ON THE SUBLIME Alain Billault Longinus' On the Sublime entered the history of French literature in 1674, when Boileau's translation of the Greek text was published in Paris. The title of the book read Traité du Sublime ou Du mervàlleux dans le discours, traduit du grec de Longin. Its publication enabled the well-read audience to rediscover an ancient treatise which had been neglected for a very long time. It was also a turning-point in Boileau's literary career and a path-breaking event of some consequence in the history of aesthetics. This is why the context, the making, the contents, the purpose and the influence of this translation are worth studying. The Context of the Publication of Boileau's Translation The rediscovery of Longinus' On the Sublime in Europe at the time of the Renaissance was difficult and slow.1 In 1554, Francesco Robortello published in Basel the editio princeps of the Greek text. Paul Manuce, the famous Venetian publisher, followed in his foot­ steps the year after. But in 1605, the great scholar Isaac Casaubon commenting on Persius' Satires remarked that Longinus was seldom read: "Longe plura Longinus in aureolo nee satis unquam lecto libello."2 Then came Franciscus Portus whose edition was published in Geneva in 1669 and became the source of all the subsequent edi­ tions through the eighteenth century. But the treatise was not paid much attention, even after 1663, when Tanneguy Le Fèvre's edition was published in Saumur.3 In 1694, Jacobus Tollius released his own edition in Utrecht. He had actually finished his work in 1677, but he had beeen unable to find a publisher for seventeen years. This is a sign of the poor success Longinus was meeting with.4 1 Weinberg 1950. Brody 1958: 9-35. 2 Casaubon 1605: 57. 3 Le Fèvre 1663. 4 Brody 1958: 11. 316 ALAIN BILLAULT The translations were not faring better. In the sixteenth century, the French scholar Marc-Antoine Muret, who was living in Rome, worked on a Latin version of the text which was supposed to be published with Paul Manuce's edition, but his work never appeared in print. There were two other Latin versions by Domenico Pizzimenti (Naples, 1566) and Pietro Pagani (Venice, 1572), but they came to be known much later, after the publication of Gabriele Dalla Pietra's own Latin translation (Geneva, 1612). This translation was reprinted in England and included in the same volume as G. Langbaine's edi­ tion which was published in Oxford in 1636 and did not excite much interest. Neither did the English translation by John Hall (London, 1652). The first Italian version had been established, but not published by Giovanni di Niccolo da Falgano towards 1575. In 1639, Niccolo Pinelli published his own in Padova. But only a few scholars were still acquainted with the work of Longinus. France was no exception to the rule. Longinus is never plainly quoted from in the sixteenth-century French literature. Nevertheless one may suspect that implicit references are sometimes made to his work by some authors. For example, the poet Jacques Peletier du Mans remarked in his Art poétique which was published in 1555, that such great poets as Pindar and Vergil cannot be reproached with the small mistakes they happened to make sometimes because of their very greatness.5 Longinus expresses the same idea in his trea­ tise (33, 4-5). He also discusses and rules out another idea: he denies that the decline of eloquence originates from the loss of political freedom (44). Guillaume du Vair mentions this explanation in 1594, in his treatise De Véloquence française^ One is tempted to conclude that du Vair had read On the Sublime? even if the same theme can also be found in Horace's Ad Pisonem (351-353). This is why it has been assumed that On the Sublime was read in the sixteenth century by a few initiate who formed kind of an unofficial literary club. They were scholars, like Marc-Antoine Muret, and writers, like Montaigne,8 who mostly lived in Italy or traveled there and spread in Europe the main themes of Longinus' thinking, even if they did not men- 5 Boulanger 1930: 102. 6 Radouant 1908: 133, 147-148. 7 Clements 1942: 192, 243. 8 Logan 1983. .