[99] An equally eulogistic epigram, by Heinsius, is quoted by Hallam, Literary History, II. 35.
[100] Scaligeriana, p. 130. This collection is the first of the series of anas since so popular.
[101] Ibid. p. 232.
[102] On Scaliger’s powers of abuse, see M. Nisard’s brilliant and amusing Triumvirat Literaire au XVI. Siecle, p. 296, 302, 305, &c. The “triumvirs” are Lipsius, Scaliger and Casaubon.
[103] Feller’s Dict. Biograph., vol. V. p. 312.
[104] Mithridates, I. 650.
[105] Cologne 1615.
[106] I cannot help thinking that Adelung quite underrates this curious work. I have seldom consulted it but with pleasure or profit. And the concluding chapter, “on the language of animals and of birds,” on which great ridicule has been thrown, is in reality a very curious, interesting, and judicious essay.
[107] Mr. Kenrick, in the preface of his recent work on Phœnicia, confesses that “the most diligent reader of ancient authors with a view to the illustration of Phœnician history, will find himself anticipated or surpassed by Bochart.”
[108] Bochart’s death was the consequence of a fit with which he was seized during a vehement dispute which he had with Huet, in the academy of Caen in 1667, respecting the authenticity of some Spanish medals. Huet appears to have long felt the memory of it painfully. He alludes to it in a letter to his nephew, Piadore de Chersigne, above forty years afterwards; and seems to console himself by thinking that Bochart’s death “ne lui fut causèe par notre dispute, sinon en partie.” It is curious that Disraeli has overlooked this in his “Quarrels of Authors.”