Madame d'Houtetôt
MADAME D’HOUTETOT.(1)
___________
HUMAN nature is in general fond of riddles. We delight
to unravel a knotty point, and we study with the greatest
pleasure those characters, whose ruling feeling we do not
entirely comprehend. They oblige us to disentangle our
ideas with delicate precision, and to make subtle differences,
at once exercising our talents and our patience. It is for
this reason, in a great measure, that so many books have
been written about Rousseau.(2) His sensibility, his genius,
his pride, his alleged ingratitude and subsequent madness,
have made him one of the most interesting personages of mo-
dern times: the misrepresentations of his enemies have given
a spur to our researches: and we may safely assert that we
know more of his character and actions than his contempo-
raries: just as we are better acquainted with the course of a
river, looking down on it from a distant eminence, than sit-
ting on its banks, listening to the murmur of its waters.
From the character of Rousseau, our attention has been
turned to that of his friends; we have become familiar with
and their falsehood or truth have received their merited
judgment.
Among these last, no one more excites our sympathy than
Madame d’Houtetôt, the object of his passionate love and
the cause of so many of his misfortunes. Madame d’Hou-
[Page 68]
[Page 68]
tetôt was a woman of talent, and of the gentlest and most
affectionate disposition. But unpretending and unnoticed,
we should probably never have heard of her existence but
for the passionate remembrance of Rousseau. It is the at-
tribute of genius to gift with immortality all the objects it
deigns to hallow by its touch. The memory of the feelings
of the heart, however amiable and prized, expires with that
heart which was their shrine. But genius cannot die. The
present moment passes with the sun that hastens to its re-
pose in the deep; and oblivion, like night, descends upon
its world of suffering, enjoyment, or thought, did not genius
prolong it to an eternity. The wisest hand down to us the
actions of the best. When the chain of such spirits is snapt
we emphatically call those times the “Dark Ages:” we turn
shuddering from a time when men acted, but were unable to
record their acts, and we seek with fresh avidity those re-
mains of our fellow creatures which are more lasting than
regal mausoleums, and more akin to our nature than the
very body, preserved in a thousand folds of the embalmer’s
cloth.
It is on Rousseau’s account therefore that we feel curious
concerning the character of Madame d’Houtetôt. But while
satisfying that curiosity we become interested on her own
account, and although she has left little behind her by which
we may trace her life, yet we are touched and pleased, and
finish by declaring her worthy for her own sake of that at-
tention, which we at first bestowed on her for another’s.
Elizabeth-Sophie-Françoise de la Live de Bellegarde(7) was
the daughter of M. de Bellegarde, Farmer-General,(8) and the
father of M. d’Epinay. Madame d’Epinay and she were
therefore sisters-in-law, and lived together under the same
roof until the marriage of the latter.(9) Mademoiselle de la
than her sister-in-law; and from her earliest years was dis-
tinguished by her sensibility, her gaiety, and her talent.
Loving every one, she was much beloved; and this extraor-
dinary tenderness of disposition which characterised her in-
fancy, continued to adorn her to the end of her life. She
was married in the year 1747 to the Count d’Houtetôt.(11) The
preliminaries of this marriage are a curious specimen of the
manners of the age. Madame d’Epinay describes Count
d’Houtetôt as “a young nobleman without fortune; twenty-
two years of age; a gamester by profession; as ugly as the
devil, and of low rank in the army; in a word, ignorant, and
apparently formed by nature to continue so.”(12) She says
further, that when she first heard of the proposal she could
not have restrained her laughter, had she not feared that the
consequences of this ridiculous affair would render her sister-
in-law unhappy. In addition to this, it is affirmed that at
the moment of his marriage Count d’Houtetôt was passion-
ately attached to another woman, to whom he was unable to
unite himself.
Such circumstances offend and even disgust those who are
accustomed to look upon any disposal of the person of woman,
however legalized, as disgraceful, unless it be sanctioned by
the feelings of the heart. The individual character of Sophie(13)
is the redeeming ore amidst this loam; her acknowledged
excellence attaches us to her, and we desire to follow her
through her path of life, to read a new page in the volume of
human nature, and to see how this amiable and gifted crea-
ture conducted herself in circumstances the most unfavourable
to the developement of the nobler virtues of our nature.
The passions of Sophie were in repose; she therefore per-
mitted herself to be disposed of according to the customs of
her country, though her unsophisticated nature shuddered at
the formation of a tie, intended to be the dearest link among
[Page 70]
[Page 70]
human beings, on this occasion degraded to little other than
a tangible chain.
The proposal of marriage was made on the part of Count
d’Houtetôt by M. de Rinville, his distant relation. M. de
Bellegarde declared that his first wish was to please his
daughter, and agreed to meet the young Count the next day
at a dinner given by M. de Rinville, where the young people
should be introduced to each other. The family of Belle-
garde were present at this meeting, and found assembled at
the house of M. de Rinville, the Marquess and Marchioness
d’Houtetôt, the young Count their son, and a whole host of
relations. The Marchioness rose eagerly to receive them as
they entered, and embraced them all with cordiality. The
first introduction over, she took the young Sophie aside,
talked to her, complimented her, and was struck with sud-
den admiration of her attractions and understanding. At
table the young people were placed near each other, and the
parents of the bridegroom seized upon M. de Bellegarde.
They were determined to take the poor girl by storm; they
employed every art to cajole her and her relations, and soli-
cited an immediate yes or no to their proposition. Sophie
blushed, and was praised, her father was caressed, and Ma-
dame d’Esclavelle (the mother of Madame d’Epinay)(14) alone
retarded the final decision. She turned to the lady of the
house, saying: “It appears to me, Madam, that M. de Rin-
ville is too hasty in this affair. The particulars are not suf-
ficiently arranged for our young friends to decide; and if, in
expectation of an union, they should become mutually at-
tached, and obstacles should afterwards arise”—”You are
quite right,” exclaimed M. de Rinville, clapping his hands;
“good counsel for ever! We had better first arrange the
articles, and while we are thus engaged, the young people
may converse and become better acquainted; that’s the best
[Page 71]
[Page 71]
way! that’s the best way!” Then taking the parents of the
young Count by the hand, he led them to a corner near M.
de Bellegarde and Madame d’Esclavelle, calling out to the
younger part of the company: “Amuse yourselves, my
dears; we are going to employ ourselves in finding means
to render you both happy.” The fortune of the young Count
was then declared, and the old Countess d’Houtetôt, regard-
ing the relations of Sophie with eager solicitude, cried: “I
understand nothing of business; but I will give all I have to
give, and above all, my diamonds:—my diamonds, Sir, which
are very fine. I do not know their exact value; but I will
give them all to my daughter-in-law, independent of my
son.”—“This, my good friend,” said M. de. Rinville to M.
de Bellegarde, “is a very handsome present, and what is
more, very handsomely bestowed. What say you to our
propositions?” M. de Bellegarde declared himself satisfied,
but still insisted on consulting the happiness of his daughter.
He was interrupted by an eulogium on the young Count: his
wife, it was declared, must be the most fortunate of women.
M. de Bellegarde was overcome: he stated the dowry of his
daughter, and M. de Rinville instantly demanded that the
contract should be signed that evening, the first banns pub-
lished on the following Sunday, dispensation for the rest
procured, and the nuptials celebrated on Monday. The
family of d’Houtetôt applauded this arrangement; the rela-
tions of Sophie hesitated, but the importunity of the officious
M. de Rinville was triumphant. The families of both par-
ties were assembled; all unknown one to the other, they
looked on each other with distrust, while the reserve, suspi-
cion, and anxiety, inspired by so sudden an event, gave them
all an air of stupidity. The marriage-articles were read, the
Marchioness presented Sophie with two cases of diamonds,
[Page 72]
[Page 72]
the contract was signed, the assembly went to supper, and
the marriage was fixed for the following Monday.
During this short interval, rumours not very creditable to
the family of d’Houtetôt reached the ears of M. d. Bellegarde;
but it was too late; the fate of Sophie was decided. She
was passive during the arrangement of the contract, but her
spirits became agitated as the decisive moment approached.
If she appeared thoughtless and gay in company, yet she
wept in secret. It was on the eve of her marriage that she
saw Rousseau for the first time. She shewed him the suite
of rooms that had been prepared for her, and conversed with
him for a long time with that fascinating ease that was na-
tural to her. The next morning, when Madame d’Epinay
assisted at her toilette, she was very sorrowful, and had
been weeping bitterly. She was going to live among stran-
gers, and to submit her future happiness to the guidance of
a man whom she hardly knew by sight.
She married, and became one of that society which has
been handed down to us as a model of all that we can know
of elegant, refined, well-informed and amusing,— but over
which, the strange mode in which their domestic ties were
arranged casts an air of heartlessness and intrigue. The
conduct of Madame d’Houtetôt was influenced by the opi-
nions of those around her; but she was nevertheless un-
blemished by those cardinal defects; and every one of every
party unites in celebrating the warmth of her heart and the
almost childish ingenuousness of her nature. Her person
and character have been so vividly described, that we feel
as if we knew her, and that her form flitted before us as we
depict it upon paper. She was not handsome. Her face
was even plain; her forehead low, her nose large, her com-
plexion yellow and deeply marked by the small-pox; but
[Page 73]
[Page 73]
this irregularity of feature was compensated by the vivacity
and sweetness of her expression. Her person was remarka-
bly elegant, her hands and arms fair, her feet small, and she
danced with extreme grace. She was vivacious, absent
even, frank, and unaffected; her wit was spontaneous and
her imagination lively: Her soul was penetrated and made
up of love. This unrestrained affectionateness of her dispo-
sition was indeed her characteristic. Given up to the enjoy-
ment of the emotions of her heart, she never permitted her
ill-wishers to have the satisfaction of exciting in any degree
a mutual sentiment in her pure and angerless mind. Her
intellect was richly adorned by every talent, but her natural
modesty prevented her from making any display. Possessed
of great poetical talent, she neither published nor permitted
her friends to make copies of her verses: she probably shrunk
from any competition of wit with St. Lambert,(15) who was a
Poêt de Compagnie,(16) and whose laboured and dull productions
form a striking contrast with her simple and spirited effu-
sions. Both Rousseau and St. Lambert have left descrip-
tions of her character. The one by the latter is almost the
only passage of interest in his superficial “Cathechisme
Universelle.” “She has devoted herself,” he says, “from
infancy to the pleasure of loving, and has enjoyed all the
happiness which an affectionate nature can bestow. She is
passionately attached to all who are amiable in her own fa-
mily and among her friends; and the ingratitude and trea-
chery with which her sentiments have been repaid, have not
diminished the strength of her affections, but only forced
her to change their object. She has never hated those whom
she has ceased to love; and she desires more to be assured
of the happiness of her friends than of their attachment to
her. Gratitude, benevolence, and generosity, are her attri-
butes; and now in the flower of womanhood, she preserves
[Page 74]
[Page 74]
all the artlessness and candour of a child. Her under-
standing is penetrating, just, and delicate; but she has ab-
stained from all abstruse studies. She delights in the fine
arts, and writes verses full of feeling and sweetness. She is,
from her extreme goodness, often the dupe of the malice of
others, but she shuts her eyes to all evil, and the native pu-
rity of her mind hinders her from understanding the petty.
meannesses of those around her.”(17)
It was doubtless to this fortunate blindness and her ex-
treme vivacity that Madame d’Houtetôt owed the tranquil-
lity and happiness she enjoyed; for otherwise her delicate
tact would have been perpetually wounded by the sight
of the vices and defects of her associates. She began
however to suffer early from the bad character of her hus-
band. Count d’Houtetôt proceeded legally against M. de.
Bellegarde for the dowry of his wife. We are unable to ex-
plain the circumstances; but Count d’Houtetôt was univer-
sally blamed, and M. de Bellegarde so much irritated that
he refused to see him. Poor Sophie threw herself at the
feet of her father, and entreated him not to confound her in
the anger he felt against her husband. M. de Bellegarde
was deeply hurt by the conduct of his son-in-law: he was
moved by the dutiful affection of Sophie, but he was unable
to distinguish in his own mind the different feelings with
which he ought to have regarded her and her husband. He
was cold and reserved. Madame d’Houtetôt was afflicted
by this injustice; she was told that it was more of manner
than of sentiment, but it must have estranged her from her
paternal house, and it may have contributed not a little to
the formation of her attachment for St. Lambert. During the
first years of our entrance into life we still cling to our early
affections; the name of a father is sacred, and the companion
of our infancy and the chosen friend of our heart are regarded
[Page 75]
[Page 75]
with encreased love. But at the same time, our heart,
opened to a thousand new emotions, requires tenderness and
warmth in return for the treasure of affection it so readily
bestows. We may easily put ourselves in the situation of
Sophie. The attentions of her husband were cold and heart-
less; his unworthy conduct destroyed the sensation of ten-
der friendship which she at first felt for him; his parents,
given up to dissipation, could not win her esteem. Her
father was estranged from her: her sister-in-law, Madame
d’Epinay, was engrossed by her own intrigues. Her heart
overflowed with the necessity of loving; her joys were all
centered in the exercise of her affections. She saw St. Lam-
bert; she loved and was beloved. In the society to which
she was confined, her passion was not considered criminal
as long as she covered it with the veil of what was called
decency. Her husband required no more; and thus, with-
out blame, or the consciousness of a fault, Madame d’Hou-
tetôt became the friend, the constant, passionately attached
and faithful friend of her lover, from the moment her con-
nexion with him began until death.(18)
St. Lambert was a poor noble of Lorraine, and his pecu-
niary circumstances constrained him at one time to serve in
a regiment of infantry. He was introduced into notice after
the death of Madame du Chastelêt,(19) as the successful rival
of Voltaire in the favours of that lady. Soon after her death
he appeared, for the first time, in Paris. He was received
in all the best society, and became a partaker of the petits
assembled at her house the leading characters among the
French literati. During the life of King Stanislaus(22) he divided
his time between Paris and Lorraine, where he had the place
of Exempt(23) in the body-guard of the King of Poland; he
sion in the French service. During the first part of his Pa-
risian career, Madame d’Epinay mentions him in strong
terms of favour and admiration. She was pleased with his
society, and describes him as possessing great talent, deli-
cate taste, and poetical imagination. He took a principal
part in the society to which he belonged, and, as a philoso-
pher and poet, attracted the admiration of his associates.
He has since published the result of his philosophical stu-
dies and the verses long dormant in his portfolio. The one
is without originality or truth; the latter display neither
imagination nor passion. But in society these things wear
a different aspect; and the brilliancy of his conversation,
and the vivacity of his delivery, stood in place of profundity
or wit.
Madame d’Houtetôt became attached to St. Lambert with
all the warmth of her affectionate heart; and her attachment
to him compensated for the keen disappointment she must
have felt from the conduct of her husband. His meanness,
his avidity for money, his avarice, became every day more
apparent, and the coarseness of his manners admitted of no
disguise. She turned an indulgent eye on his faults; she
did not reproach him with his want of integrity; she bore
his caprices with equanimity, whenever her mind, ever blind
to the evil side of human nature, permitted her to perceive
it; her greatest revenge was a madrigal, where a perception
of the ridiculous, and not satirical bitterness, made the point
of her reproof. Her life under the roof of his parents was
passed in a routine of pleasure, which at intervals was ex-
changed for the solitude of their country seat on the sea-
side, in Normandy. She made one at the parties of Madame
d’Epinay, and was one of the performers at her private thea-
tre. She took a part in the “Engagement Temeraire,”(25) a
comedy by Rousseau, who also had a part in it, and at that
[Page 77]
[Page 77]
time was often in the society of his afterwards beloved
Sophie. They took long walks together, and conversation
never flagged between them: he thought her very agreeable,
but he was far from foreseeing that she was to become the
destiny of his life, and the innocent cause of so many of his
misfortunes. We may guess the reason why his heart was
at that time less susceptible of passion. He lived in society,
and his literary efforts were of a political and philosophical
nature. Besides, at that time, just awakened to the con-
sciousness of his powers, his mind was too full of its own
identity and exertions, to expend itself upon sympathy with
another. But during his romantic residence at the Hermi-
tage, his solitary wanderings in the wood of Montmorenci,(26)
and his impassioned day-dreams, when he created Julie and
St. Preux,(27) his heart was awakened, and he was prepared for
the reception of that love which he so eloquently described.
In the mean time, years passed over the head of Madame
d’Houtetôt; she continued gay, simple, and enthusiastic,
forgetful of all except her constant and unalterable attach-
ment towards her friends. To them she was a sympathizing
companion during their joyous hours, an angel of consolation
in their adversity; the sensibility that filled her heart gave
a touching amiability to her manners, and her vivacity never
wounded, because it was always animated by the truest
spirit of delicacy.
St. Lambert was often absent during the campaigns. On
occasion of one of these absences, she came to the Hermi-
tage, where Rousseau then resided, to bring him news of his
friend. Her journey thither was full of adventures. Her
coachman lost his way, her carriage stuck in the mud, she
alighted to walk, but her slight shoes were soon destroyed,
and she arrived at the hermitage in boots, laughing heartily
at her misfortune. Rousseau was delighted with her frank
[Page 78]
[Page 78]
and amiable demeanour; her stay was short, but they parted
mutually pleased, and she promised to renew her visit.
She executed her promise the following year. M. d’Houte-
tôt and St. Lambert, who both served, were absent. Her
husband had wished her to retire to their estate in Normandy,
but her friends opposed themselves to so melancholy a sepa-
ration; her ill health was a pretext, and she was permitted
to rent a small house at Eaubonne, situated midway be-
tween the Hermitage and La Chevrette, the seat of Madame
d’Epinay. She came over from Eaubonne to the Hermitage
on horseback, and in man’s attire. Rousseau would not have
been pleased with this disguise in another, but the natural
grace of Madame d’Houtetôt embellished every action of
her life; she even lent an air of romance to this visit, and
the first emotions of the most passionate love were awakened
in the heart of Rousseau. He was then occupied in the
composition of “La Nouvelle Heloise,”(28) and his imagination
was excited by his extatic reveries; he was in love without
on object, and this love fascinated his sight. At first he saw
his Julie in Madame d’Houtetôt; but soon Julie was forget-
ten, and this amiable woman endowed with all the perfec-
tions of the idol of his heart. Madame d’Houtetôt made him
the confident of her affection for St. Lambert; she spoke of
him with enthusiastic tenderness, and the contagion of pas-
sion was communicated to her unfortunate hearer. For a
long time he was unaware of the feeling that had taken pos-
session of him; he attributed his agitation and deep sympa-
thy to the warmth of his friendship. It was not until he
found, during his noon-day reveries, the idea of Madame
d’Houtetôt substituted for Julie, that he opened his eyes,
and saw the extent of his misfortune.
At first, shame and timidity rendered him silent: his agi-
tation betrayed him, and Madame d’Houtetot found that
[Page 79]
[Page 79]
she was beloved. Her gentle nature would not permit her
to be angry with a man whose fault was his attachment to
her, and she hesitated to deprive St. Lambert of a friend
whom he prized. She saw a middle course, and, unread in
the human heart, she trusted that utter hopelessness would
destroy the ill-placed love, while her sincere friendship would
preserve the happiness of Rousseau. She talked to him of
St. Lambert; she drew a lively picture of the delightful
intercourse that might exist between all three, when he
should have restrained his feelings within reasonable bounds;
she exhorted him to put in exercise his virtuous principles,
and she reproached him for his treason towards his friend.
Rousseau listened with docility; and his own understanding
added force to her arguments. There was one, however, that
she did not use, but which speedily suggested itself to his
mind, and which became a spur instead of a check to his
passion. He thought of his age, and of the unalterable fide-
lity of Madame d’Houtetôt to her lover. What, he thought,
can St. Lambert, the tenderly beloved St. Lambert, have to
fear from me? Old, unattractive, sick, my folly can hurt my-
self alone, and I may love and weep, fearless of being guilty
of any treachery towards my young and favoured friend.
Rousseau having thus silenced his remorse, he gave him-
self entirely up to his destructive passion. Madame d’Houte-
tôt never flattered his delusion, or ceased to remonstrate
against it; but she treated him with gentleness, and falsely
trusted that her friendship would suffice to content a senti-
ment, which ever requires entire sympathy and uncondi-
tional return. This misjudged kindness led them both to
the brink of a precipice. They spent much of their time
together; they took long walks in the romantic country they
inhabited; they passed evenings together, under the shade
[Page 80]
[Page 80]
of trees in a small wood. Love made Rousseau eloquent,
even beyond his natural talent, but the fidelity of Madame
d’Houtetôt remained unshaken; she was moved to tears, but
St. Lambert occupied solely the shrine of her heart; his idea
was perpetually present to her; she recalled it to the me-
mory of Rousseau, and he saw with despair the insurmount-
able bounds that she eternally placed to his vainly towering
passion.
This state of things could not continue long; it could not
have endured of itself, and it was broken in upon by the
intervention of others. His love became known, and at-
tracted universal attention; an anonymous letter awakened
the suspicions of St. Lambert. He did justice to the con-
stancy of Madame d’Houtetôt; but she had concealed the
love of Rousseau from him, and this occasioned some diffi-
dence in his mind. Angry with herself for her injudicious
indulgence, and fearful of its consequences, Madame
d’Houtetôt declared to Rousseau, that he must forget his
unhappy passion, or he could see her no more. The suspi
cions which he conceived of Madame d’Epinay’s interference,
and the return of St. Lambert, brought on the catastrophe.
St. Lambert reproached him with gentleness, and Rousseau
was humiliated. On the departure of the Marquess, Madame
d’Houtetôt was altered; she became cold and estranged,
and even asked him to return her letters. Rousseau saw
that the dream was over; he saw the necessity of exerting
all his powers to extinguish his ill-fated passion. Madame
d’Houtetôt was conscious that gentleness had been fuel to the
fire that filled his heart: her visits to the Hermitage were
relinquished; he was no longer received with the same cor-
diality at Eaubonne, and he ceased to visit there. Soon
after St. Lambert was taken ill, Madame d’Houtetôt became
[Page 81]
[Page 81]
solely occupied by his welfare; she quitted Eaubonne, and
all intimate connexion between her and Rousseau was at an
end.*
On his recovery, St. Lambert quitted the French service,
and came to live at Paris. Madame d’Houtetôt, who en-
dured much painful solicitude during his absences at the
army, was doubly gay and contented on this change. St.
Lambert gave himself entirely up to literature; he became
a Member of the French Academy,(29) was subsequently elected
its Secretary, and afterwards succeeded Buffon(30) as its Di-
rector. He published his “Saisons,”(31) a work he had long
before composed and read to his friends, and on which his
poetical reputation chiefly rested. The publication, however,
destroyed the drawing-room poet; it was declared with one
voice (a voice which all into whose hands it falls must echo)
tame, dull, and unreadable; nor could the notes and tales by
which it was accompanied give feathers to the leaden-footed
Muse. Some time afterwards he published his Catechisme
* As we are not writing either a justification or a life of Rousseau, we pass
over the various contradictory accounts that have been published concerning
his conduct in this affair, and the accusations that have been heaped upon
him. His own statement by no means exculpates him, and the tone of sen-
suality that reigns throughout is in conformity to the style of “La Nouvelle
Heloise,” but takes from his passion that purity and exaltation of sentiment
which make the best part of our sympathy for a lover’s sufferings. We con-
fine ourselves in our present account to Madame d’Houtetôt, who held a
clear course; she was divided between compassion for Rousseau and her
constant attachment to St. Lambert. Her mistakes were owing to the
tenderness of her heart; and to the end she demonstrated the sweetness of
her disposition, tinctured, as was usual to her, by a little indiscretion of con-
duct and incongruity in her reasoning faculties. Nor have we entered here
upon those extensive questions which might naturally be raised on such a
subject. We are only drawing a portrait, and leave the criticism upon it to
others.
VOL. II. G
[Page 82]
Universelle; a book of false and superficial philosophy. The
best parts are borrowed from Rousseau, but the sentiments,
so eloquently expressed in the Emile,(32) meet you despoiled
and arid under the shape of St. Lambert’s aphorisms and
conclusive arguments. With his youth St. Lambert seems
also to have lost the amiable and brilliant qualities that once
distinguished him. Not so Madame d’Houtetôt; her mind
seemed endowed with perpetual youth; age did not diminish
either the gaiety of her spirits or the affectionateness of her
disposition. She nursed St. Lambert in ill health; she
humoured his foibles, and ever continued his constant and
unequalled friend. The lady to whom M. d’Houtetôt had
been attached died, and he transferred to his wife the atten-
tions and friendship of which she had hitherto been bereaved.
The fragments of poetry which remain of hers were chiefly
written during old age; and amidst all its displeasures, she
fondly dwells upon those affections which formed her only
consolations.
It would have given us great pleasure if we could have
traced Madame d’Houtetôt through the remaining years of
her long life, but we know of no record that can aid us in
this research. She was a witness of those tremendous vicis-
situdes that shook our moral world as an earthquake; she
beheld the fall of what in her younger days must have ap-
peared to her as firm set as the earth’s foundations—the
Bourbon dynasty. She saw the rise and fall of Napoleon.(33)
The last years of her life were spent at Eaubonne. Her
husband and lover were both dead; all that before had lent
life and interest to the Vale of Montmorenci had passed
away. The Hermitage was gone, Rousseau was no more.
She remained the sole land-mark of a strange country, which
the waves of time had washed over even to obliteration.
The hearts that had beat for her were cold, but hers was yet
[Page 83]
[Page 83]
warm. She was surrounded by her grandchildren, and
sought consolation in new friendships for a fresh race. As
she sat over her embroidery frame, she sang the songs she
had composed in years long gone by, and composed others
adapted to her present circumstances. Her imagination
and feelings were vanquished by death alone.
She died in the year 1813, aged 83, and we lost in her the
[1] Elisabeth Françoise Sophie de la Live de Bellegarde, comtesse d’Houdetot (1730-1813), French noblewoman. Mary Shelley became well-acquainted with Rousseau’s works and letters over the period 1815-22.
[2] Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-78), Genevan philosopher and writer whose thought influenced greatly the European Enlightenment. Among his most important works, Julie ou la Nouvelle Héloïse (1761), and Émile ou sur l’éducation and Contrat social (1762).
[3] Denis Diderot (1713-84), one of the main representatives of the French Enlightenment. His – and D’Alembert’s – major contribution is the project and realisation of the Encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers (1751-72).
[4] Friedrich Melchior von Grimm (1723-1807), German writer, art critic, journalist, and contributor to the Encyclopédie.
[5] Louise-Florence-Pétronille Tardieu d’Esclavelles, known as Madame d’Épinay (1726-83), was a French writer and saloniste, author of the autobiography Mémoires de madame d’Épinay (1818), and the pedagogical treatise Conversations d’Émilie (1781). She also contributed to Grimm’s Correspondance littéraire philosophique et critique (1753).
[6] Marie-Thérèse Levasseur (1721-1801) partner and wife of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
[7] Madame d’Houdetot (or d’Houtetot).
[8] “In pre-revolutionary France, a person who rents the right to set and collect the taxes or duties of a particular district on behalf of the king, retaining a share of the revenue”, OED, “farmer general (n.)”.
[9] Madame d’Épinay was raised in the care of her aunt and uncle, Marie-Josèphe Prouveur and Louis-Denis de La Live de Bellegarde, Madame d’Houdetot’s parents.
[10] Madame d’Houdetot (or d’Houtetot).
[11] Claude Constant César, Comte d’Houdetot (1724-1806), army brigadier.
[12] Translation from Madame D’Épinay, Mémoires et correspondance de Madame d’Epinay, 8th March 1747.
[13] Madame d’Houdetot (or d’Houtetot).
[14] Florence-Angélique Prouveur (1694-1762).
[15] Jean François de Saint-Lambert (1716-1803), French poet and writer, author several entries in the Encyclopédie, and of the pastoral poem Les saisons (1769) which is considered his masterpiece. He pursued a military career until 1758.
[16] I.e., Poet of the French Academy.
[17] English translation from Jean François de Saint-Lambert, Principes des moeurs chez toutes les nations ou Catéchisme universel, Paris: Agasse, 1798, 222-3.
[18] Jean François de Saint-Lambert was Madame d’Houdetot’s companion from 1752 until his death.
[19] Gabrielle Émilie Le Tonnelier de Breteuil, Marquise du Châtelet (1706-49), French writer, mathematician and natural philosopher. In 1748 she began an affair with Jean François de Saint-Lambert, and died a few days after giving birth to their daughter, Stanislas-Adélaïde.
[20] Dinner parties with selected guests.
[21] Jeanne-Françoise Quinault (1699-1783), French actress, playwright and saloniste.
[22] Stanisław I Leszczyński (reigned 1704-9, 1737-66), King of Poland and Duke of Lorraine.
[23] I.e., sub-officer.
[24] A staff carried as the symbol of office, i.e., he sold his position in the bodyguard.
[25] Jean-Jacques Rousseau, L’Engagement Temeraire, 1746-7.
[26] In 1756, Madame d’Épinay provided Rousseau with a cottage, which she called Ermitage, located in the Vale of Montmorency.
[27] Two of the main characters in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s epistolary novel Julie ou la Nouvelle Héloïse (1761).
[28] Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Julie ou la Nouvelle Héloïse (1761).
[29] Jean François de Saint-Lambert became member of the Académie Française in 1770.
[30] Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (1707-88), French naturalist and mathematician.
[31] Jean François de Saint-Lambert, Les saisons (1769).
[32] Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Émile ou sur l’éducation and Contrat social (1762).
[33] Napoleone Buonaparte (1769-1821), French general, statesman and Emperor (1804-1814, 1815).
[34] Louis XV (reigned 1715-74), King of France.
Ultimo aggiornamento
19.09.2025