FRERE, John Hookham (1769-1841), an English diplomatist and author, was born in London, May 21, 1769. His father, John Frere, a gentleman of a good Suffolk family, had been educated at Caius College, Cambridge, and would have been senior wrangler in 1763 but for the powerful competition of Paley; his mother, daughter of Mr John Hookham, a rich London merchant, was a lady of no small ability and culture, accustomed to amuse her leisure with the pleasures of versification; and his father’s sister Ellinor was married to Sir John Fenn, the learned editor of the Paston Letters, and contributed with her own pen to the formation of a library of fiction for children. Young Frere was sent to Eton in 1785, and there began that intimacy with Canning which so greatly affected his after life. From Eton he went to his father’s college at Cambridge, and graduated B.A. in 1792 and M.A. in 1795. He entered public service in the foreign office under Lord Grenville, and sat from 1796 to 1802 as member of parliament for the close borough of Looe in Cornwall. From his boyhood he had been a warm admirer of Pitt, and along with Canning he entered heart and soul into the defence of his Government, and contributed freely to the pages of the Anti-Jacobin. On Canning’s removal to the board of trade in 1799 he succeeded him as under secretary of state; in October 1800 he was appointed envoy extraordinary and plenipotentiary to Lisbon; and on September 1802 he was transferred to Spain, where he remained for two years. He was recalled on account of a personal disagreement he had with the “Prince of Peace,” but his conduct was approved by the ministry, and in 1808 he was again sent out as plenipotentiary to Ferdinand VII. The condition of Spain rendered his position a very responsible and ...difficult one, but had it not been for one unfortunate step he would have left the country with greatly increased reputation. When Napoleon began to advance on Madrid it became a matter of supreme importance to decide whether Sir John Moore, who was then in the north of Spain, should endeavour to anticipate the occupation of the capital or merely make good his retreat, and if he did retreat whether he should do so by Portugal or by Galicia. Frere was strongly of opinion that the bolder was the better course, and he urged his views on Sir John Moore with an urgent and fearless persistency that on one occasion at least overstepped the limits of his commission. After the disastrous retreat to Corunna, the public accused Frere of having by his advice endangered the British army, and though no direct censure was passed upon his conduct by the Government, he was called home, and the Marquis of Wellesley was appointed in his place. Thus ended Frere’s public life. He afterwards refused to undertake an embassy to St Petersburg, and twice declined the honour of a peerage. In 1816 he married Elizabeth Jemima, dowager countess of Erroll, and in 1820, on account of her failing health, he went with her to the Mediterranean. There he finally settled in Malta, and though he afterwards visited England more than once, the rest of his life was for the most part spent in the island of his choice. In quiet retirement he devoted himself to various literary labours, studied his favourite Greek authors, and taught himself Hebrew and Maltese. His hospitality was well known to many an English guest, and his charities and courtesies endeared him to his Maltese neighbours; and when he died in 1841, his loss was evidently regarded by rich and poor as a common calamity.
Frere’s literary ability was early displayed. He was a contributor at Eton to the school magazine known as the Microcosm, and gained the members’prize at Cambridge in 1792 by an essay on the strange question, “Whether it were possible to hope for improvement in morals and the cultivation of virtue in the rising republic of Botany Bay ?” During the first period of his public life he was one of the chief writers in the Anti-Jacobin, contributing, among other pieces, “The Loves of the Triangles,” a clever parody of Darwin’s “Loves of the Plants,” and sharing with Canning the honour of “The Needy Knife-Grinder” and “The Rovers.” In 1817 he published a mock-heroic poem entitled, Prospectus and Specimen of an intended National Work by William and Robert Whistlecraft, of Stow∙Markct, in Suffolk, Harness and Collar makers, intended to comprise the most interesting particulars relating to King Arthur and his Round Table. It attracted considerable attention at the time, and though it was afterwards comparatively forgotten, it served to bring again into fashion the octave stanza of the Italians, and formed, as far at least as its versification was concerned, the acknowledged model of Byron’s Bcppo. Much greater importance attached to the translations of Aristophanes, by which indeed Frere occupies an almost unrivalled position in English literature. The principles according to which lie conducted his task were elucidated in an article on Mitchell’s Aristophanes, which he contributed to The Quarterly Review, vol. xxiii. The translations of The Acharnians, The Knights, The Birds, and The Frogs were privately printed, and were first brought into general notice by Sir G. Comewall Lewis in the Classical Museum for 1847. They were followed some time after by Theognis Restitutus, or the personal history of the poet Theognis, reduced from an analysis of his existing fragments. Frere’s complete works were published in 1871, with a memoir by his nephews, W. E. and Sir Bartie Frere, and reached a second edition in 1874. Compare also an article in the North American Review, vol. cvii∙, 1868.
[972 words — estimated reading time: 6 minutes]
FRÉRET, Nicolas (1688-1749), a French scholar, one of the most learned men of his age, was born at Paris, February 7 or 15, 1688. His father was procureur to the parliament of Paris, and destined him to the profession of the law. His passion for knowledge declared itself almost from his birth; and so early did he apply himself to studies of the most diverse kind, and accumulate vast stores of information, that he scarcely seemed to have any childhood. His precocity in learning and literary labour appears to rival even that of John Stuart Mill. He had for his tutors the historian Rollin and Father Desmolets. Amongst his early studies history, chronology, and mythology held a prominent place. To please his father he studied law and began to practice as a pleader; but the force of his genius soon carried him into his own path. At nineteen he was admitted to a society of learned men who sought more freedom of discussion than was to be had within the Academy, and he read before them memoirs on the religion of the Greeks, on the worship of Bacchus, of Ceres, of Cybele, and of Apollo. The astonishing reputation which he gained for learning, and the influence of the eminent men whose friendship he enjoyed, opened the way for his recognition by the Academy. He was hardly twenty-six years of age when he was admitted as pupil to the Academy of Inscriptions. One of the first memoirs which he read was a learned and critical discourse Sur Γ Origine des Français. His views, well-grounded, unusual, and audacious, excited great indignation in the Abbé Vertot, who had written on the same subject in a manner more flattering to the vanity of Frenchmen, and he denounced Fréret to the Government as a libeller of the monarchy. A lettre de cachet was issued, and Fréret was sent to the ...Bastille. He was thus silenced on the perilous subject, and his memoir even remained unpublished till nearly fifty years after his death. During his six months of confinement—“a solitude,” he says, “whose tranquillity there was nothing to disturb”—he devoted himself to the study of the works of Xenophon, the fruit of which appeared later in his memoir on the Cyropadia. The assertion, frequently repeated, that he was allowed to read nothing but Bayle’s famous Dictionary, and that he nearly learnt it by heart and imbibed all its scepticism, is entirely untrue and unjust. From the time of his liberation in June 1715 his life was uneventful. It was a life of the most simple, pure, and complete devotion to knowledge, with absolute indifference to fame. In January 1716 he was received associate of the Academy, and in December 1742 he was made perpetual secretary. He lived and laboured without internïission for the interests and the honour of the Academy, not even claiming any property in his own writings, which almost all remained unpublished till after his death. The list of his memoirs occupies four columns of the Nouvelle Biographie Générale. They treat of a large variety of subjects, chiefly in the fields of history, chronology, geography, mythology, and religion. Throughout he appears as the keen, learned, and original critic; examining into the comparative value and credibility of documents, distinguishing between the mythical and the historical, and separating traditions with an historical element from pure fables and legends. He rejected the extreme pretensions of the chronology of Egypt and China, and at the same time controverted the scheme of Sir Isaac Newton as too limited. He investigated the mythology not only of the Greeks, but of the Celts, the Germans, the Chinese, and the Indians, and was a vigorous opponent of “euhemeristic” interpretation. He w as one of the first scholars of Europe to undertake the study of the Chinese language: and in this he was engaged at the time of his committal to the Bastille. In addition to these labours and acquirements Fréret made himself master of modern literature, and was intimately acquainted with the dramatic works of the French, Italian, English, and Spanish poets. His multifarious pursuits left him no time for carrying on the publication of the Mémoires of the Academy, an enormous arrear of which had to be made up by his successor. He died at Paris, March 8, 1749.
Long after his death several works of an atheistic character were falsely attributed to him, and were long believed to be his. These were the Examen critique des apologistes de la religion chrétienne (1766), Lettre de Thrasybule à Leucippe, printed in London about 1768, and a few others. They were republished under the title of Oeuvres philosophiques in 1776. It is now believed that they were put forth in Fréret’s name by Holbach, Naigeon, and Lagrange, and that Fréret had nothing whatever to do with them. A very defective and inaccurate edition of Fréret’s works was published in 1796-1799. A new and complete edition was projected by Cham-ρollion-Figeac, but of this only the first volume appeared (1825). His manuscripts, after passing through many hands, were deposited in the library of the Institute.
[872 words — estimated reading time: 5 minutes]
