SANSCULLOTISED LITERATURE IN FRANCE. g73 



were comjjosed ! Need I mentio'ii that, with the exception of a 

 few happy hues and some ideas worthy of the Muse, there is 

 absokitely nothing- to be found in this farrago but the traditional 

 banality oif topical verse ? In the meantime, after the success 

 achieved by his " Charles IX.," Marie Jos. Chenier. the official 

 poet of the Revolution, had finished his famous anthem, " Le 

 chant du Depart " ; Lebrun, Mercier, Neufchateau and Laharpe 

 had rhymed, more or less felicitously, a number of odes, some 

 of which are very fine, others most silly and insipid. It is 

 generally Ijclieved that the song which first fired revolutionary 

 enthusiasm into a paroxysm was that well-known dithyrami^ of 

 Rouget de I'Isle, " The Marseillaise." This is not tiuite correct. 

 It was another poem, entitled " Le Salut de la Prance," that 

 did it. This piece was composed by Roy in 1791. after an 

 aria of one of the operas of Dalayrac. Its popularity was in- 

 stantaneous and immense, probably on account of its simple 

 and easy harmony. In 1792, on the eve of the declaration of 

 war, the Mayor of Strasburg ordered one of the oflicers of 

 the town, one Rouget de ITsle, to compose a chant with which 

 to rouse the martial enthusiasm of the soldiers during their 

 march to the field of battle. Rouget set to work, and in one 

 single night composed what lie entitled " Chant de guerre de 

 r armee du Rhin." It had a marvellous success. The battalion 

 of Barbaroux took it ifor its national anthem, and so it became 

 the anthem of the " Marseillais." :\t Marseilles it was sung in 

 public 'by one Mireur, one of the fcderes, and published the next 

 morning in the papers. From Marseilles its fiery stanzas 

 promptly crossed over to Paris, wihere it was forthwith received 

 as the first war chant of the Republic* It has been frequentlv 

 contended that Rouget is not tlie author of the " Marseillaise," 

 and what the various critics w^anted especially to deny him was 

 the honour of having composed the tune, which is incmitestably 

 more original than the lines. The Ciermans ha\e claimed the 

 merit of it, alleging that it w-as plagiarized from the musical 

 works of one Holtzmann, a ( lerman precentor ! ! Others as- 

 serted that it was taken from an oratorio by one Grison- But 

 really and truly, the entire work, music and words, is by Rouget 

 and by nobody else. Out of his luunerous poems, poor fellow, 

 this is the only successful one, 'but then it is his. In our modern 

 eyes, it now incarnates the republican ideal ; the author meant to 

 make it chiefly a national anthem and a war chant. However, to 

 be merely such, it is too much impregnated with the shibb':>leth 

 of the Revolution, and abounds too much in expressions antl 

 words, fancied by the orators and hotspurs, who believed in the 

 powertful charm of the word over the enthusiasm of the mob; 

 words like " bondage " and " fetters," " despots " and " thralls," 

 '■ tyrants " and " bloodthirsty tigers."! I" spite of its blemishes, 

 in spite of its rather bombastic style and thick metaphor, this 



* Think here of what has happened to " It's a lonsf way to Tipperary." 

 t How well does it fit in the frame of the present war ! 



