, one of the most useful French biographers, was born at Paris, March
, one of the most useful French
biographers, was born at Paris, March 11, 1685. He was
of an ancient and noble family, who were in very high
repute about 1540. He studied with success in the Mazarine college at Paris, and afterwards at the college Du
Plessis. He appears to have been of a serious turn of
mind, and of great modesty, and from a dread of the
snares to which he might be exposed in the world, de
termined to quit it for a religious life. On this subject he
consulted one of his uncles, who belonged to the order of
Barnabite Jesuits. This uncle examined him; and, not
diffident of his election, introduced him as a probationer
to that society at Paris. He was received there in 1702,
took the habit in 1703, and made his vows in 1704, at the
age of nineteen. After he had professed himself, he was
sent to Montargis, to study philosophy and theology, a
course of both which he went through with credit, although
he confesses that he never could relish the scholastic system
then in vogue. His superiors then, satisfied with his proficiency and talents, sent him to Loches, in Touraine, to
teach the classics and rhetoric. Here his devout behaviour
and excellent conduct as a teacher, made him be thought
worthy of the priesthood, which he received at Poitiers in
1708, and as he was not arrived at the age to assume this
orders a dispensation, which his uncommon piety had merited, was obtained in his favour. The college of Montargis having recalled him, he was their professor of
rhetoric during two years, and philosophy during four.
In spite of all these avocations, he was humanely attentive
to every call and work of charity, and to the instruction of
his fellow-creatures, many of whom heard his excellent
sermons, pure and unadorned in style, but valuable in
matter, which he delivered not only from the pulpits of
most of the churches within the province, but even from
those of Paris. In 1716 his superiors invited him to that
city, that he might have an opportunity of following, with
the more convenience, those studies for which he always
had expressed the greatest inclination. He not only understood the ancient, but almost all the modern languages;
a circumstance of infinite advantage in the composition of
those works which he has given to the public, and which
he carried on with great assiduity to the time of his death,
which happened after a short illness, July 8, 1738, at the
age of fifty-three. His works are, 1. “Le Grand Fébrifuge; or, a dissertation to prove that common Water is
the best remedy in Fevers, and even in the Plague; translated from the English of John Hancock, minister of St.
Margaret’s, London, in 12mo.
” This treatise made its
appearance, amongst other pieces relating to this subject,
in 1720; and was attended with a success which carried it
through three editions; the last came out in 1730, in 2
vols. 12mo, entitled “A Treatise on common Water;
”
Paris, printed by Cavelier. 2. “The Voyages of John
Ouvington to Surat, and divers parts of Asia and Africa;
containing the History of the Revolution in the kingdom of
Golconda, and some observations upon Silk- Worms,
” Paris, The Conversion of England to Christianity, compared with its pretended Reformtion;
” a work translated from the English, and written by
an English catholic, Paris, 1729, 8vo. 4. “The Natural
History of the Earth, translated from the English of Mr.
Woodward, by Mons. Nogues, doctor in physic with an
answer to the objections of doctor Camerarius containing,
also, several letters written on the same subject, and a
methodical distribution of Fossils, translated from the English, by Niceron,
” Paris, 1735, 4to. 5. “Memoirs of Men
illustrious in the republic of letters, with a critical Account
of their Works. Paris,
” 12uio. The first volume of this
great work appeared in 1727; the others were given to the
public in succession, as far as the thirty-ninth, which appeared in 1738. The fortieth volume was published after
the death of the author, in 1739. Since that event three
others were added, but in these are many articles of which
Niceron was not the author. It is not easy to answer all
the objections which may be offered to a work of this kind.
The author himself, in one of his prefaces, informs us that
some of his contemporaries wished for a chronological
order; some for the order of the alphabet; some for classing the authors according to the sciences or their professions, and some according to the countries in which they
were born. As his work, however, appeared periodically,
he thought himself justified in giving the lives without any
particular order, according as he was able to procure materials. That the French critics should dwell upon the unavoidable mistakes in a work of this magnitude, is rather
surprizing, for they have produced no such collection
since, and indeed Niceron has been the foundation, as far
as he goes, of all the subsequent accounts of the same
authors. Chaufepie only treats him with respect while
he occasionally points out any error in point of date or fact.