夏尔·马里·德·拉孔达米纳Charles Marie de La Condamine

夏尔·马里·德·拉孔达米纳的父母是德·拉孔达米纳（1649-1711），波旁地区的一名区税务官，以及Louise-Marguerite de Chourses（1672-1751），Gabriel de Chourses和Judith de Breslay的女儿。德·拉孔达米纳和Louise-Marguerite于1697年2月3日在凡尔赛结婚。注意德·拉孔达米纳比他的妻子大23岁。他们有两个孩子德·拉孔达米纳，即本传记的主人公，以及Louise Hélène德·拉孔达米纳（1706-1771）。德·拉孔达米纳-德·拉孔达米纳在巴黎的圣洛克教堂受洗。

德·拉孔达米纳在巴黎的路易大帝耶稣会学院学习。在那里，Louis Castel神父教他数学，布里松神父——神学教授——教他哲学，德·拉孔达米纳波雷神父（1675-1741）——修辞学教授——教他人文学科。波雷是伏尔泰（1694-1778）的朋友，不久德·拉孔达米纳也将成为伏尔泰的朋友，伏尔泰本人也曾在路易大帝学院学习。离开学院后，德·拉孔达米纳对任何特定职业都缺乏热情，因此决定参军。1718年8月与西班牙爆发四国同盟战争时，他加入了军队。对抗西班牙的四国同盟包括哈布斯堡帝国、英国、法国和萨伏依。西班牙进攻撒丁岛和西西里后，法国通过进攻加泰罗尼亚进行报复，试图夺取罗萨斯要塞。德·拉孔达米纳参与了这次法国进攻，并在1719年初的罗萨斯围城战中以其勇敢而闻名。然而，他很快认定军队生活不适合他，便离开军队寻求其他令人兴奋的职业。回到巴黎后，他住在卢浮宫画廊附近、靠近塞纳河的圣托马斯杜卢浮死胡同的一所房子里。他开始学习数学，特别是圆锥曲线、力学、化学和物理学，其中他对磁针的偏角特别感兴趣。他当然不是在寻求平静的生活，而是寻求科学家和艺术家[6]的陪伴：-

18世纪20年代末在巴黎，他定期参加普罗可布咖啡馆的非正式沙龙，当时由华丽张扬的剧作家路易·安托万乌达尔·德·拉莫特主持。后来，皮埃尔·莫佩尔蒂接过了主导权，这位天文学家将与德·拉孔达米纳在其整个职业生涯中合作……

德·拉孔达米纳通过路易大帝学院的优秀教学和自己的学习，精通数学，他运用自己的技能为自己和他的朋友伏尔泰赚了很多钱。法国政府于1728年设立彩票以筹集资金，但他们错误计算了所提供的奖金。尼尔·萨菲尔写道[6]：-

伏尔泰从英国流亡归来后，在此期间他成为牛顿科学的积极倡导者，两位朋友构思并实施了一个绝妙的计划，从法国国库中骗取大笔钱财。对于任何愿意进行巨额初始投资的人来说，德·拉孔达米纳以其狡猾的数学才能意识到，设计拙劣的彩票将支付比实际收入更多的钱。他们尽可能多地购买彩票，并因此大发横财。

副财政部长勒佩尔蒂埃-德福尔终于意识到伏尔泰和德·拉孔达米纳设立了一个以牺牲法国国家利益为代价使他们致富的计划。他将他们告上法庭，但败诉了。彩票于1730年关闭，勒佩尔蒂埃-德福尔被解职，但伏尔泰和德·拉孔达米纳被允许保留他们的奖金。德·拉孔达米纳将他新获得的财富用于科学探索。

此时，德·拉孔达米纳已与巴黎的科学家有许多接触，被提名为Académie Royale des Sciences的化学附属成员。他于1730年12月12日当选为科学院院士。当然，他与巴黎科学家的友谊，尤其是与皮埃尔·莫佩尔蒂的友谊，是一个因素，但科学院的一些成员对德·拉孔达米纳有所警惕，因为他在彩票上的近期行为。巴黎的安静生活也不适合他，利用彩票赢来的资金，他乘坐黎凡特公司的船L'Espérance号，由Pierre Blouet de Camilly指挥，前往阿尔及尔、亚历山大、巴勒斯坦、塞浦路斯和君士坦丁堡（今伊斯坦布尔），在那里度过了五个月。他进行的一些观察和实验是由皮埃尔·莫佩尔蒂建议的。他对在埃及看到的金字塔和方尖碑特别感兴趣，观察象形文字，其中一些他画了草图。回到巴黎后，他在论文Observations mathématiques et physiques faites dans un voyage de Levant en 1731 et 1732 Ⓣ（1731年和1732年在黎凡特旅行中进行的数学和物理观察）中发表了他旅行的数学和物理观察。它包含导航、地理、力学、解剖学、化学、植物学、物理学和自然历史的部分。它于1732年11月12日提交给Académie Royale des Sciences [1]：-

尽管这篇回忆录并不完全由新结果组成，但足以让他赢得一位有能力的数学家、一位善于观察的旅行者和一位优秀故事讲述者的声誉。

例如，他这样写埃及象形文字：-

沿着海岸，在埃及亚历山大的废墟中，可以看到两座由花岗岩或底比斯石制成的方尖碑。……就方尖碑而言，暴露于西北的一侧，面向大海，以及面向新城的一侧，是保存最好的部分，人们可以清楚地辨认出刻在那里的象形文字，我已经画了草图。

Académie Royale对此印象深刻，于1735年将德·拉孔达米纳提升为副数学家，并派他前往秘鲁进行科学考察。1735年4月，德·拉孔达米纳出发前往秘鲁，测量赤道上子午线一度的长度。当时科学的一个大问题是决定艾萨克·牛顿和勒内·笛卡儿的竞争观点，前者认为地球在两极扁平，后者认为地球在赤道扁平。皮埃尔·布格是同一次考察的成员，其第三位科学成员是考察队队长Louis Godin（1704-1760）。三人通过不同路线完成了旅程，德·拉孔达米纳从曼塔陆路行进，另外两人航行到基多，在那里会合。德·拉孔达米纳沿埃斯梅拉达斯河航行，然后翻越安第斯山脉，于1736年6月4日抵达基多。作为德·拉孔达米纳进行的测量工作的一部分，他建造了金字塔：-

……特别适合固定测量的端点，这些端点是我们所有地理和天文观察的基础。

德·拉孔达米纳在Histoire des pyramides de Quito（1751年）中写道：-

从未讨论过建造一座华丽的建筑，而是一座简单而持久的纪念碑，适合清楚地展示我们基地的两个端点。就它们的形状而言，最方便实现我们目的是金字塔，而所有金字塔中最简单的是四面体；但由于我们希望根据世界各地区来定向结构，我决定让我们的金字塔有四个侧面，不包括底面，这一决定也恰好便于它们的建造。

德·拉孔达米纳在科学院的南美之旅中，于1739年使他成为化学方面的领年金成员。然而，事情并不顺利，三位法国科学家很快卷入分歧。戈丹开始独自工作，而德·拉孔达米纳与皮埃尔·布格合作。1741年，皮埃尔·布格在他们联合测量中发现了一个小错误，当皮埃尔·布格拒绝允许德·拉孔达米纳重新检查结果时，两人闹翻了。三人都进行了独立测量，工作于1743年完成。三位科学家经由不同路线返回。1743年，德·拉孔达米纳开始返程，其中包括沿亚马逊河为期四个月的木筏旅程。他给出了关于亚马逊的第一份科学记述，并将其出版为Journal du voyage fait par ordre du roi a l'équateurⓉ（奉皇家命令在赤道所做的旅行日志）（1751年）。他已在Carte du cours du Maragnon ou de la Grande Rivière des AmazonesⓉ（马拉尼翁河或亚马逊大河的河道地图）（1745年）中发表了他的地图。他写道，他的目标是制作一幅地图：-

……一条河流的河道，它穿越了地理学家几乎未知的广阔土地。

尼尔·萨菲尔在[17]中写道：-

该地图从太平洋海岸延伸到 Atlantic，从西部的西班牙美洲基多省到东部的葡萄牙城市帕拉（靠近亚马逊河口），包括北部的圭亚那和南部的巴西及秘鲁部分地区。

然而，德·拉孔达米纳的叙述是精确的测量与未经证实的当地人报告混合在一起的。例如，他试图验证许多关于南美洲的传说。对于其中一些，他确实提供了科学证据，例如关于被誉为治疗发烧的金鸡纳树皮（它含有抗疟疾药物奎宁）。其他一些，如亚马逊女战士的传说（这条河因此得名），他根据当地人的报告接受为真实。许多人认为他接受这些传说仅仅是因为它们使他的报告对法国公众来说更加有趣和令人兴奋。

德·拉孔达米纳在回家的旅途中在卡宴待了五个月，在这里他重复了让·里歇尔关于不同纬度下重量变化的实验。他没有更早返回的原因是因为法国正处于战争之中，卷入了奥地利王位继承战争，他觉得乘坐法国商船太危险，因为它容易受到攻击。他等待一艘荷兰船只，乘其返回阿姆斯特丹。这次旅行途经苏里南首都帕拉马里博，从1744年8月22日持续到11月30日。1745年2月，德·拉孔达米纳完成了最后一段旅程，于当月23日抵达巴黎。他已经离开了十年。他带回了许多笔记、200件自然历史标本和艺术品，并将它们交给了布丰。然而，到达巴黎后，他得知皮埃尔·布格以自己的名义向科学院提交了他们的共同成果。德·拉孔达米纳写道（见[4]）：-

皮埃尔·布格在首先提交我们的共同成果时占据了一切……我不可能说出任何新东西。

然而，皮埃尔·布格声称先读他的论文使他处于不利地位，因为他被要求给科学院一份副本，然后德·拉孔达米纳可以阅读，而他无法知道德·拉孔达米纳会向科学院报告什么。因此他违反了规则，拒绝将他的论文副本交给科学院。Academy的主席Jean-Jaques Amelot de Chaillou（1689-1749）试图解决这个问题，德·拉孔达米纳被要求宣读他的论文，该论文将与皮埃尔·布格的论文印在同一卷中。德·拉孔达米纳宣读了论文Relation abrégée d'un voyage fait dans l'intérieur de l'Amérique méridionale。皮埃尔·布格试图通过不断打断来扰乱德·拉孔达米纳论文的宣读，但他们的论文都出现在科学院的Mémoires同一卷中。然而争论继续，皮埃尔·布格声称德·拉孔达米纳的论文包含与向科学院报告的内容有真正的改变。如果今天比较这两个版本，我们看到德·拉孔达米纳确实对写作风格做了一些改变，但没有改变内容。当两位科学家发表与探险有关的进一步论文和书籍时，争论再次激烈起来。我们应该明确，所有这些争论与科学内容无关，而仅仅是关于谁应该获得最多荣誉的争论。Yves Laissus在Dictionary of Scientific Biography中写道[1]：-

探险的最后一位幸存者德·拉孔达米纳，他是一位不如Godin有天赋的天文学家，也不如皮埃尔·布格可靠的一位数学家，却常常获得大部分荣誉，可能是因为他和蔼的性格和他作为作家的才能。

1756年，德·拉孔达米纳前往意大利。他的目的是向教皇本笃十四世寻求许可，允许他娶他的侄女夏洛特·布齐耶·德·埃斯图伊（1726-1779），即他姐姐路易丝·埃莱娜德·拉孔达米纳和她的丈夫安托万布齐耶·德·埃斯图伊的女儿。教皇批准了许可，他们于1756年8月结婚。然而，德·拉孔达米纳去意大利不可能不进行科学观测。

这些向伦敦皇家学会提交的科学观察报告在THIS LINK

德·拉孔达米纳晚年花费大量精力倡导天花接种。他对这一主题的热情部分源于他童年时患过天花。1754年和1758年，他向科学院宣读了关于这一主题的两篇论文，但当他试图在1764年发表第三篇论文时遇到了问题。负责决定出版事宜的科学院委员会已变得反对接种。夏尔·艾蒂安·路易·加缪和安托万 Petit（1722-1794）被要求对德·拉孔达米纳的论文作出报告，但三年多没有任何进展。德·拉孔达米纳绕过委员会，将斗争带到整个科学院，1768年1月9日在那里宣读了夏尔·艾蒂安·路易·加缪和Petit的报告。报告称（见[4]）：-

我们认为，M 德·拉孔达米纳的这篇论文不仅不包含任何可能妨碍其发表的内容，相反，它包含大量有用的观点，为作者带来荣誉，并使其值得在该科学院出版的论文集中占有一席之地。

然而，委员会仍然拒绝发表德·拉孔达米纳的论文。他再次向全体科学院提出上诉，最终全体科学院推翻了其出版委员会的决定，论文得以付印。

尽管德·拉孔达米纳才华出众，但他的性格意味着他的研究不如本来可能的那样深入。尼古拉·德·孔多塞在[12]（或[13]）中写道，他的性格：-

……使一切长时间的沉思成为不可能，阻止他足够深入地进入任何科学领域以得出任何新发现。

然而，尼古拉·德·孔多塞写道，德·拉孔达米纳是[12]：-

……在每个社会都广为人知，掌握着说服他所倾听的无知民众的艺术，带回奇特的观察以激起世人轻浮的好奇心，写作富有魅力足以让人读他的作品，又足够漫不经心和过于朴素的语调，以免招致嫉妒或威胁他人的自尊，因其勇敢而引人注目，因其缺点而辛辣。

Charles-Marie de La Condamine's parents were Charles de La Condamine (1649-1711), a district tax collector of the Bourbonnais, and Louise-Marguerite de Chourses (1672-1751), daughter of Gabriel de Chourses and Judith de Breslay. Charles and Louise-Marguerite were married on 3 February 1697 at Versailles. Notice that Charles was 23 years older than his wife. They had two children Charles-Marie de La Condamine, the subject of this biography, and Louise Hélène de La Condamine (1706-1771). Charles-Marie was baptised in the Saint-Roch church in Paris.

Charles-Marie de La Condamine studied at the Jesuit College of Louis-le-Grand in Paris. There he was taught mathematics by Père Louis Castel, philosophy by Père Brisson the Professor of Theology, and humanities by Père Charles Porée (1675-1741) the Professor of Rhetoric. Porée was a friend of Voltaire (1694-1778) and soon La Condamine would also become a friend of Voltaire who had himself been a student at Louis-le-Grand. On leaving the College, La Condamine had little enthusiasm for any particular career so he decided to join the military. When the War of the Quadruple Alliance broke out with Spain in August 1718 he joined the army. The Quadruple Alliance against Spain consisted of the Hapsburg Empire, England, France and Savoy. After the Spanish attacked Sardinia and Sicily, the French retaliated by attacking Catalonia, trying to seize the fortress of Rosas. La Condamine was involved in this French attack and distinguished himself with his bravery at the siege of Rosas in early 1719. However, he soon decided that army life did not suit him and he left the army seeking other exciting occupations. Back in Paris, he lived in a house in the cul-de-sac St Thomas du Louvre near the Louvre Gallery close to the Seine. He began to study mathematics, in particular conic sections, mechanics, chemistry and physics, where he was particularly interested in the declination of the magnetic needle. He was certainly not looking for a quiet life and sought the company of scientists and artists [6]:-

In Paris in the late 1720s, he regularly attended the informal salon at the Café Procope, which was presided over at the time by the flamboyant dramaturge Antoine Houdart de La Motte. Later, Pierre-Louis Moreau de Maupertuis took the reins, an astronomer with whom La Condamine would collaborate throughout his career ...

La Condamine was adept at mathematics both through the excellent teaching at Louis-le-Grand and his own studies, and he applied his skills to make lots of money for himself and his friend Voltaire. The French government had set up a lottery in 1728 in an effort to raise money but they miscalculated the prizes offered. Neil Safier writes [6]:-

Following Voltaire's return from exile in England, during which time he had become a vocal advocate for Newtonian science, the two friends conceived and carried out a brilliant scheme to defraud the French treasury of large sums of money. For anyone willing to make the massive initial investment, La Condamine had realised with devious mathematical prowess that the poorly designed lottery would pay out more money than it actually took in. They bought as many tickets as they could, and enriched themselves greatly as a result.

The Deputy Finance Minister, Le Pelletier-Desforts, finally realised that Voltaire and La Condamine had set up a scheme which was making them rich at the expense of the French State. He took them to court but lost the case. The lottery was shut down in 1730, Le Pelletier-Desforts was sacked, but Voltaire and La Condamine were allowed to keep their winnings. La Condamine used his newly acquired fortune for scientific exploration.

At this point La Condamine, who already had many contacts with scientists in Paris, was proposed for election to the Académie Royale des Sciences as an adjoint in chemistry. He was elected a member of the Academy on 12 December 1730. Certainly his friendship with Paris scientists, particularly Maupertuis, was a factor here but some members of the Academy were wary of La Condamine given his recent exploits with the lottery. The quiet life in Paris did not suit him either and, using funds from his lottery wins, he sailed on the ship L'Espérance of the Levant Company commanded by Pierre Blouet de Camilly on a voyage to Algiers, Alexandria, Palestine, Cyprus and Constantinople (now Istanbul) where he spent five months. Some of the observations and experiments he carried out had been suggested by Maupertuis. He was particularly interested in the pyramids and obelisks he saw in Egypt, observing hieroglyphs some of which he sketched. On his return to Paris he published mathematical and physical observations of his voyage in the paper Observations mathématiques et physiques faites dans un voyage de Levant en 1731 et 1732 Ⓣ. It contains sections on navigation, geography, mechanics, anatomy, chemistry, botany, physics, and natural history. It was presented to the Académie Royale des Sciences on 12 November 1732 [1]:-

Although the memoir did not consist entirely of new results, it was sufficient to earn him the reputation of a competent mathematician, an observant traveller, and a good storyteller.

For example, he writes about the Egyptian hieroglyphs:-

One can see along the seashore, among the ruins of Alexandria, Egypt, two obelisks composed of granite, or Theban stone. ... As far as the obelisk is concerned, the side exposed to the northwest, which faces the sea, and the side facing the new city, are those that are best preserved, and one can clearly make out the hieroglyphic figures that are engraved there, and which I have sketched.

The Académie Royale was impressed, promoted La Condamine to associate mathematician in 1735, and sent him on a scientific expedition to Peru. In April 1735 La Condamine set out on the expedition to Peru to measure the length of a degree of meridian at the equator. One of the big problems of science at this time was to decide between the competing views of Newton, who argued that the earth was flattened at the poles, and of Descartes who argued that the earth was flattened at the equator. Pierre Bouguer was a member of the same expedition and its third scientific member was the leader of the expedition Louis Godin (1704-1760). The three finished their journey by different routes, La Condamine going overland from Manta, the other two sailing to Quito where they joined up. La Condamine sailed up the Esmeraldas River and then climbed over the Andes Mountains, arriving in Quito on 4 June 1736. As part of the surveying work that La Condamine carried out he had pyramids constructed:-

... specially suited to fix the endpoints of the measurement that had been the foundation of all our geographical and astronomical observations.

As La Condamine wrote in Histoire des pyramides de Quito (1751):-

There was never any discussion of constructing a fancy edifice, but rather a simple and durable monument appropriate for showing clearly the two endpoints of our base. As far as their form was concerned, the most convenient to accomplish our purposes was the pyramid, and the simplest of all pyramids was the tetrahedron; but since we wanted to orient the structure in relation to the regions of the world, I decided to give our pyramids four sides, not including the base, a decision which also happened to facilitate their construction.

While La Condamine was on the South American journey the Academy made him a pensionary member in chemistry in 1739. However, things did not go smoothly and the three French scientists were soon involved in disagreements. Godin began to work on his own while La Condamine worked with Bouguer. In 1741 Bouguer discovered a small error in their joint measurements and the two fell out when Bouguer refused to allow La Condamine to recheck the results. All three made independent measurements, the work being completed in 1743. The three scientists returned by different routes. In 1743 La Condamine began his return journey which included a four month raft journey down the Amazon river. He gave the first scientific account of the Amazon which he published as Journal du voyage fait par ordre du roi a l'équateur Ⓣ (1751). He had already published his map in Carte du cours du Maragnon ou de la Grande Rivière des Amazones Ⓣ (1745). He wrote that his aim was to produce a map:-

... of the course of a river that traverses vast lands nearly unknown to geographers.

Neil Safier writes in [17]:-

The map extended from the Pacific coast to the Atlantic, from the Spanish American province of Quito in the west to the Portuguese city of Pará in the east (near the mouth of the Amazon), including the Guyanas to the north and parts of Brazil and Peru to the south.

La Condamine's account, however, is a mixture of accurate precision surveys and unverified reports of locals. For example, he tried to verify many of the legends which had grown up concerning South America. For some of these he did indeed provide scientific evidence, for example concerning the bark of the Cinchona tree famed as a cure for fevers (it contains the anti-malarial drug quinine). Others, such as the legend of the Amazon women warriors (after which the river is named) he accepted as true on the basis of reports by locals. Many believe that he accepted such legends simply because they made his reports far more interesting and exciting to the French public.

La Condamine spent five months in Cayenne on his journey home and here he repeated Richer's experiments on the variation of weights at different latitudes. The reason he did not return earlier was the fact that France was at war, involved in the War of the Austrian Succession, and he felt that a voyage on a French merchant ship would be too dangerous as it was liable to be attacked. He waited for a Dutch vessel on which he returned to Amsterdam. The journey, which went via Paramaribo, the capital of Surinam, took from 22 August to 30 November 1744. In February 1745 La Condamine made the final leg of his journey arriving in Paris on 23rd of that month. He had been away for ten years. He returned with many notes, 200 natural history specimens and works of art which he gave to Buffon. However, after reaching Paris he learnt that Bouguer had presented their joint work to the Academy under his own name. La Condamine wrote (see [4]):-

M Bouguer has taken possession of everything in presenting our joint work first ... it is impossible for me to say anything new.

Bouguer, however, claimed that reading his paper first put him at a disadvantage since he was required to give a copy to the Academy which could then be read by La Condamine while he had no way of knowing what La Condamine would report to the Academy. Consequently he broke the rules and refused to give a copy of his paper to the Academy. The president of the Academy, Jean-Jaques Amelot de Chaillou (1689-1749), tried to sort out the problem and La Condamine was asked to read his paper which would be printed in the same volume as that of Bouguer. La Condamine read the paper Relation abrégée d'un voyage fait dans l'intérieur de l'Amérique méridionale. Bouguer tried to disrupt the reading of La Condamine's paper with continual interruptions but both their papers did appear in the same volume of the Mémoires of the Academy. The argument continued, however, with Bouguer claiming that La Condamine's paper contained real changes from what had been reported to the Academy. If the two versions are compared today, we see that La Condamine did make some changes to the style of writing but not to the content. When both scientists published further papers and books relating to the expedition again arguments raged. We should make it clear that all these arguments were not related to the scientific content, but simply arguments over who should get the most credit. Yves Laissus writing in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography says [1]:-

The last survivor of the expedition, La Condamine, who was a less gifted astronomer than Godin and a less reliable mathematician than Bouguer often received the major part of the credit, probably because of his amiable nature and his talent as a writer.

In 1756 La Condamine went to Italy. His purpose was to seek permission from the pope, Benedict XIV, to allow him to marry his niece Charlotte Bouzier d'Estouilly (1726-1779), the daughter of his sister Louise Hélène de La Condamine and her husband Antoine Bouzier d'Estouilly. Permission was granted by the pope and they married in August 1756. However, La Condamine could not make a trip to Italy without making scientific observations.

A report of these scientific observations, made to the Royal Society of London is at THIS LINK

La Condamine spent much effort in the last part of his life campaigning for inoculation against small-pox. His passion on this topic was partly due to the fact that he had suffered from small-pox as a child. He read two papers on this topic to the Academy in 1754 and 1758 but when he tried to publish a third paper in 1764 he ran into problems. The Committee of the Academy which decided on publications had become anti-inoculation. Charles-Etienne-Louis Camus and Antoine Petit (1722-1794) were asked to report on La Condamine's paper but nothing happened for over three years. La Condamine went over the heads of the Committee and took his fight to the full Academy where Camus and Petit's report was read on 9 January 1768. It stated (see [4]):-

We believe that this memoir by M de La Condamine not only contains nothing that could hinder its publication, but on the contrary that it contains a large number of useful points which bring honour to the author and which make it worthy of a place in the collection of memoirs published by this Academy.

However, the Committee still refused to publish La Condamine's paper. He appealed again to the full Academy which, eventually, overruled its own publication Committee and the paper appeared in print.

Although exceptionally talented, La Condamine's character meant that his researches were less deep than they might have been. Condorcet writes in [12] (or [13]) that his character:-

... made all prolonged meditation impossible, preventing him from going deeply enough into any scientific area to arrive at any new discoveries.

However, Condorcet writes that La Condamine was [12]:-

... widely known in every society, possessing the art of persuading the ignorant people to whom he had listened, bringing back singular observations to pique the frivolous curiosity of the people of the world, writing with enough charm to have people read his work, with enough neglect and too simple a tone to foster envy or threaten the self-esteem of others, interesting for his bravery and piquant for his faults.