he jealousy of Richelieu and the Academy, the
open attacks of Georges de Scudery and J. de Mairet and others, and the
pamphlet-war which followed, are among the best-known incidents in the
history of letters. The trimming verdict of the Academy, which we have
in J. Chapelain's _Sentiments de l'Academie francaise sur la
tragi-comedie du Cid_ (1638), when its arbitration was demanded by
Richelieu, and not openly repudiated by Corneille, was virtually
unimportant; but it is worth remembering that no less a writer than
Georges de Scudery, in his _Observations sur le Cid_ (1637), gravely and
apparently sincerely asserted and maintained of this great play that the
subject was utterly bad, that all the rules of dramatic composition were
violated, that the action was badly conducted, the versification
constantly faulty, and the beauties as a rule stolen! Corneille himself
was awkwardly situated in this dispute. The _esprit bourru_ by which he
was at all times distinguished, and which he now displayed in his rather
arrogant _Excuse a Ariste_, unfitted him for controversy, and it was of
vital importance to him that he should not lose the outward marks of
favour which Richelieu continued to show him. Perhaps the pleasantest
feature in the whole matter is the unshaken and generous admiration with
which Rotrou, the only contemporary whose genius entitled him to
criticise Corneille, continued to regard his friend, rival, and in some
sense (though Rotrou was the younger of the two) pupil. Finding it
impossible to make himself fairly heard in the matter, Corneille (who
had retired from his position among the "five poets") withdrew to Rouen
and passed nearly three years in quiet there, perhaps revolving the
opinions afterwards expressed in his three _Discours_ and in the
_Examens_ of his plays, where he bows, somewhat as in the house of
Rimmon, to "the rules." In 1639, or at the beginning of 1640, appeared
_Horace_ with a dedication to Richelieu. The good offices of Madame de
Combalet, to whom the _Cid_ had been dedicated, and perhaps the
satisfaction of the cardinal's literary jealousy, had healed what breach
there may have been, and indeed the poet was in no position to quarrel
with his patron. Richelieu not only allowed him 500 crowns a year, but
soon afterwards, it is said, though on no certain authority, employed
his omnipotence in reconciling the father of the poet's mistress, Marie
de Lamperiere, to the marriage of the lovers (1640