**_Joseph Juste Scaliger – Part 14_** ~[Part 1](https://steemit.com/scaliger/@harlotscurse/joseph-juste-scaliger)~ https://i.imgur.com/gRh7C6d.jpg**Joseph Juste Scaliger** After the publication of his edition of Marcus Manilius’s [_Astronomica_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomica_(Manilius)), [Joseph Juste Scaliger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Justus_Scaliger) became embroiled in yet another public altercation. In his commentary on Manilius he had castigated several ancient writers for their ignorance of astronomy. Among these was [Lucan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucan), the author of the _Pharsalia_, an epic poem on the Civil War between Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great. Scaliger’s scathing remarks had a lasting impact upon the critical reception of the _Pharsalia_: >Scaliger condemned Lucan as a poet, first in his commentary on Manilius, and then in a direct letter to an adversary, at about the time that [Kepler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler) was cutting his teeth. Scaliger did not want anyone to read Lucan because he felt that Lucan’s astronomy was behind his own times, and because he constantly argued that all Roman poets were a thorn in the paw of astronomical progress. No criticism of Lucan, of which there were many throughout the ages, had such a damning effect on the poetry of Lucan. So great was Scaliger’s influence that even though Lucan was defended successfully against the particular attacks, the general bilious rhetoric (borrowed somewhat from [Fronto](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Cornelius_Fronto)) still echoes in the most recent English edition ([Duff’s Loeb](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Duff_Duff)) of the _Pharsalia_, and almost any academic discussion of the poet. Thus Lucan’s condemnation is based, to a great degree, on a Renaissance desire for scholarship from poets. The irony in this case is that Lucan clearly attempted, to the limits of his stunningly catholic education, to present what we would call a realistic background of facts. Scaliger’s and later [Housman’s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._E._Housman) attacks can be summed up like this: Lucan was not as good an astronomer or geographer as I am, therefore he was an inferior poet (both critics actually were accomplished poets). ([Stevenson](https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~wstevens/keplerlucan/allessay.html)) https://i.imgur.com/MOmFPAm.jpg**Lucan on Syene, Upper Egypt** Scaliger’s comments drew the ire of one person in particular: François de Lisle, a prosecutor in the [Parlement de Paris](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Paris) and a minor poet with a penchant for the writings of Lucan: >The first edition of the Manilius had appeared in 1579. Scaliger published a second edition in 1599. In the meantime his criticism of Lucan’s astronomy, which he had mingled with his review of Manilius’ errors on the same subject, was attacked quite strongly by François de Lisle (_Insulanus_), a prosecutor in the Parlement de Paris, in a poem published in 1582. De Lisle made the mistake of being at once: a passionate admirer of Lucan, a bad poet : a bad astronomer, despite being a mathematician : and very irascible. Any one of these would have been enough to give the advantage to an adversary, and perhaps even to induce one to be generous towards him. But, apart from the fact that Scaliger thought it very impertinent that anyone should come to the defense of a poet whom he had deigned to attack, he also remembered that having once spoken irreverently of the author of the _Pharsalia_ in the presence de Lisle and some friends, de Lisle got so carried away that he would have come to blows if his good genius and, I imagine, his fear of the gendarmes ([_timor aliquis_](https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.I-II.Q41.A2.Rep3)) had not called him back to reason. Not content, therefore, with demonstrating to de Lisle that he did not even know the language of the poet whose champion he had made himself, that barbarisms and solecisms came naturally to him, that he impudently offended against the rules of prosody, and that he did not understand more than the very rudiments of astronomy, he also called him ignorant, inept, imbecile, mad, and mangy. He was so blinded by anger that he did not seem to think that an enemy who covers himself with ridicule by the impotence of the blows he deals, sometimes becomes famous for the violence of those he receives. https://i.imgur.com/TfV3KDs.jpg**Model of the Palais de la Cité, Paris, in the Late 16th Century** >But this outburst still did not relieve Scaliger’s pique. Anticipating that de Lisle was going to complain that he was being treated somewhat harshly (_duriusculè_), he did not delay in warning him that, in the event of a recurrence, he was preparing for him a dish of his own concoction—one with very different spices. This procedure of Scaliger’s might lead one to believe that, like [du Jon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franciscus_Junius_(the_elder)), de Lisle had been his friend. We have seen, however, that he was not. Scaliger only knew him for having nearly fallen victim to his violent assault, and his lordship no doubt took pleasure in avenging the pittance of fear that an underling of the [Basoche](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basoche) had had the audacity to cause him. What a pity that it did not occur to de Lisle—who, for a prosecutor, should have had more than one trick up his sleeve to avenge himself—to do what would one day work so well for [Viète](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Vi%C3%A8te) in similar circumstances. Having been insulted, like de Lisle, by Scaliger, Viète silenced Scaliger by calling him a Master of Grammar and threatening him with a defamation suit. On the contrary, de Lisle lowered his head and was himself silent. > >Scaliger had nothing but contempt for Lucan, primarily on account of the poet’s ignorance of astronomy, but also on account of his arrogance. Furthermore, while he placed Virgil and the old Latin poets who preceded him in the sanctuary of poetry, he left Lucan, as he expressed it, in the antechamber. (Nisard 204-206) To be fair to de Lisle, Scaliger’s squabble with the mathematician François Viète took place in 1590, about ten years after the row with de Lisle, so the latter can hardly be faulted for not adopting the tactics that would one day work wonders for the former. https://i.imgur.com/GWCfnyu.jpg**Title Pages of de Lisle’s Invectives against Scaliger** De Lisle’s 536-line poem, _Mathematica pro Lucano Apologia adversus Iosephum Scaligerum_ [_A Mathematical Apology for Lucan against Joseph Scaliger_] was published in Paris in 1582, with the byline: _autore Insulano Parisino procuratore_ [_written by de Lisle, Parisian Prosecutor_]. Scaliger’s response was expressed in an eighteen-page open letter in prose with the title _Epistola adversus barbarum, ineptum et indoctum poema Insulani patroniclientis Lucani_ [_Epistle against the Barbarous, Inept and Unlearned Poem of Insulanus, Patronizer of Lucan_, which was published in Paris in 1582. In this epistle Scaliger lists all the astronomical errors in Lucan’s poem, demonstrating _the scientific [in]accuracy of the poet, as well as the incompetence of de Lisle_ (Stevenson). The French philologist [Charles Nisard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nisard) is incorrect when he says that de Lisle simply lowered his head and remained silent in the face of Scaliger’s onslaught. On the contrary, in 1583 he published a response to Scaliger’s open letter: _Francisci Insulani ad Iosephi Scaligeri epistolam responsio_. Like his first broadside, this 525-line invective was written in verse. Despite his former threats, however, Scaliger did not deign to reply—at least not publicly—and the controversy died down. Anthony Grafton notes the following source, which perhaps explains why Scaliger did not follow through: >... a further reply to de Lisle, not in Scaliger’s hand, is preserved in MS Dupuy 810, fols. 88 r -90 v, under the title ‛C. Thaletis Valerii Epistola ad Jos. Scaligerum admonens ut insano versificatori Francisco Insulano ne respondeat’ [_Epistle of Caius Thaletis Valerius to Joseph Scaliger, Admonishing Him Not to Answer the Mad Versifier François de Lisle_]; it is dated July 1583. This seems to be another of Scaliger’s pseudonymous pamphlets, or at least one written in imitation of his style. (Grafton 1983:335) Caius Valerius are the forenames of the Roman poet [Catullus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catullus), whose elegies Scaliger had edited in 1577. [Thales or Thaletas](http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0104%3Aalphabetic+letter%3DT%3Aentry+group%3D6%3Aentry%3Dthales-bio-2) may refer to the Cretan lyric poet of that name—an “islander” like Insulanus. https://i.imgur.com/V4pwhmV.jpg**Marcus Terentius Varro** The altercation with de Lisle was a minor distraction from Scaliger’s other literary activities at this time. In 1581—after the publication of his Manilius but before the appearance of de Lisle’s first poem—the third edition of Scaliger’s [Varro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Terentius_Varro) came out in Geneva. Printed by Henry II Estienne, it was advertised on its title page as _Recognita et aucta_: _Revised and enlarged_. It was little more than a reprinting of the second edition of 1573. The majority of these years, however, Scaliger devoted to a much more important task—one that would result in his most famous work. **_Itaque hic finem faciam._** --- ## References ## * [Pierre Desmaizeaux (editor)](https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_Xfg9jnm87c0C/page/168/mode/2up?view=theater), _Scaligerana, Thuana, Perroniana, Pithoeana, et Columesiana_, Volume 2, _**Prima Scaligerana, Secunda Scaligerana**_, Covens & Mortier, Amsterdam (1740) * [James Duff Duff (translator)](https://archive.org/details/lucancivilwarboo00lucauoft/page/n5/mode/2up?view=theater), _Lucan: The Civil War, Books 1-10 (Pharsalia)_, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (1962) * [Anthony Grafton](https://b-ok.global/book/1198695/2c5a05), _Joseph Scaliger: A Study in the History of Classical Scholarship_, Volume 1, _Textual Criticism and Exegesis_, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1983) * [Anthony Grafton](https://www.academia.edu/37504832/Anthony_Grafton_From_De_die_natali_to_De_emendatione_temporum_The_Origins_and_Setting_of_Scaliger_s_Chronology_Journal_of_the_Warburg_and_Courtauld_Institutes_vol_48_1985_100_143), _From **De die natali** to **De emendatione temporum**: The Origins and Setting of Scaliger’s Chronology_, _**Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes**_, Volume 48, Pages 100–143, The Warburg Institute, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1985) * [Anthony Grafton](https://archive.org/details/josephscaligerst0000graf/page/n7/mode/2up?view=theater), _Joseph Scaliger: A Study in the History of Classical Scholarship_, Volume 2, _Historical Chronology_, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1993) * [Philippe Tamizey de Larroque (editor)](https://archive.org/details/lettresfranaise01larrgoog/page/n6/mode/2up), _Lettres Françaises Inédites de Joseph Scaliger_, Alphonse Picard, Paris (1884) * [François de Lisle](https://nubis.univ-paris1.fr/ark:/15733/49fh), _Mathematica pro Lucano Apologia adversus Iosephum Scaligerum_, Jean Richer, Paris (1582) * [François de Lisle](https://nubis.univ-paris1.fr/ark:/15733/49gt), _Francisci Insulani ad Iosephi Scaligeri Epistolam Responsio_, Jean Richer, Paris (1583) * [Charles Nisard](https://archive.org/details/letriumviratlitt00nisauoft/page/n3/mode/2up?view=theater), _Le triumvirat littéraire au 16e siècle: Juste Lipse, Joseph Scaliger, et Isaac Casaubon_, Amyot, Paris (1852) * [Joseph Juste Scaliger](https://books.google.ie/books?id=rIp4UaSS4aoC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false), _Marcus Manili Astronomicon_, First Edition, Mamert Patisson, Paris (1579) * [Joseph Juste Scaliger](https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_ysctzmrmHJIC/page/n3/mode/2up?view=theater), _M Terentii Varronis Opera_, Third Edition, Robert III Estienne Paris (1581) * [Joseph Juste Scaliger](https://books.google.ie/books?id=T0tMAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false), _Epistle against the Barbarous, Inept and Unlearned Poem of Insulanus [François de Lisle], Patronizer of Lucan_, Mamert Patisson, Paris (1582) * [Joseph Juste Scaliger](https://books.google.ie/books?id=e2YPkb0jkIAC&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false), _De Emendatione Temporum_ [_On the Correction of Dates_], First Edition, Mamert Patisson, Paris (1583) * [Walter Stevenson](https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~wstevens/keplerlucan/allessay.html), _Kepler on Lucan_, Work in Progress, University of Richmond, Online (18 July 1991) ## Image Credits ## * [Joseph Juste Scaliger](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Portret_van_Josephus_Justus_Scaliger,_hoogleraar_Latijn,_Oudheden_en_Historie_te_Leiden_Icones_31.tiff): Jan Cornelis Woudanus (artist), _Icones Leidensis_, Number 31, Senate Chamber, Academy Building, Leiden University, Public Domain * [Lucan on Syene](https://www.famousscientists.org/eratosthenes/): © FamousScientists (designer), Fair Use * [Model of the Palais de la Cité, Paris, in the Late 16th Century](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maquette_Palais_de_la_cit%C3%A9_XVIe_si%C3%A8cle.jpg?uselang=fr): Musée Carnavalet, Paris, © Adrian Scottow (photographer), Creative Commons License * [Marcus Terentius Varro](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Statua_di_Marco_Terenzio_Varrone_(Rieti)_02.jpg): Dino Morsani (sculptor), Rieti, © [Alessandro Antonelli](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Una_giornata_uggiosa_%2794) (photographer), Creative Commons License ## Online Resources ## * [Jacob Bernays: _Joseph Justus Scaliger_](https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV005043251) * [Jacob Bernays: _Joseph Justus Scaliger_](https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001221720) https://i.imgur.com/7kq532u.png