School of Languages, Literatures and Cultural Studies A thesis submitted for the degree of PhD in French Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon (1525-1582): A Biography and a Critical Edition Alexandra Corey Supervisor: Dr Sarah Alyn Stacey, FTCD, Chev. de L’Ordre National du Mérite, Membre de L’Académie de Savoie April 2023 I declare that this thesis has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at this or any other university and it is entirely my own work. I agree to deposit this thesis in the University’s open access institutional repository or allow the Library to do so on my behalf, subject to Irish Copyright Legislation and Trinity College Library conditions of use and acknowledgement. I consent to the examiner retaining a copy of the thesis beyond the examining period, should they so wish (EU GDPR May 2018). _____________________ Summary This thesis presents the first detailed biography of the Savoyard poet, diplomat, and historiographer, Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon (1525-1582) and the first critical edition of a selection of his works. Pingon wrote prolifically, but his writings have remained largely in manuscript form. He was a key observer of the major political, religious, and cultural developments of the period, both within the Duchy of Savoy and at a broader European level. This thesis aims to promote a better understanding of the literary and political environments of the court of Savoy in the sixteenth century and Pingon’s place within them. Table of Contents Introduction 16 1. Research to date on Pingon 18 1.1 Studies of Pingon’s life and works 20 1.2 Studies relating to Pingon’s engagement with visual culture 30 2. Critical methodology 33 2.1 A methodological approach to the biography of Pingon 33 2.2 Methodology for the critical edition of Pingon’s selected literary works 34 2.3 Rules of transcription 35 3. Literary analysis 35 3.1 Classical inspirations 35 3.2 Rhetorical devices, themes and topoi within Pingon’s court poetry 38 4. Directions for future research 44 5. Abbreviations 45 PART ONE: HISTORICAL STUDY Chapter One: STUDY OF THE LIFE OF EMMANUEL-PHILIBERT DE PINGON (1525-1582) 1. Genealogy and family 46 1.1 Birth and genealogy 46 1.2 Marriage 49 1.3 Children 51 2. Material assets 54 2.1 Properties 54 2.2 Artefacts and manuscripts 57 3. Literary and political entourage 62 3.1 Jean de Boyssonné (c. 1505-1559) 63 3.2 Antoine Baptendier (? – c. 1572) 65 3.3 Gaspard Lambert (? – c. 1569) 66 3.4 Marc-Claude de Buttet (1529/31-1586) 67 3.5 Louis Milliet (1527-1599) 70 3.6 Nostradamus (1503-1566) 71 3.7 Michel de l’Hospital (1505-1573) 71 4. Education 74 4.1 Chambéry (1529-1536) 75 4.2 Lyon (1536-1537) 75 4.3 Annecy (1537-1538) 76 4.4 Paris (1539-1545) 76 4.5 Padua (1545-1550) 79 5. Diplomatic employment 82 5.1 Employment from 1551 84 5.2 Employment from 1554 onwards 85 5.3 Employment from 1559 onwards 88 6. Pingon as writer 94 6.1 Epigraphs and inscriptions 94 6.2 Poetry 99 6.3 Historical writings 99 7. Death and descendants 104 PART TWO: A CRITICAL EDITION OF A SELECTION OF PINGON’S WORKS Chapter Two: A CRITICAL EDITION OF THE HIC VITA MEA (1567) 1. Establishment of the text 111 1.1 Manuscripts at the Biblioteca Reale di Torino 111 1.2 Manuscripts at the Archives départementales de la Haute-Savoie 112 1.3 Manuscripts at the Bibliothèque municipal de Lyon 113 1.4 The original manuscript 114 1.5 Tables of manuscripts and printed versions of the Hic Vita Mea 118 2. Text of the Hic Vita Mea (1567) 119 3. Analysis of the Hic Vita Mea (1567) 199 Chapter Three: A CRITICAL EDITION OF AN EPITHALAMIUM ON THE MARRIAGE OF MARGUERITE DE FRANCE TO DUKE EMMANUEL PHILIBERT OF SAVOY (1559) (AST [Sez. Corte], Storia della Real Casa in Materie politiche per rapporto all’interno [inventario n. 101], Categoria III – Storie particolari, Emanuele Filiberto, Mazzo 10, fascicolo 12) 1. Establishment of the text (I-IV) 203 2. Text of (I) ‘Margaritae Francae Illustrissimae et Serenissimae Allobrogum et Biturigum Ducis, Regis Henrici il Sororis Unicae Epithalamium’ (fols. [1-3] r-v) 205 2.1 Analysis of the text 211 3. Text of (II) ‘Enrico II Gallarum Regi Cristianissimo et Invictissimo’ (fol. [4] r) 216 3.1 Analysis of the text 216 4. Text of (III) ‘Philippo Hispaniarum Regi Catholico Invictissimo’ (fol. [5] r) 217 4.1 Analysis of the text 218 5. Text of (IV) ‘Illustrissimo Principi Philiberto Emanueli Allobrogum Duci’ (fol.[6] r) 219 5.1 Analysis of the text 220 Chapter FOUR: A CRITICAL EDITION OF CAROLI EM[MANUELIS] PEDEMONTIUM PRINCIPIS CUNABULA (1562) (AST [Sez. Corte], Storia della Real Casa in materie politiche per rapporto all’interno [Inventario n.101], Categoria III – Storie particolari, Carlo Emanuele I, Mazzo 11, articolo 1) 1. Establishment of the text (I-XII) 221 2. Text of Ode I: ‘Adonici Dimetri Epici’ (fols. [2r-16v]) 227 2.1 Analysis of the text 240 3. Text of Ode II: ‘Aristophanii Dimetri’ (fols. [17v-20r]) 243 3.1 Analysis of the text 246 4. Text of Ode III: ‘Archilochi Dimetri’ (fols. [20r-21v]) 248 4.1 Analysis of the text 249 5. Text of Ode IV: ‘Pharecratii Trimetri’ (fols. [21r-23v]) 250 5.1 Analysis of the text 253 6. Text of Ode V: ‘Trochaici Dimetri’ (fols. [23r-25v]) 254 6.1 Analysis of the text 256 7. Text of Ode VI: ‘Gliconici’ (fols. [25r-30r]) 257 7.1 Analysis of the text 260 8. Text of ‘Ode VII: Iambici Dimetri’ (fols. [30r-30v]) 262 8.1 Analysis of the text 264 9. Text of Ode VIII: ‘Lambici’ (fols. [31r-34r]) 266 9.1 Analysis of the text 269 10. Text of Ode IX: ‘Alcmanici Dactylici’ (fols. [34r-35r) 271 10.1 Analysis of the text 273 11. Text of Ode X: ‘Alcmanii Tetrametri’ (fols. [35r-36r]) 275 11.1 Analysis of the text 276 12. Text of Ode XI: ‘Alcmanii’ (fols. [36r-v]) 277 12.1 Analysis of the text 279 13. Text of Ode XII: ‘Phaelaecii’ (fols. [37r-38r]) 281 13.1 Analysis of the text 283 Chapter FIVE: A CRITICAL EDITION OF MS. X9, ‘ELEGY ON THE DEATH OF MARGUERITE DE FRANCE’ (1574) 1. Establishment of the text 286 2. Text of Ms. X9, ‘Elegy on the Death of Marguerite de France’ (fols. 1-2[r]) 288 2.1 Analysis of the text 292 Glossary 298 Bibliography 298 1. Bibliography of works by Pingon 299 1.1 Autobiography (Hic Vita Mea) 299 1.2 Pingon’s historiographical works (printed) 300 1.3 Pingon’s historiographical works (manuscript) 301 1.4 Speeches by Pingon 302 1.5 Poetical works by Pingon 302 1.6 Lost works by Pingon 303 2. Archival sources relating to Pingon’s life and historical context 305 2.1 Books and manuscripts owned by Pingon 305 2.2 Poetry and prose dedicated to Pingon 306 2.3 Genealogies of the Pingon family 307 2.4 Sources concerning the Pingon family 307 2.5 Records of the Chamber of Accounts consulted in Savoy 309 2.6 Civil judgments (1559-1728) 309 2.7 Other 310 3. Secondary Sources 310 3.1 Classical sources 310 3.2 Early modern sources 312 3.3 Other sources 314 Index nominum 335 Appendices 346 1. Appendix 1 – Selected images of Pingon’s historiographical works 346 1.1 ‘Arch of Titus’ in Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?), fols. 155[v]-156[r] 346 1.2 ‘Astrologia’ in Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?), fols. 234[v]-235[r] 346 1.3 ‘Self Portrait’ in Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?), fol. 235[v] 347 1.4 ‘Dürer’s Horses’ in Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?), fol. 226[v], 227[v] 347 1.5 ‘The Sarcophagus of St Constance’ in Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?), fol. 54[r] 348 1.6 ‘Image from Colonna’s Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (1499)’ in Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?), fol. 27[v] 348 1.7 ‘Portrait of Duke Emmanuel Philibert’ in Serenissimorum Sabaudiae Principum Ducumque Effigies Heroica Epigrammata Cognationes et anni Philiberto Pingonio (1567), BNT, H.IV.22, fols. 33[v]-34[r] 349 1.8 ‘Portrait of Duke Charles Emmanuel I’ in Serenissimorum Sabaudiae Principum Ducumque Effigies Heroica Epigrammata Cognationes et anni Philiberto Pingonio (1567), BNT, H.IV.22, fols. 34[v]-35[r] 350 2. Appendix 2 – Selected images of codices edited in chapters 3-5 351 2.1 Margaritae Francae, Allobrogum Biturigumque Ducis Epithalamium. AST (Sez. Corte), Storia della Real Casa in Materie politiche per rapporto all’interno [inventerio n. 101], Categoria III – Storie particolari, Emanuele Filiberto, Mazzo 10, fascicolo 12 351 2.2 Caroli Emmanuelis Pedemontium principis cunabula (1562). AST (Sez. Corte), Storia della Real Casa in Materie politiche per rapporto all’interno [inv. 101], Categoria III – Storie particolari, Carlo Emanuele I, Mazzo 11, fasc. 1. 352 2.3 BNT, Ms. X9, ‘Elegy on the Death of Marguerite de France’ (fol. [2r]) 353 3. Appendix 3 – Medallion of Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon (MRT, D.C. 5909) 355 3.1 Front of medallion with inscription ‘Philib[ertus] Pingonius Cusacien[sis] Baronis’ 357 3.2 Reverse of medallion with inscription ‘Sapienter Aude’ 357 4. Appendix 4 – Images of Pingon’s unedited poems 356 4.1 ‘AD EVNDEM OCTAVIANUM D. OSASCI | ROCHAE ARAZII COMITEM, ET SENATVS | Cismontani secundum Praesidem, Philibertus à Pingon Cusiacensium Baro[nis] Sabaudiae Referandarius’ in Decisiones Sacri Senatus Pedemontani (1569). AST (Biblioteca Antica), N.V.30 356 4.2 ‘ODE monoclos’ in Il battesimo del serenissimo principe di Piemonte (1567). BRT, Misc. 296/2 (Inventario: SMF-9776), fols. 16-17[r]) 359 4.3 ‘Versus Leonini in Crucis honorem ab antique quodam | editi, & a Philiberto Pingonio inventi’ in Opera della Croce Distinta in V. Libri by Cibriano Uberti (Rome: Francesco Zanetti, 1586). BRT, C.23(53) (Inventario: SM-18632), fol. 17[r] 360 4.4 ‘Ad Emman[uelem] Philib[ertum] Sab[audiae] Ducem Sindon’ in Sindon Evangelica (1581), pp. 21-26 362 4.5 ‘Miraculum de N. Fusina puella Guillielmi filia Camberiana’ in Sindon Evangelica (1581), pp. 27-28 363 4.6 ‘SABAUDORUM PRINCIPUM ELOGIA. Eodem Ph[ilibertus] Pingonio auctore’ in Inclytorum Saxoniae (1581), pp. 116-122 363 5. Appendix 5 – Critical review of Pingon’s unedited works 366 5.1 Pingon’s historiographical works 366 i. Antiquitatum Romanarum aliarumque Congeries (1545-156?) 366 ii. De regno gestis ac situ Allobrogum (1554) 367 iii. Serenissimorum Sabaudiae Principum Ducumque Effigies Heroica Epigrammata Cagnationes et anni Philiberto Pingonio (1576) 368 iv. Augusta Taurinorum (1577) 370 v. Chronique de Savoie (date unknown) 371 vi. Historia Sabaudiae (1578-1581) 372 vii. Le Blazon des Armoyries (date unknown) 373 viii. Inclytorum Saxoniae Sabaudiaeque principum arbor gentilata (1581) 374 ix. Pro Arbore Serenissimorum Sabaudiae Principum Philiberti Pingoni Baronis Responsio (1581) 375 x. Serenissimorum Sabaudiae Principum Ducumque Statuae Rerumque gestarum imagines, cum inscriptionibus et epigrammatibus (1572) 375 xi. Sindon Evangelica (1581) 377 xii. Livre de raison (1500-1643) 379 xiii. Regalis Sabaudiae Domus Preeminentiae Jura in Magnum Hetruriae Ducem A Philiberto Pingonio Collecta (1582) 379 5.2 Pingon’s poetical works 381 i. ‘ODE monoclos’ in Il battesimo del serenissimo principe di Piemonte (1567) 381 ii. ‘AD EVNDEM OCTAVIANVM D. OSASCI | ROCHAE ARAZII COMITEM, ET SENATVS | Cismontani secundum Praesidem, Philibertus à Pingon Cusiacensium Baro[nis] Sabaudiae Referandarius’ in Decisiones Sacri Senatus Pedemontani (Turin: Apud Jo. Antonium Stratam et Bartholomaeum Gallum, 1569) 381 iii. ‘Versus Leonini in Crucis honorem ab antique quodam | editi, & a Philiberto Pingonio inventi’ in Opera della Croce Distinta in V. Libri by Cibriano Uberti (Rome: Francesco Zanetti, 1586) 382 iv. ‘Ad Emman[uelem] Philib[ertum] Sab[audiae] Ducem Sindon’ in Sindon Evangelica (1581) 382 v. ‘Miraculum de N. Fusina puella Gullielmi filia Camberiana’ in Sindon Evangelica (1581) 383 vi. ‘Sabaudorum Principum Elogia’ in Inclytorum Saxoniae (1581) 383 6. Appendix 6 – Genealogies of the House of Pingon 386 6.1. BM. ‘Généalogie de la Maison de Pingon (1347-1524)’, (H 97 / 16o / 16-428), fol. 327[r] 386 6.2 BnF, Moreau 800, ‘Généalogie de la Maison de Pingon dressé par Philibert de Pingon Baron de Cusy, Referendaire et Historiographe de Savoye’ 388 6.3 BnF, 8-LM3-4778, Arbre Généalogique in the Arrêt de la royale chambre des comptes concernant les armoires de la maison de Pingon, ed. Anastasio Curlandi (Turin: François Antoine Mairesse, 1779), fol. 21[r] 389 6.4 ADS, 10 F 241 ‘Famille de Pingon: Arbre généalogique’ (1580) 390 6.5 ADHS, 7 J 1179 ‘Arbre généalogique montrant la descendance de Guy de Ferlay, seigneur de Sathonay et de Biollières’ (1552). Signed ‘Ph. D. P. I. C.’ 391 6.6 Amedée de Foras, Armorial et nobiliaire de l’ancien duché de Savoie, vol. IV, part 2, pp. 404-407 392 Acknowledgements To my supervisor, Dr Sarah Alyn Stacey, FTCD, I extend my foremost gratitude. The impetus of this project arose from my readings of her publications on Marc-Claude de Buttet, specifically her critical editions of Buttet’s odes and the section on Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon in her monograph Marc-Claude de Buttet (1529/31-1586): L’honneur de la Savoie (2006). The bibliography and list of archival sources in relation to Pingon provided within this monograph both inspired and facilitated my own research. Her publications on Savoy have been foundational not only to my project, but to the field of sixteenth-century French literature at large, and I am grateful to have developed my own editorial methodology in this context. Her guidance has been transformative, notably by her powerful examples in precision, integrity and generosity which have bestowed upon me the ability to begin cultivating a space for myself – in scholarship, and in life – with a clarity I had not imagined possible. This thesis, and whatever may come from it, stems from that space. I am grateful to the Trinity Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Studies for the opportunity to lead various conferences and workshops over the years, for example, the conference Decoding the Past: Critical Editions and their Editors in 2019, the TCMRS Medieval and Early Modern Postgraduate Research Seminar in 2019-2020, and the conference Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon (1525-1582) et son temps in 2022. My gratitude extends to the participants of the conference on Pingon: Dr Toby Osborne, Dr Graeme Murdock, Professor John O’Brien, Dr Grégoire Oguey, Mr Federico de Giuli, Mrs Marina Locandieri, Mr Luca Emilo Brancati, Mr Pierre de Pingon, Dr Marianne Cailloux, Mr Nicolas Broisin, and Professor Jean Balsamo (in absentia). This thesis would not have been possible without the expertise of the archivists and librarians in Turin, Chambéry, Annecy, Lyon, and Paris. I wish to thank, in particular, Julien Coppier, Hélène Maurin, Emmanuelle Combet, Fabio Uliana, Luisa Gentile, Isabella Costa, Maria-Luisa Boglione, Antonietta de Felice, and Pier Franco Chillin. I would also like to thank Georgette Chevallier and the Académie Florimontaine. For their talents, knowledge, and gracious assistance during my many visits over the years, I am indebted. I wish to thank the TCD French Department for their great support, the TCD Library staff for their valuable assistance, and the Trinity Long Room Hub for providing me with a place at which to work for so many years and a remarkable community to work alongside. Generous funding by the TCD Association and Trust and the Archives départementales de la Haute-Savoie facilitated travel to the archives and libraries in Savoy, for which I am most grateful. I extend particular appreciation to the TCD School of Languages, Literatures and Cultural Studies for the 1252 Studentship that afforded me the possibility of pursuing the PhD full-time. My gratitude extends to the Society for Early Modern French Studies for enriching conferences and workshops, particularly to Professor John O’Brien, Professor Katherine Ibbett, and the other members of the Executive Committee for their support. I wish to thank Dr Cristina Maritano, Dr Giovanna Saroni, Professor Rosanna Gorris Camos, Professor Alessandro Barbero, Dr Luisa Gentile, and Dr Laurent Perillat for communicating their expertise. I am grateful to Dr Charlie Kerrigan for his valuable guidance in deciphering Pingon’s Neo-Latin, and to Carolyn Foerster for her assistance in this regard. Professor Keith Busby provided valued support and enriching discussions about editorial practice for which I am most appreciative. My gratitude must also be expressed to Professor Jean-Paul Pittion for greatly enhancing my understanding of early modern book production. I am grateful to Dr Gregory Hulsman for his considerable support and friendship, and to each of my friends at Trinity and at the Long Room Hub. I wish to extend my gratitude also to my parents, who are at the heart of all that I do, and to my dear friend Haleigh for welcoming Pingon into her art such that his designs have been ‘ressuscités en nouvelle lumière’. Finally, I wish to thank Dr Virginia King and Professor Nigel Nicholson for bringing Renaissance French and classical literature alive from the beginning. Introduction Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon (1525-1582) was a diplomat, historiographer, and court poet who, through his writings, acted as a key observer of the political, religious, and cultural developments of the sixteenth century both within the Duchy of Savoy and at a broader European level. His life and works are central to the history of the Piedmont region in Savoy such that Baron Domenico Carutti deemed him ‘padre delle antichità piemontesi’.[footnoteRef:1] Poet and historian Léon Ménabréa also praises Pingon in the context of French history: ‘La France ne songeait guère ni aux Pithou ni aux Duchêne, les créateurs de son histoire, que déjà nous avions notre Philibert de Pingon’.[footnoteRef:2] His life embraces several significant historical episodes, a number of which are evoked in his court poems and in his autobiography, the Hic Vita Mea (1567), including the French occupation of Savoy from 1536 to 1559, the Battle of St Quentin in 1557, and the Treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis in 1559. Despite his relevance to this period and region, scholarly studies on the life of Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon are lacking, but clearly he deserves greater focus. As Alessandro Barbero observes: ‘La bibliografia sul Pingone sia tuttora di estrema povertà, ben poco essendo stato aggiunto ai dati contenuti nella sua autobiografia’.[footnoteRef:3] This thesis aims, in part, to address this lacuna: it will provide the first critical study of his life, and the first critical edition of some of his major works, specifically, his autobiography and a selection of what are arguably amongst his most significant court poems that have previously not been the subject of much scholarly attention.[footnoteRef:4] To this end, in Part One, the first chapter comprises a biographical study of his life; while in Part Two, chapters two through to five present a critical edition of his autobiography and a selection of his poems. [1: See Domenico Carutti, Il conte Umberto I e il re Ardoino (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1888), p. 50. ] [2: Léon Ménabréa, De la marche des études historiques en Savoie et en Piémont depuis le XIVe siècle jusqu’à nos jours et des développements dont ces études sont encore susceptibles (Chambéry: Puthod, 1839), p. 12.] [3: Alessandro Barbero, ‘Filiberto Pingone storico e uomo di potere’, in Imagines ducum sabaudiae: ritratti, battaglie, imprese dei principi di Savoia nel manoscritto di Filiberto Pingone, 1572 (Turin: Editrice Artistica Piemontese, 2009), p. 9.] [4: On the rationale regarding the selection of these poems, see below, p. 18.] Whilst referring to Pingon’s autobiography, the biographical study (chapter one) draws upon archival sources in the archives and libraries of Turin, Annecy and Chambéry.[footnoteRef:5] These sources include, for example, genealogies, treasury accounts, notary records, private letters, antique codices, livres de raison, contracts, and acts of sale.[footnoteRef:6] [5: For a comprehensive list of the archives consulted, see below, Abbreviations, p. 45.] [6: For a full list of these sources see below, Bibliography, pp. 303-307. For Pingon’s lost works, see below, Bibliography, pp. 301-303.] Selection of edited texts The critical editions presented in the subsequent four chapters (two through to five) comprise texts which provide insight into the socio-political context in which Pingon operated, and how this context is translated into his writing such that it becomes a platform for reflecting a literary image of the court. They do not claim to be exhaustive: a few remaining works by Pingon were excluded as their inclusion was beyond the scope of this thesis.[footnoteRef:7] To date, there is no critical edition of Pingon’s autobiography that establishes the text and collates its variants.[footnoteRef:8] There is also no critical edition of my selected court poems by Pingon and no comprehensive bibliography of his works and of the archival sources relevant to his life. This thesis aims to fill that lacuna. [7: For a critical overview of these works see below, Appendix 5, pp. 363-382.] [8: On the only other known edition of the Hic Vita Mea, edited by Anastasio Curlandi in 1779, see below, p. 109.] The texts in this edition provide insight not only into Pingon, but also into life at the court of Savoy in the sixteenth century in several ways. Firstly, Pingon’s entourage as evoked in the Hic Vita Mea provides an insight into the dynamics between courtly figures and into the constellation of their relationships. Secondly, his life touches upon events that shaped both the emerging dynasty of Savoy and early modern Europe at large, notably the plague, political tensions between France and Spain (Savoy was allied with the latter), religious tensions between Geneva and Savoy, the wars of religion, and civil unrest. The court poems focus also on significant historical events including the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Savoy in 1559;[footnoteRef:9] the birth of their son and heir to the dynasty, Charles Emmanuel I, in 1562;[footnoteRef:10] and the death of Duchess Marguerite de France in 1574.[footnoteRef:11] Each of the court poems provided by the critical editions of this thesis were hitherto unedited. By producing the first edited versions of these rare texts and by setting them within their historical context and elucidating their sources, this thesis aims to develop our understanding of Pingon and of sixteenth-century Savoy, its court culture and socio-political context, and the place of Neo-Latin poetry in the literary environment of the sixteenth century. [9: See below, ch. 3: Margaritae Francae, Allobrogum Biturigumque Ducis Epithalamium (c. 1559).] [10: See below ch. 4: Caroli Emmanuelis Pedemontium principis cunabula (1562).] [11: See below, ch. 5: BNT, Ms. X9, ‘Elegy on the Death of Marguerite de France’ (c. 1574).] There is some ambiguity regarding the authorship of two of the codices of poetry included in this edition: Margaritae Francae, Allobrogum Biturigumque Ducis Epithalamium (c. 1559) of chapter three, and Caroli Emmanuelis Pedemotium principis cunabula (1563) of chapter 4. Neither of these manuscripts bears the signature of Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon, and his name is not indicated within the original title. Both texts are, however, traditionally attributed to Pingon by the archivists of the AST (Sez. Corte), even though they are written in a style of calligraphy that aims to resemble print, but which hinders authorial attribution by an analysis of handwriting. For the Epithalamium, the title ‘Margaritae Francae Illustrissimae et Serenissimae Allobrogum et Biturigum Ducis, Regis Henrici il Sororis Unicae Epithalamium. Auctor creditur Philibertus Pingoni[es]’ is written in pencil on the paper wrapper in an archivist’s hand. For the Cunabula, ‘Caroli Pedemontium Principis Cunabula, manu scrip’ is written on the vellum cover in ink, and ‘filiberto pingone’ is written above in pencil in an anonymous hand. In response to my enquiry regarding the rationale, on 1 January 2022 I received a formal letter from the AST (Sez. Corte) indicating that the Epithalamium Margaritae is attributed to Pingon because of a note written in an archivist’s hand that reads ‘Auctor creditur Philibertus Pingoni’, and that the author of the Caroli Cunabula is credited as ‘Philiberto Pingonio auctore’ also by an archivist’s note, each of which is indicated on the paper wrapping that covers the respective manuscript. The letter also states that, for both texts, ‘la paternità dell’opera è da ritenersi attribuita a posteriori’. In the light of such confident attribution by the archive, for the purposes of this thesis, I have taken the decision to include both manuscripts. 1. Research to date on Pingon The extant research on Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon can be categorised as follows: 1) studies of his life and works, 2) studies of his engagement with visual culture,[footnoteRef:12] and 3) critical editions. [12: Specifically of the portraits and images produced in the Inclytorum Saxoniae Sabaudiaeque principum arbor gentilata (1581) and the Serenissimorum Sabaudiae Principum Ducumque Statuae Rerumque gestarum imagines, cum inscriptionibus et epigrammatibus (1572), and of his Greek and Latin inscriptions published in the Augusta Taurinorum (1577) and the Antiquitatum Romanarum aliarumque congeries (1545-156?). These works will henceforth be referenced in the following short form: Inclytorum Saxoniae (1581); Serenissimorum Sabaudiae (1572); Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?). For a comprehensive list that analyses each of Pingon’s located works, see below, Appendix 5, pp. 363-382.] 1.1 Studies of Pingon’s life and works The earliest known reference to Pingon, within a secondary source, is in Samuel Guichenon’s Histoire de Bresse et Bugey (1650) which provides important information regarding Pingon’s family and life. In volume III, for example, he elaborates on the marriage between Pingon’s mother, Françoise de Chabeu, to his father, Louis II de Pingon.[footnoteRef:13] He also discusses the marriage between Philiberte de Bruel and Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon and provides an overview of their life and offspring (III, p. 57).[footnoteRef:14] Guichenon also references Pingon’s historiography in an overview of the history of Savoy, the Histoire généalogique de la Royale Maison de Savoie (1660) and incorporates various transcriptions of Roman epigraphs and inscriptions by Pingon, drawing upon Pingon’s Antiquitatum Romanarum in order to facilitate a study of the history of Savoy.[footnoteRef:15] [13: See Samuel Guichenon, Histoire de Bresse et Bugey: Contenant les familles nobles de Bresse et Bugey, vol. III (Lyon: J.A. Huguetan et M.A. Ravaud, 1650), p. 93.] [14: On this marriage see below, ch. 1, p. 48.] [15: See, for example, Guichenon, Histoire généalogique, I, (1660), p. 62.] Andrea Rossotti mentions Pingon in the 1667 Syllabus Scriptorum Pedemontii, a list of authors from the Piedmont region.[footnoteRef:16] In addition to the Inclytorum Saxoniae (1581), Augusta Taurinorum (1577) the Sindon Evangelica (1581), and the apology to Alphonse Delbene (1581), Rossotti lists the following two historiographical works by Pingon, which have since been lost: the Tractatus in 12 Tabulas and the Historia Sabaudiae in 30 partita libros.[footnoteRef:17] Rossotti concludes with a transcription of Pingon’s epitaph.[footnoteRef:18] Although his list of Pingon’s historiographical works is incomplete, Rossotti’s study is useful in that it points up lost works that are not mentioned in the Hic Vita Mea and situates Pingon among the authors considered significant to the history of Piedmont as established in the seventeenth century.[footnoteRef:19] [16: See Andrea Rossotti, Syllabus Scriptorum Pedemontii, seu, de scriptoribus Pedemontanis in quo brevis liborum, patriae, generis & nonnumquam (Turin: F.M. Gislandi, 1667), pp. 493-495.] [17: Rossotti, Syllabus Scriptorum Pedemontii, p. 494. The Tractatus in 12 Tabulas is referenced in the ‘Ad Lactorem section of the Sindon Evangelica, p. p. XVI. This work is also listed as the Antiquitates Allobrogum, seu Historia generalis Sabaudiae in XXX libres by Jules Phillipe in Les Gloires de la Savoie (Paris: J.B. Clarey, 1863), p. 195. Phillipe indicates that it is held in manuscript form ‘dans les archives de Turin’ but I have not been able to locate it and it does not appear in the digital catalogues of the BRT or AST. See also Goffredo Casalis, Dizionario geografico storico-statistico commerciale degli stati di S.M. il re di Sardegna, V, (Turin: 1856), p. 157. Casalis describes this work as an ‘operetta imperfetta’.] [18: See Rossotti, Syllabus Scriptorum Pedemontii, p. 495.] [19: For a full list of Pingon’s lost works, see below, Bibliography, pp. 297-301.] In 1770, Giuseppe Vernazza built upon Rossotti’s Latin bibliography (indeed citing the latter) with a bibliography of 29 of Pingon’s works in his Catalogus operum D. Philiberti Pingonii.[footnoteRef:20] Vernazza includes in his list various poems that are integrated into Pingon’s historiographical works, for instance, ‘Ad Emman[uelem] Philib[ertum] Sab[audiae] Ducem Sindon’ of the Sindon Evangelica (pp. 24-30).[footnoteRef:21] Vernazza lists each of the lost works mentioned in Pingon’s Hic Vita Mea.[footnoteRef:22] Vernazza also references notes that Pingon had written on the history of the Marches and the Saluces (locations in Savoy), and Vernazza indicates that he had seen these works: ‘Notulas & additamenta scripsit D. Pingonius in Saluciensium Marchionum historiam à Jophredo ab Ecclesia concinnatam: quae autographa vidi’.[footnoteRef:23] Unfortunately, Vernazza gives no indication of where they are held, and I have not been able to locate them.[footnoteRef:24] [20: See BRT, Misc. 72/9. Giuseppe Vernazza, Catalogus operum D. Philiberti Pingonii cusiacensium baronis, Primesellæ domini, Præsidis integerrimi (Turin: 1770). On Pingon’s lost works, see below, Bibliography, pp. 301-303.] [21: On this poem see below, Appendix 5, p. 380.] [22: See Pingon, Sindon Evangelica, p. XVI.] [23: See Vernazza, Catalogus operum D. Philiberti Pingonii, p. 8.] [24: Idem, p. 9.] Giovanni Perachino di Cigliano provides an overview of Pingon’s life that is based in prior studies (for example, Guichenon).[footnoteRef:25] In his 1792 study Memorie della vita, e degli scritti di Emanuele Filiberto di Pingon, Barone di Cusì, Cigliano discusses Pingon’s wealth of historiographical works, the noble status of his relations, and his diplomatic work. Although Cigliano’s study points up useful primary sources (for example, the memoires of Pingon’s father, Louis II de Pingon), it rarely cites archival details outside of what is clear from Pingon’s texts, which makes it difficult to confirm some of his hypotheses.[footnoteRef:26] [25: See Giovanni Perachino di Cigliano, Memorie della vita, e degli scritti di Emanuele Filiberto di Pingon, Barone di Cusì (Turin: Stamperia Reale, 1792). See BRT, Misc. 35/7 for the manuscript copy of this source.] [26: For example, on p.1, note 1, Cigliano provides the following information regarding Louis II de Pingon, the father of Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon: ‘Fu Mastro Uditore della Camera de’ Conti di Savoja, ed Ambasciatore apresso le Repubbliche collegate degli Svizzeri, compose memorie delle cose succedute a’ suoi tempi spesso citate nell’Augusta Taurinorum’. He gives no indication of where these memoires are held, and I have not been able to locate them. A manuscript copy of Cigliano’s text is held at the BRT (Misc. 35/7).] In 1800, Amédée de Foras imparts a valuable genealogical study of the Pingon family in his Armorial et nobiliaire de l’ancien duché de Savoie, volume IV.2. This remains problematic, however, in that many of the sources that he cites (aside from the Hic Vita Mea) have proved impossible to locate. The sources cited by Foras that can be located also do not always provide the correct information. For instance, Foras cites the 1737 Preuves de Malte at the Archives du Rhone regarding the summary of a deed of 1566 alluded to in the Hic Vita Mea written by the commissaires de L’ordre de Malte.[footnoteRef:27] The Preuves de Malte appears to be held currently at the Archives du Rhône under Cote 48H96/01, dated 1730-1738, and the notes from 1737 are found on folios 237[r] – 245[v]. After a thorough examination of the folios in question, I was not able to locate any reference to this deed or to its summary. The deed itself is conserved, however, at the Archives départementales de la Haute-Savoie in Annecy.[footnoteRef:28] Foras discusses the difficulty of accessing relevant documentation in his study of the Pingon heritage: [27: This deed invites Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon and his brother, Louis, to share part of the inheritance of Madeleine and Françoise de Pingon. See ADHS, 7 J 1184, art. 2. On the deed see below, ch. 2, note 1073. See Foras, Armorial, IV, p. 400: ‘[Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon] dit encore ([Hic Vita Mea], p. 52) que, le 21 juin 1566, Clementia Ricia, veuve dudit Claude Pingonii d’Aix, lui envoya un acte par lequel Madeleine et Françoise, ses filles, l’appelaient ainsi que son frère, à une part de leur heritage paternal et fraternal, qui était en litige devant le sénat (Senatu) de Grenoble. Enfin aux Preuves de Malte de 1737 (Arch. Du Rhône, H. 196) les commissaires déclarent avoir vu l’acte très bizarre du 21 juin 1566, dont le résumé suivant est à ces Preuves’. ] [28: ADHS, 7 J 1184, art. 2. See below, ch. 2, note 1073.] L’absence de documents, peut-être détruits intentionnellement,[footnoteRef:29] pour les premiers degrés, a rendu notre tâche très difficile. Déjà aux Preuves de Malte de 1737, il est dit que les Archives du château de Prangin ont brûlé il y a environ vingt-sept ans, et que les titres de la branche aînée (descendant de l’historien Emmanuel-Philibert) sont sous scellés au château de Cusy, à cause de la succession en litige du dernier Pingon, baron de Cusy.[footnoteRef:30] [29: Foras provides the following footnote: ‘Nous avons signalé un exemple de ce fait aux Genève-Lullin. “Dans leurs archives, dans les inventaires de ces archives, tous les titres pouvant établir leur illégitimité ont été éliminés”, avons-nous dit’. See Amédée de Foras, Armorial et nobiliaire de l’ancien duché de Savoie, IV, (Grenoble: Édouard Allier, 1800), p. 411, note 3.] [30: See Foras, Armorial, IV, p. 411.] Information regarding Pingon’s land ownership or residences is also difficult to verify. Nonetheless, Elisa Gribaudi Rossi’s Ville e Vigne (1981) asserts that Pingon resided at the Vineyard of Valsalice in Strada Nobile: ‘Nella seconda metà del ‘500 si sa per certo che qui avevano villeggiatura il referendario Filiberto Pingone’.[footnoteRef:31] No sources are given, however, to substantiate this claim. [31: See Elisa Gribaudi Rossi, Ville e vigne della collina torinese: Dal Valsalice a Moncalieri, vol. II (Milan: Piero Gribaudi, 1981), p. 425. Pingon mentions that in 1565 he purchased a vineyard home in the hillsides near Turin. See below, ch. 2, note 1054. See Pingon, Hic Vita Mea, p. 50.] Despite the lack of archival sources confirming property ownership, it is a popular belief in Turin that Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon owned a home on via Basilica near the Palatine Gate, and a building there is currently marked by a commemorative plaque attributing the house to Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon.[footnoteRef:32] The early modern land registry documents at the Archivio di Stato di Torino are categorised only under the name of the notary, which also renders more difficult the search for archival evidence to substantiate this claim when the notary is not identified.[footnoteRef:33] The study of Pingon’s property merits further research, notably through a thorough examination of records of taxes, deeds of purchase, and land registers, in order to arrive at any reliable conclusion regarding Pingon’s ownership of (or residence at) any given location. [32: On this cultural belief see below, ch. 1, p. 56. The commemorative plaque is on Via Basilica in Turin, consulted on 16 February 2020. For the inscription see below, ch. 1, p. 51.] [33: The Savoyard land registry at the Archivio di Stato di Torino is also confined to the years 1702-1793. See the digital catalogue of AST (Sez. Riunite), ‘Catasti’, Catasto Sabaudo. See also the digital catalogue regarding the notary documents at AST (Sez. Riunite), ‘Notai’. This webpage presents a hypothesis regarding the rationale for the sparsity of notary documentation of the sixteenth century: ‘Gran parte della documentazione dei notai degli attuali distretti notarili di Torino, Ivrea e Pinerolo è relativa ai secoli XVII-XIX, mentre per quanto concerne i secoli precedenti il fondo risulta più carente. Si devono probabilmente imputare queste mancanze all’assenza nella legislazione sabauda di un obbligo di versamento ad un ufficio pubblico degli atti rogati da parte dei notai una volta cessata la loro attività’. Moreover, it states that Amadeo VIII indicated in 1430 that the deeds of a deceased notary had to pass to the notary’s heirs. https://archiviodistatotorino.beniculturali.it/fondi/?id=270088] In the nineteenth century, Jean-Louis Grillet provides a brief overview of Pingon’s life in the Dictionnaire historique (1807) that draws largely upon the Hic Vita Mea.[footnoteRef:34] He discusses Pingon’s studies, his marriage, his friendship with Louis Milliet,[footnoteRef:35] and diplomatic work in Chambéry. Grillet concludes with a brief (and incomplete) bibliography of Pingon’s historiographical works. Grillet’s study is useful in that it identifies the following works that have since been lost: 1) a narrative that recounts the distribution of sums required for the reconstruction of the banks of the Leysse river in 1553,[footnoteRef:36] and 2) a poem dedicated to Philiberte de Bruel inscribed on the wall of their vineyard home in the Valley of Salice.[footnoteRef:37] [34: See Jean-Louis Grillet, Dictionnaire historique, littéraire et statistique des départements du Mont-Blanc et du Léman: Contenant l’histoire ancienne et moderne de la Savoie, t. II (Chambéry: J.F. Puthod, 1807), pp. 75-80.] [35: On Milliet see below, ch. 1, p. 70.] [36: On this work see below, Bibliography: Lost works, pp. 301-303. On the flood see below, ch. 1, p. 84.] [37: On this poem see below, Bibliography: Lost works, pp. 301-303. For a discussion of this work, see below, ch. 1, p. 51.] In 1835, Luigi Cibrario conducted a study on Pingon, ‘Notizie di Filiberto di Pingone’ in Opuscoli storici e letterarii editi ed inedita. [footnoteRef:38] Cibrario discusses Pingon’s life as evoked in the Hic Vita Mea, with particular focus on his work for both the Duke of Nemours and the Duke of Savoy, as well as his historiography. Cibrario occasionally refers to archival sources, for instance, a letter signed by Pingon of 25 July 1576 addressed to the Bishop of Vercelli in which Pingon praises the qualities of the House of Savoy and states his mission to preserve its eminence.[footnoteRef:39] Cibrario fails, however, to provide bibliographical details regarding the archival catalogues, so the location of this letter remains elusive.[footnoteRef:40] [38: See Luigi Cibrario, Opuscoli storici e letterarii editi ed inediti (Milan, Tipografo-Libr. nei Tre Re, 1835).] [39: Idem, p. 117.] [40: Cibrario provides only the following information: ‘Lettera autografa comunicata al Vernazza da Gian Ant. Ranza, vercellese, con data di Turino, 25 luglio 1576’, and reproduces the letter from pp. 124-126 under the subheading ‘Lettera di Filiberto Pingone al Vescovo di Vercelli’ (in Opuscoli storici, p. 117, note 2). It seems from this note that the letter was given to librarian Giuseppe Vernazza (1745-1822) by presbyter Giovanni Antonio Ranza (1741-1801). Cibrario also points up Pingon’s statement in the Hic Vita Mea that he was paid 700 ecus per year for his work as référendaire et conseiller d’état, and states that this payment is corroborated by ‘le Cariche del Piemonte, f. 16 del t. 2’; however, Cibrario gives no indication of where the Cariche del Piemonte are conserved, and I have been unable to locate this information in any of the three volumes of the Cariche del Piemonte e Paesi uniti […] 1789 conserved at the BAST in Turin. See Cibrario, Opuscoli storici, p. 115, note 2.] Tommaso Vallauri’s 1846 Storia delle università degli studi (II) provides a useful overview of Pingon’s role as reformer of the University in Turin and highlights the significance of Pingon’s historiographical works on this city.[footnoteRef:41] Vallauri places Pingon’s administrative role in context, defining how the duties of reformer involved oversight of both the internal and external disciplines of the university.[footnoteRef:42] [41: Tommaso Vallauri, Storia delle università degli studi, II, (Turin: Stamperia reale, 1846), p. 36. On Pingon’s role as reformer see below, ch. 1, p. 88.] [42: Idem, pp. 36-37. ] Gaudenzio Claretta published a study in 1878 on the principal historians in Piedmont, a work that touches upon the life of Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon.[footnoteRef:43] In the introduction to his study, Claretta relies largely on the information printed in the Hic Vita Mea for his narrative of Pingon’s life as set forth in this autobiography. Claretta also analyses certain lesser-known works by Pingon conserved in the archives in Turin, for example, the Blazon des Armoyres.[footnoteRef:44] In addition to the Hic Vita Mea, Claretta cites studies by Carlo Promis[footnoteRef:45] and Samuel Guichenon,[footnoteRef:46] as well as the transcription of the Regalis Sabaudiae domus praeminentia published previously by Dufour in 1873.[footnoteRef:47] [43: See Gaudenzio Claretta, ‘Sui principali storici Piemontesi e particolarmente sugli storiografi della R. Casa di Savoia, memorie storiche, letterarie e biografiche' in Memorie dell’Accademia delle scienze di Torino, 31:2 (1879), pp. 35-45.] [44: See Claretta, ‘Sui principali storici Piemontesi’, p. 43. On Pingon’s Blazon des Armoyres, see below, Appendix 5, p. 370.] [45: On the work by Promis on Pingon, see below, p. 31. ] [46: On the work by Guichenon on Pingon, see above, p. 20.] [47: Idem, p. 45. See Dufour in Mémoires de la Société savoisienne d’histoire et d’archéologie, t. 14, (1873), pp. 169-179. On this work by Pingon, see below, Appendix 5, p. 377.] In François-Clément de Mareschale de Luciane, ‘Quelques Vieux Papiers de Pingon’ (1893), Mareschal de Luciane points up two letters found within ‘the Pingon family papers’ without citing archival information: ‘Parmi des papiers de la famille de Pingon, j’ai remarqué deux lettres de Philibert de Pingon, l’un de nos historiens savoyards, et quelques autres feuilles de correspondances de son fils aîné’.[footnoteRef:48] He provides direct quotations from these letters stating only that they are within his possession (e.g., ‘la deuxième lettre que je possède’) which prevents substantiation of his assertions dependant on these sources.[footnoteRef:49] After a thorough analysis in 2019 of the holdings of Mareschal de Luciane on the Pingon family at the ADS in Chambéry (10 F 43), it appears that these letters have disappeared without trace, so that it is not possible to authenticate the letters he reproduces.[footnoteRef:50] [48: See Mareschal de Luciane, ‘Quelques Vieux Papiers de Pingon’, in Mémoires de l’Académie des sciences, belles-lettres et arts de Savoie, t. IV, (1893), p. 467. ] [49: Idem, pp. 470-471. ] [50: For an analysis of this article see below, chapter 1, p. 47. ] Roger Peyre references Pingon in his monograph on the Duchess Marguerite de France, Une princesse de la Renaissance (1902).[footnoteRef:51] He cites Pingon’s epithalamium to the Duchess, but instead of citing the original Latin, he translates it into French.[footnoteRef:52] Gorris Camos reproduces Peyre’s translation in her article on utopia and heterotopia, a study that addresses Marguerite’s perceived diplomacy.[footnoteRef:53] Both Peyre and Gorris Camos reference these verses by Pingon to support their analyses of the literary image of the Duchess established in the sixteenth century, a literary image which the critical editions of Pingon’s poems provided in chapters three through to five also elucidate.[footnoteRef:54] [51: See Roger Peyre, Une princesse de la Renaissance: Marguerite de France, duchesse de Berry, duchesse de Savoie (E. Paul, Paris: 1902).] [52: Peyre provides a rather loose translation of Pingon’s Latin, vv. 84-86: ‘Coniugium Heroas, Semideosque feret: | Aurea iam redeunt Saturni saecula, fuint | Omnia Brumali candidiora nive’. For this translation see Peyre, Une princesse de la Renaissance (Paris, E. Paul, 1902), p. 45.] [53: See Rosanna Gorris Camos, ‘La Città del vero, une ville en papier entre utopie et hétérotopie’, in Seizième Siècle, 9, (2013), p. 184.] [54: See below, ch. 3, pp. 201-221; ch. 4, pp. 222-283; ch. 5, pp. 284-289.] In 1913, Édouard Champion published an analysis of five of Pingon’s textbooks used during his studies at the Collège de Sainte-Barbe in Paris, none of which I have been able to locate.[footnoteRef:55] Champion, having consulted these copies, points up various marginal notes located in Pingon’s copy of Horace’s Ars Poetica used in his courses with Adrien Turnèbe, for example, and indicates that Pingon catalogued his school books in the blank pages of his copy of Pomponius Mela’s De situ orbis libri tres.[footnoteRef:56] Unfortunately, Champion does not indicate where Pingon’s textbooks are held, and the pursuit of these copies merits further archival research. [55: For a discussion of these textbooks see below, ch. 1, p. 77. See Édouard Champion, ‘Notes sur un recueil formé par Philibert de Pingon’ in Mélanges offerts à M. Émile Picot, membre de l'Institut, par ses amis et ses élèves, t. II, (Paris: Picot, 1913), pp. 187-198. ] [56: For this list, see below, ch. 1, note 393.] Alexandre Cioransecu provides a short bibliography of a selection of Pingon’s works in the Bibliographie de la littérature du seizième siècle (1959).[footnoteRef:57] Cioranescu lists only four of Pingon’s works: the Augusta Taurinorum (1577),[footnoteRef:58] a reprint of the Augusta Taurinorum published in 1723; the Inclytorum Saxoniae (1581);[footnoteRef:59] the Sindon Evangelica (1581);[footnoteRef:60] and the 1779 printed version of the Hic Vita Mea in the Arrêt de la Royal Chambre des Comptes concernant les armoiries de la maison de Pingon, originaire de la ville d’Aix-en-Provence.[footnoteRef:61] Cioranescu also lists four studies on Pingon: Cibrario’s ‘Notizie di Filiberto di Pingone’ in Operette varie (Turin, 1860), pp. 251-75; Mareschal de Luciane’s ‘Quelques vieux papiers de Pingon’ in Mémoires de l'Académie de Savoie, IV, (1893), pp. 467-76; Arcollières ‘Ph. Pingon’ in Mémoires de l’Académie des sciences, belles-lettres et arts de Savoie, volume IX (1902), and Champion’s ‘Notes sur un recueil formé par Ph. Pingon’ in Mélanges Em. Picot, II, (Paris: 1913), pp. 187-98. Cioranescu’s work is limited, therefore, but it provides a useful basis for preliminary research. [57: See Alexandre Cioranescu, Bibliographie de la littérature du seizième siècle (Paris: Klincksiek, 1959), pp. 560-561.] [58: For an overview of this text, see below, Appendix 5, p. 367.] [59: For an overview of this text, see below, Appendix 5, p. 372.] [60: For an overview of this text, see below, Appendix 5, p. 375.] [61: Idem, p. 560. For a thorough analysis of this text, see below, ch. 2, pp. 109-116.] Marina Bersano Begey’s Cinquecentine Piemontesi (1961) includes seven entries of Pingon’s works in volume 1 and two entries in volume 2.[footnoteRef:62] In addition to Pingon’s printed works that have been widely circulated (the Inclytorum Saxoniae, Augusta Taurinorum, the Pro Arbore, and the Sindon Evangelica), Bersano Begey lists Neo-Latin poems by Pingon that are part of larger works.[footnoteRef:63] Bersano Begey does not include an exhaustive list of Pingon’s literary works, and all three codices of court poems included in the editions of this thesis are missing.[footnoteRef:64] The Cinquecentine Piemontesi nonetheless provides important references to some of Pingon’s poetical works that earlier bibliographies lack, for example, the Opera della Croce Distinta in V. Libri (1588), leonine verse on the sign of the cross.[footnoteRef:65] [62: See Marina Bersano Begey, Le Cinquecentine Piemontesi (Turin: Tipografia Torinese Editrice, 1961), Vol 1: 182, 260, 419, 420, 421, 422, 531, and Vol II: 1036, 1053.] [63: The works referenced in the Cinquecentine Piemontesi that include Latin verse by Pingon are as follows: 182: ‘Collegium iurisconsultorum taurinese (1575)’; 531: ‘Senatus Pedemontanus: DECISIONES | SACRI SENATVZ | PEDEMONTANI […] MDLXIX’ ; 260. ‘Aurea practica judicialis’ by Giovanni Pietro Ferrari (1575); 609. ‘FRANCISCI | ALLERIOLAE […] MDLXXVI’ by Francesco Valleriola (1576); and 1036: ‘OPERA | DELLA CROCE […] MDLXXXVI’ by Cipriano Uberti (1586); 1053. ‘IL BATTESIMO | DEL SERENISSIMO | PRENCIPE DI PIEMONTE […] MDLXVII’ by Agostino Bucci (1567). For an overview of each of these poems see below, Appendix 5, pp. 379-383.] [64: See below, ch. 3, pp. 201-221; ch. 4, pp. 222-283; ch. 5, pp. 284-289.] [65: See BRT, C.23(53) (Inventario: SM-18632), fol. 17[r]. For an overview of this poem see below, Appendix 5, p. 380.] Louis Terreaux incorporated a section on Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon in his work Histoire de la littérature Savoyarde (2011).[footnoteRef:66] Terreaux references the Hic Vita Mea in his discussion of Pingon’s life and childhood, drawing upon passages of this Latin memoir. He also includes sections from Pingon’s Inclytorum Saxoniae (1581) and the Sindon Evangelica (1581) as examples of Pingon’s works. Terreaux provides translations of the selected sections into French. This work is useful in the sense that it situates Pingon’s writings within the broader context of the literary history of Savoy. [66: See Louis Terreaux, Histoire de la littérature savoyarde, Académie de Savoie, Documents, s. 2, t. 2, 2010, (Montmélian: La Fontaine de Siloé, 2011), pp. 195-200.] Sarah Alyn Stacey includes an overview of the life of Pingon in Marc-Claude de Buttet (1529/31-1586): L’honneur de la Savoie (2006), in which she contextualises Pingon’s association with fellow court poet Marc-Claude de Buttet and other poets at the court of Savoy, notably Jean de Boyssonné who praises Pingon’s poetical abilities.[footnoteRef:67] Alyn Stacey provides a useful bibliography of Pingon’s works and indicates where the texts are held in the archives and libraries in Chambéry, Annecy, and Turin.[footnoteRef:68] She also provides a thorough list of archival sources, many hitherto not cited, including records that detail payments registered to Pingon held at the Chamber of Accounts in Savoy.[footnoteRef:69] [67: See Alyn Stacey, Marc-Claude de Buttet (1529/31-1586): L’honneur et la Savoie, (Paris: Champion, 2006), pp. 110-111. For an analysis of Boyssonné’s poem and his praise of Pingon, see below, ch. 1, p. 62.] [68: See Eadem, pp. 210-211] [69: See Eadem, pp. 110-111, note 1.] In 2012, Giovanna Saroni analysed a significant portion of Pingon’s manuscripts that are now conserved in the archives in Turin.[footnoteRef:70] In this article, Saroni draws up a list of antique codices once held in Pingon’s library, now conserved in the AST, BRT, and BNT in Turin, and conducted a thorough analysis of each, having consulted these primary sources at the archives.[footnoteRef:71] In this way, her article provides important insight into Pingon’s acquisition of his library and into his entourage.[footnoteRef:72] [70: See Giovanna Saroni, ‘Manoscritti antichi nella biblioteca di Filiberto Pingone’, Bollettino storico – bibliografico subalpino, CX, (2012), pp. 636-637.] [71: Saroni, ‘Manoscritti antichi’, pp. 637-638.] [72: See, for example, the copy of Aulo Gellio’s Noctes Atticae (BNT, J.II.6) and of Isidoro di Sviglia’s Etymologiarum sive Originum libri alia (BNT, J.II.7) given to Pingon in 1566 by renowned French Jurist Jacques Cujas (1522-1590), as is evident by the dedicatory inscription inside the cover of each copy. On Saroni’s analysis of Pingon’s codices, see ‘Su una Naturalis Historia del duca di Berry e sul suo arrive in Piemonte nelle collezioni di Filiberto Pingone’ in Bulletin du bibliophile (Paris, 2012), pp. 14-15.] Among the sources that Saroni cites is a folder of notes by Giuseppe Dondi, the former director of the Royal Library in Turin (1972-78).[footnoteRef:73] Having consulted the folder herself, Saroni indicates that it contains secondary sources in the form of a typewritten essay and two drafts of handwritten notes by Dondi on the life of Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon, primary sources in the form of handwritten notes by Pingon, analytical data sheets outlining the codices that were once held in Pingon’s library but are now preserved in the BNT and the BRT in Turin, along with photocopies of essays and articles concerning research on Pingon.[footnoteRef:74] When Saroni accessed this folder it was in the possession of Professor Giovanni Romano.[footnoteRef:75] After the death of Giuseppe Dondi in 1994, however, the folder was placed in the private collection of the Dondi family, and it has since been inaccessible to the public.[footnoteRef:76] [73: See Giuseppe Dondi, Mónsù Pingón e alcuni codici della sua celebre biblioteca cited in Saroni, ‘Manoscritti antichi’, p. 639, n. 12.] [74: It is not clear who wrote these essays and articles. See Saroni, ‘Manoscritti antichi’, p. 639, note 12. ] [75: Eadem.] [76: Eadem. This has been confirmed by a private correspondence with Saroni in December of 2022. Saroni indicated that she did not have the contact information for the Dondi family.] In 2012, Paul Gwynne usefully analysed a codex that allegedly has been altered by Pingon to imply that the poems within it are written by his uncle, Jean-Michel de Pingon, whereas they are originally by Johannes Michael Nagonius (c. 1450-1510).[footnoteRef:77] This series of poems is held at the Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino under the shelf-mark F.V.5. In 2012, Giovanna Saroni also mentioned this text in her study of Pingon’s library of antique codices.[footnoteRef:78] Gwynne’s and Saroni’s studies each rely on their respective, individual consultations of the primary sources at the archives in Turin and provide important insight into the codices held by Pingon, as well as into his interest in the collection and preservation of ancient manuscripts. [77: See Paul Gwynne, Poets and Princes: The Panegyric Poetry of Johannes Michael Nagonius (Brepols, 2012), pp. 20-28. On this study, see below, ch. 1, pp. 60-61.] [78: See Saroni, ‘Manoscritti antichi nella biblioteca di Filiberto Pingone’.] In 2012, Matthew Vester illuminates the political environment in which Pingon operated as a diplomat. In Vester’s book Renaissance Dynasticism and Apanage Politics: Jacques de Savoie Nemours (1531-1585), he describes the apanage of Genevois-Nemours that the Duke of Nemours oversaw from 1531-1585, ‘the only sixteenth-century apanage in the transalpine Savoyard domains’.[footnoteRef:79] While this text does not focus primarily on Pingon, through a developed historical analysis it describes the relationship between the Duke of Nemours and the Duke of Savoy, both of whom employed Pingon.[footnoteRef:80] [79: See Matthew Vester, Renaissance Dynasticism and Apanage Politics: Jacques de Savoie Nemours (1531-1585), (Missouri: Truman State University Press, 2012), p. 21. ] [80: He worked for the Duke of Nemours from 1554 and the Duke of Savoy from 1562.] In 2018, Laurent Perrillat published an overview of Pingon’s life that situates the narrative of the Hic Vita Mea within its historical context by citing such primary sources as those from the AST (Sez. Corte) in Turin.[footnoteRef:81] This article situates Pingon amongst a list of historians in Savoy from Uberto Foglietta (1518-1581) to Giobbe Vincenzio Fortebracci (?-1722).[footnoteRef:82] Perrillat’s book L’Apanage de Genevois aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles (2006) also brings much needed scholarly attention to the roles that Pingon held at the Conseil de Genevois and the Sénat de Savoie.[footnoteRef:83] Perrillat draws upon primary sources in the AST (Sez. Corte and Riunite) in Turin, the ADS in Chambéry and the ADHS in Annecy, for example, legal records and letters.[footnoteRef:84] His study places Pingon among a list of other presidents of the Conseil de Genevois from 1514 to 1659, setting Pingon’s legal duties in context. Perrillat elucidates certain roles within the Conseil, for instance, the role of juge-mage, which Pingon refused in 1554.[footnoteRef:85] [81: See Laurent Perrillat, ‘Philibert de Pingon, autographe et historiographe (1525-1582)’, in Écrire l’histoire, penser le pouvoir : États de Savoie, XVe-XVIe, ed. Laurent Ripart (Chambéry: Laboratoire LLSETI, 2018).] [82: Idem, pp. 70-72. Perrillat provides a table that lists his sources for each. These sources include Foras, Guichenon, Claretta, and Della Chiesa. ] [83: Perillat, L’Apanage de Genevois aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles (Annecy: Académie Salésienne, 2006).] [84: For a discussion of these sources, see below, ch. 1, p. 86.] [85: See Pingon, Hic Vita Mea, p. 39. See Perrillat, L’Apanage de Genevois, p. 305.] Other texts that provide insight into the court of Savoy during Pingon’s lifetime include the various works of Robert Oresko, Toby Osborne, Stéphane Gal, Robert Knecht, and Thalia Brero. For example, Oresko points up the complexities in claiming royal status in the sixteenth century and the Savoyard quest for sovereignty.[footnoteRef:86] In view of this quest for sovereignty, Pingon played a significant role as court poet and historiographer by anchoring Savoyard identity in a literature associated with antiquity and historical Saxon origins.[footnoteRef:87] Stéphane Gal analyses the reign of Charles Emmanuel I, for whom Pingon wrote a series of odes established in the fourth chapter of this doctoral thesis.[footnoteRef:88] Robert Knecht’s study of the French court contextualises France’s relationship with Savoy by elucidating certain figures and events in Pingon’s life (for example, Guillaume Budé, Michel de L’Hospital, King Henri II, King Henri III).[footnoteRef:89] Toby Osborne’s study of Savoy’s royal ambitions clarifies Pingon’s objectives as historiographer to the court.[footnoteRef:90] Thalia Brero’s doctoral thesis on dynastic strategies and representations of power in Savoy between 1490-1550 provides a comprehensive analysis of the history of the duchy and its relations to the surrounding nations.[footnoteRef:91] [86: Robert Oresko, ‘The House of Savoy in search for a royal crown in the seventeenth century’ in Royal and Republican Sovereignty in Early Modern Europe: Essays in memory of Ragnhild Hatton (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).] [87: For a discussion of Pingon’s role in this context, see below, ch. 1, p. 100.] [88: See below, ch. 4: Caroli Em[manuelis] Pedemontium Principis Cunabula, pp. 222-283. See Stéphane Gal, Charles-Emmanuel de Savoie: La politique du precipice (Paris: Payot, 2012).] [89: See Robert Knecht, The French Renaissance Court 1483-1486 (Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2008) and The Rise and Fall of Renaissance France 1483-1610 (Fontana Press, 1996).] [90: See Toby Osborne, Dynasty and Diplomacy in the Court of Savoy: Political Culture and the Thirty Years’ War, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), and ‘Language and Sovereignty: The Use of Titles and Savoy’s Royal Declaration of 1632’, in Political, Religious, and Social Conflict in the States of Savoy (1400-1700) ed. Alyn Stacey (Bern: Peter Lang, 2014).] [91: See Thalia Brero, ‘Le cérémonial princier à la cour de Savoie (1490-1550): Entre stratégies dynastiques et représentation du pouvoir’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Lausanne, 2013).] 1.2 Studies relating to Pingon’s engagement with visual culture Pingon’s inscriptions have attracted much critical attention. According to the Royal Museum in Turin, Pingon collected certain stone inscriptions and reliefs and subsequently donated them to the collection of Duke Charles Emmanuel I.[footnoteRef:92] In 1877, classicist and historian Theodor Mommsen included a selection of Pingon’s inscriptions from the Augusta Taurinorum (1577) and Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?) in a comprehensive edition of inscriptions from the region of Cisalpine Gaul, and analyses Pingon’s inscriptions.[footnoteRef:93] Mommsen’s incorporation of Pingon’s inscriptions into his edition is significant because the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum was seen from the nineteenth century onward as an authoritative source regarding Roman epigraphs and inscriptions.[footnoteRef:94] [92: See MRT (Museo d’Antiquita), Inv. 577, Inv. 355, and Inv. 574. Carlo Promis corroborates the idea that Pingon collected these stones in his home: ‘[Pingone] havvi un centinaio d’iscrizioni, che a quei tempi erano qua e là sparse per la città e delle quali ben XLII aveva egli raccolto nella propria casa, amando le antichità per modo che ai libri e codici da lui acquistati, apponendo il suo nome. Le iscrizioni raccolte in Piemonte (1878), p. 14.] [93: See Theodor Mommsen, ‘Inscriptiones Galliae Cisalpinae Latinae’, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, vol. V, (Berolini Apud Georgium Reimerum, 1877), pp. 772-773. For a discussion of Mommsen’s analysis, see below, ch. 1, pp. 94-95.] [94: On the reception of the CIL see, for example, Lorraine Daston, ‘Authenticity, Autopsia and Theodor Mommsen’s Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum’ in For the Sake of Learning: Essays in honour of Anthony Grafton (Brill, 2016). ] Pingon’s inscriptions are also analysed (alongside those of Maccaneo and Guichenon) by Carlo Promis in 1879.[footnoteRef:95] Promis describes the inscriptions present in Pingon’s Augusta Taurinorum (1577) and explains how they were collected on his return from Rome to Chambéry – information gleaned from the itinerary on fols. 137[r]-138[v] of Pingon’s Antiquitatum Romanarum (1545-156?).[footnoteRef:96] Promis mentions Bernardino Scardeoni’s De Antiquitate Urbis Patavii (1548), which also includes Pingon’s epigraphs and inscriptions.[footnoteRef:97] [95: See Carlo Promis, ‘Le iscrizioni raccolte in Piemonte e specialmente a Torino da Maccaneo Pingone, Guichenon’ in Memorie dell'Accademia delle scienze di Torino, 31:2, (Turin, 1879). ] [96: See below, ch. 1, pp. 81-82.] [97: See Scardeoni, De Antiquitate Urbis Patavii (1548), IV, pp. 65-67 for the reproduction of Pingon’s inscriptions. Pingon mentions Scardeoni’s inclusion of his inscriptions in the Hic Vita Mea on p. 31: ‘in cujus tumulum inter ceteros varia mea in lucem inter ceteros varia mea in lucem extant epitaphia, nostrique ideo meminit Bernardinus Scardonius in libro Antiquitatis Patavinae libro quarto’. For a discussion of this text, see below, ch. 1, p. 94.] There has been various criticism of Pingon’s inscriptions, in some cases hypothesising that they are false.[footnoteRef:98] Carlo Promis points to errors in the Latin vocabulary, while Alfonso Petitti di Roreto calls attention to letters not found in the original marble.[footnoteRef:99] Silvia Giorcelli notes the rejection of his inscriptions by art critic and curator Scipione Maffei.[footnoteRef:100] A museum label at the Royal Museum in Turin indicates that Pingon confused the Latin nominative and dative cases and cites this as the rationale regarding its inauthenticity.[footnoteRef:101] [98: For a discussion of these hypotheses, see below, ch. 1, pp. 94-98.] [99: See Alfonso Pettiti di Roreto, Ritrovamento a Cherasco di due lapidi romane già pubblicate à Torino dal Pingone (Turin: S.I. Ausonia, 1914), pp. 166-167. ] [100: See Silvia Giorcelli, ‘Falsari piemontesi del XVI secolo: Monsù Pingon e gli altri’ in La falsificazione epigrafica: Questioni di metodo e casi di suo (Edizioni Ca’Foscari, 2019), p. 138. ] [101: See MRT, Inv. 564.] Other scholars have considered some of Pingon’s epigraphs and inscriptions in a more positive light. For example, Cristina Maritano points up the validity of an epigraph in Pingon’s Antiquitatum Romanarum (fol. 60[r]) as evidence of a Christian reappropriation of pagan altars, citing a quotation by Cyriacus of Ancona to support Pingon’s entry: ‘A perugia, nella chiesa di Sant’Angelo, Ciriaco d’Ancona ricordava “sub ara maiore” la grande base marmorea di Caio Vibio, con dedica a Marco Aurelio e Antonino Pio, poi vista e disegnata da Filiberto Pingone in viaggio verso Roma’.[footnoteRef:102] In her article on Pingon’s Historia Sabaudiae (1578-1581), Maritano hypothesises that Pingon wrote the first true dynastic history of Savoy.[footnoteRef:103] In this article she also analyses the coins and seals with the effigies of Savoyard nobility present in Pingon’s Historia Sabaudiae (1578-1581) – for example, fol. 436[v], on which there appears the image of a medallion with the effigy of Philip I of Savoy – and notes that his artistic style is influenced by Albrecht Dürer.[footnoteRef:104] Pingon also drew a medallion with an effigy of Berold of Saxony in this text, which, according to Maritano, was designed in the style of early mediaeval coins.[footnoteRef:105] While Pingon’s contribution to the visual culture of early modern Savoy deserves greater analysis, it is outside the scope of this thesis. [102: See Cristina Maritano, ’In altaria vertuntur arae’, sul reimpiego dell’antico negli altari Cristiani dall’età medieval al Cinquecento’, in Prospettiva: rivista di storia dell’arte antica e moderna, No. 126/127, (2007), p. 48. ] [103: See Maritano, ‘A l’antica’, p. 17: ‘Occorrerà più di un secolo per trovare la prima vera storia dinastica sabauda. L’incarico l’ebbe Emanuele Filiberto Pingone (1525-1582) […] storico ufficiale della corte per volontà di Emanuele Filiberto’. ] [104: AST (Sez. Corte), Storia della Real Casa in Materie Politiche per rapporto all’interno, inv. 101, Cat. II, Storie Generali), Mazzo 3, fasc. 1 - 2. See Maritano, ‘A l’antica’, p. 19. ] [105: Eadem, p. 21. For the Histoira Sabaudiae (1578-1581), also known as the Chronique de Savoie, see AST (Sez. Corte), Storia della Real Casa in Materie Politiche per rapporto all’interno [inv. 101], Cat. II, Storie Generali, Mazzo 3, fasc. 1(a) – ‘brogliaccio’.] 1.3 Critical Editions In addition to the critical edition of Pingon’s autobiography provided by this thesis, there is an edition of the Latin text of the Hic Vita Mea (1567) with footnotes in Latin by royal archivist Anastasio Curlandi bound within the Arrét de la Royale Chambres des comptes concernant les Armoires de la Maison de Pingon, Originaire de la ville d’Aix en Provence, and published by François Antoine Mairesse on 19 January 1779.[footnoteRef:106] This work serves as the base text for the Latin autobiography in the second chapter of this thesis.[footnoteRef:107] Unlike my edition of the Hic Vita Mea, Curlandi’s edition does not establish the text and collate the variants. My edition also elucidates more figures and events in the Hic Vita Mea than Curlandi’s did, and provides a subsequent analysis, which situates the narrative more clearly in its historical context in this regard. [106: See BRT, V.7.89 and BNF, 8-LM3-4778.] [107: See below, ch. 2, pp. 109-200.] There is also a critical edition of the Sindon Evangelica (1581), established by Riccardo Quaglia in 2015.[footnoteRef:108] This work incorporates a brief study of Pingon’s life and provides a critical apparatus of Pingon’s history of the Shroud of Turin. Quaglia’s text provides a full translation of the text from Latin into contemporary Italian, as well as footnotes elucidating the historical context. In addition to the Italian translation, Quaglia reproduces (in facsimile) the original Latin text. In the introduction, Quaglia contextualises the Holy Shroud in Savoyard history and notes that Pingon’s Sindon Evangelica is the first book written on the subject.[footnoteRef:109] Although Quaglia points up the significance of this text to the history of Savoy and to historical studies of the Shroud of Turin, he also notes certain weaknesses in the text. For instance, he notes that while Pingon’s heraldic references to the Savoyard dynasty may assist the reader in understanding the genealogy of the nobility, they do not offer a ‘truly scientific’ approach.[footnoteRef:110] [108: For a critical overview the Sindon Evangelica, see below, Appendix 5, p. 375.] [109: See Quaglia, ‘Introduzione’, La Sindone dei Vangeli (2015), p. XXVI. On the significance of the Shroud of Turin to both Christianity and Savoyard identity, see notably, Paolo Cozzo, Andrea Merlotti and Andrea Nicolotti (eds.), The Shroud at Court: History, Usages, Places and Images of a Dynastic Relic, ed. by (Brill, 2019), p. 4: ‘The circulation of copies was a particularly efficient means of spreading the practice of Shroud worship that the Savoy family employed in an effort to communicate their prestige and propagandize their dignity’. ] [110: Idem., p. XXVII. ] 2. Critical methodology 2.1 A methodological approach to the biography of Pingon The study of Pingon’s life proposed in chapter one builds upon the scholarship discussed above in combination with analysis of the archival sources that I have consulted over the course of this project.[footnoteRef:111] The study of his life has been complicated by the fact that on occasion the documentation referenced in his autobiography has been lost to time.[footnoteRef:112] Sources key to the elucidation of certain names, places, and events discussed in Pingon’s Hic Vita Mea have been obfuscated by the loss, deterioration, or dispersal of documentation in the past five centuries. [111: For a list of archival sources used, see below, Bibliography, pp. 303-308. For a list of the archives and libraries consulted, see below, Abbreviations, p. 45] [112: For a list of Pingon’s lost works, see below, Bibliography, pp. 301-303. ] When reconstructing the life of Pingon, one must approach the historical validity of his autobiography, Hic Vita Mea, with circumspection because of the problematical nature of early-modern biography, something which has been examined by a range of scholars.[footnoteRef:113] For example, Irena Backus observes how the context of life writing may be shaped by contemporary mores, and points to the Reformation in which Luther’s Lives served as ‘sermons or funeral orations’ rather than as life studies.[footnoteRef:114] Because one cannot presume to faithfully reconstruct the perspective by which a sixteenth-century reader would understand narrative meaning in Pingon’s Hic Vita Mea, the twenty-first-century reader must approach the text from an objective standpoint informed by what archival documentation still exists. [113: On the problematical nature of early-modern life writing see, for example, Irena Backus, Life writing in Reformation Europe (Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2008) and N. Kuperty-Tsur, Se dire à la Renaissance: les mémoires au XVIe siècle (Paris: Librairie philosophique J. Vrin, 1997). ] [114: Backus, Life writing in Reformation Europe, p. xvii. ] Underpinning my biography is François Rastier’s theory of the conditions of communication, which points up the difficulty that the reader has in understanding Pingon’s text after nearly five hundred years. Rastier points up the problematic nature of reading a text for which the social norms, cultural references and linguistic conventions have evolved over the centuries such that contemporary readers may struggle to fully grasp its intended meaning: ‘Ici apparaît un problème fondateur pour la sémantique interpretative. Si l’entour change, le contenu du texte change aussi puisqu’il est immanent à une situation de communication maintenant modifiée. En règle générale, dans le cas d’un changement d’époque ou de culture, il s’appauvrit, par déperdition des connaissance’. [footnoteRef:115] Rastier makes this distance clear and indicates that we must carefully retrace the text’s origins to fully comprehend its unique system of meaning. [115: See François Rastier, Sens et textualité (Paris: Hachette, 1989), p. 51. For an application of Rastier’s theory in an analysis of the Hic Vita Mea, see below, ch. 2, pp. 198-201.] Rastier’s concept of l’entour du texte reminds us that our understanding of Pingon’s narrative is inherently shaped by the evolution of language and cultural norms: as we engage with the text, we carry our own cognitive frameworks to the reading process. Meaning emerges as a product of the reader’s personal agency in tandem with textual cues embedded within the narrative. It is therefore the responsibility of the reader to strive to maintain as much objectivity as possible. Although fully eschewing the distance between reader and text remains an elusive goal, one may endeavour to retrace its original conditions by locating not only what information remains available, but also by pointing up what remains obscure or has been lost to time, considering the limitations of available documentation. This practice offers a means of upholding the integrity of the text by acknowledging the complexities of interpretation. 2.2 Methodology for the critical editions of Pingon’s selected literary works Chapters two through to five of this thesis offer critical editions of selected court poems. My analyses of these texts are rooted in theories of intertextuality as defined by Gerard Genette, particularly in their consideration of how Pingon builds upon classical hypotexts.[footnoteRef:116] This relationship illustrates the dynamic between Pingon’s creative agency and established voices of antiquity, such that the full comprehension of a poem’s meaning relies on the reader’s awareness of the sources to which it refers. [116: Genette defines intertextuality as a form of allusion ‘dont la pleine intelligence suppose la perception d’un rapport entre lui [le texte] et un autre auquel renvoie nécessairement telle ou telle de ses inflexions, autrement non recevable’ in Palimpsestes: La littérature du seconde degré (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1982), p. 8. Genette defines the the hypotext being the source document that inspires the derivative hypertext or has a relationship to it: ‘J’entends par là toute relation unissant un texte B (que j’appellerai hypertexte) à un texte antérieur A (que j’appellerai, bien sûr, hypotexte) sur lequel il se greffe d’une manière qui n’est pas celle du commentaire. Comme on le voit à la métaphore se greffe et à la determination negative, cette definition est toute provisoire’ (p. 13).] These analyses are also based in Riffaterrean theory which considers each allusion as an inextricable component of a matrix of meaning.[footnoteRef:117] These chapters shed light on the poetical themes and conventions laid out in section 3.2 below.[footnoteRef:118] I have indicated at the beginning of each chapter how the text has been established, along with the guiding principles regarding the base text and variants.[footnoteRef:119] [117: Key to Riffaterre’s concept of intertextuality are his definitions of heuristic and retroactive readings proposed in Semiotics of Poetry (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978), p. 5.] [118: For a discussion of these themes and conventions, see below, p. 39.] [119: See below, ch. 2, for the Hic Vita Mea; see ch. 3 for the epithalamium on the marriage between the Duke and Duchess; see ch. 4 for the series of twelve odes on the birth of Charles Emmanuel I; see ch. 5 for the Elegy on the Death of Marguerite de France (BNT, Ms. X9).] 2.3 Rules of transcription In reproducing the editions of Pingon’s texts, I have respected the spelling, alignment, and indentations of the original text. I have punctuated according to modern conventions: I have added the cedilla in the French text where modern usage necessitates it, removed superfluous accent marks, and have added where necessary apostrophes, accent marks, capital letters and hyphens. I have deglutinated words (for example, dufait → fait) where necessary. I have omitted the superfluous ellipses found throughout both the Latin and French texts. I have retained original capital letters in the verse and suppressed superfluous capital letters in the prose. When transcribing archival sources that are not included in the edition, I have retained original spelling, punctuation, and alignment. 3. Literary analysis 3.1 Classical inspirations In the spirit of Renaissance humanism, which defines his age, like many of his contemporaries Emmanuel-Philibert de Pingon borrows from antiquity notably the works of Apuleius,[footnoteRef:120] Aristotle,[footnoteRef:121] Catullus,[footnoteRef:122] Cicero,[footnoteRef:123] Homer,[footnoteRef:124] Horace.[footnoteRef:125] Plato,[footnoteRef:126] Ovid,[footnoteRef:127] and Virgil.[footnoteRef:128] [120: See ch 4, X.] [121: See ch 4, IV; IX. ] [122: See ch. 4, III; VI (v. 39); XII.] [123: See ch. 4, IV.] [124: See ch. 3, I (v. 16); ch. 4, V (vv. 40-41); VI (v. 66); IX (v. 25); XI (v. 27). ] [125: See ch. 3, I (v. 32, v. 277); ch. 4, III (v. 11); V; VI; VII (v. 29); VIII (v. 12); IX; X; XII (vv. 36-37).] [126: See ch. 5, I (v. 6); ch. 4, I (vv. 75-77); IV.] [127: See ch. 4, I (v. 150, v. 234); V (v. 40); VI (v. 14, v. 39, v. 41); VII (v. 130); XI (v. 23).] [128: See ch. 3, I (vv. 21-22, v. 61); II (v. 5); ch. 4, I (v. 143, v. 289, v. 296); VI (v. 66); VIII (v. 51). ] By recourse to classical literature through intertextual allusions to Greek and Roman works, and specifically through his adherence to the genre of the ode, Pingon engages with a tradition encouraged by various sixteenth-century treatises including Thomas Sébillet’s Art poétique françoys (1548), Du Bellay’s La Défense et illustration de la langue françoyse (1549), and Jacques Peletier du Man’s Dialogue de l’ortografe e pronunciation françoese (1550).[footnoteRef:129] [129: On the tradition of drawing on classical antiquity see, amongst others, François Rouget, L’Apothéose d’Orphée : l'esthétique de l’ode en France au XVIe siècle de Sébillet à Scaliger (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1994), pp. 11-36. ] Each poem in this thesis functions as lens through which to celebrate political figures and events at the courts of Savoy and France (e.g., the marriage of the Duke and Duchess, the birth of Charles Emmanuel I, and the death of Marguerite de France), and in so doing, creates a literary impression of Pingon’s patrons such that they are tied to classical tradition. Although Pingon’s contemporaries were inspired to write odes in the vernacular in an attempt to elevate the French language to the expressive level of Greek and Latin,[footnoteRef:130] Pingon’s poems – at least those that we have identified to date – are written entirely in Neo-Latin.[footnoteRef:131] Too many of Pingon’s poetical works have disappeared, however, to know whether he wrote exclusively in the vernacular.[footnoteRef:132] [130: On this aspiration, see Du Bellay, Défense et illustration de la langue françoyse (Paris: Angelier, 1549). On the use of the vernacular in sixteenth-century French poetry see, for example, Ronsard, Oeuvres complètes: Odes et Bocage de 1550, ed. Laumonier (Paris: Droz, 1938). Regarding the vernacular French ode, Rouget notes that Ronsard was ‘le véritable inspirateur de ce genre’ (in L’Apothéose d’Orphée, p. 32).] [131: On the popularity of the Neo-Latin ode in sixteenth-century France, see, amongst others, Rouget, L’Apothéose d’Orphée (1994), pp. 20-27. ] [132: For Pingon’s lost works, see below, Bibliography, p. 301. On the recommendation to activate the vernacular in poetry, see Du Bellay, Défense et illustration de la langue françoyse (1549).] Pingon’s engagement with Neo-Latin follows a tradition well established by his predecessors, for example, Michael Marullus (1458-1500) whose Hymni et Epigrammata comprised Horatian odes, Sapphic verse, and Alcaic stanza.[footnoteRef:133] The Latin odes of Jacopo Sannazaro (1458-1530) were also written in Sapphic hendecasyllables[footnoteRef:134] and the Neo-Latin verse of Andrea Navagero (1483-1529) notably influenced Ronsard.[footnoteRef:135] Pingon’s contemporaries, for instance, Du Bellay and Baïf were also known for writing poetry in Neo-Latin.[footnoteRef:136] The themes expressed in Neo-Latin verse cannot, however, be easily distinguished from those expressed in the French vernacular poetry of the sixteenth century because the latter drew largely upon the former.[footnoteRef:137] McFarlane notes, for example, that the themes of Nature and Time are common to both French and Latin poetry of sixteenth-century France, and he cites as an example the influence of Gervais Sepin’s Neo-Latin works on Ronsard’s vernacular French verse.[footnoteRef:138] Like his contemporaries, Pingon also draws upon traditionally classical themes of Nature, Time, Peace, and Virtue, as well as upon various images and rhetorical devices which are analysed below. [footnoteRef:139] [133: See Marullus, Hymni et Epigrammata (Florence: Societas Colubris, 1497). On Marullus’s considerable influence on Neo-Latin verse in France in L’Apothéose d’Orphée, p. 21. ] [134: See Sannazaro, Opera Omnia (Venice: Alde Manuce, 1535).] [135: See Navagero, Carmina quinque illustrium poetarum (Florence: Laurentius Taurentinus, 1549). See Rouget, L’Apothéose d’Orphée, p. 21. Rouget lists various other Neo-Latin authors that were influential in sixteenth-century France, citing ‘Flaminio, Molsa, Fracastoro, Sadoleto, Crinito, Stoa, Capilupi’ (in L’Apothéose d’Orphée, p. 21). ] [136: See, for instance, Du Bellay, Poemata (Paris: Morel, 1558) and Baïf, Carmina (Paris: Mamertum Patissonium, 1577).] [137: On this influence see, for example, I.D. McFarlane, ‘Neo-Latin Verse: Some New Discoveries’, The Modern Language Review, 54:1 (1959), p. 27.] [138: Idem, pp. 27-28.] [139: See below, p. 37.] For each of the twelve odes in the Caroli Cunabula (produced below in chapter 4), Pingon indicates the source of classical meter in the title. Rouget observes of the early modern ode that ‘le titre d’une pièce dépend de l’intérêt que le poète accorde soit à la forme, soit au contenu, soit encore à la fonction conférée au poème’.[footnoteRef:140] In this sense, the metrical form stated in the title of each of Pingon’s odes, in combination with its vocabulary and meter, draws specific attention to its association with antiquity.[footnoteRef:141] The use of such classical meter to treat sixteenth-century French (and Savoyard) subjects thus allows for what Philip Ford deems ‘linguistic acculturation’ in early modern poetry, a practice in which language is used to unite two different cultural expectations.[footnoteRef:142] [140: Rouget, L’Apothéose d’Orphée, p. 32.] [141: Rouget notes that in sixteenth-century France, at least 150 poets wrote in Neo-Latin (in L’Apothéose d’Orphée, p. 20). These poets include, for example, Giovanni Pontano (1429-1503), Jean Second (1511-1536), and Joachim du Bellay (1522-1560).] [142: See Philip Ford, The Judgment of Palaemon: The Contest between Neo-Latin and Vernacular Poetry in Renaissance France (Brill, 2013), pp. 50-51.] On rare occasion, Pingon’s verse also makes use of Greek within the Neo-Latin poems. The blending of the two languages is an example of the practice of ‘word-borrowing’ that is common to sixteenth-century poetry, a rhetorical device that increases vocabulary and thereby expands meaning within the poem.[footnoteRef:143] Jespersen notes early modern poetry’s ‘predilection for foreign words’ and describes the tradition of interspersing French and Latin words within sixteenth-century English verse to achieve a similar rhetorical draw as the use of neologisms to revitalise the language.[footnoteRef:144] Pingon’s incorporation of Greek into his Neo-Latin verse achieves a similar rejuvenating linguistic effect.[footnoteRef:145] [143: On ‘word-borrowing’ see Laura Willett, Poetry & Language in 16th-Century France: Du Bellay, Ronsard, Sebillet (Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2004), p. 19. Edmund Spenser borrows from French, for example, in Shepheardes Calender and The Faerie Queene. On Spenser’s ‘word-borrowing’ see, for example, the doctoral thesis of College Garrity, ‘French Word-Borrowings in England during the Renaissance: with a Glossary of those used in Spenser’s Shepheardes Calender and Faerie Queene’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Loyola University, August 1947). ] [144: See Otto Jespersen, Growth and Structure of the English Language (New York: Appleton and Company, 1928).] [145: For an example of Pingon’s word-borrowing, see below, ch. 4, X (vv. 21-29).] 3.2 Rhetorical devices, themes and topoi within Pingon’s court poetry a. Rhetorical devices Pingon’s poems comprise various rhetorical devices conventional in the sixteenth century. Much of his poetry makes use of hypotyposis, for example; the vivid description of events.[footnoteRef:146] Fontanier describes the effect of hypotyposis as conferring an energy and vibrancy to the poem.[footnoteRef:147] Alyn Stacey observes that the use of hypotyposis reflects the early modern desire to establish concrete imagery.[footnoteRef:148] This desire relates notably to Horace’s concept of ut pictura poesis described in the Ars Poetica, which compares the function of poetry to that of painting.[footnoteRef:149] Pingon’s poetry demonstrates the manner in which vivid description confers energy and vibrancy to the poem, for instance, in the pastoral scene of the epithalamium which celebrates a new era of peace (vv. 53-56).[footnoteRef:150] [146: Hypotyposis is used notably in the following poems: ch. 3, I (vv. 53-56); ch. 4, I (v. 91); IV (vv. 13-16), VI (vv. 54-55), VIII (vv. 20-24). ] [147: See Pierre Fontanier, Les Figures du discours (Paris: Flammarion, 1977), pp. 390-391.] [148: She remarks that Buttet’s use of hypotyposis ‘témoigne d’un désir cher aux humanistes de rendre les images aussi concrètes que possible’. See S. Alyn Stacey, Marc-Claude de Buttet: Oeuvres poétiques I: Le Premier Livre des vers (1560): Édition critique, avec introduction, commentaires et glossaire (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2022), p. 26.] [149: On the tradition of ut pictura poesis and the use of hypotyposis in sixteenth-century French poetry see, among others, Christophe Chaguinian, ‘Ut pictura poesis: le cas de La Chanson de Roland’ in Neophilologus, 95 (New York: Springer, 2011). On its application see, for example, Du Bellay, ‘Au Roy’, Le Premier Livre des Antiquitez de Rome, (Paris: Federic Morel, 1558), fol. 1[v].] [150: See below, ch. 5, pp. 284-26.] In addition to hypotyposis, Pingon’s poems notably make use of the following rhetorical devices: hyperbole,[footnoteRef:151] repetition,[footnoteRef:152] anaphora,[footnoteRef:153] personification,[footnoteRef:154] metaphor,[footnoteRef:155] allegory,[footnoteRef:156] and gradation.[footnoteRef:157] The effect of each of these rhetorical devices is examined in the analysis following each poem.[footnoteRef:158] [151: See, for example, ch. 4, II (vv. 41-44); VI (vv. 31-33); VII (vv. 3-4); IX (v. 44); ch. 5, I (vv. 17-18).] [152: See, for example, ch. 3, I (vv. 53-56, v. 59); ch. 4, I (vv. 56-59); IX (vv. 8-11).] [153: See, for example, ch. 3, I (vv. 53-55).] [154: See, for example, ch. 4, I (v. 191); II (v. 17); VII (v. 30).] [155: See, for example, ch. 3, IV (vv. 1-2); ch. 4, I (vv.75-77); III (v. 7, vv. 11-2); VII (v. 7); ch. 5, I(v. 5, vv. 11-2); I (v. 227, v. 233-234); VI (v. 41, v. 48); XII (v. 14); ch. 5, I (v. 6).] [156: See, for example, ch. 3, I (v. 35).] [157: See, for example, ch. 5, I (vv. 21-22).] [158: See below, chs. 3-5.] b. Themes and topoi The themes explored in Pingon’s poems imply the poet’s ‘Orphic mission’, according to which the poet serves as divine messenger. [footnoteRef:159] This role, commonly pointed up by sixteenth-century French poets, confers upon the poet a cosmic status: by documenting various figures and events, the poet suggests his divine mission to immortalise notable members of the court through literature. Rouget describes the function of this role: ‘[L]’ode de la Renaissance permet à l’offrant de s’élever mais aussi au divin de s’approcher du monde human’.[footnoteRef:160] The poet presents himself as an emissary of the gods and invites the reader to approach his verse on this understanding, which implies a greater credibility. This status endows a gravitas upon the poet and suggests the essential truth of the messages conveyed. [159: On the concept of the poet as emissary of the divine, see Rouget, L’Apothéose d’Orphée, pp. 73-82.] [160: See Rouget, L’Apothéose d’Orphée, p. 74.] This ‘divinely’ endorsed status allows for the poet to establish a virtuous image of the patron with literary certainty. The poet uses notably the rhetorical techniques of effictio (a description of physical virtue), and notatio (a description of virtues of character) to celebrate his patrons and align them with a higher ideal.[footnoteRef:161] Pingon uses effictio, for instance, in Ode VI of the Caroli Cunabula to describe the elaborate appearance of the Duke, describing in detail his ornate garments to create a vivid image of his appearance as he addresses a crowd of citizens.[footnoteRef:162] Pingon also engages with effictio when comparing the young Charles Emmanuel I to Endymion, a mythological figure known for eternal beauty.[footnoteRef:163] Pingon engages with notatio in his description of the Duchess’s virtues, for example, by aligning her with patience, diligence and piousness in ‘Margaritae Francae […] Epithalamium’.[footnoteRef:164] [161: On effictio and notatio see, amongst others, Gerald Morgan, ‘An Aristotelian Ideal: The Beauty and Virtue of Blanche of Lancaster in Chaucer’s Book of the Duchess (c. 1368)’ in Memory and Identity in the Medieval and Early Modern World, ed. by Roman Blier, Brian Coleman and Clare Fletcher (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2022), pp. 121-153.] [162: See below, ch. 4, VI, vv. 54-55.] [163: See below, ch. 4, VI, v. 16-17] [164: See below, ch. 3, I, vv. 16-17, vv. 39-41.] Pingon draws upon classical mythology for political purposes. In this regard, he draws upon a poetical convention and method of celebration that identifies known courtly figures with classical deities and confers ideal qualities to mortal patrons. This practice was common particularly at the French court, which developed its own code of allusions.[footnoteRef:165] We see this in the way that he (like his contemporaries) often compares Marguerite to Minerva and deifies her in apotheosis, notably in his elegy on her death.[footnoteRef:166] Brantôme explores this tradition in his Vies des dames illustres: [165: Idem, p. 156.] [166: See below, ch. 5.] Ainsy que nous avons eu madame Marguerite de France […] despuis duchesse de Savoye, la-quelle a esté si sage, si vertueuse, si parfaicte en scavoir et sapience, qu’on luy donna le nom de la Minerve ou Pallas de la France pour sa sapience; aussy pour devise elle portoit un rameau d’olive en-tortillé de deux serpens entrelassés l’un en lautre, avecques ces mots: Rerum Sapientia custos, significant que toutes choses sont regies, ou doibvent estre, par sapience, qu’elle avoit beaucoup, et de science aussy, qu’elle entretenoit tousjours par ses continuelles estudes les après disnées, et ses leçons qu’elle apprenoit des gens sçavans.[footnoteRef:167] [167: Brantôme, Vies des dames illustres françoises et étrangères, ed. Louis Molland (Paris: Garnier, 1868), p. 290.] Demerson comments upon this association as a reflection of Marguerite’s identification with political accord, citing Du Bellay’s ‘Devise pour M. de Savoie’: Les poètes de la Pléiade ne pouvaient louer Marguerite de France sans les traditionnelles allusions à Minerve […] Enfin, pour ramener la paix, elle fait revivre la branche d’olivier […] Un raffinement politique de l’allusion fait de la nouvelle Minerve un Mentor pour M. de Savoie qui, comme Ulysse, en s’alliant à elle, ‘Ayant Pallas pour guide en ses dangers | Recouvre en fin sa paternelle terre” (Chm. VI, 59). Ainsi les dieux de l’Europe, par le traité de Cateau-Cambrésis, concluent heureusement l’odyssée du duché de Savoie.[footnoteRef:168] [168: Guy Demerson, La Mythologie Classique dans l’Oeuvre de la Pléiade (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1972), pp. 532-533.] In the poetry of the Pléiade, and of many of their contemporaries (including Pingon), mythological allusions amplify a particular image of the political figure, in this case the Duchess’s reputation for peaceful diplomatic relations.[footnoteRef:169] [169: On the Duchess’s diplomacy see below, ch. 2, note 1042.] In addition to evoking a comparison between courtly figures and Greco-Roman deities, Pingon engages with the Platonic ideal of virtue as a lens through which to celebrate his patrons. He does this, for example, in the first poem of the epithalamium, where he invokes the virtue of the Duchess: ‘Immo foelices qui virtutum agmina norunt | Iisque frui possunt, queis decorata nites’.[footnoteRef:170] The association between virtue and light recalls Plato’s Republic, in which light serves as a metaphor for spiritual enlightenment in the sense that clear vision (or removal from darkness and obscurity) unites the individual with the Form of the Good.[footnoteRef:171] [170: See below, ch. 3, I.] [171: See Plato, Republic, VII, 517b. ] The breadth of the Duchess’s implied influence and its supernatural dimension is echoed by the evocation of metempsychosis in the elegy on her death (BNT, Ms. X9)[footnoteRef:172] to depict her soul as a source of renewing light. The poem engages with the Neoplatonic idea that the soul can be made manifest in different forms, including as illumination within darkness.[footnoteRef:173] This image functions such that on the subject of her death, Pingon engages with various levels of semantic evocation: the Neoplatonic idea of light as a reflection of the ‘Ideal’, or the ‘Form of the Good’, and the expression of light as a life-giving source. In this Neoplatonic context, the Duchess is associated with a divine ideal in poetical apotheosis. [172: See below, ch. 5.] [173: Notably by describing the Duchess as a ‘star-dweller’ (‘Astricolam’, v. 20), and with the image of the sun in the underworld (‘sol apud Antipodas’, v. 6).] Such ideals of leadership are applied within Pingon’s verse to each member of the ducal family to establish a literary impression of them as architects of a new era for Savoy. The Golden Age, a utopian myth popular in Renaissance Europe,[footnoteRef:174] functions in Pingon’s poems as an allegory for the peace to which the duchy may return after the 1559 Treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis. This peace is heralded by the resulting alignment of the French and Savoyard courts through the marriage between Marguerite de France and Duke Emmanuel Philibert as a condition of the Treaty. The epithalamium which celebrates this marriage comprises images of gold which operate as signifiers of prosperity and addresses the Duke and Duchess as agents of peace.[footnoteRef:175] By reference to The Golden Age, a new era is foreseen, one in which Savoy is liberated from its recent hardship (under French occupation since 1536), and the allegory calls attention to the promise of newfound political autonomy.[footnoteRef:176] [174: On the popularity of ‘The Golden Age’ in Renaissance literature see Elizabeth Armstrong, Ronsard and the Age of Gold (Cambridge University Press, 1968). See also Demerson, La Mythologie Classique, pp. 111-112.] [175: See below, ch. 3, I, v. 57.] [176: See below, ch. 3, I, vv. 85-86.] Pingon’s poems also celebrate a new era by engaging with classical evocations of festivals in relation to nature: for example, in the first poem of the epithalamium (vv. 1-2) in chapter 3, Pingon alludes to the Floralia of Catullus Carmina 61 with a vivid scene of people dancing among leaves while wearing crowns of flowers. In Pingon’s ode, the celebration of rebirth marks the occasion of the marriage between the Duke and Duchess.[footnoteRef:177] In this way, Pingon rewrites the classical hypotext and its evocation of Roman tradition into a Savoyard political context in which a new era of governance is promised. Pingon mixes the nature of classical topography with vivid descriptions of the Alpine landscape, thereby aligning Savoyard territory with that of antiquity.[footnoteRef:178] [177: See below, ch. 3, I. ] [178: See below, ch. 4, VIII.] Renewed autonomy is celebrated also in light of the birth of Charles Emmanuel I, as the series of odes on this event subscribes to the ‘Mirror of Princes’ tradition (or speculum principis) to portray an image of the young duke as virtuous and prepared to step into his role as leader of Savoy.[footnoteRef:179] This series of odes recalls the ideas expressed by Erasmus in his Institutio principis Christiani (1516), primarily the imperative for a leader to value peace above war. For example, in Ode XI Pingon rewrites the myth of Actaeon and evokes a vivid scene in which the child expresses empathy towards animals, a scene that recalls Erasmus’s idea of leadership as informed by the ability to protect the weak and the view that a true leader desires ‘to help all; his power makes him able to do so’.[footnoteRef:180] Similarly, in Pingon’s poem ‘Enrico II Gallarum Regi’ (part of the epithalamium), King Henri II is portrayed as forgiving: ‘Ante hostes, firma iungis amicitia’ (v. 8). This trope of a king who privileges peace aligns Pingon’s verse within the contemporary poetical conventions of representations of ideal monarchy. Consider, for example, how Ronsard portrays ideal rule as based in the ‘modesty’ and ‘moderation’ of God:[footnoteRef:181] [179: See below, ch. 4, I-XII. On the evocation of Erasmus and speculum principis see also below, ch. 3, pp. 217; 242.] [180: Erasmus, The Education of a Christian Prince (1516), trans. Lisa Jardine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), p. 22.] [181: See Pierre de Ronsard: Oeuvres Complètes, ed. Paul Laumonier (Paris, 1914-1967), pp. 16-17. See also Gwenda Echard, ‘The Erasmian Ideal of Kingship, as reflected in the work of Ronsard and d’Aubigné’, Renaissance and Reformation / Renaissance et Réforme, 1981, 5:1 (1981), pp. 26-39. These lines are reproduced in Echard, p. 30.] Nature qui peult tout, dont le ventre deserre Toutes perfections, ne donne à nostre terre Rien si parfaict qu’un Roy modeste et modéré Et au poids de vertu justement mesuré. Seul entre les humains il a peint au visage De Dieu le venerable et redoutable image: Il en est le mirouër. (XVII, 11.325-31). The speculum principis tradition encourages authority that places the well-being of the community over concern for the self. By incorporating this trope into the court poetry of Savoy, Pingon brings this conventional model of kingship into a new and specific context, one that supports the Savoyard ambition of earned political autonomy and aspired royalty.[footnoteRef:182] [182: On this ambition see below, ch. 1, p. 100.] The future leadership of Savoy nascent within the infant Charles Emmanuel I is explored by allusion to Cicero in Ode IV of the Caroli Cunabula that describes adult reactions to the child’s laughter.[footnoteRef:183] The message of the ode recalls an idea expressed in De Oratore that laughter ‘mitigates and relaxes gravity and severity’ as the child’s