Antonio CATERINO, a celebrated historian, was born October 30, 1570, at Sacco, a village near Padua. He was the youngest son of Antonio Davila, grand constable of Cyprus, who, on the taking of that island by the Turks in 1570, had been obliged to retire into Spain, from which his family supposed that they had derived their name and origin. From Spain Antonio repaired to the court of France, and settled his son Louis and two daughters under the patronage of Catharine de Medici, whose name he afterwards gave to the historian. Young Davila was brought early to France; and at the age of eighteen he signalized himself in the civil wars of that country, and had a horse killed under him at the siege of Honfleur in 1594. His last exploit there was at the siege of Amiens, where he fought under Henry IV. and received a wound in the knee. After peace had been established in France, in 1598 he withdrew into Italy, whither he had been recalled by his father, and afterwards entered into the service of the Venetians. While at Venice he wrote his admirable work entitled Historia delle guerre civili di Francia di Henrico Caterino Davila, nella quale si contengono le operazioni di quattro re, Francesco II., Carlo IX., Henrico III., et Henrico IV., cognominato il grande, in fifteen books (Venice, Tommaso Baglioni, 1630, 4to), which contains everything worthy of notice that passed from the death of Henry II. in 1559 till the peace of Vervins in 1598. He continued to serve the republic of Venice with great reputation, till an unfortunate adventure put an end to his life in 1631. Happening to pass through Verona with his wife and family on his way to Crema, which he had been appointed to defend, and demanding, according to the usual custom of persons in his station, a supply of horses and carriages for his retinue, a brutal Veronese, called Il Turco, entered the room where he and his family were at supper, and being mildly reprimanded for his intrusion by Davila, discharged a pistol at him and shot him dead on the spot. The accomplices of the assassin also killed the chaplain of Davila, and wounded most of his attendants. But his eldest son Antonio, a youth of eighteen, avenged the death of his father by killing the murderer on the instant. All the confederates in this dreadful tragedy were secured next morning, and publicly executed at Verona.

There is only one opinion concerning the merit of Davila as a writer. His style is singularly exempt from the vices which prevailed at that time, and, though less pure than that of Guicciardini, is more compact and concise, and at the same time distinguished for its admirable facility. He appears indeed to have taken great pains to discover the truth, to have derived his information from the best sources, and to have spoken in general with much freedom. But this explicitness is sometimes affected by his individual position and connections, and also by the prejudices of his age and country. An Italian of this period could not possibly hold the balance even between the Catholics and Protestants. A man who owed the fortune of his sister, of his brother, and also the commencement of his own, to Catherine de' Medici, and whose very name reminds us that he had been devoted to her service from the period of his birth, could not be an impartial judge of the conduct of the queen-mother. He has accordingly been censured, and not without reason, for the partiality which he evinces towards that bold, bad woman, dwelling upon her address and her prudence, when he should have exposed her profound dissimulation, perfidy, and cruelty. But notwithstanding some other grave faults, on which this is not the place to expatiate, his history remains with all the eminent qualities that distinguish it, whilst its defects can no longer be productive of error or misconception.

The edition which Davila published of his history was very incorrect. It is said that he had offered the work to several publishers of Venice, but that they had all refused it, with the exception of Baglioni, whose presses were idle, and who undertook to print it; on the condition, however, that if any preferable employment came in his way, the printing of the history should be postponed. But when the edition was finished it met with so rapid a sale that the whole was disposed of in a week. It is added that it was reprinted under the same date, and that 15,000 copies were sold in the course of a year; but this appears to be greatly exaggerated. The editions which followed (Venice, 1634 and 1638; Lyons, 1641; and Venice, 1642) were scarcely less faulty than the first; but a better, and indeed a very beautiful one, issued from the royal press at Paris in 1644, folio. The work was translated into French by J. Baudoin, Paris, 1644; into a vol. folio translation which has been since emendated; into Spanish by Basil Varo de la Vega, Madrid, 1651, and 1659; and into English, first by William Aylesherry, London, 1647, folio; and next by Charles Cotterell, London, 1666, folio. Lastly, it was translated into Latin by Pietro Francesco Corazzano, Rome, 1745, in 3 vols. 4to. The best edition of the original work, however, is that printed at Venice in 1733, 2 vols. folio.