Ophelia (Ophélie) (1890) by Jules Joseph Lefebvre (French, 1836 – 1911), oil on canvas, 59 1/4 in x 36 in, Michele & Donald D'Amour Museum of Fine Arts, Springfield, Massachusetts
"Who translated into French and annotated Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Woman?"
Historian Isabelle Bour, in a 2022 article, argues that the unnamed translator was likely none other than Félicité Brissot, wife of the ill-fated journalist/deputy. Here are some of her arguments.
Félicité is known to have done translation work under the name Miss D.P. (her maidan name was Dupont) in the 1780s, both on her own and possibly together with her husband:
in 1782 The Economy of Human Life by Robert Dodsley
in 1783 A New History of England, from the earliest period to the present time by “Reverend Cooper” (Richard Johnson)
In 1783, while both were in England, Brissot translated David Williams's Letters on Political Liberty "with the help of his wife" (p. 882)
in 1786 possibly A History of England by Oliver Goldsmith. There are mixed attributions for this one: Antoine-Alexandre Barbier — who Bour points out could've had firsthand information — in his Dictionnaire des ouvrages anonymes et pseudonymes (1806-09) claims Félicité as the translator, but the 1790 edition of A History of England says “M. Brissot de Warville”. Claude Perroud, in his edition of Brissot’s Memoires, also gives the attribution to Félicité, but Brissot's own announcement of the second edition in his own newspaper Le Patriote Français, on 27 October, 1789, names himself as the translator. Brissot claims this again in his Memoires.
-> Here I’d like to point out that Brissot had earlier tried to dissuade his wife from putting her own names on her work and once said "'Does the public need to have your name? You know that I don’t like lady writers... Besides, a translation is nothing much'" (Bour p.884-885) So it's possible that regardless of who did the work, he either did not think it appropriate for her to be publicly recognized or he didn’t see it as significant.
-> Bour concludes: “for [A History of England] and others that followed, it is impossible to attribute the translation to Brissot or to his wife singly with any certainty: they most probably tended to collaborate” (p. 881)
Some of Boer’s initial arguments are extremely speculative — basically, that Félicité would’ve had the opportunity to do the translation and would’ve wanted to undertake the project for intellectual, personal, and political reasons:
“Félicité Brissot, though she had three boys to look after, was very often on her own in the rue Grétry, off the rue de Richelieu or, in the summer months, in Saint-Cloud where she went in search of fresh air and more natural surroundings. As Eloise Eller[y] notes [here], she was often lonely." (Boer, p. 883)
“Both Brissots would have been aware of Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Men (1790); though this book was not translated, it made its author famous in France as well as in Britain. So, another work whose title echoed the first would also have caught their attention. Further, we know from a letter of Brissot to his friend Jean-Marie Roland de la Platière that important books published in England were sent to him: “ (p. 883)
“In 1792, though she was still very fond of her husband, she deplored that she saw so little of him and that they had not kept up the intellectual closeness that existed during their engagement and early on in their married life.” (p. 883)
“Félicité Brissot would have found the time to translate a work which mirrored her own preoccupations and enabled her to give vicarious expression to her disappointment and her frustration. It also probably meant that she could earn a little much needed money, as the Brissot couple were not rich. Furthermore, translating Wollstonecraft was a way of serving the Revolution, of embodying her reformist views, of outlining a future for women which the Revolution was only fitfully interested in.” (p. 884)
Boer does acknowledges the speculative nature of her analysis and recognizes that there are others, all from the Girondin circle, who could've done the translation, namely:
Sophie de Grouchy, Condorcet’s wife, who translated Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments in 1798
François Lanthénas, who translated Thomas Paine’s books & speeches “and moved in the same Girondin circles as Wollstonecraft”
(“most probably”) Jean-Henri Bancal des Issarts, who also translated some of Paine’s speeches was in Britain in 1791 (p. 879)
However, there are other references that point to one or both Brissots as the translator(s)/annotator(s) in this case.
Importantly, the notes in the translation of Vindication indicate two translators, one man and one woman. As mentioned above, it's likely that Félicité and her husband had collaborated on translations.
Boer sees in some notes echoes Brissot’s anticlericalism, criticism of Anglicanism, and support of Quakers, and other ideas and experience that crop up in his background:
“Other notes seem to bear his stamp, like one that defends some British academics, whom Wollstonecraft denigrates unsparingly, characterising them as ‘the pedantic tyrants who reside in colleges’... Brissot mentions the Scottish historian William Robertson and another Scot, Hugh Blair, professor of rhetoric and belles lettres, as being worthy of esteem. (Robertson is also mentioned in a note in the Preface to the Lettres philosophiques et politiques, xv)” (p. 889)
There is also “a note about a girls’ school in ‘Queen’s Square’ (now Queen Square) in Bloomsbury, very near the street where the Brissots lived, at 26 Newman Street..." (p. 889)
"In [the same] note the annotator identifies himself as a man: ‘Montaigne who on occasions is quite unsparing with the sex on the whole thinks that it is roughly worth as much as our own’... This contrasts with the note at the beginning of Chapter VI in which the annotator unambiguously identifies herself as a woman.” (p. 889)
“The annotator, in Chapter XII, knows Milton’s works well–Brissot had been consulted about translating Paradise Lost as part of a commercial venture. The plan did not come to fruition, though he did translate two Books (Memoirs I, 208). Towards the very end of the Vindication, where Wollstonecraft writes ‘What are the cold, or feverish caresses of appetite, but sin embracing death...’ the French annotator remarks: ‘This is a conceit of Milton’s’” (p. 889)
“Brissot’s conservatism when it comes to women’s place in society is palpable here and there, as in this note: … ‘There is a great deal of truth in what the author says about the need to strengthen the body and the soul of women. Condemned by nature to give birth in pain, and to be subject to all the illnesses to which the noble and touching charge of maternity exposes them, they should early on strengthen their constitution; but let them not move too far away from nature. Much of their charm and their sway is due to their weakness; a Woman must be a Woman in all possible ways.’ This opinion, which is poles apart from the first note in Chapter VI, seems to confirm that the note is Brissot’s: his intellectual mentor was Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose Profession de foi du vicaire Savoyard radically altered the nature of his religious faith; as he says in his Memoirs (I, 38), ‘it was the first book which caused the scales to fall from his eyes’. He visited Switzerland in 1782 partly to see where the philosopher hailed from. The end of the note is a kind of paraphrase of the end of Chapter V of Emile, where Rousseau says that a woman wins sway through gentleness (l’empire de la femme est un empire de douceur)." (p. 889)
There are references to Richard Price & Joseph Priestly, whom Brissot knew: “A passage, in Chapter I, concerns men ‘who are reviled as despisers of God, and enemies of men’, though they are ‘roused by the sight of human calamity’... Wollstonecraft goes on to say: ‘These are bitter calumnies, yet they reached one of the best of men’; in a note to this last phrase she writes ‘Dr Price’. The translator has inserted this note into the main text which reads: ‘Ce sont-là des calomnies bien atroces; eh! bien, elles ont été versées à grands flots sur (le docteur Price) un des meilleurs des hommes ’ [These are truly atrocious slanders; and yet, they were poured out in great torrents upon (Dr. Price)—one of the best of men.] There is a further note on Price on page 340 of the translation. Let us also mention here that there are three references to Richard Price in the notes to Goldsmith’s Lettres philosophiques et politiques sur l’histoire de l’Angleterre—notes that, it will be remembered, were attributed to Brissot in the second French edition of that book.” (p. 885) “A note at the end of the book jointly mentions Richard Price and Joseph Priestley: as with Price, Brissot had met Priestley thanks to Richard Kirwan.” (p. 887-888)
Other notes echo Félicité’s writings in her private letters.
For example, Boer picks up on the Vindication translator's use of the word nullité ("nullity" or "non-entity"), a word which was rare in 18th century French:
“...the substantive nullité was used overwhelmingly in a legal context. The 1771 edition of the Dictionnaire de Trévoux has no other acceptation. Nullité is only attested in the sense of ‘what is valueless’ from 1747 and in the sense of ‘worthless person’ from 1812 (1798 in the Dictionnaire de l’Académie française)
Félicité uses this same unusual word used to describe the situation of women in a 1792 letter to her sister Nancy:
“The wife who readily understands the non-entity she has become for her husband often smothers her misery in silence, for the sake of her darling family.” (Bour p. 884)
"...admittedly," Bour says, "there was always a time-lag between usage and the record of new words and phrases in dictionaries. Still, Félicité Brissot’s choice of word is bold; it would have stood out for her readers—both her sister and the readers of the Défense. She was at pains to make it clear that a woman and a wife can be erased, nullified.”
Although I find the linguistic analysis fascinating, and possibly convincing, I feel like I have to point out the fact that despite its technical usage and relative rarity, it must've been in wider circulation than the written sources imply. Nullity is also not a common English word, and it's one I first saw in Baudot's description of Augustin Robespierre. From the biography by Mary Young, p. 165-166:
“ 'He was,' says Baudot, regarded as ‘such a nullity that he could have stayed unnoticed on 9 Thermidor."
The biography cites Baudot, A., Notes Historiques sur la Convention Nationale, le Directoire, l’Empire et l’Exil des Votants, published in 1893, so I don't know when Baudot would've actually written those words, but Wikipedia says he died in 1837; who knows when this word would've entered his vocabulary.
Brissot himself also uses nullité, (and in a kind of ironically similar sense to Félicité) on p. 36 of his memoires:
"...I must be myself. To be given a model, to be bound by specific forms and rules, is to reduce me to utter nullity." (c'est me réduire à la nullité”)
So, it might not've been that unusual and can't exactly be taken as ironclad evidence. Still, there are other echoes of Félicité's private letters in the notes of Vindication. Compare, for example, this 1791 letter with the two notes from Chapters VI and XII:
Letter: “ 'I think no marriage should take place without a preliminary course of education taken in a family. Both men and women should undergo this trial. I could go on and on if I told you about all that I think is to be done to the married state. The main thing is to tell young women that they must be completely selfless and have no desires other than their husband’s, while being clever enough to have him believe that he gives more than he demands.' ” (Bour, p. 887)
Note in Vindication, Chapter VI: “ ‘The position of women in society is singular indeed, though they are burdened with tasks as onerous as men, or perhaps more so! When single, it would be in vain for them to acquire speculative or practical knowledge greater than that of the most promising young men, for men in their inconsistent nature and exclusive pride forbid them to show it, deny them the use of it; as wives, their non-entity is more complete, if possible; indeed, though learned and brave, the wife of a fool and a coward will never enjoy any consideration, for the consideration given her is bound up with that shown to him, who deserves none; as a mother and a widow, she is still confined within the narrow bounds of domestic duties; if she is rich, she will at best be privileged to do without a steward and to be her own first housekeeper! Why equip ourselves to do great things when we are doomed to do small ones only!’ ”
Note in Vindication, Chapter XII: “The author means France here. Indeed, the revolution makes it possible to do something for Women who have for too long been treated with apparent respect, but actual contempt. They must be given a better education; for mothers are the first masters that nature and society give children. They must be able to divorce, which only the tyranny of priests has robbed them of. Many of them have proved that they were worthy of liberty; they only want enlightenment now. Once enlightened, they will be more virtuous, and happier. They must also obtain redress for all the gothic crimes of feudalism towards them, as far as wills are concerned, etc.; for, if nature seems to deny them political rights, they have as much entitlement as men to civil rights; in a word, it is for them to strengthen the new régime. Since the French nation has shaken off its yoke, there has been a lot of talk of counter-revolution. Law-makers! Do not shut your eyes to the fact that were a counter- revolution possible, women would impel it. Ensure that women take the constitution to heart; what you will do for them will not be wasted. They are the main custodians of the charges you have put under the authority of fathers, so that it be transmitted to future generations.”
In conclusion, there's not much hard proof to identify the anonymous translator/annotator of A Vindication of the Rights of Women. The women of the Revolution must've shared ideas, experiences, interests, and even linguistic quirks. They would've likely been familiar with the same publications and and prominent figures. I definitely don't know enough about Sophie de Grouchy, François Lanthénas, or Jean-Henri Bancal des Issarts to assess whether any of Bour's evidence is really exclusive to Félicité Brissot. A lot of the ideas sound like they could come from any number of revolutionary women.
Still, I think the author presents a compelling, if speculative case based on:
Vindication having two translators/annotators, a man and a woman and Brissot & Félicité having likely collaborated on translations previously.
Repeated, specific references to people & places the Brissots were familiar with (the girls' school in Queen's square, Richard Price, Joseph Priestly, William Robertson [whom the annotator defends, despite Wolstoncraft's criticism, and whom Brissot had mentioned in another translation])
The echoes of Félicité's letters, not just generally the same progressive ideas, but thoughts articulated fairly closely to the notes in Vindication. I can't say that I think the word nullity is proof, but the similarities between the letters and notes, both in ideas and articulation, at least make the attribution plausible.
So I don't know 100% if she was responsible for this work, but I enjoyed learning more about Félicité's translation background and how her intellectual work may have provided an public outlet for her thoughts, frustrations, and dreams for the Republic, for herself and other women. Brissot might've learned eventually to appreciate their contributions more, but like many women, Félicité's work and life were completely eclipsed by those of her husband. I like having the opportunity to bring her to light. She was not a nullity ❤️ ~~~~~
[if you need a copy of the article below, let me know and you can borrow my pdf 😊]
Article: Isabelle Bour (2022) Who translated into French and annotated Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Woman ?, History of European Ideas, 48:7, 879-891, DOI: 10.1080/01916599.2021.2022081
Abstract: "This article sets out to show that Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) was translated by Félicité Brissot de Warville, the wife of the prominent Girondin leader, Jacques-Pierre Brissot de Warville, and annotated by both. The demonstration is carried out through a study of the works translated by them, together or singly, before 1792: the annotation of those earlier works is echoed by the themes of the notes in the later chapters of the Vindication. These notes reflect J.-P. Brissot’s admiration for Quakers and for British intellectual figures such as Richard Price and Joseph Priestley (whom he knew), dislike of clergy and interest in education. Two long notes also express Félicité’s frustration at being confined to the role of mother and housewife, and can be paralleled with statements in her correspondence. To some extent, she appears as an alter ego of Wollstonecraft."
After the devout girl reading the missal, Waterhouse painted quite the opposite with this picture full of symbols of witchcraft: a wand, a skull and the woman looking into a crystal ball. Against the young girl reading the holy book, stands here an experienced woman following instructions from a book full of magical symbols. The skull was overpainted in the early 1950’s, but restored in its original state 40 years later.
Both paintings were displayed in the same gallery, side by side. They clearly belong together and as such were both bought by Frederick H. Pyman in 1909. Later they became somehow separated. This painting’s last known location is in a private collection in Mexico, whereas the location of The Missal is unknown.
There Sleeps Titania (also known as Titania Asleep), (Detail), (1872), by John Simmons (British, 1823 – 1876), oil on canvas, 76 x 64 cm (29.9 x 25.0 in), Private Collection
Violently In Love @carbonisedheart - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
ellievsbear
snowghoul
stormborns
dededos
titsay
prguitarman
baratheonpilled
kianamaiart
gummygunk
2087
janainaart
