Amelot de la Houssaye and the Tacitean Tradition in France

Amelot de la Houssaye and the Tacitean Tradition in France Author(s): Jacob Soll Source: Translation and Literature, Vol. 6, No. 2 (1997), pp. 186-202 Published by: Edinburgh University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40316855 Accessed: 20-03-2015 16:44 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Edinburgh University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Translation and Literature. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Amelotde la Houssayeand the TaciteanTraditionin France JacobSoil and commentingon Tacitus, reached Tacitism,thepracticeoftranslating fad-likeheightsof popularityduring the firsthalf of the seventeenth centuryin France as prominentthinkersand ministersclose to thethrone foundit usefulto translateTacitus fromLatin into French.1By the end of the centurythe once rich field of French translatorsof the Roman historianhad thinned,and onlyAmelotde La Houssaye, 'the last of the greatTacitists',2kept the flamealive. France had evolved betweenthe reignsof Henri IV and Louis XIV, and so had the place of Tacitus in French society.Oftenoverlookedby historiansin theirbibliographiesof French versionsof Tacitus, Amelot de La Houssaye's workmarksthe transitionfrom integral translationsof Tacitus by royal ministers, dedicatedto the monarch,to critical,segmentedtranslations, or in some cases centos,conceived as handbooksforcourtiers.This change in the formalpresentationof the translatedtextis the basis of an ambiguityin the definitionof whatconstitutesa 'translation'of Tacitus. By ignoring Amelot'scriticaltranslatededitions,historianshave come to the conclusion thatTacitus' popularitywanedat theend of theseventeenthcentury in France.3 But an examinationof Amelot's editions, his authorial intentionsexpressedin theirdedicationsand prefaces,4and his stylistic and typographicalrepresentation of the Latin source textshows thathis contributionto French translationof Tacitus is a considerableone, and should be seen as the culminationof a traditionwhich was far from defunct. There is no doubtthatthelatesixteenthand earlyseventeenth century is a busyand importantareaon themap ofEuropeanTacitism.Vernacular translationsflourished,and greatkings turnedto these now accessible textsas manualsof instruction. Marc-AntoineMuret had begunteaching Tacitus at the Universityof Rome in 1580; at the same time,Justus Lipsius and Carolus Paschaliuswereat the head of a Latinisttraditionof commentingon Tacitus' works.5The Dutch scholar Lipsius, whose editionof Tacitus firstpublishedin 1574 establishedhis reputationas a leadingscholar,was by farthe most influentialof the sixteenth-century This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 187 Tacitists: he was not only a philologistinterestedin establishingan authoritativetext, but also a commentatorwho sought to extract knowledgefromthe Roman historianby moral and politicalexegesis.6 FeedingoffthenewlyestablishedLipsian Latin editions,thelatesixteenth and early seventeenthcenturiessaw, first,the appearance of a series of political 'commentaries'on Tacitus, in effectflorilegiaof Tacitean sententiae, beginningwithPaschalius' AnnaliumLibriquatuorprioreset in hos observationes (Paris, 1581).7 Second, the period saw an explosion of ofTacitus. There had been hardlyanyduringthefirst Frenchtranslations eightyyearsof the sixteenthcentury,but, as Lipsius and Muret began theirwork,Frenchtranslationbegan in earnest.Between 1582 and 1663, editionsof eleven differenttranslationsof Tacitus at least thirty-three editionsof werepublishedin France. Between 1663 an<^r^94?twenty-six translationswere published,fourof whichwere new titles.8 six different In total, fifty-nine editions of fifteendifferenttranslationsof Tacitus between 1582 and 1694.9Dividingtheseup by individualworks, appeared therewas one combinededitionof the Germaniaand Agricolain French (1646), one of theAgricolastandingalone (1639), two of the Discourseon Oratory(1630, 1636), and two of the Histories(both 1651). Ten editions were publishedof theAnnalsin translation:one in 1600, fivefrom1640 editionsofTacitus' to 1660,and fourafter1680. There weretwenty-nine and thirteen in sixteen before 1660 after.Finally, works French: complete fourteeneditionsof centos or extractsin translationappeared,ten after 1660; of these ten, eightappeared after1680. This data reveals that the French preferredTacitus either in his or in his mostabstractform.The completeworkswerethemost entirety, popularformin whichTacitus appeared; from1580 to 1700 theirrateof publicationis constant.Translationsof theAnnalswereless popularand editionsfrom publishedmostlyafter1650. But fourteenof the fifty-nine reworked versions were in or are centos to excerpts.Critical, 1582 1694 factmorepopularthantheAnnalsin integralform.Most of thesecritical, reworkededitionswere published after1680: from1680 to 1700, four editionsof the completeworkswere published,but eight of centos or criticalextracts.There is clear historicalchange,withTacitus becoming more popular in excerptsthan in his entirety. editions By the end of the seventeenthcentury,Tacitus' fifty-nine had made him by farthe most frequentlyprintedclassical historianin French translation.A count of editionsin the General Catalogue of the BibliothèqueNationale shows thatbetween1590 and 1700JuliusCaesar is the second most popular, with twentyeditions of his Commentaries (twelvepre-1660and eightpost-1660). Curtius is third,withseventeen of his Life ofAlexandertheGreat(ten after1660). Suetonius translations This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 188 Amelotde la Houssaye takesfourthplace, six ofthetentranslations of his TwelveCaesarscoming after 1660. The only classical author to match Tacitus' popularityis worksbetween Cicero, with at least sixty-foureditionsof his different 1600 and 1700. Tacitus' popularityis understandablein the contextof historicaland intellectualevents.At the end of the sixteenthcentury,France was still in politicalchaos. Politicalwisdom was needed to unite a kingdomtorn by religiousand politicalstrife;withthememoryoftheSt Bartholomew's Day Massacre (1572) stillfresh,a new ideologywas needed to unifythe nation.To some, royalabsolutismseemed the answer.Its most notable ofthemonarchyover proponent,JeanBodin,advocatedthestrengthening othersectorsofsociety- Bodin's Six livresde la république ( 1576) suggested Annalswas of Tacitus' edition Not this. coincidentally, JustusLipsius' just his of humanists the most of in One time,and important published 1574. certainlythe leading Latin philologistand historianof ancient Rome, Lipsius, like Bodin, saw the consolidationof power in the hands of one princeas theanswerto theillsofsociety.Having experiencedat firsthand theupheavalsofthereligiouswars,Lipsius turnedto Tacitus as a political guide forrestoringstability.In dedicatinghis editionof Tacitus to the States of Holland, Lipsius characterizesTacitus thus: He does not describegloriouswars or triumphs,whose purposeis only to give pleasure to the reader.He does not describeriotsor assembliesaddressedby tribunesor agrarianand grainlaws. These thingsare of no profitto our age. Look well!He presentskingsand monarchsto you, in a word,the theaterof our lifetoday.I see in and in another one place a rulerattackingthelaws and constitution, I the find the ruler. ways and means of subjects rebellingagainst lost liberty.I efforts to recover I ill-fated find destroyingliberty; read in turnof tyrantsoverthrownand laid low; I read of power insecurewhen wielded to excess. I read too of the evils of liberty restored,disorder,rivalrybetweencolleagues,greed,looting,wealth acquired fromthe people, not forthe people. Tacitus, good God!, is a greatand usefulwriter.He should be in the hands of those in whose hands are the rudderand tillerof the state.10 Tacitus, says Lipsius, is specially suited to the end of the sixteenth century.Neither militarynor domestic historyis of interestto the Dutchman; affairsof stateare the orderof the day. Tacitus is an oracle: a mirrorof Europe's presentstateand the remedyforits ills. In 1584,followinghis successfuleditionof Tacitus, Lipsius published whichwouldgo on to be re-editedat leasteightytimes." hisDe Constantia, This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 189 His Politica of 1589 furnishesa list of 'sentences of the Ancients concerningthe state,and the dutyof princes'. Quoting Cicero, Lipsius writes:'Les Republiques serontà la fin de leurs miseres& malheurs, quand, par quelque bonne & divine adresse,puissance grandeconjointe en un mesmesujet."2Lipsius is avec sapience& justicese rencontreront in the formation of this'sujet', he credo. To assist an absolutist repeating has prepareda manual. He turnsto Aristotle,Seneca, and Tacitus as his mainguidesthroughthepreceptsofgood government.'3 Forminga cento of sententiousexemplawhollyfromcitationsof classicalauthors,Lipsius saysof his own work'thatall is mineand thatnothingis' (sig. r8v).It was ofRenaissancehumanism:Lipsius had extractedfrom an actcharacteristic the ancientspoliticalwisdom forthe perfectprince. French translatorsof Tacitus at the beginningof the seventeenth centurysharedLipsius' interest.Tacitus was translatedand presentedto royal patronsso that his wisdom could be applied to rulingthe state. Translatorswerealmostall ministersclose to themonarchto whomtheir workswerededicated.They werepoliticians,courtiers,and academicians ratherthanhumanists.Of the eleven individualswho translatedTacitus intoFrenchbetween1582 and 1660,eightheld positionsat Court:Claude Fauchet, Jean Baudoin, Francois de Cauvigny,Rodolphe Le Maistre, Marie de Jarsde Gournay,Louis Giry,Achillesde Harlayde Chanvallon, and Perrot d'Ablancourt.14Five were either members of or closely associatedwiththeAcadémieFran9aise(de Cauvigny,Le Maistre,de Jars de Gournay,Giry,and d'Ablancourt).And Tacitus was representedas a royalhistorian.De Cauvigny,de Gournay,Le Maistre,de Chanvallon, and d'Ablancourtall dedicated theirtranslationsto a reigningFrench monarch.Calling Tacitus 'Seúl Autheurdigne des Roys & des grands Princes,pour la cognoissancede bien gouvernerleursEstats',Le Maistre claimsthatHenri IV personallycommandedhim to translatethe 'Oracle ofTacitus is presentedas directly In thiscase, thetranslation ofPrinces'.15 demanded of a ministerby his king; throughoutthe firsthalf of the seventeenthcentury,it was an activitycloselylinkedwiththe throne.In his dedicationthankingCardinal Richelieu for his appointmentto the Académie Francaise, d'Ablancourtmaintainsthat Tacitus is the only author'great' and 'admirable'enough to be offeredas a giftto a prince. De Chanvallon'sdedicationto Anne of Austriagoes one step further:he claimsthatthetextcan onlybe understoodby theQueen herself.Tacitus' relationshipto the monarchis so strongthathe alone amongauthorscan enterinto the 'Cabinet of the Prince'.'6 Compared to the plethoraof ministersand academicianswho edited and translatedand Tacitus at the beginningof the century,the reignof Louis XIV seems poor in Tacitists indeed. There was only one French This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 190 Amelotde la Houssaye translatorafterJean Puget de La Serre in 1664. In 1683, almosttwenty yearsafterPuget de La Serre's version,Abraham-NicolasAmelotde La ofTacitus underthe Houssaye (1634-1706) publishedhis firsttranslation title Tibère: Discourspolitiquessur Tacite. P.D.B.'s edition of 1599 is ofTacitus published anonymous,but Tibèreis theonlyFrenchtranslation undera pseudonym:Amelotperhapsfearedit would be badlyreceivedby theroyalcensor.Firstpublishedin theNetherlands,Tibèrewas re-edited witha royal'privilege'in France, twicein 1684, once in 1685, and again in 1686. In' 1686, Amelot published La Morale de Tacite: de la /latterie (Paris, 1686 and 1686; La Haye, 1686). In 1690 his translationofAnnals I- VI appeared, under the title Tacite;therewere latereditionsin 1690, 1692, and 1709. Amelot's translationsof Tacitus, then, went through eleven editionsin sixteenyears. Only d'Ablancourt'scompete numeriin sixtyyears. cally,withtwenty-two Amelot's career is notablyless illustriousthan those of his Tacitisi predecessors.He was neithera counsellorto thekingnora memberofthe Académie Franchise.He began his careeras a copyistfortheJesuits.In 1668 he became the secretaryto the Ambassadorto Venice, but did not occupy the positionlong, forhe was accused of stealingdocuments.He de Venise(1676) thenlived by his pen, writinga Histoiredu gouvernement for in the Bastille in his which resulted angeringthe imprisonment Venetian Ambassador.17He translatedand annotatedMachiavelli's // Principeand L 'Oráculomanualy ArtedeprudenciabyBaltasarGracián.He also translatedand annotatedPaolo Sarpi's Historiadel conciliotridentino and he annotatedLa Rochefoucauld's and Trattatodellematerie beneficiane, Reflexions,sentenceset máximes.While Hobier worked for the royal Amelotwas an 'hommede lettres'who lived precariously administration, by his writing.The translationof Tacitus, once the provinceof great scholar. statesmen,was now the domain of a poor proto-Enlightenment Amelot's Tibèreis dedicatedto a prince- the Duke of Savoy, Prince of Piedmont,King of Cyprus. But somethinghas changed: the Duke is a foreignprince. Amelot is not a minister,nor has he been asked to translateTacitus fortheeducationofone oftheprince'schildren.Amelot is distantfromthe Duke, probablydedicatinghis translationto him in different hope of financialrecompense.The situationis fundamentally fromthe timewhen a translationof Tacitus was an expectedgiftfroma ministerto a king.In his dedication,Amelottriesto convincethe Duke that a translationof Tacitus is worthyof his attention.He invokesLe Maistre'stranslationand the factthatHenri IV orderedit forhis son, the futureLouis XIII. However,Amelotseemsto stumblewhenhe compares the Duke to Tiberius. He claimsthatTiberius is the masterof the 'art of reigning',the capacityin which,says Amelot,one should judge a prince. This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 191 Only laterin his reigndoes Tiberius 'overflow'with'cruelty'and 'vice'. be regardedas rich in The firstyearsof Tiberius' reigncan, therefore, examples for a prince. The argumentbecomes less convincingwhen Amelotgoes on to say thatthe Duke will recognizehis own experiences in theportraitofthisRomanprince,his childhood,and family.18 Amelot's of the into a imperialfamilydegenerates happypicture descriptionof the and adulteries,assassinations, perversionscommonplace in Tiberius' It the impressionthatthese are also qualities familiar reign(p. 7). gives to the Duke of Savoy. There is no sarcasmhere,only a tone of possible insult.Never does Amelotdiscuss Tacitus as an authorityformonarchs as his predecessorshad done: Tacitus is neitherportrayedas a domain reservedforprinces,nordefinedin relationto theprince.Instead,Amelot attemptsto linkthe Duke personallywithTiberius - the subject of the book. The attemptseems to fail, and there is no evidence of Amelot receivingany patronageor recognitionfromthe Duke. Thus, the relationshipbetweenthe translator, Tacitus, and the prince had changed.Amelotwas a professionalwriter,and Tibere was an editorial could survivein the success,reprintedthreetimes.Tacitus and translator literarymarketwithoutdirectroyalpatronage.Amelot's second translationof Tacitus, Le Morale de Tacite: de la /latterie ', 1686, is dedicatedto the ChancellorBoucherat.Once again, Tacitus is not mentionedin the dedicationas havingany particularrelationshipto the high ministerof Louis XIV's government.Instead,the subjectof 'flattery'is presentedas the main interestof the book. Tacitus is not an obscure source of royal The wisdom;rather,he is a sourceofapplicableknowledgeabout flattery. readerdoes nothaveto be a kingto learnfromTacitus. Flatteryis a subject thatis of interestto all who live at Court. The royalera of French Tacitism appears to have become a distant livresdesesAnuales(1690), memorybythe 1690s.In Tacite:Les sixpremiers Amelotmakesa considerableeffortto convincethe Due de La Feuillade, Marshal of France,thata translationof Tacitus is a giftworthyof a man of his rank: Tant cet Auteurest mistérieux, profond,nerveux,richeen pensées, & singulieren expressions.Le Cardinal de Richelieu le lisoit si souvent, qu'il en avoit apostillé de sa main presque tout un exemplaire,que l'Abbé de Boisrobert appelloit pour cela son Breviaired'Etat. Témoignage,que ce grandMinistrejugeoitbien autrementde Tacite, que le CardinalDu Perron,qui ne le trouvoit bon que pour former un Courtisan. Quoi qu'il en soit, MONSEIGNEUR, vous le goüterezau moins pour les excellens conseils, qu'il adresse aux Ministres,& aux Favoris des Princes, This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Amelot de la Houssaye 192 Vous, qui ne vous étudiezqu'à mériterPhonneurdes bonnesgraces du Roí, & à lui donnerde jour en jour de nouvellesmarquesde vòtre tres-humblereconnoissance.19 AmelotportraysTacitus as an authorappropriateforgreatministersof state. Richelieu is called a minister,and, by association,la Feuillade is comparedto him. It is recommendedthatla Feuillade studyTacitus not as an oracle forkings,but as an oracle forthose who serve them. But of Tacitus Amelot'scomplaintabout Du Perron'slimitedunderstanding as only useful for 'forminga courtier'is paradoxical,because in Louis XIV's Court even highministershad become courtiers.The days of the Richelieus and even the Colberts were over. Louis XIV had no 'prime minister'at all. * * * The above discussionhas outlinedwhathappened,and we mustnow ask century whyit happened.The success at thebeginningoftheseventeenth versionsof Tacitus by Lipsius, Muret, and of the critical-commentary Paschalius would have made it logical fortheirsuccessorsto copy this format.But thisis notwhatoccurred.The version'commandedbyHenri IV fromRodolphe Le Maistre (firstedition 1627) containsonly brief, thematicannotationsin smallprintin themargins,whichact likechapter headingsto help thereadersituatepassagesin thetext.There are no other comments.Apart fromhis dedicatorytexts,Le Maistre's translationof Tacitus standsalone,open to somewhatfreeinterpretation by the reader. Perrotd'Ablancourt'spresentationof the Annalsthirteenyearslater,in 1640, resemblesLe Maistre's: the text is alone on the page except for thematicheadingsset in a smallerfontin the margin.At the end of the principaltextare briefremarksabout translation.D'Ablancourt'spreface explainshis interestin presentingTacitus' textclearly.His goal is to stay as close to the originalas possiblewhileat the same timemakingthe text readable.20D'Ablancourt is clearly not part of the critical Tacitist tradition.This is to say that the problem of how to receive classical thought,so centralto Renaissancehumanists,has evolved. There is no question thatthe knowledgeof the ancientsis vital,and thattheirtexts contextualized. havetobe properlyemendedand theirthoughthistorically is oracle of Tacitus the are all that Tacitists kings.But, while agreed Royal someconsideritnecessaryto turnto thecriticaltraditionto helpthereader enter into the 'arcana imperii' of the Roman author,others leave his mysteriesto be decipheredby royaleyes. and Along withthese developmentsin the reception,interpretation, This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 193 presentationof Tacitus came cultural,social, and politicalchanges that creatednew conditionsfortherelevanceofTacitus in France. By theend ofthe 1660s Louis XIV had consolidatedhispower.The feudalaristocracy had had its wingsclipped afterthe Fronde and was now an essentialpart of the courtlymechanism,vyingforinfluencewhile the kingmade sure no one threatenedhis autocraticpower.21With the Court societycame new values and behaviouralmodels. Alreadyunder Mazarin the Court was influencedby Italy. Castiglione'subiquitous//Cortegianoprovided models of conversationand behaviour to promote the ambitions of With the importanceof conversationcame what Henri-Jean courtiers.22 Martin characterizesas easily obtainable and applicable knowledge: The morebourgeoiselementsof abstractsand translations proliferated.23 books to learn therulesof 'bienséance'and also to conduct turned society of the aristocratsof the the manners and attitudes to 'honnèteté', copy the comic results shown with sometimes by Moliere in Les Court, ridicules. précieuses books The interestin conductwas reflectedbytheproto-psychological of moralists.La Rochefoucauld and later La Bruyère examined the motivesbehindmen's actionsin orderto unveilthehypocrisybeneaththe gracefulposes of the perfectcourtier.BaltasarGracián's Oráculomanual y Artedeprudencia,a popularworkin Amelot'sFrenchtranslationunder the titleUhommede cour(1684), examined the same questions,not to expose immoralaction,but to providepracticaladvice on the techniques of courtly self-advancement.La Rochefoucauld was an Augustinian But they moralistclose to theJansenistmovement,and Graciána Jesuit.24 had one thingin common:theywerebothfascinatedby dissimulationand the Cartesian control of 'humours' and external emotions. For La Rochefoucauld,this meant a criticalanalysisof the Christian-humanist of man, embodied by behaviouraland confidencein the prefectibility For Gracián, the analysisof methodsof dissimuaestheticperfection.25 lationand the controlof the passions was accompaniedby a firmbelief in theearthlyhierarchyof theCatholicabsolutistuniverse;anytechnique thatcould be used to climb towardsthe kingwas a legitimatetacticin a 'saintly'enterprise.26 Frenchtranslationsof Tacitus followedthe Late seventeenth-century generalinterestin behaviourand the masteryof the passions. With the consolidationof Court societycame a new typeof Tacitus. The critical traditionfloweredonce again, not because France was 'in trouble' and needed a wise sage to counsel the king,but because Tacitus could be harnessedas a manual forcourtlysurvivaland advancement,as well as a key for unlocking the motives of individuals. Puget de La Serre's translationof Tacitus leaves no doubt about its theme: Les máximes This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 194 Amelot de la Houssaye politiquesde Tacite,ou la conduitedesgensde cour(1664), witha further editionin 1667 underthetitleL 'esprit de Tacite,ou Recueilde sesplusbelles máximes.ContenantVartde vivreà la cour:et la poltttque la plus seurpour ofTacitus This is the firstFrenchtranslation sy establir,& syymaintenir. was at centreof for success. the as a handbook courtly Puget presented the French Court at the early stages of its development.Beginningas as a CounsellorofState,he had Gastón d'Orléans's librarianand finishing known the royal Court fromits embryonicstate under Richelieu and Mazarin to its expansionduringthe firstyearsof Louis XIV's reignand the beginningof workon Versailles.Les Máximespolitiquesde Tacitewas Puget's last book. Published one yearbeforehis death,the Máximesare his mostmatureworkon a courtlytheme.Puget's book is a centoin which topics such as 'monarchy','election',and 'succession' are givenin large print,muchlikechapterheadings.Underneath,an unbrokenchainofnonidentified,correspondingthematicmaximsofTacitus follow,in a smaller font.Tacitus is an abrégéof any courtlytopic that mightinterestthe reader.The factthatthe specificsource of each maximis not identified is notuncommonforcentosand showsthatPugetconsidersTacitus' work as one large body of general information.While this book cannot be characterizedas part of the critical tradition,it is the firstFrench translationof Tacitus solely dedicated to courtlythemes. Puget's 1664 volume came earlyin Louis XIV's reign.It was the last new translationof Tacitus published until 1683, when Amelot de La Houssaye's Tibèrefirstappeared in print. Amelot's has many of the qualitiesof Puget's book: it is a centoof politicaland moraltopics.In his preface,Amelotgives a more elaborateaccountof how he has dealt with Tacitus' textthanany of the otherFrench translators.Situatinghimself in the criticaltradition,he explainshow his editionwill makeit easierto extractcourtlyknowledge.Amelot sees Tacitus not as a statictext,but ratheras an ongoingtraditionof practicesof re-presentation: Mille gens ont travaillésur Tacite. Les uns l'ont traduit,les autres l'ont commenté.Quelques-uns ont mis son texte en parafrase,à cause de son obscurité:Quelques autres en ont tiré le sue & la les Apophtegmes, moüelle,c'est à dire,les Sentences,les Aforismes, & les AxiomesPolitiques,dontil est aussi fertile,qu'il est sterileen paroles.Ses Traducteurslui ont faitparlertoutesles Langues, bien ou mal,selonqu'ils l'ontbienou malentendu.De ses Commentateurs, les uns, comme Grammairiens,n'ont épluché que son latin,& ses Les autres,comme faconsde parler,qui sonttoutesextraordinaires. ni se sont étudiés la à sa sans s'arrèter à diction, frase, Politiques, dont il à pénétrerles mistères,& les secretsde l'Art-de-gouverner, This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 195 estle Maitre,& l'Oracle universel,depuis plus de quinze-censans.27 Amelot mentions several differentways of manipulating the text: maxims,and translation.He identitiestwo types extracting paraphrasing, of commentary:grammaticaland political.Amelot,then, is presenting Tacitism as a seriesof ongoingtraditions.As forhimself,he goes on, he feels unable to characterizehis own practice. The chapter headings, ofTacitus; thechaptersthemselvesare Amelotsays,are pure translations politicaland historicalcommentary.Tiberius is the principalsubject of each chapter;but whilethe book is an examinationof his reign,it is also a generalmanual of the 'art of reigning'.It is an 'elixir' of teachingsfor princes,ministers,and courtiers.The commentariesare ordered and writtenin Amelot's language, but they come from Tacitus. Amelot concludesthathis workcan be characterizedas Lipsius characterizedhis Politica:Tinvention& la formeen sont telles,qu'il est vrai de dire,que tout est de moi, & que rien en est' (p. 3). Amelothas placed himselfin the criticaltraditionof Lipsius. Tacitus' text is turned into an easily accessiblethematicmanual of wisdom. There is one fundamentaldifferencebetween Amelot and Lipsius: Amelot'smanual is not intendedforthe prince's eyes only. It is a work designedforthemoregeneralmarketoftheCourt,and perhapsthosewho soughtto ape itsmanners.Amelothad takenan old productand modified it fora newand morevaried,but nonethelessveryspecific,public.Amelot also tailoredthe physicalpresentationof the textto his new readership. Tacitus' textis presentedin Latin, like a chapterheadingin largeprint. Underneath,in smalleritalics,is Amelot'sFrenchtranslation.Below that whichcan go on forseveralpages, in romanfontof is his commentary, the same size as the translation.In the margin,in smaller print,are his historicalcommentaries.Amelot is aware of how his presentation functions.He says he has put the Latin and the translatedpassages at the top of each section so thatthe readerknows what he has based his commentaryon. He providesboth languagesso thatreaderscan see for themselveswhetherAmelot has successfullyunderstoodthe 'spirit' of Tacitus and not merelyattemptedto 'impose' his own vision.This is an interestingway of offeringto presenta textwhichboth is and is not by Amelot.The criticaltraditionservesAmelot,but he is obligedto explain how it works. Amelot's second translationof Tacitus, La Morale de Tacite: de la /latterie(1686), is also a cento. Ratherthan focusingon an individual,as is the case in Tibere,the subject of the book is flattery;this is the first Frenchtranslationof Tacitus explicitlydevotedto a singlesubject.In his is one dedication,Amelotassures the ChancellorBoucheratthatflattery This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 196 Amelotde la Houssaye ofthemosttalked-abouttopicsof theday (p. 2);28Tacitus, organizedinto an accessible cento, will be used to understandit. Instead of a preface, La Morale de Tacite contains a 'Discours critique de divers Auteurs modernes,qui ont traduitou commentéles Oeuvres de Tacite; Avec les jugemensque Ton a faitsde son stile& de sa MORALE'. Amelotexplains thathe has done awaywiththestandardpreface,a formhe findsoutdated writtena discoursein and too limitedforhis project.He has, therefore, three parts to facilitateeasy referenceby readers. In the firstpart he and in the discussescommentatorsof Tacitus, in the second translators, thirdhe gives excerptsfrom'elegies' writtenabout Tacitus. Amelot's 'Discours critique'is in a sense the firsthistoryof FrenchTacitism. It is a thirty-two page encyclopediaof Tacitists,in whicha readerinterested ofa givenauthorcan lookup hisname in findingtheTacitean contribution in Amelot's are men pantheon),whichis printedin italicslike (there only a chapterheading,and findthecorresponding critiquebyAmelot.Among commentators,he discusses or gives extractsfrom Filippo Cavriana, JanFreinshemius, VirgilioMalvezzi,TrajanoBoccalini,CristopheForstner, he discussesEmmanuel La Rochefoucauld, and himself.Amongtranslators, Sueyro, Baltasar Alamos, Carlos Coloma, Bernardo Avanzati,Adriano Politi, Claude Fauchet, Etienne de La Planche, Rodolphe Le Maistre, Harlay de Chanvallon,and Perrotd'Ablancourt.Finally,Amelot gives extracts of'elegies'on Tacitusbyvariousauthors,withhisowncommentaries: Bodin, JustusLipsius, AntonioPossevino,Juan Mariana, Famiano Jean Strada, Baltasar Gracián, Gabriel Naudé, and La Mothe-le-Vayer. A number of Amelot's critiques reveal his views on the utilityof Tacitus. Speaking of the commentariesby Boccalini and Forstner,for and therefore example,Amelotsaysthattheyarenotpoliticalin orientation, his idea ofno consequence.The discussionofd'Ablancourtbestillustrates of how Tacitus should be read and presented.Quoting Tacitus, Amelot claims that it has hithertobeen dangerous to criticize Perrot: 'Nam est. Hist. 2. cap. 36' (p. vivorumut magnaadmiratio,ita censuradifficilis to show thatd'Ablancourt's'glory' 20). He considersit his responsibility is 'false'. To do this,he proposes,in the Morale de Tacite,to juxtapose d'Ablancourt'stranslationof several Latin passages with his own. The Latin textis presentedlike a chapterheading,withthe two translations underneath,side by side. Returningto his favouriterefrain,Amelot criticizesd'Ablancourtfornot lookingforpoliticalwisdom in Tacitus. This lack of insightaffectsthe qualityof d'Ablancourt'stranslation: II y a cete diférenceentrela traductionde M. de Chanvalon& celle de d'Ablancourt,que l'un sacrifieles motsau sens,& l'autrele sens aux mots;l'un traduiten Homme d'Etat,& l'autreen Grammérien; This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 197 celui-ci a plus de lime, & Pautre a plus de sang, ainsi que parle Patercule: enfinil seroit aisé de faireun ouvrage acompli de la Versiondu premier,parce qu'il n'y auroitqu'à corigerdes frases& des locutions,qui ne sont plus du bel usage; au lieu que pour la traductionde Pautre,il faudroity suprimeren mille perfectionner des endroits, pensées, qui sont de lui, & métreà leur piace toutes celles de Tacite, qu'il a retranchéesmal-à-propos,ou qu'il a si mal rendées, que cet Auteur paroit aussi fade en francois,qu'il est succulenten latin,(p. 21) he While Amelotdoes not considerChanvallonto be the best translator, does thinkthathe 'reads' Tacitus' textproperly,in a politicalsense. His haserrors,butthetextretainsitsessentialnature.D'Ablancourt, translation on the otherhand,has so misunderstoodTacitus thathis translationhas the meaningof the text.Amelotconcludes: falselyreformulated je conviendrasvolontiersque d'Ablancourta oté les épines de son Auteur,pourvuque Pon tombatd'acord avec moi,qu'il lui a oté ses roses avec ses épines. Car sa Versionest presque toute dénuée de à chaqué ses sentences& de ses máximesd'Etat, qui se rencontrent de période l'originai. (p. 21) What Amelot finds most objectionableis that d'Ablancourt's method of translationremovesTacitus' sententiousness.If maximsare no longer the textbecomes, in a sense, unusable. D'Ablancourt's easy to identify, functionsin an oppositewayfromthehandybooksof political translation and extractingpolitical wisdomAmelotprovides.Ratherthanidentifying as leaves the mysteriesof he himself stated, knowledge,d'Ablancourt, Tacitus to be penetratedby the prince.29 La Morale de Tacite is Amelot's most sophisticatedpresentationof Tacitus. By comparinghis translationto thatof d'Ablancourtbelow the Tacitus' text,but Latin original,Amelotshowsnotonlyhow he interprets how he representsit in French. Here, the reader is shown Amelot's 'political' readingof the textbeforecontinuingon to Amelot'scommentariesand notes,whichare also politicalin nature.For Amelot,translation essentialmeaning.Hence, is not a matterof grammarbut of interpreting in contrastto d'Ablancourt,Amelottendsto translateTacitus intomaxims in SectionXXI area goodexample: or memorablephrases.The translations PRAECIPIUM munusannaliumreor,ne virtutessileantur,aetque pravisdictis factisqueex posteritate.Ann. j. This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Amelotde la Houssaye 198 JE tiens, que le principaldevoir d'un Historienest de loüer les vertus,& de blámerles vices, afínque chacun ait peur d'etre noté d'infamiepar la postérité. D'Ablancourtdit: Afínde donnerà la vertula recompense,qu'elle mérite,qui est, à mon avis, le devoir d'un Historien,& de faire abhorrerles vices par la honte d'une infamieéternelle. (PP- 37-8) Amelot's translationsare notably more sententious than those of d'Ablancourt.Again, in Section LXXV: RARA temporumfelicitate,ubi sentirequae velis,& quae sentias dicere licet. Hist. I. C'EST un bonheurbien rare,que de vivredans un terns,où il est permis de penser ce que Pon veut, & de dire librementque Ton pense. D'Ablancourt dit: [Une matièreplus ample & moinsépineuse,]où Ton peut diresans craintece que l'on pense,qui n'estpas une petite felicité. (p. 148) In this case, the passage from Tacitus is itself a maxim. Amelot's translationhas a distinctiverhythmand sonority;d'Ablancourt'sis less smooth.D'Ablancourt has connectedthe passage withone thatprecedes it, makingthe phrase cumbersome.Perhaps Amelotchose this example on purposeto showthateven whenpresentedwitha maximd'Ablancourt would cut it up, thus destroyingits sententiousqualityin French. Amelot's interestin maxims is illustratedby his 'Recapitulationof foundat the end sentencesand maximsof Tacitus concerningflattery', maxims of the principaltext (pp. 243-8). This collectionof fifty-seven drawson all Tacitus' works.Amelotgivesthe referenceforeach passage by citing the Tacitean title and chapter number. He also gives page referencesin La Morale wherethe readerwill findfurtherexampleson the same subject. The reader can thus choose a thematicmaxim from Tacitus and then findit developed in La Morale. Followingthissection is one of 'Sentences and preceptsby Plinythe Younger,forPrincesand Courtiers'(pp. 248-50). Not onlydo the readersof La Morale de Tacite get a Tacitean manual of flattery;an extra set of courtlymaxims is provided as well' In language, commentary,and formalpresentation, Amelot has geared his book towardsa readershipinterestedin courtly This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 199 questions, and has determinedhow the book is read by thematically directingthe readerthroughthe text,withthe maximsas a guide. Amelot's critiqueof d'Ablancourtdid not please everyone.Perrot's nephew,Fremontd'Ablancourt,furiousthatAmelothad attackedhis late ouAmelotde La Houssaie uncle,respondedwithPerrotd'Ablancourt vengéf convaincude nepas parlerfrangaiset d'expliquermal le latin(1686). As the title suggests,the book is quite humorous in its virulence.It attacks Amelot and his translationwith a step-by-stepcriticismof La Morale, using the same page formatto compare texts. Instead of a political at the footof the page, Fremont'sannotationsare a mixture commentary of argumentsabout seeminglyinconsequentialtranslationquestionsand incoherentpersonalinsultsdirectedat Amelot.Besides personalmotives, Fremont'sbookgivesus littleinsightintowhyhe was opposed to Amelot's translation.It does, however,show thatTacitus was stillpopularenough to inspirepassionsand sell books. Some combinationof this'affaire'and a genuineinterestin thebook createdconsiderabledemandforLa Morale de Tacite,of which,Amelotclaims in Tacite(1690), his stationerhad to order300 extracopies fromHolland.30He is probablynot exaggerating; La Morale went throughthreeeditionsin 1686. Amelot,however,stillhad somethingto prove. Peeved by Fremont's criticisms,he respondedwithhis thirdtranslationof Tacitus, Tacite: les livresdesAnnales(1690). Amelotexplainsin the'avertissement' sixpremiers thathe wouldneverhaveundertakento translateA nnalsI-VI had Fremont not writtenhis 'libel'. His friendshave asked him to respond,forsilence The 'avertissement'invokesa seriesof could be construedas ignorance.31 defencesagainstFremont'sinsultsand a numberof apparentlyinsignificant translationquestions. On its last page thereis a note fromAmelot fromthatin Tibère.He statingthatthe commentaryin Taciteis different assures his readers,quite properly,that Tacite is freshmaterial.The 'Discours critique' is doubled in length,fromthirty-oneto sixtypages, with the addition of eleven new names: Scipione Ammirato,Janus Gruterus,Giorgio Pagliari,BenedettoPucci, Don Pio Mutio, Raffaele Dalla Torre, Anton-GiulioBrignoleSale, AntonioLoredan, Ciriaque de Lentz, Theodore Ryck,and GiorgioDati. Of theseauthors,tenare added to the commentary section,expandingits lengthto thirty-six pages. Dati section.AlthoughAmelotclaims is theonlynameadded to thetranslation that Taciteis a responseto questionsof translation,the expansionof the 'Discours critique' suggests that Amelot and his public were more interestedin commentaryand a critical discussion of the Tacitean traditionthan questionsof language. ofTacitus Amelot's1690 Tacitewas thefirstnew non-centotranslation published for nearlyfortyyears followingd'Ablancourt'sL'Histoirede This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Amelotde la Houssaye 200 Tacitein 165 1. It is also theculminationofthecriticaltraditionof French translations.The last French seventeenth-century translatorof Tacitus, Amelot studied the way in which his predecessors had translated, analysed,and representedhis original.He tookelementsfromthe Latin critical traditionand the methods of other translators.Instead of a thematiccentoin whichspecificallychosenpassagesare listed,or a simple commentaryof excerpts,Taciteshows thateveryline of Tacitus can be fora discussionof mined forinformation, or used as the starting-point contemporarypolitical,historical,or moral topics. Books I-VI of the Annals, short in length,are spread out over 560 pages. More than 60 percentof the book is made up of Amelot's 'reflexionspolitiques' and 'notes historiques'.These notes,usuallyfoundunder the principaltext, are in smallprint,oftentakingup morethanhalfthepage,and sometimes continuingto the next; so that while the text is published in its logical continuity,the commentarydominatesthe reader's eye. Taciteis by no means a simplecourtlyhandbook.Amelot'sformatshowshis methodfor readingTacitus - a hermeneuticwithan appeal wider than the courtly circle.As forLipsius a hundredyearspreviously,Tacitus is an oracle,and But Amelot's 'political' vision of Tacitus is not Amelot his interpreter. the same as Lipsius'; it is tailored to his own era. As with Amelot's other translations,Tacitus' text is a pretextfor his criticaldissection of contemporaryproblems.32 The tradition in which Amelot's work must be placed was in continuous developmentover the seventeenthcentury,then; it also continuedto develop afterhis day. While Amelotdid not outliveLouis XIV, he did liveintotheeighteenthcentury,carryingthecriticalTacitean and Tacitewas reissued traditionintothe centuryof the Enlightenment; in 1709and 1724.The eighteenthcentury,withitstasteforcriticalinsight and its eventual deconstructionof the absolutisthierarchicaluniverse, woulddiscardTacitus as a guideto rulingand to beinga courtier,retaining The black Tacitus had slowly him as a means of attackingtyranny.33 become red; the oracle of kingshad become the enemyof tyrants. Magdalene College,Cambridge Notks absentfromseventeenth-century 1. 'Tacitism'is a moderntermcompletely It is also absentfromOED, whichgivesunderthe Frenchdictionaries. his pregnant to Tacitus,or resembling adjectival'Tacitean': 'pertaining ofTacitus;Tacitize or follower sententious style,henceTacitist,a student ... to writein thestyleofTacitus'.The termis validforthisstudy,for,as This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Jacob Soil 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 201 we shall see, the conceptof Tacitism was presentin the worksof Amelotde La Houssaye. For a generalaccount of French Tacitism in this period, see Peter Burke, 'Tacitism1,in Tacitus,edited by T. A. Dorey (London, 1969), pp. 149-71. I thank the Cambridge Bibliographical Society, the Prince Consortand Thirlwall Fund, and the Royal HistoricalSociety forgenerous grantsto researchthis articleat the Bibliothèque Nationale. Burke, 'Tacitism', p. 157. French editions of Tacitus that Bibliographies of seventeenth-century overlookmanyof Amelot'stranslationsare foundin the following:Catherine Volpilhac-Auger,Taciteen France de Montesquieuà Chateaubriand(Oxford, X993)»PP- 565-9; Dominique Morineau, 'La receptiondes historiensanciens dans l'historiographiefrancaise,finXVIIe à début XVIIIe siècles' (unpublished dissertation,Universitéde Paris IV, 1988); Peter Burke,'A Surveyof the Popularityof Ancient Historians, 1450-1700', Historyand Theory,5 (1966), 135-52. An earlier account of Amelot's ways of using such 'paratexts' is Suzanne Guellouz, 'Du bon usage des textes liminaires:Le cas d' Amelot de La Houssaye\ Littératures classiques.n (iQQo), 261-75. For this period see Arnaldo Momigliano, 'Tacitus and the Tacitean Tradition',in Momigliano,TheClassicalFoundations ofModernHistoriography (Berkeley,1990), pp. 109-31. See JoséRuysschaert, critique JusteLipse et lesAnnalesde Tacite: Une méthode textuelle au XVIe siede (Louvain, 1949),especiallyp. 37; and, fora convenient generalaccount of Lipsius' approach to Tacitus, Mark Morford,'Tacitean Prudentiaand the Doctrines of JustusLipsius', in Tacitusand the Tacitean Tradition,edited by T. J. Luce and A. J. Woodman (Princeton, 1993), pp. 129-51. For a comparison of Paschalius' approach with Lipsius', see Arnaldo Momilgiano,'The First Political Commentaryof Tacitus', JRS, 37 (1947), 91-101. editionswere of the fournew titles. 8. Thirteen of the twenty-four 9. These figuresare higherthanthosecitedbyBurkein his survey(n. 3), perhaps because theyincludecriticaleditionsof maximsand extracts.They are based on the Bibliothèque Nationale General Catalogue. 10. I take this translationfromMorford(n. 6), p. 138. Other translationsbelow are mv own except wherestated. 11. For thesuccessiveeditionssee F. van der Haeghen, BibliothecaBelgica,7 vols (Brussels, 1964-75), III, 902-18; on the nature of the work see Jacqueline du stoicisme:Etudeet traduction destraites Lagrée,JusteLipse et la restauration stoiciens(Paris, 1994), especiallyp. 18. 12. Les Politiquesde JusteLipsius(Geneva, 1613), p. 3. 13. For an account of Lipsius' sources in his Politica see JacquelineLagrée, Les Politiques:Livre IV de JusteLipse (Caen, 1994), p. 7. 14. Etiennede La Plancheand IthierHobier werenotin anymajorwayconnected withtheking.The 1500 Oeuvresde Tacitebv 'P.D.B.' has notbeen attributed. 1?. Rodolphe le Maistre, Òeuvresde Tacite (Paris, 1616), pp. 2-1. 16. Achillesde Harlayde Chanvallon,Les Oeuvresde CorneilleTacite(Paris, 1645), P; 3- This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 202 Amelotde la Houssaye 17 . See mydiscussion'The Hand-AnnotatedCopy oftheHistoiredugouvernement de Venise,or How Amelot de La Houssaie Wrote His History',Bulletindu Bibliophile,2 (1995), 279-93 (p. 282). 18. Amelot de La Houssaye, Tibère:Discourspolitiquessur Tacite (Amsterdam, 1683), p. 6. livresde ses et historiques ... Les sixpremiers 19. Taciteavecdesnotespolitiques Annales(Paris, 1690), pp. 2-3. 20. Perrotd'Ablancourt,Les Annalesde Tacite (Paris, 1640), pp. 4-5. 21. For a briefaccount of the developmentof Louis XIV s court, see Roger Chartier's 'Preface' in Norbert Elias, La Société de cour (Paris, 1985), pp. i-xxviii (p. xxv). 22. For a generalanalysisof the influenceof Castiglione'sbook, see PeterBurke, ' 's 'Cortegiano TheFortunes ofCastiglione oftheCourtier:TheEuropeanReception (Cambridge, 1095). 23. Henri-JeanMartin, Livre,pouvoirset societàà Paris au XVI le siede, 2 vols (Geneva, 1984), II, 655. et littérature (Paris, 1977), 24. See Jean Lafond, La Rochefoucauld:Augustinisme as an AugusLa Rochefoucauld Lafond characterizes pp. 87-9. specifically tinianthinker,and not a Jansenist. 25. See Lafond, p. 92. 26. 'Enfin ètresaint' is the last maximin Amelot's Gracián translation,Vhomme de cour(Paris, 1684). 27. Amelotde La Houssaye, Tibère:Discourspolitiquessur Tacite,second edition (Paris, 1684.).D. 1. 28. Referencesare to the La Haye, 1686, edition here and subsequently. 29. For a full assessmentof d'Ablancourt's methods as a translator,see Roger et critiquede Balzac etsesbellesinfideles:Traduction Zuber, Perrotd'Ablancourt à Boileau (Paris, 1068). 30. Tacite (Paris, 1690), p. 2. 31. Tacite ... Les six premierslivresde sesAnnales(n. 19), p. 1. 32. A pointmade by Volpilhac-Auger(n. 3), p. 26: 'le texten'est qu'un pretexte'. 33. For the fullestrecentaccount of this laterperiod see Volpilhac-Auger. This content downloaded from 132.174.255.3 on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:44:33 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions