Oxford
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1892
Oxford
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
An attempt to present to students a succinct history of the course ofFrench literature compiled from an examination of that literatureitself, and not merely from previous accounts of it is, I believe, a newone in English. There will be observed in the parts of this ShortHistory a considerable difference of method; and as such a difference isnot usual in works of the kind, it may be well to state the reasonswhich have induced me to adopt it. Early French literature is to a greatextent anonymous. Moreover, even where it is not, the authors wereusually more influenced by certain prevalent styles or forms than byanything else. Into these forms they threw without considerations ofcongruity whatever they had to say. Nothing, for instance, can be lesssuitable for historical or scientific disquisition than the octosyllabicmetre of a satiric poem. But Jean de Meung and one at least of theauthors of Renart le Contrefait[1] do not think of composing prosediatribes. At one moment and place the form of the Chanson de Geste isall-absorbing, at another the form of the Roman d'Aventures, at anotherthe form of the Fabliau. In Book I. I shall therefore proceed by theseforms, giving an account of each separately.
After Villon the case changes. Instead of classes of chroniclers,trouvères, jongleurs, we get individual authors of eminence andindividuality striking out their own way and saying their own say[Pg vi] inthe manner not that is fashionable but that seems best to them. Duringthis time, therefore, and especially during that brilliant age of Frenchliterature, the sixteenth century, I shall proceed by authors, takingthe most remarkable individually, and grouping their followers aroundthem.
From the time of Malherbe the system of schools begins, dividedaccording to subjects. The poet, the dramatist, the historian, havetheir predecessors, and either intentionally copy them or intentionallyinnovate upon them. Malherbe and Delille, Corneille and Lemercier,Sarrasin and Rulhière, whatever the difference of merit, stand to oneanother in a definite relation, and the later writers represent more orless the accepted traditions each of his school. In this part,therefore, I shall proceed by subjects, taking historians, poets,dramatists, etc., together. One difference will be noticed between thethird and fourth Books, dealing respectively with the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries. It has seemed unnecessary to allot a specialchapter to theological and ecclesiastical writing in the latter, or toscientific writing in the former.
Almost all writers who have attempted literary histories in a smallcompass have recognised the difficulty, or rather impossibility, oftreating contemporary or recent work on the same scale as older authors.In treating, therefore, of literature subsequent to the appearance ofthe Romantic movement, I shall content myself with giving a rapid sketchof the principal literary developments and their exponents.
There are doubtless objections to this quadripartite arrangement; but itappears to me be