Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 9.djvu/706

 670 FRANCE [LITERATURE. of the Philosophe party was declared, there appeared for a brief space a group of cynical and accomplished phrase- makers presenting some similarity to that of which a hundred years before St Evremond was the most promi- Chamfort. nent figure. The chief of this group were Chamfort (1747- Rivarol. 1794^ on t i ie republican side,, and Rivarol (1753-1801) on that of the royalists. Like the older writer to whom we have compared them, neither can be said to have produced any one work of eminence, and in this they stand distin guished from moralists like La Rochefoucauld. The float ing sayings, however, which are attributed to them, or which occur here and there in their miscellaneous work, yield in no respect to those of the most famous of their pre decessors in wit and a certain kind of wisdom, though they are frequently more personal than aphoristic. 18^/t Century Moralists and Politicians. Not the least part, however, of the energy of the period in thought and writing was devoted to questions of a directly moral and political kind. The grave social and economical evils under which France laboured made this devotion almost inevitable; and though we have already noticed under the bead of his tory a certain number of works written under this inspi ration, a still larger proportion remains to be mentioned moral, political, and economical works having had, from the time of Aristotle downwards, sufficient connexion to be treated together. With regard to morality proper the favourite doctrine of the century was what is commonly called the selfish theory, the only one indeed which was suit able to the sensationalism of Condillac and the materialism of Holbach. The pattern book of this doctrine was the De Uelvetius. V Esprit of Helvetius (1715-1771), the most amusing book perhaps which ever pretended to the title of a solemn philo sophical treatise. There is some analogy between the prin ciples of this work and those of the Systeme de la Nature. With the inconsistency some would say with the question able honesty which distinguished the more famous mem bers of the Philosophe party when their disciples spoke with what they considered imprudent -outspokenness, Voltaire and even Diderot attacked Helvdtius as the former after wards attacked Holbach. Both were guilty of disregard ing the curious cant of noble sentiment which was so clear to the 18th century, and with the tenacious steadiness of traditional criticism it has been usual to speak slightingly of Helvetius ever since. The truth is that, whatever may be the general value of De V Esprit, it is full of acuteness, though that acuteness is as desultory and disjointed as its style. As Helve&quot; tins may be taken as the representative Thomas, author of the cynical school, so perhaps Thomas (1732- 1795) may be taken as representative of the votaries of noble sentiment to whom we have also alluded. The works of Thomas chiefly took the form of academic eloges or formal panegyrics, and they have all the defects, both in manner and substance, which are associated with that style. They were, however, useful in their way, as counteracting the prevailing cynicism, and have some literary importance, as being perhaps the least dead of an enormous mass of similar literature which was composed at the time. Of yet a third school, corresponding in form to La Rochefoucauld and La Bruyere, and possessed of some of the antique vigour of Vauven- preceding centuries, was Vauvenargues ( 1 71 5 -1 747). This argues, writer, who died very young, has produced maxims and reflexions of considerable mental force and literary finish. From Voltaire downwards it has been usual to compare him with Pascal, from whom he is chiefly distinguished by a striking but somewhat empty stoicism. Between the moralists, of whom we have taken these three as examples, and the politicians may be placed Rousseau, who in his novels and miscellaneous works is of the first class, in his famous Control Social of the second. The characteristics of Rousseau are too well known to need lengthy description. His discontent with the established social order and arrange ments of the world led him, on the one hand, to advocate alterations in individual morality, such as the discarding of the vices and corruptions of civilization, and the return to a simpler and less complicated manner of living ; on the other to develop and urge theories respecting the constitu tion of the body politic, which, if not altogether novel in their nature, were made so by the force of their statement and the literary beauties of its form. Rousseau s work was continued on the moral and literary rather than the political side by Bcrnardin de Saint Pierre. Of direct and avowed political writings there were few during the century, and none of anything like the importance of the Contrat Social, theoretical acceptance of the established French constitution being a point of necessity with all Frenchmen. Neverthe less it may be said that almost the whole of the voluminous writings of the Philosophes. even of those who, like Voltaire, were sincerely aristocratic and monarchic in predilection, were of more or less veiled political significance. There was one branch of political writing, moreover, which could be indulged in without much fear. The form of govern ment was sacred, but the conduct of government could be discussed without much danger, for, whatever might be the divine rights of the best of princes, his intentions might always be frustrated by wicked or incapable ministers and officials. Political economy, therefore, and administrative theories, received much attention. The earliest writer of eminence on these subjects was the great engineer Vauban (1633-1707), whose Oisivetes and Dime Royale exhibit both great ability and extensive observation. A more Utopian economist of the same time was the Abbe de St Pierre (1658-1743), not to be confounded with the author of Paul et Viryinie. Soon [political economy in the hands of Quesnay (1694-1774) took a regular form, and towards the middle of the century a great number of works on questions connected with it, especially that of free trade in corn, on which the Abb6 Galiani (1728-1787), Morellet, and above all Turgot, distinguished themselves. Of writers on legal subjects and of the legal profession, the century, though not less fertile than in other directions, produced few or none of any great importance from the literary point of view. The chief name which in this connexion is known is that of Chancellor d Aguesseau (1668-1751), at the beginning of the century, an estimable writer of the Port Royal school, who took the orthodox side in the great disputes of the time, but failed to display any great ability therein. He was, as became his profession, more remarkable as an orator than a writer, and his works contain valuable testimonies to the especially perturbed and unquiet condition of his century a disquiet which is perhaps also its chief literary note. There were other French magistrates, such as Mon tesquieu, Henault (1685-1770), Des Bros.ses (1706-1773), and others, who made considerable mark in literature; but it was usually (except in the case of Montesquieu) in subjects not even indirectly connected with their profession. The bench and bar of France were indeed at this time almost as full of abuses as the other departments of state ; and though the parliaments, metropolitan and provincial, would occasionally withstand a corrupt ministry, it was much more in the interest of their own privileges than of the community. The Espi-it des Lois stands alone. 18tk Century Criticism and Periodical Literature. We have said that literary criticism assumes in this century a sufficient importance to be treated under a separate heading. Contributions were made to it of many different kinds and from many different points of view. Periodical literature, the chief stimulus to its production, began more and more to come into favour. Even in the 17th century the Journal des Savants, the Jesuit Journal de Trevoux, and other publi cations had set the example of different kinds of it. Just