standpoint, from the number of editions of Bayle's works, from the facts of his activity and his relations with the great Europeans of his day, " Id. Vol. XIV, 37-9- 'Id. Vol. XIV, 132. •"Id. Vol. XXXIII, 568; Vol. XXIV, 274- " Diderot, CEnvres Completes, Paris, Gamier Freres, 1876. Vol. XVI, p. 490 {Encyclopedic, Article Pyrrlwnicne). "L. Racine, CEuvres, Paris, Le Normant, 1808. Vol. II, p. 95- Vol- taire speaks with particular acerbity of the partiality of Racine in his attack on Bayle; XVII, 553-5, Dictionnaire Philosophiquc, Article: Bayle. '°Cf. Betz, 127-8. "Voltaire, CEnvres, XLIV, 202, note I. Influence of Bayle i 29 from the definitely expressed opinions of the eighteenth century, it is sure that he was long a power. The way this power was exerted, the connection of liayle's ideas with those of the fol- lowing age, may be seen in a variety of cases. There are a number of tendencies for which he may to some extent be con- sidered responsible. After the seventeenth century, with its devotion to art, there came a reaction. The following century was not artistic, was not distinguished for its taste, placed emphasis on the power of the intelligence and not on aesthetic dibcermnent, produced com- paratively little that ranks high in la iitlerature ioute pure. The interest of the age was in philosophy, in the sciences, in sociolog- ical problems, and not at all in art and beauty. Bayle's literary criticism oti'ers the clearest evidence of the early leanings in this direction. It has been seen that his chief characteristic here was his positive, matter-of-fact attitude, his failure to appreciate the aesthetic value of a book, and his in- clination to judge it merely as an intellectual ettort. Xo point of view could be more distinctly of the eighteenth century. In judging those features that make an appeal to the intelligence, Bayle is keen enough. So the eighteenth century : intellectually powerful as well as artistically weak. It seems undoubted that Bayle's tendencies were a factor in the development of the fol- lowing century. Another essential difference between the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries lies in their attitude towards authority — and here again our author's influence is evident. The seventeenth century stood especially for tradition and precedent. In religion, divine and ecclesiastic authority held sway. Whatever the wrangling among Jesuits, Jansenists, Quietists, Catholics and Protestants, their differences were differences of sect ; the basic idea of faith was left undisturbed. In politics it was the epoch of the roi soldi, the voice of the people was not raised, the noble's power was practically nil, the monarchical spirit permeated every- thing. Society was an institution already fully fashioned and permanent ; individuals indeed might change, but authority had set its mark upon the various groups as such, and there were no shifts. Literature had its dictator in Boileau. Here again, only within limits might individuality assert itself; there were just so many literary kinds, and such and such precepts for composing 130 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle in each genre. x'Xuthority demanded that one should be a devout and submissive Christian, a loyal subject to absolute monarchy, a faithful adherent to the established principles of literary expression. The eighteenth century, and Bayle as its first representative, cared nothing for established principles. The spirit of tradition and precedent was given many a rude jolt, and at length was completely overturned. The French Revolution was the final expression of the overthrow of the idea of authority. Bayle was not only one of the earliest but one of the most important con- tributors to this movement. The general esprit critique which characterized his writings, the universal scepticism, has been noted. The freedom which he allows himself in the particular field of literary criticism has been pointed out at some length. Bayle not only examined, he attacked. The turn of mind, natur- ally contradictory, of this indefatigable investigator made him take great pleasure in denying fixed precepts, and his extraor- dinary keenness gave him a sure sense of their vulnerable points. Joined to all this was perhaps a certain malignity, a mischievous delight in perplexing the poor, unthinking, everyday reader. Moreover Bayle made use of his power to give interest to these attacks. The digressions, the easy manner in which he passed from one subject to another, relieving a theological doctrine with a bit of raillery, introducing an amusing story or a salete — these attracted readers and held their attention to books which seemed most unusual and which presented strange, compelling arguments against the established conceptions they had been born to and had always accepted. In matters of erudition, too, the freedom of thought so char- acteristic of Bayle exerted its influence on the following century. It has been seen that in the field of scholarship and history he was far from being awe-struck by great names, that he was always inclined to doubt, to demand substantial documentary evi- dence. Such independence of judgment was as foreign to the seventeenth century as it was distinctly- characteristic of the fol- lowing period. Bayle is the connecting link. The Dictionary spread this conception among the writers of the next age. l-lven in the attention paid to minute details of erudition its author foreshadows the eighteenth century, lie heli)s develoj) the tend- ency to consider the little facts, which are petty in tiiemselves, Influence of Bayle 1 3 1 but which soinctinies lead to ciionnous consequences. A his- torian hkc \oltairc, wlio looks on such tiny sparks as capable of kiiuilin}^ tremendous conllaprations. has evidently felt the innuenco of i'aylc. Even in the method^ pursued by I'.ayle in presenting his revo- lutionary princii)lcs. hi^ inlluence is noteworthy. It was danger- ous in his time and indeed later to speak with such extraordinary freedom on matters of religion, morals and learning. It was long necessary to conciliate the ruling powers, or at least to avoid olTending them. Our author had his own scheme for doing this: he scatteied his revolutionary reiuarks in such a way that on no single page could there be found enough evidence to damn him as a seditious writer. Potent doctrines are discovered tucked awav in the most unexpected places, in notes where no censor would look for them. It is precisely this method which is em- ployed by the eighteenth century and advocated by Diderot in his article on encyclopedia writing.^'' The direct influence of Bayle as a journalist is considerable. We have noted the distinctive marks of the N onvcUcs, and espe- cially Rayle's attitude as editor. Tlie universal character of the periodical, the enormous range of subjects, the interest in all fields of intellectual activity and the desire to bring all these things to the attention of the reading public, and to stimulate, in this public, a liking for information and for thinking — such are the traits that lead Betz to style the Nouvcllcs the crstc popidar- 7visscnschaftliche Zcitschrift. It is certain that later journalists understood the value of the XoiivcUcs as a model. It is also certain that the impartiality displayed in conducting this work, the absolute freedom from bias and the refusal to seek patronage, oflFered to editors a noble example. Needless to say, while there are so many traits which our autlior liad in comn^on with the eighteenth century and a num- ber of lines along which he influenced the next age. in some respects he differed radically from his successors He would not always have recognized his descendants. The eighteenth century men were distinctly men of action, and Bayle was not. They associated their thoughts and the practical consequences, and he did not. He was a quiet, sedentary person who delighted to live in his study and took no hand in the " Cf . Brunetiere. Etudes Critiques, V. 167, ff. 132 The Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle affairs of the world. He was interested in truth for truth's sake ; he did not study its bearing on the details of everyday existence. \'oltaire, Diderot and their contemporaries were con- cerned with social and political problems and their compositions had a real, practical significance. They were hot-blooded enthusi- asts who stood stoutly by their principles and were not sparing in villification of their adversaries. Rayle, calm and dispassion- ate, was far from having confidence in the value of his own ideas, he was inconsistent and admitted it, he was gentle in his censures. Not practical and not an enthusiast, his writings, whatever their attractions, lacked the interest awakened by an author who espouses his cause with warmth and positiveness. The eighteenth century did not sympathize with such a nonchalant attitude. Other points of difference are marked. What few opinions Bayle had on politics were monarchical. Doubtless his own habits of life had something to do with this ; a lover of peace and quiet and of opportunity for study, he would not relish the idea of political upsets, he would prefer the feeling of certainty in- spired by such an absolute monarch as Louis XIV. The theories of republican government he was inclined to look on as pretexts for the bullyings of demagogues. It is unnecessary to comment on the different point of view which characterized the eighteenth century. Furthermore Rayle was not at all a man of science, and his knowledge of the natural sciences was especially meagre. The eighteenth century devoted much of its energy to science and based thereon many of its most aggressive doctrines. There is none of this interest in Bayle. And he is far from paying the cult to reason so typical of the eighteenth century. He overturns authority on the basis of reason, he appeals to reason to support his independence and freedom of thought, but. after all, he concludes that reason too is a poor thing. To him reason is far from a goddess. Bayle, then, is like and unlike the eighteenth century. Living himself in the seventeenth centurv and in the midst of its ideas, the position he took was distinctly radical ; he was most certainly a forerunner of the later period, and his influence was most certainly powerful. At the same time he does not really belong to either age; he is ratlicr a connecting link between the two epochs, and, as such, his position is of great significance. r.iiw.K »(;r.\i'iiv I. Works hy Raylc. Dictioiniairc Historique rl Critique' (cd. Rcuchot). Paris. Desoer, 1820. 16 vols. 8 vo. CRmrcs l^ivcrscs. coiitciiaiit tout cc que cct autcur a public execute sou Dictioiiuairc ..." La Hayc, 1737. 4 vols., fol. De Bude. E. (ed ) : Lcttrcs Inedites adrcssccs de 1686 a 1731 a J.-A. Turrettini, thcologicu gciicvois. Paris ct Geneve. 1887. 3 vols., 12 mo. Cliaravay. E. (ed.): Vne I.cttrc incditc de Pierre Bayle. In: L' Amateur d'Autotjraphes, 15 Septembrc, 1898. d'Eichtal, E. (ed.) : Uue Lettre iucdite de Bayle. In : Revue d'llistoire Littcraire de la France, 1909, pp. 352-3. Gigas, Emile (ed.) : Choix de la Corrcspoiidance Incditc de Pierre Bayle. Copenhague. J. E. C. Gad, 1890. Ph. Tamizey de Larroque (ed.) : Une Lettre incditc de Bayle. In: Rez'uc d'llistoire Littcraire de la France, 1894, pp. 430-32. Pelissier, L. G. (ed.) : Quelqucs Lcttrcs de Bayle ct de Balucc. In: Annates du Midi, 1891, pp. 21-59. Pelissier. L. G. (ed.) : Lett res de Divers Ecrivains Frangais. In : Bulletin du Bibliophile, 15 Mars. IQ06. Volney. H. (ed.) : Une Lettre incditc de Bayle. Uu Pnhne franqais a la ntcinoire de Bayle. In; Revue d'Ardcnne ct d'Argonne, Juin, 1900. Waddington. Francis (ed.) : Memoires Incdits de Jean Rou. Paris, Societe de I'llistoire du Protestantisme Frangais. 1857. ' Referred to as " D " in the present study. Besides volume and page, article and note are given in order to facilitate locating the refer- ences in other editions. Where several articles bear the same name, the one referred to is identified by a following numeral. " Referred to as " O. D." in the present study. Where on a single page in the O. D. there is more than one chapter, section or letter, the reference is made more definite by adding the Roman numeral which indicates the particular division. The collection of letters in the first volume, which has a separate pagination, is referred to as " O. D I. L." 134 Tlie Literary Criticism of Pierre Bayle II. Works on Bayle. Arabet, Rene: Discoitrs a riitaugnration dn mo)iHmcnt Pierre Bayle. Toulouse, 1005. Bastide, Ch. : Bayle est-il I'auteur de I "Avis atix Refugies"? In: Bulletin de la Socicte de I'Histoire dn Protestantisme Fraii(ais, 1907, PP- 544-558. Betz, Louis P. : Pierre Bayle uiid die " Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres" Zurich, Albert Miiller, 1896. Brunetiere, F. : Etudes Critiques sur I'Histoire dc la Litterature Fran- gaise. Cinquieme Serie, Paris. Hachette, 1893. Bruaetiere, F. : La Formation de I'Esprit Encyclopediste. In : Revue Hebdomadaire, 9 et 16 Nov. 1907. Cazes, Albert : Pierre Bayle, sa vie, ses id'ees, son influence, son (ruvre, Paris, Dujarric et C'^, 1905. Disraeli, Isaac : Curiosities of Literature. Boston, William Veazie, 1858. Douen, O. : Un Opusclc dc Bayle. In: Bulletin de la Societc de I'Histoire du Protestantisme Frangais. 1877, pp. 94-95- Faguet, Emile : Di.v-huiticme Siccle. Paris, Societe Fran^aise d'lm- primerie et de Librairie, 1898. Haag, Eugene et Emile: La France Protestante. Paris, Librarie San- doz et Fischbacher, 1877. Article on Bayle (by H. Bordier), Vol. I. col. 1055 ff- Janet, Paul : Notice sur des Lettres inedites de Bayle. In: Seances et Travaux de I' Academic des Sciences Morales et Poli- tiques, Compte-Rendu, Juin, 1875. Kent, Henry W. : Pierre Bayle's Dictionary. In; Library .fournal. Vol. 36, No. i, Jan. 1911. Lanson, Gustave : Origines et premieres manifestations de I'esprit pliilosophique dans la litterature frangaise de 1675 a 1748. In : Revue des Cours et Conferences, Paris, 1907-8. Lenient, C. : Etude sur Bayle. Paris, chez Madame V^ Joubert, 1855. Picavct, F. : Bayle. Article in La Grande Encyclopedie. Rossel, Vergile: Histoire de la Litterature Frangaisc hors de France. Paris, Alfred Schlachter. Bibliography 1 3 5 Rougerie : Bayle le Sceftique et la tolerance a Famiers en i8y8. Pamiers, 1898. Sainte-Beuve. C. A.: Portraits Litteraires, I. Paris, Gamier Freres, 1862. Sainte-Beuve, C. A.: Nouveaux Lundis, IX. Paris, Michel Levy Freres. 1867. Sayous, A. : Histoire de la Litterature Franqaisc d I'Etranger. Paris. Cherbuliez, 1853'' Schoell, Th. : Pierre Bayle. a f>ro[^os de deux litres recents. In : Bulletin de la Societe de I'Uistoire du Protestantisme Franqais, 1908. pp. 359-375 Sheldon. F. : Pierre Bayle. In: North American Review, Vol. CXI, 1870, p. 377 ff. Souquet, Paul : Pierre Bayle, Libre Penseur et folitique. In: La Revolution Franqaise, Revue d'Histoire Moderne et Contem- toraine. \'o]. XVI II. 1890, pp. 97-124: 210-231. Vinet, Alexandre: Moralistes des Xl'I^ et XVII' Siecles. Paris, 1859. Vol. I. p. 238. contains a quotation from an inedited letter of Bayle. MTA I, Horatio Elwin Smith, was born May 8, 1886, at Cam- bridge, ^Massachusetts. I attended public schools in Cambridge and Soiiierville, Massachusetts, and in Brattleboro, \'erniont, and graduated from Amherst College in 1908 with the degree of A. B. The three years from February, 1908 to February, 1911, were spent as a student of Romance Languages at the Johns Hopkins University. Since the last-named date I have been instructor in French in Yale College. The summer of 1909 was spent in study in Paris. I desire herein to express my appreciation of courses followed under Professors ^I. P. Brush, G. C. Keidel. C. C. Marden. J. E. Shaw, A. Terracher and F. M. Warren, and to acknowledge my especial indebtedness to the late Professor A. Marshall El- liott, to Professors Edward C. Armstrong'and Phillip Ogden. and to Professor William A. Nitze of the University of Chicago. 14 DAY USE RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED LOAN DEPT. RENEWALS ONLY — TEL. NO. 642-3405 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subject to immediate recalL MAR otatui^a raeOlD JWISTO'SPMOS 1 8 1973 J> rvirv- (gf 'V^ hi ■IffBLD NOM 17 t^-^^ LD21A-60m-6,'69 (J90968l0)476-A-32 General Library University of California Berkeley