The open and ostensible letter was a vital element in eighteenth-century French literature. Numerous examples appeared in the periodicals of the period and many others were printed separately in pamphlet form. Addressed to a specific recipient, framed in the terms of personal exchange, such letters were nevertheless written with a broader public in view. In some cases, authors used this procedure simply to justify the act of writing; the chosen destinataire was presumably someone who had a particular interest in the question under discussion. The form of the letter allowed the author to state his or her argument in a direct manner; this type of text often punctuated literary and scientific quarrels.
In other cases, however, the open letter was dictated by a strategy of misdirection and served as a forum in which the author could introduce concerns that did not necessarily arise from the primary subject of the letter. Building on the freedom allowed by the epistolary genre, the text could take surprising turns, revealing more important centers of interest. In the case we will examine here, a linguistic question allowed Voltaire to articulate his pride in the noble military tradition of his nation. Writing in the midst of the severe crisis of the Seven Years' War, he energetically rebutted Deodati de' Tovazzi's Dissertation sur l'excellence de la langue Italienne and, in this way, expressed his attachment to the idea of French Glory in the political arena as well as the cultural domain. An examination of the history of this exchange paired with an analysis of Voltaire's letter will show that his linguistic outburst was not simply an "illustration" of the French language; it was also an aggressive, militant "defense."
When Deodati de' Tovazzi first issued his treatise promoting the Italian language, he was obviously seeking to raise the linguistic hackles of the French literary world. [2] Not only did he assert the clear superiority of his native tongue over all others, he did so in a work written in French and printed in Paris. The original edition, running 60 pages, apparently came out early in January 1761, and the author saw to it that copies were promptly distributed to prominent literary figures. [3]
Accordingly, several responses to the short text quickly appeared. Freron, for example, dated his review in L'Annee litteraire "ce 15 Janv. 1761" (1: 97-114). In habitual fashion, the journalist described the work, summarized its arguments and delivered his assessment, in this case negative: "J'invite nos Scavans & nos ecrevains de gout a repondre a M. Deodati; it a sans doute des connoissances; it s'exprime assez bien en Francois pour un etranger; mais it West pas adroit; it s'tnonce avec trop de faste, & ses decisions contre notre langue sont accompagnees d'une durete que l'on ne doit point passer "urbanite Ultramontaine" (114).
At the same time, Voltaire was working on an open letter to Deodati, which he dated, "Au Chateau de Ferney en Bourgogne, ce 24 janvier 1761," [4] This letter was immediately published, first separately and then in combination with a response from the Italian writer, dated "a Paris ce 20 Fevrier 1761." Deodati's Dissertation itself was then reissued, followed by both letters. [5] In a final salvo, Voltaire then circulated a short conciliatory poem that was published in the Mercure de France under the heading, "Reponse de M. de Voltaire a la seconde Lettre de M. Deodati" (avril 1761: 2: 12-13; Oeuvres 8: 531-32).
As a result of this activity, subsequent appraisal of Deodati's treatise became substantially more complicated; journalists found that they were no longer describing a single text but an ongoing exchange between the original author and his famous respondent. The Journal encyclopedique met this challenge by interrupting its commentary: "Au moment ou nous allions faire l'analyse de cette dissertation, le hazard nous a procure une lettre de Mr. De Voltaire, nouvellement addressee a Mr. Deodati, & qui certainement vaut mieux que tout ce que nous pourrions jamais dire a ce sujet" (fevrier 1761: 1: 86). ["At the very moment when we were preparing to perform an analysis of this essay, we happened to procure a letter from Mr. Voltaire lately addressed to Mr. Deodati, and which certainly is worth more than anything that we could ever say on this topic."]
The editor, Pierre Rousseau, then reproduced the full text of Voltaire's "Reponse," thereby granting his adherence to the philosophe's arguments (fevrier 1761: 1: 89-98). The following month, when Deodati formulated his response, Rousseau treated him with the same courtesy; the Italian's letter to Voltaire also appeared in its entirety. In this case, though, there was no approving editorial commentary (mars 1761: 1: 123-32), and the Journal included Voltaire's poem, as a sort of coda, labeled "Reponse de Mr. De Voltaire a la Lettre qu'on vient de lire" (13233). The Censeur hebdomadaire adopted a similar procedure. Like Rousseau, Pierre-Louis d'Aquin declared that he had been interrupted in his editorial task by the arrival of Voltaire's letter: "J'ouvrois sa dissertation tranchante, &, j'ose le dire, point assez mesuree, pour en faire l'extrait, lorsque j'ai recu a un excellent morceau a ce sujet intitule: Reponse de M. de Voltaire a M. Deodati de Tovazzi, Auteur du Livre de l'excellence de la Langue Italienne" (1760: 1: 221). ["I opened up his cutting and, I dare say, not at all so measured essay, so as to prepare an extract from it, when I received an excellent piece on this topic entitled: Answer of M. de Voltaire to M. Deodati de Tovazzi, Author of the Book on the preeminence of the Italian Language."]
The text of the letter was then printed in full. Again like Rousseau, d'Aquin later published Deodati's response letter to Voltaire, followed by Voltaire's poem (1760: I: 394-404). In a third instance, the Correspondance litteraire captured the entire affair in one entry. Contrary to the other journals, this review summarized the arguments of the two authors rather than recopying the texts. Deriding the superficiality of Voltaire's objections, it declared a clear victory for the Italian writer on the basis of his final letter: "Au reste, M. Diodati (sic) a deja repondu a cette lettre, et avec beaucoup d'avantages a ce qu'il m'a paru" (4: 352-53). ["Moreover, M. Diodati (sic) has already answered this letter, and very advantageously as it appears to me."]
Publicized by the periodical press and strengthened by Voltaire's notoriety, Deodati's Dissertation thus obtained a surprisingly high level of visibility in just two months. In this respect, the episode illustrates the mechanics of the eighteenth-century literary world. In its final edition, the original treatise combined with Voltaire's response and Deodati's rebuttal, the work stood as a sort of testament to its own brief moment of glory. As late as 1767, it was still being advertised on these grounds, in connection with a reprinting of Deodati's translation of Graffigny's Lettres d'une Peruvienne: "Le meme Libraire est charge de la vente de la Dissertation sur l'excellence de la langue Italienne faite par le meme auteur, avec une Lettre de M. de Voltaire a ce sujet, & la reponse de M. Deodati" (L'Annee litteraire 1767: 2: 287-88). ["The same Bookseller is commissioned with the sale of the Dissertation on the preeminence of the Italian language created by the same author, with a Letter of M. de Voltaire on this topic, & the answer of M. Deodati"]
Although the treatise has now been long forgotten, the fact remains that it earned for its author a respectable place in the literary annals of the 1760's. By provoking a small controversy, Deodati was able to attain a level of success that perhaps was unwarranted by the inherent merit of his text.
This exchange also shows how important personal influence was in orchestrating a work's reception in the eighteenth century. In the documents surrounding the dispute, we find several indications of the procedures the two combatants used to publicize their disagreement, resulting in a wider readership for both of them. Notable, Voltaire's "Reponse" reveals that Deodati himself had initially sent him the treatise: "Je suis tres sensible, monsieur, a l'honneur que vous me faites de m'envoyer votre livre de l'Excellence de la langue italienne..." ["I am very appreciative, sir, of the honor you have done me by sending me your book On the preeminence of the Italian language ..."] (Correspondence, D9572). Like many other literary aspirants, the Italian writer probably took this step with hopes of receiving a small sign of recognition from the philosophe that might stimulate interest in his work. If this was his strategy, he must have been gratified by the public nature of Voltaire's reply.
As Deodati confirmed in a letter of 21 September 1766, he had been instrumental in having Voltaire's "Reponse" reproduced in conjunction with his own text, referring to "la lettre que vous me fites l'honneur de m'ecrire en date du 24 janvier 1761, telle que je la fis imprimer alors a la suite de ma dissertation sur la langue italienne, avec ma reponse" (Correspondence D13579). ["the letter that you did me the honor to write me on the date of the 24th of January 1761, such that I then had to print it at the end of my dissertation on the Italian language, along with my answer." ]
Voltaire took similar steps to ensure that his "Reponse" would receive due publicity. In a letter to his friends Damilaville and Thieriot, he asked that the test be distributed to the appropriate parties: "Voicy ... une petite response que j'ay eu le temps de faire a M. Deodati. Vous me rendrez un important service en la faisant imprimer, en la connant a tous les journaux ... J'estime qu'il conviendrait assez que mr Daquin imprimat dans son hebdomadaire cette petite reponse et qu'il en envoyat des exemplaires a tous les interesses" (Correspondence D9573). ["Here is. . . a short response that I have had the time to make to M. Deodati. You will render me an important service in having it printed, distributing it to all the newspapers... I should think that it would be acceptable enough that M. Daquin prints this short reply in his weekly and sends copies to all interested parties."]
Rousseau was no doubt among those Voltaire intended to include in this group; during this period, he often submitted material for publication in the Journal encyclopedique. Within two weeks, the philosophe again wrote to Damilaville to urge the distribution of the "petite vengeance honnete" ["little honest revenge"] he had aimed at "l'outrecuidant auteur de l'excellence italienne" (Correspondence D96 10). ["the presumptuous author of the Italian preeminence"]
One month later, finally, he sent the text of his conciliatory poem to Damilaville with the following request: "Voici, monsieur, mon ultimatum a mr Deodati. M. le censeur hebdomadaire, a qui je fais mes complements, peut inserer ce traite de paix dans son journal" (Correspondence D9663). ["Here, gentleman, is my ultimatum to Mr. Deodati. Monsieur the weekly critic, to whom I make my compliments, could insert this treaty of peace in his journal."]
Adept at manipulating his literary contacts, Voltaire capitalized on an alliance he had begun to cultivate the previous year when d'Aquin had assumed full editorial control of the Censeur hebdomadaire (Correspondence D9484). [6]
As we have seen, this periodical did not carry out his wishes. With the publication of these various pieces, Voltaire brought his dispute with the proud Italianist to an appropriate close.
Based on the lively history of these documents, one might expect to find that they were full of incendiary insults. In fact, Deodati's treatise and Voltaire's response are very mild texts. It is true that both authors adopt a didactic, rather trenchant critical stance; but each maintains a polite tone and affirms that he has great respect for the culture of the other. Summarized briefly, Deodati protests that the Italian language is unjustly maligned by other Europeans, particularly for its lack of energy. He therefore sets out to demonstrate that, in fact, Italian is superior to all other languages. 7
To this end, he chooses French as his primary target because it is generally recognized as the dominant world language. He then develops his argument in six "articles," addressing the questions of abundance, nettele, flexibilite, harmonie, noblesse and energie. [abundance, clarity, flexibility, harmony, nobility and energy]
In the first two cases, he uses lists of Italian terms and their French equivalents to prove the superiority of the former. Drawing on Tassom Dante and Ariosts in the remaining articles, he relies heavily on parallel literary passages - Italian originals with French translations - to prove that his own language possesses greater flexibility and expressive power. Pleased with his discussion, he then concludes: "Je crois avoir demontre que notre langue est tout au moins aussi claire &, outre cela, plus abondante, plus flexible, plus harmonieuse, plus noble, & entin plus energetique que la Francoise. Que je l'applique a l'Angloise, je trouverai pareillement qu'elle l'egalera tout au moins en energie, tandis qu'elle la surpassera dans le reste ..." (Dissertation 55). ["I believe I have demonstrated that our language is at least as lucid and, beyond measure, more abundant, more flexible, more harmonious, nobler, and finally more energetic than French. As it compares to English, I similarly find that it will at least equal it in energy, while as to the rest, it will surpass it ..."]
And so for the remainder of Europe, Deodati extrapolates from the French model to proclaim Italian linguistic preeminence.
In his subsequent "Reponse," Voltaire chooses to refute only a limited portion of the demonstration, and he does so with seeming reluctance (Correspondence D9572). He first assures Deodati that he has great admiration for the Italian language and protests that no language is perfect. After these preliminaries, however, he flatly asserts French excellence and focuses on specific points. In turn, he discusses the sonority and harmony of various languages, the limited number of word endings in Italian, the use of diminutive forms, and the difficulty of writing poetry in a language as rigidly structured as French. To conclude, he cites the works of France's great writers as proof that the language possesses force, clarity, energy and expressiveness. Judged by these criteria, he suggests, the French yield to no one. His text ends by affirming the instrumental role of great individuals in shaping a language, creating a sort of circularity between linguistic and national merit. [8]
This is an argument that he has developed earlier in the text in a much different and rather surprising context, that of military valor.
In the midst of these remarks on language, Voltaire exploits the formal flexibility of the open letter and devotes several pages - nearly one half the entire text - to a curious rebuttal of Deodati's claims regarding abondance. In some respects, this passage seems to have only tangential interest, but it is here that the philosophe touches on issues of deeper import, establishing connections between language and national character, introducing an unsolicited element of bellicosity into the exchange.
As he begins this section, it seems that Voltaire wishes only to best his adversary in a game of synonym-listing. In response to the Italian's assertion that French has only one word to express the idea of "orgueil," [Ed. - "pride" or "arrogance"] he constructs a list of twelve parallel terms. This demonstration is, however, something more than an exercise in verbal dexterity, as indicated by Voltaire's further development. From a list of more than thirty terms in Deodati's treatise, he selects one particular example that has immediate resonance with the idea of French identity:
L'italico valor non a ancor morto.
Mais si vous avez valente, erode, animoso; nous avons, vaillant, valeureux, preux, courageux, intrepide, hardi, anime, audacieux, brave, &c.
["You reproach us in your alphabet for our squalor, to have only one word for signifer, valiant. I know, gentleman, that your nation is very valiant: Germany & France are happy to have in their service very brave & very good Italian officers.
Italian valor is not yet dead.
But if you have valente, erode, animoso; we have, valiant, valorous, gallant, courageous, intrepid, audacious, animated, daring, brave, &c."] In choosing to elaborate on the concept of vaillance, Voltaire shows that his goal is not only to display the richness of the French lexicon; rather, he establishes a direct equation between the language itself and the qualities of the people who speak it. He admits that the presence of courageous Italian officers in the French and German armies justifies the existence of the words valente, prode and animoso in the Italian language. With a flourish he then adds a quotation from Petrarch as further confirmation of this valor - the fact that this language can sustain such poetry seems to vouch for the validity of the ideas contained therein. The philosophe is not willing, however, to concede Italian superiority on this point. Simply by making a much longer list in his own language, he implies that French valor surpasses that of the Italians. [9] This abondance is a reflection of national virtue.
Following up on this military theme, Voltaire reinforces his curious argumentative strategy by alluding to the illustrious deeds of a number of French heroes. He claims to do this in order to demonstrate the nuances conveyed by the various words he has just listed. But the detailed way in which he pursues this idea also suggests that he wants to remind his readers -- we must recall that this letter is intended for publication -- that France does indeed possess considerable military virtue. This passage deserves to be cited at length in order to preserve the coherence of its logic and to underscore the full extent of its departure from the ostensible linguistic subject:
Nous exprimerons encore differemment l'intrepidite tranquille, que les connaisseurs admirerent dans le petit neveu du heros de la Valteline, lorsque ayant vu son armee en deroute par la terreur panique de nos allies, qui causa la notre, ayant apercu le regiment de Diesbach & un autre qui faisaient ferme contre une armee victorieuse, quoiqu'ils fussent entames par la cavalerie, & foudroyes par le canon, marcha seul a ces regiments, loua leur valeur, leur courage, leur fermete, leur intrepedite, lent vaillance, leur patience, leur audace, leur animosite, leur bravoure, &c. Voyez, monsieur, que de termes pour un. Ensuite il eut le courage de ramener ces deux regiments a petits pas, & de les sauver du peril ou leur valeur les jetait; les conduisait en bravant les ennemis victorieux, & eut encore le courage de soutenir les reproches d'une multitude mal instruite.
Verrez vows encore, monsieur, que le courage, la valeur, la fermete de celui qui a garde C'assel & Gottingen, malgrd les efforts de soixante mille ennemis tres valeureux, est un courage compose d'activite, de prevoyance & d'audace. C'est aussi ce qu'on a reconnu dans celui qui a sauve Vezel. Croyez, monsieur, que nous avons, dans notre langue, l'esprit de faire sentir ce que les defenseurs de notre patrie ont le merite de faire."
"This courage, this bravery, has several different types, each of which have their own terms. We will say truly that our generals are valiant, courageous, brave, &c; but we will distinguish the eager courage & daring of the general who conquered, sword in hand, all the works of Port-Mahon carved out of the living rock; the firmness, constant, reflexive, adroit, with which one of our leaders rescued a whole garrison from certain ruin, & made a march of thirty leagues in full view of an enemy army of fifty thousand combatants.
We will express differently still the calm fearlessness, that the connoisseurs admired in the young nephew of the hero of the Valteline, when having seen his army in defeat through the dread panic of our allies, which was the cause of ours, having observed the regiment of Diesbach & another that drew up firm against a victorious army, although they were shaken by the cavalry, & blasted by cannon, marched alone of those regiments, lent their valor, their courage, their firmness, their intrepidity, their valor, their patience, their audacity, their animosity, their bravery, &c. Visualize, sir, which of the words to use. Then he had the courage to bring these two regiments hack little by little, & to rescue them from the peril into which their valor had thrown them; led them to brave the victorious enemy, & had the courage to yet sustain the reproaches of a badly informed multitude.
You will again see, sir. that the courage, the valor, the firmness of the one who maintained ('asset & Gollingen, notwithstanding the efforts of sixty thousand very valiant enemies, is a courage composed of activity, of foresight & of audacity. It is as much as is recognized in the one who saved Vezel. Believe it, sir, that we have in our language, the spirit to make sense of what the defenders of our homeland are credited with doing."] Taking the idea of lexical refinement as a pretext, Voltaire revives the memory of recent French exploits; certainly the acts of courage he describes here would immediately have been recognized by his contemporaries. He first cites the duc de Richelieu's capture of Port-Mahon on the island of Minorca in 1756. As one of the few major French victories in the ongoing Seven Years' War, this event logically finds its place at the head of the list. The philosophe then refers to less triumphant episodes that allow him to diversify his portrait of national valor. The marechal de Belleisle's retreat from Prague in 1742 embodies steadfast resolve in the face of danger. The prince de Soubise's vigorous intervention during the fatal battle of Rossbach in 1757 is portrayed as an exceptional display of intrepid heroism. The actions of the marechal de Broglie and the marquis de Castries in Germany typify the intelligent, active courage of master strategists. In three bravura paragraphs Voltaire thus radically alters the linguistic parameters of the preceding discussion and instills his reflections with a martial character that was entirely lacking from Deodati's Dissertation. [10]
As if the message were not already sufficiently clear, he asserts at the end of this passage that the French are quite capable of recognizing and verbalizing the valorous deeds of their countrymen.
One thing, at least, should be clear from Voltaire's extended digression: despite the reputation he today enjoys as an enemy of warfare, he admired acts of martial prowess. Indeed, in the context of this letter, he definitely suggests that national prestige is impossible without a large portion of military virtue. Given the fact that military affairs hold a prominent position in his correspondence during this period, it is not surprising that he should be preoccupied by the question of valor, nor that he should be so adamantly defensive. On an almost daily basis, he sought fresh news of the conflict from all corners of Europe, expressing deep dissatisfaction at French losses;
[11] and even after peace was reestablished, he continued to write about this war and its consequences for his nation.
At the time he wrote to Deodati, Voltaire was already working on the text that now bears the title, Precis du siecle de Louis XV. [12] In this contemporary history he included four of the five episodes he mentions in his "Reponse": Richelieu stars in chapter 31 as the captor of Port Mahon; Belleisle leads the dangerous retreat from Prague in chapter 7; Soubise averts disaster at Rossbach and Castries saves the city of Vesel in chapter 33. This last example, in particular, illustrates Voltaire's sustained desire to glorify the deeds of his fellow Frenchmen. Although he criticizes the futility of warfare ("Que reste-t-il de tant d'efforts? Rien que du sang inutilement verse dans des pays incultes et desoles, des villages ruines, des families reduites a la mendicite ["What remains of so much effort? Nothing but blood uselessly poured in some uncultivated and devastated countries, ruined villages, families reduced to begging ..."]) he also asserts that it is vital to honor national heroes: "Les braves actions de tant d'officiers et de soldats sont innombrables dans toutes les guerres; mais it y en a eu de si singulieres, de si uniques dans leur espece, que se serait manquer a la patrie que de les laisser daps l'oubli" (Oeuvres 15: 35355). ["The brave deeds of so many officers and soldiers are innumerable in every war; but so singularly were they possessed of these, so unique to their kind, that it would be a disservice to the country to leave them to oblivion."]
Acting on this commemorative impulse, Voltaire evokes recent heroic acts in a number of texts from his later years. In 1772, for example, in his Questions sur l'Encyclopedie, he closes the entry "Xenophon" with a tribute to Belleisle's
brave leadership in Prague (Oeuvres 20: 604-05). In this article, the philosophe has no logical need to return to the events of 1742; it seems rather that he actively seeks to create an opportunity for celebration of a contemporary hero.
Voltaire's general interest in national military prestige explains why he might be tempted to raise the question of valor in a text dating from the period of the Seven Year's War. But one may still wonder why he incorporates these reflections specifically in his open letter to Deodati, which deals primarily with the relative merits of the French and Italian languages. The answer to this question lies in the strong correlation between cultural and military matters in Voltaire's world view. Even a rapid survey of his writings reveals that he is extremely worried about French cultural decadence at this time and that he perceives a direct connection between this decadence and the incompetence of the French army. He constantly deplores the loss of French influence throughout Europe, the result not only of military failure but also of weakened cultural prestige. His agitation in the theatrical realm during this period forcefully illustrates this dual anxiety. In addition to his portrayal of a chivalrous French hero in Tancrede, he radically escalates his attacks against the influence of the English stage in France and undertakes his massive Commentaries sur Corneille with a goal of preserving and purifying a great national literary monument, one of the last French bastions capable of resisting the intense foreign assault (Williams).
Throughout the war, he tirelessly repeats his warnings that the maintenance of the French presence on the continent demands attention to the purity of the language. Voltaire's response to Deodati is rooted in the philosophe's broader meditation on the fate of his country in the evolving political and cultural arena. In many ways he anticipates - though in more somber, pessimistic tones - the main lines of Antoine Rivarol's later academic triumph, L'Universalite de la langue francaise (1784).
As one of the many ostensible letters that appear in Voltaire's correspondence with great regularity, the "Reponse de M. de Voltaire a M. Diodati (sic) de Tovazzi" opens several interesting perspectives. As an example of the genre, it wonderfully illustrates the richness of this odd form that is caught between the private and the public, addressed to a specific recipient and at the same time dispatched to a general readership. In this case, Voltaire confronts questions raised specifically by Deodati but which have great import for the whole of the French nation. By adopting a rhetorical strategy that emphasizes the links between language and martial virtue, he points to issues that have particular poignancy during the Seven Years' War but will continue to animate his thoughts and those of his contemporaries well after the conclusion of the conflict in 1763. This is not to say that he expounds a fully developed position of militant nationalism, but certainly this is not the cosmopolitanism that has often been accepted by modern scholars as one of the characteristics of the French Enlightenment. Playing on the multiple possibilities offered by the open letter, Voltaire's defense of the French language is only in part a linguistic discussion; it is also, and more tellingly, an expression of national pride in an age of militarism.
[1] I would like to thank the Research Board of the University of Missouri for providing summer funding that made this work possible.
[2] Information concerning G.-L. Deodati de' Tovazzi is scant. He was Italian by birth but lived in Paris where he taught Italian courses. His first literary endeavor seems to be the translation of a comic opera, Les Vieillards rivaux in 1749 (Conlon 49: 292). In 1759, he issued his most successful work, a bilingual French-Italian version of Graffigny's Lettres dune Peruvienne. This text was reproduced, either in bilingual editions or in Italian versions, in 1774, 1777, 1780, 1786, 1787, 1797, an VII, an XI, 1809, 1810, 1815, 1817, 1821, 1822, 1824, 1833 and 1835, by printers in Avignon, London, Lyon and Paris (Nicoletti 51-60). In 1772, he published a volume of Definitions des regles grammaticales de la langue italienne (Conlon 72: 724). Announcements for his Italian language courses appeared in L Annee litteraire in 1759 (1: 341), 1762 (2: 24), 1763 (6: 287), and 1766 (7: 142-43) and in the Censeur hebdomadaire in 1761 (2: 14).
[3] The "Approbation" is dated "14 Novembre 1760," the "Privilege du Roi" is signed by Le Begue on 17 December. and the work is registered at theChambre Syndicale on 24 December.
Editor's Note: I hereby lake the liberty of translating the above into what I hope is correct English for those of us unable to read French. Such editor's notes will be differentiated from Mr. Iverson's own by the use of non-roman-numeral symbols: "I invite our scholars and our writers of taste to respond to M. Deodati; he no doubt possesses some knowledge; he expresses himself well enough in French for a foreigner; but he is not skillful; he holds forth with too much pomp; and his pronouncements against our language are accompanied by a harshness that one should not confuse with transalpine urbanity."
[4] Voltaire's letter, as well as Deodati de' Tovazzi's response, is included in Correspondence and Related Documents. Voltaire's letter is numbered D9572, Deodati's reply is D9639.
[5] Voltaire's letter is entry 4732 in the Bibliotheque Nationale catalogue: "Reponse de M. de Voltaire a M. Diodati (sic) de Tovazzi, auteur du livre de l'excellence de la langue italienne-(S.I., 1761.) In 8°, 16 p." The brochure containing the two letters is entry 4734: "Lettre de M. de Voltaire a M. Deodati de Tovazzi au sujet de sa Dissertation sur !'excellence de la langue italienne, avec la reponse de M. Deodati a M. de Voltaire - (S.I., 1761.) In- 12, 24 p." This second text was appended to many copies of the Dissertation, so that the pagination of the letters is separate from that of the treatise itself.
[6] On the Censeur hebdomadaire's change of orientation and adoption of a pro-Voltarian stance at this time under d'Aquin's direction, see Christian Albertan (222-24).
[7] For discussion of the linguistic aspect of this exchange, see Bouvy (13-22) and Jonard (54-56).
[8] "Je finis cette lettre trop longue, par Line reflexion. Si le peuple a forma les langues, les grands hommes les perfectionnent par de bons livres; & la premiere de toutes les langues, est celle qui a plus d'excellents ouvrages" [Editor's Translation: ` I have concluded this rather long letter with a thought. If the people fashioned the languages, the great men perfected them with worthy hooks; & the first of all languages, is the one that has the most excellent works"1(Correspondence D9572). Freron makes a similar argument in L'Annee litteraire: "Je le repete, qu'est-ce qui constitue le merite dune langue? Le nombre de ses bons auteurs, & sur-tout de ses Poetes" [Editor's translation: "I repeat this: what constitutes the worth of a language? The number of its good authors, & especially its Poets"] (1761: 1: 114).
[9] Freron's treatment of the same point is more in keeping with the tenor of Deodati's text, On the question of "abondance," the author of L'Annee litteraire responds, following the Italian writer's example, with a series of parallel terms: "M. Deodati nous donne des exemples de cette abondance; it cite notre seul mot orgueil, vis-a-vis duquel il met pour preuve de richesse les mots Italiens orgoglio, alterriggia, superbia. Mais n'avons-nous pas vanite, hauteur, superbe, fierte, arrogance? Malheur, sventura, sciagura. M. Deodati ignore-t-il que nous pouvons lui opposer desastre, calamite, infortune, disgrace, accident? Vaillante, valente, prode, animoso. On peut ajouter a vaillant, courageux, valeureux, brave, plein de coeur. Briller, brillare, scintillare, sfavillare, splendere; nous avons eclater, reluire, luire, ravonner, etinceller"
[Editor's Translation: "M. Deodati gives us some examples of this abundance; he mentions only our word pride, against which lie places the words orgoglio, alterriggia, supurbia as proof of the Italian richness. But don't we also have vanity, loftiness, hautiness, pride, arrogance? Misfortune, sventura, sciagura. Does M. Deodati not know that one could also juxtapose disaster, calamity, misfortune, disgrace, accident? Valiant, valente, prode, animoso. One can add to valiant, courageous, valorous, brave, full of heart. Shine, brillare, scintillare, sfavillare, splendere; we have burst forth, glisten, gleam, radiate, glitter"] (1761: 1: 101). The straightforwardness of this refutation contrasts strikingly with Voltaire's digression on military valor.
[10] Deodati himself was sensitive to this shift in emphasis. In his response to Voltaire, he remarked pointedly, "Au reste, it serait etonnant que les Francais n'eussent qu'un mot pour exprimer le courage, eux dans qui cette qualite brillante se modifie de tant de facons, & change si souvent de nuances. J'applaudis aux exemples que vous m'en donnez; & je sais que les Francais sont depuis longtemps, /Favoris de l'Amour, de Minerve & de Mars" [Editor's translation: "As to the rest, it would he astonishing that the French should have only one word to express courage; they in which this brilliant quality is modified in so many ways, & changes so often in nuances. I applaud the examples that you give me of them: & I know that the French have for a long time been, /Favorites of Love, Minerva & Mars"] (Correspondence D9639). By adopting this stance, he recognizes the legitimacy of the parallel between national language and national character. It should be noted that Deodati has transposed the final line, an alexandrin, from Voltaire's Bataille de Fontenoy (Oeuvres 8: 389), This reference to the philosophe's celebratory poem of 1745 reinforces my analysis here. During the War of the Austrian Succession, Voltaire invested great energy in creating appropriate literary tributes to French valor (Iverson 209-15). In the less favorable circumstances of the Seven Years' War, this energy manifests itself in other forms, but the underlying concerns remain constant.
[11] For a brief overview of this period and Voltaire's reaction to the Seven Years' War, see Jean Balcou; for a more personal and detailed analysis, see Geoffrey Murray.
[12] Major portions of this work were published in 1763 as an addition to the Essai sur l'histoire generale (now commonly known us the Essai sur les moeurs). For a detailed account of the correlation between this text and the full version, see the "Advertissement de Beauchot" (Oeuvers 15: 145-50).
Albertan, Christian. "Censeur hebdomadaire." Dictionnaire des journaux, 1600-1789. Ed. Jean Sgard. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 1991. 222-24.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.Vous nous reprochez dans votre alphabet de nos miseres, de n'avoir qu'un mot pour signifer vaillant. Je sais, monsieur, que votre nation est tres vaillante: l'Allemagne & la France ont eu le bonheur d'avoir a leur service de tres braves & de tres grands officiers itallens.
Ce courage, cette bravoure, ont plusieurs caracteres differents, qui ont chacun leurs termes propres. Nous dirons bien que nos generaux sont vaillants, courageux, braves, &c; mais nous distinguerons le courage vif & audacieux du general qui emporta, l'epee a la main tous les ouvrages de Port-Mahon tailles dans le roc vif la fermete constante, reflechie, adroite, avec laquelle un de nos chefs sauva une garnison entiere d'une ruine certaine, & fit une marche de trente lieues a la vue d'une armee enemie de cinquante mille combattants.
Footnotes
Works Cited
Balcou, Jean "Coups de patteu a l'Infame." Voltaire en son temps. Dir. Rene Pomeau. Vol. 4. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 1994. 5-17.
Bibliotheque Nationale. Voltaire. Ed. llelene Fremont et al. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1978. Vol. 214 of Catalogue general des livres imprimes de la Bibliotheque Nationale. Auleurs.
Bouvy, Eugene. Voltaire et l'Italie. 1898. Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1970.
Conlon, Pierre M. Le Siecle des Lumieres: Bibliographie chronologique. 17 vols. To date. Geneva: Droz, 1975.
Correspondance litteraire, philosophique el critique par Grimm, Diderot, Raynal, Meister, etc. Ed. Maurice Tourneux. 16 Vols. Paris: Garnier Freres, 1877-82.
Deodati de' Tovazzi, G.-L. Dissertation sur l'excellence de la langue italienne, par Mr. Deodati de' Tovazzi. Paris: Bauche, Le Clerc, Lambert, 1761.
----, trans. Lettres dune Peruvienne. Traduites du Francois en Italien, don't on a accentue tous les mots, pour faciliter aux Etrangers le moven d'apprendre la prosodie de cette Longue. By Madame de Gruffigny. Paris: Briasson, Prault ills, Duchesne, Tillard, 1754.
Iverson, John R. "Voltaire, Fontenoy, and the Crisis of Celebratory Verse" Studies in Eighteenth
Century Culture. Ed. Judy Chandler Hayes and Timothy Erwin. Vol. 28, Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1999. 207-28.
Jonard, Norbert. La France et Italie au siecle des Lumieres. Essai sur les echanges intellectuels. Paris: Honors Champion, 1994.
Murray, Geoffrey. "Voltaire's Candide: The Protean Gardener, 1755-1762." Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century 69 (1970).
Nicoletti, Gianni. Introduction. Lettres d'une Peruvienne. By Madame de Graffigny. Baril Adriatica Editrice, 1967.
Voltaire. Correspondence and Related Documents. Ed. Theodore Bestermnn. 51 vols. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 1968-77.
----. Oeuvres completes de Voltaire. Ed. Louis Moland. 52 vols. Paris: Garnier, 1877-1885.
Williams, David. "Voltaire's War with England: The Appeal to Europe, 1760-1764." Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century 179 (1979): 79-100.
Back to Seven Years War Asso. Journal Vol. XII No. 2 Table of Contents
Back to Seven Years War Asso. Journal List of Issues
Back to Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2001 by James J. Mitchell
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com