Esprit cartesien? Issues concerning the influence of Descartes on the works of Nicolas Poussin

Esprit cartesien? Issues concerning the influence of Descartes on the works of Nicolas Poussin

H E N R Y KEAZOR

#

T h e introduction to a recent French m o n o g r a p h on Descartes a n d his philosophy featured the following statement:

L'esprit cartesien n'a pas tres bonne image aujourd'hui. II est souvent synonyme d'un rationalismc autoritaire et rcducteur.' T h i s quite negative appraisal is contradicted elsewhere in which it is postulated that Cartesian philosophy was a n d r e m a i n s f u n d a m e n t a l to o u r way of perceiving a n d conceiving o u r o w n reality:

. .. nicht wenigc unserer Ansichten iiber Seele und Korper, Subjekt und Objekt, die wir fur selbstverstandlich halten, weil wir iiber sie nicht nachzudenken pflegen, sind in Wirklichkeit nicht selbstverstandlich, sondern cartesianisch."

W h e n c o m p a r i n g these two quotations taken f r o m two different m o n o g r a p h s on the philosopher it a p p e a r s that o u r attitude to Cartesian philosophy is schizophrenic: for whilst m a n y of o u r ideas a n d concepts, which we take for granted, are Cartesian in origin we reject this 'Cartesian mentality' w h e n the notion of it b e c o m e s explicit.

It is already a difficult task to agree univocally on the extent to which in this day a n d age we are m o u l d e d by the Cartesian imprint a n d yet m o r e difficult to define the impact Descartes h a d on his contemporaries. But such definition is all the m o r e i m p o r t a n t in view of the fact that it has b e c o m e obligatory to evaluate the significance a n d role of philosophical concepts t h r o u g h their repercussions, the way in w h i c h they were received by their c o n t e m p o r a r i e s a n d succeeding generations. T h e case for presentation a n d analysis in this p a p e r is even m o r e significant for it deals not simply with h o w a c o n t e m p o r a r y philosopher of Descartes m a y h a v e b e c o m e a c q u a i n t e d with his ideas, but w h e t h e r in transgressing the b o u n d a r i e s of scientific disciplines, a n artist (and here it must b e e m p h a s i z e d , o n e of the most intellectual artists of his time) h a d registered such response to the philosophy in his work. A fact, if established, which would m a k e the influence of the philosopher even m o r e remarkable.

T h u s the question posed is w h e t h e r Nicolas Poussin (figure i),

frequently d u b b e d a 'peintre philosophe',

assimilated the ideas of R e n e Descartes, as has b e e n often and quite diversely m a i n t a i n e d (figure 2).

F o r his part the philosopher not only treated matters of e x t r e m e interest to painters such as optics but also occasionally resorted to art

I'ii^urc 1. Nicolas Poussin, Self-Portrait. Paris, Louvre, 1650.

m e t a p h o r s in his writings.

In Discourse de la methode (1637) he asserted that his desire was to represent his life ' c o m m e en u n tableau'.

M o r e o v e r , h e explained his intention of present­

ing only a few examples of his new m e t h o d pars pro loto by d e m o n s t r a t i n g only results f r o m his work in optics, as b e a r i n g c o m p a r i s o n with painters w h o a r e compelled to choose the m a i n side of a three­dimensional b o d y in o r d e r to paint it o n canvas;

similarly he has chosen to select the results o b t a i n e d f r o m his work in optics to indicate the r a n g e of his n e w m e t h o d . In Dioptrique he m e n t i o n e d the experi­

ence gained by the so­called 'taille­douces' (engravings) to affirm the difference between visible things a n d their images, which, however, m u s t resemble t h e m u p to a certain

W O R D & I M A G E , V O L . 1 9 , N O . 3 , J U L Y — S E P T E M B E R 2 O O 3

' 5

Word & Image ISSN 0266 6286 (' 2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd h t t p : / / w w w Jandf.c-n.uk/journals/tr/o'2fi(i(>'j8(i. lit ml

Originalveröffentlichung in: Word & image : a journal of verbal visual enquiry 19 (2003), S. 151-165

ih

-4r

4T.

Figure '2. Sebastien Bourdon, Portrait of Rene Descartes. Paris, Louvre, 1649 (Inv. No. 2812).

point.

H e emphasizes here that o n e is able to interpret the simple ink lines on p a p e r of a n engraving as things depicted a n d although the objects represented in this way d o not b e a r a one h u n d r e d p e r c e n t resemblance to the original, we can indeed recognize them. H e n c e we recognize an object as r o u n d or square even if perspectival distortions turn it into an oval or r h o m b o i d (figure 3).

" It seems pointless to once m o r e call attention to the repetitive use of the term ' p e i n t u r e ' utilized in the Dioptrique to signify the image projected on the r e t i n a . " Finally, in the Meditationes de prima philosophia (1641) he asserted that even t h o u g h the things created by painters are merely imaginary, at least the colours with which these fantasies were p a i n t e d d o indeed physically exist.

A clarification of w h a t u p to now is only a p r e s u m e d relationship between the 'peintre philosophe' Poussin a n d the philosopher Descartes, w h o used artistic m e t a p h o r s poignantly, could yield some useful results:

1. It could serve as a 'touchstone' to verify the validity of a r g u m e n t s used to g r o u n d the hypotheses linking other artists to Descartes.

2. If successful in the first point a n o t h e r e x a m p l e could be a d d e d c o n c e r n i n g the assimilation of Cartesian ideas, the analysis of which would assist in c o m p r e h e n d i n g which ideas h a d such repercussions a n d why.

Figure 3. Details from an engraving by Etienne Picart after Poussin's 'The

Plague at Ashdod', 1677.

3. Should the first point fail, however, it would m a k e us m o r e cautious in the future w h e n t e m p t e d to attribute certain m o d e s of thinking to Descartes only because they resemble Cartesian ideas. F u r t h e r m o r e , such a negative result would help us better u n d e r s t a n d the indisputable impact of Descartes. T h e fact that his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s n u r t u r e d ideas similar to his — which at first glance a p p e a r to tell of his influence — p e r h a p s indicates that others h a d already p l o u g h e d the g r o u n d for such thoughts a n d that Descartes himself h a d grasped, a b s o r b e d a n d s u m m a r i z e d the intellectual currents of his era.

If we n o w turn to the m a t t e r of Descartes's influence o n Nicolas Poussin's painting we are compelled to deal with the great p a r a d o x that Descartes's f u n d a m e n t a l m e t h o d of systematic d o u b t ('De o m n i b u s d u b i t a n d u m ' ) has never b e e n applied to this issue. Indeed, r a t h e r t h a n paying heed to the first rule of the Discours de la methode — 'never to accept a n y t h i n g as true which I d o not clearly a n d distinctly see to b e s o '

we discover simple u n d e m o n s t r a t e d affirmations of his influence repeated with varying degrees of intensity.

T h e s e r a n g e f r o m a stating of the fact of their m e r e con ­ t e m p o r a n e i t y to blank assertions of a p r e s u m e d influence of Descartes on Poussin. O b s e r v i n g the second a n d third Cartesian rules to 'divide each of the difficulties u n d e r e x a m i n a t i o n into as m a n y parts as possible' a n d 'to conduct m y thoughts in order, beginning with the objects that are the

I 5 2 H E N R Y K E A / . O R

simplest and easiest to know a n d so proceed, gradually, to knowledge of the m o r e c o m p l e x ' , '

the following p a n o r a m a reveals itself.

A n t h o n y Blunt, for instance, confined himself to m e n t i o n ­ ing that Descartes a n d Poussin were contemporaries;

' yet d o c u m e n t s indicate that they never actually met, unlike the painters Frans Hals or Sebastien Bourdon,

' w h o both p a i n t e d portraits of the philosopher (see figure 2). W h e n in 1624 Descartes arrived in Venice,'

Poussin h a d already left for R o m e . T h o u g h they were both to spend the a u t u m n a n d winter of that H o l y Y e a r in the ancient capital no meeting or even a c k n o w l e d g m e n t of each other has been r e c o r d e d

­ both of t h e m were quite u n k n o w n at the time. W h e n f a m o u s a n d living a b r o a d , '

Descartes in T h e N e t h e r l a n d s a n d Poussin in R o m e , they missed each other w h e n they chose to r e t u r n to France. Poussin was there between 1640 a n d 1641, whereas the philosopher visited Paris three years afterwards with the artist settled again in R o m e . '

T h e possibility of Poussin being in Paris a n d in the absence of Descartes still c o m i n g into contact with m e m b e r s of his intellectual circle a p p e a r s to be denied by what sources tell us. A letter f r o m Bourdelot, d a t e d 1 M a y 1642, features the guest list of a Paris d i n n e r p a r t y w h e r e Poussin is listed clearly as sitting next to n o n e other than Pierre Gassendi — Descartes's great a n d impetuous adversary.

"

In view of this a p p a r e n t total lack of any direct, personal contact between the painter a n d philosopher, we can p r o c e e d to the next level of o u r considerations: e x a m i n i n g the possibility of a n intellectual affinity between the two e x t e n d i n g b e y o n d p u r e a n d simple c o n t e m p o r a n e i t y or a personal meeting.

As early as 1904 Paul Desjardins's book (the title being demonstrably Cartesian sounding in itself) La Methode (note the capital 'M'!) des classiques francais, offered a view of Poussin, which, according to M a r c Fumaroli's inter­

pretation, presents the painter alongside Descartes, Corneille and Pascal as the antidote for the romanticism of the 'great vagueness'

a n d troubles of the early twentieth century.

W h a t a p p e a r s to link the painter a n d philosopher are not only the key w o r d ' m e t h o d ' , but also the 'scientific discipline' that distinguishes t h e m both. In the case of Poussin, Fumaroli states that the discipline assures that 'the truth blossoms t h r o u g h o u t with its secret a n d definite laws'.

It is precisely because of this a p p a r e n t b o n d between 'scientific discipline' a n d the 'secret a n d definite laws' that such duality is m o r e a n d m o r e frequently repeated in the subsequent literature on Descartes a n d Poussin, a n d thus b e c a m e c e m e n t e d , b u t only slightly developed, explained or d e m o n s t r a t e d .

T h e first a t t e m p t at explaining the trio of Descartes, Corneille a n d Poussin

evoked by Desjardins involves mainly the philosophic concept that would unite the three personalities a n d would then, in a second instance, function as the b a c k g r o u n d for the m e t h o d all three applied.

However, before e x a m i n i n g this m e t h o d m o r e closely we should first analyse the philosophical concept p r e s u m e d to be c o m m o n to Descartes a n d Poussin.

Erwin Panofsky in 1939 d r e w a parallel between the painter a n d philosopher in this m a n n e r :

. . . in the visual arts a calmer, nearly Cartesian mind [exactly our 'esprit cartesien'] was to create the unsurpassable images of Time as a cosmic power: Nicolas Poussin. '

T a k i n g Poussin's f a m o u s self­portrait in the Louvre (see figure 1) as his starting point, in 1966, Walter Friedlander wrote:

He showed himself, as he wanted to be seen and understood for all time: as the peintre­philosophe, the creative and meditative architect of spatial and human relationships — as the spiritual equal of Corneille and Descartes."'

W o r d s such as 'calmer m i n d ' a n d 'meditative architect' indicate the course taken by the studies on the c o m m o n concepts of Corneille, Descartes a n d Poussin. Friedlander summarizes the results with the following:

The general aflinily which has often been observed between Nicolas Poussin and two of his French contemporaries, is based partly upon the Stoic conceptions underlying the work of all three.

"

At first glance there a p p e a r to be clear bints in the writings of both Poussin a n d Descartes, which could sustain such a hypothesis. T h e y both use the m e t a p h o r of the 'great book of the world',

always called u p o n to contrast with the merely theoretical, that which is only r e a d a n d is thus s e c o n d h a n d knowledge.

T h i s image was present in late R o m a n literature, in particular the work of St Augustine, b u t here it is taken f r o m M o n t a i g n e ,

a model of Stoicism actually lived by the philosopher. T h e m e t a p h o r of the world as a theatre also surfaces a n d can b e traced to the 'Enchiridion' by the stoic philosopher Epictctus;

" the notion here is that the world must only b e viewed f r o m a distance,

' as Poussin wrote in a letter to Paul Freart de C h a n t a l o u in 1643, 'to enjoy the gestures of the actors'.

Similar w o r d s can be detected in Descartes's Discours, a n d m a y b e reflected in J a n Baptist Wcenix's portrait (figure 4), which features the philosopher holding an open book displaying the inscription ' M u n d u s est fabula'.

A n d w h e n reading a sentence such as:

. . . toutes vos actions estant conduittes par le moyen de la raison vous ne polities lien faire qui n'ave une [in vravcincnl vertueuse

a n d c o m p a r i n g it w ith this statement:

. .. il sulfit de bien juger, pour bien faire, & de juger le mieux qu'on puisse, pour faire aussy tout son mieux, e'est a dire pour acquerir toutest les verbis .. .

it is difficult to attribute either of these quotations to Poussin or Descartes with any certainty. At any rate, as has been

>53

w.

Figure 4. J a n Baptist Wecnix, Portrait of Rene Descartes. Utrecht, Centraa]

Museum; r. 1647.

e m p h a s i z e d elsewhere,

both writers invite their audiences to act patiently a n d discerningly, criticizing,

. . . ceux qui . . . ne se peuuent empescher de precipter leurs jugements, ny auoir assez de patience pour conduire par

ordre toutes leurs pensees '"

rather than looking at things with ' t e m p j u g e m c n t et intelligensc.' -

All these opinions, however, shared as they m a y be, are rather marginal traits a n d the question of w h e t h e r or not the nuclei of Descartes a n d Poussin's philosophical concepts have f u n d a m e n t a l c o m m o n aspects remains open. K u r t Badt

has noted that the above similarities e m e r g e as rather superficial.

In brief, the most essential differences can be s u m m a r i z e d as follows: notwithstanding some elements of Stoic ethics (like the desire for tranquillity

" a n d a certain distance in relation to the world) Cartesian ethics are not Stoic because they eventually reveal themselves to be active a n d therefore in real opposition to Stoicism. It is n o coincidence that Descaru s s key words are verbs such as 'to direct', 'to influence' a n d 'to control'.

' For Descartes, passions, the central t h e m e of Stoicism, are not weaknesses that must be

suppressed b u t assets

we have to learn to use properly.

Passions in themselves are useful

* a n d we must only u n d e r ­ stand their causes, functions, m e a n i n g , advantages a n d drawbacks in o r d e r then to control, m a n a g e a n d guide t h e m with the help of free will. T h i s concept of free (because reasonable) will

implies a separation b e t w e e n feelings a n d thoughts, a separation that renders conceivable the idea of a possible a u t o m a t i c conditioning of m e n , applicable mainly to m e n too weak to control their passions.

Entirely the opposite holds true for Poussin. Such auto­

matic conditioning is unthinkable to him for h e assumes outright a direct link between thoughts a n d passion w h e n , for instance, he expresses his desire to r e m i n d the viewer of wisdom a n d virtue as refuges f r o m destiny in the depiction of the most agitated scenes. I m a g i n i n g a type of 'Anti­

S a c r a m e n t s ' in contradistinction to his paintings of the 'Seven S a c r a m e n t s ' painted for Cassiano Dal Pozzo a n d Paul Freart de C h a n t e l o u , Poussin envisions a series of pictures representing episodes in which fortune does the oddest things to m e n , the idea being to teach the viewer to acquire wisdom a n d virtue a n d so r e m a i n firm a n d immobile against the vagaries of c h a n c e .

As fortune is as unpredictable as it is irresponsible, it a p p e a r s better to keep a tight rein on all passions a n d thus b e c o m e totally i n d e p e n d e n t . W h a t is indicated here makes it difficult to m a i n t a i n a parallelism b e t w e e n the philosophical concepts of Descartes a n d Poussin, let alone a possible influence of the philosopher on the painter of which, u p to now, n o trace has been f o u n d .

W e will now look at the central issue of w h e t h e r any indications exist of a p r o c e d u r a l m e t h o d c o m m o n to both Descartes a n d Poussin. In Desjardins's 1904 Methode the a u t h o r hinted at such a similarity of a p p r o a c h w h e n discussing the 'scientific discipline' a n d the 'secret a n d definite laws' of not only the philosopher a n d painter b u t also the playwright Corneille. T e n years later G r a u t o f f was p r e p a r e d to accept a n d develop this notion w h e n he drew attention to the analogies between 'the principles according to which Descartes constructed his concept of the world', the structure of Corneille's plays a n d Poussin's paintings.

Die Descartes verwandten Elemente haben Poussin aus seiner von einer Gesamtstimmung, einem rein kiinstlerischen Bewegungsmotiv ausgehenden Kunst der fruheren Jahre fort in die rationalist ische Atmosphare der Hochrcnaissance zurik'kgetrieben, und er korrigierte, innerlich immer wieder heimkehrend, ihre Ausdrucksformen an den [sic] Stil des Dramatikers Corneille.

In 1949 K e n n e t h Clark pointed to the direction in which these analogies could be concretized in calling the painter the 'stern, Cartesian Poussin' w h o , in his opinion, aspired with his landscapes to give 'logical form even to the disorder of natural s c e n e r y '

— a n opinion subsequently taken u p by W a l t e r F r i e d l a n d e r ' " a n d A n t h o n y Blunt. H o w e v e r , first

I 5 4 H E N R Y K E A Z O R

of all it left a clear imprint on the concept R e n e H u y g h e presented in his i960 b o o k L'art et Fame (figure 5), w h e r e by use of a kind of musical 'stretta' he tries to d r a w a parallel b e t w e e n Poussin a n d the philosopher. H e insists that Poussin, like Descartes, based his art on reason a n d that, like Descartes, the p a i n t e r looked at the world, but subjected the d a t a he collected to a processing of the intellect. In so doing, just as Descartes h a d freed t h o u g h t f r o m the d o m i n a n c e of the C h u r c h , H u y g h e insists Poussin achieved the same for painting.

' With the exception of these last, disputable statements, H u y g h c ' s thesis might well have appealed to Rensselaer W . Lee w h o in 1940 expressed the opinion that ' s o m e t h i n g closely akin to the Cartesian rationalism was strong in Poussin himself',

as h e doubtless h a d the same q u o t a t i o n as H u y g h e in m i n d w h e r e Poussin theoretically distinguishes the superficial, exterior 'aspect' f r o m the m o r e p r o f o u n d 'prospect' f r o m which the conclusion is d r a w n that the p a i n t e r d e m o n s t r a t e d the same scepticism regarding sensory perception as the p h i l o s o p h e r ?

But these state­

m e n t s take n o notice of the fact that Poussin's distinction between 'aspect' a n d 'prospect', clarified in a letter to Sublet de Noyers,

has not only n o t h i n g to do with Cartesian scepticism (Poussin's distinction only concerns itself with h o w an u n e d u c a t e d glance at something differs f r o m the way a judicious person looks u p o n the same object)

'

but is, above all, in no way Cartesian. T h e distinction is, in fact, medieval in origin a n d is to be f o u n d in the work of Alhazen, s o m e b o d y w h o m we k n o w Poussin studied a n d copied.­'

A similar objection applies to the references to 'clarte', which some authors would have unite Poussin and Descartes.

Blunt feels the second series of the 'Seven S a c r a m e n t s ' features a 'clarity' c o r r e s p o n d i n g to a society 'whose taste has been p r o f o u n d l y influenced by the m e t h o d s of Descartes'.

Even if o n e could p r o v e the p r o f o u n d Cartesian imprint on Parisian society in the 1640s in general a n d in particular on the p a t r o n C h a n t e l o u ,

it has to be conceded that the notion of 'clarity' as a property of 'beauty' is to be found in T h o m a s Aquinas.

Yet a n o t h e r example is to be f o u n d in a manuscript of V i n c e n z o Borghini's, which in 1564 declares 'clarity' as one of the aesthetic qualities.'"'

M e n t i o n i n g authorities such as Alhazen, T h o m a s A q u i n a s a n d Borghini p r e p a r e s the p a t h for the next a r g u m e n t , which distinguishes Poussin f r o m Descartes by d e m o n ­ strating how each shows a different way of c o m i n g to terms with authorities a n d tradition. Poussin followed the classic p a t h w h e n quoting in his writings, a n d his paintings drew f r o m traditional authorities, i m p l e m e n t i n g ideal examples f r o m Antiquity or R a p h a e l for instance. H o w e v e r , we ktiow that Descartes — for various reasons " — nourished such a strong desire to be i n d e p e n d e n t of precursors a n d philo­

sophers of the past that not only did he refuse to q u o t e f r o m t h e m b u t was in fact c o n t e m p t u o u s of philology and history, castigating t h e m as 'useless s c i e n c e s ' .

Precisely this con­

t e m p t — which according to legend, was responsible for

Descartes being poisoned at the court of Q u e e n Christina of Sweden by philologists in fear of their position''

— pits the philosopher against the painter Poussin whose entire artistic o u t p u t virtually exclusively featured subject m a t t e r chock­full of biblical, mythological a n d historical scenes.

T o avoid continuing along this rocky p a t h which rears u p the m o m e n t one follows only vague associations,

'

o u r efforts should turn p e r h a p s to seeking clues which could verify a concrete reception of Descartes in Nicolas Poussin's paintings. In iggo Felix T h u r l e m a n n claimed to have arrived at a m o r e a d e q u a t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the 'Israelites G a t h e r i n g the M a n n a ' (Paris, Louvre; figure 6)

' p a i n t e d for C h a n t e l o u in 1639, by interpreting it against the b a c k g r o u n d of Descartes's treatise, Les passions de I'dme, considered by the a u t h o r to be 'part of the seventeenth century's cultural assets'.

T h e p r o b l e m remains, however, that the painting was completed ten years prior to the publication of the 'Passions', m a k i n g the task of proving a concrete b o n d between the two s o m e w h a t difficult — in view of this it is hardly surprising that T h u r l e m a n n h a d n o desire to carry out such work.

Lee's a t t e m p t in 1940, however, is m o r e articulate a n d consequently m o r e c o n v i n c i n g / '

His p u r p o s e is to d e m o n ­ strate that the Cartesian principles expressed in the Discours (1637) are actively involved in both Poussin's 'Israelites' a n d the f a m o u s lecture Le B r u n delivered on it in 1667. Lee's interpretation rests on the fact that Lc Brun d e m o n s t r a t e d that all the figures in the painting were s u b o r d i n a t e d to the m a i n theme'"' which, for Lee, gave evidence that both Poussin a n d Le Brun were following the second a n d third rules of Descartes's Discours, i.e. setting forth the n e e d to divide a complex thing into its elements a n d then p r o c e e d i n g f r o m the simplest to the most complex.

" U n f o r t u n a t e l y , for Lee, application of such rules does not prove exclusively Cartesian m e t h o d as it can be easily observed that Alberti's treatise, 'Delia Pittura' (1436) sufficiently p r e ­ e m p t s it with these words: ' i m p r i m a tutti c corpi a d quielo si d e b b a n o m u o v e r e , a d che sia o r d i n a t a la storia . . . et cosi . . . tutto a p a r t e n g a a h o r n a r e o a insegniarti la storia'.

'

As Baxandall has d e m o n s t r a t e d , the technical concept

of the 'composito' is broadly based on rhetorical models

developed, amongst others, by Quintilian.

" It has b e e n

shown therefore that Descartes followed Quintilian w h e n he

developed his concept of clear a n d distinct ideas,

a n d is

interesting to note that it is through the person of that great

R o m a n orator that Descartes a n d Poussin c o m e together

(at least in the ideal sense). Poussin himself h a d recourse

to Quintilian's concepts: not only in his famous letter on

' m o d e s ' does h e reveal a. direct relationship to 'Institutio

O r a t o r i a '

, but in a letter written in 1655 to C h a n t e l o u he

p a r a p h r a s e d a n d even a d a p t e d a passage f r o m the treatise

for his explanation of the differentiation of the various talents

of painters.

N i n e years earlier the artist h a d revealed h o w

faithful a disciple of Quintilian he was w h e n h e refused a

TrF

-rff"

I

i'Aj/tf Xjthn.it Gallery LonJm

Le

carUsianisme

('observation

mats

rigenU mentaltment : Poussin

h

mStne 4 " " ' * ^

^,

195

F i g u r e 5. P a g e 195 f r o m R e n e H u y g h e , L'art et I'ame, Paris, i 9 6 0 .

I 5 6 H E N R Y K E A Z O R

Figure 6. Nicolas Poussin, The Israelites Gathering the Manna. Paris, Louvre, 1639.

commission to paint a 'Christ Bearing the Cross', basing his a r g u m e n t directly on a passage f r o m the 'Institutio O r a t o r i a ' , which advises the orator to identify himself with his subject in such a m a n n e r as to p r o d u c e the mindset within himself to be utterly convincing:

Quare in iis, quae esse verisimilia volemus, simus ipsi similes eorum qui vere patiuntur adfectibus, et a tali animo proficiscatur oratio qualem f'acere iudiecem volet. . . . Primum est igitur, ut apud nos valeant ea quae valere apud iudicem volumus, adficiamurque antequam adficere conemur.

'' Nos ill] simus, quos gravia, indigna, tristia passos queremur, nec agamus rem quasi alienam, sed adsumamus parumper ilium dolorem. Ita decemus, quae in nostro simili casu dicturi fuissemus.

T h e painter declined the commission, saying that his pre­

carious health would not permit h i m to throw himself into the kind of affliction necessary to realize a 'Christ Bearing the Cross', with these words written in 1646 to the client J a c q u e s ­ A u g u s t e de T h o u :

Je n'ay plus assez de joye ni de sante pour m'engager dans ces sujets tristes... . Je ne pourrois pas resister aux pensees affligeantes et serieuses dont il faut sc remplir I'Esprit et le coeur pour reussir a ces sujets d'eux mesmes si tristes et lugubres. Dispensez m'en done s'il vous plaist.

"

H o w e v e r , Poussin's awareness a n d , above all, observance of Quintilian's rules should not be overestimated. Fumaroli correctly e m p h a s i z e d that the orator was not so closely followed when painting the 'Israelites Gathering the M a n n a ' . T h e figure of Moses violates Quintilian's injunction never to raise one's a r m s or h a n d s above the eyes.

Although the painter a n d philosopher c a m e together only indirectly in the application of Quintilian's concepts, within the French A c a d e m y we. find ourselves on m u c h firmer g r o u n d .

In Charles Lc Brun we have a person familiar with Descartes's writings, at least with the Passions*", which he tried to r e n d e r applicable to painting by developing a close link b e t w e e n the passions described a n d analysed

•57

by Descartes a n d the representations following Poussin's statement:

. .. de mesmc que les 24 lcttres de l'alfabet servent a former nos parolles et exprimer nos pensees, de mesme les lineamens du corps humain a exprimer les diverses passions de l'ame pour faire paroistre au dehors ce que Ton a dans l'esprit.

T h u s Friedlander's observation defining the relationship between Poussin, Descartes a n d Le B r u n was correct w h e n h e wrote:

A renewed interest in systems governing the emotions or passions prevailed in philosophic and artistic circles in France, culminating in the 'Traite des Passions' published in 1649 by Rene Descartes. Poussin's fame in the French Academy was largely the result of his special gift in portraying emotions.

H e n c e , Poussin a n d Descartes's interest in 'passions' — one analysing t h e m a n d explaining t h e m , the other p o r t r a y i n g t h e m — was coincidence e n o u g h for the F r e n c h A c a d e m y , mainly in Le Brun's lectures, to justify the connection. N o w we h a v e to ask ourselves if the idea of Poussin being influenced a n d conditioned by Descartes did not have its roots within the A c a d e m y a n d in Le B r u n ' s ' C o n f e r e n c e sur l'cxprcssions' in which Poussin's works are cited to illustrate Cartesian ideas as well as lectures by Le Brun or B o u r d o n (the latter, w h e n we look at his portrait of the philosopher, must have had some knowledge of the man). T h e fact remains that Descartes's n a m e was never explicitly associated with Poussin, although both Le Brun a n d B o u r d o n often availed themselves of the vocabulary a n d theories of the 'Passions' in a n effort to explain certain details of the painted figures, which in this way could have their authenticity a n d correct­

ness confirmed. In his ' C o n f e r e n c e ' ( N o v e m b e r 1667) on Poussin's 'Israelites Gathering the M a n n a ' Le Brun describes the m a n w h o is watching stupefied as he witnesses a w o m a n nursing h e r own m o t h e r thus:

. .. les esprits qui abandonnent les autres parties de son corps, font qu'elles demeurent sans mouvement.

T h i s passage obviously owes its existence to the Cartesian treatise where, in article 73, we read this a b o u t the effects of astonishment:

Et cettc surprise a tant de pouvoir, pour (aire que les esprits . . . sont tenement occupes a conserver l'impression de l'objet qu'on admire, qu'il n'y en a aucuns qui passent de la dans les muscles .. . ce qui fait que tout le corps demeure immobile comme une statue... ."

In spite of the two academics' hesitation explicitly to n a m e Descartes as Poussin's source here, at the beginning of the twentieth century first Desjardins a n d then G r a u t o f f argue in favour of such a d e p e n d e n c y . T h e F r e n c h art historian wrote a b o u t the f a m o u s ' R e b e c c a a n d Eliazar' in 1904:

Dans la 'Rebecca', les gestes des filles groupees autour la fontaine signifient, ici la curiosite, la 1'envie, ici l'admiration, la l'indifference : tout l'index du traite 'Des Passions de f a m e ' de Descartes."''

His G e r m a n colleague hypothesized that the p a i n t e r would have k n o w n the Cartesian ideas of the h u m a n soul if not t h r o u g h Les Passions then via the Discours, the repercussions of which could be observed in some of Poussin's works:

Wir wissen nicht, ob Poussin Descartes [sic] Traktat iiber die Leidenschaften der Secle, der 1649 crschien, gekannt hat.

Jedenfalls konnen wir aus dem Ubergewicht des Rationalismus in seinen Formgedanken mit Sicherheit annehmen, dass er durch theoretische Studien zu dem maskenartigen Ausdruck von AfTekten gelangte; und es liegt nahe, dass er zu Descartes, der ihm nicht fremd sein konnte, griff. Schon in dem

"Discours de la mcthode' ist die Grundanschauung iiber die Leidenschaften der Seele enthalten, . . . In der Tat korrespondiert der Ausdruck ritterlicher GroBmut des Scipio Afriranus, der Ausdruck der Ehrerbietung des Allutius auf der Enthaltsamkeii des Scipio den Definitionen des Descartes.

T h e only p r o b l e m is that, in spite of G r a u t o f f ' s statement that the concept of the passions of the soul was already c o n t a i n e d 'in mice' in the Discours, Poussin would not have b e e n able to find a n y t h i n g similar. T h u s , eliminating the Discours published in 1637, we are left with the Passions which was not to be published till 1649, nine years too late to have influenced the compositions of the ' C o n t i n e n c e of Scipio' (Moscow, Pushkin M u s e u m of the Fine Arts) a n d the 'Scipio Africanus and the Pirates' (Windsor Castle, Royal Collection), chosen by G r a u t o f f for proof of this impact, which w e r e actually c o m p l e t e d in 1640 a n d 1642 respectively.

But even the Discours has to b e discounted as a source for Poussin, not only because the 'jewel' of his representations of the passions (the desperate a n d terrorized face of the m o t h e r in the 'Massacre of the Innocents', Chantilly, M u s e e C o n d e : figure 7)" p r e c e d e d the publication of the treatise by several years, but also because the actual physical source of the expression is well known, and, as one could expect of Poussin, based o n a n ancient m a s k .

Studying his models

­ taken f r o m antiquity, R a p h a e l or other masters ­ Poussin did not n e e d Cartesian descriptions or definitions to paint these passions. T h e very field of art theory itself already contains the c o n c e p t of the ' m o v e m e n t of the soul' or 'the passions of the soul' in Alberti's (1436) a n d L o m a z z o ' s (1548) treatises, as elements requested to be represented by the painter.""

T h e question of w h e t h e r or not Poussin read the Discours a n d the Passions has also to be linked to the question of w h e t h e r or not he was a w a r e of Descartes's optical theories as p r o p o u n d e d in the Dioplrique published alongside the Discours in 1637. G r a u t o f f ' s idea that Poussin's r e a d i n g of the Dioptrique represented an i m p o r t a n t step for his — as shown here, d o u b t f u l — knowledge of the Passions

' has b e e n backed by a m o r e recent a t t e m p t to r e n d e r the hypothesis

I 5 8 H E N R Y K E A Z O R

Figure 7. Nicolas Poussin, The Massacre of the Innocents. Chantilly, Musee Conde.

of Poussin's familiarity with the Dioptrique by Elizabeth C r o p p e r in an interpretation of ' T h e H e a l i n g of the Blind M e n at J e r i c h o ' painted in 1650 (Paris, Louvre: figure 8).

Inspired by a proposal of Louis Marin,

"' C r o p p e r attempts to apply some elements of this Cartesian treatise to the painting. U n d e r the suggestive title ' T o u c h e r le R e g a r d ' ( T o u c h i n g the Gaze) she highlighted the b o n d b e t w e e n seeing a n d touching, evoked by the Cartesian m e t a p h o r of the blind m a n w h o sees with his h a n d s thanks to his c a n e ,

feeling this could have influenced the painting's i c o n o g r a p h y .

H o w e v e r , this hypothesis appears difficult to support, given the fact that the only precise element to tie the painting to Descartes's text is the cane, a highly traditional element in the portrayal of the blind, a n d the rest

of the painting, if a faithful rendition of the biblical story, implements traditional iconography rather than Descartes.

A n o t h e r question to ask is w h a t Poussin could have gained f r o m reading Descartes's optical treatise, which did not set out to provide a complete theory of light, b u t instead furnished instructions for artisans, offering innovative methods for making new optical instruments and presenting a machine for cleaning l e n s e s . T h e r e f o r e the lack of all traces in Poussin's writings a n d drawings that could attest to some considerations of the Dioptrique, as has b e e n p r o v e d for instance, regarding Alhazen a n d L e o n a r d o d a Vinci, comes as n o surprise.

Poussin's study of Alhazen's a n d L e o n a r d o ' s theories

simply demonstrates that the painter — along with other

159

J

Figure 8. Nicolas Poussin. T h e H e a l i n g of the Wind M e n at J e r i c h o . Paris.

Louvre, 1650.

artists — wished to base his art on m a t h e m a t i c a l , geometric a n d scientific principles: a desire which does not auto­

matically link h i m with Descartes.

T h o s e w h o m a i n t a i n that in the ' J u d g e m e n t of S o l o m o n ' (Paris, Louvre) Poussin reveals himself to be 'without d o u b t a follower of the C a r t e s i a n anthropological concept in which the essential centre of m a n is seen in this reason', simply because the artist chose a symmetrical composition featuring the protagonist in the m i d d l e , " clearly ignore all the other paintings by Poussin in which the artist also a d o p t e d a centralized com­

position without t o u c h i n g on subjects that c o n c e r n ­ as with ' S o l o m o n ' — reason or knowledge. In the wake of this we could also m a i n t a i n that Poussin h a d observed the Cartesian rules of analysing a n d e n u m e r a t i n g w h e n immediately u p o n his arrival in R o m e , according to Bellori, he began m e a s u r i n g ancient statues to u n d e r s t a n d their proportions

— h a d this not o c c u r r e d m o r e t h a n ten years prior to Descartes publishing his Discoursl W e r e this to b e taken seriously then we would have the disconcerting reversal of presenting Descartes, owing to Poussin's chronological p r e c e d e n c e already n o t e d in the field of the passions, identified as a disciple of Poussin. T h i s absurd result should h a v e us on o u r g u a r d against such hasty conclusions.""

O u r conclusion leads us to say that there exists n o proof of any assimilation of Cartesian ideas by Nicolas Poussin.

T h e only instance in which their works have been associated is within the French A c a d e m y w h e n , c o n c e r n i n g the passions of the soul, Poussin's pictorial representations are a r g u e d to have been in unity with Descartcs's theoretical considerations. T h e e x a m p l e of Poussin, therefore, w a r n s us of the pitfalls of the m e r e similarity of certain concepts, which result in being extremely misleading. O n the other h a n d , there are gains to be m a d e by such cases, as close e x a m i n a t i o n of their anomalies is extremely helpful in better evaluating the routes a n d d e v e l o p m e n t of Cartesianism.

T h e very similarity of some concepts a n d m o d e s of think­

ing of these two significant figures p e r h a p s yields evidence suggesting that the circumstances were already suitable for a n a c c e p t a n c e of Cartesian ideas, which collected, a b s o r b e d a n d unified some earlier trends. T h e fact that the 'all n e w science' "'" of Descartes, with its direct recourse to h u m a n reason as the source of all true knowledge, aspired to a c c o m m o d a t e a n d go b e y o n d all other sciences m e a n s it should comes as no surprise w h e n we e n c o u n t e r traces of such concepts which arc also oriented t o w a r d a n absolute rationality — a n orientation perceivable in Nicolas Poussin's entire oeuvre. So, finally, it would be n o t h i n g other t h a n t h a t 'rationalisme autoritairc', generally deplored today as the most negative aspect of the 'esprit cartesien', cited in the o p e n i n g quotation, that would be able to link the painter to the philosopher. T h i s very 'authoritarian rationalism' causes the reception of Poussin a n d Descartes's work in the eighteenth a n d nineteenth centuries to suffer parallel fates, for even the painter's reputation suffered d a m a g e in this period owing to w h a t was described as his excessive recourse to rationalism. Charles Perrault, o n e of the earliest of such critics, wrote:

Q u c l q u e s - u n lc b l a m e r e n t d ' a v o i r d o n n e u n p e u t r o p d a n s la m a n i e r e a u s t e r e et p r e c i s e . D ' a u t r e s p r e t e n d e n t q u e c e s d e f f a u t s n e s o n t a u t r e c h o s e q u e d e s b e a u t e z u n p e u t r o p g r a n d e s p o u r l e s y e u x q u i n ' y s o n t p a s a c c o u s t u m e z . " '3

In the final analysis this would c o n c u r once again with Descartes, of w h o m Nicolas de M a l b r a n c h e said in his ' R e c h e r c h e de la verite' that he would deserve the glory for having been the first to arrive w h e r e darkness i m p e n e t r a b l e by the h u m a n eye a p p e a r e d to reign.

N O T E S

This article is based on a lecture given (lining the International colloque ' M u t a m e n t i culturali in Italia attorno al 1700', held in M a r c h 1999 at the Kunslhistorisches Institut in

Florence.

1 Pierre G u c n a n c i a ,

Descartes

conduit

2 Rainer Specht, Descartes (Reinbek bei H a m b u r g , 1966), p. 152.

3 - For Poussin's 'Self-Portrait' (Paris, Louvre) see Mieolas Poussin 1 51)4-1665, e x h . cat., Paris, 1994, p. 428, N o . 190.

I See for e x a m p l e Walter Friedlander, Nicolas Poussin A .Xivc Approach ( L o n d o n , 1966), p. 74 as well as, recently, Thomas Pultfarken, "Poussin's thoughts on painting', in Commemorating Poussin Reception anil Interpretation of the Artist, eds Katie Scott a n d G e n e v i e v e Warwick (Cambridge. 1999), PP- 53~75» here P- 53-

5 - For Bourdon's portrait sec note 16 below.

6 - T h u s , the statement voiced by Baigrie, a c c o r d i n g to w h o m 'with the e x c e p t i o n o f Meditation 1... Descartcs's writing are silent about art' s e e m s to b e erroneous; see Brian S. Baigrie, 'Descartes's Scientific Illustrations a n d

"la grande m e c a n i q u e de la nature" ', in Picturing Knowledge — Historical and Philosophical Prohlcins Concerning the Use of Art in Science, ed. Brian S. Baigrie ( Toronto, 199(1), pp. 8G 134, here p. 8 8 .

7 - Oeuvres de Descartes, published by Charles A d a m & Paul 'Tannery, vol. VI (Paris, 1982): Discours de la methode, p. 4.

l 6 0 H E N R Y K E A Z O R

8 - D e s c a r t e s , Discours (note 7), p . 41: ' M a i s , tout de m e s m e q u e les peintres, n e p o u u a n t e s g a l e m e n t b i e n r e p r e s e n t e r d a n s vn t a b l e a u plat toutes les diuerses faces d ' v n cors solide, e n choisissent v n e des p r i n c i p a l e s qu'ils m e t t e n t seule vers le iour, & o m b r a g e a n t les a u t r e s , n e les f o n t p a r o i s t r c q u ' e n t a n t q u ' o n les p e u t voir e n la r e g a r d a n t ' .

9 - D e s c a r t e s , Discours (note 7), p. 113: ' C o m m e v o u s voyes q u e les taille- d o u c e s , n ' e s t a n t l a k e s q u e d ' v n p e u d ' e n c r e p o s c c c a et la s u r d u p a p i e r , n o u s r e p r e s e n t e n t des forets, d e s villes, d e s h o m m e s , & m e s m e des bataillcs

& d e s t e m p e s l e s , b i e n q u e , d ' v n e infinite d c diuerses qualites qu'elles n o u s f o n t c o n c e u o i r e n ces objets, il n ' y e n ait a u c u n e q u e la figure seule d o n t ellcs a y e n t p r o p r e m e n t la r e s s c m b l a n c e ; & e n c o r e s est-ce v n e r e s s c m b l a n c e fort i m p a r f a i t c , vu q u e s u r v n e superficie t o u t e plate, ellcs n o u s r e p r e s e n t e n t des cors d i u e r s e m e n t releues & e n f o n c e s , & q u e m e s m e , s u i u a n t les regies d e la p e r s p e e t i u e , s o u u e n t ellcs r e p r e s e n t e n t m i e u x des cercles p a r des ouales q u e p a r d ' a u t r e s cercles; & des q u a r r e s p a r d e s l o z a n g e s q u e p a r d ' a u t r e s q u a r r e s ; & ainsi d e t o u t e s les a u t r e s figures.

10 - F o r this e n g r a v i n g b y E t i e n n e Picart a f t e r Poussin's ' P l a g u e at A s h d o d see G e o r g e s W i l d e n s t e i n , Les graveurs de Poussin au xvm siecle (Paris, 1957), p. 133, N o . 24.

11 - D e s c a r t e s , Discours (note 7), IM Dmptriqtlt, fifth discourse ' D e s i m a g e s q u i se f o r m e n t sur le f o n d d c l'oeil'. especially p p . 115, 117. 120 a n d 123. See also E l i z a b e t h C r o p p e r , ' T o u c h e r le r e g a r d . Le Christ guerissanl les aveugles et le d i s c o u r s d e la p c i n t u r e ' , in Nicolas Poussin (1594-1665), Actes d u colloquc, e d . Alain M e r o t (Paris, 1995), vol. B, p p . 6 0 3 - 6 2 6 , r e p e a t e d in: Elizabeth C r o p p e r a n d C h a r l e s D c m p s e y , Nicolas Poussin — Friendship and the Love of Painting ( P r i n c e t o n , 1996), p. 211.

ca - Oeuvres de Descartes, p u b l i s h e d b y C h a r l e s A d a m & Paul T a n n e r y (Paris, 1983), vol. v t i : Meditationes de prima phi/osophia, p. 20 (Prima m e d i t a t i o n c ) : ' . . . certe t a m e n ad m i n i m u m veri eolores esse d e b e n t , ex q u i b u s illud c o m p o n a n t ' . Baigrie (note 6), p . 130, n o t e 7 has d i r e c t e d a t t e n t i o n to t h e fact t h a t D e s c a r t e s in his u n f i n i s h e d treatise / / / Recherche de la verite par la lumiere, p u b l i s h e d only in 1701, c o m p a r e s the c o r r e c t i n g f u n c t i o n of r e a s o n t o w a r d s t h e i m p e r f e c t senses to a p a i n t e r , called in o r d e r to p e r f e c t t h e a w k w a r d sketch of a y o u n g disciple.

13 - T r a n s l a t e d a f t e r D e s c a r t e s . Discours (note 7), p. 18.

1 1 Ibid.

15 - A n t h o n y Blunt, Art and Architecture in France 1500-1700 ( T h e Pelican H i s t o r y of A r t : L o n d o n , 1980), p . 195: 'In p h i l o s o p h y it w a s t h e age ol D e s c a r t e s , . . . in p a i n t i n g t h a t of Poussin ' F o r Blunt's o t h e r o p i n i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e relation D e s e a r t e s - P o u s s i n see b e l o w , n o t e 98.

16 - F o r t h e p o r t r a i t , o n c e a t t r i b u t e d to F r a n s Hals (Paris, Louvre), t o d a y c o n s i d e r e d as a c o p y a f t e r t h e lost original see E. C . M o n t a g n i , L'opera complcta ill Dans Hals (Milan, 1974), p . 105, N o . 173, w h e r e t h e c a n v a s is discussed t o g e t h e r with o t h e r similar paintings: see also G e n e v i e v e R o d i s - Lewis, c a t a l o g u e d e VExposition Descartes (Paris, 1987), N o . 1; S e y m o u r Slive, Frans Hals ( L o n d o n , 1974). v o l 1, p. 164 a n d vol. in. p. 89, N o . 175 i n s t e a d identifies t h e original p a i n t i n g b y F r a n s H a l s with t h e version t o d a y c o n s e r v e d at t h e S t a t e n s M u s e u m for K u n s l at C o p e n h a g e n ; for a similar o p i n i o n see G e n e v i e v e R o d i s - L e w i s , ' S u r q u e l q u e s p o r t r a i t s d e D e s c a r t e s ' , in Regards sur fart (Paris, 1993), p p . 157-67, esp. p. 159 with a discussion of also t h e o t h e r D e s c a r t e s p o r t r a i t s at U t r e c h t (signed by J a n Baptist VVeenix:

figure 4) a n d at G r o n i n g e n ( d r a w i n g b y J a n Lievens); t h e p o r t r a i t , t o d a y a t t r i b u t e d to S e b a s l i e n B o u r d o n (Paris, I-ouvrc: figure 2) b u t recently p u t in d o u b t a g a i n b y J a c q u e s T h u i l l i e r (see below), w a s o n c e a t t r i b u t e d to D a v i d Beck, V a n D y c k ' s disciple a n d c o u r t p a i n t e r o f Q u e e n C h r i s t i n a of S w e d e n w h o a c c o r d i n g to a r e p o r t w o u l d h a v e b e e n ' r e - c o n v e r t e d ' to religious belief b y D e s c a r t e s while h e was p a i n t i n g the p h i l o s o p h e r in 1650 o n t h e o r d e r s of C h r i s t i n a (see for this S p e c h t , p. 137). J a c q u e s T h u i l l i e r , Sebaslien Bourdon: x6i6 1671 (also exh. cat. M o m p e l l i e r / S t r a H b o u r g ; Paris, 2000), p. 489, N o . 150 stresses t h e fact that B o u r d o n only a r r i v e d at S t o c k h o l m in O c t o b e r 1652 w h e n D e s c a r t e s h a d a l r e a d y been d e a d for two years a n d t h e r e f o r e d o u b t s the attribution to B o u r d o n h o w e v e r , t h e p o r t r a i t could also h a v e b e e n p a i n t e d in 1644 o r 1647 48 while D e s c a r t e s was in Paris, e v e n t h o u g h R o d i s - L e w i s , ' S u r q u e l q u e s p o r t r a i t s ' , p. 161, n o t e 11 thinks

that this h y p o t h e s i s is ' p e u v r a i s e m b l a b l e ' (yet, w i t h o u t giving a n y r e a s o n for this opinion). A n o t h e r (until n o w u n k n o w n ) p o r t r a i t by P h i l i p p e d e C h a m p a i g n c has b e e n r e p o r t e d b y B e r n a r d Dorival, Philippe de Champagne (1602-1674) (Paris, 1976), vol. 11, p . 374, n o . 1984 a n d p . 166, n o . 339, w h e r e also a n o t h e r c a n v a s by this p a i n t e r is discussed w h i c h h a d b e e n e r r o n e o u s l y identified as a portrait of D e s c a r t e s . Finally, t h e lost p o r t r a i t of D e s c a r t e s h a s to b e n a m e d , w h i c h h a d b e e n d r a w n b y R e m b r a n d t a n d w h i c h w a s d o c u m e n t e d in t h e early S e t t e c e n t o in t h e collection of V a l e r i u s R o v e r at Delft. For W e e n i x ' s p o r t r a i t f r o m a r o u n d 1647-49 see J e n n i f e r M . Kalian, e n t r y 'VVeenix, J a n Baptist', in The Dictionary of Art, e d . J a n e T u r n e r ( L o n d o n , 1996), vol. 33, p . 26.

17 - F o r these d a t e s see e.g. t h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l table f u r n i s h e d b y S t e p h e n G a u k r o g e r , Descartes — An Intellectual Biography ( O x f o r d , 1997), p . x v .

18 - F o r a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s u c h a ' d e r a c i n a t e d ' life, ' s u p e r i e u r a u x petites patrics, citoyen d ' t i n e Republican- des Lettrcs universellc' (as M a r c F u m a r o l i , L'Ecole du silence [Paris, 1994], p. 60 p u t s it), as a F r e n c h quality winch unites Poussin a n d D e s c a r t e s see A n d r e G i d e , Poussin (series 'Les D e m i - D i e u x ' : Paris, 1945), (without p a g i n a t i o n ) p. 4, a n d G e n e v i e v e R o d i s - L e w i s , ' D e s c a r t e s et Poussin', in: xviie siecle, 23, 1954, p. 521, t h e n a g a i n in: i d e m , Regards sur I'art (Bibliotheque des A r c h i v e s d e P h i l o s o p h e , N o u v e l l e Serie 56: Paris, 1993), p p . 85-114 (the version cited here), p. 96.

19 - G a u k r o g e r (note 17), p . x v n .

20 - F o r this letter see C h a r l e s J o u a n n y , ' C o r r e s p o n d a n c e d e N i c o l a s Poussin', in Archives de I'art francais, vol. 5 (Paris, 1911), p. 132, n o t e 2; a s h o r t c o m m e n t is also given by A n t h o n y Blunt, Nicolas Poussin ( L o n d o n , 1967), p.

211. T h i s e n c o u n t e r b e t w e e n Poussin a n d G a s s e n d i at Paris h a d b e e n doubtlessly f a v o u r e d by the n a r r o w c o n t a c t s b e t w e e n t h e R o m a n p a t r o n of t h e p a i n t e r , C a s s i a n o D a l Pozzo, his f r i e n d Claude-Francois d c Peiresc, G a s s c n d i ' s p a t r o n , a n d Gassendi himself. S e e e.g. t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b y Dal P o z z o a n d Peiresc w h e r e G a s s e n d i is n a m e d , collected in: Peiresc — lAlres d Cassiano dai Pozzo (1626-1637), eds J e a n - F r a n c o i s L h o t e a n d D a n i e l l e J o y a l ( C l e r m o n t - F e r r a n d , 1989), p p . 218, 244, 249, 257, a n d A n n a Nicold, // carteggio di Cassiano dal PozZfi (Florence, 1991), p . 5, letter N o . 82 (sent f r o m G a s s e n d i to Dal P o z z o 16 M a y 1642). F o r Peiresc as G a s s c n d i ' s p a t r o n a n d c o l l a b o r a t o r as well their c o r r e s p o n d e n c e see B a r r y Brundcll, Pierre Gassendi ( D o r d r e c h t , 1987), p a s s i m , w h e r e r e f e r e n c e is also m a d e to t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n D e s c a r t e s a n d G a s s e n d i .

21 - M a r c F u m a r o l i , L'Ecole ... (note 18), p . 57: ' . . . des g r a n d e s c h o s e s v a g u c s . . . ' .

22 - As a m a t t e r of fact, t h e q u o t a t i o n s b y F u m a r o l i , L'Ecole ... (note 18), p. 57 a r c exclusively taken f r o m t h e p r e f a c e of D e s j a r d i n ' s b o o k w h e n he is n o t d e a l i n g w ith Poussin in p a r t i c u l a r but is instead talking a b o u t t h e p o e t in general Paul D e s j a r d i n s , IM Methode des classii/ues francais [Paris, 1904], p. 11:

' . . . le p o e t e , u n e (bis i m p r e g n e d e la discipline seicntifique, n e se p e r m e t p o i n t d ' i n s c r e r son c a p r i c e d a n s la r e a l i t e . . . ' resp. a b o u t t h e classical d r a m a ('La c o m c d i c c l a s s i q u e . . . ; le reel, avee scs lois secretes et sines, alllcurc p a r t o u t ' ) .

23 - F o r a chronologically n e i g h b o u r i n g r e c e p t i o n of this trio see e.g. O t t o G r a u t o l f , Nicolas Poussin — Sein Werk und sein Lehen (Leipzig, 1914), p . 219:

' W a s Poussins W e r k e v o n j e n e n V o r b i l d e r n [i.e.: M a n t e g n a / R a f f a e l ] u n t e r s c h e i d e t , ist wieclerum sein F r a n z o s e n m m . N e b e n d e r geistigen V e r w a n d s c h a f t mil Descartes, w i r d in dieser E p o c h e v o r allcm die m i t C o m e i l l e d c u t l i c h . ' For a (quite curious) a t t e m p t to d e e p e n this c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n the p a i n t e r a n d these p l a y w r i g h t s see H . T . Barnwell, ' S o m e N o t e s o n Poussin, C o m e i l l e , a n d R a c i n e ' , Australian Journal of French Studies, 4 / 2 (1968), p p . 149-61 w h e r e t h e fact is stressed that Poussin u s e d a t o y t h e a t r e in o r d e r to d e v e l o p his c o m p o s i t i o n s — for a critique of this a r g u m e n t set- D a v i d C a r r i e r , Poussin's Paintings — A Study in Art-Historical Metliodology (Pennsylvania,1993), p . 72, n o t e 97.

24 - E r w i n P a n o f s k y , ' F a t h e r T i m e ' , in Studies in Icono/ogy Humanistic Tliemes in the Art of the Renaissance ( N e w Y o r k , 19651; p u b l i s h e d for t h e first t i m e in 1939), p p . 6 9 - 9 3 , h e r e p . 92. F o r a n a l m o s t direct r e c e p t i o n of this n o t i o n of Poussin's ' c a r t e s i a n m i n d ' see S a m u e l H o l t M o n k , ' A G r a c e

1 6 1