The life of Cardinal Mezzofanti: With an introductory memoir of eminent linguists, ancient and modernRussell, Charles William
History
The life of Cardinal Mezzofanti: With an introductory memoir of eminent linguists, ancient and modern
Russell, Charles William
Linguists; Mezzofanti, Giuseppe, 1774-1849
Bochart’s pupil and his friend in early life, (although they were
bitterly alienated from each other at a later period, and although
Bochart’s death is painfully associated with their literary quarrel[108])
the celebrated Peter Daniel Huet, can hardly deserve a place in the
catalogue of French linguists; but he was at least a liberal and
enlightened patron of the study.
Many of the French missionaries of the seventeenth century would deserve
a place in this series, and among them especially Francis Picquet, who,
after serving for several years as French consul at Aleppo, embraced a
missionary life, and at last was consecrated Archbishop of Bagdad in
1674. Le Jay, the projector and editor of the well-known polyglot Bible
which appeared in France a few years before the rival publication of
Brian Walton, though he is often spoken of as the mere patron of the
undertaking, was in reality a very profound and accomplished Orientalist.
The same may be said of Rapheleng, the son-in-law of Plantin, and often
described as his mere assistant in the publication of the King of
Spain’s Polyglot Bible. Matthew Veysiere de la Croze, too, the apostate
Benedictine, although a superficial scholar and a hasty and inaccurate
historian, was a very able linguist.
But, as we descend lower in the history of this generation of French
linguists, we find comparatively few names which, for variety of
attainments, can be compared with those of Italy or Germany. Beyond the
cultivation of the Biblical languages, little was done in France for this
department of study during the rest of the seventeenth century. There
seems but too much reason to believe that the reputation of the learned
but pedantic Menage as a linguist, is extravagantly exaggerated. He was
an accomplished classicist, and his acquaintance with modern languages
was tolerably extensive. He was a good etymologist, too, according
to the servile and unscientific system of the age. But his claims to
Oriental scholarship appear very questionable. And in truth during this
entire period, if it were not for the interest of the controversy above
referred to, on the antiquity and authority of the Masoretic Points,
it might almost be said that Oriental studies had fallen entirely into
disuse in France. Even of those who took a part in that discussion, the
name of Masclef (who knew Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, and Arabic,
with perhaps some of the modern languages) is the only one which can
approach the rank of the higher masters of the study. The three Buxtorfs
(father, son, and grandson), Guarin, and even Girandeau, were mere
Hebraists; patient and accurate scholars, it is true, but with few of the
characteristics of an eminent linguist. La Bletterie can hardly claim
even this qualified reputation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account