DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.3825#0019
PROVENCE. 13
that art which so quickly diffused itself over Europe)
has been neglected; on the contrary, no theme has been
more laboriously handled, and yet the true materials
for judging their character, which have hitherto been
laid before the public, are exceedingly scanty. M.
Schlegel very justly observes, " Tout le monde par-
lait des Troubadours et personne nc les connaissait."
Abundance of treatises were written, and elaborate
judgements pronounced, while scarcely an author
thought it necessary to produce his evidence, and en-
able his readers to exercise their own judgement. Un-
fortunately the majority of French critics appear to en-
tertain a sovereign contempt for every thing which is
not in the court dress of Louis XIV., and are content
to let the fine language of their ancestors rest in cheer-
less oblivion. All, and particularly Millot, seem stu-
diously to keep the originals in the back ground; it is
difficult to say why, unless it were felt to be most pru-
dent to deny to the world the means of judging of the
competency or fidelity of the alledged translations.
Those who will take the pains to examine them will
often see that this precaution was by no means im-
politic.
Even M. Ginguene and M. Sismondi appear to be
satisfied with conclusions drawn at second hand from
the works of Millot, scarcely ever venture on a trans-
lation of their own, and furnish only here and there
an original fragment, selected with no view to the
that art which so quickly diffused itself over Europe)
has been neglected; on the contrary, no theme has been
more laboriously handled, and yet the true materials
for judging their character, which have hitherto been
laid before the public, are exceedingly scanty. M.
Schlegel very justly observes, " Tout le monde par-
lait des Troubadours et personne nc les connaissait."
Abundance of treatises were written, and elaborate
judgements pronounced, while scarcely an author
thought it necessary to produce his evidence, and en-
able his readers to exercise their own judgement. Un-
fortunately the majority of French critics appear to en-
tertain a sovereign contempt for every thing which is
not in the court dress of Louis XIV., and are content
to let the fine language of their ancestors rest in cheer-
less oblivion. All, and particularly Millot, seem stu-
diously to keep the originals in the back ground; it is
difficult to say why, unless it were felt to be most pru-
dent to deny to the world the means of judging of the
competency or fidelity of the alledged translations.
Those who will take the pains to examine them will
often see that this precaution was by no means im-
politic.
Even M. Ginguene and M. Sismondi appear to be
satisfied with conclusions drawn at second hand from
the works of Millot, scarcely ever venture on a trans-
lation of their own, and furnish only here and there
an original fragment, selected with no view to the