conclusive. It happened that the hypothesis he suggested was brought forward about the same time by an ingenious Frenchman, and neither of them was acquainted with
His first publication was “Observations and Inquiries
relating to various parts of Ancient History: containing
Dissertations on the wind Euroclydon, and on the Island
Melite, together with an account of Egypt in its most early
state, and of the Shepherd Kings; wherein the time of
their coming, the province which they particularly possessed, and to which the Israelites afterwards succeeded, is
endeavoured to be stated. The whole calculated to throw
light on the history of that ancient kingdom, as well as on
the histories of the Assyrians, Chaldeans, Babylonians,
Edomites, and other nations,
” New System or Analysis of Ancient Mythology; wherein an Attempt is made to divest Tradition
of Fable, and to reduce Truth to its original Purity.
” Of
this publication the first and second volumes came forth
together, in 1774, and the third followed two years after. It
being his professed design to present a history of the Babylonians, Chaldeans, Egyptians, Canaanites, Helladians,
lonians, Leleges, Dorians, Pelasgi, and other ancient nations, his researches for this purpose were not only of necessity recondite, but in many instances uncertain; but to
facilitate his passage through the mighty labyrinth which
led to his primary object, he not only availed himself of
the scattered fragments of ancient history wherever he
could find them, but also of a variety of etymological aids;
for being persuaded that the human race were the offspring
of one stock, and conceiving thence that their language in
the beginning was one, this favourite notion was exemplified by him in the investigation of radical terms, and application of these as collateral aids. As his knowledge of
the oriental dialects was very confined, upon some occasions he has indulged too freely to fancy; yet his defects
in this kind of learning form a strong plea in his favour;
for if, without fully understanding these languages, he has
succeeded in tracing out so many radicals as his table of
them exhibits, and more especially if he has been right in
explaining them, it will follow that his explanations must
be founded on truth, and therefore are not chimerical. In
opposition, however, to them, Mr. Bryant experienced
some severe and petulant attacks: first, from a learned
Dutchman, in a Latin review of his work; and shortly after
from the late Mr. Richardson, who was privately assisted
by sir William Jones; a circumstance which there is reason to think Mr. Bryant never knew. Mr. Richardson, in
the preface to his Persian Dictionary, has no doubt successfully exposed some of Mr. Bryant’s etymological mistakes with regard to words of eastern origin. Bryant had
a favoyrite theory with regard to the Amonians, the original inhabitants of Kgypt^ whose name, as well as descent,
he derives from Ham, but Richardson has stated an insuperable objection to the derivation of the name, for
though the Greeks and Latins used Ammon and Hammou
indifferently, yet the Heth in Ham is a radical, not mutable
or omissible; and had the Greeks or Latins formed a word
from it, it would have been Chammon, and not Ammon,
even with the aspirate. To these and other strictures, Mr.
Bryant replied in an anonymous pamphlet, of which he
printed only a few copies for the perusal of his friends;
and that part of his work which relates to the Apamean.
medal having been particularly attacked, especially in the
Gentleman’s Magazine, he defended himself in “A Vindication of the Apamean Medal, and of the inscription
NilE, together with an illustration of another coin struck
at the same place in honour of the emperor Severus.
” This
was first published in the Archaeologia, and afterwards separately, 1775, 4to, and although what he offered on the
subject was lightly treated by some, whose knowledge in
inedallic history is allowed to be great, yet the opinion of
professor Eckhel, the first medallist of his age, is decidedly
in favour of Mr. Bryant. And whatever may be the merit,
in the opinion of the learned, of Mr. Bryant’s “New System
” at large, no person can possibly dispute, that a very
uncommon store of learning is perceptible through the
whole; that it abounds with great originality of conception, much perspicacious elucidation, and the most happy
explanations on topics of the highest importance: in a
word, that it stands forward amongst the first works of its
age.
, an ingenious Frenchman, was a native of Caen in the seventeenth
, an ingenious Frenchman,
was a native of Caen in the seventeenth century, and the
discoverer of the art of making figured diaper. He did not,
however, bring it to perfection, for he only wove squares
and flowers; but his son Richard Graindorge, living to
the age of eighty-two, had leisure to complete what his
father had begun, and found a way to represent all sorts
of animals, and other figures. This work he called Hautelice, perhaps because the threads were twisted in the
woof. They are now called damasked cloths, from their
resemblance to white damask. This ingenious workman,
also invented the method of weaving table napkins; and
his son, Michael, established several manufactures in different parts of France, where these damasked cloths are
become very common. The same family has produced several other persons of genius and merit among these is
James Graindorge, a man of wit and taste, and well skilled
in antiquities he is highly spoken of by M. Huet, who
was his intimate friend. His brother Andrew, also,
doctor of physic of the faculty at Montpellier, was a learned
philosopher, who followed the principles of Epicurus and
Gassendi. He died January 13, 1676, aged sixty. He
left, “Traite de la Nature du Feu, de la Lumiere, et des
Couleurs,
” 4to; “Traite de TOrigine des Macreuses,
”
De Interpretatione
” to this gentleman.
, an ingenious Frenchman, was born at Clameci, of a good family,
, an ingenious Frenchman, was born
at Clameci, of a good family, in 1635 and was educated
at Nevers, Auxerre, and Paris, and lastly studied divinity
in the Sorbonne. In the mean lime, he cultivated the
art of painting, which he was supposed to understand in
theory as well as practice. The former accomplishment
led him to an acquaintance with du Fresnoy, whose Latin
poem upon painting he translated into French. Menage
also became acquainted with his great merit, and procured
him, in 1652, to be appointed tutor to the son of Mons
Amelot: in which he gave such satisfaction, that, when his
pupil was old enough to travel, he attended him to Italy.
There he had an opportunity of gratifying his taste for
painting; and upon his return to Paris, he devoted himself to the study of that art, and soon acquired a name
among connoisseurs. In 1682, Amelot, his quondam pupil, being sent on an embassy to Venice, de Piles attended
him as secretary; and, during his residence there, was sent
by the marquis de Louvois into Germany, to purchase pictures for the king, and also to execute a commission relating to state affairs. In 1685, he attended M. Amelot to
Lisbon; and in 1689 to Switzerland, in the same capacity.
In 1692, he was sent to Holland, apparently as a picturecollector, but in reality to act secretly with the friends of
France. On this occasion, however, he was discovered,
and thrown into prison, where he continued till the peace
of Ryswick, and amused himself with writing “The Lives
of Painters.
” In