New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women (Volume 99) (The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series) 1649590814, 9781649590817

Citation preview

provocative salon culture of seventeenth-century France by bringing to life its sounds, conversations, and participants. Lynn S. Meskill’s elegant and faithful translation conveys the voices of Buffet’s female contemporaries as they shape French language and engage fully in early modern culture wars. Buffet’s text forces a reexamination of long-held views about salon culture and women’s roles in seventeenth-century France, freeing the salon from satirical portraits of Molière and succeeding centuries. Meskill’s exemplary introduction provides the

MARGUERITE BUFFET

Marguerite Buffet’s fascinating text allows today’s readers to experience the vibrant and

Marguerite Buffet

New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women EDIT ED AND T RANS LAT ED B Y

Lynn S. Meskill

tools to understand this work in its complex literary and historical context. Women regain their place as the masters of conversation and a major force that shaped the French language.

Faith E. Beasley Professor of French, Dartmouth College

Little is known about Marguerite Buffet except that she lived in Paris and taught French to a rare glimpse into the life, habits, and culture of seventeenth-century France thanks to Buffet’s vivid examples of proper language use at the time. Her Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, long considered a valuable source for biographies of some of her contemporaries, lauds an array of women exemplars of erudition, wit, and conversation. The present volume presents Buffet’s work in its near entirety for the first time in English. Lynn S. Meskill is Associate Professor of English Literature and Translation at Université Paris Cité. She is the author of Ben Jonson and Envy (2009), as well as articles and book chapters on Jonson, Shakespeare, and Milton.

The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series, 99

New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women

women during the reign of Louis XIV. Her New Observations on the French Language offers

ISBN Placeholder FPO DO NOT PRINT!

vol_99.indd All Pages

ITER PRESS

The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series, 99 2023-04-11 8:42 AM

NEW OBSERVATIONS ON THE FRENCH LANGUAGE, WITH PRAISES OF ILLUSTRIOUS LEARNED WOMEN

The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series, 99

FOUNDING EDITORS

Margaret L. King Albert Rabil, Jr. SENIOR EDITOR

Margaret L. King SERIES EDITORS

Vanda Anastácio Jaime Goodrich Elizabeth H. Hageman Sarah E. Owens Deanna Shemek Colette H. Winn EDITORIAL BOARD

Anne Cruz Margaret Ezell Anne Larsen Elissa Weaver

MARGUERITE BUFFET

New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women •

Edited and translated by LYNN S. MESKILL

2023

© Iter Inc. 2023 New York and Toronto IterPress.org All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

978-1-64959-081-7 (paper) 978-1-64959-082-4 (pdf) 978-1-64959-083-1 (epub)

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Buffet, Marguerite, author. | Meskill, Lynn S., editor, translator. | Buffet, Marguerite. Nouvelles observations sur la langue françoise. English. | Buffet, Marguerite. Eloges des illustres sçavantes. English. Title: New observations on the French language ; with Praises of illustrious learned women / Marguerite Buffet ; edited and translated by Lynn S. Meskill. Other titles: Praises of illustrious learned women Description: New York : Iter Press, 2023. | Series: The other voice in early modern Europe: the Toronto series ; 99 | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “Two feminist works by Marguerite Buffet that had been bound together in their original 1668 edition: a grammatical work on proper French usage and a celebration of famous women, another entry in the ongoing literary debate known as the querelle des femmes”-- Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2022054384 (print) | LCCN 2022054385 (ebook) | ISBN 9781649590817 (paperback) | ISBN 9781649590824 (pdf) | ISBN 9781649590831 (epub) Subjects: LCSH: French language--Middle French, 1300-1600. | French language--Grammar--Early works to 1800. | Women--Biography--Early works to 1800. Classification: LCC PC2070 .B813 2023 (print) | LCC PC2070 (ebook) | DDC 448.2--dc23/ eng/20230127 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022054384 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022054385

Cover Illustration A Conversation between Women, Also Said Women at Lunch (oil on panel) / Bosse, Abraham (1602– 76) (attr. to) / Musée National de la Renaissance, Ecouen, France / Bridgeman Images XIR156759.

Cover Design Maureen Morin, Library Communications, University of Toronto Libraries.

For Margaret

Contents Acknowledgments



ix

Illustrations xi Introduction 1 New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women 43 Epistle: “To the Queen” Epistle: “To the Reader” Epistle: “To Mademoiselle Buffet, on Her Book”

44 46 47

of the necessity of speaking your language well, and how highly French is esteemed by all nations

49

The First Part For the correction of barbarous and archaic terms, as well as those necessary for proper use; and of the origin of the letters that make up spelling

51

against those who speak too much, and the advantages to those who are sparing of words. On the subject of Pleonasm which follows

64

The Second Part Examining Pleonasm, or the redundancy of useless words, and the means of correcting it

67

concerning corrupt and badly pronounced words, and the advantages enjoyed by women who speak with exactness

70

The Third Part Treating corrupt and badly pronounced words, and the means of correcting these errors

71

regarding terms that are poorly adapted, and the use one should make of time

76

The Fourth Part In which may be found remarks concerning some badly adapted terms, or terms whose meanings are confused with other terms

82

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present

85

Praises to the Glory of Some Illustrious Learned Women of Past Ages 106 Certificate of the King’s Privilege

123

Bibliography

125

Index

135

Acknowledgments My gratitude goes first to Karen Newman for her support for this project from its conception. I thank Line Cottegnies for her comments and suggestions throughout the preparation of the book, and Claire Gheeraert-Graffeuille, who helped with some passages in the French text. Nathalie Vienne-Guerrin and Jean-Louis Haquette both offered material comments, as did Anne-Marie Miller-Blaise, Andrew Hiscock, Christine Sukic, and Susan Wiseman. I thank my colleagues Antoine Cazé and Thomas Constantinesco for their translation wisdom, and Catherine Pascal for sharing her knowledge about galleries of women worthies. My friends Douglas Bruster, Jennifer Kirby, Fabienne Moine, Isabelle Olivero, Allan Potofsky, Elizabeth Scala, and Will Slauter have all contributed to this project in important ways, as they well know. Parts of this book were written during a two-year research fellowship awarded by the CNRS (Centre nationale de la recherche scientifique) in association with the Université Paul-Valèry-Montpellier 3. The book has benefited as well from the generous support of my own research group, UMR CNRS LARCA (Laboratoire des recherches sur les cultures anglophones) at Université Paris Cité. I am grateful to the kind staff of the Arsenal Library in Paris, with special thanks to Khadiga Aglan. Margaret King, founding editor with the late Albert Rabil, Jr. of “The Other Voice Series,” personally saw the book through every stage of the editorial process. I thank the Press’s anonymous reader for comments that appreciably helped me to improve the volume. Cheryl Lemmens and Margaret English-Haskin made this book possible in its present form. All remaining errors are my own. My gratitude goes finally to Margaret Llasera, who first read and commented on the whole of the translation. This book is dedicated to her.

ix

Illustrations Cover.

A Conversation between Women, Also Said Women at Lunch (oil on panel) / Bosse, Abraham (1602–76) (attr. to) / Musée National de la Renaissance, Ecouen, France / Bridgeman Images XIR156759.

Figure 1.

Title page of Marguerite Buffet, Nouvelles Observations sur la langue françoise; où il est traité des termes anciens et inusitez, et du bel usage des mots nouveaux. Avec les Eloges des illustres sçavantes, tant anciennes que modernes (1668). Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal - 8 - BL - 1608.

xi

42

Introduction The Other Voice In 1668, during the reign of Louis XIV, in the midst of the cultural and artistic activity that was to give France’s Grand Siècle its epithet, Marguerite Buffet published her New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present in Paris.1 Buffet’s is an all but forgotten feminist work,2 written by a woman about whom we know next to nothing. Although we have scant information concerning the life story of the author, Buffet’s only published work is a unique contribution to the centuries-long debate concerning the status of women known as the querelle des femmes. The 342-page duodecimo volume joins together genres never found before in a single text: first, observations, or remarks, on the French language, and second, éloges, or praises, of famous women.3 Buffet’s work is of interest, therefore, not only for its conscious annexing of these two radically different genres—linguistic and epideictic—but also for its late seventeenth-century pro-woman reworking of both.4 The first two-thirds of Buffet’s text, New Observations on the French Language, describes common errors in contemporary language usage, then gives examples of correct expression for both speaking and writing. The remaining 1. The full title is New Observations on the French Language, Treating of Old and Archaic Terms, and the Proper Use of New Expressions, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present (Nouvelles Observations sur la langue françoise; où il est traité des termes anciens et inusitez, et du bel usage des mots nouveaux. Avec les Eloges des illustres sçavantes, tant anciennes que modernes), published in Paris by Jean Cusson, 1668. The French text may be found online at Gallica: . No subsequent editions were published. New Observations on the French Language will be referred to as “Observations” throughout this Introduction and in the notes; Praises of Illustrious Learned Women will be referred to as “Praises.” Unless otherwise indicated, all translations from the French, both of primary and secondary sources, are my own. 2. In calling Buffet’s work “feminist,” I am taking up Joan Kelly’s argument that within the context of the history of French feminism, which has traditionally identified Christine de Pizan (1364–ca. 1430) as the first feminist thinker, the word “feminist” is appropriate to describe “a 400-year-old tradition of women thinking about women and sexual politics in European society before the French Revolution.” See Joan Kelly, “Early Feminist Theory and the Querelle des Femmes, 1400–1789,” Signs 8 (1982): 4–28, at p. 5; see also Joan DeJean, Tender Geographies: Women and the Origins of the Novel in France (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), 6. 3. In the original French text, the Observations are on pages 1–198 and the Eloges on pages 199–342. 4. Aristotle describes epideictic declamation as the rhetoric of “praise or blame,” one of the three major types of rhetoric along with deliberative and forensic (Art of Rhetoric, 1.3). Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric, trans. John Henry Freese, rev. Gisela Striker (Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press, 2020), p. 33.

1

2 Introduction third, Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, opens with a defense of the female sex, followed by a catalogue of illustrious women, both living and dead, who are noteworthy not as epitomes of the cardinal virtues but specifically as exemplars of women’s learning, or savoir.5 Buffet’s Observations belongs to a genre very much in vogue in the latter half of the seventeenth century: remarks on aspects of the French language—such as pronunciation, spelling, vocabulary, and style—not covered in traditional grammars. Her Praises belongs to the so-called de claribus tradition of catalogues of renowned women, of which there was no lack of contemporary seventeenth-century French specimens. What distinguishes Buffet’s work is her decision to pair these two fashionable but seemingly unrelated genres in order to exhort French women to excel in their native language and to emulate the female paragons of learning whose biographies Buffet provides at the end of her volume. In her Observations Buffet unites pertinent examples of the language of daily life, whether from the world of fashion, or the world of love, courtship, and galanterie.6 The work thus offers rare glimpses into the habits and language of women of various backgrounds at the time.7 Buffet takes care to mention the benefits that accrue to women who study the art of conversation and the companion art of letter-writing. She exhorts women to learn how to manage their time more efficiently so that they may spend their many leisure hours in the pursuit of a greater knowledge of their own language, of speaking and writing it well, instead of wasting time in idleness or, presumably, gambling and card-playing. In the Praises, Buffet argues for the equality of the sexes by highlighting women’s aptitude for learning, praising the abilities of a number of her and her readers’ contemporaries. These exemplars are exhibited as living proofs of the power 5. The four cardinal virtues, set out in antiquity and specifically identified in early Christianity, are prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance. Concerning early modern humanist treatises in defense of women, Constance Jordan writes: “Treatises of this class typically argue that the cardinal virtues, celebrated in antiquity and represented in classical philosophy and history, have been (and can be) as well exemplified by women as men.” See her “Feminism and the Humanists: The Case of Sir Thomas Elyot’s Defence of Good Women,” in Rewriting the Renaissance: The Discourses of Sexual Difference in Early Modern Europe, ed. Margaret W. Ferguson, Maureen Quilligan, and Nancy J. Vickers (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986), 242. 6. Galanterie is a complex notion in French. The source of the English “gallant” and “gallantry,” the word possesses a wide range of meanings in French, including noble or chivalrous, flirtatious, and charming. See Delphine Denis, Le Parnasse galant: Institution d’une catégorie littéraire au XVIIe siècle (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2001), and Alain Viala, La France galante: Essai historique sur une catégorie culturelle, de ses origines jusqu’à la Revolution (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2008). 7. Regarding social classes in France during the Ancien Régime see Robert Mandrou, Introduction to Modern France, 1500–1640: An Essay in Historical Psychology, trans. R.E. Hallmark (London: Edward Arnold, 1975), originally published as Introduction à la France moderne, 1500–1640: Essai de psychologie historique (Paris: Albin Michel, 1961).

Introduction 3 wielded by educated women. In the Observations Buffet actively encourages her women readers to leave aside their bagatelles, or trifling concerns, in favour of the more profound pleasures of disciplined study, or, at the very least, the satisfaction of knowing how and when to join in or leave a conversation.8 In the Praises she subsequently draws portraits of women writing in their cabinets, or studies, and speaking in public forums. Nowhere does Buffet explicitly say, “If you follow my rules of good speaking and writing, you too can become another Madeleine de Scudéry or Anna Maria van Schurman,” but readers would have come to this conclusion themselves, given the way the biographies echo the lessons taught in the linguistic treatise. Better self-expression would naturally place Buffet’s readers—as it did Buffet herself—among members of that group of women proficient in the arts taught in the Observations. Buffet promotes education as the means of elevating women in society as well as its role in a woman’s path to glory. Buffet’s unusual hybrid work emerges out of specific historical and literary contexts. The first is the founding in 1635 of the Académie Française, or the French Academy, by Cardinal Richelieu, chief minister for Louis XIII. With the founding of the Academy was inaugurated an official program to rehabilitate the French language. The new Academy was charged with the task of purifying the language, ridding it, for instance, of what it considered archaic and regional terms, and making it the fitting reflection of a modern nation and civilized culture.9 Article 24 of the Statutes of the French Academy states that its principal mission would be to provide French with fixed rules to render it pure, eloquent, and suitable for expressing the arts and the sciences.10 The first major work to codify such fixed rules was written by Claude Favre de Vaugelas (1585–1650) and published 8. The importance of the art of conversation in the salons and in the novels of seventeenth-century France cannot be overstated. See “De la Conversation,” in Madeleine de Scudéry’s Conversations sur divers sujets, 2 vols. (Paris: Billaine, 1680), 1:1–35, for its insight into debates surrounding the exact rules to which the best conversation should adhere. For secondary sources on the subject see Faith E. Beasley, “Changing the Conversation: Re-positioning the French Seventeenth-Century Salon,” L’Esprit Créateur 60 (2020): 34–46; Peter Burke, The Art of Conversation (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993); Benedetta Craveri, L’Age de la conversation, trans. Eliane Deschamps-Pria (Paris: Gallimard, 2002); Delphine Denis, La Muse galante: Poétique de la conversation dans l’œuvre de Madeleine de Scudéry (Paris: Honoré Champion, 1997); Emmanuel Godo, La Conversation: Une utopie de l’éphémère (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2014); Elizabeth C. Goldsmith, Exclusive Conversations: The Art of Interaction in Seventeenth-Century France (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988); and David Randall, The Concept of Conversation: From Cicero’s Sermo to the Grand Siècle’s Conversation (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2018). 9. Later, during the reign of Louis XIV, the Academy would aim to make French a universal language, replacing Latin, so that the glory of the Sun King would never disappear from memory. 10. See Statuts et règlements of the Académie Française: .

4 Introduction in 1647: Remarques sur la langue française, utiles à ceux qui veulent bien parler et bien écrire (Remarks on the French Language, Useful to Those Who Wish to Speak and Write Well).11 Buffet’s New Observations on the French Language was directly influenced by Vaugelas’s work, as were similar works by Scipion Dupleix, Gilles Ménage, Dominique Bouhours, and Paul Tallemant, among others.12 All of these books aimed to help readers distinguish archaic and provincial terms from those terms acceptable in polite and proper usage. Among the books in this new genre, Buffet’s New Observations on the French Language is the only volume in the corpus addressed specifically to a female public.13 The second important context for Buffet’s work is the so-called “woman question.” Treatises and pamphlets actively defending women from traditional misogynist arguments, along with catalogues and galleries of renowned women or “women worthies,” constituted an integral part of the querelle des femmes.14 Buffet’s Praises appears after a veritable seventeenth-century explosion of lists of women notable for their piety, heroism, or military genius, as well as for their learning.15 Buffet’s work is distinctive in that she focuses exclusively on learning as a criterion for all the women in her gallery: she dedicates the first half of the section to celebrating nineteen contemporary women at length as living exemplars of such learning before cataloguing the intellectual achievements of women from the recent and ancient past in the second half. The contemporary women Buffet chooses to elevate in her Praises—some of whom are remembered today only because Buffet wrote about them—are central to grasping the final important context for her work, namely the culture 11. Claude Favre de Vaugelas, Remarques sur la langue française, utiles à ceux qui veulent bien parler et bien écrire (Paris: Pierre le Petit, 1647; rpt., Paris: Editions Ivrea, 1996). 12. Scipion Dupleix, Liberté de la langue Françoise dans sa pureté (Paris: Denys Bechet, 1651); Gilles Ménage, Observations de Monsieur Ménage sur la langue françoise (Paris: Claude Barbin, 1672; 2nd ed., Paris: Claude Barbin, 1675), and Observations de Monsieur Ménage sur la langue françoise. Seconde partie (Paris: Claude Barbin, 1676); Dominique Bouhours, Remarques nouvelles sur la langue françoise (Paris: Sebastien Mabre-Cramoisy, 1675; rpt., Paris: Georges and Louis Josse, 1692), and Suite des Remarques nouvelles sur la langue françoise (Paris: Georges and Louis Josse, 1692; rpt., 1693); and Paul Tallemant, Remarques et decisions de l’Academie françoise (Paris: Jean-Baptiste Coignard, 1698). For a complete list see the Corpus des remarques sur la langue française (XVIIe siècle) published by Classiques Garnier online (). 13. Buffet emphasizes that she is writing explicitly for women. “I have taken a completely different approach from that of other guides,” she says in the prologue to the First Part, “by choosing to work primarily for women” (Observations, 50). 14. See Natalie Zemon Davis,  “ ‘Women’s History’ in Transition: The European Case,” Feminist Studies 3 (1976): 83–103, at p. 83. 15. See Joan DeJean, Tender Geographies, 26–32, and Ian Maclean, Woman Triumphant: Feminism in French Literature, 1610–1652 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977), 76–77.

Introduction 5 of the Parisian salon. Most of Buffet’s women were connected to various salons, places where assemblies of cultivated men and women interested in literature and polite conversation gathered together.16 What we now call “salons” (i.e., rooms) were known at the time by architectural terms designating certain spaces in the house such as chambre, ruelle, alcove, or réduit.17 Joan DeJean describes the ways in which the culture of the salon helped transform the terms of the querelle des femmes in France, opening up a unique space for women to express themselves: The beginning of the seventeenth century . . . marks a decisive turning point in the history of French feminism, an evolution that generates innovative types of writing about women that reflect new realities and mark an important departure from the treatises produced in conjunction with the Querelle. To the nearly simultaneous inceptions of the regency of Marie de’ Medici (1610) and the equally absolute reign in the socio-literary sphere of another Italian, . . . [the] Marquise de Rambouillet, founder of the French salon tradition, may be traced the origin of a golden age of activity that is not only feminocentric but also feminist.18 Marguerite Buffet’s work emerges from this culture of the seventeenth-century salon. Her linguistic treatise, as well as her gallery of women, hint that it was a world with which Buffet was intimately familiar. The salon of Catherine de Vivonne, marquise de Rambouillet (1588–1665), located in her residence between the Louvre and the Tuileries palaces, was known as the chambre bleue for the room in which it took place. Regular attendees here included Vaugelas, as well as the Jesuit priest and grammarian Dominique Bouhours (1628–1702) and the lawyer Guillaume Colletet (1598–1659), French translator of Anna Maria van Schurman.19 The novelist Madeleine de Scudéry (1607–1701), one of the contemporary women immortalized in Buffet’s Praises, was also an early habitué. In the early 1650s, Scudéry would go on to found her own salon, known as her samedis for the day of the week on which gatherings took place. Karen Newman provides us with the following description: At Scudéry’s samedis, contemporaries read aloud and discussed literature, invented and played literary games, and apparently collaborated—Scudéry’s famous carte de tendre, which presents a 16. Maclean, Woman Triumphant, 141. 17. DeJean, Tender Geographies, 21. 18. DeJean, Tender Geographies, 19. 19. For Colletet, see Anne R. Larsen, Anna Maria van Schurman, “The Star of Utrecht”: The Educational Vision and Reception of a Savante (London: Routledge, 2016), 119.

6 Introduction psychology of love as movement through geographical space, is said to have originated out of a game or jeu d’esprit among her friends. Like Sapho, Scudéry presided over her “court,” guided its conversations, and was its arbiter of taste.20 Buffet’s Observations invites close comparison with Scudéry’s work, and the Praises an examination of the person of Scudéry herself, one of the most popular literary figures of the time. Scudéry’s Sapho—resurrected from the classical past and placed, as an arbiter of taste and an expert conversationalist, in a salon of mid-seventeenth-century France—may well have served Buffet as a model for her own voice in the Observations. And Scudéry’s “Histoire de Sapho,” inserted in her novel Artamène, ou Le Grand Cyrus (1649–1653), may be fruitfully mined for passages and ideas taken up by Buffet. The comparison between Sapho and the pedantic Damophile in Scudéry’s fiction is particularly apt with regard to Buffet’s project—shared by other authors of linguistic remarques—of promulgating a certain worldly or mondaine attitude toward language use, as opposed to a more academic or docte (i.e., learned) one.21 As Newman notes, “Damophile’s cardinal sin is that she advertises her learning; in contemporary parlance, she is a showoff, always seeking to be seen with erudite men and to discuss learned topics. . . . Sapho, on the other hand, hides her learning, discourages those who would praise it, and presents her verses as no more than an amusement.”22 In this seventeenthcentury linguistic quarrel between ancients and moderns, between the defenders of a neoclassical style (such as Nicolas Boileau, Jean Racine, and Molière) and the proponents of a modern, spoken style (such as Jean-Louis Guez de Balzac, Claude Favre de Vaugelas, and Vincent Voiture), Buffet advocates the more worldly image of cultivated women as sçavantes sans la paroistre, or “learned without showing it.”23 Buffet celebrates Scudéry, and women accomplished for their literary and conversational acumen as versions of the femme forte, or heroic woman, a kind of literary amazon. Buffet’s Observations and her Praises may be seen as having emerged out of salon culture and “the flowering of préciosité as a literary-linguistic model.”24 By 1668, however, Buffet may have also been responding to a backlash against women’s role in the salon as arbiters of what constituted good literature. Faith Beasley reminds us that in the three most well-known and detailed descriptions 20. Karen Newman, introduction to Madeleine de Scudéry, The Story of Sapho, trans. Karen Newman (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003), 2. 21. See Scudéry, The Story of Sapho, 22–23. 22. Newman, introduction to Scudéry, The Story of Sapho, 7. 23. Maclean, Woman Triumphant, 152. 24. DeJean, Tender Geographies, 51.

Introduction 7 of activities of the salons—Michel de Pure’s La Précieuse, ou Le Mystère de ruelles (1656), Antoine Baudeau de Somaize’s Grand dictionnaire des Prétieuses (1660), and, most infamously, Molière’s Les Précieuses ridicules (1659)—the rule of women in the salons was satirized and openly interrogated in a manner reminiscent of the old querelle des femmes: “The 1650s and 1660s witnessed intense debate regarding what if any influence the worldly arena should exert on the literary field.”25 Joan DeJean argues that the year 1661, the beginning of the absolute reign of Louis XIV, marked the end of the salons’ feminocentric cultural dominance.26 Nicholas Paige speaks to the growing unease with the very structure of the salon and the relative power of the women in them: “In works like Molière’s The Precious Damsels, salon women were characterized as ridiculous and passé. Aside from their evident misogyny, attacks like these were motivated by the need to destroy these bastions of a proud independent aristocracy and to pull everyone who counted into the ambit of the monarchy.”27 The shift of literary power away from the salon and the women who dominated them may perhaps already be visible in Buffet’s Eloges—praising paragons of an oral and literary culture that was already on the wane. Buffet’s voice—encouraging and supportive of her readers, but always firm, even opinionated—comes through in her plain, direct, and pedagogical style. Her book is highly readable even for us today. Buffet applies to her own writing the lessons of economy and clarity she promulgates. Yet her work is also important for us as a history of its own time: “Protoliterary histories, in particular Marguerite Buffet’s Eloge des illustres savantes (1668), demonstrate that in the salon era conversational brilliance was just as likely to be rewarded with literary status as the written production that is today the sole measure of talent.”28 Historians on both sides of the Atlantic are now acknowledging the intellectual and cultural stakes of the conversations held in the ruelles and the influence of the salons on the literature produced in and through them by both the women and men who frequented them. The world of the salons and the women who ran them are being seen as having influenced canonical authors and thinkers of the seventeenth century, and Buffet and many of the women she praises are now seen as bona fide members of the Republic of Letters.29 Buffet occupies a unique position in this history both as 25. Faith E. Beasley, Salons, History, and the Creation of Seventeenth-Century France: Mastering Memory (Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006), 41 and 42–43. 26. DeJean, Tender Geographies, 12. 27. Nicholas D. Paige, introduction to Marie-Madeleine Pioche de La Verge, comtesse de Lafayette, Zayde: A Spanish Romance, ed. and trans. Nicholas D. Paige (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006), 8. 28. DeJean, Tender Geographies, 59. 29. Beasley, “Changing the Conversation,” 36.

8 Introduction a participant in, and historian of, the intellectual and social world of the salon. The time is ripe for both a modern edition of her work in French and a translation of her work into English, so that she may be read and appreciated for the glimpse she offers into a world that has been recognized as vital to French literature and culture.

Life and Work Very little is known about Marguerite Buffet’s life. She was born after 1600, and the consensus is that she died in or around 1680. According to the few historical records that mention her, Marguerite Buffet was a Parisian woman of letters and a tutor of French. One source of information on Buffet, and many other women, is the Dictionnaire of Fortunée Briquet (1782–1815), published in 1804. This ambitious compendium of more than five hundred French women connected with the world of letters has the very briefest of entries for Buffet: BUFFET, (Marguerite) of Paris, lived in the 17th century. She was the author of the following work: New Observations on the French Language, which treats terms fallen into disuse and the correct use of new words, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women. Paris, Cusson, 1668, one vol. in-12.30 By the beginning of the nineteenth century, when this entry was written, a little more than a century after her death, this was all that was known about Marguerite Buffet with any certainty. It is assumed that she was born, lived, and died in Paris. Most of what is known about her must be gleaned from her sole remaining work. Hers is a biography by inference. From the title page of her book we learn that its author, Marguerite Buffet, was a demoiselle, or gentlewoman, “exercising the profession of guiding Ladies in the art of speaking and writing well on all subjects, with French Spelling according 30. Fortunée Briquet, Dictionnaire historique, littéraire et bibliographique des françaises, et des étrangères naturalisées en France, connues par leurs écrits, ou par la protection qu’elles ont accordée aux gens de lettres, depuis l’établissement de la monarchie jusqu’à nos jours (Paris: Treuttel and Würtz, 1804), 71. Briquet’s ambitious compilation lists more than five hundred francophone women who, as stated in the book’s full title, “were known for their writings or for the patronage they gave to people of letters.” Briquet’s entry is not the first for Buffet. For instance, Jean-François de La Croix mentions her in the same brief manner in his Dictionnaire portatif des femmes célèbres: Contenant l’histoire des femmes savantes, des actrices, et généralement des dames qui se sont rendues fameuses dans tous les siècles par leurs aventures, les talents, l’esprit et le courage. Nouvelle edition revue et considérablement augmentée, vol. 1 (Paris: Belin, 1778), 442. For more on the reception of Buffet’s work, see the section “Reception and Afterlife” in the Introduction, 33–38.

Introduction 9 to the rules.”31 Most probably a woman of good, perhaps even noble birth, Buffet taught women of a certain social status both spoken and written French.32 The description of the author on the title page of her book—perhaps at the behest of the publisher or the bookseller to introduce her to the public—is repeated in Buffet’s description of herself in her dedicatory epistle to Marie-Thérèse, queen consort to Louis XIV, as une fille de condition, or a well-born woman, “obliged to support herself by teaching the French language.”33 Buffet was thus an unmarried woman, and almost certainly without an inheritance. As to her profession, she gives us additional indications throughout her linguistic treatise as to the kind of teaching she did to support herself, referring, for example, to teaching correct French pronunciation to foreigners “who have understood the rules quite well and made few mistakes.”34 With regard to her lessons on the arts of conversation and letterwriting, she writes, “My principal employment in life is to teach these precepts to those Ladies who honor me by calling on me.”35 Statements such as these lead us to believe that Buffet may have been a kind of private tutor of aristocratic or bourgeois ladies, as individuals or perhaps in small groups. In her Observations, Buffet refers more than once to “my book of spelling rules, which I give to the women I teach, consisting of a very easy method for learning in very little time.”36 She also makes a brief allusion to providing other women, in the future, with certain “tools . . . in written form” of her method, which she notes she has used with her students to such good effect in the past.37 Buffet may have provided her students with learning materials in manuscript form, one of which she calls a book. None of these linguistic tools or aids were published; of her linguistic pedagogy, only the Observations made it into print.38 Was Marguerite Buffet’s motive in publishing her Observations to enlarge the clientele for her tutoring business? Two critics have suggested that this might 31. “Par Damoiselle Marguerite Buffet, faisant profession d’enseigner aux Dames l’art de bien parler & de bien écrire sur tous sujets, avec l’Orthographe Françoise par regles.” See Marguerite Buffet, Observations, 42. 32. Buffet’s good birth seems likely, borne out by the fact that she was extremely well-read; her treatise testifies to her learning, containing references to classical authors such as Cicero, Seneca, Aristotle, and Ovid, as well as Saint Augustine. References to Numa Pompilius, Cato the Elder, Sulla, and the Roman girl Tutula are from Plutarch’s Lives; the section on the history of the alphabet is from the Annals of Tacitus. 33. Buffet, Observations, 45. 34. Buffet, Observations, 76. 35. Buffet, Observations, 77. 36. Buffet, Observations, 52. 37. Buffet, Observations, 76. 38. For more on spelling in the period, see Dena Goodman, “L’Ortografe des Dames: Gender and Language in the Old Regime,” French Historical Studies 25 (2002): 191–223.

10 Introduction be the case.39 Buffet does seem to be actively advertising her method at various junctures in her linguistic treatise by reminding her readers of her success in teaching women. At the same time, since her Praises seek to immortalize illustrious women of learning, her ambition in the Observations appears to be loftier. Buffet seems to have aimed to change the cultural perception of the female sex, and she was also clearly interested in being an author. A visible sign of her quest for authorship appears in the last two pages of her work, in which we find the Extrait du Privilège du Roy and learn that Buffet, following in the footsteps of other French women authors of the period, obtained a privilège from the king to publish her book under her own name: By the grace and Privilege of the King, given in Paris the 17th day of February 1667. Permission is given to Marguerite Buffet, Gentlewoman, to print a Book entitled, New Observations on the French Language, Treating of Old and Archaic Terms and the Proper Use of New Expressions, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present.40 Like earlier women writers such as Louise Labé and Marie de Gournay, and, closer to her own time, Marie-Catherine Desjardins, Madame de Villedieu, Buffet obtained a privilège d’auteur, or a royal privilege in her own name, to publish her manuscript.41 Seeking and obtaining such a privilege was both a sign of a desire for public recognition and a sign that she was recognized. At the same time, many important women writers, such as the novelists Madeleine de Scudéry and Marie-Madeleine Pioche de La Vergne, comtesse de Lafayette (1634–1693), did not attach their own names to their privileges, yet were recognized by the public as the authors of their books. Edwige Keller-Rahbé explains that when female authors chose to remain anonymous, the privilège would be in the name of their bookseller. In other cases, a woman author’s privilège would be given to 39. Linda Timmermans and Cinthia Meli both suggest that publicity for her teaching may have been at least one of Buffet’s aims, if not the primary one. See Linda Timmermans, L’Accès des femmes à la culture sous l’Ancien Régime (1598–1715) (Paris: Honoré Champion, 1993), 277, and Cinthia Meli, “Un bien dire à l’usage des bourgeoises: Les Nouvelles Observations sur la langue françoise (1668) de Marguerite Buffet,” in Femmes, rhétorique et éloquence sous l’Ancien Régime, ed. Claude La Charité and Roxanne Roy (Saint Etienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Etienne, 2012), 90. 40. Buffet’s privilege appears on p. 123 of the present volume. 41. Louise Labé (ca. 1524–1566), daughter of a Lyon ropemaker, was well educated, and an accomplished rider and archer. Before writing poetry, she had hosted a literary salon whose attendees included numerous members of the Lyonnais literati. In 1555, Henri II granted her a privilege protecting her right to publish her own works for five years. On Marie de Gournay (1565–1645), see the second part of Praises, 107, and note 61; on Marie-Catherine Desjardins (1640–1683), see Buffet’s biography in Praises, 103, and note 47.

Introduction 11 another person, a man, as was the case with Madeleine de Scudéry, whose works were often published under the name of her brother Georges de Scudéry. Less frequently, the name of the female author would appear side by side with that of her bookseller, indicating that the author was not trying to hide her identity, but not completely conceding to the act of publication either. Finally, in the rarest of all practices, the name of the female author—as in Buffet’s case—would appear alone in the privilège, showing active consent to the act of publication.42 Well-born, but a teacher, ambitious to make her mark, but a woman, Buffet avows that she feels she has done something “extraordinary” in daring to dedicate her book to the queen. But while she claims it to be an extraordinary act, Buffet appears to have been in a position to address herself to the queen. Her references in the Observations as to what words were in or out of fashion at court hint that she may have had first-hand experience of court life under Louis XIII and Louis XIV. Buffet does represent herself as someone associated with this world, seeking the patronage of the queen, and obtaining a privilege for herself as an author. Buffet’s epistle “To the Reader”—Au Lecteur, implying both male and female readers, since the collective noun in French is masculine—portrays the author as surprisingly conversant with the world of print publication. She opens her epistle with a modesty topos perfectly befitting her womanhood—“I am eternally obliged to my sex and my temperament for my innate shyness”—but this timidity is at cross-currents with the whole of her address, which is punctuated by references to the danger, risk, and public humiliation associated with putting a book into print.43 While humbly denying any desire to take such risks, Buffet’s discourse speaks precisely to the thrill of such danger. She writes of the hazardous pleasure of “holding a high place at the court of Apollo,” in other words, the court of Louis XIV as patron of the arts, by breezily recounting the public humiliation of one of the greatest of court wits and writers of the day, Vincent Voiture (1597–1648): [T]his hazardous recreation [i.e., being a writer at court] seems just as unpleasant as that trick played on the late Monsieur Voiture. This is why I am in the habit of comparing the risk of appearing in print to being tossed in a blanket, or flying up and down on a swing, because 42. Edwige Keller-Rahbé, “Pratiques et usages du privilège d’auteur chez Mme de Villedieu et quelques autres femmes de lettres du XVIIe siècle,” Œuvres et Critiques 35 (2010): 69–94, at pp. 72–73. For more on the subject of privilège d’auteur see Michèle Clément and Edwige Keller-Rahbé, eds., Privilèges d’auteurs et d’autrices en France (XVIe–XVIIe siècles): Anthologie Critique (Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2017). Faith Beasley, Joan DeJean, and Erica Harth, among others, have discussed the privilège d’auteur for writers later in the century. 43. Buffet, Observations, 46. Faith Beasley discusses this passage and Buffet’s work in detail in Salons, 50–66. For another perspective on this opening passage, see Leah L. Chang, “Les Précautions ridicules: Textspin in 17th-century France,” Romance Notes 38 (1998): 333–41, at pp. 334–37.

12 Introduction of the danger that goes hand in hand with the amusement we get out of it.44 Buffet refers here to the renowned Voiture being tossed in a blanket, or “berné,” as punishment for not having succeeded in making one of the court ladies laugh. This incident was one of the many pranks routinely played by members of the court on each other, and is recorded with zest by Voiture himself in his own correspondence.45 Why does Buffet include this incident in her address to the reader? She appears to wish to place the name of Vincent Voiture at the threshold of her book, as a kind of imprimatur, testifying to her intimacy with the salon and literary matters. She speaks of the incident familiarly, using the French impersonal pronoun on, which could mean “the trick we played on Monsieur Voiture” as well as “the trick played on Monsieur Voiture.” I have translated it as the latter so that the reader of the English version of Buffet’s work is not tempted to imagine Buffet herself holding one of the blanket’s corners at court the day Voiture was unceremoniously tossed; but her use of the pronoun on leaves open the possibility of a certain insider knowledge, and it is this insider status that she may well wish to convey to her readers. Buffet follows up on her reservations concerning the dangers, but also the amusements, of print publication, claiming by way again of the modesty or humility topos current in such prefaces that she has exposed herself in

44. See “To the Reader,” 46. In making a reference to Apollo and the Muses, Buffet may also be alluding to the ceiling fresco painted for the gallery of Cardinal Mazarin’s palace by Gian Francesco Romanelli: Les Précieuses parisiennes entourant Apollon, or The Parisian Précieuses surrounding Apollo (1646–47). According to Joan DeJean, “each of the muses has the face of a woman intellectual prominent at the court”; see Tender Geographies, 35. Ian Maclean discusses this and other paintings of galleries of women in Woman Triumphant, chap. 7, “Feminist Literature and the Visual Arts,” 209–32 and 211n9. The Galerie Mazarine, and Romanelli’s fresco, are now part of the Bibliothèque nationale de France. 45. Voiture recounts the incident in a letter to Anne Geneviève de Bourbon, sister of the duc d’Enghien (the Grand Condé) and later the duchesse de Longueville. He writes that because he had not been able to make her laugh in the time that had been allotted him, Madame de Rambouillet (the salonnière Catherine de Vivonne, marquise de Rambouillet) had ordered that he be punished by being tossed in a blanket, an allusion, perhaps, to Sancho Panza’s being tossed in a blanket in Cervantes’s Don Quixote. Voiture’s letter is a classic example of the galanterie in speech and in writing for which its author was famed in his time. The incident described by Voiture—to make the twelve-year-old Mademoiselle de Bourbon laugh—describes the kinds of games played in the chambre bleue. Voiture’s letter is one of the first in the two-volume edition of his correspondence. See Vincent Voiture, Lettres, ed. Octave Uzanne, vol. 1 (Paris: Librairie des Bibliophiles, 1880), Letter 9 (pages 30–34). For more on these games see Jean-Marie Apostolidès, Le Roi-machine: Spectacle et politique au temps de Louis XIV (Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1981), 55–58; see also Charles Sorel, Les Récréations galantes (Paris: Estienne Loyson, 1671), for descriptions of games of the period.

Introduction 13 print practically against her will and only at the urging of “learned friends.” Buffet reveals her ambition to her readers even as she covers it up. One of these friends may have been a certain Bruslé, writer of a commendatory epistle, “To Mademoiselle Buffet, on her Book,” which follows Buffet’s own epistles to the queen and to the reader. We know nothing of Bruslé except that he was “a Lawyer at Parliament,” as we see from his signature at the end of his epistle. Bruslé may well have been chosen to examine, and vet, Buffet’s book for the obtaining of the privilege. Regarding her book, he does affirm, “I have examined it with pleasure,” and expresses his satisfaction that she has decided to publish it.46 Such language raises questions as to Bruslé’s connection to Buffet or perhaps to her publisher, Jean Cusson. Whether Bruslé was the official examiner of Buffet’s book or not, his letter in the front matter is clearly intended to serve as a kind of seal of approval as to the seriousness of the work and as personal testimony to the character of its female author. Bruslé writes glowingly of Buffet in the hyperbole customary in such liminal epistles; his letter can be seen as an expert exercise in the commendatory line. He speaks of her “glory” and the esteem she enjoys among a certain group of habiles, or experts, in belles lettres, or good literature. He calls her another Tullia, a reference to Cicero’s beloved daughter, whom Buffet, in imitation of a number of other compilers of famous women, includes in her gallery of learned women from antiquity.47 Bruslé claims that the heroic women in Buffet’s Praises would be thrilled to have her not only among them, but as a kind of crowning glory who would “add . . . the final touches of perfection” to their own works.48 He thus places her at the head of the very women she praises, as a shining exemplar of the learning she has lauded in others. Finally, he seems to outdo himself in confiding how Buffet’s book has made him jealous, and specifically jealous of women. He envies the good Buffet is doing for her sex in writing such “reasonable and easy lessons,” all the while avoiding “those obscure and impenetrable terms the fair sex cannot tolerate.”49 Given the hyperbole of such epistles, we must read this letter with care, not to exaggerate Buffet’s fame among her contemporaries or even Bruslé’s own regard for the work. Nevertheless, Buffet’s decision to dedicate her work to the queen, and the mere fact of a lawyer’s letter in her favour, argue for a woman who is not without friends in high places and who has gained a reputation, perhaps even at court, in her chosen domain—namely, as a tutor of French. 46. Buffet, Observations, 47. 47. Certain women, mostly ancient, were standard in galleries of women after Boccaccio’s De Claris Mulieribus (On Famous Women, discussed later); Tullia, the daughter of Cicero, was one of the most mentioned. 48. Buffet, Observations, 48. 49. Buffet, Observations, 47.

14 Introduction

New Observations on the French Language Like Vaugelas and other writers of remarques on language, Buffet shows herself to be interested in the idea of pureté, or purity, to which she refers throughout her Observations. She holds firmly to the line of thinking, shared more or less by all these writers on language use, that all pedantry and excessive erudition, all regional and provincial words, are to be banished from the language, so that people will speak and write pure French—in other words, correct or proper French. Vaugelas goes so far as to advise people not to spend too much time (un trop long séjour) in the provinces to avoid being contaminated by the bad language spoken there (il ne faut pas insensiblement se laisser corrompre par la contagion des Provinces).50 Buffet’s habit of rebuking those who use provincial terms may be seen as following in the footsteps of Vaugelas. While in this and many other points Buffet is clearly imitating her predecessor, her book comprises more than just a list of contemporary linguistic points to be observed and then judged as good or bad according to the best authors or current usage. In her Observations, Buffet does indeed compile lists of linguistic errors, which she identifies and corrects, and several of the words and corrections in her treatise are copied from Vaugelas.

Unlike her model, however, Buffet carefully organizes her examples according to type, writing at length about each kind of error, and addresses rules of elegant usage with reference specifically to women. Buffet is determined to teach women not only how to get through their toilette according to le bel usage, but also how to converse among intellectuals. In one of her early examples, she informs her readers that they may refer to a learned woman as meriting “the first rank in Parnassus,” but that they should not call her “another Plato or Aristotle.”51 And it is Buffet, not Vaugelas, who notes that “a woman who likes to gain knowledge” is not a femme de lecture, or a woman who reads; she is rather a femme de cabinet, a woman of or in her study. These are issues, among many others, in which Buffet distinguishes herself from her most important predecessor in the Observations. Moreover, Buffet’s addition of a defense and catalogue of learned women to her linguistic treatise creates a kind of echo chamber between the two parts of her work, recreating the genre of remarques into a genre of its own.52 50. Vaugelas, Remarques sur la langue française, Preface, n.p. This comment appears at the end of section 2 of the Preface. “You must not let yourself gradually be contaminated by the infection of the provinces.” 51. Buffet, Observations, 56. 52. For a better understanding of the genre of remarques see Vaugelas’s Preface to his work, and his explanation of his aims and philosophy of language. Buffet was clearly very familiar with this preface and influenced by the ideas in it.

Introduction 15 Buffet’s Observations are addressed to educated women and men with an avid interest in matters of language. Henri-Jean Martin describes the importance of good language as a marker of social status, and peoples’ interest in acquiring it, not only in Paris, but also the provinces: In this society, in which elegant language is becoming a sign of social class and which holds eloquence as the means of solidifying its domination, everyone wants the Defense of Le Maître and the Letters of Balzac or Costar, or examines Vaugelas [. . .] people would also fight to get their hands on the latest installment by La Calprenède or Madame de Scudéry as soon as they arrived on the bookstalls in the provinces, available only a few days after publication in Paris, and those who could not afford the exorbitant price of six livres would rent the books for half the price. Voiture enjoyed a comparable success in the provinces.53 Worldly society, both women and men, devoured certain books because they were eager to learn the polite language displayed in Scudéry’s novels or the advice on language offered in the Remarques of Vaugelas. Women were among a certain class of buyers and consumers of books, and Martin illustrates this point by citing some of the books purchased by one Uranie de Calignon. Buffet’s readership would have included members of Parisian salons, aristocrats, or even the bourgeois class living in the provinces.54 Her pocket-size, duodecimo volume would definitely have been affordable to a less than aristocratic buyer. And these same buyers might well have been readers of other books issuing from the same press as Buffet’s—that of Jean Cusson in Rue Saint-Jacques—such as the influential Journal des Sçavans, first published in 1665, a kind of registry of scientific publications in Europe.”55 This journal aimed to keep a certain culturally aware and curious public abreast of the latest in scientific discoveries and books in a variety of disciplines, often referring to discussions that had taken place in the salons. The Observations may have been seen as doing the same with regard to the latest advances in language for the same readers. Buffet opens her work by reminding her readers of the high esteem in which the French language is held, not just in Europe but around the world. “There is no true courtier in any neighbouring court,” she says, “who 53. Roger Chartier and Henri-Jean Martin, Histoire d’édition française, vol. 2: Le Livre triomphant, 1660–1830 (Paris: Promodis, 1984), 558. 54. With regard to the actual class or classes of Buffet’s readership (noble, petit aristocracie, bourgeoise) the question is still open. See, for example, Faith Beasley, Salons, 53. 55. Le Journal des Sçavans [or Journal of the Learned]. While Le Journal des Sçavans was published in Paris by Jean Cusson from 1665 onwards, other editions were published in Cologne, Brussels, and Amsterdam as well.

16 Introduction cannot understand and who cannot speak French.”56 Since French is the dominant language of intellectual and cultural life, it is crucial that it should be mastered, especially by the French themselves; yet Buffet notes that many native speakers of French—“so many well-born people, and mainly women”—continue to make “substantial errors” both in their speech and in their writing.57 If elegant French is indeed becoming a marker of social class and cultural capital, faulty speech and poor writing skills are social handicaps that must be overcome—and can be, with the right instruction. Buffet promotes her treatise and her method by promising readers that she can help them correct socially embarrassing errors in language use better than any of the other “excellent minds” who have “considered this matter.”58 After all, with all the linguistic mistakes she notices, “it may be that their teaching methods are not lucid enough, or they have not explained things clearly enough,” to rectify the problem of poor French.59 Buffet diagnoses the continuing problem of errors in language and offers her own Observations as the remedy: “I have studied how to make things easy and clear, as I am opposed to terms that are obscure and hidden, or too pedantic, all of which are more likely to throw people into confusion than give them instruction.”60 This manifesto for ease and clarity, as opposed to pedantry and opacity, perfectly reflects the opposition of the world of the salon, and the mondaines, to the scholarly or docte world of certain grammarians and members of the French Academy. Having explained her primary aim in writing the Observations, Buffet states that she will divide it into four parts, and, in keeping with her aforementioned philosophy, she will keep each part short so as not to bore her readers. The topics of discussion are barbarous and archaic terms (First Part), redundancy and superfluous terms (Second Part), corrupt and badly pronounced terms (Third Part), and the use of appropriate words (Fourth Part). Preceding each of the four parts—each of which consists of short introductory paragraphs and then linguistic examples in no particular order—are prologues, mini-treatises that consider the linguistic problems addressed in each part in more general and abstract terms. In these brief, unnumbered discourses—which should be read in conjunction with the numbered parts they precede—Buffet gives herself the scope to philosophize, draw parallels with antiquity, or anatomize types of people she encounters and their various weaknesses and foibles, all by way of the language skill she is about to teach. 56. Buffet, Observations, 50. 57. Buffet, Observations, 50. 58. The French is matière and refers, presumably, to the subject of proper language use. 59. Buffet, Observations, 50. 60. Buffet, Observations, 51. It would be interesting to know if Buffet is referring to traditional grammar books here, and which ones she might have in mind.

Introduction 17

The First Part: Barbarous and Archaic Terms Throughout the Observations, Buffet offers what might be termed a sociology of good and bad uses of the French language—the language as spoken by people in the provinces, by the common people or petit peuple, by the bourgeoisie, and at court. In her First Part, Buffet discusses “barbarous and archaic terms,” from the Latin barbarismus, referring to words that are meaningless or obsolete in the context of current usage. In condemning barbarous terms, she describes them as “old,” “outdated,” “wretched,” or “laughable,” but also as “provincial,” “used by the meaner sort,” “ill-bred,” and “rude.” Newer terms receive her approbation as “well received” or “beginning to come to the fore.” Buffet thus steers her readers through the uncertain sea of proper use, inflected with opinions of value in terms of taste that reflect distinctions among people in society. For us today, Buffet’s discussion of barbarous and archaic terms is as interesting in the context of linguistic history—which words were in, and which were out—as for what she ends up telling us about the material culture of the seventeenth century, as well as the different social classes and their activities in that period. Buffet talks about hair extensions, for example, noting that many people do not call them by their correct name. She also informs her readers of the current words to describe hair color. Calling hair “red,” for example, is simply not appropriate; red hair should be referred to as blond doré, or golden blond. The distinction between people of different social ranks can especially be seen in Buffet’s attitudes—following Vaugelas—toward people from the provinces. She is unforgiving of those whose speech is “provincial and old-fashioned.”61 Yet further into her treatise, Buffet seems to change her tune. Giving her reader the example of a Parisian woman describing a boring man as having a “provincial manner,” she is quick to point out that it is “nasty” to speak badly of provincials, especially as there are “some very clever and quite accomplished people” living in the provinces.62 As Faith Beasley points out, Buffet’s manner of presenting her examples “is designed with her selected public in mind . . . she will draw upon her particular public’s desire to conform to their societal values.”63 When Buffet states in the opening pages of her Observations, therefore, that she will address French linguistic problems that are most common to the greatest number of people, she is referring to a very select number of people. These she quickly divides into those who know Latin and those who do not, claiming that those with Latin may know how to conjugate French verbs better than those without, although both groups of people make many mistakes in all other aspects of speech and writing. She goes on to provide the conjugations of those verbs 61. Buffet, Observations, 55. 62. Buffet, Observations, 58. 63. Beasley, Salons, 54.

18 Introduction that she feels are “the most necessary” to the language, but says that “the other verbs . . . are arranged in order in my book of spelling rules.”64 One would like to know what Buffet’s spelling rules were. She gives us a taste of her interest in spelling, however, when she calls spelling a science “too subtle and studied to be acquired without order or method.”65 Spelling is the key to pronouncing and understanding French. She then offers the “curious” reader a glimpse into the origins of the alphabet, narrating the history of the invention of each letter, and using an architectural metaphor to describe the letters of the alphabet as “stones lying useless” unless they are “cut and placed in order” in elegant, grammatically correct sentences.66 Buffet’s insistence on order and method with regard to the basic letters of the alphabet seems almost to come as a response to one of Sapho’s interlocutors, who laments that “there is so little syntax and their spelling is so bizarre that most ladies seem to write in order not to be understood.”67

The Second Part: Redundancy and Superfluous Terms Taking up the idea that when the building blocks of the alphabet are joined in good order it serves to “render ornate discourse redundant,” the Second Part of the Observations considers the issue of unnecessary and superfluous words. In a tangible and often amusing way, this section illustrates the project of stripping the French language to its most efficient expression. In describing the sins of redundancy, Buffet also takes aim at people whose main problem is garrulousness. She prefaces the Second Part by castigating “those who speak too much,” those who should learn the value of discretion and even silence.68 “There are many people,” she says, “who are convinced, secure in the opinion that their thoughts are all beauty and eloquence, that they cannot be considered annoying if they produce them for the pleasure of all those who are listening.”69 Unlike “the wisest politicians,” who speak only when necessary, these people 64. Buffet, Observations, 52. The conjugations of important verbs are not included in this volume, but appear on pp. 20–26 of the original text. 65. Buffet, Observations, 52. 66. Buffet, Observations, 53. Her history of the alphabet comes from the Annals of Tacitus, 11.14; see note 27 to the Observations. 67. See Karen Newman’s translation of Madeleine de Scudéry, The Story of Sapho, 45. 68. See Scudéry’s discussion of the same topic in “De parler trop, ou trop peu, et comment il faut parler,” Conversations sur divers sujets, 1:159–204; this is translated as “On Speaking Too Much or Too Little, and How to Speak Well,” in Madeleine de Scudéry, Selected Letters, Orations, and Rhetorical Dialogues, ed. and trans. Jane Donawerth and Julie Strongson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), 105–17. 69. Buffet, Observations, 64.

Introduction 19 have contracted the “intolerable sickness” of talking incessantly. Buffet provides examples from antiquity of philosophers and rulers—Socrates, Pythagoras, the Roman king Numa Pompilius—who practiced prudence of speech. She notes that Numa even established a “tenth Muse,” whom he named “Muta,” or “Silence.”70 Knowing the value of prudent speech is, moreover, not a virtue confined to kings and philosophers. Buffet brings her subject down to the sphere of the salon, and of polite conversation, in which garrulousness threatens “the smooth workings of society . . . it leads to the backbiting that tears apart reputations; it is very difficult to speak with such appetite without mixing jests and scorn, which soon leads to outright insult and slander.”71 When words become poisonous, these incessant talkers “fall into a narcissistic pleasure in their own praises,” and Buffet again returns to the analogy of sickness, describing them as eaten alive by their own folly. They are “banished from polite circles” and eventually become social outcasts, a “plague upon the most pleasant conversations.”72 Buffet then turns to “the redundancy of useless words.” Both here and in the prologue she uses the term “pleonasm,” a lesser known synonym for redundancy that made its way into both French and English from Latin (pleonasmus) and the Greek pleonasmós, derived from a word meaning “excess.” As she puts it, superfluities “are never well received.”73 She rails against redundancies that have become commonplace: “So many people say, ‘I saw it with my own eyes,’ as if you could see with someone else’s eyes, which is ridiculous.”74 Stripping language of such excesses is an important part, for both Buffet and scholars of her century, of their work toward a new, more economical French language—“not stuffed or overwhelmed with superfluous words,” as Vaugelas puts it.75 Molière specifically targets women’s lack of economy in language in Les Précieuses ridicules, in which, instead of simply referring to chaises, or chairs, an aspiring précieuse calls them les commodités de la conversation, or “conveniences for conversation.” Buffet would obviously have enjoyed Molière’s satirical example. In the Second Part, however, she provides examples of redundancy outside the salon, in everyday speech. These errors can often be corrected by leaving out just one word—“about,” for example, in “There were about ten or twelve of us in this group,” or “all” in “I was all alone in my room.”76 70. Buffet, Observations, 65. On Numa’s devotion to the Muse Tacita (another name for Muta), see note 69 to the Observations. 71. Buffet, Observations, 66. 72. Buffet, Observations, 67. 73. Buffet, Observations, 67. 74. Buffet, Observations, 68. 75. “[N]on pas estouffé ny accablé de mots superflus,” as it is phrased in the section on synonyms. See Vaugelas, Remarques sur la langue française, 496. 76. Buffet, Observations, 68.

20 Introduction Two of the examples of superfluous words single out provincial speech mannerisms: “Il est tout fin neuf” (“It is brand spanking new”) and “Ils sont riches comme tout” (“They are as rich as anything”).77 Buffet makes a compelling case for the “wonderful discourse” of linguistic economy, which she likens to fine craftsmanship: “It is like an expensive watch that has been scaled down by the expert hand of a skilled watchmaker . . . a diminutive timepiece of exquisite delicacy that encloses much in very little space.”78 And “[a]s pieces of gold or silver have more value the lighter they are, so too the value of words consists in saying much with little.”79 Buffet may be seen as prizing economy in size and weight, promoting the small and the light over the large and the heavy. By comparing economical language to a prized luxury item such as a watch or a piece of gold jewelry, she renders in material terms the value of prudence in speaking and writing in society. Buffet also fleshes out her disgust of excess words by personifying such speech, or pleonasm, in the character of the big talker (grand parleur) offering her reader an image of the oblivious public speaker, convinced that his or her thoughts are “all beauty and eloquence.” She then provides as a contrast those who are circumspect in speech (les discrets en parole): philosophers, emperors, and kings who have valued prudent moderation in speech, even to the extent of preferring silence, above all things.80 Her description of how the overbearing conversationalist is banished from all polite circles illustrates for her female readers just how “fatal” speaking too much can be.81

The Third Part: Corrupt and Badly Pronounced Terms Buffet begins the prologue to the Third Part by stating that eliminating “vile or old words” and “redundant terms” are just the first steps in speaking perfect French. “There still remain a large number of corrupt and badly pronounced terms that . . . represent a real obstacle to speaking your own language properly.”82 She goes on to describe women who speak impeccably as “patrons of eloquence,” comparing them to Tullia, the daughter of Cicero, “a treasure trove of fine speech,” and depicting them in rather florid terms:

77. Buffet, Observations, 68 and 69. 78. Buffet, Observations, 64. 79. Buffet, Observations, 66. 80. Buffet, Observations, 65. 81. Buffet, Observations, 67. 82. Buffet, Observations, 70.

Introduction 21 They are deferred to like queens, in court circles, in the alcoves, and in the most elevated conversations. When they enter a room, they are seen as stars lighting up the whole assembly. . . . these illustrious women are powerful, and I dare say that they merit very nearly the same honours given by those in the past who could not praise enough the Roman emperors when they entered in triumph, after having conquered their nation’s enemies. They threw roses and lilies at their heads, quantities of flowers testifying to their rejoicing and the respect that they owed to these monarchs.83 These descriptions of the well-spoken women who reign in the ruelles and in court circles pave the way for Buffet’s subsequent biographies of such women in Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present. Buffet then turns to the effects of good speech, and the miracles that can be worked by those who know how to argue well, again making an analogy with antiquity. The potent rhetoric to be heard in the law courts of today is the same as in the days of Cicero. She tells a story of an unknown Roman, sentenced to death, but saved in the eleventh hour by Cicero’s pleading for him at court, and compares the ancient orator to present-day lawyers who “pluck justice from the sky” in defense of “the oppressed innocent,” able, with their eloquence, even to “resurrect the dead.”84 Buffet personifies the virtues of eloquence as a lawyer in the same way she personified the evils of poor speaking in the figure of the big talker. The portrait of the brilliant lawyer may perhaps have been a compliment to the lawyer, Bruslé, who examined Buffet’s work and whose fluent epistle may have helped to enable the author to receive the privilège issued by Louis XIV. Buffet’s vibrant depiction of the lawyer as intercessor may also parallel her own act of resurrecting the dead women of her Praises. Just as she provides us with vivid images of women speaking in the salon and the pedantic bore shunned by society, Buffet’s subject in the Third Part of her Observations offers an extremely tangible, and rare, glimpse into the spoken word of the period. Pronunciation problems discussed here include the incorrect use of a “g” sound when a “c” sound is required (“segret” rather than “secret”), and vice-versa (“vacabonds” rather than “vagabonds”), as well as the dropping of “s” in certain words (“satify” rather than “satisfy”). Other pronunciation errors include “deligence” for “diligence,” “redicule” for “ridicule,” and “ormoire” for “armoire.” To those who say “perzecute” instead of “persecute,” she notes simply: “The pronunciation of the Z is pointless.” She tells us that at court everyone has dropped 83. Buffet, Observations, 70. 84. Buffet, Observations, 71.

22 Introduction the word bigearre and is now using bizarre instead, while in the provinces, horror of horrors, people pronounce “chicory” as “sigory.” Buffet also provides examples of correct verb use. She explains the difference between the verbs “to bend” (ployer) and “to fold” (plier): knees are bent, clothes are folded. And in differentiating between “consuming” and “consummating,” Buffet says coyly that the latter is used “with regard to marriage,” while the former describes a man who “consumed his entire fortune.” Later, she returns to the subject of verbs when she devotes a paragraph to the pronunciation of infinitives, which she says “are pleasing when emphasized in speech. . . . Whenever you pronounce an infinitive, you should make the last syllables resonate just a bit, as this greatly contributes to the pleasing quality of your speech.”85 Following the specific examples of pronunciation errors, Buffet makes some interesting observations on the pronunciation of individual letters in French. The letter X, for example, is “one of the most beautiful sounds in our language.” The letter A “has the singular grace of being a little bit lengthened in words where it is found the most,” and should be pronounced that way “in the middle of the word.” Displaying a cosmopolitan comprehension of language difference rather than a parochial, xenophobic attitude, she reminds her readers that foreigners have particular trouble pronouncing A and Y simply because “there are fewer of these vowels in their language than in ours.” Indeed, she has worked with a number of foreigners, and—promoting her method of language instruction—says she has given them “the means of being heard with as much ease as if they were native French speakers.”86 In addition to pronunciation, Buffet devotes a lengthy passage to tone of voice, and, as in the section on “those who speak too much,” encourages the reader to imagine particular types of people who do not manage this aspect of speaking very well: There are people who raise their voices so much that it seems they are always speaking to deaf people. Their speech loses all of its graceful appeal and wounds the ears of those who listen to them, making them even more bothersome in conversation. There are others who go to the other extreme, keeping their voices so low and speaking so slowly that you would think they were always sick. As a result, they lose the gracious ability to enliven what they are saying and do not give the same impression . . . as those who possess that elegant tone of voice which keeps to the middle. . . .87 85. Buffet, Observations, 74. 86. Buffet, Observations, 76. 87. Buffet, Observations, 75.

Introduction 23 These lively descriptions enable Buffet to fix her lessons indelibly in her readers’ minds. And lest there be any hesitancy or confusion on the part of the reader, she drives home her point by noting that the “most skilled conversationalists”—like the great orators of ancient Greece and Rome—keep their tone of voice so well regulated that “their discourse is like manna from heaven, dropping into the ears of those who hear it.”88 Buffet closes with some extra pointers. First, pronunciation is a crucial aspect of tone of voice—in fact, “its principal ornament.” Reading aloud enables the speaker to practice both tone of voice and pronunciation; she reiterates the importance of infinitives by stating that “all the infinitives should be strongly pronounced.”89 Second, punctuation is an aid in regulating tone of voice. A comma requires pausing “for just an instant,” but a period requires stopping “by changing the tone of voice, either by raising or lowering it, both of which are equally good.” She reiterates the benefit of reading aloud and listening to oneself as one speaks; “you should sound as if you were telling a story to a friend in conversation.”90

The Fourth Part: The Appropriate Word While Buffet’s comparison of women conversationalists to ancient models of eloquence and oratory is a remarkable stance, it is at the heart of Buffet’s project in both the Observations and the Praises. Buffet not only praises illustrious women writers or scholars, she also gives a prominent place to women who never wrote, or hid their writing from view, but who shone as expert conversationalists and letter-writers. In the lengthy preamble to the Fourth Part of the Observations, Buffet advises women that their advancement and fortunes in society depend on their mastery of the twin arts of conversation and letter-writing. A woman of “good breeding” knows “how to enter and leave a conversation,” and knows how to write and answer letters “in a graceful way,” for even those women who “appear very clever” are “embarrassed” by how ignorant they are when they find they must put pen to paper.91 Buffet emphasizes the close connection between the two arts, noting, “The rules of writing letters are no different than those for conversation.” Just as a conversation is a “portrait” of our thoughts—which themselves are

88. Buffet, Observations, 75. 89. Buffet, Observations, 75. 90. Buffet, Observations, 76. 91. For letters and letter-writing in the period see Katharine Ann Jensen, Writing Love: Letters, Women, and the Novel in France, 1605–1776 (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1995), and Elizabeth C. Goldsmith and Colette H. Winn, eds., Lettres de femmes: Textes inédits et oubliés du XVIe au XVIIIe siècles (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2005).

24 Introduction portraits of all the people and things we see in the world—a letter is a “portrait” of our conversations, sent to absent friends, or written for posterity.92 A letter should resemble a conversation in every respect, in terms of style, subject, and even tone, and should represent the person writing as if they are speaking. In other words, people need to speak and write, in daily life and with others, in their own character. Just as authors have to be sure that their fictional characters always speak in a consistent manner in order to be believable, so too people should speak in public settings in a manner perfectly befitting their station and place in life. Buffet becomes quite passionate about this point. When kings act like clowns, or when shopkeepers decide the affairs of state, she says, “can I prevent myself from crying out?”93 Turning to the subject matter of any conversation, Buffet states that propriety is as important as being consistent. Things that are serious, such as “affairs of state, religion, morality,” should be treated seriously; pleasant things, such as “courtship, games, or pastimes,” should be treated galamment, or lightly. Finally, Buffet observes that when people speak or write letters, they should always have in mind the people who are on the receiving end, again reinforcing the importance of visual imagery in her pedagogy. Buffet goes on to offer her readers, with almost mathematical precision, “four properties” that are key to excellent public oration and that she feels are well suited as rules for perfect conversation and letter-writing: clarity, brevity, plausibility, and ease. All of these properties are key to the art of holding the attention of others, and, in so doing, of successfully persuading them to your opinion. Facility or ease in speaking is the skill which Buffet marks out for special notice, again bringing in Voiture as her shining example of “that grace and eloquence the whole world is looking for and which it adores when it finds it. Voiture was unrivalled in this respect in his letters.”94 In the course of her discussion on letter-writing, Buffet provides yet another perspective on the benefits of being economical. The linguistic economy she counsels in the Second Part is here supplemented by advice on time management. When she says that even clever women are “embarrassed” by their ineptitude at letter-writing, she points out that it is “not always due to a lack of wit, but rather to their having paid attention to other things which they imagined were more pressing.” They are, in short, “bad organizers of their time.”95 Buffet urges her female readers to become like those “precious housewives of time” who thriftily manage their hours to “discover the beauties and charm of erudition.” Although she states that she does not want to “play the philosopher here,” her tone at the end is serious and sober: “we should never let any day of our life pass without it bringing some 92. Buffet, Observations, 77. 93. Buffet, Observations, 78. 94. Buffet, Observations, 79. 95. Buffet, Observations, 80.

Introduction 25 profit,” whether in the arts or in life—a life that is too short “to do nothing.” Buffet concludes by saying that she believes her own time will have been “very usefully employed if I inspire women with the desire for the arts and virtue.”96 The Fourth Part of Buffet’s Observations deals with “badly adapted terms, or terms whose meanings are confused with [those of] other terms.” For example, it is inappropriate to speak of a man who is “frightfully rich” when he should be described as “extraordinarily rich,” or to speak of spending “frightful amounts of money” rather than simply “lots of money.” And when someone speaks of “lighting the fire,” they should really be speaking of “lighting the wood.” Buffet is sometimes caustic in her comments here. The common statement “This fabric is quite reasonable for the price,” for example, clearly makes no sense—“as if the commodities themselves could speak and show that they possessed reason!” And those who use the expression “This house possesses all my affection” earn even greater censure as “people who speak with so little sense that if animals were able to speak they would express themselves with more reason.”97 In concluding the Fourth Part, Buffet notes that many women make errors in speech and writing “because they lack instruction.” These errors may be rectified by reading her “little book,” which she hopes they will not find “too tedious.” Her aim is to make women both competent and comfortable in speaking their language—“an area where they should be at ease.”98 We have here, then, Buffet’s contributions to the new literature, indeed the new literacy, moving from the oral to the written, from eloquence in speech to eloquence in writing. The Observations provides a synopsis of the way in which the culture of the salon “built” the new literature, with its attention to vocabulary, economy, pronunciation, and style in both speaking and in putting pen to paper. And when she counsels women on the need to use time well in learning and perfecting the use of language, Buffet also shows that literacy is a lifelong vocation.

Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present Buffet closes her Observations by exhorting her readers to study her book so that they will not appear “ignorant” in matters of language. The Praises that follow are intended to provide readers with the antithesis of, and perhaps the antidote to, that ignorance—a gallery of learned women. In conjunction with her linguistic lessons, the gallery also provides us with a valuable glimpse into the culture of the salon, and debates concerning the standardization of the language in midseventeenth-century France. The Observations furnishes the present-day reader 96. Buffet, Observations, 81. 97. Buffet, Observations, 82. 98. Buffet, Observations, 84.

26 Introduction with the nuts and bolts of the new literature that emerged out of the French ruelles, while the lives of the women Buffet lauds in her Praises of Illustrious Learned Women serve to embody—and substantiate—those lessons. The gallery of women, and especially the nineteen contemporary women in it, serves as an aspirational model for those who are willing to recognize their own wit and are inclined to apply themselves to honing it. Buffet’s decision to append what she calls a short treatise (petit traité) of learned women to her Observations implies that she sees the Praises as somehow completing the process of learning begun in the Observations. While the Praises appear to serve as a kind of coda to the Observations, it may easily be read as a separate work, detachable from what goes before. Nevertheless, the two parts of the work echo each other; Buffet’s earlier discussions on the subjects of time and thrift, expense and waste, resound in the later biographies of individual women. While it is not necessary to read the linguistic and epideictic parts of Buffet’s work together, readers stand to gain better understanding and insight into Buffet’s work as a whole, and the Praises in particular, after having read the Observations. The Praises are divided into two parts—a reasoned defense of the female sex, followed by a catalogue of illustrious women—bringing into juxtaposition two genres, both with histories going back to the Middle Ages and both integral to the querelle des femmes. At the time Buffet was writing, the catalogue of renowned women was a genre that had become very fashionable in France. Between Hilarion de Coste’s Les Eloges et vies des reynes, princesses, dames et damoiselles illustres en piété, courage et doctrine qui ont fleury de nostre temps et du temps de nos pères, avec l’explication de leurs devises (1630 and 1647) and Buffet’s Praises of Illustrious Learned Women (1668), nearly twenty compilations of notable women had been published by both men and women.99 The original source and model for these catalogues of illustrious women was Boccaccio’s De Claris Mulieribus, or On Famous Women, composed in Latin in the 1360s before being translated into Italian and French in the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries.100 The work praises 106 famous and infamous women, mostly from the classical tradition, and represents the largest single repository of information on ancient women.101 While Boccaccio’s praises exemplified a male ambivalence toward women, Christine de 99. See a list of works in Maclean, Woman Triumphant, 76–77. 100. An entry in Treccani’s Dizionario Biografico states that the Augustinian friar Antonio da Sant’ Elpidio translated De Claris Mulieribus into the vernacular (“in volgare”) in 1370. Laurent de Premierfait (ca. 1370–1418), a clerk who lived and worked at the papal court in Avignon before relocating to Paris, was the first translator of Boccaccio into French and may well have translated the De Claris Mulieribus in addition to the De casibus virorum illustrium (On the Fates of Famous Men) and the Decameron in 1400 and 1410 respectively. 101. Stephen Kolsky, The Ghost of Boccaccio: Writings on Famous Women in Renaissance Italy (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2005), 3.

Introduction 27 Pizan’s Book of the City of Ladies (1405), in contrast to and in direct response to Boccaccio, offers a positive vision of the female sex. Christine represents herself unearthing old beliefs and misconceptions before laying the groundwork for a utopia that does justice to women’s abilities and intelligence. Although Buffet’s catalogue is in the pro-woman vein of Christine de Pizan, she makes no mention of her fifteenth-century predecessor or any of her books in the Praises. Buffet does, however, include praises of two compilers of women worthies of her own epoch: Madeleine de Scudéry, for her Les Femmes Illustres, ou les harangues héroïques (1642), and Jacquette Guillaume, for her Des Dames illustres (1665). Both Scudéry and Guillaume’s works, as well as Hilarion de Coste’s Eloges (especially the much-expanded 1647 edition) and Pierre le Moyne’s Gallerie de femmes fortes (1647), all probably influenced Buffet’s work.102 In her praise of Guillaume, Buffet specifically lauds the work that surely must have been an intertext for her own: “This illustrious learned woman has just printed a book in which she proves, with very good and powerful reasons, that the feminine sex is better than the masculine one.”103 Buffet here praises not only a contemporary woman of learning, but also a woman whose work was a model for her own. And she is not alone in praising a female author of a catalogue of illustrious women. As defenders of their own sex, female compilers were often included in these catalogues. Buffet herself would be placed in subsequent galleries of illustrious women, and praised for her work, for the same reason.104 Buffet’s catalogue of women comprises a group of nineteen contemporary women, followed by a group of fifty women from the past presented in reverse chronological order. She takes up as many pages to praise her nineteen literary contemporaries as she does for the remaining women of past ages back through to Roman and Biblical heroines, all chosen for their intelligence, cleverness, or command of language. As a kind of preface to the catalogue of individual women, Buffet includes a humanistic defence of the female sex. Scholars agree that hers is an example of those defences of the female sex that were the stock and trade of the querelle de femmes. Isabelle Ducharme has shown that Buffet rehearses many of 102. Women from Pierre le Moyne’s La Gallerie des femmes fortes (Paris: Antoine de Sommaville, 1647)—such as Clotilde, Indegonde, Margaret More Roper (the daughter of Thomas More), and Marie Stuart—appear in Buffet’s Praises. Le Moyne’s work was soon translated into English as The Gallery of Heroick Women (London, 1652) by John Paulet, marquess of Winchester. 103. Buffet, Praises, 103. For useful comparisons between Guillaume and Buffet’s catalogues see JeanPhilippe Beaulieu, “Jacquette Guillaume et Marguerite Buffet: Vers une historiographie du savoir féminin?” in Les Femmes et l’écriture de l’histoire, 1400–1800, ed. Sylvie Steinberg and Jean-Claude Arnould (Mont-Saint-Aignan: Presses Universitaires de Rouen et du Havre, 2008), 325–39, and his “ ‘La gloire de nostre sexe’: Savantes et lectrices dans Les dames illustres (1665) de Jacquette Guillaume,” Etudes françaises 47 (2011): 127–42. 104. See the section on “Reception and Afterlife,” 33–38.

28 Introduction the traditional arguments found in these pro-woman texts, already standard fare for a seventeenth-century readership. Buffet’s major contribution to the genre, in Ducharme’s opinion, was her ability to eschew the tedious digressions typical of these debates. Buffet manages to reinvigorate the customary ingredients of the genre—descriptions of similarities between women and men; the nature, function, and placement of the organs of each sex; the extent of women’s intellectual capacities; the theory of humours and temperaments applied to each sex; and the discrediting of misogynists and their judgments—by keeping her apologia brief.105 Buffet’s defense of the female sex may therefore be a good example of the genre for the modern reader to sample, for, in addition to its being concise, its author writes in the same lively and opinionated voice we have heard in the Observations. She begins by listing all of the stock epithets used against women by their enemies, including Plato, Aristotle, and Solomon. Women are “monsters,” “errors of nature,” “irrational animals,” “mules and she-goats.” As if this were not enough, men add to these insults “a whole host of silly puns and proverbs as ridiculous and outrageous as they are unworthy of women.” But who are the real “monsters”? Men, who seek women “with a kind of instinct befitting animals, common to all beasts.” Buffet later launches without hesitation into ad hominem attacks on the ancient worthies whose misogynistic comments she has quoted. Plato, for example, “resembled a Cyclops” whom women could not bear to look at; therefore she notes, “it is not astonishing if in some parts of his works he criticized women harshly.” And Aristotle was “a hunchback with twisted legs and short arms, . . . a stutterer with a very ugly face, which is why all women rejected him.”106 Buffet also discusses male and female physiology at length, deftly turning what were traditionally considered women’s weaknesses into strengths. The skulls and brains of females, for example, “are smaller and narrower than those of the male,” and according to women’s enemies “fill up more easily” with “acrid, fuliginous, and biting humours that irritate the nerves and membranes of women more quickly and violently,” making them prone to “fantastical and sudden movements.” But Buffet argues that “these very traits raise them far above men, whose spirits and humours are infinitely more ponderous.” Comparing sexed bodies to machines with springs, she shows that women’s supposed giddiness and volatility should be seen rather as lightness and rapidity. Like machines whose “parts work together with the greatest velocity . . . when their springs move more briskly,” women are more efficient—and therefore better—than heavy, slow men. Buffet again turns men’s comparison of women to animals back on them: “Let men brag as much as they like, and let them glory in the greatness of their bodies and the largeness of their heads. They have this in common with the stupidest animals 105. Isabelle Ducharme, “Une Formule discursive au féminin: Marguerite Buffet et la Querelle des femmes,” Papers on French Seventeenth-Century Literature 30 (2003): 131–55, at pp. 137–42. 106. Buffet, Praises, 93.

Introduction 29 and the heaviest beasts.”107 Women’s superiority is further supported by scripture: while man was formed out of clay, woman was formed from “the most robust part of a man’s body”—that is, part of his ribcage, the structure that protects the heart.108 And Buffet’s machine metaphor reminds us of the analogy she makes in her Observations when she compares the economical use of language to a tiny watch, perfectly operational in all its parts, or to pieces of gold and silver which are worth more the lighter they are.109 The same voice that corrects errors in language can be heard correcting misogynistic stereotypes. The coherence between the Observations and the Praises lies in such echoes. The apologia for women that opens the Praises is an extension of issues already discussed in the Observations. In her linguistic treatise, Buffet teaches women not only how to master the French language, but also how to master themselves. They are taught not only which neologisms are in currency, but also how to economize their time, or apply themselves to study, or disdain gossip and trifles in favour of intelligent conversation. Buffet, in short, calls on her students of language not to be the female stereotypes men say they are, but to be men’s intellectual equals. Her pro-woman defense thus offers Buffet a logical passage for the reader from the linguistic lessons of the New Observations on the French Language to the individual praises of exemplary women of learning. In her Observations, Buffet makes conscious efforts to organize her discussion of different types of linguistic errors, rather than listing errors in no particular order as does Vaugelas. Her text is divided into parts with both prologues and introductory discussions of the issues involved before she launches into her actual “lessons.” Similarly, in her Praises, Buffet does not content herself with proof by random accumulation of individual examples. Rather, she engages in providing her reader with philosophical arguments for women’s equal abilities before providing proofs of them in her catalogue of exemplary women.110 Of course, in so doing, in taking on Plato and Aristotle, and in participating as an active debater in the woman question, Buffet displays her own education and intelligence—that same habileté, or skill and cleverness, she lauds in her illustrious women. One of the most important threads running through Buffet’s defense is her concerted effort to downplay differences between the sexes by hinging her arguments on the similarities between men’s and women’s souls, or inward natures. The opening sentence of the Praises affirms that both men and women, not just

107. Buffet, Praises, 92. 108. Buffet, Praises, 85. 109. Buffet, Observations, 64 and 66. 110. Buffet, Praises, 89–93.

30 Introduction men, are true copies of God, both created in His image (imago Dei).111 Buffet then cites the Augustinian notion that “souls have no sex” before stating: “So it follows that there is no difference between the inward beauty of a man and the inward beauty of a woman, and this beauty is an attribute of both sexes.”112 Having established that both men and women are “true copies of God,” then, and so possess the same “inward beauty,” Buffet develops her argument that the sexes, despite certain physical differences for the purposes of procreation, are inherently the same. Buffet will return to the subject of unsexed souls when she begins to talk about Platonic or “immaterial forms” that make up “intellectual substances” or souls. She posits that “if our souls are the breath of God, we must necessarily imagine souls to be equal among themselves, with regard to size, strength, power, and goodness.”113 Here she can be seen teasing out the implications of the idea that both sexes are infused with the same divine pneuma, then mobilizing this argument again to downplay the differences between the sexes—differences that for male philosophers and women’s many detractors inevitably confirm women’s incapacities and weaknesses compared to men. To drive home her point, Buffet then adds that, in fact, the sexes are not so much opposites as to be seen lying along a continuum: “And there is not more difference between the sexes than there often is between individuals of the same sex.”114 Buffet may be seen referencing Marie de Gournay’s Equality of Men and Women (1622) and anticipating by several years Poullain de la Barre’s Equality of the Sexes (1673).115 It might be worthwhile to consider a possible source for Buffet’s line of argument in Symphorien Champier’s The Ship of Virtuous Ladies (1503), a catalogue of women consciously modeled on Boccaccio’s De Claris Mulieribus or Famous Ladies (1374) and Christine de Pizan’s The Book of the City of Ladies (1405). Book 4 of Champier’s Ship may well have inspired Buffet’s idea of ungendered “souls” or “minds.” According to Todd Reeser, by applying the Neoplatonic idea that the body is less important than the mind or spirit, Champier argues for the implicit equality of men and women: “In marrying [Marsilio] Ficino and a pro-woman 111. Richard J. McGowan, “Augustine’s Spiritual Equality: The Allegory of Man and Woman with Regard to Imago Dei,” Revue des Etudes Augustiniennes et Patristiques 33 (1987): 255–64, at p. 257. 112. Buffet, Praises, 85. The notion that “souls have no sex” derives from Augustine’s statement in De Trinitate (On the Trinity), 12.7.12, that in the spiritual realm, man and woman “are renewed to the image of God, where there is no sex.” See note 1 to the Praises on p. 85. 113. Buffet, Praises, 91. 114. Buffet, Praises, 91. 115. See Marie Le Jars de Gournay, Apology for the Woman Writing and Other Works, ed. and trans. Richard Hillman and Colette Quesnel (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), 86–87, and François Poullain de la Barre, “On the Equality of the Two Sexes,” in Three Cartesian Feminist Treatises, introd. Marcelle Maistre Welch, trans. Vivien Bosley (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), 49–120.

Introduction 31 stance, Champier does something very important for the history of the querelle des femmes: he sets the stage for later Renaissance thinkers and writers to consider that the sexes are equal via this version of Neoplatonism.”116 Buffet appears to be one of those thinkers and writers to have followed Champier’s lead in arguing for the equality of the sexes through a Neoplatonic focus on souls as opposed to bodies. To argue against the traditional opposition between men and women, Buffet highlights the differences to be found between individuals of the same sex. By focusing on individuals as asexual souls or minds, she imagines difference based not on sex, but on individuals’ merit and accomplishments as acquired through discipline and education. While Buffet’s liminal defense of women engages with centuries-old debates, she breathes life into them in her ardent tributes to nineteen of her contemporaries. Buffet’s praise of her contemporaries constitutes a valuable source of information concerning many of these now forgotten seventeenth-century women. We find in the Praises biographies of well-known women such as Queen Christina of Sweden, Anna Maria van Schurman, and Madeline de Scudéry, but also many women known today only because they have been praised in Buffet’s book, some of whom are what Carolyn C. Lougee has called “society ladies.”117 Buffet’s version of the centuries-old galleries of famous women speaks eloquently to the idea that savoir—learning, but also worldly knowledge—could be a standard by which to judge women’s greatness, or gloire. Buffet celebrates the learning, the literary but also conversational accomplishments, of women. Praising women for their wit and command of the French language, written and spoken, she offers food for thought with regard to the power of living exemplars of savoir in the successful education of women. Buffet’s choice of Queen Christina and Anna Maria van Schurman to head her list of illustrious learned women merits attention, especially as Buffet has already mentioned them both at the beginning of her Observations. It is worthwhile returning to that moment in the text in which she explains the importance of language to society and to civilization. First, Buffet evokes the legendary figure of King Mithridates as proof of the importance of language, since he was fluent, Buffet writes, in twenty-two languages. Then she announces that she will find an example “closer to home,” in Buffet’s own time, as proof of the importance of language and language skills. She chooses Anna Maria van Schurman, whose linguistic abilities were legendary at the time, but Buffet introduces her in an interesting manner:

116. In Symphorien Champier, The Ship of Virtuous Ladies, ed. and trans. Todd W. Reeser (Toronto: Iter Press; Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2018), 5. 117. Lougee, Le Paradis des femmes, 29.

32 Introduction And, to find an example closer to home, if I could abdicate the throne like Christina of Sweden, or change my circumstances in life as well as my sex, I would not hesitate to place the extraordinary Mademoiselle de Schurman at the same level as Mithridates.118 Placing herself, “I,” squarely between Christina of Sweden and Anna Maria van Schurman, Buffet imagines what she might do if she could attain power through a change in social rank and sex. In this upside-down world Buffet imagines that she would raise Schurman to become the equal of Mithridates and rewrite history, and, indeed, this is precisely what she does with her gallery of illustrious women—write a new historical record. In these first two biographical portraits, of a queen and of a scholar, we can see some themes and images that run though many of the later biographies. For instance, Buffet favours making comparisons between her exemplars and goddesses, such as Minerva and Athena; or Roman women, such as Cornelia; or male exemplars, from ancient history, such as Mithridates, Horace, or Ovid; or recent history, such as Vincent Voiture. These comparisons serve Buffet in a number of ways. They are effective means of flattery; they situate the present in a longer, even mythical past; and they serve to argue for equal ability between the sexes. At the end of her Praise of Schurman, Buffet hints that only those who know Schurman—in this case her Dutch countrymen and women—can truly appreciate her talent. Yet Buffet hints that she too knows her as well as the Dutch do and differentiates herself from other French people, who, she says, only write narratives about Schurman without, it would seem, having a kind of personal acquaintance with her.119 Buffet’s emphasis on a special intimacy, implicitly linked to conversation and presence, may be compared with her insistence on the oral—voice, pronunciation, speaking publicly, and even the oral nature of letter writing—in the Observations. Orality and conversational intimacy are the conditions for writing this other history, one that Buffet, in fact, illustrates in writing her Praises. Faith Beasley has shown that Buffet praises a number of women for their “oral prowess” and concludes that in contrast to what the historical record generally retains, “[s]uch traditionally ephemeral strengths are the focus of Buffet’s record of her world.”120 Buffet is writing a new kind of history, focusing on the voice and on nominally ephemeral speech, which, like the literature that emerged from the conversations of the salon, is not lost because Buffet stages herself as the one on the scene to record it as having been said. Her role, in both the Observations and the Praises, is to record what others say. 118. Buffet, Observations, 49. 119. Buffet, Praises, 95. 120. Beasley, Salons, 63.

Introduction 33 Unsurprisingly, then, there are many occasions in the portraits of her contemporaries when Buffet claims, directly and indirectly, to being acquainted with the lady in question. It is difficult to gauge to what extent Buffet may have known, or even witnessed, the conversational or oratorical prowess of these women. Her implicit claim to have known or met a specific woman may very well be rhetorical. We cannot be absolutely certain of how much, if at all, Buffet may have mixed with members of the salons. Such rhetoric may be employed by Buffet not so much to show that she actually sat with and listened to these women in the ruelles, but rather to confirm these women’s expertise in the art of conversation, and to provide testimony to their glory. In her biography of Mademoiselle Dupré, for example, Buffet argues the lady’s merits by implying acquaintance: Her wonderful wit is so fertile that it is inexhaustible when she endeavors to accomplish anything. In short, you only need to know her (la connaître) in order to speak to her advantage and render her the justice she merits.121 Knowing an accomplished woman is all Buffet needs in order to speak. Having spoken, she will render her subject the justice she merits—too often denied by history, or by fortune (la fortune), who can show herself to be capricious (capricieuse) and close-fisted (très avare) as in the case of Lucrèce de L’Hôpital.122 For some of the women she praises, known only to a few even in their own time, Buffet’s goal may well be to provide an antidote to fortune’s stinginess.

Reception and Afterlife After enjoying a certain renown in the years following the publication of her book, Marguerite Buffet and her work may be said to have suffered a near, although not total, eclipse until the second half of the twentieth century. Neglect of Buffet may be attributed to the fact that very little has ever been known about her life. Moreover, her work partakes of genres and intellectual habits of mind rooted in particular cultures of seventeenth-century France. Despite these obstacles, her posterity—her feminist contribution to memorializing the women she lauds in her Praises as well as the light she sheds on the world of the salon and its language—has been exhumed by feminist studies beginning in the late 1970s and early 1980s, thanks in part to the scattered references to Buffet in print publications of preceding centuries. These publications include nineteenth-century compilations of famous men and women in France, such as Fortunée Briquet’s Dictionnaire, catalogues of books in print, journal articles on language, and early 121. Buffet, Praises, 104. 122. Buffet, Praises, 98.

34 Introduction biographies of women Buffet lauded in her Praises.123 What follows is a brief sampling of what was written about Marguerite Buffet and her work before scholarship on Buffet came into its own from the late twentieth century to the present. Buffet’s near contemporaries appear to have recognized her Praises of Illustrious Learned Women as an important defense of her own sex, and by the end of the seventeenth century, Buffet becomes an object of praise in her own right. Just as she acknowledges Jacquette Guillaume and Madeleine de Scudéry for their catalogues of famous women by praising each author in her book, so too in 1698 the historian Claude-Charles Guyonnet de Vertron recognizes Buffet’s Praises alongside Scudéry’s Les Femmes Illustres, ou les harangues héroïques (1642), and Poullain de la Barre’s Egalité de deux sexes (1673). Vertron writes that Marguerite Buffet “merits eternal praise,” and places her in the “ranks of illustrious women,” for having “so well praised [own] sex.” He then goes on to say that his Muse is compelled to address “this eloquent girl,” even though she has passed away (he is writing almost twenty years after her death): BUFFET, we have not seen for more than thirty years A girl such as you; Justice demands of me That I place you in the ranks of your illustrious women.124 He recognizes Buffet as an author, a sçavante, and a fellow historian of women writers and conversationalists, and we see here again the highly self-reflexive nature of the de claribus genre, incorporating women who write in defense of their own sex into new and ever expanding galleries of worthy women. After de Vertron’s dithyrambic tribute at the end of the seventeenth century, Buffet appears in a scattering of bibliographic entries.125 In the Dictionnaire universel, historique, critique et bibliographique (1810), the former Benedictine monk and biographer Louis Mayeul Chaudon writes that Buffet was living in Paris in 1668, and that “she applied herself to the study of French grammar and 123. For Fortunée Briquet’s biographical entry for Buffet, see p. 8. 124. Claude-Charles Guyonnet de Vertron, Preface to La Nouvelle Pandore; ou, Les Femmes illustres du siècle de Louis-le-Grand (Paris: Veuve de Claude Mazuel, 1698), sig.Y3v. 125. See Jean-François de La Croix, Dictionnaire historique portatif des femmes célèbres: Contenant l’histoire des femmes savantes, des actrices, et generalement des dames qui se sont rendues fameuses dans tous les siècles par leurs aventures, les talents, l’esprit et le courage. Nouvelle édition revue et considérablement augmentée, 2 vols. (Paris: Belin; Volland, 1788), 1: 442; For entries on other women which include a mention of Buffet, see Claude-François Lambert, Histoire littéraire du règne de Louis XIV, 3 vols. (Paris: Prault fils, Guillyn, and Quillau fils, 1751) and Pierre-Joseph Boudier de Villemert, Notice alphabétique des femmes célèbres en France (Amsterdam and Paris: Monory, 1779).

Introduction 35 published the fruits of her work in a book entitled New Observations on the French Language, after which can be found Praises of a number of women famous in literature and the arts.”126 Similarly, a Jesuit theologian, François-Xavier de Feller, includes Buffet in his Dictionnaire historique (1832) with the following entry: “Buffet (Marguerite), a Parisian lady. She made a name for herself with her Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present, and with her Observations on the French Language. She exercised the profession of teaching people of her own sex the art of speaking and writing well. She was still living in 1680.”127 These examples are typical of the entries to be found on Buffet in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It is perhaps worthwhile to note that de Feller has incorporated information about Buffet and her work “teaching people of her own sex” almost word for word from the title-page of Buffet’s own volume. In fact, many of these short biographies of Buffet include all or a part of the information about her work as a teacher copied directly from the title-page of her volume. Evidently, Buffet’s book was, even then, as it is to this day, the main, if not the only, source of information about her life available to biographers and historians from at least the early nineteenth century onward if not before. The nineteenth-century classical philologist Emile Egger seems to confirm this. In the Journal des Sçavans of January 1883 Egger reviews a recent book by another philologist, Charles Thurot, on the history of French pronunciation in which Buffet briefly appears. Egger notes that Thurot leaves certain questions about Buffet unanswered: In Monsieur Thurot’s bibliography I then find the famous demoiselle de Gournay, Montaigne’s niece, who was raised in Picardy but spent most of her life in Paris [. . .] Following naturally is a work entitled “New Observations on the French Language, Treating of Old and Archaic Terms, and the Proper Use of New Expressions . . . by Damoiselle Marguerite Buffet, exercising the profession of guiding ladies in the art of speaking and writing well . . . (1668).” Was she also a Parisian? Monsieur Thurot does not say; no doubt, like many others, he did not find any more information about Damoiselle Buffet than what was contained in that long title. But this naïve teacher, even a bit pedantic, appearing with such singular composure next to 126. Louis M. Chaudon, Dictionnaire universel, historique, critique et bibliographique, vol. 3 (Paris: Mame frères, 1810), 398. 127. François-Xavier de Feller, Dictionnaire historique, ou, Histoire abrégée des hommes qui se sont fait nom par leur génie, leurs talens, leurs vertus, leurs erreurs ou leurs crimes, depuis le commencement du monde jusqu’à nos jours, 8th ed., vol. 3 (Lille: L. Lefort, 1832), 40.

36 Introduction the great lady, learnedly represented our taste for literary elegance in France.128 Buffet’s work “naturally” follows that of the “great lady,” Marie de Gournay, most probably because both authors wrote defenses of women as well as treatises on language. Yet, unlike Gournay, whose origins and personal and professional connections are well known, Buffet’s are not clear at all.129 Zeroing in on the fact that Thurot tells us nothing new about Buffet, Egger then proceeds to offer his own portrait of this ghostly presence “appearing with such singular composure” next to Gournay, describing Buffet as a “naïve teacher,” yet also learned and “pedantic.” Egger is not the only (male) scholar to use the patronizing sobriquet “naïve” in describing Buffet, yet Buffet is also “singular,” and with this descriptive it is clear that Egger is describing Buffet as her book. Her book is indeed singular, unique, one of kind, a hapax—and so she is as well. In his description of Buffet’s volume in his catalogue of “rare, curious, and singular books,” the bibliophile Victor Luzarche also emphasizes Buffet’s singularity: A rare work. It is quite odd (fort singulier) that this author who professes to “guide ladies in the art of speaking and writing well” should provide such a host of expressions used by the common people (petit peuple) that are completely unknown to us today and labels as lowbrow (vicieuses) locutions that have since become common usage, etc. A part of the volume is filled with praises of the most learned ladies.130 Luzarche expresses misgivings as to the contrast between the female teacher of dames—as advertised on the title-page of Buffet’s work—and her clear familiarity with the language of the lower classes. He implicitly raises the question of her origins: did she belong to the right class of people to teach ladies how to speak properly? And how competent was she, since her judgment on certain locutions 128. Emile Egger, review of De la prononciation française depuis le commencement du XVIe siècle, d’après les témoignages des grammairiens, by Charles Thurot, vol. 1 (Paris, 1881), in Journal des Sçavans (janvier 1883): 251–58, at p. 257 in Gallica. 129. As noted (p. 13), Buffet did clearly benefit from a certain amount of male and very possibly powerful female protection as well. Her printer, Jean Cusson, was the well-known publisher of the Journal de Sçavans, while Bruslé, a “A Lawyer at Parliament,” praised her in the front matter of her book. Buffet’s temerity in addressing the queen, as well, points to a woman who was not without friends. 130. Victor Luzarche, Catalogue des livres rares, curieux et singuliers en tous genres, bien conditionnés, et des manuscrits anciens (du Xe au XVIIIe siècle), vol. 1 (Paris: A. Claudin, 1868), 280.

Introduction 37 can now be seen as going completely against the tide of history? Despite their slightly dismissive tone, Luzarche’s questions on Buffet’s Observations and the contingency of language point to some interesting issues with regard to Buffet and the history of language. At the start of the twentieth century, Buffet was increasingly recognized for her defense of women and as an important chronicler of some of her contemporaries’ lives and achievements. She is mentioned twice by the writer and literary historian Emile Magne, who dedicated a number of books to the lives and accomplishments of women of the time. Magne turned to Buffet’s Praises for material in his biographies of Madame de Villedieu (Hortense des Jardins) and Madame de La Suze (Henriette de Coligny), written in 1907 and 1908 respectively. In his biography of Madame de Villedieu he notes that “Marguerite Buffet, a female grammarian who teaches ‘the art of speaking and writing well on all subjects with French spelling according to the rules,’ sings a dithyramb in her honor.”131 And of Madame de La Suze he writes that “Marguerite Buffet declares her odes superior to those of Horace and her elegies more tender than Ovid’s.”132 About a decade later, Raymond Toinet included Buffet in a two-part survey of “écrivains moralistes au XVIIe siècle”—writers whose works, published during the reign of Louis XIV, dealt with what he calls “morale appliquée,” or practical ethics. This two-part article, published in the Revue d’histoire litttéraire de la France in 1916 and 1917, includes not just renowned women writers such as Madeleine de Scudéry and Anna Maria van Schurman, but Jacquette Guillaume and Marguerite Buffet. Toinet’s entry for Guillaume (numbered 121 in the 1916 article) notes that she had been recognized by Buffet: “Marguerite Buffet did not fail to place Jacquette Guillaume (p. 276) among her ‘illustrious learned women,’ writing a praise following her New Observations on the French Language, 1668.”133 In the entry on Buffet (numbered 338 in the 1917 article), Toinet justifies her inclusion in his survey because of her essay on “the equality of the sexes” preceding her Praises. Although his comments on “some amusing naïve remarks” (quelques naïvetés amusantes) by Buffet could be seen in a negative light, Toinet nevertheless commends the Praises for their “moderate tone,” and Buffet’s inclusion in the survey should be seen as noteworthy in itself.134 131. Emile Magne, Madame de Villedieu (Hortense des Jardins), 1632–1692: Documents inédits et portrait (Paris: Société du Mercure de France, 1907), 356. 132. Emile Magne, Madame de La Suze (Henriette de Coligny) et la Société précieuse: Documents inédits (Paris: Société du Mercure de France, 1908), 247. 133. Raymond Toinet, “Les Ecrivains moralistes au XVIIe siècle.” Revue d’histoire littéraire de la France 3/4 (1916): 570–610, at p. 594. 134. Raymond Toinet, “Les Ecrivains moralistes au XVIIe siècle.” Revue d’histoire littéraire de la France 4 (1917): 655–71, at pp. 664–65.

38 Introduction Buffet’s role as a historian of women of the seventeenth century is the main reason she remained in view in the twentieth century. Since the 1990s, however, Buffet’s work has been increasingly studied in its own right, as an important document in the history of the French language and of seventeenth-century salon culture. Buffet is now not only a source of information about other women of her own time, her unique contribution to the history of women in the seventeenth century is itself the object of study.

Note on Translation Buffet’s New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women Past and Present, presents challenges to the translator, some characteristic of other seventeenth-century writing and some specific to Buffet. Like other writers of her epoch, Buffet uses a cluster of key concepts to which she returns again and again. Terence Cave writes that words such as esprit, honnêteté, or galanterie are central to French thought and are repeatedly used by authors of the period in often widely differing contexts. The use of these highly polysemic, ever “shifting” words, in a variety of different situations, creates an ambiguity “excruciating” to translate.135 It is for the translator to decide on the specific meaning of the French word in any given situation and to choose the appropriate English term for that situation. Translation, in fact, is what sets into relief a French neoclassical tolerance, even preference, for the kind of ambiguity—or polysemy—in a single word that is anathema in English. Buffet, like her contemporaries, consistently uses the word esprit, but this word encompasses a wide array of meanings in English from “spirit,” “ghost,” and “soul” to “mind,” “thought,” “intelligence,” “wit,” “conceit,” and “liveliness,” to “inclination,” “temper,” “genius,” and “character.” In her Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, we see the author often referring to the esprit of her exemplary women, and I have often translated esprit as “wit” and “intelligence.” Different English terms for esprit help the reader distinguish among women of varying occupations, levels of society, and personalities. The translator therefore looks for clues in Buffet’s short biographies in order to try and distinguish between the salon “wit” and the “intelligence” or “cleverness” of the queen, or the “intellectual prowess” of a scholar, in order to add the nuance demanded by the English language, and the English reader, of the single word esprit in French. Striking too is how Buffet uses an almost rigidly select group of adjectives throughout her work. By far the most important adjective in her New Observations 135. See Terence Cave’s introduction to his translation of Madame de Lafayette’s The Princesse de Clèves, The Princesse de Montpensier, and The Comtesse de Tende (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), xxvii; see also Karen Newman’s introduction to Madeleine de Scudéry’s The Story of Sapho, 9–11.

Introduction 39 of the French Language is beau. Everywhere in her linguistic remarks, Buffet turns to the idea of the beau stile or bel usage as the ultimate goal of all those who read her work and wish to learn her lessons. While “beautiful” or “good” or “excellent,” or even “handsome,” may be used to translate beau in many of her examples, in the case of style and language use, Buffet is often referring to what is “proper” or “correct” speaking and writing style. At the same time, the necessity in English of choosing between these various possibilities may well rob Buffet’s beau of some of its palimpsest effect: what is grammatically correct is also beautiful and perhaps even good in a Platonic sense. Like beau, the word habile may be cited as another adjective to which Buffet returns repeatedly. This word, as a noun and as an adjective, is a kind of all-purpose word to express an array of qualities in her exemplary women. Someone who is habile is “able,” “nimble,” “active,” “clever,” “cunning,” “skillful,” “inventive” and “ingenious.” When Buffet uses the term to describe a woman she is praising, she generally wants to express the fact that the individual has become expert—in other words, habile—in her chosen field or domain, whether it be governing, writing, or speaking. It is key, then, for the translator to move back and forth through a variety of English words to capture the different shades of meaning implicit in Buffet’s use of conceptual terms such as esprit, beau, or habile, among others. Those interested in following the thread of a particular French word through the text will do well to consult the French original. I have, however, taken care to use historically appropriate English terms familiar to readers of English literature of the same era. As is characteristic of other seventeenth-century prose, Buffet’s sentences are often connected by strings of commas or “ands” that entail repunctuating in English. And while she does use paragraphs more than some of her contemporaries, I have added some paragraph breaks for greater visual and syntactic readability. That being said, Buffet is not a Madame de Lafayette writing fiction; Buffet’s prose style is not “tortuous” or “repetitious,” as acknowledged by Lafayette’s English translator.136 Modelling the ideals of clarity, order, and elegance that she promulgates in her Observations, Buffet divides her work into symmetrical parts, writing in a clear and for the most part uncomplicated style as she has announced she would do. Her aim being to teach, her pedagogy is founded on a certain economy of style, even a surgical precision, with which she points out an error and then swiftly excises it. Immediately comprehensible as her linguistic lessons may have been for her contemporary French reader, they present a unique challenge to the modern 136. Cave, The Princesse de Clèves, xxviii. Cited by Nicholas Paige in his comments on the translation of Lafayette’s Zayde, 30; see also Paige’s “The Complexities of the French Classical Lexicon,” in Teaching Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century French Women Writers, ed. and introd. Faith E. Beasley (New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2011), 17–24.

40 Introduction translator. The majority of Buffet’s language lessons are very much lost in translation if the reader does not have the French words and phrases beside their English translations. The difference between “temperature” and “temperament,” for instance—apparently a common confusion among some of Buffet’s students—is one with which the modern English reader can sympathize. The two words sound alike and are written similarly in both languages. There is, moreover, a similarity in their meanings in French and English in the seventeenth century, the traces of which remain even in current idiom: the degree of hot or cold in weather and in a person, derived from an older physiological model of humours used to explain varying emotional constitutions. Nevertheless, this kind of correspondence is extremely rare, and the historical meaning and period-specific implications of most of the words Buffet brings to the fore can only be appreciated if the French word is available to the reader for further analysis. It is for this reason that I have included the French text with the English for Buffet’s linguistic examples in the Observations. Having the French text at hand may enable the reader to better comprehend the actual types of mistakes Buffet is addressing, as well as the precise lexicography in question. In addition to creating a bilingual text for Buffet’s examples of linguistic errors, I have chosen to place quotation marks around those words or phrases that represent direct speech, even though there is no such punctuation in the original French.137 I have done so because Buffet continually uses the word dire, or “to say,” to introduce her examples of improper and proper speech. While the direct speech implied by dire does not necessarily call for the insertion of quotation marks, I felt that the reader would find their insertion helpful for reading purposes. Finally, I have not included all of Buffet’s linguistic examples, but have aimed to provide the reader with an ample selection of a variety of pertinent examples— while trying to avoid being overly repetitious—for a study of the language and culture of the period. I have noted, with brackets in the text, precisely where I have omitted linguistic examples. Otherwise, the present translation of Buffet’s work is complete. To understand this unique text in its lexical, typographical, and syntactic individuality, readers may easily consult the BnF’s facsimile copy of the 1668 text online at Gallica while awaiting a readily accessible modern French edition.

137. Further with regard to punctuation, it should be noted that words in the original edition are often not accented. For example, “généreuse” is printed as “genereuse,” “caractères” is “caracteres,” etc. This practice occurs throughout the original text.

Figure 1. Title page of the first and only edition of Marguerite Buffet’s New Observations on the French Language, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, published in Paris in 1668. From The Arsenal Library, Paris.

New Observations on the French Language, Treating of Old and Archaic Terms, and the Proper Use of New Expressions, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women,1 Past and Present

By Marguerite Buffet, Gentlewoman,2 exercising the profession of guiding Ladies in the art of speaking and writing well on all subjects, with French Spelling according to the rules

Paris, at the Press of Jean Cusson, for Monsieur Bourbon, dwelling at the entrance to the Quarré du Pont S. Landry. MDCLXVIII [1668]3 With the King’s Permission

1. The French is illustres sçavantes. The word sçavante appears repeatedly both as a masculine and feminine noun and as an adjective from the verb savoir, “to know.” The word describes a person who is educated, wise, experienced, informed, or a good scholar. 2. The French damoiselle, or demoiselle, would have referred to a gentleman’s daughter and indicated Buffet’s good status in society. 3. As indicated in note 1 to the Introduction, no other editions (i.e., in subsequent years) were published.

43

44 MARGUERITE BUFFET To The Queen 4 Madame, Respectful veneration for Your August Majesty would have prevented me from offering you my little work had I not thought about how great ones on earth are like God; none of their grandeur is diminished when they protect the smallest things. Madame, having observed that it is a universal custom to offer up to altars and to place into the hands of sovereigns one’s first fruits, both the most ordinary as well as those that are the most rare and the most precious, I take the liberty of presenting you with the productions of the wit5 of a girl6 who believes that she has done something extraordinary. She has had the ambition to raise herself as high as the throne of the greatest queen of the universe. Your Majesty will find in this little work observations as curious as they are necessary about a language that she holds dear. My aim is that she may make use of this work to converse with the greatest monarch of the world,7 and that she employ it every day to pronounce with him the oracles admired throughout the world. I have brought back to life the most illustrious ladies of former centuries so as to unite them with the most learned and most virtuous ladies of your court and of all Europe. If these heroic women, who in life appeared with such pomp, were resurrected and rose from their graves, they would have the joy of seeing Your Majesty shine with a merit rarer and more dazzling than any that had appeared in their own times. They would see, Madame, all the wisdom and virtue they had sought with so much ardour while they were alive, and which each possessed separately. Through their admiration and their respect they will join the ladies of your court, so as to adore the most august of queens, and the most perfect image of the majesty of God on earth. Yes, Madame, it is a Christian truth that kings and queens are divinities visible to those people who obey them. It is with this thought in mind that a girl 4. Marie-Thérèse of Austria (1638–1683) was the Spanish Infanta, and later queen consort of Louis XIV of France, to whom she was married in 1660. She was thirty years old when Buffet dedicated this work to her in 1668. 5. The French esprit encompasses a dizzying array of meanings: spirit, ghost, soul; mind, thought, intelligence, wit, conceit, liveliness; inclination, temper, genius, character. In the descriptions of Buffet’s illustres sçavantes, I have often used “wit” and “intelligence” to convey the intellectual powers of her exemplary ladies, but not exclusively. Depending on the context, I also translate esprit as “mind,” and occasionally as “soul” or “spirit.” 6. The French fille refers to a daughter as well as to any unmarried woman and is translated as girl, lass, or maid. I have often used “girl” and “maid” to translate fille. Here Buffet utilizes the term selfreflexively as part of a modesty topos in her address to the queen. 7. Louis XIV.

New Observations on the French Language 45 of a certain condition in life,8 obliged to support herself by teaching the French language, comes to throw herself at her sovereign’s feet, finding no other sanctuary so favorable, and knowing that Y.M.9 is the most generous10 princess in the world. She is well persuaded, Madame, that this poor gift, from a girl, is not at all worthy of consideration, except that she desires to please you. It is infinitely inferior to those works that merit being presented to Y.M. Nevertheless, Madame, may it please you to consider that just as there are no gifts worthy of God, or of sovereigns, they cannot be refused when they are offered with such an ardent and sincere zeal for the glory and the preservation of Your Majesty, by she who is, Madame, Your very humble, very obedient, and very loyal subject and servant, Marguerite Buffet.

8. The French phrase is une fille de condition, translatable as a woman of quality, a well-born woman, or a noble woman. Here Buffet can be seen asserting her elevated social station. 9. “Your Majesty.” 10. The French term here is généreuse, the feminine of the adjective généreux. It may be translated as liberal, magnanimous, and generous, but also noble, valiant, and brave. I have used “generous” and “noble” as translations of généreuse. The reader who consults the original text will also note that this word is printed without accents (“genereuse”), something that occurs throughout.

46 MARGUERITE BUFFET To the Reader It is strange how we take so much pleasure in putting ourselves in danger, and that such peril should be as alluring to people of letters as it is to soldiers. I am eternally obliged to my sex and my temperament for my innate shyness, because, however pleasant it may be to hold a high place at the court of Apollo and have a footstool in the house of the Muses, these places are at such a height, and it is so easy to fall after such a difficult climb, that this hazardous recreation seems just as unpleasant as that trick played on the late Monsieur Voiture.11 This is why I am in the habit of comparing the risk of appearing in print to being tossed in a blanket, or flying up and down on a swing, because of the danger that goes hand in hand with the amusement we get out of it. Clearly, I have not undertaken this work to coolly expose myself to the mercy of fame. I only hope to give myself satisfaction, not aim for the public good. This is why, Reader, if my observations do not have the honor of pleasing you, know that my learned12 friends would be just as guilty of my misfortune, incurred in following their advice, as I would be by complying with them. I had at first intended not to follow their counsel, but they had already engaged me to do so by their most strong and most tender friendship.

11. Vincent Voiture (1597–1648) was a habitué of the Hôtel de Rambouillet. Voiture relates in a letter how he was condemned by a pseudo “tribunal” to be berné, or tossed into the air in a blanket, as punishment for not having succeeded in making the young Mademoiselle de Bourbon laugh. Buffet here uses the pronoun on, which could have been translated as “we,” making the sentence more active: “when we played that trick on the late Monsieur Voiture.” However, it is unclear whether Buffet was actually present at Voiture’s blanket toss or not. What is clear is that she inserts a reference to this incident to attach herself to the salon and its members. See the Introduction, 12. 12. The French is docte, which, like savant, is often best translated simply as “learned.”

New Observations on the French Language 47 To Mademoiselle BUFFET, on her book Mademoiselle, I am no less jealous of the good you do the public than I am of your glory, and I have enough of an appreciation of good things so as not to take back the advice I gave you to publish your manuscript. I have examined it with pleasure, and I have read it with admiration. It is the best and most finished work I have seen in my life for the excellent instruction it provides those who will know how to make use of your precepts, so necessary and so intelligently expressed, in order to speak our language well. Your precepts ought to be praised by all those authors who have written best with regard to the refinement of language. It will seem that you are too sparing of the productions of your wit if you refuse to give this gift to the public, depriving them of the knowledge of so many choice insights which have filled me with wonder and oblige me to add to the high estimation I have of your works. Believe me, Mademoiselle, be more bountiful, let this book leave your study13 and be put to press. I do not imagine that you are incited by the goal of burnishing your reputation, so esteemed among experts14 that it cannot be more distinguished. I admit that there have been good authors who have labored at reforming our language, but I have seen no one who has placed things in such a perfect order as you have done, by a division into four different parts that show the errors that are made against the rules of good speaking, with the means to correct them. You give such reasonable and easy lessons, pushing aside so skillfully those obscure and impenetrable terms that the fair sex cannot tolerate. With such grace and eloquence you show women the best use of their time, and the importance of a familiarity with literature15 for those who follow it. The rules that you give them for conversation and letter-writing are so pleasant and so useful that it would be very advantageous for me to follow no other, since nowhere are these rules better expressed than by you. 13. The French is cabinet, referring to an inner room, next to the bedroom, used for reflection and intimate conversation. This was what was known in English as a “closet,” a private space in which a person would read and write, and where they put the things that were most precious to them, such as their books and other valuables. 14. This is the first use of the word habile, or habille in the feminine, in the text. Buffet uses the word repeatedly, both as a noun and as an adjective. It is a kind of verbal Swiss army knife referring, variously, to a person who is able, nimble, active, clever, cunning, skillful, ingenious, or, as here, an “expert” in his or her domain. 15. The French is belles-lettres, referring both to a certain kind of humanist learning in general and more specifically to “good literature.” Les sciences, by way of contrast with belles-lettres, is translated as “knowledge,” as it refers to more than our term “science.”

48 MARGUERITE BUFFET Although your modesty is hostile to all ostentation and praise, it can in no way prevent me from saying publicly that the productions of your learned pen put to shame all those ancient and modern authors who have written panegyrics of illustrious learned women. All that is beautiful and striking that they have accomplished appears so elegantly expressed in your praises. It seems that eloquence gave you the finest of styles, and it is as if she gave only you this gift, having given you the art of speaking with such precision and beauty. All that you say is admirable. You have that pleasing air and fine turn of phrase that gives so much grace to your thoughts. Only you possess the power of expressing yourself well. Our rhetoricians who take such pains to speak well will follow no other than your precepts, as if you were another Tullia,16 whom Cicero made so eloquent that she was followed by the most famous orators, who believed she bore the entire treasure of eloquence. You are so rich in this treasure, Mademoiselle, that those who would doubt it have only to read your works, and I am entirely persuaded that if the heroic women whom you praise so eloquently appeared in our own centuries, they would find the greatest happiness in offering you the richest productions of their wit so that you could add to them the final touches of perfection. They would see in you rare and inestimable qualities. I would like very much to tell you my weakness. I am jealous of your sex, and seeing the praises of our illustrious modern women shine with such advantage thanks to your writing, I am duty-bound to speak up. You give such brightness to their merit that it seems as if you wished to show disdain for men, laboring only for the glory of the fair sex. How much your sex owes you is inexpressible. Undoubtedly, it is in your sex’s best interests to immortalize your memory, and to regard your own illustrious person as, in days gone by, the Romans did the famous Cornelia, who was so skilled that in her writings we may find all that is most eloquent.17 I think with even more reason that your writings may satisfy the most refined readers, for good style, and indeed for everything. Accept these truths from someone who is entirely, Mademoiselle, Your very humble and very obedient servant, Bruslé18 Lawyer in Parliament 16. Tullia was the beloved only daughter of the Roman orator and politician Marcus Tullius Cicero. She is one of the ancient women mentioned in the second part of the Praises, in which Buffet notes that Cicero, the byword of rhetorical ability, bequeathed “the treasure trove of [his] eloquence” to his daughter. See Praises, 115, and note 94. 17. Cornelia, daughter of the Roman general Scipio Africanus and mother of the Gracchi. Letters supposedly written by her to her younger son, Gaius, were excerpted by the biographer Cornelius Nepos and referred to by Cicero. See Praises, 115, and note 93. 18. The identity of Bruslé is unknown. See the Introduction, 13.

New Observations on the French Language 49 of the necessity of speaking your language well, and how highly French is esteemed by all nations Since men are born to be in society, and since society can function only by means of language, it should come as no surprise that the greatest minds,19 not only of our own time, but also of all times past, have praised those wishing to learn languages properly.20 Indeed, an understanding of languages is so necessary that it seems that everyone should make an effort to master them. Mithridates21 was so utterly persuaded of this truth that he knew how to speak twenty-two foreign languages with the same ease as the language his nurse had taught him. And, to find an example closer to home, if I could abdicate the throne like Christina of Sweden,22 or change my circumstances in life as well as my sex, I would not hesitate to place the extraordinary Mademoiselle de Schurman23 at the same level as Mithridates, for she benefitted so much from the study of languages that antiquity has nothing comparable to her, and posterity will never produce anyone to challenge the glorious title she has rightfully earned for also speaking twenty-two different languages. She is a writer, and her finest works are in French, the language she esteems above all other languages. This is not to say that all languages are equally useful. If we become fluent in the tongues of distant climes it is with the sole object of communicating with the people who use them; and since we communicate less with those people than 19. The French is les plus grands esprits. 20. Buffet uses the phrase dans leur pureté, which I have translated as “properly.” Buffet is here referring directly to the mission—undertaken by the Académie Française and writers such as Vaugelas and herself—to purify or clarify the French language, with the aim of attaining a certain exactness of style. See the Introduction, 3. 21. Mithridates VI (135–63 BC), known as Mithridates the Great, king of Pontus in northern Anatolia (present-day Turkey). In his Natural History, 7.24.88, Pliny the Elder states that Mithridates could speak the languages of all the twenty-two nations he governed. See Pliny the Elder, Natural History, Books 3–7, trans. Harris Rackham (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1942), 563, 565. 22. Christina (1626–1689) was queen of Sweden from 1644 to 1654. One of the most educated women of the seventeenth century, she brought men such as Descartes, Grotius, and Salmasius to the Swedish court during her reign and was a patron of the arts. She created a scandal in Europe when she abdicated the throne in 1654 and converted to Roman Catholicism. Hers is the first of Buffet’s Praises; see p. 94. 23. Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678), the “Star of Utrecht,” was a Dutch polymath, considered the most learned woman of her time. Her influential defense of female education, Dissertatio de ingenii muliebris ad doctrinam et meliores litteras aptitudine (Leiden, 1641), was translated into English in 1659 as The Learned Maid, or, Whether a Maid May Be a Scholar. Schurman was renowned for her knowledge of theology, philosophy, medicine, art, and music, and at least fourteen languages: Dutch, German, French, English, Italian, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, Syriac, Samaritan, Persian, and Amharic (the primary language of Ethiopia). Hers is the second of Buffet’s Praises; see p. 95.

50 MARGUERITE BUFFET with the people among whom we are born, and with whom nature places us in the vital necessity of conversing, there is no doubt that the language we share with our own countrymen must be the principal end of our most important studies, and the subject of our most serious occupations. It is for this reason that I have resolved to write something in French. I did it even more particularly, and with more pleasure, knowing that the language is valued not only throughout Europe, but even in all other parts of the world. There is no true courtier in any neighbouring court who cannot understand and who cannot speak French, for this is enough to make a courtier loved by the Prince and kept close to him. It is even said that Charles V neglected a quantity of other languages in which he was fluent, mostly using French while accomplishing his most important deeds.24 If it was fighting the enemy, it was in French that he would inspire his soldiers with that rage and courage which crowned them with victory so often. In peacetime, if the people needed to be reined in so as to observe duty and obedience, it was in French that he showed them again that he was Charles V, and that they were born to be his subjects. Yet while this language is as necessary as it is esteemed, there are many people who are not fully versed in it, or, because they are not precise enough when they speak, end up making substantial errors. I know that in order to remedy these errors many excellent minds have considered this matter; but it may be that their teaching methods are not lucid enough, or they have not explained things clearly enough, for I see so many well-born people, and mainly women, making mistakes every day, and this makes me think that they have not read the books written by these authors, or that, if they have read them, they haven’t benefitted from them. This is why I have taken a completely different approach from that of other guides, and have forsaken the path they have taken, arriving at my destination with less trouble by choosing to work primarily for women. Thus I have divided this short treatise into four parts, and I will shorten it as much as possible so as not to bore them. In the first part, concerning barbarous and archaic terms, they25 will see how many people make mistakes without even knowing they are 24. Charles V (1500–1558), king of Spain and Holy Roman Emperor, would struggle to hold his empire together against the growing forces of Protestantism. His first language was French, followed by Dutch; he eventually became fluent in Spanish and Italian, and had a limited knowledge of German, but spoke Latin poorly. As his biographer Geoffrey Parker notes: “ ‘La langue bourguignonne’ [the Burgundian language] would always remain his mother tongue: during his last years, secluded in a Spanish monastery, a member of his entourage reported that ‘Here with His Majesty we speak only French,’ ” See Geoffrey Parker, Emperor: A New Life of Charles V (New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press, 2019), 30. 25. The French is elles. Buffet has stated that she is writing a book for women, and this fact is underlined throughout her Observations by a consistent use of the feminine pronoun elles, for which there is no equivalent in gender-neutral English. At certain junctures I have substituted the word women

New Observations on the French Language 51 making them, mistakes which can be easily corrected. In the second part, treating of redundancy, they will learn to avoid using redundant words, and appreciate the advantages of speaking little. In the third part, which treats of corrupt26 and badly pronounced terms, they will be helped by the distinctions I make between different terms, and they will see the gratifying honors received by those who know how to speak properly. In the last part, they will understand how often we make mistakes by not using the appropriate word, and they will also understand the distinction between the masculine and the feminine, which women often mix up. I have discussed all these things in a way that is closest to common usage and easily understandable. This is what makes me hope that they will receive instruction from it. I know that women like beautiful things and are not less capable of judging them than men, possessing the same aptitude for learning about them. Those who recognize the vivacity and excellence of women’s wit know that to whatever discipline women apply themselves, they will be as skilled in it as men. You will see at the end of this book a short treatise concerning some women who have earned in their own age as much respect and fame as the most illustrious persons of the other sex. The First Part For the correction of barbarous and archaic terms, as well as those necessary for proper use; and of the origin of the letters that make up spelling First, my intention is to offer a general and easy understanding of how to avoid errors in the French language. I am anxious not only to observe all the mistakes one can make, but also to note the newest words that contribute to speaking this language well. For this purpose, I have studied how to make things easy and clear, as I am opposed to terms that are obscure and hidden, or too pedantic, all of which are more likely to throw people into confusion than give them instruction. It is important that people who sit down to write be at least methodical and receptive to instruction if they want their books to be understood by all those who can read. Among the variety of people I see every day, there are few who know their own language. One can see those who, from experience or instruction in Latin, never make mistakes in the conjugation of verbs, which is the subject of one of for elles to remind the reader that Buffet is indeed referring at that moment to women. Nevertheless, while her linguistic remarks are intended to teach women, and she consistently uses the gendered pronoun elles, the ultimate audience for both the Observations and the Eloges is a gender-neutral or gender-mixed posterity. 26. The French is les termes corrumpus, meaning words that become “corrupted” or have altered in use from their original meaning.

52 MARGUERITE BUFFET the first parts of this section. Still, they make a great many other ridiculous errors without ever being aware of it. They use what we call barbarisms, and these errors cannot be accepted among polite and well-spoken people. Others, who have no Latin, lack an understanding of the order that must be observed in the conjugation of certain verbs, and these are not minor errors. So I feel obliged to conjugate here those verbs that I believe are the most necessary in using our language, and even those that I have noticed are often not well conjugated. For the other verbs, they are arranged in order in my book of spelling rules, which I give to the women I teach, consisting of a very easy method for learning in very little time. An understanding of these rules has enabled many people whom I have taught to become thoroughly proficient. My book is made up of about thirty-eight or forty different rules, all explained in French, even though they come from Latin. Without these precepts, it would be useless to teach spelling, since this science is too subtle and studied to be acquired without order or method. Those who have Latin know full well that it is silly to believe you can succeed in this discipline simply by copying and reading. You must be instructed by rules that explain the correct order of letters required for the pronunciation of words, which in turn explains our language. Knowing these rules provides students with as much insight as if they had studied for a long time and already knew how to write in the correct order. People who are curious about these things are hard put to know the origin of the letters used in the spelling of our language. To satisfy them I will say what I have been able to learn.27 The Egyptians were the first to represent their thoughts,28 which they did with pictures of animals engraved in stone. They also boasted that they were the first to invent letters. Then the Phoenicians, who at that time were the best sailors and masters of the sea, brought these letters into Greece, and even though they had gotten them from the Egyptians, they were later honoured with having invented them. It is certain that Cadmus,29 arriving in Greece on the Phoenician ships, taught this art to the still uncultured Greeks. Written records show us that during the Trojan War it was the Athenian, Cecrops, or the Theban, Linus, who along with Palamedes Argyen invented the shapes30 of sixteen letters of the alphabet, and that Simonides found the rest. The letters were then brought into Italy by a Corinthian, Damaratus, who taught them to the Tuscans. The Arcadian, Evander, then taught them to the native peoples. We also 27. In constructing a genealogy of the alphabet, Buffet follows the Annals of Tacitus, 11.14, which begins with the Egyptians and Phoenicians and includes all of the figures she mentions here. See The Annals, Books IV–VI, XI–XII, trans. John Jackson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1937), 269, 271. 28. The French is les conceptions de leur esprit. 29. Cadmus founded the city of Thebes after consulting the Delphic Oracle, and is said to have introduced an alphabet into Greece. 30. The French is caractères, the typographical mark or letter of the alphabet.

New Observations on the French Language 53 see that Latin letters have the form of the oldest Greek characters. The Emperor Claudius added three letters that were in use during his Empire, and they can still be seen today, engraved on the copper tables of the temples and public places in Rome, to make the ordinances of the people known to everyone.31 If the invention of letters was difficult, the way they were linked and organized was no less so. It is order that puts the finishing touches to a painting and throws light on the thoughts of men. It is order that provides the means by which a sound expresses the thing we wish to declare, as well as the means to pronounce correctly. Finally, it is order that is the true instrument of eloquence and good discourse. In vain would rhetoric have the means to persuade without order, and the knowledge of good literature and great minds would remain buried in eternal oblivion, and in extreme confusion. The letters of the alphabet, on their own, can be compared to a pile of stones lying useless, but which, cut and placed in order, form very beautiful buildings and serve to raise palaces of wonderful architecture. In the same way, if the letters are correctly joined, they compose beautiful words, which, in turn, render ornate discourse redundant. This is why it is easy to see how important this order is that I intend to show with all imaginable ease. To return to my first point, it is therefore necessary to note that we have many verbs in our language that are pronounced in different ways. We have quite a few in which the G is pronounced, something which most people do not do because they do not know they are supposed to. For example, take the verb, avindre (to get). You should say, in the past tense, J’avingnis (I got), vous avingnistes (you got), il avingnit (he got), nous avingismes (we got), ils avingnirent (they got), ils avingnent (they got, in the subjunctive), and so on throughout the conjugation of the verb in the same way, all the time being sure to pronounce the G. Buffet here proceeds to offer examples of the correct pronunciation and conjugation of a selection of verbs frequently conjugated incorrectly.32 31. With regard to the creators of the alphabet: Cecrops was a mythical king of Athens; Linus was a legendary poet-musician of Thebes. The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (Bibliotheca Historica, 3.67) states that after Cadmus had brought the letters of the alphabet from Phoenicia, Linus was the first to transfer them into the Greek language. Palamedes was a Greek leader during the Trojan War, renowned for his cunning, and, as such, a good example of habilité, so praised in Buffet. He is associated with rhetoric in Plato’s Phaedrus, and according to Hyginus (Fabulae, 277) invented eleven letters of the Greek alphabet. Simonides was a Greek lyric poet of the fifth and sixth centuries BC whose work is collected, as is Sappho’s, in the Greek Anthology; he is credited with the invention of four letters of the Greek alphabet. Demaratus of Corinth is said by Tacitus to have brought letters to the Etruscans. Evander was a son of the god Hermes and, according to Tacitus, taught the art of writing to the native inhabitants of Italy before the founding of Rome by Aeneas. Finally, the Roman emperor Claudius added three new letters to the Latin alphabet (the “Claudian letters”), but their use was discontinued after his death. 32. The conjugation of these verbs may be found on pp. 20–26 of the original text.

54 MARGUERITE BUFFET It would be pointless to explain this in more detail by going through a lengthy conjugation that wouldn’t be specific to all verbs. And since French is not wholly dependent on its verbs, I would like to focus now on other common errors, so as to find remedies for as many as I can. We still make such a large number of faults by using barbarous terms and old words, or not avoiding redundant words, or employing corrupted words and pronouncing words badly, or mingling the masculine and the feminine genders. All these will be seen later in this treatise, which I have organized for the greatest ease possible.33 First among barbarous terms, we often use the word mesque.34 For example, we might say, “mesque nous aurons receu de l’argent” (“when we have received some money”), but this is not French. You should say, “quand nous aurons receu de l’argent” (“when we have received some money”) or “lors que nous aurons fait cette affaire” (“at the moment when we have done this thing”). Many people say, “vous aurez du repenty d’avoir fait une telle chose” (“you will repent having done such a thing”), which is also a most barbarous word. You should say, “vous aurez du regret d’avoir fait telle chose” (“you will regret having done such a thing”). Others often say, when it is night, “on ne voit plus goute” (“you can’t see a single drop”), never imagining that they are making a mistake. We should not be speaking of drops at all, except if we refer to something that flows or trickles, such as oil, wine, or water. Unless you insist on using improper words that are in use, you should say, “on ne voit plus” (“it’s too dark to see anything”), or il fait nuit (“it’s night”). [. . .]

33. In Buffet’s text, each of the linguistic lessons appears as a short paragraph with no punctuation to clearly distinguish between the linguistic error and Buffet’s commentary on it. Buffet will often begin an observation with an introductory expression such as “Many people say” without using quotation marks around what is said. In the interest of greater readability, I have placed those words and phrases that Buffet introduces as direct speech in quotation marks. As I have wished to provide readers with a bilingual version of each observation, both French and English examples are in quotation marks with the French first. For the sake of greater clarity, I have italicized the words or phrases in each of the examples that Buffet is specifically correcting and have used parentheses to separate languages. Throughout this translation, I have chosen to transcribe Buffet’s French as it appears in the original text, only silently correcting those spellings which the reader might take as typographical errors. 34. “Mesque” is a contracted version of “mes que,” or “mais que.” Here Buffet follows Vaugelas (162– 63), who states: “Mais que, pour quand, est un mot dont on use fort en parlant, mais qui est bas, & qui ne s’écrit point dans le beau stile” (162). See Claude Favre de Vaugelas, Remarques sur la langue française: Utiles à ceux qui veulent bien parler et bien écrire (Paris: Pierre Le Petit, 1647; rpt., Paris: Editions Ivrea, 1996), 403–4. The page numbers for Vaugelas are from the 1647 edition, as are all other references to the Remarques.

New Observations on the French Language 55 A number of people have a manner of speaking that is so provincial and old-fashioned. They say of a man, “il est courtois envers les Dames” (“he is courteous toward the ladies”). These words, courteous and toward, are old style. You should say, “il est civil & obligeant aux Dames” (“he is civil and obliging with the ladies”). [. . .] Speaking of a man who is fin (shrewd), there are those who say, “il est bien madré” (“he is very crafty”), a word that is old and ridiculous.35 [. . .] It is a laughable to say, “Gagner la bonne grace de quelqu’un” (“Get in someone’s good grace”). You should use the plural and say, “Gagner les bonnes graces” (“Get in someone’s good graces”).36 [. . .] “Cette personne a le visage tenebreux, ou brun” (“That person’s face is gloomy or somber”). Both are well received. [. . .] Never imagining they are making an error, many say, “il est tombé d’accord de cette affaire” (“he fell into agreement about this affair”), and other such similar things. You should say, “demeuré d’accord” (“was in agreement”). [. . .] A good number of people still use this term that is very ill-bred, “je n’ay bougé de la maison, il ne bougea de sa chambre” (“I didn’t move from the house; he didn’t move from his room”). You should say, “on n’a point sorty de sa chambre, de sa maison” (“he never left his room, or his house”), and so on in the same way. [. . .] We often say, “enquestez vous de cela” (“investigate this”). You should say, “enquerez-vous, ou informez-vous” (“inquire into this, or get information about this”). [. . .] Speaking of a visit, we say, “une visite à la cavaliere” (“a casual visit”) when it is brief. When visits are quite long, we call them “des visites à la pedantesque” (“pedantic visits”).

35. Madré,” meaning “crafty” or “sly,” is decried by Buffet as “a word that is old and ridiculous.” “Madré” also describes wood that has a mottled, veined, or marbled appearance, and this meaning is still in use. The use of “madré” to mean “crafty” may have come about because marbled wood essentially plays a trick on those who look at it—it is not what it seems. 36. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Gaigner la bonne grace” (249).

56 MARGUERITE BUFFET Using new terms, we now say, “nous prendrons le bain à la Romaine” (“we will take a bath in the Roman style”); we also say, “ils prendront le bain à la bourgeoise” (“they will take their bath as the bourgeois do”). Since we know that a bath was a luxury for the Romans, this shows us that people of quality take them differently than do the bourgeois. We no longer use the word “Poulet” (“a love letter”). We usually say “Billets doux”.37 “Belle comme un Astre” (“As beautiful as a star”) or “comme un Ange” (“as an angel”) are both correct. This expression, “d’en verité” (“in truth”), is very much used. It is well received in both speaking and writing. This term is now much in use and new; when a woman exerts a certain attraction, we say, “elle a bien du revenant” (“she seems like a spirit that walks or haunts a house”). [. . .] When a woman is learned, you may say to her with good grace that “elle a merité le premier rang au Parnasse” (“she has merited the first rank in Parnassus”), not that “she is another Plato or Aristotle,” as some people do. [. . .] Speaking in the proper style, we refer to “un regal de conversation” (“a diverting conversation”), or “on nous donne un regal de musique” (“they provide us with a feast of music”). As to whether to say “un beau poil” (“a nice coat”), or “des beaux cheveux” (“beautiful hair”), both are good. With regard to the wigs that women attach to their hair, we do not say “coins” (“hair locks”) as many do. You should call them “apossetiches” (“extensions”).38 “On a fait ce qu’on a pû pour adoucir cet homme” (“We did all we could to soften this man”). Using a newer term we say, “On a fait ce qu’on a pû pour l’humaniser” (“We did all we could to civilize or to humanize him”). For a woman who likes to gain knowledge (cultiver les sciences), we often say that she is a “femme de lecture” (“a woman who reads”). You should say she is a “femme de cabinet” (“a studious woman”).

37. Buffet notes that “poulet,” an old term for “love letter,” has been replaced by “billet doux” (literally, “sweet note”). The use of “poulet” to describe a love letter appears to derive from the way these missives were folded, with two tips that looked like chicken wings. A similar word use occurs in Shakespeare’s Love’s Labor’s Lost (first published in 1598). In Act 4, scene 1, a love letter is intercepted by the Princess of France, who orders her attendant, Boyet, to open it: “Boyet, you can carve; / Break up this capon.” 38. A postiche, or “topper,” is a kind of hair extension designed as a clip-on hairpiece. Buffet’s “apossetiche” may be etymologically linked to apostille, meaning a note or addition in the margin of a book, derived from apostiller, to write in the margins.

New Observations on the French Language 57 “Il a illustré sa naissance par ses belles actions, il a fait cette action pour illustrer sa famille” (“He brought renown to his lineage through his fine deeds; he did this deed to bring fame to his family”). We use these terms in correct style. [. . .] “Je ne vis jamais personne” (“I have never seen anyone”) or “Je ne connus jamais personne” (“I have never known anyone”) who plays the lute with such good grace as you do.” Both are good.39 The richly decorated alcoves of fine40 ladies are what we call nowadays “des resides enchantées entre les plus jolies” (“the most pretty and enchanted of nooks”). While this phrasing seems a bit affected,41 it is well received. [. . .] This word encanailler (to keep ill company) is beginning to come to the fore. For example, we say, “je ne veux point m’encanailler de ces gens-là” (“I have no desire to associate with such people”) to mean we do not want to see these people. Even though it is not often used, this term is well received. [. . .] “Cet homme est chagrin, ou cet homme est melancholique” (“This man is morose, or this man is melancholic”). You should say “melancholic”, for although these two are different, the distinction between them is not often made. Seeing a woman who is lacking her usual gaiety, we say, “qu’elle est toute desorientée” (“she is all out of countenance”). The term is quite good. [. . .] When people do not get along with each other, we often make use of the word gronder (scold). This term is not generally accepted, so you should say, “ils sont broüillez” (“they have fallen out”) or “je suis broüillé avec cette personne” (“I have fallen out with this person”).42 [. . .] Speaking of the beauty of an oval face, we no longer say in the correct style, “c’est un visage long” (“it is a long face”). You should say, “c’est une ovale achevée” (“it is an oval brought to perfection”), when it is a beautiful one. If it is round we say, “c’est une beauté à la Romaine” (“she is beautiful in the Roman style”). 39. The spellings of the verbs are, again, those of Buffet’s original seventeenth-century edition. 40. The French is curieuses. It may mean rare, excellent, neat, or, as I have translated here “fine.” 41. The French term is précieux. The decorated alcoves described were in fact those frequented by the précieuses, an epithet for women which became a pejorative term for a certain affectation in speech and manner, most famously parodied in Molière’s play, Les Précieuses ridicules (first performed in 1659). This description of a ruelle, or alcove, refers to the kind of neologisms the précieuses were renowned for inventing. 42. The French gronder can describe thunder rumbling, or a peevish person grumbling. Here, Buffet is referring more specifically to meanings such as scold, reprimand, spurn, repulse, or “snub.”

58 MARGUERITE BUFFET “Cette femme est de belle taille, elle a un beau maintien” (“This woman is of pleasing height; she has a fine carriage”) is not correct. You should say, “cette femme a bonne grace, elle a tout le bel air qu’il faut avoir” (“this woman has good grace; she has all of the graceful demeanor one ought to have”). Those who speak properly do not say “un poil rouge” (“red hair”). We say “un poil ardent, ou un blond doré” (“sandy, or golden blond hair”). [. . .] “Cette personne est fiere, ou cette personne est arrogante” (“This person is proud or arrogant”). This word “arrogant” is rude, and we seldom use it. You should say “proud.” Speaking of a woman who has invented or discovered something we say, “elle est l’inventeuse de cela” to mean “elle est l’inventrice de cela” (“she is the inventress of that thing”, to mean “she is the female inventor of it”). [. . .] To describe a man who flatters a woman with good grace, we no longer say, “il sçait bien dire la fleurette” (“he knows how to whisper sweet nothings”). You must say “il entend la belle galanterie” (“he proffers pleasant gallantries”). [. . .] If a learned man, whose speech is not all grace and politeness and who only talks of heavy and serious things, is among women, they will say that this man has an “entretien provincial” (“a provincial manner”). This is a very nasty way of speaking, whichever way you look at it. In the provinces there are some very clever and quite accomplished people. We can use another term and say that the man has an “entretien pedantesque” (“a pedantic manner”). [. . .] When a woman is fâchée (angry), many still say that “elle est outré jusques au coeur” (“she is provoked to the core”). This phrasing is rude and outdated. You should simply say “fâchée” (“angry”) or “affligée” (“afflicted”). [. . .] Speaking of some letter that is well written, we say “cela est bien dicté” (“it is well indited”). Others say “cela est bien couché par écrit” (“it is well couched in writing”). Neither is good. You must say “cette personne dit bien par écrit” (“this person speaks well in writing”). People who speak correctly speak in this way.43 [. . .] To know which is better, “cet homme est docte” (“that man is erudite”) or “cet homme est sçavant” (“that man is learned”), both may be used without error, although sçavant, (learned) is used more. 43. This observation highlights the conflation of speech and writing in Buffet’s Observations and in the culture of the salon, where conversation and its attendant naturalness, not erudition, was valued.

New Observations on the French Language 59 For example, this word ortodoxe (orthodox) is excellent, but it is best not to make use of it on too many occasions. [. . .] You must beware when speaking of terms that resemble one another. You must say, “une armée florissante, & un arbre fleurissant” (“a flourishing army, and a flowering tree”), and any other flowering thing.44 Many pronounce [the French word for “cemetery”] as “ceumetiere,” others “cemetiere.” You must pronounce it “cimetiere.” You must pronounce [the French word for “navigate”] as “naviger” and not “naviguer.” We often say [the French word for “extraordinary”] as “extreordinaire,” for “extraordinaire,” which is good. We also say [the French word for “ridiculous”] as “rediculement” and “redicule.” You must say “ridicule” and “ridiculously.” These are quite noticeable faults among people who speak well. [. . .] Many say, “j’ay pris la hardiesse de vous parler de telle chose” (“I made free to speak with you about something”); “j’ay pris la hardiesse de vous escrire” (“I made bold to write to you”) which is very bad style. You must say “liberté” (“liberty”) both when speaking and in writing with people above you and equal to you in degree.45 [. . .] “Je ne hante point, & ne frequente point ces gens-là” (“I no longer haunt nor frequent these people”) are old and ridiculous ways of speaking. You must say, “je ne voy plus ces gens-là” (“I no longer see these people”). “Il danse des mieux, il chante des mieux” (“He dances best, he sings the best)” is no longer said. You must say, “Il danse & chante fort bien” (“He dances and sings very well”). [. . .] Possible, pour peut-être (Possible for perhaps) is not good.46 [. . .] We often say, “cette affaire m’est tres importante” (“This matter is very important to me”). You should say, “cette affaire m’est de la derniere consequence” (“This matter is of the utmost consequence to me”). 44. A flourishing army is one in the prime of its youth and brilliance, from the verb fleurir. 45. The French word translated as “degree” is condition, variously rendered as condition in life, state, nature, circumstance, status, rank, or “degree.” 46. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Possible, pour Peut-estre” (149).

60 MARGUERITE BUFFET “Je n’ay pas le loisir de faire telle chose, je n’ay pas le temps” (“I do not have the leisure to do this or that; I do not have the time”). Time is more in usage. [. . .] “Cet homme est joyeux, cette personne est joyeuse” (“This man is joyous; that woman is joyous”). These old terms are no longer in use in good style. You should say, “gaye, ou de belle humeur” (“merry, or in a good mood”). [. . .] Which is better to say, “une bierre, ou un cercueil” (“a bier or a coffin”)? Either one may be used. “Elle est superbe ou orgueilleuse” (“She is proud or arrogant”). Superbe (Proud) is more in use.47 [. . .] Some still say, “il est couroucé contre vous” (“he is raging against you”) to mean “fâché” (“angry [with you]”). You may say, “la mer est couroucée” (“the sea is raging”) “& les vents sont en courroux” (“and the winds are raging”) and not otherwise. [. . .] Esclavitude, esclavage (Slavitude, slavery) are both good.48 [. . .] Saying, “Cet homme est fortuné” (“This man is fortunate”) to say he is “heureux” (“happy”) is good and elegant. [. . .] Incognito (incognito) is very good and very much in use.49 [. . .] Some still use this wretched word, “il m’a taxé en ma reputation” (“he taxed my reputation”). You should say, “il a mal traité ma reputation” (“he abused my reputation)”. What really offends me is that this word taxé (taxed) has no place here.50 47. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Superbe” (31). 48. The word “esclavitude” appears to have been invented by François de Malherbe, who preferred it to “esclavage.” Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Esclavitude, esclavage” (403–4). 49. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Incognito” (464–65). Vaugelas comments at length on this Italian term, noting that it does not change with gender or plural form, and that it should be pronounced with the accent on the last syllable (“incognitò”) (465). 50. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Taxer” (221). Buffet gets very angry about the misuse of “taxer” and on this point she is in agreement with Vaugelas, who states that the use of the financial term “taxer” as a synonym for verbs such as “blame” (blasmer) and “rebuke” (reprendre) is not acceptable “dans le beau langage” (221). The Académie Française, however, disagrees, stating that “taxer” can be used in both contexts because they are easily distinguished from each other. “C’est fort bien parler que de dire, taxer quelqu’un d’avarice” (AF, 242).

New Observations on the French Language 61 [. . .] For the word supplier (to humbly beg), we do not use it except with regard to kings and queens. You should say, “je vous prie” (“I entreat you”) in speaking and in writing, and take care not to use supplie (beg) except when referring to sovereign powers. So many people fail to make this distinction.51 [. . .] Some still say, “Cet homme a bon renom” (“This man has good fame”) which is quite barbarous; you should say, “bonne reputation” (“a good reputation”). [. . .] Conjoncture (Conjuncture), to express a good or bad chance event, is very good and comes from the Italian. [. . .] Nonchalamment (Carelessly) is an old word no longer in good use. You must say “negligemment” (“negligently”). However, nonchalant, nonchalance, (careless and carelessness) are both good.52 [. . .] Seriosité (Seriosity) is a new word, which is in use and which is well received at Court.53 [. . .] When referring to authors [they are reading], many say, “chez Aristote, chez Coëffeteau” (“At Aristotle’s, at Coeffeteau’s”). You should say, “dans Aristote, dans Coëffeteau” (“In Aristotle, in Coeffeteau”) you will find this or that thing.54 [. . .]

51. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Supplier” (221). 52. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Nonchalamment, loisible” (242). Although Vaugelas opposed it as “un vieux mot,” the Académie Française would later beg to differ: “Nonchalamment est un fort bon mot que la Langue conserve & qui s’employe avec grace en beaucoup d’endroits” (AF, 263–64). 53. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading Seriosité (254–56). Buffet briefly notes that the word is “new” and “well received at Court.” Vaugelas also approves of it in a more lengthy discussion (254–56), saying that “un de nos plus fameux écrivains [Guez de Balzac] s’en est servi dans son nouveau recueil de lettres” (“one of our most famous writers has already used it in his new collection of letters”) and that “il ne lui faut plus qu’un peu de temps, joint à la nécessité et à la commodité qu’il y aura d’en user, pour l’établir tout à fait” (“it only needs a little time, added to the necessity and the convenience that there will be of using it, to establish it completely”) (255). In addition, “seriosité” can be seen as analogous to “curiosité”—“car comme curiosité se forme de l’adjectif curieux, aussi seriosité se forme de l’adjectif serieux” (255). The Académie Française, however, opposed “seriosité” (AF, 278), rejecting the analogy with “curiosité.” 54. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Chez Plutarque, chez Platon” (297–98).

62 MARGUERITE BUFFET Many still say, in speaking and in writing, “recevez mes obeïssances” (“with all due respects”). It is only good in the singular. You must say, “with all due respect.”55 [. . .] Some say “cupidité” (“cupidity”) and some say “convoitise” (“covetousness”). Both are good.56 [. . .] “Il veut ambitionner cet honneur, cette charge” (“He ambitiously seeks that honour, or that position of responsibility”). This manner of speaking is no longer received. You must say, “He hopes for or he desires that position or that honour.”57 [. . .] “Si par hazard, ou par avanture vous faites telle chose” (“If by chance or by accident you do this or that”) are terms so old that they are only used by the meaner sort. [. . .] Temperament (temperament) and temperature (temperature) are two words with quite different meanings. You should not mix them up, for temperature refers to air and temperament to people.58 [. . .] Here is one of the most barbarous terms that many people from the provinces use. They say, “cet homme est riche comme tout” (“this man is as rich as anything”). This manner of speaking is quite ridiculous and barbarous. You must say, “beaucoup” (“very”) or “grandement” (“extremely”) rich. [. . .] Regarding a zealous man, people say, “il voudroit se sacrifier, & s’immoler pour votre service” (“he would sacrifice himself, and even make himself a laughing stock for your sake”); “ sacrifice himself” is better and more pleasant59 to the ear.60 [. . .] You must also say and write, “orthographier” (“to spell” [with an i]) and not “orthographer [without an i].” Orthographier is the true spelling and the better received among all people of letters.61 55. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Mes obeissances” (353). 56. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Cupidité” (339). 57. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Ambitionner” (346). 58. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Temperature, temperament” (74). 59. The French is doux. Buffet often uses doux, that which is sweet or pleasing to the ear, as a justification for her language preferences. 60. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “s’immoler à la risée publique” (120–23). 61. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Orthographe, Orthographier” (112).

New Observations on the French Language 63 [. . .] “J’ay grande veneration pour cette personne” (“I have great veneration for this person”); we only rarely use this word veneration anymore. You must say, “j’ay un grand respect” (“I have great respect”). [. . .] Vomir injure, vomir des blasphemes (To vomit insults, to spew blasphemies); these words are well received even though they do not seem very pleasant.62 [. . .] When a man is very galant [gallant, a courtier, a great gallant or beau, genteel, fine, brave, polite], provincial people use the following term; they say, “cajoleur” (“a coaxer”), which means nothing. You may say “civil, galant” (“his behaviour is civil or polite”), which are more pleasing63 terms and better received. C’est un railleur, c’est un moquer (He is a jeerer, he is a mocker); jeerer is better.64 Ce lieu est fort étendu ou spacieux (This place is vast or spacious). One is as good as the other. [. . .] Many people say, “on exaucera votre priere, votre demande” (“your prayer or your wish will be answered”). You must say, “on accordera” (“will be granted”). It would have been correct if we said, “God will answer your prayer or your wish,” and not people. [. . .] Many people say, never thinking they are in error, “il peut sept, huit personnes dans ce carosse, il peut dix, douze personnes dans le rond de cette table” (“the coach can seven or eight women” or “the table can ten or twelve women”). You should add, “il peut tenir” (“the coach or the table can hold”). This is not the place to cut off words. [. . .] When speaking of numbers, we no longer say, “septante, octante, nonante” (“three-score and ten, fourscore, fourscore and ten”). You should say, “soixante & dix, quatre-vingt, quatre-vingt dix” (“seventy, eighty, ninety”). There are merchants who still cannot correct themselves.65 62. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Vomir des injures” (127–28). 63. The French is doux. 64. According to Guez de Balzac, “La bonne Raillerie est une marque de la bonne naissance . . . ; [elle] est un effet de la raison vive et réveillée” (“Good banter is a mark of good birth . . . ; it is a result of a lively and aroused intelligence”). See Jean-Louis Guez de Balzac, “Du stile burlesque” (Entretien 38), in Les Entretiens de feu Monsieur de Balzac [Interviews with the Late Monsieur de Balzac] (Paris: Augustin Courbé, 1657), 425. I thank Jean-Louis Haquette for this reference. 65. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Septante, octante, nonante” (420).

64 MARGUERITE BUFFET [. . .] “On ne sçait à qui avoir confiance” or “on ne sçait en qui avoir confiance” (“We do not know to whom we can put our trust,” or “we do not know in whom we can trust”). You should say, “en qui” (“in whom”). [. . .] Par avarice, & ambition (By avarice and ambition) means nothing. You should repeat by and say, “By avarice and by ambition.” Here ends the first part, which I have not extended further for fear of being tedious. I have thought it enough to focus on the most common mistakes made in French to aid people in the correcting of them using my precepts.

against those who speak too much, and the advantages to those who are sparing of words. On the subject of Pleonasm66 which follows People who are well versed in literature have always condemned overly long speeches, however fine and eloquent they might be, saying that the real secret of speaking and writing well is knowing how to express much with few words. Such is that wonderful discourse, ingeniously embellished with short sentences, which the most eloquent people employ with good grace; it is like an expensive watch that has been scaled down by the expert hand of a skilled watchmaker who knows, having industriously practiced his art, how to put together a diminutive timepiece of exquisite delicacy that encloses much in very little space, becoming more precious and more highly regarded than if it were larger. There are many people who are convinced, secure in the opinion that their thoughts are all beauty and eloquence, that they cannot be considered annoying if they produce them for the pleasure of all those who are listening. Even before a crowd, they think long speeches are best; having so many profound things to say, they believe these things must be aired in public to add even more luster to their reputation. It must be admitted that these people have been struck by an intolerable sickness that makes them stray from that course followed by the wisest politicians, captured in that fine maxim: “To speak but little,” who know how to make the most of their time and words. This fine advantage of speaking little is the chief praise that has always been given to the wisest and best minds. We see that those who are sparing in their speech are listened to in the same way as, in past ages, those great oracles that were like lesser gods among the vulgar sort caught in the grip of pagan error. It cannot be said enough how much those who are circumspect in speech have the upper hand over big talkers, as the wisest 66. “Pleonasm” is a synonym for redundancy. Buffet will examine linguistic redundancy and superfluity in the Second Part.

New Observations on the French Language 65 politician certainly knows when to be silent or how to speak in moderation and within the time allotted, as well as about those things that are deemed necessary. We see that those who have attained this degree of prudence know how to make use of their words, always leaving their auditors wanting to hear more. This only doubles the esteem that we have for them, for when things are less common they move our spirits more and add to our desire. One great emperor perfectly understood the value of those who spoke little; he never followed the advice of those who spoke too much, believing that it was impossible for a big talker to keep a secret and not to keep the wherewithal to harm on the tip of his tongue. Socrates asked three things of his followers, and the first and foremost was to speak little. Pythagoras, the philosopher, so immersed in the abstract, aspired to such a great moderation in speech that he only admitted as his disciples those who had undergone the ordeal of silence for five years.67 The Lacedaemonians had few laws, and spoke very little, which underscores that truth, that we should not be too harsh on those wise men who say that there is more work in knowing how to be silent than in speaking too much.68 A great king of Mesopotamia was once obliged to receive Roman ambassadors, who were astonished that he didn’t speak. They asked him why he was so quiet, and he answered that he often regretted speaking too much, but never regretted remaining silent. We know that Numa Pompilius established a tenth Muse, which he named Muta, and even wished that she be acknowledged the mother of all the rest.69 67. Diogenes Laertius, in his Life of Pythagoras, says of the philosopher’s disciples that “[f]or five whole years they had to keep silence, merely listening to his discourses without seeing him, until they passed an examination, and thenceforward they were admitted to his house and allowed to see him.” See Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, vol. 2, trans. R.D. Hicks (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1925; rev. ed., 1931), 329. The works of Diogenes were translated into French by François de Fougerolles at the beginning of the seventeenth century (Lyon: I.A. Huguetan, 1602). 68. The Lacedaemonians (i.e., the Spartans) practiced a form of prayer known as euphemia (silent worship) that was embraced by Socrates. See Plato, Alcibiades II, 149b, trans. W.R.M. Lamb (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927; rev. ed., 1955), 267. 69. Numa Pompilius (753–673 BC) was the legendary second king of Rome, who established many of the city’s religious and political institutions. When Buffet refers to his establishing “a tenth Muse,” she is alluding to the fact that there are nine Muses in the Greek Pantheon; Plato (Greek Anthology, 9.506) famously calls the poetess Sappho a “tenth muse” as a form of ultimate compliment. Buffet, however, draws on a story in Plutarch’s Life of Numa, in which the king prescribes devotion to “one Muse in particular, whom he call[s] Tacita, that is, the silent, or speechless one; thereby perhaps handing on and honouring the Pythagorean precept of silence.” See Plutarch, Numa, 8.6, in Lives, vol. 1, trans. Bernadotte Perrin (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914), 333. “Tacita” is in fact the same figure as “Muta,” and is a figure in Ovid’s Fasti, 2.571–616. Originally a very talkative and indiscreet nymph named Lara, she learns of one of Jupiter’s many amours and informs his consort, Juno. Jupiter punishes her by removing her tongue, rendering her mute (“Muta”), and condemns her to live in the silent realm of the Underworld, thus turning her into “Tacita” (“the silent one”). Muta is impregnated by Mercury, who has been assigned to escort her to the Underworld, and she gives birth to twin deities,

66 MARGUERITE BUFFET All these examples, even if from the distant past, show that speaking little has always been commendable, since we see that among the pagans this fine maxim was always regularly observed. Even nature teaches us this truth, having given us two ears, and only one tongue to teach us to listen more than speak, and this is why the tongue is positioned underneath the brain, which is the seat of judgment, to show that our speech should be sparing and in agreement with reason before being uttered. The tongue is the organ of good and of bad, by its sobriety or by its intemperance, and this is the reason that a wise man, renowned in antiquity, sent a tongue as a present to a king who had asked him for either the best or the worst part of his victim.70 As pieces of gold or silver have more value the lighter they are, so too the value of words consists in saying much with little. Speaking too much is one of the great troubles that disturb the smooth workings of society because it leads to the backbiting that tears apart reputations; it is very difficult to speak with such appetite without mixing jests and scorn, which soon leads to outright insult and slander. This significant fault makes people fall into a narcissistic pleasure in their own praises, just as a famished man looks about for something to eat, and makes a meal of his own flesh, devouring the Lares, who guard the crossroads of Rome. In saying that Numa wished Muta to be acknowledged as “the mother” of the other Muses, Buffet may have misinterpreted Muta’s role as Mater Larum, the “Mother of the Lares.” Buffet would have been able to read Plutarch in the translation of the Lives by the distinguished bishop and scholar Jacques Amyot (1513–1593) and published in 1559. Françoise Frazier and Olivier Guerrier state that in translating both Plutarch’s Lives and Moralia, the latter in 1572, Amyot not only broke ground by working directly from the original Greek text, but “he played a part in establishing the literary credentials of the French language.” (Buffet also draws from the Moralia in both Observations and Praises.) See Frazier and Guerrier, “Plutarch’s French Translation by Amyot,” in Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Plutarch, ed. Sophia Xenophontos and Katerina Oikonomopoulou (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2019), 421. Ovid’s Fasti appeared in French as Les Fastes d’Ovide, translated by the abbot Michel de Marolles (1600–1681) in 1660. 70. This is a reference to a story in Plutarch’s Moralia about the Egyptian pharaoh Amasis: “So they say that when Amasis sent Pittacus a sacrificial animal and asked him to return to him that part of it which was at once the finest and the worst, the latter removed the tongue and sent it back.” The account is part of Plutarch’s commentary on Hesiod’s didactic poem Works and Days (written ca. 700 BCE). Here, Plutarch comments on lines 719–721, which read as follows in the original: “Among men, the tongue that is the best treasure is a sparing one, and the most pleasure comes from a tongue that goes according to measure: if you say evil, soon you yourself will hear it more.” [From Plutarch, Commentary on Hesiod’s Works and Days, in Moralia, vol. 15: Fragments, trans. F.H. Sandbach (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969), fragment 89, p. 193. The quotation from Hesiod is from his Works and Days, in Theogony; Works and Days; Testimonia, ed. and trans. Glenn W. Most (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018), p. 145.] Erasmus repeated this story in Lingua, sive, De Linguae usu atque abusu Liber utillissimus (Language, or the Use and Abuse of Languages, 1521), and a variation of it in his earlier Adages (1500); his versions are published in an appendix to The Unruly Tongue in Early Modern England, ed. Nathalie Vienne-Guerrin (Madison and Teaneck, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2012), 178.

New Observations on the French Language 67 by this means the core substance which keeps him alive, like the oil in a lamp that keeps the flame flickering; and over time this same man, lacking solid nourishment, sickens, and having corrupted the essence of his natural being, is carried off finally to his grave. It is even so with these great talkers who have ruined their own reputations and are banished from polite circles and ruelles71 because of the intemperance and looseness of their tongues. Speaking too much is also fatal in that it often interrupts the discourse of wise people, and in so doing prevents everyone else from hearing them. Such indiscreet talkers never know how to procure others’ sympathy, since they are the plague upon the most pleasant conversations. Great talkers never make friends, since they are the sworn enemy to any secret and to all discretion, the two principal elements of friendship. As they do everything to say too much, they are then outcasts, deserving no one to confide in them. They resemble the earth, which, just to let off vapours and exhalations from its bosom, turns away from the beams of the sun. Their sheer temerity and lack of consideration for others prevents them from participating in all the insights and charm that are part of a conversation of philosophers. In Scripture, their tongues are compared to the fire that devours all before it, and suffers nothing to exist beside it. The city of Athens was taken only because two old men talked so unguardedly that they revealed the weakness of their city; this information was brought to their enemy, Sulla,72 who in turn conquered the town, making himself master of it. To return to my subject, then, it is important in all instances of speaking and writing to avoid redundant terms, one of the greatest affronts that can be made against the French language, as it will be shown in the following discourse.

The Second Part Examining Pleonasm, or the redundancy of useless words, and the means of correcting it Excess terms, elegant and pleasing as they may be, are never well received. All those whose profession it is to speak the French language well condemn 71. The ruelles, (I.e. rooms where people engaged in conversation). 72. Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix (138 BC–78 BC) was a Roman general and statesman who revived the Roman office of dictator—providing a model for Julius Caesar, who followed his precedent. Here, Buffet refers to Sulla’s siege of Athens—ruled by the tyrant Aristion—in 87–86 BCE. According to Plutarch’s Life of Sulla, Roman soldiers “overheard some old men talking with one another, and abusing the tyrant because he did not guard the approaches to the wall at the Heptachalcum [located between the West and Sacred Gates], at which point alone it was possible and easy for the enemy to get over.” After this was reported to Sulla, he investigated the wall himself at night and, “seeing that the place could be taken, set himself to the work.” See Plutarch, Sulla, 14.1–2, in Lives, vol. 4, trans. Bernadotte Perrin (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1916), p. 369.

68 MARGUERITE BUFFET redundancy. For example, if you want to say, “This man is rich (riche) and wealthy (opulente),” one word has the same meaning as the other; consequently, one or the other is necessary.73 Or, rather than say, “There were about (environ) ten or twelve of us in this group,” you should say, “There were ten or twelve of us”; about adds nothing, being useless. Many say, “I was all alone (tout seul) in that affair,” or “I dined all alone today”; “I was all alone in my room,” or “I got dressed all alone.” In short, in a number of instances we use all completely uselessly. You should say, “I was alone in this business,” “I dined alone today,” or “I got dressed alone.” You must correct this all, which is redundant. So many people say, “I saw it with my own eyes,” as if you could see with someone else’s eyes, which is ridiculous. You should simply say, “I saw it,” avoiding redundancy. And there are still others who say, “I heard it with my own ears,” to say, “I heard it.” Others say, “He said that with his own mouth,” or “He wrote in his own hand.” This way of speaking, with these redundant terms, is not good usage. You should say, “He said this,” or “He wrote this,” full stop.74 And we still say, “This person is very neat (propre) and tidy (ajustée).” You should say, “This person is very neat”; the other word adds nothing, being useless. “I have thought (pensé) and wondered (songé) about you.” You should simply say, “I have thought about you,” for adding wondered is useless, having the same meaning as the other. “This person loves (aime) and cherishes (cherit) you tenderly.” Only one or the other is needed, both in speaking and writing, as these terms mean exactly the same thing. [. . .] So many people say, “When I am no longer your friend, as I am (comme je suis),” or “When I am no longer obliged to you, as I am.” You should simply say, “When I am no longer your friend,” or “When I am no longer obliged to you.” [. . .] Speaking of dress or other things, many provincial people say, “Il est tout fin neuf” (“It is brand spanking new”) which means nothing. You must say, “This suit is new.” 73. In this section, I have chosen simply to provide in parentheses the crucial French word or words to enable the reader to understand the point of the lesson. In most cases, I have refrained from providing the entire example in French for the sake of simplicity, since Buffet’s lessons on redundant language work as well in English as in French. 74. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Unir ensemble,” a section on pleonasm and superfluous words (157–60). Vaugelas uses the examples “I saw it with my own eyes” and “I heard it with my own ears.”

New Observations on the French Language 69 [. . .] We often say that this woman has so much vanity (vanité) and pride (gloire). These two terms have the same meaning, so you should say only either one or the other. [. . .] We say that this woman is humble (humble) and she is submissive (soumise), which says exactly the same thing; consequently, one or the other is redundant. [. . .] There are so many people from the provinces and others who say, “Ils sont riches comme tout, il est brave comme tout” (“They are as rich as anything; he is as decent as anything”); in short, in thousands of instances we use this ridiculous way of speaking. You should say, “They are very rich,” or “He is very decent.” [. . .] Instead of saying, “Cet homme est fâcheux, voire mesme insupportable,” (“This man is peevish, even intolerable”) you should say, “This man is peevish and intolerable.”75 We hear people say, “He knows how to play the harpsichord perfectly (parfaitement) and learnedly (sçavamment).” One word is redundant, and that is a fault.76 [. . .] “This woman has a desire (desir) and a longing (envie) to speak with you”; these two terms have the same meaning, so one is redundant. There are people who cannot speak without using excess words, which are simply wrong. They will say, “This man is not at all punctual, and he is slothful (lâche) and lazy (paresseux),” all of which mean the same thing! “He signed the contract with his hand.” You should simply say, “He signed the contract.” And others say, “It is true that he confessed with his own mouth (de sa propre bouche),” in order to say, “It is quite true that he confessed.” [. . .] Writing “Henry quatre, Louis treize, Louis quatorze,” (“Henry four, Louis thirteen, Louis fourteen”) is acceptable, despite what the partisans of Monsieur de Vaugelas say to the contrary.77 75. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Voire mesme” (42–43). 76. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Des mieux” (123). 77. In his discussion under the heading “Quatre, pour quatriesme, & autres semblables” (123–24), Vaugelas opposes the use of cardinal numbers to denote kings, popes, etc. “Quelle grammaire, & quel mesnage de syllabes est ce là?” he asks. The Académie Française, however, disagrees: “Henry quatre, Charles sept, . . . sont des façons de parler generalement receuës” (AF, 217). Buffet is in the Académie’s camp here.

70 MARGUERITE BUFFET It is therefore important for those women who wish to speak the French language well to avoid making these errors, since there is nothing so opposed to the beauty of familiar discourse than redundant terms used in either speaking or writing.

Concerning corrupt and badly pronounced words, and the advantages enjoyed by women who speak with exactness Those who know the principal means of reaching perfection in spoken French are right in saying that it is not enough to avoid vile or old words or even to get rid of redundant terms. There still remain a large number of corrupt and badly pronounced terms that you will encounter in the following treatise which represent a real obstacle to speaking your own language properly while adhering to the appropriate rules. It will be easy to correct yourself using these lessons that I have made convenient and easy for women. It is not hard to believe that all those women who possess this noble advantage of speaking correctly are highly esteemed, seeing as they are called the patrons of eloquence. They shine with as much glory and pomp as the most famous orators, and receive the same honour. Their conversation is sought out by the most excellent minds, as if they carried with them, like another Tullia,78 a treasure trove of fine speech, having acquired the secret of making themselves as celebrated and heeded as did, in the past, the great Roman orators, who had the art of winning people over and persuading whomever they wished by the force and the enchantment of their fine speaking. Doors are opened to these illustrious women wherever they go. They are deferred to like queens, in court circles, in the alcoves, and in the most elevated conversations. When they enter a room, they are seen as stars lighting up the whole assembly. No one ever disputes their rights. Those who are glad to learn from them give way to them happily; those who are charmed when they hear such elegant speech overwhelm them with courtesy and hasten to cover them with praises. In short, these women receive all the glory and praise that are given to those who are the most perfect in this world. Finally, these illustrious women are powerful, and I dare say that they merit very nearly the same honors given by those in the past who could not bestow enough praise on the Roman emperors when they entered in triumph, after having conquered their nation’s enemies. They threw roses and lilies at their heads, quantities of flowers testifying to their rejoicing and the respect that they owed to these monarchs. To return to my subject, it is impossible to describe the effect good speech can have on the mind. It is the supreme master. If it hands down laws, they are never severe; they are observed with pleasure and without resistance. Its force is 78. On Tullia, see note 16, and Praises, 115.

New Observations on the French Language 71 so powerful that thousands of elegant pens have labored to show us how much might and splendor it has. Among the orators who have shone with such admiration, we know that after they have spoken, there remains no opposition to their point of view. They know how to soften the severity and pride of monarchs and often baffle the ambitious designs harmful to the preservation of monarchies. I remember the story of that Roman, who, after Caesar had decided not to pardon him, but as soon as Cicero had spoken, saw the sentence of death disappear into thin air, finding mercy at the moment he was fated to die.79 Without looking for examples at such a remove, every day we see so many excellent minds in the law courts, who, with potent rhetoric, pluck justice from the sky, bringing it down to earth to punish the guilty and defend the oppressed innocent. We could say that they can perform whatever miracles they wish. They know how to resurrect the dead. They easily obtain mercy for criminals. They know how to quench without difficulty80 the burning coals of anger in families where injustice reigns. In short, they are more powerful in having this lovely treasure of eloquence than Croesus81 ever was in possessing boundless wealth. To get back to my subject, it is not that I wish to force all women to apply themselves only to the study of speaking well. I know that they need to think about business that is more important to them. There are others whose position in society requires that they be called upon every day to participate in elegant conversation; these women appear obliged to cultivate themselves a little more than those who live more withdrawn from the great world. The point is that it is requisite for all kinds of people not to make mistakes in their native language. We should try to avoid becoming the object of mockery when we can, since we see how very ridiculous people can be in their way of speaking. It will not be an ineffective use of time to apply oneself to remembering this lesson.

The Third Part Treating corrupt and badly pronounced words, and the means of correcting these errors I see many people not only making mistakes in the French language, but also pronouncing it so badly that it seems as if they rob each word they utter of a couple of syllables, never articulating the final ones which are most necessary to render the sound of the words. They often do this out of habit, or because they are 79. Possibly a reference to the consul Marcus Claudius Marcellus, who supported the optimates (a group seeking to maintain the authority of the Roman senate) in their struggle against Julius Caesar. 80. The French is sans peine, that is, without ado, difficulty, trouble, or without toil or labor. The key is that eloquence should appear easy, flowing, and without obstacles. 81. Croesus was king of Lydia in the sixth century BC, and renowned for his wealth.

72 MARGUERITE BUFFET unaware that it is always in good taste to clearly articulate your words, since clear articulation is the principal ornament to speaking well. [. . .] There are still some who do not know if you should say, a portrait or a pourtrait. You should pronounce it as portrait for the noun and portraire for the infinitive of the verb.82 Many say segret, and segretly, pronouncing a G, which is very bad. You should say secret and secretly. Some also say vacabonds when you should say vagabonds.83 [. . .] I very often see mistakes in pronunciation when people say, segond, and segondly; there are even women for whom it is such normal usage that they cannot write it otherwise. You should say, second and secondly. [. . .] Here is a rather delicate term where you should be on your guard for the pronunciation. We often say anagram, but you should pronounce and write it anagramme.84 We no longer use this word bigearre and bigearrerie. Everyone at Court says bizarre (fantastical) and bizarrerie (fantasticalness).85 [. . .] With regard to in the first place (au prealable), or firstly (prealablement), you should leave these words to pettifogging hair-splitters. [. . .] Many people still get this following pronunciation wrong: you should pronounce cangrene and write gangrene.86 [. . .] Bend (ployer) and fold (plier) seem to be the same, but they are two different things. You should say “Bend (ployer) the knees,” and, when speaking of laundry, “Fold (plier) the laundry.”87

82. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Portrait, pourtraict” (340–41). 83. These examples are discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Gangreine,” which also includes “secret” and “vagabond” (361–62). 84. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Epithete, equivoque, anagramme” (26–27). As he notes: “Anagramme est toujours feminin” (27). 85. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Bigearre, bizarre” (330). 86. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Gangreine” (361–62). 87. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Ployer, plier” (410–11).

New Observations on the French Language 73 To consume (consumer) and to consummate (consommer) are also two different things. For example, with regard to marriage, you should say consummate; otherwise, you should say, “He consumed his entire fortune.”88 Many say, pourcelain, but you should say, porcelain. You should be careful with the following pronunciation, as it is not the same as in the written form. For example, you should write ingredient, inconvenient, expedient, efficient. And in speaking, you should pronounce an A, saying, ingrediAnt, expediAnt, inconveniAnt.89 [. . .] Many people think they are correct in saying occean. You should say ocean and not pronounce -oc. A number of people still make a mistake in pronunciation when they say deligent, and deligence. You should say diligent and diligence, emphasizing the final i. [. . .] In legal parlance we say submission, but you should say soumission, which is better.90 You should also say an intrigue, and not an intrique.91 A number of people from the provinces say sigory for chicory. [. . .] Others say to perzecute for to persecute. The pronunciation of the Z is pointless.92 There are many who still lose an S, saying satify (satifaire) and satifaction (satifaction). You should make the S sound, and say satisfy (satisfaire) and satisfaction (satisfaction). [. . .] I have heard so many people make mistakes pronouncing the verb to buy (acheter). For example, they say and write, “I bought (ajeté),” “You will buy (ajeterez),” or “He bought (ajeté).” In short, throughout the conjugation of the verb, they pronounce a Y for an H, which is simply ridiculous. You should say, pronouncing the H, “To buy (acheter),” or “Let’s buy (achetons) it.”93 You should say and write a half-hour and a half-dozen, and not simply a half. [. . .] 88. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Consommer, & consumer” (300–2). 89. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Ingredient, expedient, inconvenient, & autres semblables” (29–30). 90. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Soumission, & submission” (25). 91. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Intrigue” (126). 92. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Persecuter” (114). 93. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Acheter” (318–19).

74 MARGUERITE BUFFET If you wish to know whether to pronounce belief as croyance or creance, know that you should write croyance, but pronounce the word as creance, which is better.94 Without ever imagining that they are making a mistake, many say redicule and rediculously, instead of saying, ridicule and ridiculously, with an i. [. . .] Someone will say Wednesday as Mecredy and the other will say Mercredy. You should say the latter, which is better. [. . .] A very great number of people, never imagining they are making a mistake, say, “Open the ormoire,” when you should say armoire, because it is an armoire. How many people still get this pronunciation wrong: one person will say cemetery as cemetiere, while the other will say ceumetiere; neither is good. You should say, in French, cimetière. [. . .] Regarding the pronunciation of D, it should ring throughout the conjugation of the verb to admire. The D is pronounced also in adjudication, administer, and adverb. I know that we write to adjourn, and to adjoin, but you should not pronounce the D in these cases. [. . .] There is also the pronunciation of X, which is one of the most beautiful sounds in our language. Those women who speak correctly never forget to pronounce it, although a very great number of other people forget to do so. For example, those people will say estremity for extremity, estremely for extremely, estraordinary for extraordinary. In short, in different situations, they forget the importance of articulating this letter. Infinitives also are pleasing when emphasized in speech. Infinitives are all those terms that end in -er, -ir, and -oir, such as to love (aimer), to dress (habiller), or to wish (vouloir), among others. Whenever you pronounce an infinitive, you should make the last syllables resonate just a bit, as this greatly contributes to the pleasing quality of your speech. There is still a very important remark to make. For those who wish to speak pleasingly, and who are at ease with the idea of joining those who speak our language with complete exactness and grace, there is a rule of good pronunciation that it is important to follow. You should note that in all words in which there are many Y’s, you need to sound this vowel a bit by placing the emphasis upon it. For example, you should say, a reconciliYation, precipitaYtion, civilizaYtion or facilYty, civilYty. 94. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Croyance, creance” (541–42).

New Observations on the French Language 75 [. . .] There is another vowel, A, which has the singular grace of being a little bit lengthened in the words where it is found the most, where only the ear can distinguish this appealing quality, such as in the following the words: admirAble, admirAbly, agreeAble. In words where this vowel sounds most, you should lengthen the A that is in the middle of the word a bit. This renders speech more fluid and gives it an extremely pleasing air, and contributes also to the beautiful tone of the voice when you take care to make good use of this vowel. While knowing exactly how to make use of these advantages and by correcting corrupted terms and those that are badly pronounced, it is still necessary to well regulate the tone of the voice. There are people who raise their voices so much that it seems they are always speaking to deaf people. Their speech loses all of its graceful appeal and wounds the ears of those who listen to them, making them even more bothersome in conversation. There are others who go to the other extreme, keeping their voice so low and speaking so slowly that you would think they were always sick. As a result, they lose the gracious ability to enliven what they are saying and do not give the same impression—nor are received in the same manner—as those who possess that elegant tone of voice which keeps to the middle, that is to say, neither too high nor too low. All those who speak correctly agree that the tone of voice is one of the most beautiful and pleasing parts contributing to the perfection of good speaking. This advantage holds the key to all the best expressions of orators. Not one of them would be perfect if they were shorn of this ornament. The most skilled conversationalists, as were the orators among the Greeks and Romans, are keen to regulate their voice well, as this is the first and sole means of making a strong impression on their auditors, and ensures that their discourse is like manna from heaven, dropping into the ears of those who hear it. If the tone of the voice must have its measure and rule to render speech pleasant, pronunciation is its principal ornament and adds the finishing touch to the perfection of speaking well. This is why it is important for those who teach young people how to read to take into account good pronunciation for reading well. Changes in the tone of voice while reading aloud are among the most important parts of good reading, and I hold that it is very difficult for those who have not learned to read well to ever learn to speak well. There are so few people who read effectively that out of one hundred there are no more than four. You should therefore note when reading that all the infinitives should be strongly pronounced. There is also the pronunciation of the letter X that is, as I have mentioned, one of the most beautiful in our language, where I remarked that people often forget to pronounce it at all. It is easy to regulate the tone of voice once you have been taught. For example, a comma means stop without stopping, that is to say, for just an instant. The period is quite different. It means stop by changing the tone of voice, either

76 MARGUERITE BUFFET by raising or lowering it, both of which are equally good. I do not want to enlarge upon this subject, but I will say that our ear needs to be our principal judge in this case. It only takes listening to yourself and doing the same when reading aloud, so that when you are reading you should sound as if you were telling a story to a friend in conversation. As for foreigners who esteem the French language, and who are in quest of any means to become skilled in it, as well as any help to make it easier to learn, both in the pronouncing of it and the acquisition of the rules for speaking the language well, they will find here very clear lessons which will help give them the possibility of avoiding a great number of errors they commit against this language. I have taught some foreigners who have understood the rules quite well and made few mistakes, but they have great difficulty in pronouncing certain terms correctly, especially those words with A and Y. They do not pronounce words containing these two vowels in a natural manner, which means that the adjoining words they do pronounce better, the ones without those vowels, are stripped of all grace. Having examined in detail all these kinds of faults, I have worked to remedy them in the easiest way. I have also noted something all foreigners have in common, which is that, in those words in the feminine terminating in E, which have no sound at all, they have difficulty achieving proper pronunciation. After having examined everything carefully, I have worked to provide my students with correct order and necessary remedies through an easy to understand method. This method will give them the means of being heard with as much ease as if they were native French speakers. I can teach whoever wishes to have a perfect knowledge of French in very little time, and I will leave the tools to those wishing to see and examine them in written form. We know that we have five vowels that give sounds to all the words of our language, and without which we could not pronounce any word with so many of the consonants we put in them. If foreigners fail to pronounce well those words containing more A’s and Y’s, it is clearly because there are fewer of these vowels in their language than in ours. They therefore have had less practice making the sounds of these vowels, and part of the real pleasure of our language are these vowels, and those who know best how to articulate their words always strongly pronounce them. The reason I have made all these remarks is that, having slighted all other languages, I have wished to concentrate on French, which I have cultivated as much as possible, noting the faults of various people so as to correct those of the men and women who wish to use my lessons.

Regarding terms that are poorly adapted, and the use one should make of time This final section treats terms that are poorly adapted to a given situation and the mistakes we make when we confuse the proper meaning of words. After

New Observations on the French Language 77 closely reading the lessons in the following section, it will be easy to correct these errors. A great number of people fail to use the proper word either out of habit or because they are too lazy to look up the rules of proper speech. I beg them to take into consideration the fact that an eloquent person prevails over the minds of others, and that excellent speeches are powerful enough to force all those with whom a woman mixes in society to accept her opinions. Such a woman will see that nothing is more important to her advancement and her fortunes in society than the proper use of words and the art of parceling out in a pleasing way her thoughts in conversation. It is then that she appears sociable, and engages in the most important affairs of well-bred life, where she may overcome and triumph every hour of the day among those men and women with whom she finds herself and whom she is capable of persuading about all things. This obliges me to speak again in favour of the art of eloquence. There are some arts that are less useful than that of speaking well, yet they are studied with great care, even though we do not need to use them every single hour of the day as we do speech, which is the true copy and faithful portrait of our thoughts and most mysterious secrets of our hearts, when words are set in order and followed by all the fine terms used by those who speak precisely. As I have shown in the preceding section, there is absolutely no doubt that these women achieve all they could wish for thanks to the charm of their eloquence. If it is important for women of good breeding to know how to enter and leave a conversation, it is no less necessary for them to know how to exchange letters and answer them in a graceful way, which is one of the highest accomplishments of civil life. I draw attention to the different parts of a letter when teaching spelling rules. I know that many look eagerly for the precepts needed to write a good letter, an art necessary for all kinds of people, so that they may not give any signs of their ignorance when they are obliged to write. My principal employment in life is to teach these precepts to those Ladies who honour me by calling on me. The rules of writing letters are no different than those for conversation. For if conversation is a faithful portrait of our thoughts, as our thoughts are portraits of all the players and all the actions of the theatre that is this world, the letter would be the portrait of that conversation intended for those who are absent. It is with letters that we give color and body to our conversations and our thoughts, and capture them in order to communicate them to our absent friends, or to posterity, which would be deprived of the secret knowledge of its ancestors. And so, as I hold conversation to be the original, it should serve as the rule for a letter that is its copy, which, to be a true and faithful one, should resemble conversation in everything. The rules of the one should be those of the other, so as to conform in style, in content, and in expression. Just as conversation is opposed to a style either full of inkhorn terms or too lofty, so is a letter. As a conversation is made of everything, so should a letter be. As a conversation changes depending on the subject and the people

78 MARGUERITE BUFFET involved, the letter should in like manner, to such an extent that even the tone of the voice should be similar. There are three essential parts in a conversation, like three generals to whom all the other rules report. The first is to consider who is speaking; the second, the subject about which that person is speaking; and third, those who are listening. As for the one who speaks, the discourse should always be appropriate to that person, with regard to his or her nature, age, profession, passions, in a word, all those characteristics that distinguish them and which, in keeping with this variety, should vary with every situation. The supreme degree of judgment and eloquence in authors is to make all kinds of people speak worthily and judiciously. This is why I say that all men are in the theater of our civil life, like so many actors who must fit their speech to that of the people they wish to represent. From whence come the excellent words addressed to Philippe by one of his courtiers, who saw him pretend to be a drunken clown.95 “Sire, aren’t you ashamed to play this part? You, who should be playing an Agamemnon?” When I see monks writing plays about love96 or treatises on the art of war, or shopkeepers deciding affairs of state, can I help but say something? Are you not at all ashamed of being so wise? Think of who you are! When I see young people playing Cato97 and criticizing the most ordinary actions, can I prevent myself from crying out? Are you not at all ashamed to be so wise, or rather, so foolish at your age? People who do not speak as they ought are speaking foolishly and are badly received. Treating of serious matters while joking, or joking while consoling friends, are the kinds of things that clash with the nature of their subject. This is why the second precept in a speech or a letter is to consider the subject at hand, so as to fit the speech to the matter. Things that are naturally of great consequence, such as the affairs of state, religion, morality, and other similar subjects, should be treated seriously, with respect, and with great diligence. Pleasant things, such as courtship, games, or pastimes, should be treated lightly,98 95. This is a reference to Philippe I, duc d’Orléans (1640–1701), the younger brother of Louis XIV. Buffet seems to have been aware of court activities and gossip in telling this unflattering anecdote about “Philippe”. 96. The French here is pièces de galanterie. Galant could describe a person who was noble, chivalrous, flirtatious, charming and, in this case, amorous. 97. Marcus Porcius Cato, also known as Cato the Elder and Cato the Censor, was known for his wisdom. Plutarch—whose Lives were translated by Jacques Amyot in 1559—devoted one of his biographies to the Roman senator. Details of Cato’s life were also to be found in Livy’s History of Rome, which had been reassembled by Petrarch; this Latin text was then translated into French ca. 1358 by the Benedictine monk Pierre Bersuire (ca. 1290–1362) at the command of Jean II, king of France. In 1440, Bersuire’s translation was inscribed in a beautiful illustrated manuscript commissioned by a nobleman from Metz; a later French translation based on the work of Bersuire was published in Paris in 1514. 98. The French is galamment.

New Observations on the French Language 79 and with merry and innocent speech mixed with harmless mockery. Harsh things need to be softened, sad things need to be varied with serious considerations, and so, in this way, other matters follow the judgment of the one who treats them, fitting his speech to the nature of the things he treats. Everything that is misplaced is ridiculous, such as to extol marriage to a nun, wax lyrical about the advantages of the single life to honeymooners, play the clown while giving comfort, cry at public festivals, or cite Greek and Roman law for a trifling, two-bit swindle. For the third precept, good sense and common usage furnish rules so stable and unchanging that it would have been necessary to have received no education at all to have failed to follow them. No one questions that you should speak with more respect and discretion before great ones to whom a certain reverence is due, with greater freedom and familiarity with parents and friends, and more haughtily before our inferiors and our enemies. This last precept, which teaches how to vary conversations according to the interlocutor, is too extensive and will take me too far away from my subject to treat it, since I am now only giving some counsel on eloquence to women. I then move on to the four properties that orators ascribe to public discourse and which are perfectly suited to conversation and epistles. For we only need to express our thoughts simply and clearly, as our thoughts truly and naturally explain the things with which they are concerned. These properties are clarity of discourse, brevity or precision, plausibility or probability, and, finally, facility and ease. Clarity makes the conversation intelligible; brevity prevents it from being too digressive and boring; plausibility enables it to be received by drawing attention and faith to what we say; but, as pleasure seasons all things, a speech cannot be pleasant and eloquent if it does not please while it persuades and if it does not shine with such spirit that we are taken by surprise. It is this last property that provides that easy sense, that grace and eloquence the whole world is looking for and which it adores when it finds it. Voiture was unrivalled in this respect in his letters. Clarity is necessary in a speech to be understood by those to whom we speak, so much so that it is pointless to speak without it, if the obscurity of our words means that no one hears us and serves only to confound the one who speaks in vain. Clarity and order are indispensable so as not be considered hateful and impertinent by those who listen to you. As discomfort99 curtails the pleasure we look for in conversation as soon as things become embarrassing and confused, you can be assured that you will lose everyone’s attention, especially the attention of those Great Ones, who are used to finding something sweet in all that is said to them. As for the due measure of the conversation, we should put in nothing redundant, only that which scrupulously adheres to and is not off the subject, which would make conversation boring and ridiculous. It is necessary to avoid 99. The French is la peine.

80 MARGUERITE BUFFET repetitions, parentheses, and everything that encumbers a speech or a letter by needlessly prolonging it. And, just as he who can win a victory with two thousand men would be wrong to bring one hundred thousand to the field of battle, so too he who can speak or write their thoughts in two sentences or in two lines would be ridiculous to add more. This is therefore a precept of conversation that renders it balanced and, in a letter, makes it as unified as possible, that is to say, not mixed up in a thousand different matters, but instead taking one thought and continuing with it and pushing it as far as it can go, having even a beginning and an end as appropriate to the same thought as possible. It is here that wit and judgment are shown most particularly. The way we write at the present time is very easy. It is a natural style and pleasing, and this elegant way of writing has nothing artificial or strained about it, being neither too learned nor too novelistic. And so it should be for conversation and for all things to have the charm that comes with this easiness and this graceful turn of phrase while speaking and writing well, which is the last rule of writing letters and making conversation. This rule does not proceed only from art, but also from natural gifts that give us pleasure in speaking and writing. To return to my subject, I am most pleased that this little treatise provides me with the occasion to compel women to scorn trifles so as to concentrate on better and more useful employments. Many, by neglecting these pursuits, lose any desire to become clever, and imagine that knowing how to speak and write well is only for bookish men. I admit that these occupations would be useless to us if we had resolved never to converse with anyone ever again, and decided to do without all that is the sweetest pleasure and the most natural environment of the best minds, which is conversation. It would also be unnecessary to learn the rules of order to explain our thoughts well in writing, if we had resolved never to speak by this means with those who are absent and deprive our faraway friends of the satisfaction of receiving our conversation in our letters. Therefore, even those who are the most indifferent to and most unconcerned with seeking after beautiful things agree that speaking and writing well are not the least of the arts we need to cultivate. We see a number of women who appear very clever, yet, when duty or necessity forces them to write to someone, they find themselves so embarrassed and so ignorant in carrying out this exercise that they have no clue from which end to begin; and this is not always due to a lack of wit, but rather to their having paid attention to other things which they imagined were more pressing. They are such bad organizers of their time and know so little how to esteem its value that they often give themselves up to a thousand exercises that are badly adapted to what they really need, never thinking twice as to how their time ought to be employed, and how much time they lose, since it is only by and through time that we can discover the beauties and charms of erudition when we make use of it and nurture it.

New Observations on the French Language 81 No one doubts that the insights and knowledge that we receive by studying letters100 is a means of leading us to wisdom and teaching us to control our passions and knowing how to reason in all of life’s situations. I admit that those who have a greater wit and have a different inclination than those I have just been speaking of, because of their application to the study of letters, find nothing they esteem more than the value of time. They well know what is worth the use they make of their time, so that we call them the precious housewives of time. They know how to make the most of the good lessons of Seneca.101 Even though this great man was in the error of paganism, he left us such wise thoughts and excellent arguments concerning the good use we should make of time in raising our spirits to the study of serious and solid things. We are often so blind and so caught up in present trifles that we never reflect that time passes, and that one of the most important things in life is to make good use of it. Every day we see those who have wasted time or who have been poor managers of it and who wish to buy it back, at any price, from those who have been thriftier in order to apply themselves to study. It must be granted that the person who said that the arts were more precious than diadems never spoke better. A learned man, making good use of the arts, finds within himself all that he could ever wish for, never knowing a bad hour in his life. There would be excellent arguments to add to this matter, but as I am only treating these things in passing, I do not want to play the philosopher here. My purpose is to persuade women to scorn trifles by lifting up their spirits a little toward the knowledge of good things, and being better managers of their time. They ought to remember the wisdom of the sage who said that we should never let any day of our life pass without it bringing some profit, whether to advance virtue by the application of good habits, or to practice the arts, or to make our vocation where God calls us. Finally, the wisest people have never found any philosophy more sensible than that of thinking carefully about what we should do with our time during the course of our life, which is so short that we do not ever have the time to begin to do nothing. As for myself, I would say that my time has been very usefully employed if I inspire women with the desire for the arts and virtue.

100. The French is bonnes lettres. 101. Lucius Annaeus Seneca (ca. 4 BCE–65 CE) was a Roman statesman, Stoic moral philosopher, and dramatist. Buffet refers here to his essay De Brevitate Vitae (On the Shortness of Life), written ca. 49 CE and addressed to his father-in-law, Paulinus. Despite the title of his essay, Seneca argues that people do have enough time to pursue a meaningful, purposeful life if they manage it properly and do not waste it on frivolous activities.

82 MARGUERITE BUFFET The Fourth Part, In which may be found remarks concerning some badly adapted terms, or terms whose meanings are confused with other terms It must be recognized that there is nothing so badly received in speaking and in writing than terms that are poorly adapted, running contrary to the meaning of the things that we wish to describe. For example, we say, “This man is frightfully (effroyablement) rich,” as if riches, which are in themselves quite pleasant, were frightful, a word inapt in this context. You should say, “extraordinarily” (“extraordinairement”) or “very rich” (“beaucoup riche”), which is better.102 There are others who often say, “She is” or “He is furiously fine (furieusement brave).” Fury is never dressed in handsome clothes. This is quite bad, so you should say, “She is” or “He is,” following the gender of the person, “extremely (extremement) fine in his or her clothes.” [. . .] There are people who speak with so little sense that if animals were able to speak they would express themselves with more reason. These women will say, “Cette maison a toute mon inclination” (“This house possesses all my affection”) or, in another situation, “Voila des arbres à qui j’ay donné mon coeur” (“These are the trees to which I have given my entire heart”). Is there anything less apt? You should say, “I love this house,” “I prize these trees.” Many people still misuse the term terror. They say, “Il est terriblement amoureu de cette fille” (“He is terribly in love with this girl”) or “[Il] prendre de la terreur dans un si belle passion” (“He is seized with terror in such a beautiful passion”). You should say, “He is very much in love with this girl,” which is much more appropriate for the situation. “He has the wit (esprit) of four or twelve” is not well received. It is better to say, “He has wit like an angel or like a demon.” [. . .] People cannot stop saying things like, “Cette étoffe est bien raisonnable pour son prix” (“This fabric is quite reasonable for the price”) as if the commodities themselves could speak and show that they possessed reason! You should say, “This fabric is not expensive (pas chere) for the price.” Other people, thinking themselves refined, will say, “He speaks” or “She speaks miraculously (à miracle).” You should say, “This person speaks very properly (fort juste),” or “admirably well (admirablement bien),” and either is as good as the other. Speaking of beauty, we might ask which word is better adapted: “This girl is as beautiful as a star or an angel.” I say both are possible. 102. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Horrible, effroyable” (362–63).

New Observations on the French Language 83 [. . .] Here is a term in current use: “Allumez le feu” (“Light the fire”) even if the word is not appropriate, since you really should be saying, “Light the wood.” As usage prefers fire, though, we must use it. Here is a place where many people make a mistake: “Cette femme a un teint le plus beau & le plus éclatant du monde” (“This woman has the most beautiful and most sparkling complexion in the world”). This is quite inapt. Whiteness never sparkles. Sparkling is only for diamonds and other precious stones. It happens that many people, seeing a person with an excellent memory, will say, “Cet homme a horriblement de memoire” (“This man is horribly endowed with memory”) which is very badly said. You should say, “This man has a capacious (beaucoup de) memory.” “He spends frightful (effroyable) amounts of money,” or “He is horribly (horriblement) tall,” are all ways of speaking that are quite ridiculous. You should say instead, “He spends lots of money (une grande dépence),” or “He is quite (extremement) tall.”103 [. . .] Others say, “An infinity (infinité) of people were at that place or in that assembly,” whereas you should say, “Many (beaucoup) people or a great many (grand monde) were in that assembly.”104 “Today I saw a woman whose dress was full of braveries (gallants).” You ought to say, “Today I saw a woman whose dress was covered in ribbons,” as the word braveries is inappropriate in this situation. [. . .] Many still make a great number of mistakes, both when speaking and in writing, because they do not distinguish between the masculine and feminine, which can be rather delicate in certain situations. Here are the means of correcting this mistake. [. . .] The masculine always has the advantage when many people of both sexes have said something or gone on a journey or taken a walk together. In these cases you should say, “They (ils) have said this” or “They (ils) have gone to that place” or “They (ils) have undertaken that thing,” and not “They (elles),” even when there are many more women than men. [. . .] Today, ship is masculine, whereas in the past it was feminine, which means you should say, “It is a fine (un beau) ship (navire).” 103. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Horrible, effroyable” (362–63). 104. Discussed by Vaugelas under the heading “Une infinité” (41).

84 MARGUERITE BUFFET It was debated a while ago at the Académie Française as to whether a comet should be masculine or feminine. It was resolved that a comet should be in the feminine, contrary to the Latin word, which is masculine.105 [. . .] Many women often make these errors because they lack instruction. They could easily correct themselves by reading these precepts that I have made as clear as I have been able. Since I have worked only for the instruction of women, I have tried to be informal, not wishing to embarrass them by speaking of things that are too exalted, which would have been quite unprofitable. I hope that by applying themselves by reading this little book, they will find it not too tedious, and benefit from the lessons on the French language, as well as from the diversity of aids to conversation and writing. I hope, finally, that they will discover, with a little practice, its utility, and cease to appear ignorant in an area where they should be at ease.

105. Buffet’s readers would certainly have been aware of the two comets seen over Europe not long before she published her treatise. The first appeared in November 1664 and disappeared in March 1665, while the second, “even brighter than the first one,” and with “a longer tail,” appeared just as the first one was dissipating “and stayed among the stars until mid-April.” Here, Buffet shows that she is up-to-date on matters of French language scholarship as discussed at the Académie Française or debated in publications such as the Journal des Sçavans. Sophie Roux, “The Two Comets of 1664–1665: A Dispersive Prism for French Natural Philosophical Principles,” in The Idea of Principles in Early Modern Thought, ed. Peter R. Anstey (London: Routledge, 2017), 98–146, at p. 98.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present The perfection of creatures consists in their resemblance and affinity to God, who is the source and first cause of all excellence and beauty. This is why we appreciate a portrait the more perfectly it reproduces the lineaments and expression of its original. It is certain that woman resembles God as much as man does. Whether we compare the sexes in terms of inward nature or outward grace, woman, like man, possesses the advantage of having been created in the image of the Divinity, both as to the soul and in its three noble faculties of intellect, will, and memory. Souls have no sex, so it follows that there is no difference between the inward beauty of a man and the inward beauty of a woman, and this beauty is an attribute of both sexes.1 As for the body, we might suggest that woman has something which raises her above man, since man’s body was formed out of clay, which is not in the least comparable to the material out of which woman was formed, for, as we know, the most robust part of a man’s body was used to shape the body of woman. To know the truth of the matter, we can submit to no better authority than to God, who assures us that the perfection of the universe depended upon the creation of a woman, the last of his works and his crowning glory. Without this excellent creature, the world would not have been so beautiful or so pleasant. Even the first man gives credence to this fact since we see that he did not admire the light of the sun, nor that of the stars, nor anything splendid and remarkable in the universe, until that moment a woman stood before him and he admired her as the object of his greatest pleasure. When we consider it, is there any more powerful and more convincing example of God’s will than the fact that the Eternal Wisdom brought a Virgin into the design of man’s salvation? The greatest kingdoms of Christianity, France and Spain, owe their faith and their purifying baptism to the piety of this sex, represented by two great queens, Clotilde and Indegonde, each of 1. The notion that “souls have no sex” derives from Saint Augustine’s statement in De Trinitate (On the Trinity), 12.7.12, that in the spiritual realm, man and woman “are renewed to the image of God, where there is no sex.” Augustine is commenting on Galatians 3:26–28, in which Saint Paul states that “in Christ Jesus . . . there is neither male nor female.” See Augustine, On the Trinity: Books 8–15, ed. Gareth B. Matthews, trans. Stephen McKenna (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 91. Domna C. Stanton and Rebecca M. Wilkin note that this concept appeared in Abbé Pierre le Moyne’s Gallery of Strong Women (Gallerie des femmes fortes, 1647) before being taken up here by Buffet in 1668. See Gabrielle Suchon, A Woman Who Defends All the Persons of Her Sex: Selected Philosophical and Moral Writings, ed. and trans. Domna C. Stanton and Rebecca M. Wilkin (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010), 6. See also Richard J. McGowan, “Augustine’s Spiritual Equality: The Allegory of Man and Woman with Regard to Imago Dei,” Revue des Etudes Augustiniennes et Patristiques 33 (1987): 255–64; 257.

85

86 MARGUERITE BUFFET whom laid the foundation stones of their respective kingdoms.2 How many more queens and princesses have hunted down error and paganism in so many kingdoms of Europe? Did the Roman Empire not recognize that it had received the true religion through the teaching and piety of an English princess, Helene?3 The Hungarians also acknowledge that they received this joy from Giselle when she married their king, Stephen I, who was later canonized.4 Did not the Muscovites receive the same grace through Princess Olga?5 How much do the Poles owe the daughter of Boleslas, Prince of Bohemia, Damburca, who refused to marry Mieszko, Prince of the Sarmatians, unless he converted to the Christian religion?6 This clever and virtuous princess turned to Pope John XIII for aid in converting her people, and the Holy Man sent Gilles de Paris, Bishop of Tusculum—a very learned man with a high reputation—to Poland as his legate to instruct the Poles in the most important aspects of our religion.7 Scholars have not forgotten Hedwig, Queen of Poland, youngest daughter of Louis the Great, King of Hungary and Poland.8 History has named this noble and illustrious princess the mother of learned women because she founded a college at the University of Krakow and was active in Poland defending and upholding the Catholic faith, which testified to her great zeal in converting her people, whom she won over both by her beliefs and by her marvellous bearing.9 2. Clotilde (ca. 474–ca. 545), whose husband, Clovis, king of the Franks, converted to Christianity in 496 at her behest; Indegonde, or Ingund (b. ca. 567), the wife of Hermenigild, prince and Christian martyr in sixth-century Spain. Both queens are discussed in the second part of Buffet’s Praises. 3. Helena, or Saint Helena, (ca. 250–ca. 330) was an empress and mother of Constantine the Great, the first Christian Roman emperor. 4. Gisela of Hungary (ca. 985–1065) was the sister of Henry II, the Holy Roman Emperor. She became the first queen of Hungary by marriage to Stephen I, who was canonized in 1083. 5. Olga (d. 969) was the wife of Igor of Kiev, ruler of Kievan Rus’ from 912 to 945, and ruled for almost twenty years after his death as regent for her son. She converted to Christianity after traveling to Constantinople, and is venerated as a saint in the Eastern Orthodox Church. 6. Buffet refers to Doubravka, or Dobrawa, of Bohemia (ca. 940–977), the daughter of Boleslaus I, duke of Bohemia, and duchess of the Polans by marriage. Dobrawa urged her husband Mieszko, ruler of Poland, to accept baptism in 966. 7. Pope John XIII and Gilles de Paris actually lived in different eras. Buffet makes an inadvertent error here by conflating two rulers, Dobrawa’s father, Boleslaus I (915–972), duke of Bohemia, with Bolesław III (1086–1138), duke of Poland. The brief pontificate of John XIII (who ruled from 965 to 972) was spent mediating a conflict between the Holy Roman Emperor, Otto I, and the noble families of Rome. It was not John, however, but Pope Calixtus II (r. 1119–24) who sent Gilles de Paris, or Gilo of Toucy (d. ca. 1142) to Poland as a papal legate. 8. Jadwiga, also known as Hedwig (ca. 1373–1399), was the first female monarch of the kingdom of Poland, reigning from 1384 until her death. 9. Hedwig and her husband, the Polish king Władysław-Jogaila, asked Pope Boniface IX (r. 1389–1404) to approve the establishment of a theology faculty at Krakow; the pope granted their request in 1397.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 87 We could fill volumes if we wanted to, numbering all the women who have received the praises of the greatest historians, not only for having accomplished great deeds in the name of Christianity and for converting entire peoples and nations, but also for having succeeded in the study of letters, and in governing states, not only in times of peace, but also in times of war, both foreign and domestic. This is why it is easy to come to the conclusion that women are as capable as men of occupying the highest positions. Allow me to speak of one of the first philosophers, Plato. This great man, whose divine name has never been blotted out after so many centuries, and who must have known good from bad and the strength and weakness of all things, spoke of women so honorably and so highly that he asserted that they could be employed in the same activities as men; and they are shown to be no less capable by Plutarch, whose book is entitled Virtues of Women.10 The great Origen, whose memory will always shine among the wise, taught women in his own era. He was right to say that they were as apt as men in interpreting and deciphering Scripture.11 Ancient and modern history brings to light a great number of women scholars and courageous heroines who have been admired throughout the centuries. There is no clime where they have not provided proofs of their erudition. Some have governed states with the most measured political prudence. Others have maintained people in that allegiance they owe their sovereigns. Others have handed down laws of sovereign authority and, by their prudence and sagacity, prevented the ruin of monarchies. A very great number more are rightly praised for their valor and the strength of their courage. Others have spoken and written so learnedly in prose and verse that there are great men who would be hard put to imitate them. The people of Asia were the first to freely recognize government by women, and this was well noted by the Roman emperor Claudian.12 We know that the Amazons were worthy commanders, and built the finest and most imposing 10. Plutarch’s essay De Mulierum Virtutibus, or On the Bravery of Women, appears in his philosophical work Moralia. 11. Origen of Alexandria (ca. 185–ca. 253) was the most important theologian and biblical scholar of the early Greek Church. His greatest work is the Hexapla, a synopsis of six versions of the Old Testament. Origen quotes from Romans 16:1–2, in which Paul commends Phoebe, a woman “in the ministry of the church” at Cenchrae who “assisted many,” including the apostle himself. As Origen goes on to state, “this passage teaches with apostolic authority that women are likewise appointed to the ministry of the Church. . . . women are to be considered ministers in the Church, and the kind who have assisted many and who through good services have merited attaining unto apostolic praise ought to be received in the ministry.” See Origen, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Books 6–10, trans. Thomas P. Scheck (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2002), 290–91. 12. Buffet probably means Claudius here; there was no Roman emperor by the name of Claudian. However, whether she means the more familiar Claudius I (10 BC–54 AD), or Claudius II (214–270), is unknown. Claudius II (Claudius “Gothicus”) clashed with Zenobia, queen of Palmyra, over supremacy in Asia Minor before his death; his successor, Aurelian, eventually defeated her forces in battle and captured her, although it is unclear whether he had her killed or exiled.

88 MARGUERITE BUFFET cities, such as Ephesus, among others, famous for its Temple, one of the wonders of the world.13 In the West and East Indies, queens were admired in government, and among the Lacedaemonians,14 women commanded men. History is filled with so many examples of famous and courageous heroines. Did not she, to whom France owes so much, show by her valor that nothing is difficult for this sex?15 Are not the Semiramises, the Zenobias, the Thomyrises, the Judiths, the Isabelles, and the Camilles at the head of triumphing conquerors?16 Illustrious women have flourished in the great Roman Empire as eminent as the Caesars. Some were cherished by their husbands, honored at the court, and adored by the people. Others excited the public envy by the brilliance of their virtues, and engendered that jealousy which is the greatest proof of merit. Look at the ancient registers of the Capitol to find August Marcia, the grandmother of Julius Caesar, who brought the republic back under the yoke of the monarchy, while nonetheless preserving that long succession of consuls and the royal spirit that originated in Ancus Marcius, one of the kings of the city of Rome.17 Julia, the aunt of this same Julius Caesar, married to Caius Marius, was an example of great fortitude during the afflictions of her husband, whom she supported with a heroic generosity. Aurelia, the mother of Julius Caesar, was eminently worthy to be the Imperial Queen. The care she took in the education of the first of the emperors would have clothed her in the purple had death not taken her beforehand while Caesar was at war with the Gauls. Augustus, the wisest of all the emperors, followed the advice of Livia in all the most important matters of the Empire.18 These illustrious women sparkled at the beginning of the Roman Empire like stars at the birth of the world, and all the others of which history 13. The Amazons were said to have founded Ephesus, whose temple—one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World—was dedicated to a powerful female deity, Artemis or Diana. Otrera, the first queen of the Amazons, is said to have established this temple (as recounted in Hyginus, Fabulae, 223 and 225). 14. I.e., the Spartans. “Sparta” was originally the name of the main settlement within the city-state of Lacedaemon. 15. Joan of Arc (ca. 1412–1431) was a French heroine and martyr of the Hundred Years’ War, burned at the stake in Rouen and later canonized as a saint. 16. Semiramis was a legendary Assyrian queen; Zenobia, a third-century queen of Palmyra; Thomyris, the legendary queen of the Massagetes in what is now Central Asia; and Judith, a Biblical heroine. “Isabelle” may refer to Isabelle of France (1224–1270), who founded a monastery of Poor Clares—the religious order founded by Clare of Assisi—near Paris with the help of her brother, Louis IX of France. Camilla was a huntress and warrior of the Volsci, an Italic tribe, who sided with Turnus against Aeneas and the Trojans in Virgil’s Aeneid. 17. Marcia, the paternal grandmother of Julius Caesar, “claimed to be descended from Ancus Marius, fourth historical king of Rome.” See Antony Kamm, Julius Caesar: A Life (London and New York: Routledge, 2006), 20. 18. Livia Drusilla (58 BC–29 AD), also known as Julia Augusta, was the wife of Roman emperor Augustus Caesar. She is also mentioned in the second part of the Praises.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 89 makes honorable mention are examples and models of perfection who indeed help us to see that women are capable of being raised to employments as noble as those of men. In our flourishing kingdom, the foremost in Europe since the birth of this monarchy, capable of satisfying the desires and the curiosity of all nations, how many venerable, clever, and learned princesses have shown the proofs of the beauty of their spirit? Their manly and heroic actions have often forced even those who have been most indifferent to them to put pen to paper, revealing a great number of excellent women learned in good literature.19 There are others who have been adored by the people for the luster of their reputation. Our historians well know that twelve of our queens, and two of our princesses, have governed the state as regents; four others, Adèle de Champagne, Blanche de Castille, Anne de Bretagne, and Catherine de Medici, were all regents twice, and the fourth, Catherine de Medici, was regent four times and so loved by the people that she was called the mother of the state.20 In our age, there are many ingenious and learned women, in this kingdom and in all parts of the world, who adorn their lives with heroic and praiseworthy actions. Historians who write about them find ample material to enlarge at length on such exemplary subjects. We know that in past ages many have written the history of illustrious learned women, giving us examples of a great number of those who have written and spoken so learnedly that they put the great men of their century to shame. I will mention just a few of these women at the end of this treatise. The fact that women are as skilled as men in everything is so well known that, as I would like to show in the rest of this essay, we cannot make any objections to the contrary. Now to speak more seriously, we know that all philosophers agree that all things have their opposites, and so they say that just as things are different and diametrically opposed, so too learning and knowledge are so, and that we know white in contrast to black, or light by gloom. And, just as shadows are perceived by means of bodies opposed to light, I say that it is by the vices and the faults that we impute to women that their virtues and their perfections are better seen and stand more in relief, and shine with even more brightness. Their enemies say that woman is an evil, albeit a necessary one for the keeping and preservation of men, who seek them with a kind of instinct befitting animals, common to 19. The French is belles-lettres. 20. Adèle de Champagne (ca. 1140–1206) was queen of the Franks, the third and last wife of Louis VII. Blanche de Castille (1188–1252) was queen consort of Louis VIII and mother of Louis IX (later canonized as Saint Louis). Anne de Bretagne (1477–1514), duchess of Brittany, was queen consort of France twice, through marriages to Charles VIII and Louis XII. Catherine de’ Medici (1519–1589), queen consort of Henri II of France and Regent of France from 1560 to 1563, was the mother of three French kings: François II, Charles IX, and Henri III. Both Blanche and Catherine are discussed in the second part of the Praises.

90 MARGUERITE BUFFET all beasts, and, consequently, against all reason. They say that women are errors of nature, and the prince of philosophers, Aristotle, calls them monsters.21 The divine Plato very nearly placed them in the category of irrational animals, and the wise Solomon, who was often in their company, said that there was not one who possessed prudence. He compared them to that abyss into which men hurl themselves to their wretched perdition. He said that all wickedness must be borne, except that of women. Those men who talk about them less harshly compare them to mules and she-goats, and equate the capricious humours of women with the foolish transports of these animals. To this they add a whole host of silly puns and proverbs as ridiculous and outrageous as they are unworthy of women. To reply to these very strong invectives using reason and logic, we must consider the origin of women. We must understand how their origin differs from that of men and see if women were formed and composed of other principles or elements. With regard to such hypothetical principles and elements, there is no book to leaf through, no index to consult, since the adversaries of women are clearly all in agreement that men and women are of the same kind. There is only more of this and less of that in different people that constitute the differences between the sexes. It is this that we observe, and it goes for men as well as for women. We must therefore look for the difference in their Platonic forms, which are infused into individuals and make them act, either by their own powers and without physical matter hindering them, or in keeping with the placement of the organs of the subjects they inform. As to organs, they are generally alike and there is no perceivable difference in the sexes. This is why there is no reason here to pause to consider these differences in their particulars. If the immaterial forms that make up the intellectual substances are infused into individual bodies by a superior principle from which they emanate directly, those substances are without doubt all equal in power, size, and movement. To believe that they are distinguishable, by order or by degree of priority or otherwise, or even that they are different or belong to one sex or the other, or that they multiply themselves, or among themselves, as do most material bodies, would be to impose upon the 21. Buffet is probably referring here to Aristotle’s comments in The Generation of Animals (De Generatione Animalium), 4.767b: [. . .] anyone who does not take after his parents is really in a way a monstrosity, since in these cases Nature has in a way strayed from the generic type. The first beginning of this deviation is when a female is formed instead of a male, though (a) this indeed is a necessity required by Nature, since the race of creatures which are separated into male and female has got to be kept in being; and (b) since it is possible for the male sometimes not to gain the mastery either on account of youth or age or some other such cause, female offspring must of necessity be produced by animals. See Aristotle, The Generation of Animals, trans. A.L. Peck (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1942), 401, 403. French editions of De Generatione Animalium, based on the Latin translation by Theodore Gaza (ca. 1398–ca. 1475), were published in Lyon in the very early sixteenth century.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 91 circle of philosophers an infinite multiplication of superior and inferior existences and imagine that souls and spirits of the imagination are masculine and feminine in the way material things are gendered, which would be a very foolish error. But if, as reasonable people and even as Christians, we concede that the principle by which souls are infused into the body is the Being of Beings, the eternal God whom we adore, and if our souls are the breath of God, we must necessarily imagine souls to be equal among themselves, with regard to size, strength, power, and goodness. And in the same way, we should consider that the means, the organs, or the instruments by which they act are also equal, as we have said above, and that these organs are generally alike, or only slightly different from each other. And there is not more difference between the sexes than there often is between individuals of the same sex. This is why we may, with as much reason as with truth, say that the sexes are equal in every way, and that we need to consider their differences by their deeds and by general and particular actions. But because our adversaries base the whole of their argument on the differences that are—or that they say exist—between the shapes of the organs and the mechanisms and all the different movements that they see or that are between the two sexes, I respond to them that there is necessarily some dissemblance, since the sexes are destined by nature to different purposes for the maintenance and preservation of the species, and that this has nothing to do with the actions that depend on the will. The virtues of the soul of each of the sexes are perfectly equal. Otherwise, souls and spirits would be dissimilar, which is in direct opposition with what we have shown above. Now, our adversaries state that the ventricles, the seams in the skulls, and the brains of the female are smaller and narrower than those of the male. Consequently, they fill up more easily and almost without any evaporation of those acrid, fuliginous, and biting humours that irritate the nerves and membranes of women more quickly and violently. And, because of the tightness of the seams in the skull, these humours carry women away into fantastical and sudden movements, which we see almost every day. I claim that rather than being prejudicial to their sex, these very traits raise them far above men, whose spirits and humours are infinitely more ponderous, and not easily stirred up and quickened. Who does not know that the most perfect quintessence is that which evaporates most promptly and which disappears into thin air if the vessels or limbecks22 containing them are not firmly sealed? And it is for this reason that wise and everprudent Nature so compressed and tightened the ventricles as well as the seams in women’s skulls, and principally those of the crown of the head. And do we not know as well that all compound things excel when all their parts move readily, and that machines are so much more admirable when their parts work together with the greatest velocity and when their springs move more 22. I.e., alembics. An alembic was an apparatus, composed of two vessels connected by a tube, used in the process of distillation.

92 MARGUERITE BUFFET briskly? And, on the contrary, is it not the case that all compounds, whether natural or artificial, are so much less praiseworthy in the execution of their actions when their parts move more slowly? This is well known by all geometers and observed by natural philosophers in various animals, principally in asses and oxen, which, even though they have huge heads, have neither brain nor spirit in them. Let men brag as much as they like, and let them glory in the greatness of their bodies and the largeness of their heads. They have this in common with the stupidest animals and the heaviest beasts. It is therefore certain, generally speaking, that women have more vivacity of spirit than men, and this is manifest everywhere in life where they are employed. It is this that the most excellent politicians, naturalists, and legislators have well known, having spoken of women in their laws exceedingly well. And, furthermore, as nature is more just, does she not show by the most perfect and most admirable of her work (namely, woman) that she has worked with much care, since she takes more time to make a girl than a boy, because more time is required to make a more perfect work than one that is less perfect? For this reason males may live after five, or seven months, as well as nine months of gestation, but nature needs a full nine months to finish her chef-d’œuvre, which is woman. And it is also by this admirable creature that God finished his work, or the work of his hands, as Scripture says, as has been mentioned above. It is plain that women have a greater share of the gifts of heaven and nature than men. They are more pious, they are more faithful in keeping their promises, more steadfast and enduring in that which they love. They surpass many men in beauty and in all perfections. This has been sufficiently proven both by the most expert authorities as well as the most gallant men, for all the reasons mentioned above, and so women need only combat the most thick-headed and outrageous of them. All that we have said up to this point pertains to the subject of men and women, and particularly their differences, both general and particular, as well as the different impressions they make because of some dissemblance between them, as well as between particular individuals of the same sex. And, after having proven all with reason and good authority, all that remains is to respond to the invectives of Plato, Aristotle, and Solomon. To do so, I say that history has shown us that Plato and Aristotle were exceedingly hated, not only by all the beautiful and most spiritual women, but even by those women who were only moderately so. For Plato got his name because he had shoulders that were triple, even quadruple, the size of other men’s.23 He was tall and bent over and had excessively long and 23. Plato’s name (from “platus,” or πλατύς in Greek) means “broad” or “wide.” Diogenes Laertius, the third-century biographer of the Greek philosophers, writes that “Plato” was actually a nickname, but how Plato acquired it is a matter of speculation. As an accomplished wrestler, he had a muscular build, which seems a likely explanation. Diogenes says that the nickname may have referred to the vast scope

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 93 large limbs. So he was very strong and won the prize for wrestling many times in the Olympic Games. He was dreadful to see. He had a very large head, fat cheeks, big, wide eyes and nose. He resembled a Cyclops, or some heavy or powerful dog’s body, rather than an honest man or a great philosopher. This is why it is not surprising that women hated him, to the extent that they could not look at him without horror. So, it is said, he saw no women because they could not bear to look at him! Consequently, it is not astonishing if in some parts of his works he criticized women harshly. He made many other impudent remarks touching a variety of excellent subjects, as everyone knows, and it is not necessary to repeat them here. As to his disciple Aristotle, who was the son of a doctor, it is certain that he is the prince of philosophers. He was one of the most exceptional and excellent men of the world for his mind, but as for his body, he was quite deformed, for he was very short and had a limp. He was a hunchback with twisted legs and short arms, and was without proportion in every part of his body. In addition to all this, he was a stutterer with a very ugly face, which is why all women rejected him. We should not be surprised as to why, for we know well that to be loved it is necessary to be well-made, or at the very least, not deformed. We must consider that all these reasons were part of the basis for the invectives that these philosophers have unjustly made against women. There is therefore no cause to be surprised, since not only were they disliked by women, they also had been often mocked, disdained, and harshly criticized by them, and so wrote many things against them, which they immediately retracted once they were safe from the violence of these women’s passions, as we see subsequently in their works. As for Solomon, there is no reason to be astounded that he, who had so tried God’s wisdom, should also speak badly of woman, the Divinity’s crowning achievement. It must be admitted that human nature was very perverse in him, since he abused, to his own detriment and harm, that wisdom which ought to have served as his glory and salvation. So we can trust nothing he says about women. It would be impossible for me, without writing a number of very large and thick volumes, to list here the names of the virtuous, prudent, noble, and very learned women who have shone in the admiration of their century, and whose lives have adorned the books of the most serious and most famous authors, who have written about them throughout history. This is why I will end my discourse with the names of some of the women of learning whom I have judged the most important in the pursuit of knowledge and in the literary arts.24 of Plato’s writings, or even his wide forehead. See Diogenes Laertius, Plato, Book 3 of Lives of Eminent Philosphers, vol. 1, trans. R.D. Hicks (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972), 279. The first French translation of Diogenes, by the medical doctor François de Fougerolles (ca. 1560–1626), was published in 1601. 24. The French is la science & les belles lettres.

94 MARGUERITE BUFFET Praise to the Glory of the Queen of Sweden25 I cannot think of a more noble way to begin a history of the illustrious learned women of the present century than by placing at their head the choicest ornament of our sex, Christine, Queen of Sweden. She is so commendable for her superior erudition and the excellent clearness of her intelligence that she could be taken for the Minerva of Europe.26 This august princess always believed that nothing raised earthly monarchs to the heights more than their wisdom, and that they could imitate God most closely only by approaching him through contemplation. She believed that those whom divine Providence had raised above other men were absolutely engaged by the laws of honor and conscience to become scholars, so as to serve as an example to their people and guide them to public happiness by passing good laws. Her first victories over the Germans and other Northern people were the fruits of her initial judgment and its exhortations. All the battles that the generals won under her leadership plainly showed that Mars is never happier than when he is led by Pallas. When the noble maid27 descended the throne from which she had promulgated laws throughout the north, it was to accede to an even more glorious sovereign power, more fitting to her sex, which was to reign over people’s minds with the strength of that eloquence which had laid as many nations at her feet as has been bruited about. She left off governing over men for whom Jesus Christ was no longer king, and founded an empire worthy of the scope of her courage. She wished to gain ascendancy over herself by changing her religion so as to reign forever with the King of Kings. No, I am wrong. Christine’s spirit still holds sway in the hearts of Swedes who remember and recognize the good she did them. She reigns in all the courts of the princes of Europe, where her guidance and precepts serve as rules for good government and her royal virtues as a model for all good princes who strive for the glory of imitating her. She reigns in the universal city that has always been ruled by wisdom.28 She reigns in the country of politicians where she has chosen to be lodged so as to be the arbiter of all the differences between the princes of Europe and the wise mediator who can restore universal peace among Christians. Yet the power of her eloquence has established 25. On Christina, see Observations, 49, and note 22. It is significant that Buffet begins the Praises with her biography and that she refers to Christina at the opening of her Observations. See also the Introduction, 31–32. 26. Christina was called “the Minerva of the North,” a reference to the Roman goddess of not just wisdom but defensive warfare (as opposed to Mars, god of offensive warfare). 27. The French is généreuse fille. 28. After Christina converted to Roman Catholicism and abdicated her throne, she relocated to Rome, where she lived for most of the rest of her life. In stating that Christina “reigns in the universal city that has always been ruled by wisdom,” Buffet is referring to Rome. There may also be an implied reference to Augustine’s “universal City of Christ” (City of God, 22.11).

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 95 her authority even more absolutely in the empire of letters, where she distributes glory to all authors who happily burn the midnight oil, once they have the joy of receiving her approbation. Her name will be faithfully enrolled in the temple of memory, to perpetuate the glory and the honor of our sex and leave behind a shining example to posterity of the most illustrious and wisest heroine who ever voluntarily abdicated the throne. Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle Schurman29 But to show you that the abilities of ladies do not appear only in royalty, we will choose, among an infinite number of learned women, Mademoiselle Schurman, the honor of her age and country. This erudite and unequaled maid acquired a towering reputation throughout the entire universe for having studied languages to such advantage that she earned the right to wield the sceptre with more glory than Mithridates, who knew them all.30 She knows how to speak twenty-two languages as fluently as the one her nurse taught her. Her prodigious memory has left the most learned men, as well as others who have wished to test its accuracy, rapt in astonishment. This illustrious maid is no less skilled in other disciplines. She has studied theology and philosophy in depth. I have even learned that she is consulted on certain doubtful points of theology. Her reputation is distinguished throughout Europe and especially in the Netherlands, Flanders, and Germany, which look upon her as perfectly marvelous. Her memory will be immortalized by the people who know her personally rather than by the French, who mention her only in their written narratives.31 Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle Scudéry32 It will have been fruitless to seek proofs of merit and learning among ladies abroad if I do not show that France is not beneath other nations in the glory of its heroes or in the learning and virtue of its heroines. Let Sweden admire its illustrious queen, and Holland its erudite Schurman. We find in the Sapho of our own time, the incomparable Mademoiselle Scudéry, more knowledge, erudition, and wit than in the Greek Sapho so extolled in antiquity.33 For whether we consider 29. On Anna Maria van Schurman, see Observations, 49, and note 23. 30. On Mithridates, see Observations, 49, and note 21. 31. The people Buffet refers to here appear to be those of Schurman’s native land, the Netherlands. 32. Madeleine de Scudéry (1607–1701), the renowned salonnière and novelist, author of Ibrahim, ou L’Illustre bassa (1641); Artamène, ou Le Grand Cyrus (with a portrait of herself as “Sapho,” 1649–53); and Clélie (with an influential carte du tendre or “map of love,” 1654–60). She also wrote Les Femmes illustres, ou Les Harangues heroïques (1642), a collection of heroines’ speeches. 33. Like Scudéry, Buffet writes “Sapho” rather than “Sappho.” The poet’s name was spelled in a variety of ways, even in Greek. See Joan DeJean, Fictions of Sapho, 1546–1937 (Chicago: University of Chicago

96 MARGUERITE BUFFET the beauty and fertility of her wit in the excellent creations of her works, or the source and delicacy of her judgment in the orchestrating of her stories, or finally, if we focus on the embellishments of her discourse, we find that she has created so much beauty that we cannot help but be struck by the wonder of the whole of it. What orator has better known how to unlock the secrets of the heart than this eloquent girl? Who is the poet who can match the majesty of her heroines with his own? Who is the historian who can write such narratives as hers, or the painter who can rival the lifelike descriptions of her palaces? As for me, when I see her writing in such a moving manner, I say that she cannot help but move minds, for she knows so well how to touch the heart. We also see that all those who know how to speak and write have so universally held her in esteem that they take her for the perfect model of good speaking and writing. The whole world reads her works with as much profit as pleasure so that we may say in her honor that she can only be unknown or overlooked by pedants or barbarians. The silence of this eloquent girl would have been more of a loss to the court than the suppression of one of the Academies of the kingdom. I would say more if I were not persuaded that she cannot be praised justly enough than by someone as well-spoken as herself. Her works will make her altogether admired by all those who know how to read. Praise to the Glory of Madame, the Duchess of Montausier34 All the illustrious women I have been talking about, while all very learned, will justifiably cede the highest place in their ranks to Madame the Duchess of Montausier for being the best one for the perfect letter-writing style. We see shining in her writing the sober gentility of the most graceful style that has ever appeared among the most celebrated authors. It is reasonable to say that we can truly see in the illustrious lady a new Cornelia,35 the most accomplished of all Roman women in her writing. Madame Montausier has written such rare and beautiful epistles that we find in them all that we could wish for in eloquence. The whole court is of the opinion that the incomparably worthy lady has no less grace and fluency in her writing than her famous Roman predecessor. There is something so refined36 in the care she takes in writing her letters, it is striking to behold. We see that Monsieur de Voiture and all the modern authors have still not found the secret of persuading so agreeably, nor of expressing their thoughts in Press, 1989). 34. Julie Lucine d’Angennes de Rambouillet, duchesse de Montausier (1607–1671), was the daughter of Catherine de Vivonne, marquise de Rambouillet, and married into one of the oldest families in France in 1645. She frequented the renowned literary salon at her mother’s residence in Paris, the Hôtel de Rambouillet, known as the chambre bleue, and inspired a collection of poems, the Guirlande de Julie, written by a group of poets in her honor and presented to her in 1641. 35. On Cornelia, daughter of Scipio Africanus and mother of the Gracchi, see note 93. 36. The French word is galant.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 97 such an orderly manner and with such charm and embellishment, as this learned and worthy lady has done. Her discourse is elegant, sumptuous, and borrows the idiom of the best orators, being well modulated and never forced. This is what is called that “wonderful way to write,” which can be seen in her to be at times more delicate or more audacious as she wishes it to be, and in relation to the subject matter she is treating. She knows how to expand upon her thoughts in a charming way, and to vary them with more serious and weighty matters which are no less lovely than those thoughts which shine more brilliantly. Everything she writes is so beautiful, and in such a splendid style, that the letters of the illustrious lady need to be admired as if they were themselves complete works. Those whom she has honored by sending them keep them safe as if they were precious objects. Praise to the Glory of Madame la Maréchale de La Mothe37 It is with as much truth as justice that ancient philosophers and historians have shown us on numerous occasions that women could be called to distinctions and employments as important as those of men. They have supported this claim with effective and powerful reasons and examples. Yet today we see a stronger and more illustrious proof of it in the person of Madame la Maréchale de La MotheHoudancourt, who seems to have been handpicked by a heavenly and miraculous mystery to be the governess of the greatest prince in the universe, Monseigneur le Dauphin. The King could not have made a more judicious choice of a wiser, more virtuous, or more enlightened lady to whom to entrust the primary education of his best-beloved scion, who is particularly precious as his stock will bear fruits fit to ensure happiness throughout the foremost Christian monarchy. In the midst of this beautiful dawn, France sees the bright star rise, which, while it advances, will spread its light and virtue throughout Europe. The King’s inclination toward martial glory, which will assure the happiness of the French people and at the same time amaze our enemies, is the first tendency that this illustrious governess nourishes in educating the most powerful monarch awaited in the world. She makes sure that he sucks the royal virtues of his august father with his milk, and we must place our hope in her care of him that a perfect wisdom will herald his coming of age. The illustrious and noble heroine drew from her family, and a glorious and magnanimous husband, only lofty feelings, worthy of being inculcated into our young conqueror. Her emulation of Monsieur le Maréchal de La Mothe, whom she saw enlarge French dominions, and her passionate desire to share with him the glory of serving her King faithfully and nobly, brought her to court, where she received honors for her wisdom as high as those given to her family for its worthy actions in the military. 37. Louise de Prie, maréchale de La Mothe-Houdancourt (1624–1709), was the governess of the dauphin, son of Louis XIV, and of other children of the French royal family. She was married in 1650 to Philippe de La Mothe-Houdancourt, who was maréchal of France during the Thirty Years’ War.

98 MARGUERITE BUFFET But is it temerity on the part of a girl to want to express the high virtue and great qualities that the illustrious lady possesses, as much as for the heroic actions that have adorned her own life and perpetuated her own memory as that of her ancestors who so zealously served our kings? All of Europe knows that France is beholden to her family for a part of its happiness. France did not receive less joy when she was chosen to be the governess of our august Prince than did Macedonia long ago, when Aristotle was chosen to be tutor to Alexander the Great. And what is known throughout the world is that the illustrious governess rendered herself worthy of being chosen from among all the ladies of the court, by her virtues and her conduct, to keep and bring up the first Prince of the world, and that she is the honor and the example to our sex and the admiration of those who have the joy to know and to imitate her. Praise to the Glory of Madame la Maréchale de L’Hôpital38 For the ancients, Fortune is a blind, fickle woman who does not always take into account the merit of those to whom she offers her favours. Far from cossetting her and offering a large portion of her goods to her, I hold that Fortune was quite close-fisted with Madame la Maréchale de L’Hôpital. If that same Fortune had been more even-handed and enlightened she would without doubt have raised this illustrious lady, whose beauty of spirit and body were worthy of the first rank, to the throne. By way of the most important actions of her life, she has made sufficiently well known the force and the beauty of a spirit both as rare and enlightened as the one she possesses to the highest degree. After having seen the havoc wreaked in the wake of all sorts of extremely controversial events, her spirit developed with all the glory and advantage that she could wish for. Her excellent mind has such an extraordinarily penetrating luminosity that the illustrious heroine has always triumphed over those who have desired to injure her. You must go further into the matter to be persuaded of the truth that there are few in Europe with her strength, her temperament, and her virtue, much admired for her learning, and for so many excellent qualities associated with her. She still possesses that appeal, which is to know how to make herself loved by all those who meet her, which is the highest of all gifts and the most sought after in life.

38. Lucrèce de L’Hôpital (d. 1666) was born Lucrèce Bouhier de Beaumarchais, the eldest daughter of Vincent Bouhier, seigneur de Beaumarchais, and Marie Lucrèce Hotman. Widow of Louis de La Trémouille, marquis de Noirmoutier, she later married Nicolas de L’Hôpital, maréchal of France, in 1617.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 99 Praise to the Glory of the Comtesse du Plexis39 The virtue and the modesty of Madame la Comtesse du Plexis plucks the pen out of my hands and orders me to be silent, since I know that the illustrious lady does not like praises except when she distributes them herself. Yet since I know very well what I am doing, I cannot deny myself the satisfaction of rendering justice to her by publishing the truth, that she has more virtue, wit, and learning than the classical authors boasted of with regard to all their heroines. It is not enough to say that she is another Athena for her eloquence and for the excellence of her memory, which she possesses to the highest degree. This precious treasure, possessed by all gifted people, is to be found in such a large portion in this glorious heroine that it has inspired her with the desire to learn what is most excellent and noble in those elevated arts and disciplines to which she has always applied herself most diligently, loving the study of literature more than the entertainments familiar to those of her station in life. Her fine wit is discreet and proper, having only elevated ideas and disdaining toys and trifles. Her conversation is very pleasing. Those who know the measure of good things find much to glean from her. As she is very fluent and knowledgeable with regard to the very best subjects, there is an inexpressible satisfaction in the joy of being able to hear her reason so pithily and yet so universally about everything. She speaks with so much grace and passion that we are left with the wish that she should speak again so that we might be aroused anew to imitate her. Praise to the Glory of the Comtesse de La Suze40 Let us not brag anymore about the poets of antiquity, to the prejudice of our own sex, now that we see shine our French Minerva, the incomparable Madame la Comtesse de La Suze, the ornament of the court, and the marvel of our century, who speaks the language of gods so well that she merits being placed above men. It is with the unrivalled works of her wit, the delicacy of her thoughts, and the 39. Suzanne du Plessis-Bellière (1605–1705) was a marquise and author of a recueil (collection) de sonnets on the death of her parrot. She was close to Nicolas Fouquet, Louis XIV’s superintendent of finances, whom she tried to save from disgrace in 1661. An original member of the chambre bleue, she counted among her friends the painter Charles Le Brun and the grande dame of French letter-writing, Marie de Rabutin-Chantal, the marquise de Sévigné. 40. Henriette de Coligny (1618–1673), comtesse de La Suze, was a poet and salonnière. As the daughter of Gaspard III de Coligny, second maréchal of Châtillon, she was also the great-granddaughter of the Huguenot admiral Gaspard II Coligny, assassinated in 1572. Like both her father and her husband, the comte de Suze, she was originally Protestant, but converted to Catholicism. Her Poésies appeared in 1666. Claude François Lambert includes an entry for her in his Histoire littéraire du règne de Louis XIV (Paris: Prault fils, Guilyn, and Quillau fils, 1751), 3.9.13–16, noting that among her “plus zélés partisans” is “Mademoiselle Buffet” (3.9.13). On Lambert and his discussion of “dames sçavantes,” see note 50 to Buffet’s praise of Marie Dupré.

100 MARGUERITE BUFFET vigor of her expressions that the enemies of her glory and those envious of her reputation must be baffled. No one can dispute her place in the first rank among the finest wits of the age without letting on that they have no experience with the best things, and are completely ignorant in the art of speaking and writing well, since the music of her odes is more enchanting than those of Horace. I can add that her literary complaints are worthy of Ovid in his elegies. Everything she does, she does according to the rules. We want for nothing in her works, except, perhaps, that they be a bit longer and there be more of them. When you write as perfectly as she does, you can never write enough. But I am mistaken. Her writings serve as examples; they must therefore be rare. Praise to the Glory of Madame de Bonnevaut41 I am so utterly convinced of the competence of women that I was hardly surprised when I saw who in history had instructed learned men. Didn’t Aspasia teach Pericles, the famous Greek orator?42 She also gave lessons to Socrates, one of the great philosophers of his age. Behold here a new Aspasia, who will astonish you in the person of Madame de Bonnevaut, blessed with the most refined intelligence that has ever cultivated philosophy. She is extremely learned in the philosophy of Monsieur Descartes. No one has ever understood him with greater ease than this beacon of light. When she gathered the most erudite men together to meet at her home, this thoroughly learned philosopher appeared like a torch to give them the wisdom required to deal with philosophical questions, which she examined with such intense learning that she earned the admiration and approval of all present. Never has the philosophy of Monsieur Descartes been so honored or so esteemed than since it received the approbation of this illustrious lady, who dispelled the obscurity surrounding it by bringing it into the light of day forever.

41. Madame de Bonnevaux, or Bonneveau, was known for espousing Cartesian philosophy, a popular subject of discussion among men and women in the salons. As Erica Harth notes, “Contemporary accounts give the impression that from the 1640s to the 1660s the salons were beset by a craze for Cartesian philosophy.” Of Bonnevaux, however, who held lectures on Descartes at her home with the assistance of “Madame de Gredeville” (praised next by Buffet), “little trace of her activities” remains. See Erica Harth, Cartesian Women: Versions and Subversions of Rational Discourse in the Old Regime (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992), 64 and 65. 42. Aspasia is mentioned in the second part of the Praises; see p. 116.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 101 Praise to the Glory of Madame de Gredeville43 If, as in past ages, learned women occupy the highest ranks, I know no woman in Europe who deserves the place with more justice than the incomparable Madame de Gredeville. Her fine reputation has become enhanced today to an even greater extent among people of letters, who, more than others, know so well the merit of this illustrious woman of learning and appreciate the way the sheer ingenuity of her wit enables her to be so well versed in all the best arts. She is one of those women whom we might call one of the precious managers of time, since she employs the lion’s share of hers to the study of learning,44 which is her most pleasant pastime. It is known that she is extremely well versed in mathematics, has a considerable knowledge of astrology, and finds philosophy, geography, and all of history mere child’s play for her nimble wit. She knows many languages, and as for French, she speaks it perfectly. No one in her company can help but be enchanted. She is one of those women who know best how to join in and leave a conversation. As she is incredibly articulate she speaks about everything extremely well. Finally, nothing is more charming than conversing with her, nothing more refined than her discourse. Praise to the Glory of Madame de Miramminy45 There is no doubt at all that in this century there have been a very great many capable women who love learning, and yet who study and write without wishing to be known, either out of a kind of humbleness or some other concern that prevents them. Madame de Miramminy is one of these women. She received a good education and has always eagerly applied herself to the understanding of good literature, spending her most enjoyable moments reading, despising anything to 43. Buffet may well be referring to “Madame de Guédreville”: Marie Thiersault (d. 1686), wife of Sebastien du Bois de Guédreville and one of the “Cartésiennes” mentioned by Harth (Cartesian Women, 65). According to Somaize, Madame de Guédreville was instructed in philosophy, mathematics, and music. See Antoine Baudeau de Somaize, Le Grand dictionnaire des Prétieuses, ou, La Clef de la langue des ruelles (Paris: Jean Ribou, 1660; 2nd rev. ed., 1661). Marie-Frédérique Pellegrin writes that Madame de Bonnevaux presided at her “Cartesian salon” with the assistance of “her friend Mme de Gueudreville [sic]”; the renowned Dutch physicist and astronomer Christiaan Huygens stated that he “assisted in the lectures on Cartesian physics by Mme de Gueudreville at this salon.” See Pellegrin, “Cartesianism and Feminism,” in The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism, ed. Steven Nadler, Tad M. Schmaltz, and Delphine Antoine-Mahut (Oxford University Press, 2019), 565–79, at p. 571. 44. The French term is bonnes lettres. Cf. Buffet’s comments on the management of time, and “the precious housewives of time,” in the prologue to the Fourth Part of her Observations at pp. 80–81. 45. Buffet may be the sole source for this woman’s existence. Although she appears to be mentioned only by Buffet, we cannot discount the fact that Buffet may have misspelled her surname. Cf. Buffet’s spellings of the “Comtesse du Plexis” and “Madame de Gredeville,” as well as her identification of Bettisia Gozzadini as “Bestizia Gosadina,” at p. 114.

102 MARGUERITE BUFFET do with idle trifles. This illustrious lady is one of the most enlightened of the age. Her humility prefers that her works be kept away from the light. They are the most precious papers in her study, which she leaves in manuscript. The work being so excellent, I dare say that there is an injustice in her wishing to hide it. The public would be indebted to this illustrious lady if she were to present it as a gift, disclosing all the rare handiwork of her intellect. Praise to the Glory of Madame de l’Esclache46 If those who sit on thrones have their enemies, it seems inevitable that intelligent women should have them too. I do not find it at all astonishing that some unreasonably jealous men take it into their heads to make women their enemies and then wage continual war upon them. They want women to be sealed off in ignorance; they want them separated from any chance of possessing the wit and the inclination needed to absorb knowledge. Yet men have sufficient examples to think otherwise about women, given what historians have said about the remarkable things that have been done over so many centuries by so many active and illustrious women. If men are not fully convinced of these facts, I send them to the history of the present age, where they will learn how many skilled women there are today who write and speak so learnedly about everything. We see all the arts of the philosophers of antiquity blazing forth in the person of Madame de l’Esclache. This erudite philosopher is so wise and learned in her art that she has taken by surprise the bravest wits of the day, who would have doubted the depth of her understanding if they had not been present on the occasions when she has spoken and defended her theses, preeminent among the most cultivated people of Paris, where the most wondrous and most curious questions of philosophy were being discussed and where this learned Minerva could be seen to triumph with such erudition and eloquence, winning the hearts of her auditors as easily as their esteem for her mind. She has a grace and ease in expressing herself that is so pleasing, a pronunciation so natural, a tone of voice so appealing, that nothing can be added to this peerless woman. The days she spoke in public, all the leading lights of Paris would come to hear her. I do her justice when I say that she received no fewer praises to her glory than did the famous Greek and Roman orators of the past when they pleaded before the Senate.

46. Madame de L’Esclache, a seventeenth-century author, wrote works of philosophy under her husband’s name.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 103 Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle des Jardins47 All the learned men of the present time have held in high esteem the works of Mademoiselle des Jardins. To give her justice, we could say that she possesses invention that is as comely and bold in its handiwork as is ordinarily that of those who write best. The noble woman has worked in prose and in verse. She has had the advantage of having the productions of her fine wit admired even in the cabinets of great lords. Her prose is splendid and potent and her thoughts are enriched by incidents so interesting and lively it is beguiling. Her poetry adheres to the rules, and she is one of the best poets of the present age. Her poetic line is striking and cleverly conceived with regard to the subject she treats. This illustrious learned woman also has a precious treasure that is necessary for all women of learning, which is an excellent memory. Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle Guillaume48 All the learned pens of antiquity, which have written on behalf of women, will give way today to the learned Mademoiselle Guillaume, who has so ably found the secret of revealing women’s merit and shutting the mouths of those who do not want them to equal men in skill. This illustrious learned woman has just printed a book in which she proves, with very good and powerful reasons, that the feminine sex is better than the masculine one. She shows the difference between the sexes using such strong and well-reasoned arguments that she is unrivalled in this work. She notes with erudition the difference between the sexes in their nature and especially in gracefulness, where we find the special qualities of the feminine sex. These are investigations so wonderful, so curious, and yet so lightly treated that the work has received the approval even of the greatest enemies of women, who admit that nothing needs to be added and that it is so finished it appears that the eloquent girl went to work on it with much care. What she shows us of history is narrated truthfully in a pleasingly organized manner. I say that women are eternally in her debt to have opened such impressive truths to the public.

47. Marie-Catherine Hortense Desjardins (ca. 1640–1683), known as Madame de Villedieu, was a playwright, poet, and novelist. She enjoyed literary success in 1662 with her first tragedy, Manlius, and a prose-and-verse work, Le Carousel du Daufin. One of the earliest women to write for a living, Desjardins is best known for a tragi-comedy, Le Favori (1666). See the introduction and bibliography to Madame de Villedieu, Memoirs of the Life of Henriette-Sylvie de Molière: A Novel, ed. and trans. Donna Kuizenga (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004). 48. Jacquette Guillaume (1610–1670) authored Les Dames illustres, où, par bonnes et fortes raison, il se prouve que le sexe feminine surpasse en toutes sortes de genres le sexe masculine (Paris: 1665). Published just three years before Buffet’s own Praises, Guillaume’s book can be seen as a direct source for that of Buffet.

104 MARGUERITE BUFFET Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle Descartes49 In Brittany we have the celebrated Mademoiselle Descartes, sister to the great philosopher, whose reputation is praised throughout the whole of Europe. The illustrious maid amply benefited from being taught by her thoroughly erudite brother. She is held in very high esteem in her region of France and universally commended by all knowledgeable people. She writes very well in prose and in verse, but in a manner that is not at all feminine. Her style is elegant and stately, and filled to the brim with erudition. Without enlarging upon the point further, given the many wonderful works of wit she has brought to light, we can understand how precious an education the girl received from a brother who, by sharing it with her, gave her a gift as considerable as anything that could enchant the highest ambition. Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle Dupré50 If all the women who love good conversation knew Mademoiselle Dupré, they would without a doubt prefer the pleasure of talking to her to almost any other pleasure in the world. This illustrious maid, whose conversation is priceless, is one of the bravest wits of the century. No one knows better how to join in and leave a conversation with more mastery than she does. She knows how to speak well on a multitude of subjects, and with all the ease and eloquence to make her sought after. This remarkable girl applies herself to learning, delighting in dignified and serious matters. Her habits are far from trifling. She works a few hours daily on composition. Her style is smooth and elegant. Her wonderful wit is so fertile that it is inexhaustible when she endeavors to accomplish anything. In short, you only need know her in order to speak to her advantage and render her the justice she merits. Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle Déspinasse51 As I do not wish to speak only of the clever women who are in Paris—there are so many of them—I have decided to speak only of those I know.52 Even though 49. Jeanne Descartes (b. ca. 1590) was the sister of the philosopher René Descartes. 50. Marie Dupré (1650–1700) was a poet and scholar known as “La Cartesienne.” She was the niece of two well-known men of letters, Roland Desmarets and Jean Desmarets de Saint-Sorlin, the latter being one of the first members of the Académie Française. Fluent in Italian as well as her native French, she also learned Greek and Latin. Dupré merits a two-page entry (3.9.11–12) in Claude François Lambert’s Histoire littéraire du règne de Louis XIV, in a section devoted to “Eloges Historiques des dames sçavantes” (3.9.1–92). 51. Buffet may be the sole source for this woman’s existence. The poet “Monsieur de Lauret” also remains unknown. 52. Buffet appears to be saying that since she cannot speak about all clever women in Paris, she will content herself with speaking only of those she knows personally. Nevertheless, there is always the

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 105 the humility of Mademoiselle Dépinasse prevents me from placing her among the learned women of the age,53 I am not any less enchanted by the eloquence and the comeliness of the wit of this illustrious girl than was the great poet, Monsieur de Lauret, who held her in high esteem and often conferred with her when he had to work on the most important pieces of his poetry. The girl is adept in natural philosophy, and she speaks of so many things with logic so admirably powerful that you would think she was a perfect philosopher. She is very precise in speaking her own language correctly. She doesn’t make even the slightest error, which means she is highly regarded when she contributes to conversation, speaking aptly and with embellishments. Praise to the Glory of Mademoiselle de Mortmart54 If you think that the best wits can be found only at the courts of great princes, in the law courts, or in the government, then you are mistaken. It is in the cloisters of convents that the rarest and most excellent geniuses can be found. We have outstanding proof in the nun, Madame de Mortemart, who is one of the best and most exceptional minds not only in her own order, but among all women who have been called to the monastic life. The young marvel, beautiful as a star, sought learning in her cradle. She is well versed in literature, and she shows us clearly that she has never enjoyed anything with so much pleasure, having found out the secret of closely following the advice of that philosopher who left admirable precepts on the good use one should make of time.55 The illustrious woman holds time so precious that she spends all those hours normally used for recreation to study. She is an amazing person, who knew more at eighteen than other women did who were three times her age. She is very learned in philosophy and geography, knows everything there is to know about the whole of history, and speaks many different languages excellently. She is one of the sweetest and most agreeable souls in the world in conversation. She has a code of behavior that she follows with all kinds of people, secular as well as religious, and that is that she loves and esteems everyone.

possibility that she could also be referring to women she knows something about from other sources. 53. In other words, Buffet would not want to embarrass Dépinasse by exposing her to fame. 54. Marie Madeleine Gabrielle Adélaide de Rochechouart-Mortemart (1645–1704) was the abbess of Fontevrault. Fortunée Briquet, author of Dictionnaire historique, littéraire et bibliographique des françaises, et des étrangères naturalisées en France . . . (Paris: Treuttel and Würtz, 1804), tells the story of her being presented at court in 1660 to Marie-Thérèse of Austria, who had just arrived in France, and speaking to the new queen of France in a Spanish “digne de Madrid” at the age of “eleven.” Supposedly a friend of Racine, she translated parts of the Iliad. 55. I.e. Lucius Annaeus Seneca. See Observations, 81, note 101.

106 MARGUERITE BUFFET Praise to the Glory of Madame de Chaune56 I cannot conclude these praises of famous women of our own time with more honor than by admiring the learned and virtuous Madame de Chaune, nun at the Abbaye-aux-Bois, who humbly took on the task of educating a great number of the best qualified young girls of the kingdom, who feel very fortunate to have been enlightened by her teaching and piety. Her wise prudence made her establishment the foremost seminary of the court, capable of educating the girls of France under such proper and wise training. By her side, I have seen and been astonished by young princesses only eight years old, who spoke Latin as if it were their own language. She teaches them the history of the Bible, the history of France, geography and philosophy. Madame de Mortemart, one of the achievements of Madame de Chaune, amply shows us what can be accomplished after receiving her model education.

Praises to the Glory of Some Illustrious Learned Women of Past Ages In more recent times, and in days gone by, there have always been women of excellent intellect, not only in the kingdom of France, but everywhere in the world. Have we not seen a quite extraordinary prodigy in the person of Julienne Morelle,57 born in the city of Barcelona? The learned maid spoke and wrote very well in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Italian, and Spanish, and defended philosophical arguments at Lyon when she was twelve years old; and when she was twenty-three years old, she produced a commentary with wonderfully erudite annotations and remarks on the Spiritual Life of Saint Vincent, which she dedicated to the Queen Mother,58 writing to her Majesty that she had been admitted in the Monastery of Saint Praxède of Avignon, of the Order of Saint Catherine of Siena, at the age of fourteen. She had so much learning, and to such a high degree, that it elevated her to the contemplation of He who enriched her with such radiant light. 56. Probably Antoinette d’Albert d’Ailly de Chaulnes (1633–1708), daughter of Honoré d’Albert, maréchal de France, and Charlotte-Eugénie d’Ailly, comtesse de Chaulnes. She became a Benedictine nun and served at the Abbaye-aux-Bois before being named to head the royal abbey of Poissy in 1669. Mademoiselle de Rochechouart-Mortemart entered religious orders at the Abbaye-au-Bois in 1664, and left with Madame de Chaulnes when the latter became the abbess at Poissy. See Pierre Clément, Une Abbesse de Fontevrault au XVIIe siècle: Gabrielle de Rochechouart de Mortemart, étude historique (Paris: Didier, 1869), 8. 57. Julienne Morelle (ca. 1594–1653) was a multilingual Spanish-born scholar and prodigy of learning who defended her philosophical theses at the age of twelve. She entered the Dominican convent of St. Praxède in Avignon in 1608, took her final vows in 1610, and became prioress three years later. 58. The commentary on the Life of Saint Vincent was actually dedicated to Anne of Austria (1601– 1666), queen of France, daughter of Margaret of Austria, and mother of Louis XIV; Buffet appears to have mixed up this work with an earlier work dedicated to Margaret of Austria (1584–1611), queen of Spain, Portugal, Naples, and Sicily from 1599 until her death.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 107 Marie Clemence Ruoti,59 nun at the Monastery of Saint George in Florence, was another of the rare intellects of Europe. The learned maid wrote the history of the Patriarch Jacob so ingeniously in verse that it is a perfect piece of work, and one of the finest ever admired for its poetry. Madame the Vicomtesse Dauchy60 was one of the cleverest women in all of France, who knew how to make the best use of time. She was such a capable manager that she would calculate the hours in order to extract some profit from each one. She offered up a good part of her day on behalf of her neighbours helping the poor, and another part of her day to studying and learning. She wrote commentaries on the Epistles of Saint Paul in such a learned yet graceful and elegant manner that it seemed to be a work of one of the most articulate men who had ever lived, for there is nothing to add or take away from it. And now we come to Mademoiselle de Gournay,61 whose reputation shone throughout Europe. The learned maid sacrificed most of her life to the study of literature, with which she spent her days and nights. She wrote with great skill in prose and in verse. The greatest and most erudite men of the kingdom held Monsieur de Montaigne, who was one of the extraordinary intellects of the age, in the very highest esteem, and he, acknowledging her eminent virtues, called her his adopted daughter. It is fair to say that the illustrious maid knew all there was to know about what the learned men of her time were doing. She often conferred through letters with many cardinals, bishops, and scholars, not only in France, but also in Germany and Holland, and they all spoke of her with praise in their writings. Many of the letters that had been written to her from those cardinals, bishops, and other people of the highest station in life were found after her death. The originals are now in the keeping of Monsieur de La Mothe Le Vayer, historiographer to the King,62 whom she had named the executor of her estate.

59. Maria Clemente Ruoti (1609 or 1610–1690) was a nun and a playwright. She wrote Giacob Patriarca (Pisa: Francesco delle Dote, 1637) and Il Natal di Cristo, an unpublished manuscript. 60. Charlotte Jouvenel des Ursins, vicomtesse d’Auchy (1570–1646), was a woman of letters who authored an unpublished paraphrase of the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Hebrews. She held a Parisian salon every Tuesday on the rue des Vieux Augustins, around 1605, which was frequented by a different set than that of Madame de Rambouillet’s chambre bleue. 61. Marie Le Jars de Gournay (1566–1645) was the fille d’alliance of Michel de Montaigne and the first editor of his Essays. She wrote a defence of the female sex, Égalité des hommes et femmes (The Equality of Men and Women), published in 1622. See Marie Le Jars de Gournay, Apology for the Woman Writing and Other Works, ed. and trans. Richard Hillman and Colette Quesnel (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002). 62. François de La Mothe Le Vayer (1588–1672), a writer and Academician who tutored the future Louis XIV. As Buffet notes, he was later appointed historiographer of France.

108 MARGUERITE BUFFET Marguerite Morus63 was the daughter of Thomas More, Chancellor of England, the great man who wrote so well and converted so many among the English. The learned maid, improved by the instruction of such an intellectually gifted father, gave ample proof of her upbringing and showed that despite the misfortunes and persecutions she had endured for the Catholic faith, she had forgotten nothing of those precepts she had received from her father, the most virtuous and learned of men. History reports that she was present when they beheaded him. Her brave spirit remained steadfast. Seeing him die for a just cause, she received the blow as if it were a precious gift from Heaven. Some time later, the English wished to execute her for the same reason as her father. She was brought before her accusers to the tribunal of heretics, and they were so enchanted to hear her lay open so wisely the deepest mysteries of our religion that they became her admirers and, acquitting her, sent her in triumph from her enemies. She was extremely proficient in writing both in Greek and Latin. Since the establishment of the French monarchy, how many illustrious and excellent princesses have shown the signs of an exemplary life by the virtue and nobility of their actions, which in turn have augmented their reputations and perpetuated their memories throughout the ages. We have been blessed to have had the skilled and virtuous Clotilde,64 who gave France its first Christian king, The princess so effectively held sway over the mind of Clovis, the monarch, that she won from him what no one else had ever been able to obtain from the man who, in his own opinion, was the most powerful in the world. Indegonde,65 Clotilde’s granddaughter, who was married to Hermenigilde, son of the King of Spain, was no less beneficial to the entire kingdom. The wise and virtuous princess lay the foundations of our religion by converting the prince when he married her. Seeing that his son was resolute in his Catholic faith, his father executed him on Easter Day. Some time afterward, God plucked that unfortunate father from the world. Another of his sons who had embraced the Roman religion succeeded him, and the Catholic faith came to be observed throughout Spain,66 showing, as we have seen, how much these two kingdoms, France and Spain, owe to the two princesses, Clotilde and Indegonde. 63. Margaret More Roper (1505–1544) was the eldest daughter of Sir Thomas More, who was beheaded after refusing to recognize Henry VIII as head of the Church of England. Fluent in Latin and Greek, she translated Erasmus’s Precatio Dominica (A Devout Treatise upon the Paternoster), published in 1526, as well as translating Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History from Greek into Latin. 64. As discussed in note 2, Clotilde was responsible for the conversion of her husband, Clovis, to Christianity. 65. Indegonde, or Ingund, the wife of Hermenigild, is also discussed in note 2. She was actually Clotilde’s great-granddaughter; her father, the Frankish king Sigebert I, was the grandson of Clovis I and Clotilde. 66. Reccared I, younger brother of Hermenigild, succeeded his father as Visigothic king of Hispania. Reccared later converted to Roman Catholicism.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 109 Blanche de Castille67 was the mother of Louis IX, one of the most virtuous and most astute men ever to have governed the State. Did not the great princess contribute much by giving us a great saint in France? The august Prince governed by following only the advice of his wise and prudent mother. It was she who acted as regent during his voyage to the Levant. Monsieur le Baron d’Auteuil wrote the life of the illustrious princess in three books.68 She was exemplary. It is wonderful to learn about all the commendable qualities she had and the good example she gave all those who were in attendance at her Court, who both loved and respected her as she led such a brilliantly worthy life in a position in which she was absolutely honored. Jeanne de Bourbon69 was the wife of King Charles V, known as the Wise. She was so clever in aspects of state affairs that the great Prince was in the habit of calling her the “Sun of his State.” He found no one to give him better counsel than this princess. He trusted so in her profound integrity that he made it a practice of bringing her to parliament and then conferring privately with her afterward. He even declared her regent of his kingdom after his death. God, who overturns the best-laid plans of kings as well as those of other men, gave her permission to go first. Catherine de Medici70 was one of the greatest minds that has ever been called to serve the government of the French monarchy. She proved her great worth throughout the four years she was regent, and a list of all the events during that time would be too long to speak of here. The intelligent and illustrious princess received praises to her glory from all the historians, and in particular from the poet Ronsard,71 who wrote the most noble and elegant panegyrics to her. He showed how much the princess was loved by the French, and how in her they saw all that was most perfectly good-natured in the world. He describes quite well that history styled her the patron of learned men. She was a devotee of conversation. She gave herself the pleasure of dipping into the royal treasury to acquire the most rare manuscripts in all languages from Greece and throughout the Levant, not counting the Medici Library, which she had sent over from Italy. All this shows 67. Blanche de Castille, queen consort of Louis VIII; see note 20. 68. Charles de Combault, baron d’Auteuil, Blanche infante de Castille, mère de St. Louis, reyne et regente de France (Paris: Antoine de Sommaville and Augustine’s Courbe, 1644). The three books are the sections into which the one-volume work is divided. 69. Jeanne de Bourbon (1338–1378) was queen consort of Charles V of France. Christine de Pizan chronicled the life of Charles V in a book called Le Livre de bonnes faits et meurs du sage roy Charles V (1404). 70. Catherine de’ Medici, queen consort and later Regent of France, and one of the most powerful and influential women of her time. See note 20. 71. Pierre de Ronsard (1524–1585), court poet and acknowledged leader of the group of poets known as “La Pléiade.”

110 MARGUERITE BUFFET how much the great princess loved knowledge. She gave the best part of her time to amassing it as the greatest pleasure in her life. Queen Marguerite, Duchess of Valois,72 was also very gifted and one of the most learned women and greatest politicians of her time. The princess so loved learning that she would always have the most erudite men seated around her table. Four of them were usually in the company of her Majesty. She treated herself to making them give their opinions on many questions on different matters during the hours they spent at the meal. She commissioned a translation of the Summa of Saint Thomas Aquinas into French, a work encompassing all the most worthy and learned theology. She chose for the task the reverend Father Coëffeteau, General of the Order of Jacobins.73 He acquitted himself very well and dedicated his work to Her Majesty. The magnanimous princess received the work with very good grace and rewarded him with her usual liberality, which showed so many marks of the grandeur and the nobility of her soul, by means of such bountiful actions. Marguerite of France, Duchess of Savoy, Princess of Piedmont, daughter of the great King François I,74 was one of the most well-read and accomplished princesses in Europe. From the time she was a child, when children normally give themselves over to trifles and toys, she began to show the signs of the exceeding excellence of her wit as she improved it in the study of fine things. She applied herself to Greek and Latin, which made her quite learned over time and gave her the necessary tools to understand great works, which made her dearly beloved of the King her father. Upon the death of the Prince she was named the benefactress of men of learning; her sole joy was to help them and to take pleasure in doing them good. Among others, there was the poet Ronsard, whom she loved well.

72. Marguerite de France, or Marguerite de Valois (1553–1615), was the daughter of Henri II and Catherine de’ Medici, and sister of the French kings François II, Charles IX, and Henri II; she became queen consort to the Huguenot king Henri de Navarre when they were married in 1572. Well educated and multilingual, she was renowned as a woman of letters, and was the first woman to write her memoirs. 73. This is a reference to Nicolas Coeffeteau (1574–1623), a theologian, poet, and historian who was appointed vicar general of the Dominican Order in France in 1606. A prolific author, Coeffeteau was a friend of the poet François de Malherbe and other men of letters. For Buffet, he is important as a writer whose command of the French language earned him the praise of Claude Favre de Vaugelas. In his Remarques, Vaugelas calls Coeffeteau one of “the two great masters of our language,” along with the writer and translator Jacques Amyot; see Remarques, 2:372. 74. Marguerite de France, or Marguerite de Savoie (1523–1574), was the daughter of François I. She was a patron of the poets of the Pléiade, a group of French poets which included Pierre de Ronsard, Joachim du Bellay, and Jean-Antoine de Baïf. On Ronsard, see also Buffet’s discussion of Catherine de’ Medici at p. 109.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 111 Louise of Lorraine, Princess of Conti, daughter of Henry of Lorraine, the Duke of Guise,75 was one of the most exceptional minds that has ever appeared at the Court. History relates that she was very astute and spoke cleverly about everything. She had acquired such an excellent reputation among the most gifted of her time that a great number of the best authors dedicated their works to her. Among these were Monsieur Coëffeteau, Monsieur de Malherbe, Monsieur de la Serre, and numerous very famous authors,76 who regarded their own works more highly once they had received her approval. She loved those who made their living as writers, and supported them rather than those who were ignorant. She was eloquent and spoke quite delightfully. She wrote excellent French verse. It was she who wrote the Romant Royal, as well as the Court Adventures, under the assumed name of Monsieur du Piloust. She published the Romant in 1620. The work was very well received, for she had furnished it with many graceful descriptions and eloquent expressions. Claude Catherine de Clermont, Duchess of Raix,77 was so universally accomplished that she was called in her time the court’s star of scholarship, and venerated by learned men. She was most able in Greek and Latin and in all the liberal arts. She gave herself completely, burning the midnight oil, to the study of the great authors. She was one of the most worthy wits to be born on French soil. After the Poles had elected as their king Henry III, Duke d’Anjou and Bishop of Posne, the foremost illustrious lords of the Polish kingdom came to France. They confessed that the most remarkable and charming thing they found was the learned heroine who had spoken to them so knowledgeably in Greek and Latin. Surely, if the hand that wields the sceptre cannot avoid losing its grip and letting it fall to the ground, it is by some strange mechanism known only to our Lord, from whom nothing is hidden. This is what befell Catherine of Spain, Queen of England.78 The virtuous princess was profoundly persecuted by her hus75. Louise-Marguerite de Lorraine (1588–1631) was the daughter of Henri I de Guise and the second wife of François de Bourbon, prince of Conti. She is credited as being the author of a fictionalized account of Henry IV’s court, reworked and published under various titles including Romant royal (1621), Advantures de la cour de Perse (1629), and Histoire des amours du grand Alcandre (1651). 76. Nicolas Coeffeteau, mentioned on p. 61; François de Malherbe, mentioned on p. 60; and the author and dramatist Jean Puget de la Serre (1594–1665), who became almoner to Anne Marie Louise d’Orléans, duchesse de Montpensier (“La Grande Mademoiselle”) in 1647. 77. Claude Catherine de Clermont-Tonnerre, duchesse de Retz (1543–1603) was lady-in-waiting to Catherine de’ Medici. Recognized for her intellectual prowess, she spoke Latin, Greek, and several living languages. She was a regular attendee at the Académie du Palais, the first learned academy in France, as well as a patron of the arts. 78. Catherine of Aragon (1485–1536) was the first wife of Henry VIII and queen of England from June 1509 until May 1533, when he divorced her in order to marry Anne Boleyn, initiating the schism with the Catholic Church that would lead to his becoming the Supreme Head of the Church of England.

112 MARGUERITE BUFFET band Henry VIII, the King of England, who caused her great anguish by entering into a very unjust second marriage during her reign. She experienced a complete reversal of her fortunes in the midst of the wrath of her enemies. The noble soul maintained a steady spirit that surprised all those who bewailed her tribulations. She suffered them with an invincible courage and a might that had no hint of the feminine in it. She was learned. She wrote two excellent books: the first, a meditation on the Psalms, and the second one on the regrets of a sinner.79 Not only in the kingdom of France are the excellent intellects of women and illustrious Amazons to be found, but in all parts of the world women have given proof of their value and merit. Isabelle, Infanta of Spain, Archduchess of the Netherlands, and daughter of Philip II,80 was the most judicious and most gifted Princess who ever reigned in Europe. Historians speak of her as one of the greatest polymaths of all ages to have been called to the government of the State, and they say that women need no other examples than this great princess to understand how to reign well. She was so expert in all affairs regarding her government that she ended up instructing the very people who had been called in to give her advice. She understood military science very well, and she demonstrated just how well after bringing the siege of Breda to an end.81 Margaret of Austria, Duchess of Parma,82 was appointed by Philip II to be Governor of the Netherlands. The illustrious princess found plenty of knots to The controversial book by Juan Luis Vives, The Education of a Christian Woman (1523), which argued for women’s right to an education, was commissioned by and dedicated to her. 79. These books were written by Henry VIII’s last wife, Catherine Parr (1512–1548), who actually wrote three books in total. The first, Psalms or Prayers, was published anonymously in 1544. The second, Prayers or Meditations, was published under her own name in 1545, and was not only the first book ever published by an English queen but the first book published in England, in the English language, by a woman under her own name. Catherine published The Lamentation of a Sinner in November 1547, almost a year after the death of Henry VIII. This last work began with a confessional and penitential declamation so unprecedented that the privy councillor Sir William Cecil, who wrote the preface, felt obliged to apologize “for the queen’s public abasement of herself.” As Janel Mueller continues: “He appeals to English readers to be charitable and understanding toward the harshly negative example the queen makes of herself to impress on her fellow Christians their own personal need for Christ’s forgiveness, redemption, and redirection in a new life.” See Janel Mueller, ed., Katherine Parr: Complete Works and Correspondence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), 426. 80. Isabella Clara Eugenia (1566–1633) was the daughter of Philip II of Spain. With her husband, Albert VII, archduke of Austria, she governed over the Spanish Netherlands in the Low Countries and the north of modern France, an area embroiled in conflict during the Eighty Years’ War. 81. The Siege of Breda (1624) was the last campaign of the Spanish general Ambrogio Spinola (1569– 1630), whose successes solidified the rule of Albert and Isabella in the Netherlands. A painting by Pieter Snayers, The Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia at the Siege of Breda (ca. 1628), depicts the archduchess visiting the field of battle on horseback. 82. Margaret of Parma (1522–1586) was governor of the Netherlands from 1559 to 1567 and from 1578 to 1582. She was the illegitimate daughter of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. Through her

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 113 untangle in this country, and plenty that required the prudence of her worthy wit. She was obliged to keep two prestigious personages83 uppermost in her mind at all times; one was a great man of State involved in the handling of those thorny questions which were thwarting it; the other was a great Doctor involved in reclaiming those people who had wandered from the right path because of the German and the Geneva heresies, which had crept into Flanders, and which had made so many towns rebel, leading to great turmoil throughout the country. The incomparable princess, who was an extremely prudent politician, calmed the tumult and purged Flanders of heresy and rebellion. No less important in the defence of the true Religion was the illustrious maid, Anna Bijns,84 whose memory will be perpetuated throughout the ages. The celebrated heroine was so highly honored in her lifetime that she was placed among the ranks of the most learned writers of Flanders, who all wrote poems in her praise. She came from the city of Anvers.85 The worthy soul saw that the heresies of Luther and Calvin86 were spreading through the Duchy of Brabant and the County of Flanders. To set to rights the chaos which was ruining the whole of the Netherlands, she wrote a number of books in Flemish verse against the new-born errors. After reading her books many Catholics started to inquire about what was going on, and so were able to stand more firm and constant in the true Catholic religion. The erudite Gilles Eucharius wanted her noble work to be better known, so he translated her poems into Latin and published them in Anvers in 1581.87 Among the number of women of learning from all corners of the world, I have found few to have the influence of the Venetian, whom we call faithful Cassandra,88 who had such a wonderful reputation throughout Italy that the marriages to Alessandro de’ Medici and Ottavio Farnese, she was a duchess of Florence and a duchess of Parma and Piacenza. 83. Possibly a reference to (i) William the Silent (1533–1584), also known as “William of Orange,” originally an advisor to Margaret who turned against the Spanish Habsburgs and led the Dutch Revolt, and (ii) Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle (1517–1586), a cardinal and Habsburg statesman whose efforts to stamp out Protestantism in the Netherlands made him extremely unpopular there. 84. Anna Bijns (1493–1575) was a Flemish educator, poet, and religious writer. Buffet’s praise is based on that of Hilarion de Coste, Les Eloges et vies des reynes, princesses, dames et damoiselles illustres en piété, courage et doctrine . . . (Paris: Sébastien Cramoisy, 1630; rpt., Paris: Sébastien and Gabriel Cramoisy, 1647), 41–42. 85. I.e., Antwerp. 86. The Protestant reformers Martin Luther (1483–1546) and John Calvin (1509–1564). 87. Eligius Eucharius, or Elooi Hoeckaert (1488–1544), was rector of the Latin school at Ghent. His translation of Bijns’s poems was published in Antwerp by Willem Vosterman in 1529, not 1581. 88. Cassandra Fedele (1465–1558) was a renowned Venetian scholar and orator, fluent in Greek and Latin. She participated in public debates on philosophical and theological issues with influential humanists, and was asked to speak on the subject of higher education for women before Agostino Barbarigo, Doge of Venice, and the Venetian senate.

114 MARGUERITE BUFFET Italians called her the honor of their country and a torch lighting the way for all intellectuals of her age. The erudite and illustrious maid was fluent in Greek and Latin and had studied philosophy and theology extensively, giving public orations in Latin to the finest minds of Venice, where she was born. She defended theses in philosophy and theology and responded very learnedly to the most important questions of her day. She gave many public talks at the famous University of Padua. She wrote a number of Latin epistles, which were so excellent and elegant that the greatest men of her time wrote her praises in their own works. The following scholar is not less skilled than the previous one. Her example will show that nobility of spirit knows no sexual difference with regard to all excellent qualities. Here we have a learned maid who appeared in public, and with a reputation as elevated as that of the first Roman orators. She was a native of Bologna and called Bestizia Gosadina.89 The learned maid became interested in studying Latin from a very early age. When she was older she studied in Loix, where she succeeded so well that when she was only twenty-three years old she gave a funeral oration, which was admired by everyone in the audience, in the great Church of Bologna at the funeral of Sir Louis Fratra, Bishop of Bologna.90 Three years later she earned the degree of Doctor in the famous university of Bologna. Her reputation grew to such an extent that she was awarded a public chair in 1239, and knowledgeably taught countless students from different nations all over. She wrote many books on the law that were then published under a pseudonym, and the greatest and most learned princes on earth honored her scholarship. She never wished to marry, so as to give herself over entirely to the study of literature. Among the people of the North, there are always exceptional women to be found in England. There is one very famous Marcia,91 gifted in all the liberal arts. For a long time she administered the affairs of the kingdom during the minority of the young prince, her son. She was such an excellent politician that she handed down the laws herself to the people of England, which they called the Lex Martiana after the wise and clever princess. Her reputation has become immortal among the English. The most potent politicians are convinced that skill in the sciences and literature are just as befitting to women as to men, since women have the same disposition and inclination for learning as men. We see so many marks of this truth 89. Bettisia Gozzadini (1209–1261) is considered the first woman ever to have taught at a university. After graduating from the University of Bologna in 1237, she taught law at her home for two years before being offered a chair at the university. 90. The bishop of Bologna referred to here was Enrico della Fratta, and his actual date of death means that Gozzadini gave the oration at the age of 32 or 33. 91. Queen Marcia was a legendary female ruler of Britain, queen consort of Guithelin, and later regent for their son, Sisillius II. In his History of the Kings of Britain (1136), Geoffrey of Monmouth writes that she codified the Marcian Laws, or the Lex Martiana.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 115 in both ancient and modern history, where women have given proofs of their worth. In days gone by we would have been astonished if the great king of Persia appointed his wife the general of his army.92 Yet, the wise prince was persuaded of her ability to lead. He knew how eloquent she was and how her words acted like magic charms, rousing up her soldiers to combat, and sweeping them along in her desires. She governed her army with order and with as much prudence and leadership as she governed herself. The illustrious Cornelia,93 the mother of the Gracchi, was the most persuasive woman who ever shone brightly among the Romans. Her reputation will never die among these people. She wrote epistles that were noble and elegant, and history teaches us that her famous children found all that was most graceful expressed in them. She was the mother of two of the most talented members of the Roman Senate, and so esteemed by the Romans that they dedicated an altar to her. Tullia,94 whom Cicero made so eloquent, was followed everywhere by a crowd of orators, who believed that she carried with her the treasure trove of eloquence. This shows us that women are no less good orators than men when they put their mind to it. Hortensia95 won much esteem from the Romans, and was highly praised for having defended the cause of Roman women, using the eloquence that her father had taught her. Sulpitia,96 the wife of Calanus, was so learned that she wrote on morals for married women with such art and understanding that we have lauded her books as masterpieces, finer than those of many written by men of her time. 92. Possibly a reference to Pantea Arteshbod (fl. 539 BC), a commander in the army of Cyrus the Great. According to Iranian historical tradition, she is said to have assisted her husband, a general, in forming the great army of 10,000 warriors known as the “Immortals.” She participated in the Battle of Opis (539 BC), in which Cyrus defeated Neo-Babylonian forces and took control of their empire. 93. Cornelia (ca. 195 BC–ca. 115 BC) was the mother of the Gracchi, distinguished for her virtue and oratory and a byword for eloquence in women. She was the daughter of Scipio Africanus, hero of the Second Punic War. Letters supposedly written by her to her younger son, Gaius, were excerpted by the biographer Cornelius Nepos and referred to by Cicero. She appears in Plutarch’s biographies of her sons, Life of Tiberius Gracchus and Life of Gaius Gracchus. 94. Tullia (ca. 79 BC–45 BC) was the first child and only daughter of the Roman orator Marcus Tullius Cicero by his first marriage to Terentia. 95. Hortensia was the daughter of consul and advocate Quintus Hortensius Hortalus, and famous as a skilled orator during the late Roman Republic. She is best known for giving a speech before the members of the Second Triumvirate (Octavian, Antony, and Lepidus) in 42 BC that resulted in the partial repeal of a tax on wealthy Roman women. Hortensia’s speech was documented by the second-century Greek historian Appian, and later praised by Valerius Maximus as having emulated the oratorical eloquence of her father. 96. Sulpicia lived during the reign of Domitian (81–96 CE). Her husband, Calenus, was likely a patron of Martial, who wrote two poems through which Sulpicia is known to us (Epigrams, 10.35 and 10.38). Sulpicia herself appears to have written both satirical and erotic verse, the latter in the context of her

116 MARGUERITE BUFFET Pamphilia,97 the famous Roman woman, who wrote as many as thirty-three books which astonished everyone, raising her reputation to the heights among all the Greeks and Romans, was one of the most gifted women ever to have emerged from the Occident. Aspasia98 was the miracle of Greece in her time. She was so learned in philosophy, among many other disciplines, that it was held that Socrates had been her disciple and that she was deemed capable of teaching Pericles, who was in turn the Greek orator capable of teaching the rest of the world. Pompey’s wife99 was very learned in mathematics, one of the higher sciences that attract a number of inquiring minds. In earlier times, Roman women had so much power, and their reputations shone with so much esteem among their people, that they were even summoned to give their counsel to the greatest men. This reminds me of a remarkable moment in history when a young girl named Tutole offered a very important piece of advice to the entire Senate, which was well received and put into effect. It was the idea that those Latins who asked Romans for their daughters in marriage should give up any weapon they bore.100 love for her husband; as Martial notes in Epigram 10.35, “She tells of pure and lawful love, playful caprice and merriment.” See Martial, Epigrams, Books 6–10, trans. D. Shackleton Bailey (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 349. 97. A reference to Pamphile of Epidaurus (fl. first century CE), one of the first known female historians. Of Egyptian descent, Pamphile is known for her Historical Commentaries, a compendium of historical anecdotes in thirty-three books. She is mentioned in the tenth-century Byzantine encyclopedia, the Suda, as well as in the work of the ninth-century writer Photios. Deborah Gera has argued that Pamphile may be the author of the treatise Tractatus de mulieribus claris in bello (Treatise on Women Famous in War); see her Warrior Women: The Anonymous Tractatus De Mulieribus, Mnemosyne Supplementum 162 (Leiden, New York, and Cologne: E.J. Brill, 1997), 60–61. 98. Aspasia of Miletus (ca. 470 BC–ca. 410 BC) was a teacher, writer, and intellectual in Athens who became the mistress and later partner of the statesman Pericles. A noted conversationalist, she appeared in the writings of Plato and Xenophon, among others. In La Nef des dames vertueuses (1503), Symphorien Champier quotes from Plato in stating, “Socrates had no shame in confessing that he had learned much from this woman.” See Champier, The Ship of Virtuous Ladies, ed. and trans. Todd W. Reeser (Toronto: Iter Press; Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2018), 52. 99. Cornelia Metella (ca. 73 BC–ca. 48 BC) was a member of the Metelli, a noble family of Rome. She became the fifth wife of Pompey the Great in 52 BC. In his Life of Pompey, Plutarch writes that she was “well versed in literature, in playing the lyre, and in geometry, and had been accustomed to listen to philosophical discourses with profit.” He adds, interestingly, that “she had a nature which was free from that unpleasant officiousness which such accomplishments are apt to impart to young women”— that is, she was cultivated without being pedantic, or “learned without showing it,” as discussed in the Introduction, 6. See Plutarch, Pompey, 55.1–2, in Lives, trans. Bernadotte Perrin, vol. 5 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1917), p. 261. 100. According to a “fabulous” tale, Tutole, or Tutula, helped the Roman army defeat the Etruscans, who had seized the allied city of Sutrium in the late fourth century BC; her story is told by Plutarch in

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 117 The mother of Coriolanus101 was no less in favour with the Romans, since, without the aid of this astute woman, we would have seen the most superb city in the world bloodied and ruined if Coriolanus’s plan to defeat them had not been stopped. Neither the supplications nor the craftiness of the Romans was able to sway the pride of his great heart. His will was inexorable; he would not forgive them. His prudent mother knew well how to win him over with gentleness, the charms of her eloquence, and the force of her reason, so that she disarmed all his anger, possessing both the ascendancy and the diplomacy to vanquish the proudest and most inflexible of all men. The mother of Severus Alexander102 was also much loved by the Roman people as that of Coriolanus. She held the reins of the empire during the prince’s youth. She raised her son to excel in virtue and in those arts practiced by princes by surrounding him with a number of talented men dedicated to his education. Finally, the illustrious regent was known in her time as such an accomplished princess that the historians who chose to delve further into her life found nothing to fault her for, except perhaps that she had been accused of being a little stingy. We know that after the death of this same Emperor Severus, his wife Meszac103 was in charge of the empire for a time, and honored by the Senate, who had so much respect for her that they took her advice and orders concerning public affairs. People claim the Senate had never before shown such respect to a woman. Livia,104 wife of Augustus Caesar, reigned side by side with him. The great emperor would consult her about the most important business of the empire. His son, Tiber,105 held his mother’s guidance in such high regard that, concerning his Life of Furius Camillus. See Plutarch, Camillus, chap. 33, in Lives, vol. 2, trans. Bernadotte Perrin (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914), pp. 177, 179. 101. Veturia, known also as Volumnia, was the mother of the general Gnaeus Marcius Coriolanus, who moved Coriolanus with her pleas to spare Rome from invasion. Plutarch’s Life of Coriolanus served as a source for Shakespeare’s portrayal of Volumnia. 102. Julia Mamaea (ca. 180–235) was a noblewoman of Syrian descent and, along with Severus Alexander’s grandmother, Julia Maesa, held power during her son’s short reign as Roman emperor. Both she and her son were assassinated by Roman soldiers during a campaign against Germanic tribes, paving the way for Maximinius Thrax’s assumption of the emperorship. 103. Severus Alexander is said to have had three wives, of whom the names of only two are known: Sallustia Orbiana and Sulpicia Memmia. Neither is said to have ruled after his death. This could possibly be a reference to Julia Domna (ca. 160–217 CE), a native of Emesa (modern-day Homs) in Syria, and wife of the emperor Septimius Severus (145–211 CE)—but only if we assume that Buffet has conflated the two emperors named Severus. 104. Livia Drusilla, the wife of Augustus Caesar; see note 18. 105. I.e., Tiberius (42 BCE–37 CE), the son of Livia Drusilla with Tiberius Claudius Nero. When Livia divorced Tiberius and married Augustus, the younger Tiberius was adopted by the emperor, and eventually succeeded him.

118 MARGUERITE BUFFET all the public affairs of his State, he preferred her opinions to those of his closest advisors. The courageous Cloelia,106 whose story is so familiar today, shows us how the conduct of the ingenious maiden gave Romans their liberty. Her courage and her eloquence so powerfully swayed the heart of Porsenna that she toppled all his pride. The great man confessed that the manner of this illustrious maiden had conquered him and forced him to give up his weapons. Removing her prisoner’s chains, he sent her back to his enemies in triumph with the other Roman maidens who had followed her through all her adventures. Fausta,107 the wife of Constantine and daughter of the emperor Diocletian, was the finest wit and greatest politician of her time. Her father governed by listening only to the advice of this clever maiden. He could find no better counsel than hers to manage all the most important business of his State. The Imperatrix Athenais,108 a marvel in her own time, was extremely learned and eloquent. She was the daughter of a simple philosopher, who disinherited her as he lay dying, reasoning that she was already rich enough through her learning and her keen intelligence. All these excellent qualities moved the heart of Theodosius so much that after hearing her plead against his brothers in defence of his estate, he was left so charmed that he made her the Imperatrix of his heart and of his property. In the Roman Empire, among those who built their grandeur upon the ruin of others, we often find that their policy, while quite stringent, did not disapprove of either the power or the authority of women. From the time of the establishment of the emperors, government by the fair sex was universally accepted in all the states, even among those nations recognizing male precedence in succession, where women often exercised the role of regent and so gained an understanding of public affairs. 106. Cloelia, according to Roman legend, was one of the Roman hostages given to the Etruscan king Lars Porsena in the course of his war with the newly founded Roman republic (510 BC). She escaped by swimming across the Tiber, but had to be handed back to Porsena, who in turn freed her and some of her companions in recognition of her bravery. 107. Fausta, or Flavia Maxima Fausta (289–326), was the daughter of Roman emperor Maximianus Herculius, sister of the emperor Maxentius, and wife of the emperor Constantine I. She married Constantine in 307, but was executed by him in 326 for reasons still unknown—although ancient historians have speculated on his motives. Constantine ordered a damnatio memoriae (“condemnation of memory”) against his wife and, as a result, no contemporary records of her life exist. 108. Aelia Eudocia Augusta (ca. 401–460), was a Greek-born Eastern Roman empress through her marriage to the Byzantine emperor Theodosius II. Her given name, Athenais, was chosen in honor of Pallas Athena, protectress of Athens, the city of her birth. She received training in rhetoric, literature, and philosophy early in life, and her Homeric centos (poems composed completely of passages taken from the work of Homer) have been extensively studied by modern scholars.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 119 The Romans praised women as well as men after their deaths. Plutarch confirms this, since he wrote a panegyric or a funeral oration for Leonide.109 We can see how favourably he speaks of women in a treatise he dedicated to their virtues.110 On one occasion, the great man praises Portia111 to the skies for her book learning, describing in detail her wonderful talents. Saint Jerome, one of the first Church fathers, was what we might call golden-tongued. He was the first of all the sages and the one who wrote the best. This great man noted that during his time there were many women who had dedicated themselves to literary studies, and that many men were obliged to use some of their books and learn from these women in order to then teach others. Teaching arts they had borrowed from Roman ladies did not strike them as shameful. Seneca knew to what degree women were capable and inclined to learning when they wished. We see this when he wrote to his mother,112 saying that he wanted her to understand moral philosophy. He believed it was vital that she apply herself to the study of knowledge, by making good use of her time, which is so precious to us and which it is so important to manage well throughout our lives. Pythagoras’s daughter113 was one of the most formidable in Greece for her wisdom. She taught in Athens all her life, where she held a kind of open school for women, giving them lessons in philosophy. She delivered these as brilliantly as her father had, for she too was a born pedagogue and taught effortlessly.

109. This is a reference to Leontis, a friend of Plutarch, whose death leads to his conversation with another woman friend, Clea, on the equality of the sexes, and eventually to his work De Mulierum Virtutibus (On the Bravery of Women). 110. De Mulierum Virtutibus, first mentioned at the beginning of the Praises (p. 87, note 10). 111. Porcia Catonis (ca. 70 BC–ca. 42 BC), also known as Portia, was the daughter of the senator Cato the Younger and the second wife of Marcus Junius Brutus, one of the assassins of Julius Caesar. Like her husband and her father she was an ardent supporter of the republican cause, and is said to have wounded her thigh in order to show herself worthy to share the secret of the plot against Caesar’s life; see Plutarch’s Life of Brutus. 112. Helvia was the mother of the Stoic philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca the Younger. She is known primarily as the recipient of one of his consolatory letters, Consolation to Helvia, written around 40–45 AD during his exile in Corsica. 113. Damo (fl. ca. 500 BC) was a Pythagorean philosopher said to have been the daughter of Pythagoras and Theano. She is mentioned by the biographers Diogenes Laertius and Iamblichus.

120 MARGUERITE BUFFET The wise Hipathia,114 born in the city of Alexandria and wife of the philosopher Isidore,115 wrote wonderfully about astronomy, and held the Academy entranced in a celebrated speech. She surpassed all the philosophers of her time in erudition. Themistoclea116 was the sister of Pythagoras, and was so learned that even Pythagoras adhered to her opinions. Sapho117 was admired throughout Greece. This illustrious and incomparable maiden was so learned in the study of poetry, writing in such a sophisticated manner, that she surpassed even the greatest poets. Her lines were no less powerful or less elegant than Virgil’s. Her companion, Erinna,118 was second only to her in the same poetic art. No crowned head was more unjustly persecuted and unable to defend himself or herself than Mary Stuart,119 the queen of three kingdoms. Even in the midst of her numerous misfortunes, this illustrious and virtuous princess never lost her senses. Her mind was always clear and never fluctuated before the 114. Hypatia (ca. 355/370–415) was a Greek philosopher, astronomer, mathematician, and teacher in Alexandria. She was the daughter of the mathematician Theon of Alexandria and is the first woman mathematician whose life has been documented. Although she was a pagan, she was a woman of great stature among pagans and Christians alike, and had many Christian students. As pagan and Christian cultures clashed in Alexandria, however, Hypatia was condemned as a heretic and a witch, and murdered by a mob of Christian militants. 115. The claim that Hypatia was the wife of Isidore of Alexandria is made in the tenth-century Byzantine encyclopedia, the Suda, but is incorrect; Isidore was born about 35 years after Hypatia’s death. 116. Themistoclea, or Aristoclea, was a priestess at Delphi in the sixth century BC. In his biography of Pythagoras in Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, Diogenes Laertius mentions the possibility that Themistoclea taught Pythagoras. 117. Sapho, or Sappho (ca. 630–ca. 570 BC), was a Greek lyric poet and a contemporary of the poet Alcaeus. Only one of her poems, an address to Aphrodite, has survived intact, while another work, the “Tithonus poem” on the subject of aging, is substantially complete. Her poetry—preserved in papyrus fragments and in quotations in other authors’ works—was well known and admired in antiquity. 118. Erinna (ca. fourth century BC) was an ancient Greek poet of the island of Telos, near Rhodes. She is famous for a poem called The Distaff, a lament for her childhood friend Baucis, which survives only in quotations and papyrus fragments. See Madeleine de Scudéry’s harangue “Sapho à Erinne” in Les Femmes illustres, ou Les Harangues héroïques (Paris: Antoine de Sommaville and Augustine’s Courbé, 1642), 422–41, and in the modern edition of The Story of Sapho, trans. and introd. Karen Newman (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003), 137–44. Some ancient traditions, as well as the Suda, state that Erinna was a contemporary or companion of Sapho—but this is incorrect based on their life dates. 119. Mary, Queen of Scots (1542–1587), was queen of Scotland from 1542 to 1567. She was the daughter of James V of Scotland and mother of James VI of Scotland. Considered the legitimate heir to the throne of England by English Catholics, she was found guilty of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth I of England and beheaded in 1587. Her son James VI (James I of England and Ireland) succeeded Elizabeth I in 1603. She appears in Pierre Le Moyne’s Gallerie des femmes fortes (see note 1).

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 121 fury of her enemies. After a long time in prison, the invincible queen arrived at the moment when she must die. Her constancy and virtue revived the drooping spirits of those who sought to console her, and even gave them a desire to die with her in order to find a happier life than here. She applied her excellent brain to acquiring knowledge; she could speak many different languages. The Scottish people still revere her memory. She will never die among these people who have always loved her. Even though many learned women of earlier centuries were ensnared in the error of paganism, a great many whose lives have been studied observed high moral conduct. We find many Christian women in these centuries whose lives were exemplary for their virtue and their erudition. The sister of Saint Gregory120 was so learned and so skilled that he acknowledged in his writings that her exceptional soul was eternal. She was the person who taught him how to teach the best literature, and he was obliged to make use of her excellent wit to help him write a treatise concerning the soul and the resurrection. Was not Saint Bridget121 the most excellent intellect of her time? Was she not admired by the most learned men, who saw that she had written so well concerning mystical theology that a council readily accepted her doctrine and commanded that it be believed for the good of the soul and for its edification? Saint Catherine, Princess of Alexandria,122 was very learned, and knew the art of persuading others to do what she wished. At the head of a group of fifty of the most famous philosophers, using strong and indubitable arguments, she refuted the vain illusions of these learned men, and so converted and made martyrs of them.

120. Saint Macrina the Younger (ca. 330–379) was born in Cappadocia and was sister to two of the socalled Cappadocian Fathers, Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa. She became a nun, devoting herself completely to her religious beliefs. Buffet refers to Saint Gregory’s composition, A Dialogue on the Soul and Resurrection, based on a conversation with his sister Macrina on her deathbed. 121. Bridget (Birgitta) of Sweden (ca. 1303–1373) was a mystic, saint, and founder of the Bridgettines, an order of nuns and monks. In 1350 Bridget made a pilgrimage to Rome to obtain the authorization to found a new order, which was granted in 1370 by Pope Urban V. 122. Saint Catherine of Alexandria, also known as Saint Catherine of the Wheel, was according to tradition a Christian saint and virgin, martyred at the hands of the Roman emperor Maxentius in the early fourth century. Joan of Arc identified Catherine as one of the saints who spoke to her. A noted scholar, Catherine successfully debated a group of fifty philosophers summoned by Maxentius to dispute with her; several of these men converted to Christianity and were then executed. Catherine was condemned to death on a breaking wheel, but after it shattered when she touched it, she was ordered beheaded. Some modern scholars believe that Catherine may have been conflated with Hypatia of Alexandria (see p. 120 and note 114), a renowned woman philosopher who was murdered by a mob of Christian militants.

122 MARGUERITE BUFFET Saint Catherine of Siena123 was a nun of the Order of Saint Dominic. Her life was the very same as an angel’s. It has been remarked that she wrote numerous elegant and learned letters to popes, cardinals, princes, and great lords that reveal the beauty of her spirit, and the rule of her life. She received the highest of honors upon her canonization by the very learned Pope Pius II. Saint Gertrude124 is known for the excellent books she wrote on the perfection of the Christian life, showing us how God communicates with souls in spiritual retreat, who live the contemplative life. Her works are so wonderfully instructive that those who pursue the holy life understand the profit they gain from reading them. She was the Abbess of Nivelles in Brabant. Saint Theresa125 was the most extraordinary spirit that was ever called to the religious life. The seraphic love that she had for God lifted her soul by divine favor toward the very highest revelation, and placed a pen in her hand with which she wrote many books. Through the language of meditation she made manifest things that were truly marvelous, since her wise words showed us what divine succor can accomplish when it moves in a soul as pure and enlightened as hers. I cannot end these panegyrics more gloriously than by recalling the virtues and conduct of this beautiful spirit, the most remarkable soul ever to have entered the contemplative life.

The End

123. Saint Catherine of Siena (1347–1380) was an author, philosopher, and theologian, and a lay member of the Dominican Order. She is said to have received the stigmata while on a visit to Pisa, where she advocated for clergy reform. Canonized in 1461, she was proclaimed as the second female Doctor of the Roman Catholic Church in 1970 (after Saint Teresa, discussed later). 124. Gertrude of Nivelles (ca. 628–659) was a Benedictine nun who, with her mother, founded the Abbey of Nivelles in present-day Belgium. Buffet conflates her with the German-born Saint Gertrude the Great (1256–1302), also a Benedictine nun, and a prolific writer whose surviving works include Legatus Memorialis Abundantiae Divinae Pietatis (The Herald of Divine Love, or The Herald of God’s Loving Kindness) and a book of spiritual exercises. 125. Saint Teresa of Avila (1515–1582) was a Spanish mystic, Carmelite nun, author, and theologian of contemplative life through prayer. Canonized in 1622, she was proclaimed as the first female Doctor of the Roman Catholic Church in 1970. Her books include spiritual classics such as The Way of Perfection, The Interior Castle, and her autobiography, The Life of Teresa of Jesus.

A Treatise of Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present 123

Certificate of the King’s Privilege By the grace and Privilege of the King, given in Paris the 17th day of February 1667. Permission is given to Marguerite Buffet, Gentlewoman, to print a Book entitled, New Observations on the French Language, Treating of Old and Archaic Terms and the Proper Use of New Expressions, with Praises of Illustrious Learned Women, Past and Present. Except for the Seller, all others are forbidden to print, sell or retail copies for five years, counting from the day the first printing is completed, upon penalties and fines brought to bear by the aforementioned Privilege, and in accordance with what is more amply specified in the Original. Printed 16 January 1668. Registered in the Book of the Community of Printers and Booksellers126 in January 1668, in accordance with the Parliamentary decree of 8 April 1663. From the Press of Jean Cusson, the Younger, Rue S. Jacques, at the entrance to the Rue des Mathurins.

126. The French is Livre de la Communauté des Imprimeurs & Libraires.

Bibliography Primary Sources Académie Française. Observations de l’Académie française sur les remarques de M. Vaugelas. Paris: Jean Baptiste Coignard, 1704. ———. Statuts et règlements. Paris: Académie Française, 1995. . Agrippa von Nettesheim, Heinrich Cornelius. Declamation on the Nobility and Preeminence of the Female Sex. Translated and edited by Albert Rabil, Jr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Aristotle. The Art of Rhetoric. Translated by John Henry Freese. Revised by Gisela Striker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2020. ———. The Generation of Animals. Translated by A.L. Peck. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1942. Augustine. On the Trinity: Books 8–15. Edited by Gareth B. Matthews. Translated by Stephen McKenna. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Auteuil, Charles de Combault, baron d’. Blanche infant de Castille, mère de St. Louis, reyne et regent de France. Paris: Antoine de Sommaville and Augustine’s Courbe, 1644. Balzac, Jean-Louis Guez de. Les Entretiens de feu Monsieur de Balzac. Paris: Augustine’s Courbé, 1657. ———. Lettres familières de M. de Balzac à M. Chapelain. Leiden: Jean Elsevier, 1656. Boccaccio, Giovanni. Famous Women. Edited and translated by Virginia Brown. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001. Bouhours, Dominique. Remarques nouvelles sur la langue françoise. Paris: Sebastien Mabre-Cramoisy, 1675. Reprint, Paris: Georges and Louis Josse, 1692. ———. Suite des Remarques nouvelles sur la langue françoise. Paris: Georges and Louis Josse, 1692; reprint, 1693. Boyer, Abel. Le Dictionnaire Royal, François-Anglois et Anglois-François. Amsterdam: R. and G. Wetstein and Pierre Humbert, 1727. Reprint, London: Printed for W. Innys et al., 1748. Buffet, Marguerite. Nouvelles Observations sur la langue françoise; où il est traité des termes anciens et inusitez, et du bel usage des mots nouveaux. Avec les Eloges des illustres sçavantes, tant anciennes que modernes. Paris: Jean Cusson, 1668. Gallica: . Champier, Symphorien. The Ship of Virtuous Ladies. Edited and translated by Todd W. Reeser. Toronto: Iter Press; Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2018. 125

126 Bibliography Christine de Pizan. The Book of the City of Ladies. Translated by Earl Jeffrey Richards. Foreward by Marina Warner. New York: Persea Books, 1982. ———. The Book of the Mutability of Fortune. Edited and translated by Geri L. Smith. Toronto: Iter Press; Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2017. Coste, Hilarion de. Les Eloges et vies des reynes, princesses, dames et damoiselles illustres en piété, courage et doctrine. . . . Paris: Sébastien Cramoisy, 1630. Reprint, Paris: Sébastien and Gabriel Cramoisy, 1647. Diogenes Laertius. Plato. In Lives of Eminent Philosophers, translated by R.D. Hicks. Vol.1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972. ———. Pythagoras. In Lives of Eminent Philosophers, vol. 2, translated by R.D. Hicks. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1925; rev. ed., 1931. Dufour, Antoine. Les Vies de femmes celebres. Edited by Guillaume Jeanneau. Geneva: Droz, 1970. Dupleix, Scipion. Liberté de la langue Françoise dans sa pureté. Paris: Denys Bechet, 1651. Eusebius of Caesarea. The Ecclesiastical History. Translated by J.E.L. Oulton. Taken from the edition published with H.J. Lawlor. Vol. 2. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1932. Furetière, Antoine. Dictionnaire universel. The Hague and Rotterdam: Arnout and Reinier Leers, 1690. Gournay, Marie le Jars de. Apology for the Woman Writing and Other Works. Edited and translated by Richard Hillman and Colette Quesnel. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. ———. Les Idées littéraires de Mlle de Gournay: Réédition de ses traités philologiques. Edited by Ann Uildriks. Groningen, Netherlands: V.R.B. Kleine, 1962. Guillaume, Jacquette. Les Dames illustres, où par bonnes et fortes raisons il se prouve que le sexe féminin surpasse en toutes sortes des genres le sexe masculin. Paris: Thomas Jolly, 1665. Hesiod. Works and Days. In Theogony; Works and Days; Testimonia. Edited and translated by Glenn W. Most. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018. Le Journal des sçavans, de l’an M.DC.LXV. Amsterdam: Pierre Le Grand, 1679. Lafayette, Marie-Madeleine Pioche de La Vergne, comtesse de. Zayde: A Spanish Romance. Edited and translated by Nicholas D. Paige. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006. Le Moyne, Pierre. La Gallerie des femmes fortes. Paris: Antoine de Sommaville, 1647. Martial. Epigrams, Books 6–10. Translated by D. Shackleton Bailey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993. Ménage, Gilles. Observations de Monsieur Ménage sur la langue françoise. Paris: Claude Barbin, 1672; 2nd ed., Paris: Claude Barbin, 1675.

Bibliography 127 ———. Observations de Monsieur Ménage sur la langue françoise. Seconde partie. Paris: Claude Barbin, 1676. Molière. Les Femmes savantes (first performed 1672). Paris: Pierre Promé, 1672. ———. Les Précieuses ridicules (first performed 1659). Paris: Guillaume de Luyne, 1660. Montpensier, Anne-Marie-Louise d’Orléans, duchesse de. Against Marriage: The Correspondence of La Grande Mademoiselle. Edited and translated by Joan DeJean. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Origen. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Books 6–10. Translated by Thomas P. Scheck. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2002. Ovid. Fasti. Translated by James G. Fraser. Revised by G.P. Goold. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996. Parr, Catherine. Katherine Parr: Complete Works and Correspondence. Edited by Janel Mueller. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011. Pliny the Elder. Mithridates. In Natural History, Books 3–7, translated by Harris Rackham. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1942. Plutarch. Bravery of Women. In Moralia, vol. 3, translated by Frank Cole Babbitt. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931. ———. Camillus. In Lives, translated by Bernadotte Perrin. Vol. 2. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914. ———. Commentary on Hesiod’s Works and Days. In Moralia, vol. 15: Fragments, translated by F.H. Sandbach. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969. ———. Numa. In Lives, translated by Bernadotte Perrin. Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1915. ———. Pompey. In Lives, translated by Bernadotte Perrin. Vol. 5. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1917. ———. Sulla. In Lives, translated by Bernadotte Perrin. Vol. 4. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1916. Poullain de la Barre, François. De l’Egalité des deux sexes: Discours physique et moral où l’on voit l’importance de se défaire des préjugez. Paris: Jean Du Puis, 1673. ———. Three Cartesian Feminist Treatises. Introduction by Marcelle Maistre Welch. Translated by Vivien Bosley. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Pure, Michel de. La Prétieuse, ou Le Mystère des ruelles. Paris: Guillaume de Luyne, 1656. Scudéry, Madeleine de. Conversations sur divers sujets. 2 vols. Paris: Billaine, 1680. ———. Les Femmes illustres, ou Les Harangues héroïques. Paris: Antoine de Sommaville and Augustine’s Courbé, 1642.

128 Bibliography ———. “L’histoire de Sapho.” In Artamène, ou le Grand Cyrus. Paris: Augustine’s Courbé, 1649. ———. Selected Letters, Orations and Rhetorical Dialogues. Edited and translated by Jane Donawerth and Julie Strongson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004. ———. The Story of Sapho. Translated and with an introduction by Karen Newman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Somaize, Antoine Baudeau de. Le Grand dictionnaire des Prétieuses, ou, La Clef de la langue des ruelles. Paris: Jean Ribou, 1660; 2nd revised edition, 1661. Sorel, Charles. Les Récréations galantes. Paris: Estienne Loyson, 1671. Suchon, Gabrielle. A Woman Who Defends All the Persons of Her Sex: Selected Philosophical and Moral Writings. Edited and translated by Domna C. Stanton and Rebecca M. Wilkin. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2010. Tacitus. Annals. Translated by John Jackson. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1937. Tallemant, Paul. Remarques et décisions de l’Académie françoise. Paris: Jean-Baptiste Coignard, 1698. Tallemant des Reaux, Gédéon. Historiettes. Edited by Antoine Adam. Paris: Gallimard, 1967. Titon du Tillet, Evrard. Le Parnasse françois. Paris: Jean-Baptiste Coignard, 1732. Reprint, Geneva: Slatkine, 1971. Vaugelas, Claude Favre de. Remarques sur la langue française: Utiles à ceux qui veulent bien parler et bien écrire. Paris: Pierre le Petit, 1647. Reprint, Paris: Editions Ivrea, 1996. Vertron, Claude-Charles Guyonnet de. La Nouvelle Pandore; ou, Les Femmes illustres du siècle de Louis-le-Grand. Paris: Veuve de Claude Mazuel, 1698. Voiture, Vincent. Lettres. Edited by Octave Uzanne. Vol. 1. Paris: Librairie des Bibliophiles, 1880.

Secondary Sources Apostolidès, Jean-Marie. Le Roi-machine: Spectacle et politique au temps de Louis XIV. Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1981. Ayres-Bennett, Wendy. “Le Rôle des femmes dans l’élaboration des idées linguistiques au XVIIe siècle en France.” In “La Grammaire des Dames,” edited by Wendy Ayres-Bennett, special issue, Histoire Epistémologie Langage 16, no. 2 (1994): 35–53. ———. Vaugelas and the Development of the French Language. London: Modern Humanities Research Association, 1987. ———. “Vaugelas’s Literary Sources: Anciens, Modernes and Demi-Modernes.” Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur 117 (2007): 225–38.

Bibliography 129 Beasley, Faith E. “Changing the Conversation: Re-positioning the French Seventeenth-Century Salon.” L’Esprit Créateur 60 (2020): 34–46. ———. “Marguerite Buffet and la Sagesse Mondaine.” In Le Savoir au XVIIe siècle: Actes du 34e Congrès Annuel de la North American Society for SeventeenthCentury French Literature, ed. John D. Lyons and Cara Welch, 227–35. Tübingen: Narr Verlag, 2003. ———. Salons, History, and the Creation of Seventeenth-Century France: Mastering Memory. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006. ———, ed. Teaching Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century French Women Writers. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2011. Beaulieu, Jean-Philippe. “ ‘La gloire de nostre sexe’: Savantes et lectrices dans Les dames illustres (1665) de Jacquette Guillaume.” Etudes françaises 47 (2011): 127–42. ———. “Jacquette Guillaume et Marguerite Buffet: Vers une historiographie du savoir féminin?” In Les Femmes et l’écriture de l’histoire, 1400–1800, edited by Sylvie Steinberg and Jean-Claude Arnould, 325–39. Mont-Saint-Aignan: Presses Universitaires de Rouen et du Havre, 2008. Boudier de Villemert, Pierre-Joseph. Notice alphabétique des femmes célèbres en France. Amsterdam and Paris: Monory, 1779. Briquet, Fortunée. Dictionnaire historique, littéraire et bibliographique des françaises, et des étrangères naturalisées en France, connues par leurs écrits, ou par la protection qu’elles ont accordée aux gens de lettres, depuis l’établissement de la monarchie jusqu’à nos jours. Paris: Treuttel and Würtz, 1804. Burke, Peter. The Art of Conversation. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993. ———. The Fabrication of Louis XIV. New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press, 1992. Cave, Terence. Introduction to The Princesse de Clèves; The Princesse de Montpensier; The Comtesse de Tende, by Marie-Madeleine Pioche de La Vergne, comtesse de Lafayette, vii–xxx. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. Chang, Leah L. Into Print: The Production of Female Authorship in Early Modern France. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2009. ———. “Les Précautions ridicules: Textspin in 17th-century France.” Romance Notes 38 (1998): 333–41. Chartier, Roger. Lectures et lecteurs dans le France d’Ancien Régime. Paris: Seuil, 1987. Chartier, Roger, and Henri-Jean Martin, eds. Histoire d’édition française. Vol. 2, Le Livre triomphant, 1660–1830. Paris: Promodis, 1984. Chaudon, Louis M. Dictionnaire universel, historique, critique et bibliographique. Vol. 3. Paris: Mame frères, 1810. Classiques Garnier. Corpus des remarques sur la langue française (XVIIe siècle). .

130 Bibliography Clément, Michèle, and Edwige Keller-Rahbé, eds. Privilèges d’auteurs et d’autrices en France (XVIe–XVIIe siècles): Anthologie Critique. Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2017. Clément, Pierre. Une Abbesse de Fontevrault au XVIIe siècle: Gabrielle de Rochechouart de Mortemart, étude historique. Paris: Didier, 1869. Craveri, Benedetta. L’Age de la conversation. Translated by Eliane DeschampsPria. Paris: Gallimard, 2002. Davis, Nathalie Zemon. “ ‘Women’s History’ in Transition: The European Case.” Feminist Studies 3 (1976): 83–103.  DeJean, Joan. Fictions of Sapho, 1546–1937. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989. ———. Tender Geographies: Women and the Origins of the Novel in France. New York: Columbia University Press, 1991. Denis, Delphine. La Muse galante: Poétique de la conversation dans l’œuvre de Madeleine de Scudéry. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1997. ———. Le Parnasse galant: Institution d’une catégorie littéraire au XVIIe siècle. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2001. Dewald, Jonathan. Aristocratic Experience and the Origins of Modern Culture: France, 1570–1715. Berkeley  and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993. Ducharme, Isabelle. “Une Formule discursive au féminin: Marguerite Buffet et la Querelle des femmes.” Papers on French Seventeenth-Century Literature 30 (2003): 131–55. ———. “Marguerite Buffet: Lectrice de la Querelle des femmes.” In Lectrices d’Ancien Régime, edited by Isabelle Brouard-Arends, 331–40. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2003. Duchêne, Roger. Les Précieuses, ou comment l’esprit vint aux femmes. Paris: Fayard, 2001. Egger, Emile. Review of De la prononciation française depuis le commencement du XVIe siècle, d’après les témoignages des grammairiens, by Charles Thurot, vol. 1 (Paris, 1881). Journal des Sçavans (January 1883), 251–58. Feller, François-Xavier de. Dictionnaire historique, ou, Histoire abrégée des hommes qui se sont fait nom par leur génie, leurs talens, leurs vertus, leurs erreurs ou leurs crimes, depuis le commencement du monde jusqu’à nos jours. 8th ed. Vol. 3. Lille: L. Lefort, 1832. Genlis, Stéphanie Félicité de. De l’influence des femmes sur la literature française, comme protectrices des lettres et comme auteurs; ou Précis de l’histoire des femmes françaises les plus célèbres. Paris: Maradan, 1811. Godo, Emmanuel. La Conversation: Une utopie de l’éphémère. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2014.

Bibliography 131 Goldsmith, Elizabeth C. Exclusive Conversations: The Art of Interaction in Seventeenth-Century France. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988. Goldsmith, Elizabeth C., and Colette H. Winn, eds. Lettres de femmes: Textes inédits et oubliés du XVIe au XVIIIe siècles. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2005. Goodman, Dena. “L’Ortografe des Dames: Gender and Language in the Old Regime.” French Historical Studies 25 (2002):191–223. Grand, Nathalie. Stratégies de romancières: De Clélie à La Princesse de Clèves (1654–1678). Paris: Honoré Champion, 1999. Harth, Erica. Cartesian Women: Versions and Subversions of Rational Discourse in the Old Regime. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992. ———. Ideology and Culture in Seventeenth-Century France. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1983. Jensen, Katharine Ann. Writing Love: Letters, Women, and the Novel in France, 1605–1776. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1995. Jordan, Constance. “Feminism and the Humanists: The Case of Sir Thomas Elyot’s Defence of Good Women.” In Rewriting the Renaissance: The Discourses of Sexual Difference in Early Modern Europe. Edited by Margaret W. Ferguson, Maureen Quilligan, and Nancy J. Vickers, 242–58. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986. Keller-Rahbé, Edwige. “Pratiques et usages du privilège d’auteur chez Mme de Villedieu et quelques autres femmes de lettres du XVIIe siècle.” Œuvres et Critiques 35 (2010): 69–94. Kelly, Joan. “Early Feminist Theory and the Querelle des Femmes, 1400–1789.” Signs 8 (1982): 4–28. King, Margaret L. Women of the Renaissance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991. Kolsky, Stephen. The Ghost of Boccaccio: Writings on Famous Women in Renaissance Italy. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2005. La Croix, Jean-François de. Dictionnaire portatif des femmes célèbres: Contenant l’histoire des femmes savantes, des actrices, et généralement des dames qui se sont rendues fameuses dans tous les siècles par leurs aventures, les talents, l’esprit et le courage. Nouvelle édition revue et considérablement augmentée. Vol. 1. Paris: Belin, 1788. Lambert, Claude-François. Histoire littéraire du règne de Louis XIV. 3 vols. Paris: Prault fils, Guillyn, and Quillau fils, 1751. Larsen, Anne R. Anna Maria van Schurman, “The Star of Utrecht”: The Educational Vision and Reception of a Savante. London: Routledge, 2016. Lougee, Carolyn C. Le Paradis des femmes: Women, Salons and Social Stratification in Seventeenth-Century France. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.

132 Bibliography Luzarche, Victor. Catalogue des livres rares, curieux et singuliers en tous genres, bien conditionnés, et des manuscrits anciens (du Xe au XVIIIe siècle). Vol. 1. Paris: A. Claudin, 1868. Maclean, Ian. Woman Triumphant: Feminism in French Literature, 1610–1652. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977. Magne, Emile. Madame de La Suze (Henriette de Coligny) et la Société précieuse: Documents inédits. Paris: Société du Mercure de France, 1908. ———. Madame de Villedieu (Hortense des Jardins), 1632–1692: Documents inédits et portrait. Paris: Société du Mercure de France, 1907. Maître, Myriam. Les Précieuses: Naissance des femmes de lettres en France au 17e siècle. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1999. Mandrou, Robert. Introduction to Modern France, 1500–1640: An Essay in Historical Psychology. Translated by R.E. Hallmark. London: Edward Arnold, 1975. Originally published as Introduction à la France moderne, 1500–1640: Essai de psychologie historique. Paris: Albin Michel, 1961. McGowan, Richard J. “Augustine’s Spritual Equality: The Allegory of Man and Woman with Regard to Imago Dei.” Revue des Etudes Augustiniennes et Patristiques 33 (1987): 255–64. Meli, Cinthia. “Un bien dire à l’usage des bourgeoises: Les Nouvelles Observations sur la langue françoise (1668) de Marguerite Buffet.” In Femmes, rhétorique et éloquence sous l’Ancien Régime, edited by Claude La Charité and Roxanne Roy, 87–101. Saint-Etienne: Publications de l’Université de SaintEtienne, 2012. Paige, Nicholas D. “The Complexities of the French Classical Lexicon.” In Teaching Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century French Women Writers, edited and with an introduction by Faith E. Beasley, 17–24. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2011. Parker, Geoffrey. Emperor: A New Life of Charles V. New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press, 2019. Pascal, Catherine. “Les recueils de femmes illustres au XVIIe siècle.” Communication donnée lors des premières Rencontres de la SIEFAR: “Connaître les femmes de l’Ancien Régime. La question des recueils et dictionnaires.” Paris, June 20, 2003. . Pellegrin, Marie-Frédérique. “Cartesianism and Feminism.” Translated by Tad M. Schmaltz. In The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism, edited by Steven Nadler, Tad M. Schmaltz, and Delphine Antoine-Mahut, 565–79. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. Plantié, Jacqueline. La Mode du portrait littéraire en France, 1641–1681. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1994. Randall, David. The Concept of Conversation: From Cicero’s Sermo to the Grand Siècle’s Conversation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2018.

Bibliography 133 Rigolot, François. “The Invention of Female Authorship in Early Modern France.” In Teaching French Women Writers of the Renaissance and Reformation, edited by Colette H. Winn, 84–93. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2011. Roux, Sophie. “The Two Comets of 1664–1665: A Dispersive Prism for French Natural Philosophical Principles.” In The Idea of Principles in Early Modern Thought, edited by Peter R. Anstey, 98–146. London: Routledge, 2017. Schiebinger, Londa. The Mind Has No Sex?: Women in the Origins of Modern Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989. Siouffi, Gilles. Penser le langage à l’Age classique. Paris: Armand Colin, 2010. Staël, Germaine de. De la Littérature. Paris: Maradan, 1799. Reprint, Paris: Garnier-Flammarion, 1991. Stanton, Domna C. “The Fiction of Préciosité and the Fear of Women.” Yale French Studies 62 (1981): 107–34. Timmermans, Linda. L’Accès des femmes à la culture sous l’Ancien Régime (1598– 1715). Paris: Honoré Champion, 1993. Toinet, Raymond. “Les Ecrivains moralistes au XVIIe siècle.” Revue d’Histoire littéraire de la France 3/4 (1916): 570–610. ———. “Les Ecrivains moralistes au XVIIe siècle.” Revue d’Histoire littéraire de la France 4 (1917): 655–71. Viala, Alain. La France galante: Essai historique sur une catégorie culturelle, de ses origines jusqu’à la Revolution. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2008. ———. Naissance de l’écrivain: Sociologie de la littérature à l’âge classique. Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1985. Vienne-Guerrin, Nathalie, ed. The Unruly Tongue in Early Modern England. Madison and Teaneck, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2012.

Index Bouhours, Dominique, 4, 5 Bourbon, Jeanne de, 109 Breda, Siege of (1624), 112 Bridget of Sweden, Saint, 121 Briquet, Fortunée, 8, 33–34, 105n54 Bruslé (lawyer), 13, 21, 47–48 Brutus, Marcus Junius, 119n111

Académie Française, 3, 49n20; on comète, 84; on nonchalance, 61n52; on taxer, 60n50 Adèle de Champagne, 89 alphabet, development of, 9n32, 52–53 Amasis, Egyptian Pharaoh, 66n70 Amazons, 87–88 Amyot, Jacques, 66n69, 110n73 anagramme, 72 Anne de Bretagne, 89 Aquinas, Thomas, Saint, 110 archaic terms, 17–18, 54–64 Aristotle, 93, 98; on rhetoric, 1n4; on women, 28, 29, 90 Aspasia of Miletus, 100, 116 Athenais, Byzantine empress, 118 Auchy, vicomtesse d’ (Jouvenel des Ursins), 107 Augustine, Saint, 30, 85n1 Augustus, Roman Emperor, 117 Aurelia (Julius Caesar’s mother), 88 Auteuil, baron d’ (Charles de Combault), 109 avindre, 53

cabinet, 3, 14, 47n13, 56 Calixtus II (pope), 86n7 Camilla (Volsci warrior), 88 Catherine of Alexandria, Saint, 121 Catherine of Aragon, 111–12 Catherine of Siena, Saint, 106, 122 Cato the Elder, 78 Cato the Younger, 119n111 Cave, Terence, 38 Cervantes, Miguel de, 12n45 Champier, Symphorien, 30–31 Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, 50, 112 Chaudon, Louis Mayeul, 34–35 Chaulnes, Antoinette d’Albert d’Ailly de, 106 Christina of Sweden, 31, 32, 49, 94–95 Christine de Pizan, 1n2, 26–27, 30, 109n69 Cicero, 21, 48, 71. See also Tullia Claudius, Roman Emperor, 87–88 Cloelia (Roman maiden), 118 Clotilde, Frankish queen, 85–86, 108 Coeffeteau, Nicolas, 110n73 Colletet, Guillaume, 5 conjoncture, 61 Constantine I, Roman Emperor, 118 conversation, art of, 2–3, 9, 99–101; salons and, 33. See also eloquence

Balzac, Jean-Louis Guez de, 6, 15, 61n53, 63n64 “barbarous” terms, 17–18, 54–64 Beasley, Faith, 6–7, 17 beau, 39 belles-lettres, 47n15, 89n19, 93n24 Bijns, Anna, 113 bizarre, 22, 72 Blanche de Castille, 89, 109 Boccaccio, Giovanni, 13n47, 26–27, 30 Bonnevaux, Madame de, 100, 101n43 135

136 Index Coriolanus, Gnaeus Marcius, 117 Cornelia (mother of the Gracchi), 48, 96, 115 corrupted terms, 51, 70–71 Coste, Hilarion de, 26, 27 Croesus, King of Lydia, 71 Cusson, Jean, 13, 15, 123 Damo (Pythagorean philosopher), 119n113 de claribus genre, 2, 34 DeJean, Joan, 5, 7 Descartes, Jeanne, 104 Descartes, René, 100, 101n43 Desjardins, Marie-Catherine Hortense (Madame de Villedieu), 10, 103 Déspinasse, Mademoiselle, 104–5 dicté, 58 Diogenes Laertius, 65n67, 92n23 Dobrawa, Bohemian princess, 86n6 docte, 6, 16, 46n12, 58 Ducharme, Isabelle, 27–28 Dupleix, Scipion, 4 Dupré, Marie, 33, 104 Egger, Emile, 35–36 Egyptian writing system, 52 eloquence, 3, 23, 53; art of, 14–15, 18–19, 77; Bruslé on, 47–48; of Cicero, 21, 48, 71; of Cornelia, 115n93; discretion and, 20, 64; patrons of, 20, 70; salons and, 25, 33; social status and, 9, 15–16, 78; of Voiture, 24, 79. See also conversation, art of encanailler, 57 epideictic, 1, 26 Erasmus, Desiderius, 66n70, 108n63 Erinna (Greek poet), 120 esclavitude, 60

esprit, 38, 44n5, 49n19, 82. See also soul Eucharius, Gilles (Elooi Hoeckaert), 113 euphemia, 65n68 fâché, 58, 60, 69 Fausta, Flavia Maxima, 118n107 Fedele, Cassandra, 113–14 Feller, François-Xavier de, 35 feminism. See proto-feminism femme forte, 6 Ficino, Marsilio, 30–31 flattery, 32, 58 Fouquet, Nicolas, 99n39 François I of France, 110 friendship, 6, 23, 46, 67, 76 galant, 38, 58, 63, 96n36 garrulousness, 18–20, 64–70. See also pleonasm Gera, Deborah, 116n97 Gertrude, Saint, 122n124 Gertrude of Nivelles, 122 Gilles de Paris, 86 Gisela, Hungarian queen, 86 gossip, 66–67 Gournay, Marie Le Jars de, 10, 30, 35–36, 107 Gozzadini, Bettisia, 114 Granvelle, Antoine Perrenot de, 113n83 Greek alphabet, 52–53 Gregory, Saint, 121 Guédreville, Marie Thiersault de, 101 Guillaume, Jacquette, 27, 34, 37, 103 habile, 29, 39, 47n14 hair extentions, 56 Harth, Erica, 100n41, 101n43 Hedwig, Polish queen, 86 Helena, Roman empress, 86

Index 137 Helvia (Seneca’s mother), 119n112 Henry VIII of England, 112 Hesiod, 66n70 Horace, 32, 100 Hortensia, 115 humoral theories, 28–29, 91 Huygens, Christiaan, 101n43 Hypatia, 120, 121n122 incognito, 60 Indegonde, Spanish princess, 85–86, 108 Isabella Clara Eugenia, Spanish infanta, 112 Isabelle of France, 88 Jerome, Saint, 119 Joan of Arc, Saint, 88n15, 121n122 John XIII (pope), 86 Jordan, Constance, 2n5 joyeuse, 60 Judith (biblical heroine), 88 Julius Caesar, 67n72, 71, 88, 119n111 Keller-Rahbé, Edwige, 10–11 Kelly, Joan, 1n2 Labé, Louise, 10 La Croix, Jean-François de, 8n30 Lafayette, comtesse de (MarieMadeleine Pioche de La Vergne), 10, 39 La Mothe-Houdancourt, maréchale de (Louise de Prie), 97–98 La Mothe Le Vayer, François de, 107 La Serre, Monsieur de, 111 La Suze, comtesse de (Henriette de Coligny), 37, 99–100 Latin alphabet, 52–53 Le Jars de Gournay, Marie, 30n115 Le Moyne, Pierre, 27, 85n1, 120n119 L’Esclache, Madame de, 102

letter-writing, 2, 23–25, 77–78, 96–97, 99n39 L’Hôpital, Lucrèce de, 33, 98 Livia Drusilla, 88–89, 117–18 Lorraine, Louise-Marguerite de, 111 Lougee, Carolyn C., 31 Luzarche, Victor, 36–37 Macrina the Younger, Saint, 121n120 madré, 55 Magne, Emile, 37 Malherbe, François de, 60n48, 110n73, 111 Mamaea, Julia, 117n102 Marcellus, Marcus Claudius, 71n79 Marcia (Julius Caesar’s grandmother), 88 Marcia, British queen, 114 Margaret of Parma, 112–13 Marie-Thérèse of Austria, 9, 11, 44n4 Martin, Henri-Jean, 15 Mary, Queen of Scots, 120–21 Mazarin, Jules, 12n44 Medici, Catherine de’, 89, 109–10 Medici, Marie de’, 5 Ménage, Gilles, 4 mesque, 54 Metella, Cornelia, 116n99 Miramminy, Madame de, 101–2 misogyny, 4, 7, 28–29 mispronunciation. See pronunciation Mithridates VI of Pontus, 31–32, 49, 95 Molière, 7, 19, 57n41 Montaigne, Michel de, 35, 107 Montausier, duchesse de (Julie Lucine d’Angennes de Rambouillet), 96–97 More, Thomas, 108 Morelle, Julienne, 106 Mortmart, Mademoiselle de, 105, 106 Mueller, Janel, 112n79

138 Index Neoplatonism, 30–31 Newman, Karen, 6 nonchalance, 61 Numa Pompilius, 19, 65 Olga, Saint, 86 Orléans, duc d’ (Philippe I), 78 ortodoxe, 59 Otrera, Amazon queen, 88n13 Ovid, 65n69, 100 Paige, Nicholas, 7 Pamphile of Epidaurus, 116 Pantea Arteshbod (Persian general), 115n92 Parker, Geoffrey, 50n24 Parr, Catherine, 112n79 Paul, Saint, 85n1, 107 pedantic terms, 16, 21, 36, 51 Pericles, 100, 116 Philip II of Spain, 112 Philippe I, duc d’Orléans, 78 Phoebe (Christian minister), 87n11 Phoenician alphabet, 52 Piloust, Monsieur du, 111 Pius II (pope), 122 Pizan, Christine de. See Christine de Pizan Plato, 30–31, 87, 92–93; on Sappho, 65n69; on women, 28, 29, 90 Pléiade, 109n71, 110 pleonasm, 19–20, 51, 64n66, 67–70 Plessis-Bellière, Suzanne du, 99 Pliny the Elder, 49n21 Plutarch, 66n70, 119; on Cornelia, 116n99; on Numa, 65n69; on Portia, 87; on Sulla, 67n72; on Tutula, 116n100 Portia, 119 poulet, 56 Poullain de la Barre, François, 30, 34 préciosité, 6–7, 19, 57n41

Premierfait, Laurent de, 26n100 Prie, Louise de (maréchale de La Mothe-Houdancourt), 97–98 privilège d’auteur, 10–11 privilège du roy, 10, 21, 123 pronunciation, 20–23, 51, 59, 71–76 proto-feminism, 1–3, 5, 7, 33. See also querelle des femmes provincial speech, 4, 14, 58, 63; oldfashioned and, 17, 55, 68; superfluous, 20 punctuation, 75–76 Pure, Michel de, 7 “purity” of language, 3, 14, 49n20 Pythagoras, 19, 65, 119, 120 querelle des femmes, 1, 4–7, 26–28; Champier on, 31; Gournay on, 36. See also proto-feminism Racine, Jean, 105n54 railleur, 63 Rambouillet, marquise de (Catherine de Vivonne): salon of, 5, 96n34; Voiture and, 12n45 redundancy. See pleonasm Reeser, Todd, 30–31 remarques genre, 14 Retz, duchesse de (Claude Catherine de Clermont-Tonnerre), 111 Richelieu, duc de, 3 Rochechouart-Mortemart, Marie Madeleine Gabrielle Adélaide de, 105, 106 Romanelli, Gian Francesco, 12n44 Ronsard, Pierre de, 109, 110 Roper, Margaret More, 108 ruelles, 5–8, 21, 25–26, 33, 57n41, 67. See also salons Ruoti, Maria Clemente, 107

Index 139 salons, 5–8, 25–26, 33, 67; “Cartesian,” 101n43; of Rambouillet, 5, 96n34; of Scudéry, 5–6 Sant’ Elpidio, Antonio da, 26n100 Sappho, 120; Plato on, 65n69; Scudéry on, 6, 18, 95, 120n118 Savoy, Marguerite de, 110 Schurman, Anna Maria van, 3, 31–32, 49, 95; Rambouillet’s salon and, 5 Scudéry, Georges de, 10–11 Scudéry, Madeleine de, 3, 31, 95–96; author’s privilege of, 10–11; on garrulousness, 18n68; Martin on, 15; salon of, 5–6; on Sapho, 6, 18, 95; works of, 27, 34, 95n32 Semiramis, Assyrian queen, 88 Seneca, Lucius Annaeus, 81, 105n55, 119 seriosité, 61 Severus Alexander, Roman Emperor, 117 Sévigné, marquise de (Marie de Rabutin-Chantal), 99n39 Socrates, 19, 65, 100, 116 Solomon, Israeli king, 28, 90, 93 Somaize, Antoine Baudeau de, 7 soul, 29–31, 85, 91, 121, 122. See also esprit Sparta, 65n68, 88 Sulla, Lucius Cornelius, 67 Sulpicia (Calenus’s spouse), 115n96 supplier, 61 Tacitus, 9n32, 52n27, 53n31 Tallemant, Paul, 4 taxer, 60 Teresa of Avila, Saint, 122 Themistoclea (Pythagoras’s sister), 120 Theodosius II, Byzantine Emperor, 118

Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648), 97n37 Thomyris, Massagete queen, 88 Thurot, Charles, 35–36 Tiberius, Roman Emperor, 117–18 Toinet, Raymond, 37 Tullia (Cicero’s daughter), 13, 20–21, 48, 70, 115 Tutula, 116n100 Valois, Marguerite de, 110 Vaugelas, Claude Favre de, 3–5, 69, 110n73; on incognito, 60n49; on language “purity,” 3, 14, 49n20; on pleonasm, 68n74; on seriosité, 61n53 verbs, 22, 23, 74; conjugations of, 17–18, 51–52 Vertron, Claude-Charles Guyonnet de, 34 Veturia (Volumnia), 117 Villedieu, Madame de (Hortense Desjardins), 10, 37 Vincent, Saint, 106 Voiture, Vincent, 11–12, 24, 32, 46n11 William of Orange, 113n83 “woman question.” See querelle des femmes Zenobia, Queen of Palmyra, 87n12, 88

The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series

Series Titles Madre María Rosa Journey of Five Capuchin Nuns Edited and translated by Sarah E. Owens Volume 1, 2009 Giovan Battista Andreini Love in the Mirror: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Jon R. Snyder Volume 2, 2009 Raymond de Sabanac and Simone Zanacchi Two Women of the Great Schism: The Revelations of Constance de Rabastens by Raymond de Sabanac and Life of the Blessed Ursulina of Parma by Simone Zanacchi Edited and translated by Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski and Bruce L. Venarde Volume 3, 2010 Oliva Sabuco de Nantes Barrera The True Medicine Edited and translated by Gianna Pomata Volume 4, 2010 Louise-Geneviève Gillot de Sainctonge Dramatizing Dido, Circe, and Griselda Edited and translated by Janet Levarie Smarr Volume 5, 2010

Pernette du Guillet Complete Poems: A Bilingual Edition Edited with introduction and notes by Karen Simroth James Poems translated by Marta Rijn Finch Volume 6, 2010 Antonia Pulci Saints’ Lives and Bible Stories for the Stage: A Bilingual Edition Edited by Elissa B. Weaver Translated by James Wyatt Cook Volume 7, 2010 Valeria Miani Celinda, A Tragedy: A Bilingual Edition Edited with an introduction by Valeria Finucci Translated by Julia Kisacky Annotated by Valeria Finucci and Julia Kisacky Volume 8, 2010 Enchanted Eloquence: Fairy Tales by Seventeenth-Century French Women Writers Edited and translated by Lewis C. Seifert and Domna C. Stanton Volume 9, 2010

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Sophie, Electress of Hanover and Queen Sophie Charlotte of Prussia Leibniz and the Two Sophies: The Philosophical Correspondence Edited and translated by Lloyd Strickland Volume 10, 2011 In Dialogue with the Other Voice in Sixteenth-Century Italy: Literary and Social Contexts for Women’s Writing Edited by Julie D. Campbell and Maria Galli Stampino Volume 11, 2011 Sister Giustina Niccolini The Chronicle of Le Murate Edited and translated by Saundra Weddle Volume 12, 2011 Liubov Krichevskaya No Good without Reward: Selected Writings: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Brian James Baer Volume 13, 2011 Elizabeth Cooke Hoby Russell The Writings of an English Sappho Edited by Patricia Phillippy With translations from Greek and Latin by Jaime Goodrich Volume 14, 2011 Lucrezia Marinella Exhortations to Women and to Others If They Please Edited and translated by Laura Benedetti Volume 15, 2012 Margherita Datini Letters to Francesco Datini Translated by Carolyn James and Antonio Pagliaro Volume 16, 2012

Delarivier Manley and Mary Pix English Women Staging Islam, 1696–1707 Edited and introduced by Bernadette Andrea Volume 17, 2012 Cecilia del Nacimiento Journeys of a Mystic Soul in Poetry and Prose Introduction and prose translations by Kevin Donnelly Poetry translations by Sandra Sider Volume 18, 2012 Lady Margaret Douglas and Others The Devonshire Manuscript: A Women’s Book of Courtly Poetry Edited and introduced by Elizabeth Heale Volume 19, 2012 Arcangela Tarabotti Letters Familiar and Formal Edited and translated by Meredith K. Ray and Lynn Lara Westwater Volume 20, 2012 Pere Torrellas and Juan de Flores Three Spanish Querelle Texts: Grisel and Mirabella, The Slander against Women, and The Defense of Ladies against Slanderers: A Bilingual Edition and Study Edited and translated by Emily C. Francomano Volume 21, 2013 Barbara Torelli Benedetti Partenia, a Pastoral Play: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Lisa Sampson and Barbara Burgess-Van Aken Volume 22, 2013

François Rousset, Jean Liebault, Jacques Guillemeau, Jacques Duval and Louis de Serres Pregnancy and Birth in Early Modern France: Treatises by Caring Physicians and Surgeons (1581–1625) Edited and translated by Valerie WorthStylianou Volume 23, 2013 Mary Astell The Christian Religion, as Professed by a Daughter of the Church of England Edited by Jacqueline Broad Volume 24, 2013 Sophia of Hanover Memoirs (1630–1680) Edited and translated by Sean Ward Volume 25, 2013 Katherine Austen Book M: A London Widow’s Life Writings Edited by Pamela S. Hammons Volume 26, 2013 Anne Killigrew “My Rare Wit Killing Sin”: Poems of a Restoration Courtier Edited by Margaret J. M. Ezell Volume 27, 2013 Tullia d’Aragona and Others The Poems and Letters of Tullia d’Aragona and Others: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Julia L. Hairston Volume 28, 2014 Luisa de Carvajal y Mendoza The Life and Writings of Luisa de Carvajal y Mendoza Edited and translated by Anne J. Cruz Volume 29, 2014

Russian Women Poets of the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Amanda Ewington Volume 30, 2014 Jacques Du Bosc L’Honnête Femme: The Respectable Woman in Society and the New Collection of Letters and Responses by Contemporary Women Edited and translated by Sharon Diane Nell and Aurora Wolfgang Volume 31, 2014 Lady Hester Pulter Poems, Emblems, and The Unfortunate Florinda Edited by Alice Eardley Volume 32, 2014 Jeanne Flore Tales and Trials of Love, Concerning Venus’s Punishment of Those Who Scorn True Love and Denounce Cupid’s Sovereignity: A Bilingual Edition and Study Edited and translated by Kelly Digby Peebles Poems translated by Marta Rijn Finch Volume 33, 2014 Veronica Gambara Complete Poems: A Bilingual Edition Critical introduction by Molly M. Martin Edited and translated by Molly M. Martin and Paola Ugolini Volume 34, 2014 Catherine de Médicis and Others Portraits of the Queen Mother: Polemics, Panegyrics, Letters Translation and study by Leah L. Chang and Katherine Kong Volume 35, 2014

Françoise Pascal, MarieCatherine Desjardins, Antoinette Deshoulières, and Catherine Durand Challenges to Traditional Authority: Plays by French Women Authors, 1650–1700 Edited and translated by Perry Gethner Volume 36, 2015 Franciszka Urszula Radziwiłłowa Selected Drama and Verse Edited by Patrick John Corness and Barbara Judkowiak Translated by Patrick John Corness Translation Editor Aldona Zwierzyńska-Coldicott Introduction by Barbara Judkowiak Volume 37, 2015 Diodata Malvasia Writings on the Sisters of San Luca and Their Miraculous Madonna Edited and translated by Danielle Callegari and Shannon McHugh Volume 38, 2015 Margaret Van Noort Spiritual Writings of Sister Margaret of the Mother of God (1635–1643) Edited by Cordula van Wyhe Translated by Susan M. Smith Volume 39, 2015 Giovan Francesco Straparola The Pleasant Nights Edited and translated by Suzanne Magnanini Volume 40, 2015 Angélique de Saint-Jean Arnauld d’Andilly Writings of Resistance Edited and translated by John J. Conley, S.J. Volume 41, 2015

Francesco Barbaro The Wealth of Wives: A Fifteenth-Century Marriage Manual Edited and translated by Margaret L. King Volume 42, 2015 Jeanne d’Albret Letters from the Queen of Navarre with an Ample Declaration Edited and translated by Kathleen M. Llewellyn, Emily E. Thompson, and Colette H. Winn Volume 43, 2016 Bathsua Makin and Mary More with a reply to More by Robert Whitehall Educating English Daughters: Late Seventeenth-Century Debates Edited by Frances Teague and Margaret J. M. Ezell Associate Editor Jessica Walker Volume 44, 2016 Anna StanisŁawska Orphan Girl: A Transaction, or an Account of the Entire Life of an Orphan Girl by way of Plaintful Threnodies in the Year 1685: The Aesop Episode Verse translation, introduction, and commentary by Barry Keane Volume 45, 2016 Alessandra Macinghi Strozzi Letters to Her Sons, 1447–1470 Edited and translated by Judith Bryce Volume 46, 2016

Mother Juana de la Cruz Mother Juana de la Cruz, 1481–1534: Visionary Sermons Edited by Jessica A. Boon and Ronald E. Surtz Introductory material and notes by Jessica A. Boon Translated by Ronald E. Surtz and Nora Weinerth Volume 47, 2016 Claudine-Alexandrine Guérin de Tencin Memoirs of the Count of Comminge and The Misfortunes of Love Edited and translated by Jonathan Walsh Foreword by Michel Delon Volume 48, 2016 Feliciana Enríquez de Guzmán, Ana Caro Mallén, and Sor Marcela de San Félix Women Playwrights of Early Modern Spain Edited by Nieves Romero-Díaz and Lisa Vollendorf Translated and annotated by Harley Erdman Volume 49, 2016 Anna Trapnel Anna Trapnel’s Report and Plea; or, A Narrative of Her Journey from London into Cornwall Edited by Hilary Hinds Volume 50, 2016 María Vela y Cueto Autobiography and Letters of a Spanish Nun Edited by Susan Diane Laningham Translated by Jane Tar Volume 51, 2016

Christine de Pizan The Book of the Mutability of Fortune Edited and translated by Geri L. Smith Volume 52, 2017 Marguerite d’Auge, Renée Burlamacchi, and Jeanne du Laurens Sin and Salvation in Early Modern France: Three Women’s Stories Edited, and with an introduction by Colette H. Winn Translated by Nicholas Van Handel and Colette H. Winn Volume 53, 2017 Isabella d’Este Selected Letters Edited and translated by Deanna Shemek Volume 54, 2017 Ippolita Maria Sforza Duchess and Hostage in Renaissance Naples: Letters and Orations Edited and translated by Diana Robin and Lynn Lara Westwater Volume 55, 2017 Louise Bourgeois Midwife to the Queen of France: Diverse Observations Translated by Stephanie O’Hara Edited by Alison Klairmont Lingo Volume 56, 2017 Christine de Pizan Othea’s Letter to Hector Edited and translated by Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski and Earl Jeffrey Richards Volume 57, 2017

Marie-Geneviève-Charlotte Thiroux d’Arconville Selected Philosophical, Scientific, and Autobiographical Writings Edited and translated by Julie Candler Hayes Volume 58, 2018

Margaret Fell Women’s Speaking Justified and Other Pamphlets Edited by Jane Donawerth and Rebecca M. Lush Volume 65, 2018

Lady Mary Wroth Pamphilia to Amphilanthus in Manuscript and Print Edited by Ilona Bell Texts by Steven W. May and Ilona Bell Volume 59, 2017

Mary Wroth, Jane Cavendish, and Elizabeth Brackley Women’s Household Drama: Loves Victorie, A Pastorall, and The concealed Fansyes Edited by Marta Straznicky and Sara Mueller Volume 66, 2018

Witness, Warning, and Prophecy: Quaker Women’s Writing, 1655–1700 Edited by Teresa Feroli and Margaret Olofson Thickstun Volume 60, 2018 Symphorien Champier The Ship of Virtuous Ladies Edited and translated by Todd W. Reeser Volume 61, 2018 Isabella Andreini Mirtilla, A Pastoral: A Bilingual Edition Edited by Valeria Finucci Translated by Julia Kisacky Volume 62, 2018 Margherita Costa The Buffoons, A Ridiculous Comedy: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Sara E. Díaz and Jessica Goethals Volume 63, 2018 Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle Poems and Fancies with The Animal Parliament Edited by Brandie R. Siegfried Volume 64, 2018

Eleonora Fonseca Pimentel From Arcadia to Revolution: The Neapolitan Monitor and Other Writings Edited and translated by Verina R. Jones Volume 67, 2019 Charlotte Arbaleste DuplessisMornay, Anne de Chaufepié, and Anne Marguerite Petit Du Noyer The Huguenot Experience of Persecution and Exile: Three Women’s Stories Edited by Colette H. Winn Translated by Lauren King and Colette H. Winn Volume 68, 2019 Anne Bradstreet Poems and Meditations Edited by Margaret Olofson Thickstun Volume 69, 2019 Arcangela Tarabotti Antisatire: In Defense of Women, against Francesco Buoninsegni Edited and translated by Elissa B. Weaver Volume 70, 2020

Mary Franklin and Hannah Burton She Being Dead Yet Speaketh: The Franklin Family Papers Edited by Vera J. Camden Volume 71, 2020 Lucrezia Marinella Love Enamored and Driven Mad Edited and translated by Janet E. Gomez and Maria Galli Stampino Volume 72, 2020 Arcangela Tarabotti Convent Paradise Edited and translated by Meredith K. Ray and Lynn Lara Westwater Volume 73, 2020 Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve Beauty and the Beast: The Original Story Edited and translated by Aurora Wolfgang Volume 74, 2020 Flaminio Scala The Fake Husband, A Comedy Edited and translated by Rosalind Kerr Volume 75, 2020 Anne Vaughan Lock Selected Poetry, Prose, and Translations, with Contextual Materials Edited by Susan M. Felch Volume 76, 2021 Camilla Erculiani Letters on Natural Philosophy: The Scientific Correspondence of a SixteenthCentury Pharmacist, with Related Texts Edited by Eleonora Carinci Translated by Hannah Marcus Foreword by Paula Findlen Volume 77, 2021

Regina Salomea Pilsztynowa My Life’s Travels and Adventures: An Eighteenth-Century Oculist in the Ottoman Empire and the European Hinterland Edited and translated by Władysław Roczniak Volume 78, 2021 Christine de Pizan The God of Love’s Letter and The Tale of the Rose: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Thelma S. Fenster and Christine Reno With Jean Gerson, “A Poem on Man and Woman.” Translated from the Latin by Thomas O’Donnell Foreword by Jocelyn Wogan-Browne Volume 79, 2021 Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, Marquise de Villars Letters from Spain: A Seventeenth-Century French Noblewoman at the Spanish Royal Court Edited and translated by Nathalie Hester Volume 80, 2021 Anna Maria van Schurman Letters and Poems to and from Her Mentor and Other Members of Her Circle Edited and translated by Anne R. Larsen and Steve Maiullo Volume 81, 2021 Vittoria Colonna Poems of Widowhood: A Bilingual Edition of the 1538 Rime Translation and introduction by Ramie Targoff Edited by Ramie Targoff and Troy Tower Volume 82, 2021

Valeria Miani Amorous Hope, A Pastoral Play: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Alexandra Coller Volume 83, 2020 Madeleine de Scudéry Lucrece and Brutus: Glory in the Land of Tender Edited and translated by Sharon Diane Nell Volume 84, 2021 Anna StanisŁawska One Body with Two Souls Entwined: An Epic Tale of Married Love in Seventeenth-Century Poland Orphan Girl: The Oleśnicki Episode Verse translation, introduction, and commentary by Barry Keane Volume 85, 2021 Christine de Pizan Book of the Body Politic Edited and translated by Angus J. Kennedy Volume 86, 2021 Anne, Lady Halkett A True Account of My Life and Selected Meditations Edited by Suzanne Trill Volume 87, 2022 Vittoria Colonna Selected Letters, 1523–1546: A Bilingual Edition Edited and annotated by Veronica Copello Translated by Abigail Brundin Introduction by Abigail Brundin and Veronica Copello Volume 88, 2022

Michele Savonarola A Mother’s Manual for the Women of Ferrara: A Fifteenth-Century Guide to Pregnancy and Pediatrics Edited, with introduction and notes, by Gabriella Zuccolin Translated by Martin Marafioti Volume 89, 2022 Maria Salviati de’ Medici Selected Letters, 1514–1543 Edited and translated by Natalie R. Tomas Volume 90, 2022 Isabella Andreini Lovers’ Debates for the Stage: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Pamela Allen Brown, Julie D. Campbell, and Eric Nicholson Volume 91, 2022 Marie Guyart de l’Incarnation, Anne-Marie Fiquet Du Boccage, and Henriette-Lucie Dillon de La Tour du Pin Far from Home in Early Modern France: Three Women’s Stories Edited and with an introduction by Colette H. Winn Translated by Lauren King, Elizabeth Hagstrom, and Colette H. Winn Volume 92, 2022 Marie-Catherine Le Jumel de Barneville, baronne d’Aulnoy Travels into Spain Edited and translated by Gabrielle M. Verdier Volume 93, 2022

Pierre de Vaux and Sister Perrine de Baume Two Lives of Saint Colette. With a Selection of Letters by, to, and about Colette Edited and translated by Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski Volume 94, 2022 Dorothy Calthorpe News from the Midell Regions and Calthorpe’s Chapel Edited by Julie A. Eckerle Volume 95, 2022 Elizabeth Poole The Prophetess and the Patriarch: The Visions of an Anti-Regicide in SeventeenthCentury England Edited by Katharine Gillespie Volume 96, 2023 Mary Carleton and Others The Carleton Bigamy Trial Edited by Megan Matchinske Volume 97, 2023 Marie Baudoin The Art of Childbirth: A Seventeenth-Century Midwife’s Epistolary Treatise to Doctor Vallant A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Cathy McClive Volume 98, 2022