2019/08/27 by Derval Conroy · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Social Sciences · #European Political History Analysis #Historical Influence and Diplomacy #Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
paper · doi:10.1093/frebul/ktz009
openalex publication_date 2019/08/27 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/04/05
The assassination of Henri IV by François Ravaillac in 1610 sparked an immediate pamphlet polemic regarding the Jesuits and their position in France. First in the fray was the Lettre déclamatoire by the assassinated king’s Jesuit confessor Pierre Coton, which triggered the anti-Jesuit satire L’Anti-Coton. Amongst other replies, Marie de Gournay’s pro-Jesuit text Adieu de l’ame du roy de France et de Navarre Henry le Grand à la Royne, avec la Defence des Peres Jesuistes appeared at this point, shortly followed by Le Remerciment des Beurrières de Paris, the latter of which treats Gournay as a public woman.1 At the other end of the century, in a passage frequently cited as an indication of disapproval of female participation in general in socio-political public controversy, and as a criticism of Marie de Gournay in particular for the same, Pierre Bayle writes in the main body of the article devoted to Gournay in his Dictionnaire historique et critique (1697), with reference to the Adieu: ‘Elle eût bien fait de ne pas écrire contre les partisans de l’Anticoton. Une personne de son sexe doit éviter soigneusement cette sorte de querelles.’2 Taken in isolation (as it has been), the comment might seem unequivocal, typical of the deep-rooted and widespread (although not unchallenged) censure of the very articulation of a female voice in the public sphere that marked the period.3 But when replaced in the immediate context of the observations that directly precede and follow it, viewed in the context of the entry on Gournay as a whole, and, above all, read in the light of the overarching Dictionnaire project, this interpretation appears questionable.4 In keeping with the aim at the heart of the Dictionnaire to unmask error, Bayle juxtaposes conflicting images of Gournay and conflicting anecdotes concerning her, both implicitly inviting the reader to exercise bon sens in their judgement and explicitly highlighting the unlikelihood of certain tales by their very co-existence. While such juxtaposition necessitates lengthy citation, of both positive and negative representations, the cited passages need to be read in the light of the comments that accompany them. The aim of this article is to (re-)examine Bayle’s reception of Marie de Gournay, in light both of his historiographical practice, and of the lexical nuances of the word querelle.