TILE 18TH CENTURY The beginning of the 18th century is among the dead seasons of French literature. Fenelon and Malebranche still survived, but they were emphatically men of the last age, as was Massillon, though he lived till nearly the middle of the century. The char acteristic literary figures of the opening years of the period are d'Aguesseau, Fontenelle, Saint-Simon, personages in many ways interesting and remarkable, but purely transitional in their char acteristics. Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle (1657-1757) is, indeed, perhaps the most typical figure of the time. He was a dramatist, a moralist, a philosopher, physical and metaphysical, a critic, an historian, a poet and a satirist.' The manner of his works is always easy and graceful, and their matter rarely con temptible.
The universal genius of Voltaire (1694-1778) showed itself in his poetical productions no less than in his other works, and it is perhaps not least remarkable in verse. It is impossible nowadays to regard the Henriade as anything but a highly successful prize poem, but the burlesque epic of La Pucelle, discreditable as it may be from the moral point of view, is remarkable enough as litera ture. The epistles and satires are among the best of their kind, the verse tales are in the same way admirable, and the epigrams, impromptus, and short miscellaneous poems generally are the ne plus ultra of verse which is not poetry. The Anglomania of the century extended into poetry, and the Seasons of Thomson set the example of a whole library of tedious descriptive verse, which in its turn revenged France upon England by producing or helping to produce English poems of the Darwin school.
Andre Chenier (1762-94) stands far apart from the art of his century, though the strong chain of custom, and his early death by the guillotine, prevented him from breaking finally through the restraints of its language and its versification. Chenier, half a Greek by blood, was wholly one in spirit and sentiment. The man ner of his verses, the very air which surrounds them and which they diffuse, are different from those of the 18th century; and his poetry is probably the utmost that its language and versification could produce. To do more, the revolution which followed a generation after his death was required.
Very early in the century Alain Rene le Sage (1668-1747), in the admirable comedy of Turcaret, produced a work not unworthy to stand by the side of all but his master's best. Philippe Des touches (168o-1754) was also a fertile comedy writer in the early years of the century, and in Le Glorieux and Le Philosophe mane achieved considerable success. As the age went on, comedy, al ways apt to lay hold of passing events, devoted itself to the great struggle between the Philosophes and their opponents. Curiously enough, the party which engrossed almost all the wit of France had the worst of it in this dramatic portion of the contest, if in no other. The Mechant of Gresset and the Metromanie of Alexis Piron (1689-1773) were far superior to anything produced on the other side, and the Philosophes of Charles Palissot de Montenoy (173o-1814), though scurrilous and broadly farcical, had a great success. On the other hand, it was to a Philosophe that the in vention of a new dramatic style was due, and still more the pro mulgation of certain ideas on dramatic criticism and construc tion, which, after being filtered through the German mind, were to return to France and to exercise the most powerful influence on its dramatic productions. This was Denis Diderot , the most fertile genius of the century, but also the least produc tive in finished and perfect work. His chief dramas, the Fils naturel and the Pere de famille, are certainly not great successes; the shorter plays, Est-il bon? est-il mechant? and La Piece et le prologue, are better. But it was his follower Michel Jean Sedaine (1719-97) who, in Le Philosophe sans le savoir and other pieces, produced the best examples of the bourgeois as opposed to the heroic drama. Diderot is sometimes credited or discredited with the invention of the Comedie Larmoyante, a title which indeed his own plays do not altogether refuse, but this special variety seems to be, in its invention, rather the property of Pierre Claude Nivelle de la Chaussee (1692-1754). The most original dramatist of the century is perhaps Pierre de Marivaux (1688-1763) whose Jeu de l'Amour et du Hasard, for delicacy of style and feeling, is one of the permanent masterpieces of the comic stage. He reaches at times to an astonishing modernity of tone and sensibility: At the extreme limit of our present period there appears the remarkable figure of Pierre Caron de Beaumarchais (1732-99). The Mariage de Figaro and the Barbier de Seville are well known as having had attributed to them no mean place among the literary causes and forerunners of the Revolution. Their dramatic and literary value would itself have sufficed to obtain attention for them at any time, though there can be no doubt that their popu larity was mainly due to their political appositeness. The most remarkable point about them, as about the school of comedy of which Congreve was the chief master in England at the beginning of the century, was the abuse and superfluity of wit in the dia logue, indiscriminately allotted to all characters alike.
The great vogue and success of Telemaque produced a certain number of didactic works, in which moral or historical informa tion was sought to be conveyed under a more or less thin guise of fiction. Such was the Voyage du jeune Anacharsis of Jean Jacques Barthelemy (1716-95) ; such the Numa Pompilius and Gonzalve de Condone of Florian who also deserves notice as a writer of pastorals, fables and short prose tales ; such the Belisaire and Les Incas of Jean Francois Marmontel (1723 99) . Between this class and that of the novel of sentiment may perhaps be placed Paul et Virginie and La Chaumiere indienne; though Bernardin de Saint-Pierre (1737-1814) should more prop erly be noticed after Rousseau and as a moralist. Diderot's fiction writing has already been referred to, but his Religieuse deserves citation here as a powerful specimen of the novel both of analy sis and polemic ; while his undoubted masterpiece, the Neveu de Rameau, though very difficult to class, comes under this head as well as under any other. There are, however, two of the novel ists of this age, and of the most remarkable, who have yet to be noticed, and these are the author of Marianne and the author of Julie. We do not mention Pierre de Marivaux (1688-1763) in this connection as the equal of Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712– 1778), but merely as being in his way almost equally original and equally remote from any suspicion of school influence. Gray's definition of happiness, "to lie on a sofa and read endless novels by Marivaux," is well known, and the production of mere pas time by means more or less harmless has since become so well recognized a function of the novelist that Marivaux, as one of the earliest to discharge it, deserves notice. The name, however, of Jean Jacques Rousseau is of far different importance. His two great works, the Nouvelle Heloise and Enzile, are as far as possi ble from being perfect as novels. But no novels in the world have ever had such influence as these. To a great extent this influence was due mainly to their attractions as novels, imperfect though they may be in this character, but it was beyond dispute also owing to the doctrines which they contained, and which were exhibited in novel form. In the other works of Rousseau, especially in the Confessions, there is not merely shown passion as fervid though perhaps less unaffected than that of Mademoiselle de Lespinasse—there appear in them two literary characteristics which, if not entirely novel, were for the first time brought out deliberately by powers of the first order, being for the first time made the mainspring of literary interest, and thereby set an exam ple which for more than a century has been persistently followed, and which has produced some of the finest results of modern lit erature. The first of these was the elaborate and unsparing analy sis and display of the motives, the weaknesses and the failings of individual character. This process, which Rousseau unflinchingly performed on himself, has been followed usually in respect to ficti tious characters by his successors. The other novelty was the feel ing for natural beauty and the elaborate description of it, the credit of which latter must, it has been agreed by all impartial critics, be assigned rather to Rousseau than to any other writer. His influence in this direction was, however, soon taken up and continued by Bernardin de Saint-Pierre, the connecting link be tween Rousseau and Chateaubriand, some of whose works have been already alluded to. In particular the author of Paul et Vir ginie set himself to develop the example of description which Rousseau had set, and his word-paintings, though less powerful than those of his model, are more abundant, more elaborate, and animated by a more amiable spirit.
Montesquieu was, as we have said, followed by Anne Robert Jacques Turgot (1727-81), whose writings are few in number, and not remarkable for style, but full of original thought. Turgot in his turn was followed by Condorcet , whose tend ency is somewhat more sociological than directly historical. Towards the end of the period, too, a considerable number of philosophical histories were written, the usual object of which was, under cover of a kind of allegory, to satirize and attack the existing institutions and government of France. The most famous of these was the Histoire des Indes, nominally written by the Abbe Guillaume Thomas Francois Raynal (1713-96), but really the joint work of many members of the Philosophe party, espe cially Diderot. Side by side with this really or nominally philo sophical school of history there existed another and less ambi tious school, which contented itself with the older and simpler view of the science. The Abbe Rene de Vertot (1655-1735) be longs almost as much to the 17th as to the 18th century. In the same class, too, far superior as is his literary power, must be ranked the historical works of Voltaire, Charles XII., Pierre le Grand, Histoire du Siecle de Louis XIV .
The century opened with the memoirs of the duc de Saint Simon (1675-1755), an extraordinary series of pictures of the court of Louis XIV. and the Regency, written in a powerful style, with something of the irregular excellence of the great 16th-cen tury writers, and most striking in the sombre bitterness of its tone. The subsequent and less remarkable memoirs of the century are so numerous that it is almost impossible to select a few for reference, and altogther impossible to mention all. Of those bear ing on public history the memoirs of Madame de Stael (Mlle. Delaunay) (1684-1750), of Pierre Louis de Voyer, marquis d'Argenson (1694-1757), of Charles Pinot Duclos (1704-72), of Stephanie Felicite de Saint-Aubin, Madame de Genlis (1746 1830), of Pierre Victor de Besenval (1722-91), of Madame Cam pan (1752-1822) and of the cardinal de Bernis , may perhaps be selected for mention ; of those bearing on literary and private history, the memoirs of Madame d'Epinay (1726-83), those of Mathieu Marais (1664-1737), the so-called Memoires secrets of Louis Petit de Bachaumont (169o-177o), and the in numerable writings having reference to Voltaire and to the Phil osophe party generally. Here, too, may be mentioned a remark able class of literature, consisting of purely private and almost confidential letters, which were written at this time with very remarkable literary excellence. As specimens may be selected those of Mademoiselle Aisse (1694-1757), which are models of easy and unaffected tenderness, and those of Mademoiselle de Lespinasse (1732-76) the companion of Madame du Deffand and afterwards of d'Alembert. These latter, in their extraordinary fervour and passion, not merely contrast strongly with the gen erally languid and frivolous gallantry of the age, but also con stitute one of its most remarkable literary monuments. It has been said of them that they "burn the paper," and the expression is not exaggerated. Madame du Deffand's (1697-178o) own let ters, many of which were written to Horace Walpole, are note worthy in a very different way. Of lighter letters the charming correspondence of Diderot with Mademoiselle Voland deserves special mention.
It has never been at all accurately decided how far what may be called the scoffing school of Voltaire represents a direct re volt against Christianity, and how far it was merely a kind of guerilla warfare against the clergy. It is positively certain that Voltaire was not an atheist, and that he did not approve of atheism. But his Dictionnaire philosophique, which is typical of a vast amount of contemporary and subsequent literature, consists of a heterogeneous assemblage of articles directed against various points of dogma and ritual and various characteristics of the sacred records. From the literary point of view, it is one of the most characteristic of all Voltaire's works, though it is perhaps not entirely his. The desultory arrangement, the light and lively style, the extensive but not always too accurate erudition, and the somewhat captious and quibbling objections, are intensely Voltairian. But there is little seriousness about it, and certainly rio kind of rancorous or deep-seated hostility. With many, how ever, of Voltaire's pupils and younger contemporaries, the case was altered. They were distinctively atheists and anti-super naturalists. The atheism of Diderot, unquestionably the greatest of them all, has been keenly debated ; but in the case of Etienne Damilaville (1723-68), Jacques Andre Naigeon (1738-1810), Paul Henri Dietrich, baron d'Holbach, and others there is no room for doubt. By these persons a great mass of atheistic and anti-Christian literature was composed and set afloat. The char acteristic work of this school, its last word indeed, is the famous Systeme de la nature, attributed to Holbach (1723-89), but known to be, in part at least, the work of Diderot. In this remark able work, which caps the climax of the metaphysical materialism or rather nihilism of the century, the atheistic position is clearly stated.
As the Revolution approached, and the victory of the Philo sophe party was declared, there appeared for a brief space a group of cynical and accomplished phrase-makers presenting some similarity to that of which, Too years before, Saint-Evremond was the most prominent figure. The chief of this group were Nicolas Chamfort on the republican side, and Antoine Riv arol (1753-1801) on that of the royalists. Like the older writer to whom we have compared them, neither can be said to have produced any one work of eminence, and in this they stand dis tinguished from moralists like La Rochefoucauld. The floating sayings, however, which are attributed to them, or which occur here and there in their miscellaneous work, yield in no respect to those of the most famous of their predecessors in wit and a certain kind of wisdom, though they are frequently more personal than aphoristic.
Luc de Clapiers, marquis de Vauvenargues (1715-47) has pro duced maxims and reflections of considerable mental force and lit erary finish. From Voltaire downwards it has been usual to com pare him with Pascal, from whom he is chiefly distinguished by a striking but somewhat empty stoicism. Between the moralists and the politicians may be placed Rousseau, who in his novels and miscellaneous works is of the first class, in his famous Contrat social of the second. All his theories, whatever their originality and whatever their value, were made novel and influential by the force of their statement and the literary beauties of their form.
Political economy and administrative theories received much attention. The earliest writer of eminence on these subjects was the great engineer Sebastien le Prestre, marquis de Vauban 1707), whose Oisivetes and Dime royale exhibit both great abil ity and extensive observation. A more utopian economist of the same time was Charles Irenee Castel, abbe de Saint-Pierre (1658 '743), not to be confounded with the author of Paul et Virginie. Soon political economy in the hands of Francois Quesnay (1694 17 74) took a regular form, and towards the middle of the cen tury a great number of works on questions connected with it, especially that of free trade in corn, on which Ferdinand Galiani (1728-87), Andre Morellet (1727-1819), both abbes, and above all Turgot, distinguished themselves.
18th Century Criticism and Periodical Literature.—Lit erary criticism assumes in this century a sufficient importance to be treated under a separate heading. Contributions were made to it of many different kinds and from many different points of view. Periodical literature, the chief stimulus to its production, began more and more to come into favour. Even in the 17th century the Journal des savants, the Jesuit Journal de Trevoux, and other publications had set the example of different kinds of it. Just before the Revolution the Gazette de France was in the hands of J. B. A. Suard (1734-1817), a man who was nothing if not a literary critic. Perhaps, however, the most remarkable con tribution of the century to criticism of the periodical kind was the Feuilles de Grimm, a circular sent for many years to the German courts by Frederic Melchior Grimm (1723-1807), the comrade of Diderot and Rousseau, and containing a compte rendu of the ways and works of Paris, literary and artistic as well as social.
The most characteristic critic of the mid-century was the abbe Charles Batteux (1713-80) who illustrated a tendency of the time by beginning with a treatise on Les Beaux Arts reduits a un meme Principe (1746) ; reduced it and others into Principes de la lit terature (1764), and added in 1771 Les Quatres Poetiques (Aris totle, Horace, Vida and Boileau). Batteux is a very ingenious critic and his attempt to conciliate "taste" and "the rules," though inadequate, is interesting. Works on the arts in general or on special divisions of them were not wanting, as, for instance, that. of Dubos, the Essai sur la peinture of Diderot and others. Criti cally annotated editions of the great French writers also came into fashion. Of these Voltaire's edition of Corneille was the most re markable, and his annotations, united separately under the title of Commentaire sur Corneille, form not the least important por tion of his works. The method of much of the literary criticism of the close of this period was indeed deplorable enough. Jean Fran cois de la Harpe (1739-1803), who though a little later in time as to most of his critical productions is perhaps the most representa tive figure, shows criticism in one of its worst forms. La Harpe lays it down distinctly that a beauty, however beautiful, produced in spite of rules is a "monstrous beauty" and cannot be allowed.
The Encyclo pedie, unquestionably on the whole the most im portant French literary production of the century, if we except the works of Rousseau and Voltaire, was conducted for a time by Diderot and d'Alembert, afterwards by Diderot alone. It num bered among its contributors almost every Frenchman of emi nence in letters. It had, besides a considerable theological and political influence, an immense share in diffusing and gratifying the taste for general information.
The chief philosophical writers were Pierre Paul Royer Collard F. P. G. Maine de Biran (1776-1824), and Theo dore Simon Jouffroy (1796-1842). Their influence on literature, however, was altogether inferior to that of the reactionist school, of whom Louis Gabriel, vicomte de Bonald (1754-•184o), and Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821) were the great leaders. As Bonald is royalist and aristocratic, so Maistre is the advocate of a theo cracy pure and simple, with the pope for its earthly head, and a vigorous despotism for its system of government. Joseph Jou bert (1754-1824) is the most illustrious successor of Pascal and Vauvenargues, and to be ranked perhaps above both in the literary finish of his maxims, and certainly above Vauvenargues in the breadth and depth of thought which they exhibit. In pure literary criticism more particularly, Joubert, though exhibiting some in consistencies due to his time, is astonishingly penetrating and suggestive. Etienne Pivert de Senancourt (177o-1846), with Obermann (1804) , had an extraordinary influence on his own and the next generation in the direction of melancholy moralizing.
We have already alluded to some of the beginnings of periodical and journalistic letters in France. For some time, in the hands of Bayle, Basnage, Des Maizeaux, Jurieu, Leclerc, periodical litera ture consisted mainly of a series, more or less disconnected, of pamphlets, with occasional extracts from forthcoming works, crit ical adversaria and the like. Of a more regular kind were the often-mentioned Journal de Trevoux and Mercure de France, and later the Annee litteraire of Freron and the like. The Corre spondence of Grimm also, as we have pointed out, bore consider able resemblance to a modern monthly review, though it was ad dressed to a very few persons. Of political news there was, under a despotism, naturally very little. 1789, however, saw a vast change in this respect. An enormous efflorescence of periodical literature at once took place, and a few of the numerous journals founded in that year or soon afterwards survived for a consider able time. A whole class of authors arose who pretended to be nothing more than journalists, while many writers distinguished for more solid contributions to literature took part in the move ment, and not a few active politicians contributed. Thus to the original staff of the Moniteur, or, as it was at first called, La Gazette Nationale, La Harpe, Lacretelle, Andrieux, Dominique Joseph Garat (1749-1833) and Pierre Ginguene (1748-1826) were attached. Among the writers of the Journal de Paris Andre Chenier had been ranked. Fontanes contributed to many royalist and moderate journals. Guizot and Morellet, representatives re spectively of the 19th and the 18th century, shared in the Nou velles Politiques, while Bertin, Fievee and J. L. Geoffroy 1814), a critic of peculiar acerbity, contributed to the Journal de l'empire, afterwards turned into the still existing Journal des debats. With Geoffroy, Francois Benoit Hoffman (176o-1828), Jean F. J. Dussault (1769-1824) and Charles F. Dorimond, abbe de Feletz (1765-185o), constituted a quartet of critics sometimes spoken of as "the Debats four," though they were by no means all friends. Of active politicians Marat (L'Ami du peuple), Mira beau (Courrier de Provence), Barere (Journal des debats et des decrets), Brissot (Patriote franrais), Hebert (Pere Duchesne), Robespierre (De f enseur de la constitution), and Tallien (La Sen tinelle) were the most remarkable who had an intimate connection with journalism. On the other hand, the type of the journalist pure and simple is Camille Desmoulins (1759-94), one of the most brilliant, from a literary point of view, of the short-lived celebrities of the time. Of the same class were Pelletier, Durozoir, Loustalot, Royou. As the immediate daily interest in politics drooped, there were formed periodicals of a partly political .and partly literary character. Such had been the decade philosophique, which counted Cabanis Chenier, and De Tracy among its con tributors, and this was followed by the Revue f rancaise at a later period, which was in its turn succeeded by the Revue des deux mondes. On the other hand, parliamentary eloquence was even more important than journalism during the early period of the Revolution. Mirabeau naturally stands at the head of orators of this class, and next to him may be ranked the well-known names of Malouet and Meunier among constitutionalists ; of Robespierre, Marat and Danton, the triumvirs of the Mountain; of Maury, Cazales and the vicomte de Mirabeau, among the royalists; and above all of the Girondist speakers Barnave, Vergniaud and Lan juinais. The last named survived to take part in the revival of parliamentary discussion after the Restoration. But the perma nent contributions to French literature of this period of volumi nous eloquence are, as frequently happens in such cases, by no means large. The union of the journalist and the parliamentary spirit produced, however, in Paul Louis Courier a master of style. Courier spent the greater part of his life, tragically cut short, in translating the classics and studying the older writers of France, in which study he learnt thoroughly to despise the pseudo-classi cism of the i8th century. It was not till he was past 4o that he took to political writing, and the style of his pamphlets, and their won derful irony and vigour, at once placed them on the level of the very best things of the kind. Along with Courier should be men tioned Benjamin Constant (1767-183o), who, though partly a romance writer and partly a philosophical author, was mainly a politician and an orator, besides being fertile in articles and pamphlets.
Madame de Stael (1766-1817) on the other hand, as became a daughter of Necker, retained a great deal of the Philosophe char acter and the traditions of the r8th century, especially its liberal ism, its sensibilite, and its thirst for general information; to which, however, she added a cosmopolitan spirit, and a readiness to introduce into France the literary and social, as well as the political and philosophical, peculiarities of other countries. Her early writings were of the critical kind, half aesthetic, half ethical, of which the 18th century had been fond, and which their titles, Lettres sur J. J. Rousseau, De l'influence des passions, De la lit terature consideree dans ses rapports avec les institutions sociales, sufficiently show. Her romances, Delphine and Corinne, had im mense literary influence at the time. Still more was this the case with De l'Allemagne, which practically opened up to the rising generation in France the till then unknown treasures of literature and philosophy, which during the most glorious half century of her literary history Germany had, sometimes on hints taken from France herself, been accumulating. The literary importance of Chateaubriand (1768-1848) is far greater, while his literary in fluence can hardly be exaggerated. Chateaubriand's literary father was Rousseau, and his voyage to America helped to develop the seeds which Rousseau had sown. In Rene and other works of the same kind, the naturalism of Rousseau received a still further development. But it was not in mere naturalism that Chateau briand was to find his most fertile and most successful theme. It was, on the contrary, in the rehabilitation of Christianity as an inspiring force in literature. This theme he develops with the most splendid language, and with every conceivable advantage of style, in the Genie du Christianisme and the Martyrs. The splen dour of imagination, the summonings of history and literature to supply effective and touching illustrations, analogies and inci dents, the rich colouring so different from the peculiarly monoto nous and grey tones of the masters of the i8th century, and the fervid admiration for nature which were Chateaubriand's main attractions and characteristics, could not fail to have an enormous literary influence.
THE 19TH CENTURYThe19TH CENTURY The literary work of the 19th century and of the great Romantic movement which began in its second quarter was to repeat on a far larger scale the work of the 16th, to break up and discard such literary forms as had become useless or hopelessly stiff, to give strength, suppleness and variety to such as were retained, to invent new ones where necessary, to enrich the language by importations, inventions and revivals, and, above all, to bring into prominence the principle of individualism. Authors and even books, rather than groups and kinds, demand principal attention.
The result of this revolution is naturally most remarkable in the belles-lettres and the kindred department of history. Poetry, not dramatic, was revived ; prose romance and literary criticism were brought to a perfection previously unknown ; and history produced works more various and more remarkable than at any previous stage of the language.
At the accession of Charles X. France possessed three writers, and perhaps only three, of already remarkable eminence, if we except Chateaubriand, who was already of a past generation. These three were Pierre Jean de Beranger (178o-1857), Alphonse de Lamartine (179o-1869), and Hugues Felicite Robert Lamen nais (1782-1854). The first belongs definitely in manner, despite his striking originality of nuance, to the past. He has remnants of the old periphrases, the cumbrous mythological allusions, the poetical "properties" of French verse. His astonishing popularity makes it necessary to mention him, but very little of value remains of his work. Beranger's talent was still too much a matter of in dividual genius to have great literary influence, and he formed no school. It was different with Lamartine, who was, nevertheless, like Beranger, a typical Frenchman. The Meditations and the Harmonies exhibit a remarkable transition between the old school and the new. In going direct to nature, in borrowing from her striking outlines, vivid and contrasted tints, harmony and variety of sound, the new poet showed himself an innovator of the best class. In using romantic and religious associations, and expressing them in affecting language, he was the Chateaubriand of verse. But with all this he retained some of the vices of the classical school. His versification, harmonious as it is, is monotonous, and he does not venture into the bold lyrical forms which true poetry loves. He has still the horror of the mot propre; he is always spiritualizing and idealizing, and his style and thought have a double portion of the feminine and almost flaccid softness which had come to pass for grace in French. The last of the trio, Lamennais, represents an altogether bolder and rougher genius. Strongly influenced by the Catholic reaction, Lamennais also shows the strongest possible influence of the revolutionary spirit. His earliest work, the Essai sur l'indi ff erence en matiere de reli gion (1817 and 1818) was a defence of the church on curiously unecclesiastical lines. It was written in an ardent style, full of illustrations, and extremely ambitious in character.
In Lamennais's prose, especially as afterwards developed in the apocalyptic Paroles d'un croyant (1839), are to be discerned many of the tendencies of the Romantic school, particularly its hardy and picturesque choice of language, and the disdain of established and accepted methods which it professed. The signs of the revolution itself were, as was natural, first given in period ical literature. The feudalist affectations of Chateaubriand and the legitimists excited a sort of aesthetic affection for Gothicism, and Walter Scott became one of the favourite authors in France. Soon was started the periodical La Muse francaise, in which the names of Hugo, Vigny, Deschamps and Madame de Girardin appear. Almost all the writers in this periodical were eager royal ists, and for some time the battle was still fought on political grounds. There could, however, be no special connection between classical drama and liberalism; and the liberal journal, the Globe, with no less a person than Sainte-Beuve among its contributors, declared definite war against classicism in the drama. The chief "classical" organs were the Constitutionnel, the Journal des debats, and after a time and not exclusively, the Revue des deux mondes. Soon the question became purely literary, and the Romantic school proper was born in the famous cenacle or clique in which Hugo was chief poet, Sainte-Beuve chief critic, and Gautier, Ger ard de Nerval, the brothers Emile (1791-1871) and Antony (1800-69) Deschamps, Petrus Borel (1809-59) and others were officers. Alfred de Vigny and Alfred de Musset stand somewhat apart, and so does Charles Nodier (178o-1844), a versatile and voluminous writer, the very variety and number of whose works have somewhat prevented the individual excellence of any of them from having justice done to it. The objects of the school were, briefly stated, the burning of everything which had been adored, and the adoring of everything which had been burnt. They would have no unities, no arbitrary selection of subjects, no restraints on variety of versification, no academically limited vocabulary, no considerations of artificial beauty, and, above all, no periphrastic expression. The mot propre, the calling of a spade a spade, was the great commandment of Romanticism; but it must be allowed that what was taken away in periphrase was made up in adjectives. The representation of Hernani in 183o was the cul mination of the struggle, and during a great part of the reign of Louis Philippe almost all the younger men of letters in France were Romantics. The representation of the Lucrece of Francois Ponsard (1814-67) in 1843 is often quoted as the herald or sign of a classical reaction.
In poetry proper, as in drama, Victor Hugo showed the way. In him all the Romantic characteristics were expressed and em bodied—disregard of arbitrary critical rules, free choice of sub ject, variety and vigour of metre, splendour and sonorousness of diction, abundant "local colour," and that irrepressible individ ualism which is one of the chief, though not perhaps the chief, of the symptoms. A deficient sense of the ludicrous which character ized many of the Romantics was strongly apparent in their leader, as was also an equally representative grandiosity, and a fondness for the introduction of foreign and unfamiliar words, especially proper names, which occasionally produces an effect of burlesque. Victor Hugo's earliest poetical works, his chiefly royalist and polit ical Odes, were cast in the older and accepted forms, but already displayed astonishing poetical qualities. But it was in the Bal lades (e.g., the splendid Pas d'armes du roi Jean, written in verses of three syllables) and the Orientales (of which may be taken for a sample the sixth section of Navarin, a perfect torrent of out landish terms poured forth in the most admirable verse, or Les Djinns, where some of the stanzas have lines of two syllables each) that the grand provocation was thrown to the believers in alexandrines, careful caesuras and strictly separated couplets. Les Feuilles d'automne, Les Chants du crepuscule, Les Voix interieures, Les Rayons et les ombres, the productions of the next 20 years, were quieter in style and tone, but no less full of poetical spirit. The Revolution of 1848, the establishment of the empire and the poet's exile brought about a fresh concentration of his genius on lyrical subjects. Les Chdtiments and La Legende des siecles, the one political, the other historical, reach perhaps the high-water mark of French verse ; and they were accompanied by the philo sophical poems Dieu, La Fin de Satan, and by Les Contempla tions, and followed by the lighter Chansons des rues et des bois, the Annee terrible, the second Legende des siecles, etc. The liter ary productiveness of Victor Hugo himself has been the measure and sample of the whole literary productiveness of France on the poetical side. At 25 he was acknowledged as a master, at 75 he was a master still. He is the one single universal literary genius whom France can recognize as her representative, and to be set in world literature on the level of Dante, Cervantes, Shakespeare and Goethe. In the later part of his work, in such poems as Dieu and La Fin de Satan he takes his place among the religious prophets of mankind. • Hugo's poetical influence has been represented in different schools, from which very few of the poetical writers of the cen tury can be excluded. Alfred de Musset, a writer of great talent, felt part of the Romantic inspiration very strongly, but was on the whole unfortunately influenced by Byron, and partly out of wilfulness, partly from a natural want of persevering industry and vigour, allowed himself to be careless and even slovenly in com position. Notwithstanding this, some of his lyrics are among the finest poems in the language, and his verse, careless as it is, has extraordinary natural grace. Auguste Barbier (1805-82) whose lambes shows an extraordinary command of nervous and masculine versification, also comes in here. Alfred de Vigny 0799-1865) is a great poet of little bulk and somewhat over fastidious, but possessing one of the strongest styles to be found in French with a curious restrained passion and a complicated originality, rising to the greater heights of philosophical poetry. Madame Ackermann (1813-9o) is the philosophical poetess of the Romantic period ; but for actual poetical powers, Marceline Des bordes-Valmore (1786-1859) perhaps excelled her, though in a looser and more sentimental fashion. Theophile Gautier (1811 7 2) is one of the best poets in point of form that France has produced. The Comedie de la snort, the Poesies diverses, and still more the Emaux et camees, display a distinctly classical tendency —classical, that is to say, not in the party and perverted sense, but in its true acceptation. The tendency to the fantastic and horrible may be taken as best shown by Petrus Borel a writer of singular power almost entirely wasted. Gerard La brunie or de Nerval (1808-55) adopted a manner also fantastic but more idealistic than Borel's, and distinguished himself by his oriental travels and studies, and by his attention to popular bal lads and traditions, while his style has an exquisite but unaffected strangeness hardly inferior to Gautier's. Theodore de Banville (1823-91), adopting the principles of Gautier, and combining with them a considerable satiric faculty, composed a large amount of verse, faultless in form, delicate and exquisite in shades and colours, but so entirely neutral in moral and political tone that it has found fewer admirers than it deserved. Charles Marie Rene Leconte de Lisle (1818-94) (Poemes Antiques, Poemes Barbares, Poemes Tragiques), carrying out the principle of ransacking foreign literature for subjects, went to Celtic, classical or even oriental sources for his inspiration, and despite a science in verse not much inferior to Banville's, and a far wider range and choice of subject, diffused an air of erudition, not to say pedantry, over his work which disgusted some readers, and a pessimism which displeased others, but has left poetry only inferior to that of the greatest of his countrymen. Charles Baude laire (1821-67) in Les Fleurs du Mal, by his choice of unpopular subjects and the terrible truth of his analysis, revolted not a few of those who, in the words of an English critic, cannot take pleas ure in the representation if they do not take pleasure in the thing represented, and who thus miss his extraordinary command of the poetical appeal in sound, in imagery and in suggestion generally. He is, as Hugo said, the inventor of a frisson nouveau, and his influence on French poetry is growing greater and greater.
The first Parnasse had been projected by MM. Xavier de Ricard (1843-1911) and Catulle Mendes (1841-1909) as a sort of manifesto of a school of young poets: but its contents were largely coloured by the inclusion among them of work by repre sentatives of older generations—Gautier, Laprade, Leconte de Lisle, Banville, Baudelaire and others. The continuation, how ever, of the title in the later issues, rather than anything else, led to the formation and promulgation of the idea of a "Par nassien" or an "Impassible" school which was supposed to adopt as its watchword the motto of "Art for Art's sake," to pay especial attention to form, and also to aim at a certain objectivity. As a matter of fact the greater poets and the greater poems of the Parnasse admit of no such restrictive labelling, which can only be regarded as mischievous, though (or very mainly because) it has been continued. Another school, arising mainly in the later '8os and calling itself that of "Symbolism," has been supposed to indicate a reaction against Parnassianism and even against the main Romantic tradition generally, with a throwing back to Lamartine and perhaps Chenier. This idea of successive schools ("Decadents," "Naturists," etc.) has even been reduced to such an absurdum as the statement that "France sees a new school of poetry every 15 years." Those who have studied literature suffi ciently widely, and from a sufficient elevation, know that these systematizings are always more or less delusive. Parnassianism, symbolism and the other things are merely phases of the Romantic movement itself—as may be proved to demonstration by the sim ple process of taking, say, Hugo and Verlaine on the one hand, Delille or Escouchard Lebrun on the other, and comparing the two first mentioned with each other and with the older poet. The differences in the first case will be found to be differences at most of individuality : in the other of kind. We shall not, therefore, further refer to these dubious classifications, but specify briefly the most remarkable poets whom they concern, and all the older of whom, it may be observed, were represented in the Parnasse itself. Of these the most remarkable were Sully Prudhomme (1839-1907), Francois Coppee (1842-1908) and Paul Verlaine The first (Stances et poemes, 1865, Vaines Tendresses, 1875, Bonheur, 1888, etc.) is a philosophical and rather pessimistic poet. The second (La Greve des forgerons, 1869, Les Humbles, 1872, Contes et vers, 1881-87, etc.) a dealer with more generally popular subjects in a more sentimental manner; and the third (Sagesse, 1881, Parallelement, 1889, Poemes saturniens, including early work, 1867-90), by far the most original and remarkable poet of the three, starting with Baudelaire and pushing farther the fancy for forbidden subjects, but treating both these and others with wonderful command of sound and image-suggestion. Verlaine in fact (he was actually well acquainted with English) endeavoured, and to a small extent succeeded in the endeavour to communicate to French the vague suggestion of visual and audible appeal which has characterized English poetry from Blake and Coleridge onwards. Rimbaud an extraordinary per sonality who gave up writing before he was 20, must be men tioned for his influence, which ranks with that of Baudelaire and Verlaine. His Le Bateau ivre is a short masterpiece. Stephane Mallarme (1842-98), afterwards chief of the Symbolists, was also a true poet in his way, but somewhat barren, and the victim of pose and trick; Jose Maria de Heredia (1842-1905), was a very exquisite practitioner of the sonnet but with perhaps more art than matter in him. A. Villiers de 1'Isle-Adam was another eccentric with but a spark of genius ; Leon Dierx, after producing even less than Mallarme, succeeded him as Symbolist chief.
Yet another flight of poets may be grouped as those specially representing the last quarter of the century and (whether Parnas sian, Symbolist or what not) the latest development of French poetry. Verlaine and Mallarme already mentioned were in a manner the leaders of these. The whole tendency of the period has been to relax the stringency of French prosody. Albert 'Sa main (1859-1900), a musical versifier, Jean Moreas (1856-191o), who began with a volume called Les Syrtes in 1884; Laurent Tail hade (1854-1919) and others are more or less Symbolist, and contributed to the Symbolist periodical (one of many such since the beginning of the Romantic movement which would almost require an article to themselves), the Mercure de France. Jean Richepin (1849-1926) made for a time considerable noise with poetical work of a colour older even than his age, and harked back somewhat to the type of early Romanticism—La Chanson des gueux, Les Blasphemes, etc. Edmond Rostand brilliantly re vived the romantic drama in verse in Cyrano de Bergerac (1897) and other plays. Henri de Regnier, born in 1864, has received very high praise for work in Lendemains (1886) and other volumes like Les Jeux rustiques et divins (1897) and Les Medailles d'argile (1900). His later writings cover a larger field.
Prose Fiction Since 1830.—The romance-writing of France during the period has taken two different directions—the first that of the novel of incident, the second that of anaylsis and character. The first was that which, as was natural when Scott was the model, was formerly most trodden ; the sec ond required the genius of George Sand, of Balzac and of Beyle to attract students to it. The novels of Victor Hugo are novels of incident, with a strong infusion of purpose, and con siderable but rather ideal character drawing. They are in fact lengthy prose drames rather than romances proper, and they have found no imitators. They display, however, the powers of the master at their fullest. On the other hand, Alexandre Dumas originally composed his novels in close imitation of Scott, and they are much less dramatic than narrative in character. The best of them, such as Les Trois Mousquetaires, Vingt ans apres, La Reine Margot, are probably the best specimens extant of their time. Of something the same kind, but of a far lower stamp, are the novels of Eugene Sue (1804-57). Dumas and Sue were accompanied and followed by a vast crowd of companions, inde pendent or imitative. Alfred de Vigny had already attempted the historical novel in Cinq-Mars. By degrees, however, the taste for the novel of incident, at least of an historical kind, died out till it was revived in another form, and with an admixture of domestic interest, by Erckmann-Chatrian. The last and one of the most splendid instances of the old style was Le Capitaine Fracasse, which Theophile Gautier began early and finished late as a kind of tour de force. The last-named writer in his earlier days had modified the incident novel in many short tales, a kind of writing for which French has always been famous, and in which Gautier's sketches are masterpieces. His only other long novel, Mademoiselle de Maupin, belongs rather to the class of analysis. With Gautier, as a writer whose literary characteristics even excel his purely tale telling powers, may be classed Prosper Merimee (1803-70), one of the most exquisite 19th-century masters of the language. Already, however, in 1830 the tide was setting strongly in favour of novels of contemporary life and manners.
The great master of the novel of character and manners as opposed to that of history and incident is Honore de Balzac (1799-185o) . With him George Sand and Stendhal must be studied. Henri Beyle (1798-1865), who wrote under the nom de plume of Stendhal, stands by himself. His chief books in the line of fiction are La Chartreuse de Parme and Le Rouge et le Noir, exceedingly powerful novels of the analytical kind, and he also composed a considerable number of critical and miscellaneous works. Of little influence at first (though he had great power over Merimee) being somewhat in front of his time, he has exercised ever increasing authority as a master of pessimist analysis. Indeed much of his work was never published till towards the close of the century. George Sand (1804-76) began with books strongly tinged with the spirit of revolt against moral and social arrangements, and she sometimes diverged into very curious paths of pseudo-philosophy, such as was popular in the second quarter of the century. At times, too, as in Lucrezia Floriani and some other works, she did not hesitate to draw largely on her own personal adventures and experiences. But later on she devoted herself rather to sketches of country life and manners, and to novels involving bold if not very careful sketches of character and more or less dramatic situations. She was one of the most fertile of novelists, continuing to the end of her long life to pour forth fiction at the rate of many volumes a year. Of her different styles may be mentioned as fairly charac teristic, Lelia, Lucrezia Floriani, Consuelo, La Mare au diable, La Petite Fadette, Francois le champi, Mademoiselle de la Quintinie. Considering the shorter length of his life the productiveness of Balzac was almost more astonishing, especially if we consider that some of his early work was never reprinted, and that he left great stores of fragments and unfinished sketches. He is, moreover, the most remarkable example in literature of untiring work and deter mination to achieve success despite the greatest discouragements. His early work was worse than unsuccessful, it was positively bad.
After more than a score of unsuccessful attempts, Les Chouans at last made its mark, and for 20 years from that time the astonish ing productions composing the so-called Comedie humaine were poured forth successively. The sub-titles which Balzac imposed upon the different batches, Scenes de la vie parisienne, de la vie de province, de la vie intire, etc., show, like the general title, a deliberate intention on the author's part to cover the whole ground of human, at least of French life. Such an attempt could not suc ceed wholly; yet the amount of success attained is astonishing. Balzac has, however, with some justice been accused of creating the world which he described, and his personages, wonderful as is the accuracy and force with which many of the characteristics of humanity are exemplified in them, are sometimes not altogether human. Balzac stands as the foremost novelist of France, and in the opinion of many as the greatest of all novelists.
The so-called realist side of Balzac was developed (but, as he himself acknowledged, with a double dose of intermixed if some what transformed Romanticism) by Gustave Flaubert (1821-8o), who showed culture, scholarship and a literary power over the language inferior to that of no writer of the century. No novelist of his generation has attained a higher literary rank than Flaubert. Madame Bovary and L'Education sentimentale are studies of con temporary life ; in Salammbo and La Tentation de Saint Antoine erudition and antiquarian knowledge furnish the subjects for the display of the highest literary skill. Eugene Fromentin (182o-76), best known as a painter, wrote a novel, Dominique, which is highly appreciated by good judges.
The Naturalists proper chiefly developed or seemed to develop one side of Balzac, but almost entirely abandoned his Romantic element. They aimed first at exact and almost photographic delineation of the incidents of modern life, and secondly at still more uncompromising non-suppression of the essential features and functions of that life which are usually suppressed. This school may be represented in chief by four novelists (really three, as two of them were brothers who wrote together till the rather early death of one of them) , Emile Zola (184o-19o3) , Alphonse Daudet (1840-97), and Edmond (1822-97 ) and Jules (183o-7o) de Goncourt. The first, of Italian extraction and Marseillais birth, began by work of undecided kinds and was always a critic as well as a novelist. Of this first stage Contes a Ninon (1864) and Therese Raquin (1867) deserve to be specified. But after 187o Zola entered upon a huge scheme (suggested no doubt by the Comedie humaine) of tracing the fortunes in every branch, legiti mate and illegitimate, and in every rank of society of a family, Les Rougon-Macquart, and carried it out in a full score of novels during more than as many years. He followed this with a shorter series on places, Paris, Rome, Lourdes, and lastly by another of strangely apocalyptic tone, Fecondite, Travail, Verite, the last a story of the Dreyfus case, retrospective and, as it proved, prophetic. The repulsiveness of much of his work, and the over done detail of almost the whole of it, caused great prejudice against him, and will probably always prevent his being ranked among the greatest novelists ; but his power is indubitable, and in passages, if not in whole books, does itself justice.
The Goncourts, besides their work in Naturalist (they would have preferred to call it "Impressionist") fiction, devoted them selves especially to study and collection in the fine arts, and produced many volumes on the historical side of these, volumes distinguished by accurate and careful research. This quality they carried, and the elder of them after his brother's death continued to carry, into novel-writing (Renee Mauperin, Germinie Lacerteux, Cherie, etc.) with the addition of an extraordinary care for pecul iar and, as they called it, "personal" diction. On the other hand, Alphonse Daudet (who with the other three, Flaubert to some extent, and the Russian novelist Turgeniev, formed a sort of cenacle or literary club) mixed with some Naturalism a far greater amount of fancy and wit than his companions allowed themselves or could perhaps attain; and in the Tartarin series (dealing with the extravagances of his fellow-Provencaux) added not a little to the gaiety of Europe. His other novels (Fromont jeune et Risler aine, Jack, Le Nabab, etc.), also very popular, have been variously judged, there being something strangely like plagiarism in some of them, and in others, in fact in most, an excessive use of that privilege of the novelist which consists in introducing real persons under more or less disguise. It should be observed in speaking of this group that the Goncourts, or rather the survivor of them, left an elaborate Journal of much importance for the appreciation of the personal side of French literature during the last half of the century.
Barbey d'Aurevilly (1808-1889) with l'Ensorcelee and Le Chevalier Destouches has a place of his own and many passionate admirers. He is in his own way a master of fiction and a master of prose. The tales of Villiers de l'Isle-Adam (1840-89) also de serve to be at least mentioned.
In 188o Zola, who had by this time formed a regular school of disciples, issued with certain of them a collection of short stories, Les Soirees de Medan, which contains one of his own best things, L'Attaque du moulin, and also the capital story, Boule de suif, by Guy de Maupassant (1850-93), who in the same year published poems, Des vers, of very remarkable if not strictly poetical qual ity. Maupassant developed during his short literary career per haps the greatest powers shown by any French novelist since Flaubert (his sponsor in both senses) if a series of longer novels (Une Vie, Bel Ami, Pierre et Jean, Fort comme la mort) and shorter stories (Monsieur Parent, Les Soeurs Rondoli, Le Horla), but they were distorted by the Naturalist pessimism and grime, and perhaps also by the brain-disease of which their author died. J. K. Huysmans (1848-1907), also a contributor to Les Soirees de Medan, who began a little earlier with Marthe (1876) and other books, gave his most characteristic work in 1884 with Au rebours and in 1891 with La-bas, stories of exaggerated and "satanic" pose, decorated with perhaps the extremest achieve ments of the school in mere ugliness and nastiness. Afterwards, by an obvious reaction, he returned to Catholicism. Of about the same date as these two were two other novelists of note, Julien Viaud ("Pierre Loti," 1850-1923), a naval officer who embodied his experiences of foreign service with a faint dose of story and character interest, and a far larger one of description, in a series of books (Aziyade, Le Mariage de Loti, Madame Chrysan theme, etc.), and Paul Bourget (1852-1935), an important critic as well as novelist who deflected the Naturalist current into a "psychological" channel, connecting itself higher with Stendhal, and composed in it books very popular in their way—Cruelle Enigme (1885), Le Disciple, Terre promise, Cosmopolis. As a contrast or complement to Bourget's "psychological" novel may be taken the "ethical" novel of Edouard Rod (18S7-1909)—La Vie privee de Michel Tessier (1893), Le Sens de la vie, Les Trois Coeurs. Contemporary with these as a novelist though a much older man; and occupied at different times of his life with verse and with criticism, came Anatole France (1844-1924), who in Le Crime de Silvestre Bonnard, La Rotisserie de la reine Pedauque, Le Lys rouge, and others, made a kind of novel as different from the ordinary styles as Pierre Loti's, and of the highest appeal in its wit, its subtle fancy and its perfect French.
Edmond Scherer (1815-89) and Paul de Saint-Victor (1827 1881) represent different sides of Sainte-Beuve's style in literary criticism, Scherer combining with it a martinet and somewhat prudish precision, while Saint-Victor, with great powers of appre ciation, is the most flowery and "prose-poetical" of French critics. In theatrical criticism Francisque Sarcey (1827-99), an acute but somewhat severe and limited judge, succeeded to the good-natured sovereignty of Janin. The criticism of the Revue des deux mondes has played a sufficiently important part in French literature to deserve separate notice in passing. Founded in 1829, the Revue, after some vicissitudes, soon attained, under the direction of the Swiss Buloz, the character of being one of the first of European critical periodicals. Its style of criticism has, on the whole, in clined rather to the classical side—i.e., to classicism as modified by, and possibly after, the Romantic movement. Besides some of the authors already named, its principal critical contributors were Gustave Planche (1808-57), an acute but somewhat trucu lent critic, Saint-Rene Taillandier (1817-79), and Emile Montegut A remarkable writer whose talent, approaching genius, was spoilt by eccentricity and pose, and who belonged to a more mod ern generation, Jules Barbey d'Aurevilly (1808-89), poet, novelist and critic, produced much of his critical work, and corrected more, in his later days. Not only did the critical work in various ways of Renan, Taine, Sarcey and others continue during the latter part of the century, but a new generation, hardly in this case inferior to the old, appeared. The chiefs of this were Anatole France, Emile Faguet (1847-1916), Ferdinand Brunetiere (1849 1906) and Jules Lemaitre (1853-1914). The last, however, though a brilliant writer, was but an "interim" critic, beginning with poetry and other matters, and after a time turning to yet others, while, brilliant as he was, his criticism was of ten ill-formed. So too Anatole France, after compiling four volumes of La Vie litteraire in his own inimitable style and with singular felicity of appreciation, also turned away. But the body of recent critical literature in France is perhaps larger in actual proportion and of greater value when considered in relation to other kinds of litera ture than has been the case at any previous period.
to the political and scientific rather than to the purely philosophical side (which indeed he regarded as antiquated), was not very re markable merely as a man of letters. Victor Cousin (1792-1867), on the other hand, almost a brilliant man of letters and for a time regarded as something of a philosophical apostle preaching "eclecticism," betook himself latterly to biographical and other miscellaneous writings. Similar phenomena, not so much of incon stancy to philosophy as of a tendency towards the applied rather than the pure branches of the subject, are noticeable in Edgar Quinet (1803-75), in Charles de Remusat (1797-1875), and in Ernest Renan (1823-92), the first of whom began by translating Herder while the second and third devoted themselves early to scholastic philosophy, de Remusat dealing with Abelard and Anselm (1856), Renan with Averroes (1852). Renan is one of the greatest of prose writers of all time, for purity, elegance and fluidity. Outside his historical work, his Souvenirs and his Drarnes and Dialogues ptiiloso pliiques are imperishable masterpieces. His original ideas are best expressed in L'Avenir de la Science. More single-minded devotion to at least the historical side was shown by Jean Philibert Damiron (1794-1862), who published in 1842 a Cours de plsilosophie and many minor works at different times; but the inconstancy recurs in Jules Simon (1814-96), who, in the earlier part of his life a professor of philosophy and a writer of authority on the Greek philosophers (especially in Histoire de l'ecole d'Alexandrie, 1844-45), began before long to take an active and, towards the close of his life-work, all but a foremost part in politics.
Political philosophy and its kindred sciences have naturally received a large share of attention. Towards the middle of the century there was a great development of socialist and fanciful theorizing on politics, with which the names of Claude Henri, comte de Saint-Simon (i760-1825), 'Charles Fourier (1772-1837), Etienne Cabet (1788-1856), and others are connected. As political economists Frederic Bastiat (1801-50), L. G. L. Guilhaud de Lavergne (1809-80), Louis Auguste Blanqui (18o5-81), and Michel Chevalier (1806-79) may be noticed. In Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-59) France produced a political observer of a remarkably acute, moderate and reflective character.
The brothers Thierry devoted themselves to early French history Amedee Thierry (1797-1873) producing a Histoire des Gaulois and other works concerning the Roman period, and Augustin Thierry (1795-1856) the well-known history of the Norman Conquest, the equally attractive Recits des temps Merovingiens and other excellent works. Philippe de Segur (1780 18 73) wrote a history of the Russian campaign of Napoleon, and some other works chiefly dealing with Russian history. The volu minous Histoire de France of Henri Martin (1810-83) is an impartial work dealing in detail with the whole subject. A. G. P. Brugiere, baron de Barante (1782-1866), after beginning with literary criticism, turned to history, and in his Histoire des dues de Bourgogne produced a work of capital importance. As was to be expected, many of the most brilliant results of this devotion to historical subjects consisted of works dealing with the French Revolution. No series of historical events has ever perhaps re ceived treatment at the same time from so many different points of view, and by writers of such varied literary excellence, among whom it must, however, be said that the purely royalist side is hardly at all represented. One of the earliest of these histories is that of Francois Mignet (1796-1884), a sober and judicious historian of the older school, also well known for his Histoire de Marie Stuart. About the same time was begun the brilliant if not extremely trustworthy work of Adolphe Thiers on the Revolution, which established the literary reputation of the future president of the French republic, and was at a later period completed by the Histoire du consulat et de l'empire. The down fall of the July monarchy and the early years of the empire witnessed the publication of several works of the first importance on this subject. Barante contributed histories of the Convention and the Directory, but the three books of greatest note were those of Lamartine, Jules Michelet (1798-1874), and Louis Blanc (1811-82). Lamartine's Histoire des Girondins is written from the constitutional-republican point of view, and is sometimes con sidered to have had much influence in producing the events of 1848. It is, perhaps, rather the work of an orator and poet than of an historian. The work of Michelet is of a more original char acter. Besides his history of the Revolution, Michelet wrote an extended history of France, and a very large number of smaller works on historical, political and social subjects. His imaginative powers are of the highest order, and his style stands alone in French for its strangely broken and picturesque character, its turbid abundance of striking images, and its somewhat sombre magnificence, qualities which, as may easily .be supposed, found full occupation in a history of the Revolution. Edgar Quinet (1803-75), like Louis Blanc a devotee of the republic and an exile for its sake, brought to this subject a mind and pen long trained to literary and historical studies; but La Revolution is not considered his best work. And Taine, after distinguishing himself, as we have mentioned, in literary criticism, and attaining less success in philosophy (De t'intelligence), turned in Les Origines de la France moderne to an elaborate discussion of the Revolution, its causes, character and consequences. Francois Pierre Guillaume Guizot (1787-1874), like his rival Thiers, de voted himself much to historical study. His earliest works were literary and linguistic, but he soon turned to political history, and for the last half-century of his long life his contributions to his torical literature were almost incessant and of the most various character. The most important are the histories Des Origines du gouvernement representatif, De la revolution d'Angleterre, De la civilisation en France, and a Histoire de France, which he was writing at the time of his death.
In the last quarter of the century, under the department of history, the most remarkable names were still those of Taine and Renan. Indeed it may be here proper to remark that Renan, in the kind of elaborated semi-poetic style which has most characterized the prose of the 19th century in all countries of Europe, takes pre eminence among French writers even in the estimation of critics who are not enamoured of his substance and tone. The chief work of his life is the Histoire des origines du Christianisme, which includes the celebrated Vie de Jesus. But, under the influence of Taine to some extent and of a general European tendency still more, France during this period attained or recovered a consider able place for what is called "scientific" history-the history which while, in some cases, though not in all, not neglecting the develop ment of style attaches itself particularly to "the document," on the one hand, and to philosophical arrangement on the other. The chief representatives of the school were probably Albert Sorel (1842-1906) and Fustel de Coulanges (1830-89) (La Cite An tique, Histoire des Institutions de l'ancienne France).