BAYLE, Peter, author of the Historical and Critical Dictionary, was born on the 18th of November 1647, at Carla, a village in the county of Foix, in France, where his father, John Bayle, was a Protestant minister. In 1666 he went to the Protestant university at Puylaurens, where he studied with the greatest application; and in 1669 he removed to the university of Toulouse, whither the Protestants at that time frequently sent their children to study under the Jesuits; but here, to the inexpressible grief of his father, he embraced the Romish religion. However, being soon sensible of his error, he left that university and went to study at Geneva, after which he was chosen professor of philosophy at Sedan; but this Protestant university having been suppressed by Louis XIV. in 1681, he was obliged to leave the city, and was soon after chosen professor of philosophy and history at Rotterdam. The year following he published his Letter concerning Comets. And Father Maimbourg having about this time published his History of Calvinism, in which he endeavoured to draw upon the Protestants the contempt and resentment of the Catholics, Mr Bayle wrote a piece to confute it. The reputation which he had now acquired induced the states of Friesland, in 1684, to offer him a professorship in their university; but he wrote them a letter of thanks, and declined the offer. The same year he began to publish his Nouvelles de la République des Lettres.

In 1686 he was drawn into a dispute in relation to the celebrated Christina, queen of Sweden. In his Journal for April he took notice of a printed letter supposed to have been written by her Swedish majesty to the chevalier de Terlon, in which she condemns the persecution of the Protestants in France. He inserted the letter itself in his Journal for May; and in that of June following he says, “What we hinted at last month is confirmed to us from day to day, that Christina is the real author of the letter concerning the persecutions in France, which is ascribed to her: it is a remainder of Protestantism.” Mr Bayle received an anonymous letter, complaining that, in speaking of her majesty, he had called her simply Christina, without any title; finding great fault with his describing the letter as “a remainder of Protestantism ;” and blaming him likewise for inserting the words “I am,” in the conclusion. “These words,” says this anonymous writer, “are not her majesty’s; a queen, as she is, cannot employ these words but with regard to a very few persons, and Μ. de Terlon is not of that number.” The author of this letter stated that he wrote of his own accord, being in duty bound to do so, “as a servant of the queen.” Mr Bayle wrote a vindication of himself as to these particulars with which the author of the anonymous letter declared himself satisfied, excepting what related to “the remainder of Protestantism.” He would not admit the validity of the defence in regard to that expression, and in another letter advised Mr Bayle to retract it. He adds in a postscript, “You mention, in your Journal of August, a second letter of the queen, which you scruple to publish. Her majesty would be glad to see that letter; and you will do a thing agreeable to her if you would send it to her. You might take this opportunity of writing to her majesty. This counsel may be of some use to you; do not neglect it.” Mr Bayle took the hint, and wrote a letter to her majesty, dated the 14th of November 1686, to which the queen, on the 14th of December, returned the following answer :—

“Mr Bayle, I have received your excuses, and am willing you should know by this letter that I am satisfied with them. I am obliged to the zeal of the person who gave you occasion of writing to me, for I am very glad to know you. You express so much respect and affection for me, that I pardon you sincerely; and I would have you know, that nothing gave me offence but that remainder of Protestantism, of which you accused me. 1 am very delicate on that head, because nobody can suspect me of it without lessening my glory, and injuring me in the most sensible manner. You would do well if you should even acquaint the public with the mistake you have made, and with your regret for it. This is all that remains to be done by you, in order to deserve my being entirely satisfied with you. As to the letter which you have sent me, it is mine without doubt; and since you tell me that it is printed, you will do me a pleasure if you send me some copies of it. As I fear nothing in France, so neither do I fear anything at Rome. My fortune, my blood, and even my life, are entirely devoted to the service of the church; but I flatter nobody, and will never speak anything but the truth. I am obliged to those who have been pleased to publish my letter, for I do not at all disguise my sentiments. I thank God, they are too noble and too honourable to be disowned. However, it is not true that this letter was written to one of my ministers. As I have everywhere enemies and persons who envy me, so in all places I have friends and servants; and I have possibly as many in France, notwithstanding the court, as anywhere in the world. This is purely the truth, and you may regulate yourself accordingly. But you shall not get off so cheaply as you imagine. I will enjoin you a penance; which is, that you will henceforth take the trouble οf sending me all curious books that shall be published in Latin, French, Spanish, or Italian, on whatever subject or science, provided they are worthy of being looked into; I do not even except romances or satires; and above all, if there are any books of chemistry, I desire you may send them to me as soon as possible. Do not forget likewise tosend me your Journal. I shall order that you be paid for whatever you lay out; do but send me an account of it. This will be the most agreeable and most important service that can be done me. May God prosper you.”

On receiving this letter, which was signed “Christina Alexandra,” it now only remained that Mr Bayle should acquaint the public with the mistake he had made, in order to merit that princess’s entire approbation; and this he did in the beginning of his Journal for January 1687.

The persecution which the Protestants at this time suffered in France affected Mr Bayle extremely. He made occasionally some reflections on their sufferings in his Journal; and he wrote a pamphlet also on the subiect. [7:4:467]Some time afterwards he published his Commentaire Philosophique upon these words, “Compel them to come in.” The great application he bestowed on this and other works threw him into a fit of sickness, which obliged him to discontinue his Literary Journal. Being advised to try a change of air, he left Rotterdam on the 8th of August, and went to Cleves; whence, after a time, he removed to Aix-la-Chapelle, and thereafter returned to Rotterdam on the 18th of October. In the year 1690, the famous book entitled Avis aux Réfugiez, &c. made its appearance. Mr Jurieu, who took Mr Bayle for the author of it, wrote a piece against it; and he prefixed an advice to the public, in which he calls Mr Bayle a profane person, and a traitor engaged in a conspiracy against the state. As soon as Mr Bayle had read this libel against him, he went to Rotterdam, and offered to go to prison, provided his accuser would accompany him, and undergo the punishment he deserved if the accusation were found unjust. He published also an answer to Mr Jurieu’s charge; and as his reputation, nay his very life, was at stake in case the accusation of treason were proved, he therefore thought himself not obliged to keep any terms with his accuser, and attacked him with the utmost severity. Mr Jurieu lost all patience, and applied to the magistrates of Amsterdam, who advised him to a reconciliation with Mr Bayle, enjoining them not to publish any thing against each other till it was examined by Mr Boyer, the pensioner of Rotterdam. But notwithstanding this prohibition, Mr Jurieu again attacked Mr Bayle with so much passion, that he forced the latter to write a new vindication of himself.

In November 1690 Μ. de Beauval advertised in his Journal A Scheme for a Critical Dictionary. This was the magnum opus of Bayle. The articles of the first three letters of the alphabet were already prepared; but a dispute which happened between him and Μ. de Beauval obliged him for some time to lay aside the work. Nor did he resume it till the month of May 1692, when he published his scheme; but the public not approving of his plan, he threw it into a different form, and the first volume was published in August 1695, and the second in October following. The work in its new shape was extremely well received by the public; but it engaged him in fresh disputes, particularly with Mr Jurieu and the abbé Renaudot. Mr Jurieu published a piece, in which he endeavoured to engage the ecclesiastical assemblies to condemn the Dictionary, and presented it for that purpose to the synod sitting at Delft; but they took no notice of the affair. The consistory of Rotterdam granted Mr Bayle a hearing; and after having considered his answers to their remarks on his Dictionary, they declared themselves satisfied, and advised him to communicate this to the public. Mr Jurieu made another attempt with the consistory in 1698, and so far prevailed with them, that they exhorted Mr Bayle to be more cautious with regard to his principles in the second edition of his Dictionary, which was published in 1702, with many additions and improvements.

Bayle was a most laborious and indefatigable writer. In one of his letters to Maizeaux, he says that since his twentieth year he hardly remembers to have had any leisure. His intense application contributed perhaps to impair his constitution, for it soon began to decline. He suffered from an affection of the lungs, which weakened him considerably; and as this was a distemper which had cut off several of his family, he judged it mortal, and would take no remedies. He died on the 28th of December 1706, after he had been writing the greater part of the day. He was the author of several pieces besides those we have mentioned, many of which were written in his own defence against attacks made upon him by the abbé enaudot, Clarke, Jaquelot, and others. Among the productions which do honour to the age of Louis XIV. Μ. Voltaire has not omitted the Critical Dictionary of our author. “It is the first work of the kind,” he says, “in which a man may learn to think.”...“In placing him,” continues the same author, “amongst the writers who do honour to the age of Louis XIV., notwithstanding his being a refugee in Holland, I only conform to the decree of the parliament of Toulouse, which, when it declared his will valid in France, notwithstanding the rigour of the laws, expressly said, that such a man could not he considered a foreigner”