but his opinions speedily changed, and he became remarkable for the violence of his sentiments. He was sent as deputy to the National Convention by the department of the Isère in September, 1792. Here he showed himself a furious demagogue. He commenced by denouncing certain machinations which he asserted were in preparation in Alsace and along the banks of the Rhine, He next attacked the opinions of his colleague, Lanjuinais, who denied the Convention's right of trying the king. Amar contended that the Convention should assume the right of pronouncing as a judge upon a fact, such as tyranny; and, acting upon this opinion, he voted for the death of Louis XVI., with execution within twenty-four hours, and for the rejection of the appeal to the people. After the trial he was sent with Merlinot to Bourg, where he committed the most cruel excesses. Five hundred persons were thrown into prison, some under pretexts notoriously false; and at length a deputation from the department presented itself before the Convention for the purpose of denouncing him. This complaint will be found, in print, in the British Museum, under the title "Petition et Mémoire à la Convention Nationale contre les Arrestations arbitraires faites par Ordres des Citoyens Amar et Merlinot, Commissaires Conventionels dans le Departement de l'Ain. Mai, 1793." But the reign of terror speedily commenced, and the complaint fell to the ground, Amar stood foremost among the bloodthirsty revolutionists his denunciations brought numbers to the scaffold; and as a member of the Committee of General Safety, he gave full scope to his dreadful thirst for human life. He always kept by him reports containing accusations directed against those who gave umbrage by their virtue or their talents. The fate of the pretended federalists, of Brissot, Danton, Buzot, and their colleagues, is well known. Amar in his zeal disdained no function, however degrading, and was equally ready to denounce or to assist in the arrest of a victim. In 1795, Collot d'Herbois, Billaud Varennes, and Barrère having been condemned to transportation, Amar undertook their defence, and thereby involved himself in their ruin. He was arrested and confined in the castle of Ham, but after an imprisonment of some months, regained his liberty. He was living in Paris, in obscurity, when the Directory ordered his arrest as an accomplice in the conspiracy of Drouet and Babeuf; he contrived, however, to evade the search that was made after him by the assistance of a linen-weaver, whom he married out of gratitude. He was at length taken, close to the house in which he had himself assisted to arrest his colleague Rabaud de Saint Etienne, and conducted to Vendôme; but, although implicated in all the conspiracies of the time against the government, no legal proof was adduced against him, and he was acquitted. After the hundred

days, an attempt was made to bring him within the operation of the law of amnesty against those who had voted for the death of the late king; but he alleged in his defence, and proved, that he had not filled any public situation nor taken any oath since 1814, and that consequently the amnesties pronounced under both restorations were in his favour. This plea was admitted, and he continued to reside in Paris until 1816, when he died quietly in his bed.

Notwithstanding Amar's unenviable celebrity, his biographers are not agreed as to his Christian name. In the 66 Biographie Universelle " he is called J. P. Amar; in Rabbe and Arnault, N. Amar; but there exists a piece in the British Museum entitled "Acte d'Accusation contre plusieurs Membres de la Convention Nationale, présenté au nom du Comité de Sûreté Générale par André Amar, Membre de ce Comité. An. 2.," which is considered a sufficient authority for adopting that name in the present article. (Rabbe, Biographie des Contemporains; Arnault, Biographie des Contemporains.) J. W. J.

AMAR, AMAR DU RIVIER, or AMARE, JEAN AUGUSTIN, one of the conservators of the Mazarin library at Paris, a member of the Legion of Honour, and honorary inspector of the Academie of Paris, was born in that city in 1765. He was educated at the college de Montaigu, and having devoted himself to the labours of public instruction, he entered early into the Congregation des pères de la doctrine Chrétienne, and taught with success until the close of the year 1791, both in the college of Bourges and in that of La Flêche. He was engaged at Lyon in his duties of schoolmaster when that city was besieged by the revolutionary army in 1793, under Dubois-Crancé, and he shared with the rest of its inhabitants all the dangers and evils of that terrible period. He was condemned to death, and only escaped by the exertions of one of the members of the very commission by which he had been sentenced to die. When the storm had passed over he resumed his course of instruction at Lyon, and continued it until the end of the year 1802. He attempted dramatic composition, and wrote among other pieces a tragedy called Catherine II.; it was not performed, from political motives, but it made some noise, and attracted the attention of M. de Champagny, the minister of the interior, who in 1804 appointed him under-librarian of the Mazarin library, and in 1809 he became conservator. From this time his literary labours were incessant. He died on

the 25th of January, 1837. His works are -1. "Chefs-d'œuvre de Goldoni, traduits pour la première fois en François, avec le Texte Italien un Discours préliminaire sur la Vie et les Ouvrages de Goldoni," &c. 3 vols. Lyon, 1801, 8vo. 2. "Conciones et Orationes poeticæ Latinæ, ou Discours et

perished, we have at least the positive assertion of the Kandjekaveri Pothi and the Kerala Utpatti that the "Amara Kosha" was spared at that period, together with the "Ashtanga Hridaya and the "Dharma Kirti." This celebrated lexicographer seems indeed to have been very zealous in propagating the doctrine which he himself professed. An inscription found at Buddhagaya records his having erected a temple of Buddha at this place the ruins of the building are to be seen even to this day. The inscription bears the date of Samvat, 1005, which corresponds to A. D. 949, and states that it was put up in order to preserve the memory of Amara Deva in the minds of men. This, however, our lexicographer had no need of; the " Amara Kosha" is a lasting monument of his genius.

This work is a vocabulary of the Sanscrit language, in which the words are arranged according to the subjects: it is divided into three books and eighteen chapters. The two chapters of the first book treat of supernatural objects and terms relating to the moral qualities of man, philosophy, and the fine arts. The second book contains ten chapters, and treats of the things in this world, and of man in his different occupa- | tions, &c. The third book has more of a grammatical character, and contains six chapters. These three sections of the " Amara Kosha" have occasioned the name of "Trikand'a," or the " Tripartite," under which it is frequently quoted. The Sanscrit nouns (for the "Amara Kosha" does not include verbs) | are distributed among the eighteen chapters of the Trikand'a, each word being arranged with its synonymes in one or more lines of sixteen syllables each, and forming that kind of metre which is known under the name of Vaktra or S'loka. A few passages only are in the Arya metre. The whole number of words which are explained in this manner, including their synonymes, does not exceed ten thousand, a number which may be thought very small for so rich a language as the Sanscrit; but it must be borne in mind that "Amara Sinha" has rejected all derivative and compound words, and has confined himself to the nouns. This deficiency is however well supplied by the treatises of Maitreya, Mâdhava, and others, on the roots of the Sanscrit language.

66

The plan of the "Amara Kosha" met with universal approbation; its excellence was proved by the many translations which were made of it into other languages of India. The Pali vocabulary, known under the title of Abhidhânappadîpika," and the "Burmese Abhidhâna" are entirely founded on it, and even the original Sanscrit vocabularies which were written after the "Amara Kosha are chiefly supplements to this work: such are the "Vis'waprakâsa," the "Medinî," and the "Harâvali." Besides these and many other works which are used as supplying the de

|

|

ficiencies of the " Amara Kosha," there is a great number of commentaries. Colebrooke quotes ten, among which the "Pada Chandrikâ " is considered the best. It was written in 1430 by Râya Mukut'a Man'i, and has experienced the successive improvements of Achyuta, Iallakî, and Bhânujî Dîkshita.

The first chapter of the "Amara Kosha" was printed for the first time at Rome in 1798 with Tamul types; it bears the following title:- "Amara Sinha; seu Dictionarii Sanscrudamici Sectio prima de Cœlo, ex tribus ineditis codicibus indicis MSS. curante P. Paulino a S. Bartholomæo," &c.

The whole of the work appeared for the first time at Calcutta in 1807; it was printed with four other vocabularies at Khizurpur, and bore the title of "The Amara Kosha, Trikand'a S'esha, Medinî, and Harâvalî,” 8vo. Another edition, in 4to. by H. T. Colebrooke, was published at Calcutta in 1808, with an English translation, an index, and a preface, which was reprinted in his essays. In 1831 the Sanscrit text was reprinted at Calcutta, and in the same year there appeared a translation of it in Bengali by Ramodaya Vidyâlankar. The late Loiseleur des Longchamps published at Paris in 1839 the original, with a French translation, chiefly based on the English version of Colebrooke. There is an edition of the "Amara Kosha," which was printed at Tanjore in 1808 by order of the Mahârâja.

The "Amara Mâla" is another work of Amara Sinha, which is often quoted by commentators, but we are not aware that it ever was discovered. (Wilson, Sanscrit Dic tionary, 1st ed. Preface; Colebrooke, Essays, ii. 16. 50. London, 1837 ; Asiatic Researches, i. 284. viii. 242; Journal Asiatique, x. 249. ; Mackenzie Collection, ii. 93.; Amara Kosha, ou Vocabulaire d'Amara Sinha, par Loiseleur des Longchamps, Preface.) F. H. T.

AMARA'L, ANDRES DO, a Portuguese by birth, and knight of the order of St. John of Jerusalem, of that branch called "the language of Castile," at the time that the order was in possession of the island of Rhodes. In the year 1510 he was sent on an expedition against the fleet of the sultan of Egypt, then lying in the gulf of Ajasso, in company with Villiers de l'Isle Adam. Amaral was commander of the galleys of the order, in number three, and L'Isle Adam of the rest of the ships, in number eighteen. In a difference of opinion which arose, Amaral, who was of an impetuous character, used such offensive language to L'Isle Adam, that the quarrel had nearly come to blows, and at last, though it was ended by Adam giving way for the sake of peace, Amaral still seemed not entirely satisfied. The attack on the sultan's fleet terminated in a glorious victory. On the death of Carretta, the forty-second grand master in 1521, Amaral, who was then grand prior of the

sure, since he knew for certain that very soon after the island would be lost and the order utterly destroyed." Though the order continued to exist for some centuries, the prediction was verified that L'Isle Adam would be the last grand master of Rhodes. Provisions and ammunition were failing fast, for the report of Amaral respecting the powder had been false; L'Isle Adam, by the advice of his council, though against his own opinion, surrendered the place on honourable conditions, and on Christmas-day, 1522, Sultan Solyman took possession of Rhodes.

In this account of Amaral's detection, trial, and death, the statements of Jacques, bastard of Bourbon, a knight commander of the order, have been strictly followed, with the exception of the date and some particulars of his execution, which have been taken from Lomellino, an eye-witness. The narrative of Bourbon is contained in his history of the siege of Rhodes published at Paris in December, 1525, three years after the conclusion of the siege, and dedicated to Villiers de l'Isle Adam. Another narrative had been published the year before at Rome, by Fontanus of Bruges, who makes no mention of the treason of Amaral, which forms one of the most prominent features of Bourbon's narrative, save by the brief allusion already quoted, that he was "reserved for a heavier and a merited fate." This silence of one of his most important authorities seems to have not a little perplexed Bosio, the great historian of the knights of St. John, whose uncle had himself played a conspicuous part in the siege, and who in his narrative of these transactions is very careful to mention, whenever he makes any statement respecting the treason of Amaral, that he does so on the authority of Bourbon, till, at the end of all, describing the execution, he cites the authority of the manuscript of Lomellino. This Lomellino, a gentleman of Genoese extraction, but a Rhodian by birth, had written an account of the siege, at which he was present, which was not put into Bosio's hands till he was finishing his narrative; and Bosio states that he found with much satisfaction that it confirmed the exact truth of every statement of Bourbon with regard to Amaral.

The evidence seems quite sufficient to prove the crime of Amaral, which indeed Pantaleon asserts that he confessed; but in later times his guilt has been doubted. We are told by Bourbon that Amaral said nothing in answer to Diez's statements, but that he was a villain. Vertot, who refers to no other authorities than some of those already quoted, puts a circumstantial defence in the mouth of Amaral which he can have found nowhere else than in his own lively imagination. Vertot also tells the story of the quarrel before the sea-fight at Ajasso, with an evident bias in favour of Amaral, whom he represents as having proposed the plan of attack which

was adopted, and which led to success, in opposition to L'Isle Adam, who supported another. These inventions of Vertot have been copied by later writers and seem to have led the last English historian of the order, Sutherland, to say of Amaral that "he met death with the fortitude of a martyr, and there exists not in the whole records of his tragical story a single circumstance that discredits the inference that he filled a martyr's grave."

The innocence of Amaral may still be believed by some; but it is rather singular to find a grave historian, who ought to have been well acquainted with his history, obstinately denying the facts of his arrest and execution. This, however, is the case with Funes, a Spanish knight of the order, who published its history in 1636, and who expresses his astonishment that Bosio should have related such a story, and affirms that he had seen a letter from Bosio's brother to the historian, pointing out that no traces of Amaral's treason existed in the records of the order, which would have been sure to contain some notice of his having been deprived of the habit. The account of Amaral's treason, according to Funes, who makes no mention of Bourbon, is "confusedly founded on a Greek ballad current among the populace, which has been examined by men very well versed in that language, and found to contain nothing of authenticity or truth." He concludes by affirming that several high dignitaries of the language of Castile, whose names he mentions, have expressed to him their surprise that Bosio should have so groundlessly assailed the reputation of an honourable knight. Funes was himself of the language of Castile, and his assertions are a singular proof of the lengths to which misdirected national spirit will carry a writer. (Jacques, bastard du Bourbon, Oppugnation de la noble et chevalereuse Cité de Rhodes, Paris, 1525, leaf xxxii., &c.; Fontanus, De Bello Rhodio, Libri tres, Rome, 1524; Marulli, Vite de' Gran Maestri della sacra Religione di San Giovanni, Naples, 1636, p. 676.; Bosio, Istoria della sacra Religione di San Giovanni, Rome, 1594, ii. 577, &c.; Pantaleon, Militaris Ordinis Johannitarum Historia nova. Basil, 1581, p. 198.; Vertot, Histoire des Chevaliers Hospitaliers de St. Jean. Paris, 1726, ii. 404. 422. 499, &c. [Bourbon's narrative is reprinted entire in the proofs appended to vol. ii., and is also given, absurdly enough in French, in the English translation. London, 1728.] Sutherland, Achievements of the Knights of Malta, in Constable's Miscellany, Edinburgh, 1830, ii. 72, &c.; Funes, Coronica de la Religion de San Juan. Valencia, 1626, i. 571.) T. W.

AMARA'L, ANTONIO CAETA'NO DO, a Portuguese writer, was born at Lisbon on the 13th of June, 1747. His parents were in humble circumstances, his father holding a small situation in the Casa da