The Quarrel of the Ancients and the Moderns () was a debate about literary and artistic merit that stirred the French literary and artistic world for most of the 17th century, and whose echoes continued throughout the 18th century. It started with a small number of debaters in the Académie Française, and grew to encompass most of the French educated community. This debate took its historical name from the publication, starting in 1688, of Charles Perrault's Parallèle des anciens et des modernes (Parallel of the Ancients and the Moderns), whose title provided the pretext for a play on words transforming "parallèle" into "querelle" (quarrel).

Origins of the debate A central tenet of the European Renaissance was the study of culture and institutions from classical (Greek and Roman) antiquity. In contrast to the medieval scholastic emphasis on Christian theology and unchanging monarchy, Renaissance humanists launched a movement to recover, interpret, and assimilate the language, literature, learning and values of ancient Greece and Rome.Burke, P., "The spread of Italian humanism", in The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe, ed. A. Goodman and A. MacKay, London, 1990, p. 2.

The 15th-century rediscovery and interest in ancient texts was facilitated by the introduction of the printing press around 1440, which allowed classical concepts to spread quickly and spurred revolutions in intellectual, social, and scientific pursuits.Shapin, Steven. The Scientific Revolution, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996, p. 1. For example, in the field of architectural theory, Filippo Brunelleschi revolutionized medieval architecture after studying the remains of ancient classical buildings, analyzing the works of 1st-century BC writer Vitruvius, and understanding the mathematical principles that could be discerned from them.Hooker, Richard. Architecture and Public Space (Retrieved May 10, 2007).

This cultural rebirth of classical ideals and the following changes in scientific and artistic perspective provoked reactions from those who perceived it as a danger to the stability of Christian civilization and wished to reassert the social and political values of medieval modernity.Hause, S. & Maltby, W. (2001). A History of European Society. Essentials of Western Civilization (Vol. 2, pp. 245–246). Belmont, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc. The debate became known in France as a "quarrel", after the frequently made pun on Charles Perrault's title (Parallel between Ancients and Moderns, 1688–92); the word being used in the place of .H. R. Jauss and M. Imdahl: "Normes esthétiques et réflexions historiques dans la Querelle des Anciens et des Modernes". In: Parallèle des Anciens et des Modernes, München, Eidos Verlag, 1964 Debate in France

The quarrel between the Classics and the Moderns opposed two distinct currents:

The Ancients (), led by Nicolas Boileau-Despréaux, felt that literary creation has its roots in the fair appreciation of the heritage of antiquity. According to them, it is the test of time that makes the masterpieces, not the pedantic opinion of an elite of scholars; the worth of ancient authors from Greece and Rome is established by twenty centuries of universal admiration.George Alexander Kennedy, H. B. Nisbet, Claude Rawson, Raman Selden: The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism: Volume 4, The Eighteenth Century, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005. While recognizing the merits of the great writers of his time (Boileau predicted that Pierre Corneille, Jean Racine and Molière would be acclaimed as geniuses in centuries to come), he argued it was also important to recognize the cumulative dimension of culture and study predecessors.Marcel Hervier, L'Art poétique de Boileau, étude et analyse (in French), Paris, Chefs-d'œuvre de la littérature expliqués, Mellottée, 1948, p. 213–219. The metaphor of the dwarves standing on the shoulders of giants illustrates this principle: by learning from the works of the great men of the past, it is possible to surpass them. Boileau had on his side the greatest French writers of his time, including Jean Racine, Jean de La Fontaine, François Fénelon and Jean de La Bruyère.Paddy Bullard, Alexis Tadié: Ancients and Moderns in Europe: Comparative Perspectives, Voltaire Foundation, 2016.

The Moderns (), represented by Perrault, maintained that since the France of King Louis XIV surpassed all other states in history in its political and religious perfection, it followed that the works created by 17th-century authors to the glory of King and Church were necessarily superior to anything produced in the past centuries.Joan DeJean: Ancients Against Moderns: Culture Wars and the Making of a Fin de Siecle, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1997. Therefore, they argued for a new literature adapted to the modern era, complacent towards the Court of France, respectful of 17th-century decorum, zealous for Catholic religion, renouncing the freedom of old classical authors and always seeking to celebrate the French monarchy and the Catholic Church.Larry F. Norman: The Shock of the Ancient: Literature and History in Early Modern France (Chapters 6 "Modernity & Monarchy" and 7 "The Pagan Menace"), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2011. Perrault had on his side the Académie, the devout party, the literary salons and a host of fashionable poets—who, in the present day, are almost completely forgotten.Denis Hollier: A New History of French Literature, Harvard University Press, 1994.

The gradual takeover of the literary community by political powers during the 17th century—including the creation of the Académie by Cardinal Richelieu (with Richelieu's men acting as supreme judges of all things literary), governmental censorship, the banning of controversial books (which sometimes also carried legal penalties against their authors), and the giving of pensions to authors who flattered the government—greatly favored Perrault. He had risen to prominence through the power and patronage of minister Jean-Baptiste Colbert, and his political backing bolstered the Modern party's views on artistic creation.David T. Pottinger, The French Book Trade in the Ancien Regime, 1500 – 1791, Harvard Univ. Press (1958).George Alexander Kennedy, H. B. Nisbet, Claude Rawson, Raman Selden: The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism: Volume 4, The Eighteenth Century, pg,34–35, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.

From 1637 to 1694, the proponents of a literature adapted to modern times raged against the "Ancients". In 1637, Corneille's Le Cid was attacked in the salons and condemned by the Académie, who accused it of anti-patriotism and affronting decorum and morality.Corneille and His Times, François M. Guizot; Harper & Bros., New York, 1852. The "Moderns" mobilized again in a 1663 attack against Molière's L'École des femmes, as well as in 1667 against Racine's Andromaque, and then in 1677 against Racine's Phèdre; all were called irreligious and outrageous to French customs and society.

In 1674, Jean Desmarets de Saint-Sorlin made a public call on his friend Perrault to "defend France" against "that heretical troop who prefers ancient works to our own." In response to this call, Perrault and his brother Claude tried to charge Boileau with the crimes of blasphemy and lèse-majesté on the grounds that he preferred the works of ancient pagan authors who wrote under a regime of liberty (in Classical Athens or the ancient Roman Republic) to the works of modern, Catholic authors who submitted to the absolute monarchy of Louis XIV.Antoine Arnauld, Letter to Dodart, 10 July 1694; in Lettres de Monsieur Antoine Arnauld, docteur de Sorbonne, V. 3 (in French), Nabu, 2011.

One of the key episodes in the quarrel's development was the so-called Quarrel of the Inscriptions (), which was triggered by Colbert's plan for a triumphal arch glorifying Louis XIV's victories to be erected on the ground that would later become the Place de la Nation in Paris. This construction project ended up being abandoned in around 1680, and the unfinished structures were demolished shortly after Louis XIV's death. The question was whether the inscriptions glorifying the King on the projected arch should be in Latin ("ancient") or French ("modern"). Antiquarian François Charpentier argued in favor of French inscriptions, and was countered by Jesuit Jean Lucas of the College de Clermont, who defended the option of Latin in an eloquent address pronounced at the College on , which was published in 1677 under the title ..

The actual episode that took the name of happened a decade later and lasted from 1687 to 1694, starting with the reading in the Académie of Perrault's (The Century of Louis the Great), in which he supported the merits of the authors of the century of Louis XIV and expressed the Moderns' stance in a nutshell:

The poem particularly attacks Homer, along with other classical poets, whom Perrault considered overrated and mediocre. Upon hearing this, Boileau stood up and left in anger, saying he was ashamed that a countryman of his could have spoken like that.Louis Augustus Triebel: Facets of France and French Literature, Australasian Publishing Company, 1952.

Between 1688 and 1692, Perrault wrote the four volumes of (Parallel between Ancients and Moderns) where he attempted to prove his ideas on literature. Boileau countered with satirical epigrams mocking Perrault's errors and, more seriously, his critical reflections on Longinus.Chisholm, Hugh. "Boileau-Despréaux, Nicolas" in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press, 1911.

In 1694, after a mediation by Antoine Arnauld, the two officially reconciled, but the prolonged and heated polemic left Perrault embittered and resentful. He threatened, in the following years, to write new pamphlets against Boileau, to which Boileau replied that he was "done with Perrault" and that whatever Perrault did was "completely indifferent to him."Gordon Pocock: Boileau and the Nature of Neoclassicism, Cambridge University Press, 1980; Literary Criticism Collection.

Racine showed himself one of the Ancients by focusing his choice of subjects on those drawn from the literature of antiquity. He also delimited his tragedies by the classical unities, derived by the classicists from Aristotle's Poetics; the unities of place, time, and action (one scene location, 24 hours, and consistent actions, respectively).

In the opening years of the 18th century, Pierre de Marivaux showed himself a Modern by establishing a new genre of theatre—unknown to the Ancients—the sentimental comedy (). In it, the impending tragedy was resolved by the end, amid reconciliations and floods of tears.

Assessment

In the end, the Quarrel of the Ancients and Moderns was a cover, often a witty one, for opposing views of much deeper significance. One side was attached to the classic ideals of Greece and Rome and rejected a theory of art that turned literature into propaganda for the ruling powers, while the other contested the very idea of intellectual or aesthetic values above the authority of the King and the Church.