many of his great fellow-actors of that period, had received a
good education: he had been articled to an architect, he had even
dabbled in painting, and there were few historical personages into whose
characters he had not a thorough insight. He was a fair authority upon
costume and manners of the Middle Ages, and his acquaintance with Roman
and Greek antiquities would have done credit to many a professor. He was
called "le comedien savant" and "le savant comedien." As such, whenever
a pupil failed to grasp the social or political importance of one of the
_dramatis personae_ of Racine's or Corneille's play, there was sure to be
a disquisition, telling the youngster all about him, but in a way such
as to secure the attention of the listener--a way that might have
aroused the envy of a university lecturer. The dry bones of history were
clothed by a man with an eye for the picturesque.

"Who do you think Augustus was?" he said one day when I was present, to
the pupil, who was declaiming some lines of "Cinna." "Do you think he
was the concierge or le commissionnaire du coin?" And forthwith there
was a sketch of Augustus. Absolutely quivering with life, he led his
listener through the streets of Rome, entered the palace with him, and
once there, became Augustus himself. After such a scene he would
frequently descend the few steps of the platform and drop into his
armchair, exhausted.

Every now and then, in connection with some character of Moliere or
Regnard, there would be an anecdote of the great interpreter of the
character, but an anecdote enacted, after which the eyes would fill with
tears, and the ample chequered handkerchief come into requisition once
more.

Regnier was a great favourite with most of his fellow-actors and the
employes of the Comedie-Francaise, but he was positively worshipped by
Giovanni, the wigmaker of the establishment. They were in frequent
consultation even in the green-room, the privilege of admission to which
had been granted to the Italian Figaro. The consultations became most
frequent when one of the members undertook a part new to him. It was
often related of Balzac that he firmly believed in the existence of the
characters his brain had created. The same might be said of Regnier with
regard to the characters created by the great playwrights of his own
time and those of the past. Of course, I am not speaking of those who
had an historical foundation. But Alceste, Harpagon, Georges Dandi