FOOTNOTES
[1] Fourth Series of our works, Literature, vol. ii.
[2] It remains for us to collect from all our writings the scattered elements of a new Theodicea, especially founded upon an exact Psychology, fecundated by a legitimate induction, with the double purpose of defending the great faith of the human race against the detestable philosophy which Germany, in these last times, has sent into France, after having borrowed it from her, and of defending also true and good philosophy against a pusillanimous devotion, unworthy of Christianity, and condemned by the Church, which refuses to human reason the right and the power of elevating itself, even to God. It especially remains to us to put the last hand to that translation of Plato, which we would make the least perishable monument of our philosophic enterprise.
[3] See the work of Villefore: The Life of Madame the Duchess de Longueville, in two parts. There are two somewhat different editions. The first, which we shall quote, is of 1738, without indication of place; the second of Amsterdam, 1739.
[4] Quatremère de Quincy: Dissertation upon the Antique Statue of Venus, discovered in the Island of Milo, in-4ᵒ; and Collection of Archeological Dissertations, 1836, in-8ᵒ, p. 143.
[5] Millengen: Ancient Unedited Monuments, in fol.: London, 1826, p. 15, plate viii.
[6] The only two good and complete editions are those of Renouard, 1804 and 1817, and that of the collection of Petitot. See this last vol. 51, p. 455.
[7] This disease attacked her during the year of her marriage. Scarcely any trace of it remained.
[8] Retz, Amsterdam, 1731, vol. i., p. 185. Ibid., vol. iv., p. 219.
[9] Memoirs, Amsterdam, 1750, vol. i., p. 44.
[10] Vol. ii., p. 16-17.
[11] Memoirs, Amsterdam, 1735, vol. i., p. 45.
[12] Library of the Arsenal, Manuscripts of Conrart, in fol., vol. viii., p. 145. On Mademoiselle de Vaudy, the relative and friend of Madame the Countess de Maure, see Mademoiselle, vol. iii., p. 58, and vol. v., p. 25, as well as her portrait among the portraits of Mademoiselle. See also Tallemant, vol. ii., p. 334.
[13] In an obscure work, entitled, The Life of Pierre Dubose, Minister of the Holy Gospel, enriched with Letters, Harangues, etc., Rotterdam, 1698, in-8ᵒ, I find a speech made to Madame de Longueville, at Caen, in June, 1648, in which the good Protestant minister speaks of her very much like Scudéry, p. 328: “The portrait, Madame, which fame has made of you, is known throughout the world; and it is so full of marvels that every one supposes the original to be flattered until he has the happiness of seeing you. Then all admit that what the public voice says of your Highness is but a pencil-sketch of what you are.... It is impossible to paint too well that agreeable mixture of sweetness and majesty which tempers your countenance, and which at once gives boldness and fear to those who have the honor to approach your person. It is impossible to express that inimitable address which appears in all your actions, that brilliant vivacity so admired in your words, that graceful and grand air which causes your silence to be respected. And what pencil can represent that mind, formed by the hand of the Graces and cultivated by that of the Muses, which produces nothing in you but that is judicious, delicate, brilliant, which gains for you the admiration of the age, the rapture of the court, the applause of the provinces, which has even merited the homage of enemies at Munster, bringing them to your feet, while they refused peace to all Europe.”
[14] Attique du Nord, No. 2173.
[15] Pacificatores orbis Christiani, sive icones principum, ducum et legatorum qui Monasterii atque Osnabrugæ pacem Europæ reconciliarunt, quosque singulos ad nativam imaginem expressit Van Hull, celissimi principis Auriaci dum viveret pictor, in folio, Rotterodami, 1697. This portrait has been often reproduced, among others, in the Europe illustre and the Collection of Odieuvre.
[16] This is, in fact, the date of the first edition of the first part, as given in the patent, printed January 7, 1649.
[17] Gallery of the first floor, No. 2195.
[18] Cabinet of Medallions, with this inscription: An. Gen. Borbonia, D. Long, S. P. Novi Castri. On the other side of the medal is the portrait of her husband.
[19] There should be at the Château d’Eu a portrait of Madame de Longueville, 22 inches by 18, which comes from the old collection of the Duchess de Montpensier. See vol. ii., p. 124, the work of M. Vatout, entitled, Historical and Descriptive Catalogue of the Pictures belonging to his Royal Highness the Duke of Orleans. 4 vols., in-8ᵒ, 1823. It is so long since we have seen this portrait, that we cannot say at what period it represents Madame de Longueville, wherein it differs from or resembles other portraits of her, or by what hand it was produced. It is perhaps the portrait which is at Versailles. Father Lelong mentions the following portraits of Madame de Longueville: 1, Van Hull; 2, Poilly, in fol. (We have not found this portrait in the work of Poilly in the Stamp-Office. See note, p. 363.) 3, Frosne; 4, Moncornet; 5, the collection of Odieuvre.
[20] Villefore, 2d part, p. 170.
[21] Retz, vol. i., p. 219.
[22] Ibid., vol. iii., p. 59.
[23] Retz, vol. ii., p. 18.
[24] In-12ᵒ. We possess the copy of the dedication which belonged to Mademoiselle de Bourbon, and which bears her arms.
[25] Villefore, p. 75.
[26] Vol. ii., p. 19.
[27] Ibid., p. 7.
[28] Boileau, in his letter to Perrault, places the Count de Tréville among the nicest judges of wit. Saint-Simon undertakes to paint him, vol. iv., p. 184, and thus finishes his portrait, vol. vi., p. 372: He had belonged “to the great world, at one time a courtier, then a devotee and recluse, again, by degrees, an active member of the best society, always gallant, full of wit, and of the most refined taste.” He had loved Madame, the amiable Henriette, and the beautiful de Ludre. See the Memoirs of Lafare and Madame de Sévigné, letter of the 13th March, 1671. It is said that the observation, he talks like a book, was first made concerning him. He is the Arsène of the charactères of La Bruyère. I have seen some of his unpublished letters; the language is the best, but for any thing else they are not remarkable.
[29] IVth Series of our works, Littérature, vol. ii., Jacqueline Pascal, p. 20.
[30] Memoirs, vol. i., p. 221: “I do not believe that Queen Elizabeth of England had more capacity for State affairs.”
[31] Oraison funèbre de la Princesse Palatine.
[32] Ægidii Menagii Pœmata, since the first edition, which is of 1652, in-4ᵒ, Ægidii Menagii Miscellanea, until the Elzeverian edition, more complete, of 1663. In this there are more than twenty French, Latin, and Italian pieces to Madame de La Fayette before and after her marriage. Madame de Sévigné does not appear so often; but, as an offset, she is seen in the edition of 1652, both under her own name and under that of Uranie. The study of the different editions of the poems of Ménage would not be useless in a history of Madame de Sévigné and of Madame de La Fayette.
[33] See the Italian Sonnet of Madame de Sévigné, published by M. de Montmerqué.
[34] This correspondence was sold at Sens, in 1849, at the sale of M. Tarbé. I examined it for several hours. It is composed of about seventy-six letters, all unpublished, and runs over almost all the life of Madame de La Fayette. We here find that Ménage felt a passion for his beautiful pupils. Repulsed and discouraged rather quickly by Marie de Chantil, he turned to her relative, Mademoiselle de Lavergne, with no better fortune, but without experiencing so much neglect. The intercourse of Ménage with Mademoiselle de Lavergne continued even after her marriage to the Count de La Fayette, became more intimate during her widowhood, and continued even until her death. Madame de La Fayette coquetted evidently with her Latin and Italian master, and for some time their relations were intimate but not tender. Finally, they became good and perfect friends. Several letters show with what care Madame de La Fayette had studied under Ménage the poets and good writers, both ancient and modern. She consults him, and refers to their disputes in regard to the use of such and such an expression. She speaks continually of their common friend, Huet, who wrote for Zaïdé a dissertation on the origin of the romance. There are a few lines about Segrais. I do not remember seeing the name of La Rochefoucauld once mentioned. This was perhaps a delicate subject, upon which the beautiful lady did not consult her learned friends. What existed between the duke and the countess did not concern the Abbé Huet and the Abbé Ménage. It was only to the Marchioness de Sévigné, or to the Marchioness de Sablé, that she would speak on such a matter. Besides, in this collection, we have only the letters or rather notes of Madame de La Fayette; not one of Ménage. Most of them are autographs, some dictated and signed, all perfectly authentic. M. Tarbé made a copy of this correspondence, which was sold with the autographs. It belongs now to M. Feuillet.
[35] See the dissertation of Madame de Grignan on the Pure Love of Fénelon, in vol. x. of the works of Madame de Sévigné, p. 518, edition Montmerqué.
[36] We shall often return in this work, for example, 1st Part, chap. ii., to this difference between the literature of Louis XIII. and that of Louis XIV. We have elsewhere said, Fourth Series, vol. ii., of the illustrious women of the seventeenth century, p. 13: “Let us go on and examine the age of Louis XIV. An end has come to the manly vigor of the times of Richelieu; the freedom of the Fronde has ceased; Louis XIV. has made politeness and dignity, tempered by good taste, the order of the day. Fortunate are the minds which have been formed in the strength and liberty of the preceding age, which receive the polish of the new epoch! This was the privilege of Madame de Sévigné, as well as of Molière and of Bossuet.”
[37] Part i., chap. iii.
[38] Ibid., chap. iv.
[39] No one has been duped by the disavowal which he made, for political purposes, of the passages of these memoirs which concern Condé and his sister; for they are the very ones which most betray his hand. They shocked the public conscience, whose interpreter is Madame de Motteville, vol. v., pp. 114, 115, and 132.
[40] See Part iii.
[41] Mémoires, edit. of Amsterdam, 1733, p. 12.
[42] Mémoires, vol. ii., p. 15.
[43] Mémoires de Guy-Joly, collection Michaud, 3d Series, vol. ii., p. 15.
[44] Petitot, vol. li., p. 896.
[45] Ibid., p. 398, 399.
[46] Petitot, vol. li., pp. 898, 899.
[47] Petitot, vol. li., p. 899, etc.
[48] Petitot, vol. li., p. 462.
[49] Ibid., p. 401.
[50] Petitot, vol. lii., p. 9.
[51] Vol. iii., p. 295.
[52] Ibid., p. 393.
[53] Mémoires, p. 47.
[54] Mémoires de La Rochefoucauld, Petitot, vol. lii., p. 24.
[55] Mémoires de La Rochefouc., Petitot, vol.lii., p. 72.
[56] Ibid., p. 71.
[57] Mémoires de La Rochefoucauld, Petitot, vol. lii., pp. 79, 80.
[58] See Part ii.
[59] Mémoires de Madame de Nemours, p. 150.
[60] La Rochefoucauld, p. 198 of the edition of 1664: “The Prince de Condé was warned of the design which she had to ruin his party, by very extraordinary means, for the interest of Nemours, and feared, that similarly prejudiced in behalf of another, she might go to the same extremities if this one should so desire it.” Was warned, and by whom, if not by La Rochefoucauld, who then enjoyed the entire confidence of Condé? La Rochefoucauld perceived so plainly the odiousness of this passage, that he afterwards modified and softened it, as may be seen in the editions of Renouard and Petitot.
[61] Vol. v., pp. 114, 115.
[62] Madame de Sévigné doubts it very much. Letter of October 7, 1676: “I do not believe that he was ever in love.” He says himself in making his own portrait: “I who know whatever is delicate and strong in the sentiments of love, if ever I happen to love, it will certainly be in this manner. But in one of my make, I do not believe that this knowledge which I possess ever passes from the mind to the heart.” Segrais, (Mémoires, Anecdotes, edit. d’Amsterdam, 1723, p. 113): “M. de la Rochefoucauld said that he had never found love except in romances; as for him, he had never felt it.”
[63] Vol. v., p. 132.
[64] Edit. of 1664, pp. 229-282; Petitot, pp. 156-158.
[65] Mémoires, vol. ii., p. 129.
[66] Some time ago I expressed the same opinion in regard to La Rochefoucauld, and, as may be seen, I still hold it. See 1st series of my works, vol. iv., p. 200; 4th series, vol. i., p. 51, and vol. ii., p. 8.
[67] Mémoires, Anecdotes, p. 31.
[68] Vol. i., p. 217.
[69] On the Fronde and its general causes, see Part i., chap. 4.
[70] See thereon a curious passage of Madame de Motteville, vol. iv., p. 359, etc.
[71] We borrow the translation that Villefore has given of this part of the Italian narrative of the cardinal, Part 1st, p. 22.
[72] Part 1st, p. 44.
[73] See, in the Library of the Arsenal, Manuscripts of Conrart, in-4ᵒ, vol. xvi., p. 642, an unpublished letter of Henri de Bourbon to his mother, upon the assassination of Henri IV., which proves how absurd it is to accuse him of having been concerned in that assassination. The same volume contains different writings of the same prince against Marshal d’Ancre.
[74] We find in regard to all this, new and curious details in a Journal historique et anecdote de la cour et de Paris, t. xi., in-4ᵒ, manuscripts of Conrart. This unpublished journal commences January 1, 1614, and goes to January 1, 1620.
M. the Prince was arrested September 1, 1616, by order of Marshal d’Ancre, favorite of the queen regent, Marie de Médicis.
“September 11. Madame the young Princess arrives very much afflicted. It is said that M. de Montmorency was not pleased that the queen was unwilling to permit her to see M. le Prince.
“May 19, 1617. M. le Prince petitions the king to do a charitable deed by delivering to him his wife, that she might remain a prisoner with him.
“May 26, 1617. Madame the Princess de Condé goes to salute the king and supplicate him to let her enter as a prisoner in the Bastile with M. the Prince. The king grants it to her, and permits her to take with her only one damsel. Upon which her petit nain, having supplicated the king to be pleased that he should not abandon his mistress, his majesty also permitted him. The same day, after dinner, Madame the Princess entered the Bastile, where she was received by M. the Prince with all the testimonies of friendship that can be imagined; and he gave her no repose until she had said to him that she pardoned him.” In this same journal, there has often been a question of the bad conduct of the prince towards his wife, in regard to which there is not one word of blame.
“August 31, 1617. The undertaking to save the prince from the Bastile discovered.
“September 15, 1617. M. the Prince taken from the Bastile to the wood of Vincennes.... A long time before he had asked that he might be placed there in order to have better air. M. de Modène said to him that, mindful of that, he had pressed the king so much upon the subject, that at last he had obtained it. M. the Prince responded that in the mean time he had become accustomed to the air of the Bastile; and thereupon resisted all that he could, until it was necessary to go. Madame the Princess also went with him in a coach, having been unwilling to enter a litter. It is said that in the beginning M. the Prince only thought it was desired to deprive him of his wife. M. de Vitry, M. de Persan, M. de Modène, were with him in the coach. After his arrival at the wood of Vincennes, it was permitted him, about the beginning of October, to walk upon the top of a thick wall, which is in the form of a gallery. M. de Persan dwelt in the tower of the wood of Vincennes, in order to guard the prince with the greatest part of the soldiers that he had with him in the Bastile, and M. de Cadenet (afterwards Duke and Marshal de Chaulnes, brother of Constable de Luynes), with a dozen companies of the regiment of Normandy, kept guard in the court of the château, which the soldiers are not permitted to leave.
“About December 20, 1617. Madame the Princess very sick. She is put to bed in the wood of Vincennes, at seven months, of a still-born child, and was more than forty-eight hours without motion or feeling. Never was a person in greater extremity without dying. Among other physicians, M. Duret and M. Pietre assisted her with extreme care. When M. the Prince desired that there should be obsequies for this little infant, M. the Bishop of Paris assembled some theologians, who judged that, since, not having received baptism, it had not entered into the Church, no ceremonies ought to be used on the subject of its death.
“September 5, 1618. Madame the Princess is put to bed of two dead boys. The king shows great displeasure thereupon. Several persons had permission to go to see her.
“March 21, 1619. M. the Prince falls sick. Tuesday, April 2. MM. Hatin, Duret, and Seguin came to the Louvre to represent the state of the malady. The cause was attributed to profound melancholy. For several days he was regarded as hopeless. Madame his mother, Madame the Countess, Madame de Ventadour, Madame the Countess d’Auvergne, Madame de la Trémouille, Madame de Fontaines, Madame la Grande, etc., were allowed to go and visit him. Monday, April 8, the king sent to him his sword by M. de Cadenet, and wrote to him: ‘My cousin, I am very much grieved at your illness. I pray you to be comforted. As soon as I shall have set in order my affairs, I will give you your liberty. Be rejoiced then, and have the assurance of my friendship. I am, etc.’
“August 28, 1619. Between midnight and one o’clock, Madame the Princess was put to bed of a daughter, in the wood of Vincennes.
“October 17, 1619. Council held, in which is taken the final resolution of releasing M. the Prince.
“October 18. The king goes to Chantilly, to await there M. the Prince.
“19th. M. de Luynes goes to find M. the Prince at the wood of Vincennes.
“20th. M. de Luynes goes early in the morning to the wood of Vincennes, and gets into a carriage with M. the Prince and Madame the Princess, in which were also MM. de Cadenet and de Modène. He goes to Chantilly to find the king, and sees him in a cabinet, where, it is said, he falls upon his knees, and makes extreme protestations of fidelity, and feeling of obligation, which he had for him.
“22d. The king returns to Compiègne, accompanied by M. the Prince. Madame the Princess arrived there and saw the queen the same day.”
In the xvi. vol. of the same manuscript, p. 933, a French diplomatic agent transmits the reports spread abroad in the Low Countries, on the subject of the Prince and Princess de Condé, prisoners at the Bastile or in Vincennes: “The Princess de Condé, the younger, has written from there to her own femme de chambre married in that city, that M. the Prince de Condé was under the impression that he had been poisoned by his head-cook, named Baucheron, who had practiced and received money for that purpose, and had escaped; and because he might take refuge in that country, she charges her to inform the Prince and Princess of Orange, in order to arrest him if possible. The people of the so-called Prince of Orange also say, that M. the Prince de Condé has thought of escaping, and has been betrayed and discovered by one of his domestics, but that he has still other means for regaining his liberty.”
[75] Mémoires de Lenet, collection of Michaud, 3d series, v. ii., p. 448.
[76] Mémoires de Lenet, Michaud, 3d series, vol. ii., p. 458.
[77] Mémoires de Lenet, Michaud, 3d series, vol. ii., p. 455.
[78] His eldest brother, who, having taken his title after his death, was also distinguished for his beauty, his bravery, his gallantry, played an important part in the life of Madame de Longueville, and perished in a senseless duel with the Duke de Beaufort, his brother-in-law.
[79] Paris, 1800, in-8ᵒ.
[80] There is a constant demand for a collection of the cartularies of the old abbeys. Why will not some friend of religion and letters occupy himself with filling up the lacunes, so much to be regretted, of the Gallia christiana, by bringing together, under the name of the Cartulary of the convent of the Carmelites of the Faubourg Saint-Jacques, a multitude of pieces which we have held in our hands, which would establish, upon authentic monuments, the history of that interesting congregation, from the first years of the seventeenth century to the French Revolution? All the notes, extracts, and copies, that we have amassed, belong to him who will undertake to enrich with a new volume of this kind the Collection des documents inédits relatifs à l’histoire de France.
[81] For example, Guido, Champagne, and Lebrun.
[82] Among others, a statue, in white marble, representing the Cardinal de Bérulle on his knees. This beautiful work is by Jacques Sarrazin, and is still to be seen in the chapel of the Carmelites.
[83] General Archives, demesnial section, 1st file, letter C: “Letters-patent of King Henry IV. for the establishment of the order of the nuns of Nôtre-Dame of Mount Carmel, verified in parliament October 1, 1602, at the very humble petition of our dear well-beloved cousin, Demoiselle de Longueville.” And in other pieces it is also said: “The said lord (King Henry), favorably disposed to the petition of Catherine d’Orleans, daughter of the late Henri d’Orleans, Duke de Longueville and de Touteville....”
[84] Since that time the convent of the Rue Saint-Jacques has been called the Great Convent, to distinguish it from the house in the Rue Chapon.
[85] The act of donation which is in the General Archives, was made in the name of the duchess dowager de Longueville, as well as in the name of her son, the future husband of Anne de Bourbon. “Madame Catherine de Gonzagues and de Clèves, Duchess de Longueville and de Touteville, widow of the late very powerful prince Henri d’Orleans, during his life, Duke de Longueville and de Touteville, sovereign Count of Neufchâtel and Valengin, in Switzerland, also Count of Dunois and Tancarville, etc., dwelling at Paris, in his hôtel de Longueville, Rue des Poulies, parish of Saint-Germain de l’Auxerrois, as well in his own name as in that of Monseigneur Henri d’Orleans, his son, also Duke de Longueville and de Touteville.” ... Catherine de Gonzagues and Clèves was sister of Charles de Gonzagues, Duke de Nevers, the father of Marie and Anne de Gonzagues, the queen of Poland and the Palatine. Her son, Henry II., exercised himself much in playing at tennis, and one of his shoulders became larger and more elevated than the other. All the skill of the physicians was powerless. The desolate mother addressed herself to Madame Acarie, then sister Marie de l’Incarnation. She engaged in prayer previous to the holy sacrament, and the next day the form of the youth was very much improved. Through gratitude, the mother and son founded the house of the Rue Chapon, endowed it with ten thousand crowns in silver, and two thousand livres a year. The Duke de Longueville testified to this fact before the Apostolic Commissioners, charged with the beatification of Madame Acarie. Catherine de Gonzagues died in 1629. We find in the Archives different acts which prove that the niece of Richelieu, Madame the Duchess d’Aiguillon, was also one of the benefactresses of both convents. “Marie Vignerot, Duchess d’Esguillon, dwelling in her hôtel, situated in Saint-Germain-des-Prés, parish of Saint-Sulpice.”...
[86] See Gomboust’s plan of Paris, in 1652, and the plan called Turgot’s, of Paris, in 1740.
[87] See Malingre, Antiquités de la Ville de Paris, in-fol., Paris, 1640, pp. 152 and 153, also pp. 501 and 503, Nouveaux Mémoires concernant la maison des Carmélites; a few lines in the Histoire de la Ville de Paris of Felibien and of Lobineau, vol. ii., pp. 1268-1271, and some records in vol. iii. of the Preuves et Pièces justificatives, p. 144. Sauval contains but a page on the Carmelites, vol. i., p. 450. The best thing in regard to this convent is found in the Curiosités de Paris, 1771, vol. i., pp. 459-463. We take from it the following description of the church: “Although the main body of this church is very ancient, it is one of the best decorated in Paris. The great altar is formed of four marble columns, and is reached by twelve steps, very ingeniously placed, with a balustrade of marble. All the ornaments of this altar are of bronze gilded; the tabernacle, which represents the ark of the covenant, is all of silver; the bas-relief in front is highly wrought, and represents the Annunciation. Nothing is more sumptuous than this altar on feast-days. You then see a sun, bright with stones of great value, accompanied by candlesticks, vases, and other pieces of goldsmith’s ware, whose quantity equals its magnificence. The picture is by Guido, and represents the Annunciation.
“The choir is separated from the nave by four beautiful columns of sea-green marble, surmounted by flames of gilded bronze of wonderful beauty and size. The crucifix of bronze, which you see on the door, is one of the best and highly esteemed of the works of Sarrazin.
“The vault of the church, upon which numerous stories from the Holy Scriptures are represented, was painted by Champagne, through the liberality of Marie de Médicis. Observe in it an excellent piece of perspective, designed by Des Argues: it is a crucifix, with the Holy Virgin and St. John, so artistically painted by the same Champagne, that, on entering the church, they appear upon a perpendicular plane, although horizontal, which produces an agreeable and singular effect.
“Above the door of this church there is a beautiful gallery, containing statues of Saint Peter, of Saint Paul, and of Saint Michael overcoming the devil.
“All the chapels are magnificent: the most beautiful pictures and gildings adorn all parts of it; neatness and good taste reign throughout.
“The twelve pictures ornamented with gilded frames, which are placed under the windows, represent subjects drawn from the New Testament, and were painted by very skilful masters. The first, at the right on entering, represents the Resurrection of Lazarus; the second, The Circumcision of our Lord; the third, The Adoration of the Magi; the fourth, The Assumption of the Holy Virgin; the fifth, The Descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles; the sixth, The Birth of our Lord. These six pictures were also painted by the celebrated Champagne, and are very highly esteemed. On the other side, the first represents the Miracle of the Five Loaves, by Stella; the second, The Madeline at the feet of our Lord, at the house of Simon the Pharisee—it is one of the finest works of the famous Le Brun; the third, The Entry of Jesus Christ into Jerusalem, by La Hire; the fourth, Christ at the side of Jacob’s well, talking with the Samaritan woman, by Stella; the fifth, Christ served in the Desert by Angels—this is also by Le Brun; the sixth, The Appearance of our Lord to the three Marys, by La Hire.
“Opposite to the choir of the nuns, observe the great picture representing the Annunciation; it is an excellent work by Guido, who painted it for Queen Marie de Médicis.
“Look afterwards at the chapel of Sainte-Marie-Madeleine; it is one of the most ornamented. You will there see the statue of Cardinal de Bérulle, made in marble by Sarrazin, in 1657; it is raised upon a marble pedestal, upon which are excellent bas-reliefs, by Lestocart, a famous sculptor. These bas-reliefs represent the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and that also performed by Noah, when he left the ark. You will also see in this chapel, all covered with pictures, one of the most perfect paintings ever produced by the famous Le Brun; it represents the Penitent Madeleine. Grief and repentance are so vividly expressed in this, and the skill of the excellent master so well proved by all the accompaniments, that you can find nothing more finished and more perfect. The life of this saint is represented in the wainscot of this beautiful chapel.”
[88] Histoire manuscrite, t. ii.
[89] We have elsewhere established that of the three sources of human knowledge, intuition, induction, and deduction, the first is much the most fertile and the most elevated. It is intuition, which, by its own spontaneous power, discovers directly and without the aid of reflection, all essential truths; it is the source of light to the human race; the voice that speaks to prophets and poets; the principle of all inspiration of enthusiasm, and of that unalterable and sure faith, that astonishes reasoning which is compelled to treat it as a folly, because it cannot account for it by its ordinary processes. See the Cours de Philosophie, particularly, First Series, vol. v., p. 301; and Second Series, vol. i., Lecture vi., pp. 131-141, etc.
[90] See the Vie de la Mère Madeleine de Saint-Joseph, religieuse Carmélite déchaussée, by a priest of the Oratoire (Father Senault): Paris, 1655, in-4ᵒ. There is a second edition, of 1670, augmented. The Carmelites still have the head of their venerable mother. It is powerful and large. A portrait of her, preserved by the convent, exhibits in her face great strength of character. It has been many times engraved.
[91] The Carmelites have a small portrait, painted on wood, of Mother Marie de Jésus, somewhat advanced in life, but of a noble and sweet visage. It has been engraved by Regnesson.
[92] Histoire manuscrite, vol. ii.
[93] Histoire manuscrite, vol. ii.
[94] The Carmelites were very willing to let me see the portrait, painted upon canvas, of Mother Marie-Madeleine, which does not belie her reputation for beauty. The face is of the most perfect oval; the eyes are of the finest and deepest blue; the forehead is noble; the general aspect is full of grandeur and grace. It would be difficult to find any thing more beautiful.
[95] We will mention the best known of the general visitors of the order: in 1614, the Cardinal de Bérulle; in 1619, Father de Condren, the second general of the Oratoire; in 1627, the Abbé de Bérulle, nephew of the cardinal, etc. Among the superiors of the monastery, we find, in the earlier period, Father Gibieuf, a learned oratorien, one of the correspondents of Descartes; later, in 1662, M. Ferret, doctor in theology, and curate of Saint-Nicholas-du-Chardonnet; in 1678, M. Pirot, a doctor of the Sorbonne; in 1715, M. Vivant, grand vicar of Cardinal de Noailles; in 1747, the Bishop of Bethlehem, celebrated for having extirpated Jansenism, which had been introduced among the Carmelites at the close of the preceding century.