T <scp>héodore de</scp> B <scp>èze</scp> et A <scp>ntoine de</scp> S <scp>aint-</scp> M <scp>ichel d’</scp> A <scp>vully</scp> , <i>Réponse au gentilhomme savoisien ne se nommant pas, précédée de la Lettre d’un gentilhomme savoisien (1598)</i> . Édité par A <scp>lain</scp> D <scp>ufour</scp> . de BèzeThéodore et d’AvullyAntoine de Saint-Michel, <i>Réponse au gentilhomme savoisien ne se nommant pas, précédée de la Lettre d’un gentilhomme savoisien (1598)</i> . Édité par DufourAlain. (Textes littéraires français, 642.) Genève: Droz, 2016. xxii + 155 pp.

The two meticulously edited letters that make up this volume provide an engaging and informative window into the state of Catholic–Protestant relations at the turn of the seventeenth century. Both letters were published in 1598 in response to a scandal of sorts. In 1597, rumours were being spread across Europe, through the church pulpits, that Théodore de Bèze, by this time in his seventies, had died, and had converted on his deathbed to Catholicism, along with the entire city of Geneva. Bèze received so many letters related to this rumour that he was prompted to respond in writing, then assuming the topic to be closed. A few months later, an anonymous publication of seventy-two pages (Lettre d’un gentilhomme savoisien) claimed that the Protestants themselves had spread the rumours in order to inculpate the Jesuits. This letter, attributed to Antoine de Saint-Michel d’Avully, along with Bèze’s response, is the content of this fascinating volume. Avully, born into a Protestant family, was a recent convert to Catholicism (fruit of the efforts of one François de Sales) during a campaign by the duc de Savoie to reconvert the region of Chablais. Both letters are full of wit and irony. In response to his adversary’s anonymous letter, Bèze also signs his letter ‘anonymously’, allowing him the rhetorical advantage of writing about himself in the third person, in one instance defending the presence of two portraits of himself (along with those of Calvin and others) in his house. At issue in the twin letters are not only the source of the rumours related to the Reformer’s conversion and death but, more importantly, a controversy surrounding a public dispute proposed by a Jesuit named Chérubin and turned down by the Reformers. Bèze had long since decided that such public debates did nothing to further the cause of the Church, but Chérubin and Avully looked to characterize the refusal as a sign of confessional fear. The letters are preceded by an informative (if short) Introduction by Alain Dufour, who knows his subject well, having authored a biography of Bèze (Théodore de Bèze: poète et théologien (Geneva: Droz, 2006)) and having spent decades editing the voluminous Correspondance of the Reformer (Geneva: Droz, 1960–2017). Indeed, the detailed notes to Bèze’s epistle provide references from the author’s correspondence to support his claims. Since historical context is so critical here, and the facts rather complicated, a longer Introduction would have been welcome. The edition of Avully’s letter is taken from the Musée historique de la Réformation while Beze’s letter comes from the copy housed at the Bibliothèque de Genève, a copy that belonged to Bèze himself and contains his handwritten notes and corrections. (The present edition contains a reproduction of one page of Bèze’s annotated copy.) While the complexity of the historical context will mean that this volume will be of interest above all to seiziémistes, the two letters, in fact, provide an intriguing, and perhaps timely, look at the significance of false rumours and how both sides in a polemic attempt to use them to their advantage.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.