Comptes rendus PFSCL L, 98 DOI 10. / PFSCL-2023-0011 156 Jean-Raymond Fanlo, Madeleine Fragonard, Gilbert Schrenck, Marie-Hélène Servet (éds.) : Théodore Agrippa d’Aubigné, Les Avantures du baron de Faeneste, édition critique. Paris, Classiques Garnier, coll. « Classiques Jaunes, n o 747 », 2022. 477 p. Weary of the violence of civil war and religious controversy; and the atrocious acts of inhumanity; weary of court corruption and affectations; weary of the influence of Italian on his Gascon French; and weary of the pretensions and powers of great nobles such as Épernon and Condé, but absolutely determined to laugh and write, the Baron writes and writes poetry, history and Advantures in that order with the first part of the latter being published in 1617, and completed in 1630. While claiming to be withdrawn from public life, like Montaigne, the king knows where to find him and he is ready to serve. He is a writer who must write (the works of Viala and Jouhaud come to mind), but it also may be that he wished to give his friendly printer some work. Les Avantures is Volume VII in the edition of Agrippa’s works, with this volume comes in at 477 pages with an Introduction of 124 pages, 807 footnotes, 16 pages of variants, and 76 pages of Bibliography and Index, available for only 15 Euros. The type is small, but clear; so it is possible to get used to it. There are four erudite editors, J.-R. Fanlo, M.-M. Fragonard, G. Schrenck, and M.-H. Servet who have managed to discipline themselves to dig up and write only what makes the text more engaging for the reader. They have this reviewer’s praise, though one wrote that Henry IV made an appointment in 1615 (p.338) the type of error which is so easy to do. Does the chapter that has the word table in its title, and then reference to not discussing theology at table refer to Martin Luther’s Table Talk? Such would very probably not be the case if Agrippa were writing in Saintonge, but he is in Geneva, which along with Strasbourg were capitals of pastoral training and theological controversy. The Introduction lays out with clarity the complexity of genre and regional identities. There would seem to have been no attempt on Agrippa’s part to build above from an underlying set of questions or theme. As for the dialogue form, it is a relatively recent re-invention, notably by Pasquier in his Pourparler du Prince. He explores possible relations between forms of government and the rhetoric that is manifested in each; while the Dialogue d’entre le Maheustre et le Manant is intensely political. The Baron prompts the reader to think of Rabelais, Montaigne and Cervantes. The only way to come to know Faenest is to read him. Here is how the Baron introduces himself in the Preface: Comptes rendus PFSCL L, 98 DOI 10. / PFSCL-2023-0011 157 Un esprit, lassé de discours graves et tragiques, s’est voulu recreer à la description de ce siècle, en ramassant quelques bourdes vrayes… l’Autheur a commencé ces dialogues par un Baron de Gascogne, Baron en l’air, qui a pour Seigneurie FAENESTE, signifiant en Grec paroistre: Cetui-là jeune eventé, demi Courtisan, demi soldat : et d'autre part un vieil gentil-homme nommé ENAY, qui en mesme langue signifie estre : homme consommé aux lettres… (p. 123) Just 194 pages later he says: “Le Curai de nostre paresse disoit à un oncle min qu’il montreroit dans la Vivle [Bible] le nom de Faeneste, et que l’on aboit troubai de la monnoie de nos armoiries, lors que lou chastel fut vasti, à la bieille moude, s’entend.” (p. 317). Author, courtier, and soldier, but he is so much more than that, namely a true life-long writer, great reader. Presenting Faeneste in a brief review is impossible, and the temptation to interpret must be curtailed. What follows are partial summaries of remarks about religion and nobility. On religion, the first topic serves as a frame for what follows, and though superficially, it leads the reader to ponder differences between Catholicism and Protestantism: which conforms best to the teachings of Jesus, the visible Church, or the invisible Church? Enay presses a bit by commenting that the Baron is very much attracted to the Early Church. What follows here and there throughout the book, is the discussion of the theology and practices of the Medieval Church, namely veneration for Mary, the mother of Jesus, transubstantiation, rosaries, and of course, relics. One is a sneeze in a jar preserved from the Holy Spirit (we must recall that sneezing was thought to be a loss of the highest, or superior essence of the soul), 18 heads of St. Paul, the personal succession from the apostles, including the popes, papal taxation, recent miracles, and communion hosts that contain radishes. The writing is not polemical, but there is an evident desire to shock. The ceremony of the baptism of bells is accepted by the Baron (See J.B. Thiers). A painting that is supposed to inspire faith of St. Michael slewing the devil, but it does not because the painter gave huge private parts to the devil that might scare women. The Baron does not offer either a credo or a confession. The title of one chapter suggests that it is supposed to be about his conversion. Enay does not bristle, but often leads with a remark on the edge of noncourtly discourse. He is sanguine about the future of both Geneva and Rome. He has read More’s Utopia, but after describing a hunting party he wonders whether or not the participants were really aristocrats, or town butchers. Comptes rendus PFSCL L, 98 DOI 10. / PFSCL-2023-0011 158 Claims to familiarity with Henry IV end in the remark that both the king and the Baron have the same old noble social origins. He repeats the assertion found out from the village curé that his name is found in the Bible, but then adds that it is not in Josephus (p.358). “Je continue à dire que sa Majesté sçait Vien d’où ye suis, et encore que vous soiez à pied, ye suis toujours lou Varon de Faeneste aussi vien gentilhomme que loi Roi mesmes, il y a des tiltres chez nous qui disent Regnante Jesu propheta” (p.116), a learned allusion to when in a quarrel with the pope, Philip Augustus said that he holds his realm from God alone. There are several chapters about nuns that are mostly about their not living up to the rules of their order. Several have high aristocratic names, and of course one, of the principal seducers is Henry IV. He also has his predecessor, Henry III taking dogs away from the nuns, their owners. On his social rank, Faeneste allows the reader to conclude that he is noble, but was he gentilhomme? This not quite anxiety became more and more prevalent throughout elite French society in the later sixteenth century, and the first decades of the seventeenth century (See Ellery Schalk). The amount of legislation regarding noble titles increased markedly, and it included the cut and types of cloth that could be worn according to rank. In a note the editors comment that Agrippa was obliged to defend his noble status before royal authorities. The number of commentaries on dueling also reached a high point around 1615, so it comes as no surprise when Enay brings it up. There is agreement in the discussion about condemning young blades wandering about looking for a fight on what was called a point of honor, but which was not. Capital punishment was the law for dueling unauthorized by the king. Enay lists the crime of lèse-Majesté (just how remains unspecified), accusations of treason, defending a woman’s honor, and the support offered to a widow whose husband had been killed in a duel. There is some discussion of gloire but it does not seem specifically connected to the norms of noble conduct. The implication is that only gentilhommes duel. When Faeneste brings up his social origins he repeats what he says in the Preface, that his name is ancient Greek for to come forth, and that it is found in the bible. Enay is similar as the verb to be. He claims that there had been a château surrounded by mazures, commoner houses, and that he would never destroy these to build a gallery. He scoffs at the one added to the Louvre. The quite detailed description of Enay’s château suggests that noble identity is built on the name of a fortified place. It too, has a gallery, which the Baron suggests should be remodeled into a barn for hay. By contrast he admires his mother’s garden for the tall boxwood that are Comptes rendus PFSCL L, 98 DOI 10. / PFSCL-2023-0011 159 expensive to prune. The hostility to galleries results certainly from their Italian origins, a remnant of the culture war that lasted almost a century between Frenchness and Italian language and culture that began around 1550 (See F. Waquet). The Baron’s stay in Paris and at court has less whimsy than other parts of the book, but the anecdote about the gentilhomme who orders silversmith to make a cachet for him with his coat of arms, is a telling piece of ridicule. It takes place on the Quai des Orfèvres, and begins by the silversmith asking the gentilhomme what he desires for the champ of his blason. The latter replies millet, indicating that he did not understand the question, which refers to an etched background of some sort. The silversmith then asks for what he wishes above this, and the response is himself on a black horse that costs 100 écus and four black and white Spanish dogs. There certainly was insufficient space on a cachet for something as big as a horse and rider along with four dogs. Agrippa then describes his own coat of arms, a red window that is open with the devise, “enter if you wish” beneath it. Why is someone invited to go through a window rather than a door is not explained. There is a fascination with heraldry because it can be a foundation for authenticity and certain nobility. On the mantle of the great fireplace in the château of La Tour there is an old coat of arms of the family La Tour d’Auvergne, ancient with its own domain almost like an independent country. It is, if I am not mistaken, a simple crenelated tower. This reviewer sincerely hopes that there will be many new readers of the Baron’s advanture thanks to this learned but very unpedantic edition. Orest Ranum