WOBO: Search for words and phrases in the texts here...

, member of the academies of Nancy, of Amiens, of Kouen, and Angers, was born at Paris on the 9th of July, 1712, of a reputable family. In his early youth his progress in his studies was rapid. His assiduous application, 'his lively genius, and mild demeanour, conciliated the esteem of his master, and gained the friendship of his juvenile companions. His taste for poetry was apparent at a very earl) period; but the designs of his parents for the advancement of his fortune would not permit him to resign himself entirely to his favourite pursuits, and he sacrificed in some degree his propensity to their wishes. He was placed tinder M. Holland, an advocate, and constantly attended to the regular discharge of business. His leisure hours were devoted to the Muse; and J.e gave up that time to poetry, which by many, at his age, is sacrificed to pleasure. In 1738 his “Ecole du Temps,” a comedy in verse, was represented with applause on the Italian theatre. Encouraged by this success, and with the approbation of M. Rolland, he produced, in the following year, at the French theatre, his “Esope au Parnasse,” a comedy in verse. The reputation of the young poet, and his character for probity, recommended him to M. Lailemand of Bety, a farmer-general, who was at that time forming a system of finance, and who felicitated himself in procuring such an assistant, and in attaching him to his interest. The occupations incident to this new department were probably the causes which prevented Pesselier from producing any other pieces for the stage. Poetry was, however, still the amusement of the time that could be spared from business. In 1748, he published his fables, and among his dramatic works appears a comedy, “La Mascarade du Parnasse,” in verse, and in one act, which was never performed.

, a celebrated surgeon, was born at Paris, March 13, 1674. From his childhood he displayed uncommon acuteness, and received his first instructions in anatomy from M. de Littre, a celebrated anatomist, who resided in his father’s house. Under this master he made such rapid progress, that he had scarcely attained the age of twelve, when M. de Littre found that he might be intrusted with the care of his anatomical theatre. He afterwards studied surgery under Castel and Mareschal, and was admitted master in 1700. In the course of no long time he became the first practitioner in Paris, and was “consulted in all cases of importance; and there were few operations of difficulty and delicacy which he did not superintend, or actually perform; and his hand and his counsels were alike successful. Such a reputation soon extended throughout Europe. In 1726 he was sent for by the king of Poland, and again in 1734 by Don Ferdinand, afterwards king of Spain: he re-established the health of both these princes, who endeavoured to retain him near their persons with the offer of great rewards, but could not overcome his attachment to his native place. Among his professional honours was that of member of the academy of ^ciences, director of the academy of surgery, censor and royal professor at the schools, and fellow of the royal society of London. He died at Paris, April 20, 1750, aged 76, regretted as much for his private virtues as his public services. He communicated many memoirs to the academy of sciences, and several to the academy of surgery, which were printed in their first volume. His only separate publication was his” Traite des Maladies des Os,“printed at Paris in 1705, in 12mo, and frequently reprinted, with additions. An edition in 1758, in two volumes, 12mo, was published by M. Ant. Louis, with an historical and critical essay respecting it subjoined; and his pupil, M. Leslie, published his posthumous works in 1774, with the title of” Traite des Maladies Chirurgicales et des Operations qui leur conviennent," in three vols. 8vo, with many plates of chirurgical instruments. His treatise on the bones involved him in several controversies; but the only chagrin which he felt arose from finding Winslow, who, as censor royal, had approved the work, retract his approbation, in a letter inserted in the Journal des Savans for May 1725.

, another very learned Frenchman, was born at Paris in 1617, and brought up to the profession of physic, in which faculty he took a doctor’s degree at Montpeliier: but, afterwards returning to Paris, neglected the practice of it, and gave himself up entirely to the study of polite literature. He lived some time with the first president Lamoignon, as preceptor to his sons; and afterwards with mons. Nicolai, first president of the chamber of accounts, as a man of letters and companion. He spent the greatest part of his life in composing; and had a wonderful facility with his pen, which enabled him to write much. He was deeply read in the ancient Greek and Latin authors, and joined to his skill in these, an uncommon knowledge in philosophical matters. He died in 1687, aged seventy.

, was born at Paris, with a natural turn for literature, but entered into the military line, and was captain of dragoons, in which situation he had the honour to be the instructor of Louis XVI. in the art of tactics. Being appointed inspector-general of the coasts, he executed his office with considerable attention; but having made enemies, by a decree of haughtiness in his manner, complaints were lodged against him, which caused him to be banished to his own estate. In this situation he died soon after, in 1778. He cultivated the Muses a good deal, and was intimate with Dorat, whose style he imitated. His poems have an elegance which makes amends for a certain degree of negligence.' Such: as, 1. “Zelie au bain,” a poem in six cantos 2 A Letter from Ovid to Julia. 3. Several fugitive pieces published in the Almanach des Muses. 4. An indifferent translation of Catullus. 5. “Les Soirees Helvetiennes, Alsaciennes, & Franc-Comtoises,” 1770, 8vo, a work agreeably varied, but not sufficiently correct in style. 6. “La Rosiere de Salency,” a pastoral, in three acts, which was approved. 7. “Les Campagnes de Maillebois,” 3 vols. 4to, printed in 1775, and now rare and of great value in France. 8. There is said also to be extant a manuscript work entitled “Les Soirees Proven9ales,” not inferior to his “Soirees Helvetiennes.”

, one of the most celebrated sculptors that France has produced, was born at Paris in 1714, the son of a joiner, and by his talents became not only sculptor to the king, but chancellor of the academy of painting, and knight of the order of St. Michael. He did not manifest any early disposition for designing; he loved to model, but set about it awkwardly, and finished nothing but by means of indefatigable labour. A visit to Italy gave him that facility which he could not acquire at home. He there studied the works of the great artists, and returned thoroughly inspired with their genius. He died at Paris, Aug. 20, 1785. His most known works are, 1. “A Mercury and a Venus,” which he made by order of Louis XV. and which were presented to the king of Prussia. The king, who was delighted with them, was desirous to see the sculptor; and Pigalle, some time after, went to Berlin, but, being announced as the author of the Mercure de France, could not obtain an audience. When Frederic understood the mistake, he was very anxious to repair it; but Pigalle was already gone in some digust. Pigalle maintained that none of the heads of Frederic did justice to his physiognomy, which, in point of spirit, was the finest he had ever seen; and much regretted that he had not been allowed to model it. 2. The monument of marechal Saxe, in which the beauty of the whole obliterates all objections to the parts. 3. The pedestrian statue of Louis *XV. executed in bronze for the city of Rheims. 4. The statue of Voltaire. 5. A little boy holding a cage. '6. A girl taking a thorn from her foot. 7. Several busts of men of letters who were his friends. If Pigaile cannot be ranked among the men of the first genius in his art, the good sense of his designs, and the soundness of his taste, afford him a place in the very next class.

, a French mathematician and astronomer, was born at Paris, in 1711. In 1727 he became a member of the canons regular of the congregation of France. He was intended for the church, hut the freedom of his opinions displeased his superiors, and after a few years’ study of theology, he devoted himself entirely to the sciences. In 1749 he was appointed a member of the academy of sciences in Rouen, and was elected to fill the office of astronomer, and attained to first-rate excellence. His earliest production, as an author, was the “Calculation of an Eclipse of the Moon,” on the 23d of December 1749. Lacaille had calculated it at Paris; but the calculations differed by four minutes: Lacaille., however confessed his error, and received Pingre into his friendship. In May 1753 he was elected correspondent of the Academy of Sciences at Paris, after having sent them an observation of the transit of Mercury, which he made at Rouen. He was next appointed librarian of the abbey of St. Genevieve, obtained the construction of an observatory, and was furnished by the abbot and chapter with a six-foot telescope, while he had the loan of an excellent quadrant from the academy. At the desire of Le Monnier, he next engaged in calculating “A Nautical Almanack,” to enable navigators more easily to ascertain the longitude by means of lunar observations. He calculated a table of the eclipses visible of the sun and moon from the commencement of the Christian aera to 1900, and afterwards a table of the eclipses visible from the northern pole to the equator, for a thousand years before our aera. The utility of these labours for verifying historical dates, induced the Academy of Inscriptions to insert a part of them in the forty-second volume of their Memoirs. He published the “State of the Heavens” for 1754: in this the moon’s place was calculated with the utmost exactness according to the tables of Dr. Halley for noon and midnight, with the right ascension in seconds of time twice a day. In 1753 he published “A Memoir relating to the Discoveries made in the South Sea, during the Voyages of the English and French round the World.” In 1760, Pingre left France for the island of Rodriguez, in the Indian ocean, to observe the transit of Venus, that was to take place in the following year; and on the 6th of June of that year he made his observations, from which he concluded that the parallax, of the sun was 10“. 2. At the same time the English astronomer Mason concluded, from the observations which he made at the Cape of Good Hope, that the parallax was 8”. 2. La Lande, in his “Astronomy,” published in 1764, adopted a medium between these conclusions, and supposed l,he parallax to be 9“, in which he was followed by astronomers in general, till more numerous observations, made on the transit of 1769, led to a different result. After the return of Pingre from the East, he published a description of Pekin, in which he shewed the position of that capital from the result of a number of calculations of eclipses; and ascertained its longitude by other calculations, with a degree of precision to which none of the labours of the scientific missionaries had any pretensions. In 1769 he sailed for the island of St. Domingo, on board the Isis man of war, to observe the transit of Venus, and performed the service committed to him in the most able and satisfactory manner possible. An account of this voyage, which proved of considerable importance to the science of geography, as well as astronomy, appeared in 1773, in two vols. 4to. After comparing the results of the immense number of calculations made by the observers of the transit in 1769J the sun’s parallax has been concluded to be about 8”. 6. In 1771, Pingre made another voyage, on board the Flora frigate, with a view of extending the interests of geographical and astronomical knowledge, having with him, as the companion of his pursuits, the chevalier de Borda, a celebrated engineer and geometrician. The account of their proceedings, observations, and experiments, was published in 1778, in two vols. 4to. In 1784, M. Pingre published his “Cometography, or historical and theoretical treatise on Comets,” in two vols. 4tc, which is his most considerable work, and contains calculations of the orbits of all the comets of which an. account has been preserved. After a long life, spent in the most important services to the world, he died in the month of May 179tf, leaving behind him a high character for integrity, having enjoyed the esteem of the public, as well as that of his friends. He was author of many other works besides those that have been already noticed.

His son, of the same name, was born at Paris in 1655, entered into the army under his father, rose to the post of commander-in-chief in the French Netherlands, and at length to the still more important one of a marshal of France in 1734. He died at Paris in the year 1743, at the age of 88. He was author of a work “On the Art Military,” published by his only son James Francis, marquis of Chastenet, who died in 1782. He was the author of some political works.

, son of the preceding, was born at Paris in 1692. He was also a distinguished poet, but adopted the ecclesiastical habit, and in 1720 published his poem “On Grace.” From his retirement, D'Aguesseau brought him again into the world, and cardinal Fleury afterwards gave him a place in the finances; on which he married, and lived happily, till the loss of an only son threw him into a deep melancholy. He died in 1763, at the age of 71. His poetical writings are, “Poems on Religion and Grace;” “Odes,” of which the diction is splendid, and the sentiments elevated; “Epistles,” and a “Translation of Milton’s Paradise Lost.” In prose he wrote “Reflexions sur la Poesie” “Memoires sur la Vie de Jean Racine” “Remarques sur les Tragedies de J. Racine.” Besides these, he contributed several dissertations to the Memoires of the Academy of Inscriptions, of which he was a member. His works were collected and published in 6 vols. 12mo.

, one of the best French comic writers after Moliere, was born at Paris in 1647. He had scarcely finished his studies, when he was seized with a passion for travelling, and an ardent desire to see the different countries of Europe. He went to Italy first, but was unfortunate in his return thence; for, the English vessel bound for Marseilles, on which he embarked at Genoa, was taken in the sea of Provence by the Barbary Corsairs; and he was carried a slave to Algiers. Having some acquaintance with the art of French cookery, he procured an office in his master’s kitchen. His amiable manners and pleasant humour made him a favourite with all about him, and not a little so with the women; but being detected in an intrigue with one of them, his master insisted upon his submitting to the law of the country, which obliged a Christian, convicted of such an offence, either to turn Mahometan, or to suffer death by fire. Regnard, however, was saved from either punishment, by the intervention of the French consul, who having just received a large sum for his redemption, sent him home, about 1681.

, or Des-Marais (Francis Seraphin), a French writer, was born at Paris in 1632 and, at fifteen, distinguished himself by translating the “Batrachomyomachia” into burlesque verse. At thirty, he went to Rome as secretary to an embassy. An Italian ode of his writing procured him a place in the academy de la Crusca in 1667; and, in 1670, he was elected a member of the French academy. In 1684, he was made perpetual secretary, after the death of Mezeray; and it was he who drew up all those papers, in the name of the academy, against Furetiere. In 1668, the king gave him the priory of Grammont, which determined him to the ecclesiastical function: and, in 1675, he had an abbey. His works are, an Italian translation of Anacreon’s odes, which he dedicated to the academy de la Crusca in 1692; a French grammar and two volumes of poems, in French, Latin, Italian, and Spanish. He translated, into French, Tully “De Divinatione, & de Finibus” and Rodrigue’s “Treatise of Christian perfection,” from the Spanish. He died in 17 Is, aged 82. “He has done great service to language,” says Voltaire, “and is the author of some poetry in French and Italian. He contrived to make one of his Italian pieces pass for Petrarch’s but he could not have made his French verses pass for those of any great French poet.”

, a French writer, very learned in Oriental history and languages, was born at Paris in 1646; and, being taught classical literature by the Jesuits, and philosophy in the college of Harcourt, afterwards entered into the congregation of the oratory, where he did not continue long. His father being first physician to the dauphin, he was early introdued to scenes, where his parts, his learning, and his politeness, made him admired. His reputation was afterwards advanced and established by several learned works, which he published. In 1700, heattended cardinal de Noailles to Rome; and received great honours, together with the priory of Frossey in Bretagne, from pope Clement V. Returning by Florence he was honoured in the same manner by the great duke; and was also made a member of the academy de la Crusca. On his return to France he devoted himself entirely to letters, and composed a great number of learned dissertations, which are printed in the “Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions,” of which he was a member, as well as of the French academy. He died in 1720. Voltaire blames him for having prevented Bayle’s dictionary from being printed in France. This is very natural in Voltaire and Voltaire’s followers; but it is a more serious objection to Renaudot, that, while his love of learning made him glad to correspond with learned Protestants, his cowardly bigotry prevented him from avowing the connection. Not long before Dr. Pocock’s death that eminent orientalist received a letter from Renaudot, in which he professes a very high esteem for the doctor, desires the liberty of consulting him in all the doubts that should occur in preparing his “Collection of Liturgies,” &c. and promises, in return for this favour, to make a public acknowledgment of it, and preserve a perpetual memory of the obligation; yet, when the above work appeared, he travelled out of his way to reproach Dr. Pocock with a mistake, which was perhaps the only one that could be discovered in his writings.

, son of the preceding, was born at Paris in the year 1577. While his father afforded every encouragement to his rising talents, his mind was naturally directed to the study of medicine, in which his progress was uncommonly rapid. He took his degree in 160-1, and a very few years after acquired great reputation as an author. In 1613, he was appointed royal professor of anatomy and botany by Louis XIII.; and in this latter capacity he petitioned the king for the establishment of a botanic garden in the university of Paris. He subsequently held the appointment of physician to queen Mary de Medicis, and accompanied that princess in her travels; he arrived at Cologne after her death, in July 1642, and returned to Paris, where he resumed his profession. After having twice undergone the operation of lithotomy, he lived to the age of eighty years, and died at Paris February 19, 1657.

, wife of one of the republican ministers of France, who signed the order for the execution of the king, was born at Paris in 1754. She was the daughter of an engraver, and acquired some skill in music and painting, and a general taste for the fine arts. In 1780 she married Roland, and in 1787 visited Switzerland and England, and in these countries is said to have acquired that ardent attachment to the principles of liberty, which was in general so little understood by her countrymen. M. Roland having been appointed inspector of the manufactories at Lyons, was deputed to the constituent assembly, to obtain from it succours necessary for the payment of the debt of that town. Madame Roland at this period settled with her husband in the capital, and took delight in making her house the rendezvous of the Brissotine party, and among them acquired such superiority, that her biographers would have us believe that, for a time, she was the secret power that directed the whole government of France; perhaps one reason why it was so ill directed. Jn Marcji 1792, when the king endea r voured to allay the public discontents, by appointing 3, popular administration, Roland was chosen minister or the interior, and what kind of minister he was may be conjectured from a speech of Danton’s. When Roland resigned, and was urgently pressed by the assembly to resume his functions, Dan ton exclaimed, “if we give an invitation to Roland, we must give one to his wife too. I know all the virtues of the minister, but we want men who see otherwise than by their wives.” Indeed this lady, who had a remarkably good opinion of herself, informs us in her memoirs that she was in fact the minister without the name; and revised, or perhaps dictated, the letter which Roland addressed to the king on going out of office; “if he had written sermons,” said she, “I should have done the same.” On the 7th of December, 1792, having appeared at the bar of the national convention, to repel a denunciation made against her, she spoke with ease and eloquence, and was afterwards admitted to the honours of a sitting. She presented herself there again, when the decree was passed against her husband; but then, her eloquence having lost its charms, she was refused a hearing, and was herself sent to the Abbaye. From this prison she wrote to the assembly, and to the minister of the interior; her section also demanded her liberty, but it was in vain; and on the 24th of June, 1793, she was sent to the convent of St. Pelagic, which had been converted into a prison, where she passed her time in consoling her fellow prisoners, and composing an account of her own life, which has since been published. At length she was called before the revolutionary tribunal, and on Nov. 8, was condemned to death for having conspired against the unity and indivisibility of the republic. Her execution immediately followed. On passing the statue of liberty, in the Place de la Revolution, she bent her head towards it, exclaiming, “O Liberty, how many crimes are perpetrated in thy name.” She left one daughter, whose only provision was her mother’s writings, which are as follows: “Opuscules,” on moral topics, which treat of the soul, melancholy, morality, old age, friendship, love, retirement, &c. “Voyage en Angleterre et en Suisse;” and when in prison she composed what she entitled “Appel a Timpartiale Posterite”,“containing her own private memoirs, a strange mixture of modern philosophy and the current politics of the revolution, with rhapsodies of romance, and every thing that can shew the dangers of a <* little learning.” Although this work was written when. she was in hourly expectation of death, its principal characteristics are levity and vanity. She was unquestionably a woman of considerable abilities, and might have been, what we are told she was very ambitious of, a second Macauley, without exciting the envy of the amiable part of her sex; but she would be the head of a political party that was to guide the affairs of a distracted nation, and she fell a sacrifice to the confusion of principle in which she had assisted.

, a distinguished French painter, was born at Paris in 1630. His first studies were under the direction of Swanefelt, but he afterwards visited Italy, and accomplished himself in architecture, perspective, and landscape. On his return to Paris he immediately obtained eminence, and was employed at IVLrly. He was truly accomplished in painting edifices from his minute attention to the principles of architecture. After being patronized by Louis XIV. he was compelled to leave his native country on account of his religion, being a strict protestant. Housseau afterwards visited Holland, whence he was invited to England by the duke of Montague, to exert his talents on the magnificent palace at Bloomsbury, now the British museum. Here he painted a great deal; and many of his works are also to be seen at Hampton Court. He died in England in 1694, and was buried in St. Anne’s, Soho.

, a celebrated French poet, was born at Paris in 1669: he was the son of a shoe-maker, who, however, being a man of substance, gave him a good education; and Rousseau soon shewed himself worthy of it. He discovered early a turn for poetry; and, at twenty, was distinguished for some little productions, full of elegance, taste, and spirit. In 1688 he attended M. de Bonrepos as page in his embassy to the court of Denmark; and passed thence to England with marshal Tallard in quality of secretary. Yet, he had so little of avarice and ambition in his nature, that he never conceived the notion of n^aking a fortune; and actually refused some places which his friends had procured for him. In 1701 he was admitted into the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres. He had now obtained the reputation of a poet of the first rank, expected a place in the French academy, and was in hopes of obtaining Boileau’s pension, which was about to ba vacant, when an affair broke out which obliged him to quit his country, and embittered his whole life afterwards. Some verses full of reflections, and of a very exceptionable nature, were produced as Rousseau’s. Rousseau denied that they were his, and maintained them to be forgeries, contrived for his ruin by those who envied and hated him. He was tried in form; and, by an arrest of parliament in 1712, banished the kingdom for ever. Voltaire, who certainly has not shewn himself well affected to this poet, yet expresses himself thus upon the affair of his banishment “Those couplets, which were the cause of his banishment, and are like several which he owned, must either be imputed to him, or the two tribunals, which pronounced sentence upon him, must be dishonoured. Not that two tribunals, and even more numerous bodies, may not unanimously commit very great acts of injustice when a spirit of party prevails. There was a violent party against Rousseau.” The truth, however, is, that Rousseau was the author, although he denied it, and the probability is, that the tribunal before which he was tried had proof of this; such at least seems to be the opinion of most French writers. He now withdrew to Switzerland, where he found a lector in the count de Luc, the French ambassador to the* Helvetic body; who carried him to Baden, and introduced him to prince Eugene, who was there. He continued with the prince till the conclusion of the peace at Baden; and then accompanying him to Vienna, was introduced by hiril to the emperor’s court. He continued here three years, at the end of which he might have returned to his own country, some powerful friends offering to procure letters of grace for recalling him; but he answered, “that it did not become a man, unjustly oppressed, to seal an ignominious sentence by accepting such terms; and that letters of gracd might do well enough for those that wanted them, but certainly not for him who only desired justice.” He was afterwards at Brussels, and in 1721 went over to London, where he printed, in a very elegant manner, a collection of his poems, in 2 vols. 4to. The profits hence arising put his finances into good condition; but, placing his money with the emperor’s company at Ostend, which failed soon after, he was reduced to the necessity of relying upon private benefactions. The duke of Aremberg gave him the privilege of his table at Brussels; and, when this nobleman was obliged to go to the army in Germany in 1733, he settled on him a handsome pension, and assigned him an. apartment in his castle of Euguien near Brussels. Rousseau, losing afterwards the good graces of the duke of Aremberg, as he had before lost those of prince Eugene, for he does not seem to have been happily formed for dependence, listened at length to proposals of returning to France, and for that purpose went incognito to Paris in 1739. He stayed there some little time; but, finding his affairs in no promising train, set out for Brussels. He continued some time at the Hague, where he was seized with an apoplexy; but recovered so far as to be removed to Brussels, where he finished his unfortunate life, March 17, 1741. He now declared upon his death-bed, as he had declared to Rollin at Paris a little before, that he was not the author of the verses which occasioned his banishment.

, an architect and antiquary, was born at Paris in 1728, and was son of Julian le Roy, a celebrated mechanist, who so excelled in the art of watchmaking, that his time-pieces acquired the same celebrity in France as those of Graham in England. He died at Paris in 1759, at the age of 74, leaving four sons; of whom Julian became an eminent architect, and greatly improved the French style of architecture. He wrote, 1. “Ruines des plus beaux Monumens de la Grece,” which obtained for the author admission into the Academy of Inscriptions. This first appeared in 1758, but many errors having been pointed out by our Athenian Stuart, he published a more correct edition in 1770. 2. “Histoire de la disposition et tiesformes differentes des Temples des Chretiens;” 3. “Observations sur les Edifices des anciens Peuples. 4.” De la Marine des anciens Peuples.“5.” Les Navires des Anciens,“1783, 8vo, and in 1785, another on the same subject; which was followed, in 1796, by a memoir on cutting masts in the Pyrenees. This ingenious man died at Paris in the year 1803, at the age of seventy-five. His brother Peter was watch-maker to the king, and published memoirs for the clock-makers of Paris,” Etrennes Chronometriques,“” Treatise on the Labours of Harrison and le Roy for the Discovery of Longitude at Sea." He died in 1785. The English, on account of their numerous discoveries in this art, had enjoyed such a reputation for the excellence of their clocks and watches, that they found every where a market, in preference to any others, and tbr French themselves were obliged to come to England for their time-pieces, until Julian le Roy, the father, had the honour of removing, in part, this pre-eminence, and of transferring it to the French. He made many discoveries in the construction of repeating-clocks and watchc- in second and horizontal watches he invented an universal compass with a sight an extremely useful ar.d simple contrivance for drawing a meridional line, and finding the declination of the needle; and a new universal horizontal dial. It is to him we are indebted for the method of compensating for the effects of heat and cold in the balances of chronometers, by the unequal expansion of different metals, a discovery which has been brought by our English artists to a state of great perfection, although it had been thrown aside by the inventor’s son, Peter.

, a French orator and poet, was born at Paris in 1643, and educated in the Jesuits’ college, where he afterwards became professor of humanity and rhetoric. In 1667, when only twenty-four, he wrote a Latin poem, upon the conquests of Lewis XIV. which was thought so excellent, that Peter Corneille translated it into French, and presented it to the king; apologizing, at the same time, for not being able to convey to his majesty the beauties of the original. No introduction could be more favourable, and the king shewed him singular respect ever after. He was one of those who had the care of the Delphine editions of the classics; and Virgil was allotted to him, which he published with good notes, and a,correct life of the author, in 1675, 4to. He published also panegyrics, funeral orations, and sermons, which shew him to have been a very great orator: but his master-piece is a funeral oration for the prince of Luxembourg. There are also tragedies of his writing in Latin and French, which had the approbation of Corneille, and therefore cannot be without merit; but he would not suffer them to be performed. A collection of his Latin poems was published at Paris, in 1680, in 12mo, and at Antwerp in 1693. He died at Paris May 27, 1725, in his eighty-second year.

, a very eminent French surgeon, was born at Paris in October 1732, and after studying there, acquired the first rank in his profession, and in every situation which he filled, his knowledge, skill, and success, were equally conspicuous. He became censor-royal of the academy of sciences, professor and demonstrator of the surgical schools, secretary of correspondence, surgeon-major of the hospital of invalids, and a member of the institute. His education had been more liberal and comprehensive than usual. He not only was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar, but was well acquainted with the English, Italian, and German languages. Besides his public courses of lectures on anatomy and surgery, he instructed many private pupils, not only of his own country, but those of foreign nations who were attracted to Paris by his fame as a teacher, and were delighted with his unaffected politeness and candour. In his latter days Bonaparte appointed him one of his consulting surgeons, and he was one of the first on whom he bestowed the cross of the legion of honour. Sabatier died at Paris July 21, 1811. He retained his faculties to the last, but we are told became ashamed of his bodily weakness. “Hide me,” he said to his wife and son, “from the world, that you may be the only witnesses of this decay to which I must submit.” A little before his death he said to his son, “Contemplate the state into which I am fallen, and learn to die.” His humane attention to his patients was a distinguished feature in his character. During any painful operation he used to say, “Weep! weep! the more you express a sense of your sufferings, the more anxious I shall be to shorten them.”

, a French poet of the seventeenth century, was born at Paris, and studied with a view to the ecclesiastical profession, but his private attachment was wholly to the belles lettres and poetry, which he diligently cultivated. He spent the greatest part of his life at Livri, of which he was abbot, though no credit to the order, for he lived in a voluptuous, indolent style, circulating and practising the pernicious maxims he had learnt from his master, the poet Theophile, and to which he was so strongly attached, that Boileau in his first satire places St. Pavin’s conversion among things morally impossible. The story of his having been converted by hearing a terrible voice at the time Theophile died, in 1625, is entirely without foundation, for his conversion preceded his own death but a very short time. He died in 1670, leaving several poems not inelegantly written, which form part of vol. IV. of Barbin’s collection; and a collection of his works was published in 1759, 12mo, with Charleval, Lalane, and MontplaUir. He was related to Claudius Sanguin, steward of the household to the king and the duke of Orleans, who published “Les He-ires” in French verse, Paris, 1660, 4to, in which the whole Psalter is translated.

, in Latin Santolius, a celebrated modern Latin poet, was born at Paris May 12, 1630, of a good family. He studied the belles lettres at the college of St. Barbe, and in that of Louis le Grand, under the learned Pere Cossart, and entering soon after among the regular canons of St. Victor, devoted himself wholly to poetry, commencing his caree/ by celebrating some great men of that time. He also was employed to write many of those inscriptions which may be seen on the public fountains and monuments of Paris, and this he did in a style at once clear, easy, and dignified. When some new hymns were wanted for the Paris breviary, he was requested by his brother Claude, Pelisson, and Bossuet, to compose them, which he accomplished with the greatest success and applause, in an elevated, perspicuous, and majestic style, suited to the dignity of the subject. The reputation which he gained by these'induced the order of Clugny to request some for their breviary. With this he complied, and in return they granted him letters of filiation, and a pension. Santeul was much esteemed by the literati of his time, and by many persons of rank, among whom were the two princes of Coiide 1 father and son, whose bounty he frequently experienced 44ud Louis XIV. who settled a pension upon him. He greatly offended the Jesuits, however, by his epitaph in praise of their enemy Arnauld. While SanteuPs Latin poems were always much admired by his countrymen, he seems to have enjoyed fully as much reputation, during his life-time, for his wit, and odditjes of character. La Bruyere, under the name of T/ieodes, has described him as, in one moment, good-humoured, tractable, easy, and complaisant, in another, harsh, violent, choleric, and capricious; as at once simple, ingenuous, credulous, sportive, and volatile; in short, a child with grey hairs, and as speaking like a fool, and thinking like a sage. He utters, adds La Bruyere, truths in a ridiculous manner, and sensible things in a siliy way; and we are surprised to find so much intellect shining through the clouds of buffoonery, contortions, and grimaces. He had great credit for his witticisms, many of which may be seen in the “Santoliana.” When the duke of Bourbon went to hold the states of Burgundy at Dijon, Santeul attended him, and died there, August 5, 1697, aged sixty-seven, as he was on the point of returning to Pans. His death was attributed to an inconsiderate trick played upon him by some one whom his oddity of character had encouraged to take liberties, and who put some Spanish snuff into his wine-glass, which brought on a complaint of the bowels that proved fatal in fourteen hours. Besides his Latin hymns, 12mo, he left a considerable number of Latin “Poems,” 1739, 3 vols. 12 mo.

, a French dramatic writer, was born at Paris, June 4, 1719. Abandoned by his friends, he was, at the age of thirteen, obliged to quit his studies, in which he was little advanced, and to practise a trade for his subsistence. He was first a journeyman, and then a master mason* and architect; which businesses he conducted with uncommon probity. Natural inclination led him to cultivate literature, and particularly the drama, for which he wrote various small pieces and comic operas, the most popular of which were, “Le Deserteur;” and “Richard Coeur de Lion.”“All of them met with great success, and still continue to be performed, but the French critics think that his poetry is not written in the purest and most correct style, and that his pieces appear to more advantage on the stage than in the closet. He possessed, however, a quality of greater consequence to a dramatic writer the talent of producing stage effect. He was elected into the French academy, in consequence of the success of his” Richard Coeur de Lion," and was intimately connected with all the men of letters, and all the artists of his time. He died in May 1797, aged seventy-eight.

, or familiarly in this country Stephens, and in France Estienne, the first of an illustrious family of printers, was born at Paris in 1470; and began the business of printing about 1503, in which year appeared the abridgment of the Arithmetic of Boethius, which is the first work known to have issued from his press. His printing-house was in the rue de Tecole de Droit, and his mark the old arms of the university, with the device, plus olei quam vini. His great object was correctness, and besides reading the proofs himself with the greatest care, he submitted them to the learned men who visited him. If, notwithstanding these pains, any mistakes occurred, he informed the reader, by an “errata,” an attention which he is said to have been the first who paid. He died at Paris, according to his biographers, July 24, 1520; but this has been doubted, as not agreeing with the date of the last work he printed. He left three sons, all printers, Francis, Robert, and Charles. His widow married Simon de Colines, or Colinseus, his partner. Among the works he executed^ which are in greatest request, are the “Psalterium quintuplex,” 1509 and 1513 the “Itinerarium” of Antoninus, 1512, and Mara “De Tribus fugiendis,” &c.

, the second of the name, and the eldest son of Robert, was born at Paris in 1528, and froiii his inf-mcy gave every promise of perpetuating the honours of the family. His tatuer, uoi having it in his power to superintend his education as he wished, entrusted that care to an able tutor, who was to instruct him in the elements of grammar. At this time his tutor, in his ordinary course, was teaching his other pupils the Medea of Euripides, and Henry was bo captivated with the sweetness and harmony of the Greek language, that he resolved immediately to learn it. His tutor, however, objected to this, as he thought that the Latin should always precede the Greek, in a course of education; but Henry’s father being of a different opinion, he was allowed to foilow his inclination, and his progress corresponded to the enthusiasm with which he entire < on this language. A few days were sufficient for the Greek grammar, and Euripides being then put into his hands, he read it with avidity, and could repeat most of the plays, even before he had become a thorough master of the language. He afterwards perfected himself in Greek under Turnebus and other eminent scholars, and at the same time did not neglect to make himself acquainted with the Latin, as may appear by the notes he published on Horace, when he was only twenty years of age. He also studied arithmetic, geometry, and even judicial astrology, then very fashionable, but he is said to have very soon discovered its absurdity.

, the second of that name, and brother to the preceding, was born at Paris in 1530. Remaining attached to the Roman catholic religion, he refused to accompany his father when he went to Geneva, on which account his father disinherited him; but by his talents and labours he was soon enabled to provide for himself. From 1556 he had a printing-office with many founts of beautiful types, as we may see from his edition of Despauter’s “Rudimenta,” the first book he printed. William Morel was his partner in the publication of some works, and among the rest an Anacreon, prepared for the press by his brother Henry. It is thought that he obtained the brevet of king’s printer after the death of his father, but we do not find that he assumed the title before 1561. He died in Feb. 1571, and in the month of March following, his nephew, Frederic Morel, was made king’s printer. He married Denisa Barbe, and had three sons, Robert, Francis, who died young, and Henry. His widow married Mauiert Patisson.

, one of the best painters hi his time which the French nation had produced, was born at Paris in 1617, and studied the principles of his art under Simon Vouet, whom he infinitely surpassed; and although he was never out of France, carried the art to a very high degree of perfection. His style was formed upon antiquity, and after the best Italian masters. He invented with ease, and his execution was always worthy of his designs. His attitudes are simple and noble, and his ex r pression well adapted to the subject. His draperies are designed after the manner of Raphael’s last works. Although he knew little of the local colours, or the chiaro scuro, he was so much master of the other parts of painting, that there was a great likelihood of his throwing off Vuuet’s manner entirely, had he lived longer. Immediately aiter Vouet’s death, he perceived that his master had led him out of the way: and by considering the antiques that were in France, and the designs and prints of the best Italian masters, particularly Raphael, he contracted a more refined style and happier manner. Le Brun could not forbear being jealous of Le Sueur, who did not mean, however, to give any man pain; for he had great simplicity of manners, and much candour, and probity. He died at Paris April 30, 1655, at no more than thirty-eight years of age. The life of St. Bruno, in twenty pictures, originally preserved in the Chartreux, and which employed him for three years, have, as Mr. Fuseli informs us, been “lately consigned to the profane clutch of restoration in the attic of the Luxembourg, and are now little more than the faint traces of what they were when issuing from the hand of their master. They have suffered martyrdom more than once.It is well that the nature of the subject permitted little more than fresco in the colouring at first, and that the great merit of their execution consisted in that breadth of vehicle which monastic drapery demands, else we should have lost even the fragments that remain.‘ The old man in the fore-ground, the head of St. Bruno, and some of the disputants in the back-ground of the Predication; the bishop and the condemned defunct in the funeral; the apparition of St. Bruno himself in the camp; the female figure in the eleemosinary scene, and what has suffered least of all, the death of St. Bruno, contain the least disputable marks of the master’s primitive touch. The subject of the whole, abstractly considered, is the personification of sanctity, and it has been represented in the series with a purity which seems to place the artist’s heart on a level with that of his hero. The simplicity which tells that tale of resignation and innocence, despises all contrast of more varied composition, though not always with equal success, St. Bruno on his bed, visited by angels, building or viewing the plan for building his rocky retreat; the hunting-scene, and’ the apotheosis; might probably have admitted happier combinations. As, in the different re* touchings, the faces have suffered most, the expression must be estimated by those that escaped; and from what still remains, we may conclude that it was not inferior to the composition.”

, a Frenchman, famous for his travels, was born at Paris in 1605. His father, who was a native of Antwerp, settled at Paris, and traded very largely in geographical maps, so that the natural inclination which Tavernier had for travelling was greatly increased, by the conversations which daily passed in his father’s house, concerning foreign countries. He began to gratify his passion so early, that, at the age of two and twenty years, he had seen the finest countries of Europe, France, England, the Low Countries, Germany, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, and Italy. During the space of forty years he travelled six times into Turkey, Persia, and the East Indies, and by all the different routes he could take. In the course of these peregrinations, he gained a great estate by trading in jewels; and, being ennobled by Louis XIV. purchased the barony of Aubonne, near the lake of Geneva, in 1668. He had collected a great number of observations, but he had not learned either to speak or write well in French; for which reason he was forced to employ others in drawing up his relations. M. Chappuseau, with whom he lodged at Geneva, lent him his pen for the two first volumes of his travels; and M. Chapelle for the third. They have frequently been printed, and contain several curious particulars; yet not without some fables, which were told him purely to impose upon his simplicity. He is charged also with stealing from others to fill up his own accounts: thus Dr. Hyde, having cited a very long passage from Tavernier, tells us that “he had taken it like a downright plagiary from a book printed at Lyons, 1671, in 8vo, and written by father Gabriel de Chinon, who had lived in Persia thirty years.”

, marquis de Louvois, by which title he is generally known, was born at Paris, January 18, 1641. He was the son of Mit-hel le Teilier, secretary of state, and afterwards chancellor of France, and keeper of the seals. The great credit and power of the father gave an early introduction to the son into the offices of slate, and he was onlv twenty- three when the reversion of the place of war-minister was assigned to him. His vigilance, activity, and application, immediately marked him as a man of superior talents for business; and two years afterwards, in 1666, he succeeded his father as secretary of state. In 1668 he was appointed post-mastergeneral, chancellor of the royal orders, and grand vicar of the orders of St. Lazarus and Mount Carmel; in all which places he fully justified the first conception of his talents. By his advice, and under his care, was built the royal hospital of invalids; and several academies were founded for the education of young men of good families in the military line. After the death of Colbert, in 1683, Louvois was appointed superintendant of buildings, arts, and manufactures. Amidst this variety of occupations, to which his genius proved itself fully equal, he shone most particularly in the direction of military affairs. He established magazines, and introduced a discipline which was felt with advantage in every department of the army. He several times acted in person as grand master of the ordnance, and in that branch of duty signalized his judgment and energy no less than in every other. The force of his genius, and the success of his most arduous undertakings, gained him an extreme ascendant over the mind of Louis XIV. but he abused his power, and treated his sovereign with a haughtiness which created disgust and hatred in all who saw it. One day, on returning from a council, where he had been very ill received by the king, he expired in his own apartment, the victim of ambition, grief, and vexation. This happened when he was no more than fifty-one, on the 16th of July, 1691.

, librarian to the king of France, and a celebrated writer of travels, was born at Paris in 1621, and had scarcely gone through his academical studies, when he discovered a strong passion for visiting foreign countries. At first he saw only part of Europe; but accumulated very particular informations and memoirs from those who had travelled over other parts of the globe, and out of those composed his “Voyages and Travels.” He laid down, among other things, some rules, together with the invention of an instrument, for the better finding out of the longitude, and the declination of the needle; which, some have thought, constitute the most valuable part of his works. Thevenot was likewise a great collector of scarce books in all sciences, especially in philosophy, mathematics, and history; and in this he may be said to have spent his whole life. When he iiad the care of the king’s library, though it is one of the best furnished in Europe, he found two thousand volumes wanting in it, which he had in his own. Besides printed books, he brought a great many manuscripts in French, English, Spanish, Italian, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Turkish, and Persic. The marbles presented to him by Mr. Nointel, at his return from his embassy to Constantinople, upon which there are bas-reliefs and inscriptions of almost two thousand years old, may be reckoned among the curiosities of his library. He spent most of his time among his books, without aiming at any post of figure or profit; he had, however, two honourable employments; for he assisted at a conclave held after the death of pope Innocent X. and was the French king’s envoy at Genoa. He was attacked with a slow fever in 1692, and died October the same year at the age of seventy-one. According to the account given, he managed himself very improperly in this illness: for he diminished his v strength by abstinence, while he should have increased it with hearty food and strong wines, which was yet the more necessary Oh account of his great age. “7'hevenot’s Travels into the Levant, &c.” were published in English, in 1687, folio; they had been published in French, at Paris, 1663, folio. He wrote also “L'Art de nager,” the Art of Swimming, 12 mo, 1696.

, whom L‘Avocat prqnounces one of the most judicious and accurate critics and historians that France has produced, was born at Paris Nov. 30, 1637. His father, John L,e Nain, was master of the requests. About the age of ten, he was sent to the famous seminary of the Port Royal, where his attention to instruction, and his proficiency, were very extraordinary, and where he very early became fond of ’the study of history. This partiality seems to have been first excited by a perusal of Baronius, and while thus employed he was perpetually putting questions to his master Nicole, who at first gave him such answers as came in his head at the moment, hut soon found that his pupil was not so easily satisfied; and Nicole, although by no means ignorHiit of history, used to dread his approach, lest he might ask questions for which he was not fully prepared. At the age of e ghteen Tillemont began to read the fathers, the lives of the apostles, and their successors in the primitive church, and drew up for himself an account of early ecclesia^tical history, in the manner of Usher’s Annals, a hook he much admired, and formed his pwn somewhat on the same plan. In the mean time he was successfully instructed in other branches but it was a considerable time before he made choice of a profession. In this he was at last influenced by M. Choart de Buzanval, bishop of Brauvais, who determined him in favour of the church, and gave him the tonsure. About 1663, he went to reside with M. Hermant, a canon of the cathedral of Beauvais, and remained there five or six years. He then returned to Paris, and lodged with M. Thomas de Fosse, an old school-fellow, for about two years; but although in all these situations he was constantly employed in study, and had the quiet enjoyment of his time, he removed to the country, and, after receiving the other orders of his church, and being ordained priest in 1676, he settled at Tillemont, whence he took his name, about a league from Paris. About this time he was employed, along with his friend M. de Sacy, on a life of St. Louis, and two years after he travelled in Flanders and Holland. After his return, he continued his studies, and, in 1690, began to publish his <k History of the Emperors,“which was very favourabl\ received, and made the public more anxious to see his history of the church, on which it was well known he had been for some time employed. His” History of the Emperors“was, in fact, a part of his ecclesiastical history; hut when he printed a volume, as a specimen, it fell into the hands of a licenser of the press, who made so many petty objections, that M. Tillemont determined to suppress the work rather than submit to the proposed alterations and omissions, as none of the objections were in any way contrary to the received doctrines of the church. He then, by the advice of his friends, published the history of the emperors separately; and there being no occasion in this case for a theological licenser, he published vol. I. in 1690, 4to; and completed the work in five vols, in 1701, which had abundant success; was reprinted at Brussels, and translated into English. This was followed by his ecclesiastical history,” Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire ecclesiastique des six premiers siecles," &c. 1693, &c. completed in sixteen volumes, quarto. Extreme accuracy of facts and dates constitute the great merit of this work, and the want of a more methodical arrangement, and of a better style, its chief objections. Dupin wishes he had reduced his work to the form of annals, in imitation of Baronius; and this opinion having been conveyed to M. Tillemont, he said he could not think of going over the materials anew, but was very willing to give his manuscripts to any person who would take the trouble to put them in the form of annals. No such person offering his services, M. Tillemont proceeded in his own way, in which he met afterwards with very little opposition, except a short controversy, of no great importance, with father Lamy.

, a French writer, and one of the Encyclopedists, was born at Paris in 1715, and was bred an advocate, but forsook the bar to cultivate general literature. In his youth he is thought to have been somewhat fanatical, as he wrote Latin hymns in praise of the abb Paris, at whose tomb extraordinary miracles were performed. (See Paris). An enthusiasm of a very opposite kind connected him with the philosophers who were exerting their powers against revealed religion, and in 1748 he contributed his first share by his book called “Moeurs,” or “Manners,” in which, although tolerably disguised, are some of those bold attacks, both on Christianity and morals, which afterwards appeared more plainly in the writings of his associates D'Alembert, Diderot, &c. This work procured him, however, a name in the world, although some have endeavoured to deprive him of it, by asserting that the work was written by an impious priest, and that Toussaint consented to bear the praise or blame. For this, however, there seems little foundation, if, according to the abbe Barruel, he afterwards publicly recanted his errors. In the mean time he published “Eciaircissemens sur les Mceurs,” 1764, which he meant as an apology for the former, but it was condemned by the parliament of Paris, and the author made his escape to Brussels, where he became editor of a French paper, devoted to the inte^ rests of the house of Austria. In this, of course, he treated the king of Prussia with little respect, even using the epithet, the “highwayman of the North,” and the philosopherking was not ignorant of this, but had been so much pleased with his book on “Manners,' 7 that he bestowed on him the professorship of logic and rhetoric at Berlin, where Tous* saint died in 1772. While there he published an excellent translation of Gellert’s Fables; and while in France had contributed some articles on jurisprudence to the Encyclopaedia, and assisted in a Dictionary of Medicine, published in 6 vols. folio. His” Mceurs" were translated into English about 1750.

, a French minister of state, was born at Paris, May 10, 1727, of a very ancient Norman family. His father was, for a long time, provost of the corporation of merchants. He was intended for the church, and went through the requisite preparatory studies; but whether he disliked the catholic religion, or objected to any peculiar doctrines, is not certain. It is generally supposed that the latter was the case, and the intimacy and correspondence he had with Voltaire, Diderot, D'Alembert, &c. afford very probable ground for believing him entirely of their opinion in matters of religion. He looked, however, to the political department, as that which was best adapted to his acquisitions, and the rer sources which he found in his ingenuity and invention. For this purpose he studied the sciences suited to his destination, and mixed experimental philosophy with mathematics, and history with political disquisition. He embraced the profession of the law, and at once displayed his views by fixing on the office of master of the requests, who is the executive officer of government, in operations of commerce and finance. His panegyrist, M. Condorcet, tells us, that a master of requests is rarely without a considerable share of influence respecting some one of the provinces, or the whole state; so that it seldom happens that his liberality or his prejudices, his virtues or his vices, do not, in the course of his life, produce great good or great mischief. About this period Turgot wrote some articles for the Encyclopedic, of which the principal were, Etymology, Existence, Expansibility, Fair, and Foundation. He had prepared several o.thers; but these five only were inserted. All these his biographer praises with more zeal than judgment; the article on Expansibility being very exceptionable, and that on Existence being little more than an ingenious commentary on the first principles of Des Cartes, and by no means deserving to be called the “only improvement in the science of the human mind since the days of Locke.”

, or Henry de Valois, a French critic of great abilities and learning, was born at Paris in 1603, of parents, whose circumstances supported them without any profession. He began his studies at Verdun in 1613, under the Jesuits, and the greatest hopes were formed of him from his childhood. He was recalled to Paris five years after, and continued there in the college of Clermont; where he learned rhetoric under Petavius, who, as well as father Sirmond, conceived a great esteem for him. After having maintained his theses in philosophy with much applause, he went to Bourges in 1622, to study the civil law; and at the end of two years returned to Paris, where he was received advocate. He frequented the bar for seven years, but more to oblige his father than out of any fondness for the law, which he at length quitted, and devoted himself entirely to literary pursuits. Greek and Latin authors were all his study, and all his pleasure. Sunday he consecrated to devotion, Saturday afternoon he allotted to his friends; but all the rest of the week was spent in reading and labour. His own library not sufficing, he borrowed books of every body; and he used to say, that he learned more from other people’s books than his own, because, not having the same opportunity of reviewing them, he read them over with more care. He acquired a great reputation by his learning and publications, when a misfortune befel him, which interrupted the course of his studies. He had always a weak sight; but continual application had hurt him so, in this respect, that he lost his right eye, and saw very indifferently with the left. This put him under the necessity of having a reader; for, though his father was of too sparing a humour to make him an allowance for this purpose, yet the defect was supplied by the generosity of his friends. His father, however, died in 1650; and then his circumstances were better suited to his necessities. The same year he composed an oration in praise of Christina queen of Sweden, who had just ascended the throne; and her majesty, by way of acknowledging the favour, promised to send him a gold chain, and gave him at the same time an invitation to accompany the learned Bochart to Sweden. But the chain never came, and the invitation ended in nothing, for which Valesius himself is said to have been to blame, having been so imprudent, while he was meditating this journey, as to make use of some satirical expressions on the learned in those parts; which, being related to the queen, occasioned her majesty’s neglect of him.

, or Adrien de Valois, brother of Henry, and a very learned man also, was born at Paris in 1607, and educated in the college of Clermont there, under the Jesuits. He followed the example of his brother, and had the same counsellors in his studies, the fathers Sirmond and Petavius. History was his principal object; and he spent many years in searching into the most authentic records, manuscript as well as printed. His long perseverance in these pursuits enabled him to give the public an elaborate Latin work, entitled “Gesta Francorum, seu de rebis Francicis,” in 3 vols. folio; the first of which came out in 1646, the two others in 1658. This history begins with the year 254; and ends with 752. It is written with care and elegance, and may serve for an excellent commentary upon the ancient historians of France, who wrote rudely and barbarously: but some have considered it as a critical work filled with rude erudition, rather than a history. Colbert asked him one day concerning his Latin history of France, and pressed him to continue it; but he answered the minister, that he might as well take away his life, as put him upon a work so full of difficulties, and so much beyond what his age could bear; for he was then in years. He is the author of several other Latin works; as “Notitia Galliarum, ordine alphabetico digesta,” 1675, in folio; a work of great utility in explaining the state of ancient Gaul. He was the editor, as we have mentioned, of the second edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus;” to which, besides additional notes of his brother and Lindenbrog, he added notes and emendations of his own. He wrote also a Panegyric upon the king, and a life of his brother. There is also a “Valesiana.”

, a learned member of the French Institute, whose Christian name we have not been able to discover, was born at Paris in 1735. In his youth he applied sedulously to study, but we have no account of his progress until he became acquainted with the celebrated geometrician Fontaine, who foresaw the progress which Vandermonde would one day make in the mathematics; and under his patronage, Vandermonde determined to devote himself to geometry. In 1771 he presented himself to the Academy of Sciences, into which he was admitted; and justified the suffrages of his associates, by a paper relative to the resolution of equations.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

, a French painter, very celebrated in his day, was born at Paris in 1582, and bred up under his father, who was a painter also. He knew so much of his art, and was in such repute at twenty years of age, that Mons. de Saucy, who was going ambassador to Constantinople, took him with him as his painter. There he drew the picture of the grand signer; and, though it was impossible to do it otherwise than by the strength of memory, and from a view of him at the ambassador’s audience, yet it proved a great likeness. Thence he went to Venice; and afterwards, settling himself in Rome, became so illustrious* in his profession, that, besides the favours which he received from pope Urban VIII. and the cardinal his nephew, he was chosen prince of the Roman academy of St. Luke. He staid fourteen years in Italy; and then, in 1627, Lewis XIII. who, in consideration of his capacity, hatl allowed him a pension all the while he was abroad, sent for him borne to work in his palaces. He practised both in portrait and history; and furnished some of the apartments of the Louvre, the palaces of Luxemburg and iSt. Germains, the galleries of cardinal Richelieu, and other public places, with his works. His greatest perfection lay in his colouring, and his brisk and lively pencil; otherwise he was but tery indifferently qualified. He had no genius for grand compositions, was unhappy in his invention, unacquainted with the rules of perspective, and understood but little of the union of colours, or the doctrine of lights and shadows. Yet France was indebted to him for destroying the insipid and barbarous manner which then reigned, and for beginning to introduce a better taste. The novelty of Vouet’s manner, and the kind reception he gave all who came to him, made the French painters, his contemporaries, follow it, and brought him disciples from all parts. Most of the succeeding painters, who were famous in their profession, were bred up under him, as Le Brun, Perrier, Mignard, Le Sueur, Dorigny, Du Fresnoy, and several others, whom he employed as assistants in a great number of pictures he drew, and from his instructions they well knew how to execute his designs. He had the honour also to instruct the king himself in the art of designing.