No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Did Du Bellay Know Pindar?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
Extract
The opinion of scholars who have dealt with this question reveals an interesting, if somewhat reluctant, evolution. This opinion has held that Du Bellay did not know Pindar, that if one or two of his odes are cast into Pindaric form, the resemblance does not go beyond externals, and that if a reminiscence of Pindar may occasionally be found in a metaphor or in a poetic movement, this is merely a reflection of the profound influence of Ronsard upon Du Bellay.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1941
References
1 Henri Chamard, “L'Invention de l'Ode,” RHLF (1899), p. 47; cf., by the same author, Joachim du Bellay (Lille, au siège de l'Université, 1900), pp. 58, 216, 519; and Histoire de la Pléiade (Paris: Didier, 1939), i, 304. See also M. Chamard's edition of the Œuvres poétiques de Bu Bellay (Paris: Cornély, 1908–1931), v, 317, note 1, and 348, note 2.
2 Marcel Raymond, “Ronsard et Du Bellay,” RHLF (1924), p. 582; cf. M. Raymond's L'Influence de Ronsard sur la poésie française (1550–1585), 2 vol. (Paris: E. Champion, 1927), i, 105 and 119.
3 Ed. Chamard, v, 258, 130 ff.
4 If we must beware even of prose (indeed, of historical prose), how much more careful ought we to be of the manner in which we deduce historical fact from a page of poetry! “Montaigne avait dit de son style: ‘Que le gascon y aille, si le français ne peut.’ On l'a cru sur parole, et Victor Cousin, qui toutefois avait dû lire Montaigne, écrivait: ‘Le style de Montaigne, piquant mélange de gascon, etc.” Nous savons aujourd'hui combien il y a de mots gascons dans Montaigne. Sept. Il suffisait de les compter.“ Petit de Julleville, Preface to the Lexique de Ronsard of L. Mellerio (Paris: Plon, 1895), p. vii.
5 Ed. Chamard, iv, 46, 73 ff. Cf. iii, 83, 157 ff.
6 Ibid., v, 350, 37 ff.
7 On Antonio Caracciolo, Prince of Melfi, see the thesis of Joseph Roserot de Melin, Antonio Caracciolo, Evêque de Troyes, (1515?–1570) (Paris: Letouzey, 1923), especially Part I, Chapter VI. Caracciolo was a man of considerable cultural gifts, particularly as a poet, and, if Du Bellay's express words may be taken at their face value, as a musician as well. Cf. ed. Cham., v, 357, Pause X and note 2.
8 Ed. Cham., Defence, pp. 208 ff.
9 Cf. Raymond, Influence de Ronsard, p. 119. It is significant that Robert de la Haye couples the name of Du Bellay with that of Ronsard in applying to them the expression “fratres Pindaridas.” See ed. Cham., iv, 178, note 1.
10 Ed. Cham., v, 354 f. The numeration of French and Greek passages is intended to simplify the process of comparing the texts analytically, and of criticizing the validity of the attributions. Numerals enclosed in parentheses indicate closer approximations in significance to the Greek text than numerals enclosed in brackets. Italics show the limits of reference of a given number.
11 In the company of Caracciolo, who is represented as performing on the lute.
12 Ed. Cham., v, 357, 181 f.; 358, 199 ff.
13 Ed. Laumonier, iii, pp. 3 ff. The reference is to the critical edition of the Œuvres complètes de Pierre de Ronsard by Paul Laumonier. Ten volumes have appeared at Paris since 1914, the first six published by Hachette, the last four by Droz.
14 May one compare line 246 of Du Bellay's ode: Au double luy retournera?
15 Ronsard's pursuit of the motif does not cease with this prelude of the “Ode de la Paix.” It is taken up again, very much in the style of Pindar, after the mythical portion of the ode has been developed. Cf. the expression Ta vieille jeunesse (411), in which a pairing of moral qualities is implied; equité (423) and its correlate peché (426); and in the last line of the poem, where its position cannot fail to give great prominence to the motif, the phrase l'une & … l'autre gloire.
16 Pyth. v, 1 ff. Greek texts and translations, which are reprinted by permission of the President and Fellows of Harvard University, are taken from The Odes of Pindar, by Sir John Sandys (London: Heinemann, 1930). It will be noted that no attempt is made in the present article to determine whether Du Bellay's imitations of Pindar are based upon the original Greek, upon a Latin text, or upon recollections of Dorat's lectures on Pindar.
17 Pindar, The Olympian and Pythian Odes (New York, 1890), p. 306.
18 Fortune = heur (line 4 of Ronsard's text) = bon-heur (lines 118 and 120 of Du Bellay's text)=fortuna prospera, Ioannes Rumpel, Lexicon Pindaricum (Leipzig: Teubner, 1894), s. v. (line 3 of Pindar's text).
19 Pyth., v, 103 ff.
20 Mellerio, op. cit., s. v. faconde, p. 101.
21 See note 7, above.
22 Ed. Laumonier, iii, 34, 483 ff.
23 Pindar, to be precise, states that the eloquence of Arcesilas was derived from his mother. This, however, in no wise affects the course of the argument.
24 It is of course conceivable that Du Bellay used Ronsard's text and then changed it in such a manner that it accidentally conformed more closely to Pindar's meaning than to that of Ronsard. But this involves an hypothesis upon an hypothesis: (1) That Du Bellay imitated Ronsard; (2) That at this point he ceased imitating Ronsard, and by chance reproduced the meaning of a text with which he was unfamiliar. It seems preferable for the moment to point out that such an occurrence is improbable. As the argument proceeds, we shall see that there were two other occasions on which Du Bellay was more faithful to Pindar than Ronsard. The probability of an accidental restoration of Pindar's meaning on all of these occasions is slight.
25 The most relevant lines are quoted above, p. 2.
26 Particularly lines 103–107, quoted above.
27 Ed. Lau., i, 87, 73 ff. For the purpose of the discussion the fifth Pythian, as suggested by Laumonier, loc. cit., note 1, has been taken as the source of this passage. But cf. pp. 64 f. The Pindaric Odes of Ronsard (Paris, 1937), by the present writer, for a different, but perhaps equally probable source. In adopting the suggestion of Laumonier, we accept an hypothesis that is less favorable to our position, for if the two French poets followed different odes of Pindar, our contention would be more easily established that Du Bellay imitated Pindar independently of Ronsard.
28 With one reservation: It quite overlooks the fact that the coincidence of Du Bellay's treatment of the achievements of Caracciolo both as poet and musician in a manner similar to Pindar's treatment of the accomplishments of Arcesilas, occurs in association with the motif of paired qualities which the “Ode au Prince de Melphe” appears to have imitated from the fifth Pythian. The multiplication of such coincidences increases in something like geometrical ratio the probability of their not being really coincidences.
29 Ed. Lau., iii, 33, 472 ff.
30 Noted by Laumonier, loc. cit., note.
31 Wax not overweary in thy spending. Pyth. i, 90.
32 Lines 124–125.
33 Lines 17 and 111. Note the desultory nature of Du Bellay's imitation.
34 This is precisely the conclusion we are compelled to adopt by a comparison of the following texts:—Pindar: Ol. vi, 22–24 and 27; Pyth. ii, 10–12; Du Bellay: ed. Cham., iv, 16, 285–288; Ronsard: ed. Lau., iii, 54, 9–12. An intensive examination of these passages leads us to believe that M. Raymond incorrectly assumes that Du Bellay here imitates Ronsard (Influence de Ronsard, p. 111 and note 3), and to question M. Laumonier's chronology, based on the same assumption, for the “Hymne Triumphal sur le Trepas de Marguerite de Valois,” whence the passage from Ronsard is cited. For M. Laumonier's argument see ed. cit., iii, 55, note 4, end. This material has been presented by the writer in “Ronsard Imitator of Du Bellay,” S. P., xxxviii (1941), 165–187.
35 Therefore … do not forget to love, above all thy comrades, Carrhotus (the charioteer who drove the victorious team). Pyth. v, 23 and 26.
36 Cardinal Jean Du Bellay.
37 Ed. Cham., v, 349, 19 ff.
38 Pyth. v, 72 ff.
39 It is of the utmost consequence to Pindar to show that he is related to the Lacedemonians and the Cyrenaeans, and thus also to the victor (Arcesilas). Scholium on Pyth. v, 74, which is equivalent to verse 96 in the numeration of A. B. Drachmann, Scholia Vetera in Pindari Carmina (Leipzig: Teubner, 1903–27), 3 vols.
40 The only other comparable passage in Pindar's odes is Ol. vi, 84 ff. It is assuredly not the source of the present passage in the “Ode au Prince de Melphe.”
41 Cf. The Pindaric Odes of Ronsard by the present writer, pp. 35, 50, 84.
42 Ed. Cham., iv, 24, 469, and v, 403, 3. On the worship of Apollo at Cyrene see Luigi Pernier's Il tempio e l'altare di Apollo a Cirene (scavi e studi dal 1925 al 1934). (Bergamo: Istituto italiano d'arte grafiche, 1935), p. 132: “Nel santuario è Apollo Carneo … a lui sono dedicati il tempio e il tesoro più ampi, l'altare più esteso e più adorno, il maggior numero di anathemata, primizie e decime.” Of course, it is possible that Du Bellay learned of the worship of Apollo at Cyrene from the Hymn to Apollo by Callimachus (ii, 71–79 and 95 f.), who was enthusiastically taught at the Collège de Coqueret by Dorat (see M. Chamard's biography of Du Bellay, p. 55), but the evidence seems to indicate the fifth Pythian as the probable source.
43 Ed. Lau. iii, 3, 1 ff. follows Pyth. v, 1 ff. Ed. Lau. iii, 25, 339 f. follows Pyth. v, 45. Ed. Lau, iii, 26, 351 ff. follows Pyth. v, 27 f. and 43 f. Ed. Lau. iii, 34, 483 ff. follows Pyth. v, 114. Ed. Lau. iii, 34, 485 follows Pyth. v,45. Ed. Lau. iii, 34, 487 ff. follows Pyth. v, 117 ff.
44 Ronsard was indebted to Pythian v, 103 ff. for the passage in ed. Lau., i, 87, 73 ff., and perhaps to lines 45 ff. for the passage in ed. Lau. i, 62, 11 ff.
45 The present discussion, whether of Du Bellay or of Pindar, has involved only a single ode, the one to Caracciolo or the fifth Pythian. To the task of discussing in detail the full relationship between the two poets the writer hopes to return at an early occasion.