WOBO: Search for words and phrases in the texts here...

, a learned Protestant divine, was born at Nay in Berne, in 1658, according to Niceron, or in 1654, as in the Gen. Dictionary. He studied at Puy Laurent, at Saumur, at Paris, and at Sedan; at which last place he received the degree of doctor in divinity. He intended to have dedicated himself very early to the ministry; but the circumstances of the Protestants of France rendering it impracticable there, he accepted the offer of the count d'Espense, an officer in the service of the elector of Brandenburgh, by whom he was settled at Berlin, as a French minister. Here he resided many years, and his congregation, at first very thin, was greatly increased by the revocation of the edict of Nantes. In 1688, the elector, Frederic William, died, and our author accepted of an invitation from marshal Schomberg, to go with him first into Holland, and then into England, with the prince of Orange. In 1689 he went to Ireland, and was there in the following year, when his patron was killed at the battle of the Boyne. On his return to England, he became minister of the French church at the Savoy, but the air disagreeing with him, he went again to Ireland, and would have been promoted to the deanery of St. Patrick’s had he been acquainted with the English language. He obtained, however, that of Killaloo, the value of which was far inferior, and never had any other promotion. He occasionally visited England and Holland, for the purpose of printing his works, which were all in French. In one of these visits to London, he died at Marybone, Sept. 25, 1727. He was strongly attached to the cause of king William, as appears by his elaborate defence of the Revolution, and his history of the Assassination-plot. He had great natural abilities, which he cultivated with true and useful learning. He was a most zealous defender of the primitive doctrine of the Protestants, as appears by his writings; and that strong nervous eloquence, for which he was so remarkable, enabled him to enforce the doctrines of his profession from the pulpit with great spirit and energy.

Besides what we have mentioned, Abbt wrote a great number of works in German or Latin. His first publications were theological: in 1757, he wrote on “the Burial of Moses,” Halle, 4to, which, contrary to the usual opinion, he contended was performed by men. In 1758, he published a thesis, to prove that the “Confusion of Tongues at Babel was not a punishment,” Halle, 4to; and another on the “Search of Truth,” Halle, 1759, 4to. These appear to have been the efforts of a young author eadeavouring to establish a reputation on paradox. After he had begun to study philosophy, he published a thesis on the proper manner of studying that science, Halle, 1760, 4.to. His “Treatise on the influence of the Beautiful on Science,” Rinteln, 1762, 4to, was intended as an introduction to his lectures on the belles-lettres. He next published a “Programma on the difficulty of measuring the Human Faculties,” Rinteln, 1763, 4to; and a “Consolatory Epistle to Dr. Schwartz,” 1763, 8vo. His work entitled “Recherches sur les Sentiments Moraux, traduites de l'Allemand de M. Moses Mendelsohn,” 1763, 12mo, was the only book he wrote in French. He wrote also a “Life of his old friend professor Baumgarten,” 1765, Halle, 4to, which was re-printed in the Rinteln Literary Journal. An anonymous work, which has the date of Hamburgh 1766, 8vo, but was really printed at Berlin, the subject, the “folly of persecution among Protestants,” is ascribed to him. “Reflections on a plan of Study for young men of rank,” was written by him in 1759, but not printed till after his death, in 1767; and reprinted at Berlin 1780. He had begun an universal history, a fragment of which was published by Miller, at Halle, 1767, 8vo. After his death, the count de la Lippe published a translation of the Catiline conspiracy from Sallust, written by Abbt, and esteemed one of his best productions, Stadthagen, 1767, &vo; but it must not be confounded with a translation of the same author published at Lemgow, 1772, under his name. His reputation was such, that there have appeared two surreptitious editions of his works, at Reutlingen in 1782, and at Frankfort in 1783; but the genuine edition is that of Nicolai, 6 vols. Stetin and Berlin, in 1768, 1781, and 1790, which contains many pieces not before printed. His correspondence with Blum, Gause, Gleim, Klotz, Moses Mendelsohn, Nicolai, and others, contained in this edition, was reprinted by itself at Berlin and Stetin in 1782, 8vo. Besides these, there are several papers, on various subjects, written by Abbt, in the German literary journals, particularly that conducted by Less’ing and Moses Mendelsohn. Abbt’s life was written by Frederic Nicolai, and published at Berlin 1767, 4to.

, an Italian writer, was born at Macerata, in La Marca de Ancona, and devoted himself early to the study of polite literature, in which he made great progress. He taught the belles lettres at Urbino, where he was librarian to duke Guido Ubaldo; to whom he dedicated a small piece entitled “Annotationes varioe,” explaining some dark passages in the ancient authors. 14e published it under the pontificate of Alexander VI. and another treatise also, entitled “Hecatomythium,” Venice, 1499, 4to, from its containing a hundred fables, which he inscribed to Octavian Ubaldini, count de Mercatelli. His fables have been often printed with those of Æsop, Phaedrus, Gabrias, Avienus, &c. He has these ancient mythologists generally in view, but does not always strictly follow their manner; sometimes intermixing his fable with ludicrous stories, and satires on the clergy, which, as usual in such cases, abound in indecent allusions to the Holy Scriptures. Some of his conjectures on particular passages in the ancients are inserted in the first volume of Gruterus’s Thesaurus criticus, under the title of Annotationes variae; but they are few in number. He wrote also a preface to the editio princeps of Aurelius Victor published at Venice, 1505, and a work entitled “Libri duo de quibusdam locis obscuris in libro Ovidii in Ibin, hactenus male interpretatis,” Venice, 4to, without date. The date of his birth and death are not known, but his works appeared at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century.

The original manuscript of this history was purchased by some Swedish officers, who happened to be prisoners in Siberia, from a merchant, and had it translated into the Russian language. Count Strahlenberg translated it into German; and a French translation was published at Leyden, 1726, 12mo. Martiniere has copied it almost entirely in his Geographical Dictionary.

, or Adelard, born about the year 753, was son of count Bernard, grandson of Charles Martel, and cousin-german of Charlemagne. He had been invited to the court in his youth, but, fearing the infection of such a mode of life, had retired; and, at the age of 20 years, became a monk of Corbie in Picardy, and was at length chosen abbot of the monastery. His imperial relation, however, forced him again to attend the court, where he still preserved the dispositions of a recluse, and took every opportunity, which business allowed, for private prayer and meditation. After the death of Charlemagne, he was, on unjust suspicions, banished by Lewis the Meek, to a monastery on die coast of Acquitaine, in the isle of Here. After a banishment of five years, Lewis, sensible of his own injustice, recalled Adalard, and heaped on him the highest honours. The monk was, however, the same man in prosperity and in adversity, and in the year 823 obtained leave to return to Corbie. Every week he addressed each of the monks in particular 5 he exhorted them in pathetic discourses, and laboured for the spiritual good of the country around his monastery. His liberality seems to have bordered on excess; and his humility induced him to receive advice from the meanest monk. When desired to live less austerely, he would frequently say, “I will take care of your servant, that he may be enabled to attend on you the longer.” Another Adalard, who had governed the monastery during his banishment, by the direction of our Adalard, prepared the foundation of a distinct monastery, called New Corbie, near Paderborn, as a nursery for ecclesiastical laboarers, who. should instruct the northern nations. Our Adalard now completed this scheme; went himself to New Corbie twice, and settled its discipline. The success of this truly charitable project was great: many learned and zealous missionaries were furnished from the new seminary, and it became a light to the north of Europe. Adalard promoted learning in his monasteries, for he was himself a man of great learning; and instructed the people both in Latin and French: and after his second return from Germany to old Corbie, he died ill the year 827, aged 73. Such is the account given us of Adalard, a character, there is reason to believe, of eminent piety and usefulness in a dark age. To convert monasteries into seminaries of pastoral education, was a thought far above the taste of the age in which he lived, and tended to emancipate those superstitious institutions from the unprofitable and illiberal bondage in which they had long subsisted. His principal work work was “A treatise on the French Monarchy;” but fragments only of any of his works have come down to our times. Hincmar has incorporated the treatise on the French monarchy in his: fourteenth Opusculum, “for the instruction of king Carloman.” The ancient statutes of of the abbey of Corbie, by our author, are in the fourth volume of D'Achery’s Spicilegium.

At the publication the wits seemed proud to pay their attendance with encomiastic verses. The best are from an unknown hand, which will perhaps lose somewhat of their praise when the author is known to be Jeffreys. Cato had yet other honours. It was censured as a party play by a scholar of Oxford, and defended in a favourable examination by Dr. Sewel. It was translated by Salvini into Italian, and acted at Florence; and by the Jesuits of St. Omer’s into Latin, and played by their pupils. While Cato was upon the stage, another daily paper, called the Guardian, was published by Steele; to which Addison gave great assistance. Of this paper nothing is necessary to be said but that it found many contributors, and that it was a continuation of the Spectator, with the same elegance, and the same variety, till some unlucky spark from a tory paper set Steele’s politics on fire, and wit at once blazed into faction. He was soon too hot for neutral topics, and quitted the Guardian to write the Englishman. The papers of Addison are marked in the Spectator by one of the letters in the name of Clio, and in the Guardian by a hand. Many of these papers were written with powers truly comic, with nice discrimination of characters, an accurate observation of natural or accidental deviations from propriety but it was not supposed that he tried a comedy on the stage, till Steele, after his death, declared him the author of “The Drummer;” this however he did not know to be true by any cogent testimony; for when Addison put the play into his hands, he only told him it was the work of a gentleman in the company; and when it was received, as is confessed, with cold disapprobation, he was probably less willing to claim it. Tickell omitted it in his collection; but the testimony of Steele, and the total silence of any other claimant, have determined the public to assign it to Addison, and it is now printed with his other poetry. Steele carried “The Drummer” to the playhouse, and afterwards to the press, and sold the copy for 50 guineas. To the opinion of Steele may be added the proof supplied by the play itself, of which the characters are such as Addison would have delineated, and the tendency such as Addison would have promoted. He was not all this time an indifferent spectator of public affairs. He wrote, as different exigencies required, in 1707, “The present state of the War, and the necessity of an augmentation;” which, however judicious, being written on temporary topics, and exhibiting no peculiar powers, has naturally sunk by its own weight into neglect. This cannot be said of the few papers intituled “The Whig Examiner,” in which isexhibited all the force of gay malevolence and humorous satire. Of this paper, which just appeared and expired, Swift remarks, with exultation, that “it is now down among the dead men.” His “Trial of count Tariff,” written to expose the treaty of commerce with France, lived no longer than the question that produced it.

, probably, according to Casaubon, a native of Stymphalus, an ancient city of the Peloponnesus, is one of the oldest authors on the art of war: he is supposed to have lived in the time of Aristotle, or about the year 361 B.'C.; and to have been emperor of Arcadia, and commander at the battle of Mantinea. Casaubon published his work, with a Latin translation, along with his edition of Polybius, fol. Paris, 1609. It was republished by Scriverius, Leyden, 1633, 12mo, with Vegetius and others on military affairs; and the Count de Beausobre published a French translation, with other pieces on the same subject, and a learned commentary, Paris, 1757, 2 vols. 4to.

, a Provencal gentleman and poet, of the twelfth century, died in 1181, leaving behind him the character of a man, learned, amiable, witty, and elegant in person and manners. He married Jausserande de Lunel, in praise of whom he wrote many verses, dedicated to Ildefonso, the first of the name, king of Arragon, prince of Provence, and count of Barcelona, in whose court he held the rank of first gentleman. He complained that in his time the passion of love was not properly understood, and therefore wrote a treatise or poem, entitled “La maniera d'Amar del temps passat.” In this he maintains, in a chain of reasoning, that no one can be happy unless he is a good man; that no one can be a good man unless he is in love; and that no man knows how to love who is not careful of his mistress’s honour. None of his writings have been published. The family of Agoult still exists in Dauphiny and Provence.

, a Spanish Jesuit, and voluminous writer, was born 1566, at Torrejon, a village near Madrid, and entered the society of Jesuits at Alcale, in 1588, being then M.A. He was governor of several houses of the order in Spain, twice presided over the province of Toledo, and was twice sent as deputy to the congregations at Rome. The king, Philip IV. chose him for his preacher, and the count Olivarez, Philip’s prime minister, appointed him his confessor. He died at Madrid, Jan. 15, 1654. His works consist of six folios, in Spanish, printed at Madrid in 1629, 1638, 1640, 1641, 1643, 1646, 1653, on various religious topics; and a life of father Goudin, the Jesuit, 8vo, 1643. He left also many treatises which have not been published.

, of the same family with the preceding, born in 1504, at Bergamo, was the son of count Francis Albani, and intended by his father for the army, but preferred the study of the civil and canon law, in which, as well as in polite literature, he attained great eminence. At first, however, he bore arms in the Venetian army, and afterwards went into the church. Pope Pius V. was no sooner raised to that dignity, than he made Albani a cardinal, in 1570. It is even said that after the death of Gregory XIII. the conclave would have elected him pope, but he was then a widower and had children, a circumstance which interfered with their intentions. He died April 25, 1591. His principal works are: 1. “De Immunitate ecclesiarum,” 1553. 2. “De potestate Papæ et concilii,” Lyons, 1558; Venice, 1561, 4to. 3. “De Cardinalibus, et de douatione Constantini,” 1584, fol. Moreri gives an account of a lawyer of Bergamo, who wrote on these subjects, and is evidently the same person.

, grandson of the constable de Luynes, was the ninth child of Louis-Charles, duke de Luynes, grand almoner of France. He was born in 1672, and had in his youth the title of the chevalier d‘Albert. In 1688, he served as a volunteer at the siege of Philipshurgh; in 1690 he was twice wounded in the battle of Fleurus; and in 1693, commanded the Dauphin regiment of dragoons at Steinkirk, where he was again wounded. In 1703, he accompanied marshal Villars into Bavaria, where the elector promoted him to the rank of lieutenant-general. He was then known by the title of count d’ Albert, and was successively chamberlain, master of the horse, minister, and colonel of the Bavarian guards. The elector having arrived at the throne in 1742, by the royal title of Charles VII. appointed count d' Albert field marshal, and sent him to France as ambassador extraordinary. The same year the emperor created him a prince of the holy Roman empire, by the title of prince of Grimberghen, taken from the rich domains he acquired by marrying a princess of Berghes. He died Nov. 10, 1758, aged eighty-seven. Amidst all his campaigns and political engagements, he cultivated a taste for literature. His works are “Le Songe d'AlcU biade,” a supposed translation from the Greek, Paris, 1735, 12mo, reprinted with “Timandre instruit par son genie,” and other pieces, published at Amsterdam, 1759, 12 mo, under the title “Recueil de differentes pieces de litterature.”

, professor of divinity at Leipsic, was born in 1635, at Lehna in Silesia, and died at Leipsic in 1697. He wrote a great many controversial treatises against Puffendorf, Thomasius, the Cartesians, Cocceians, and the adversaries of the Augsburgh communion, especially Bossuet and count Leopold de Collonitsch, bishop of Wienerisch-Nenstadt. Alberti attacked also the orthodoxy of the pious Spener, the Fenelon of the Lutheran church, but who has been censured for his leaning too ranch to the pietists and mystics. Among his writings, which have been most favourably received and frequently reprinted, we may notice his “Compendium Juris naturae,” against Puffendorff, and his “Interesse prsecipuarum religionum Christian.” He also wrote two curious dissertations, “De fide hsereticis servanda,” Leipsic, 1662, 4to. Adelung, who has given a list of his works, says that his German poems are not bad, if we consider the imperfections of that language, and the false taste which prevailed in his time.

, called also Albertus Teutonicus, Frater Albertus de Colonia, Albertus Ratisbonensis, and Albertus Grotus, of the family of the counts of Bollstrcdt, was born, according to some, in 1193, and according to others, in 1205, at Lavingen in Suabia. It has been supposed that the epithet of Great, which was certainly conferred upon him by his contemporaries, in whose eyes he appeared a prodigy of learning and genius, was the family name Grsot, but none of the counts of Bollstcedt ever bore such a name. He received his early education at Pavia, where he surpassed all his schoolfellows, and that every circumstance belonging to him might have an air of miracle, it is said that he owed his rapid progress to a vision in which the holy Virgin appeared to him, and promised that he should be one of the greatest luminaries of the church. By the advice of one of his masters, the celebrated dominican Jordanus, he resolved to enter into that order in 1221. After having for some time taught the scholars of the society, he went to Paris, and gave lectures on Aristotle with great applause. As the Aristotelian philosophy had been just before forbidden by a papal bull, some of the biographers of Albertus have questioned his lecturing on the subject at Paris; but the fact is recorded by all the ancient writers on his history, and it is even probable that he was the means of having the bull rescinded as he was permitted publicly to comment on Aristotle’s physics. In 1254, his reputation was such among the Dominicans, that he was raised to the dignity of provincial in Germany. In this character he took up his residence at Cologn, a city at that time preferable to most others for a man so addicted to study, and for which he entertained so strong a predilection, that neither the invitation of pope Alexander IV. to come to Rome, nor his promotion to the bishopric of Ratisbon, in 1260, were inducements sufficient to draw him from Cologn for any considerable time. It was at Cologn probably, that he is said to have constructed an automaton, capable of moving and speaking, which his disciple, the celebrated Thomas Aquinas, broke in pieces, from a notion that it was an agent of the devil. This city is likewise said to have been the site of another of his miracles, that of raising flowers in winter to please William, count of Holland. Such tricks, or such reports of his ingenuity, procured him the reputation of a magician, in an age in which he probably had attained only a superior knowledge of mechanics. What he really did, or how far he was indebted to the arts of deception, in these and other performances, it is difficult to determine; but we know that the most common tricks, which now would only make a company of illiterate villagers stare, were then sufficient to astonish a whole nation.

, a descendant of the preceding, was born at Lyons in 1753, and died at Paris, 1789. He passed the greater part of his life in travelling and writing, and was a member of various academies. His works are: 1. “Dialogue 'entre Alexandre et Titus,” 8vo; in which he pleads the cause of humanity against those who are called heroes and conquerors. 2. “Observations d‘un citoyen sur le nouveau plan d’impositions,” 1774, 8vo. 3. “Œuvres diverses, lues le jour de sa reception a l'academie de Lyon,” 1774, 8vo. 4. “Eloge de Quesnoy,” 1775, 8vo; since inserted in the “Necrologe des Hommes celebres.” His attachment to the economists induced him to pay this respect to one of the chief of those writers. 5. “Eloge de Chamousset,” 1776, 8vo. 6. “La Paresse,” a poem; pretended to be translated from the Greek of Nicander, 1777, 8vo. 7. “CEuvres diverses,” 1778, 12mo; consisting of fables, verses, a memoir addressed to the economical society of Berne, and a letter to a suffragan bishop. 8. “Discours,” &c. on the question whether the Augustan age ought to be preferred to that of Louis XIV. as to learning and science, 1784, 8vo. This he determines in favour of the age of Louis; but a severe criticism having appeared in the Journal de Paris, he published an answer, dated Neufchatel, but printed at Paris. 9. “Discours politiques, historiques, et critiques, sur quelques Gouvernments de l'Europe,” 1779, &c. 3 vols. 8vo. The governments are Holland, England, Germany, Italy, Spain; and his remarks are chiefly valuable where he treats of commerce, agriculture, and the other subjects which the French cecjpnomists studied. In matters of government, legislation, manners, &c. he is jejune, superficial, and confused; sometimes through prejudice, and sometimes through wilful ignoranoe. This is particularly striking in his accounts of the constitutions of England and Holland. His account of Spain is perhaps the best. 10. “Discours prononcé a la seance de la societé d'agriculture de Lyon,” 1785, 8vo. 11. “Eloge de Count de Gebelin,” 1785, 8vo. This learned Protestant being denied Christian burial, according to the laws then established in France, Count d'Albon caused him to be buried in his garden, at Franconville, in the valley of Montmorency, and erected a handsome monument to his memory. These gardens, which were laid out in the English fashion, are described in a set of nineteen plates published in 1780; and they are also described by Dulaure in his “Curiosites des environs de Paris.” His numerous writings, his attachment to Quesnoy, and his liberality to count de Gebelin, procured him a considerable share of celebrity during his life, although his character was tinged with some personal oddities, and peculiarities of opinion, which frequently excited the pleasantry of his contemporaries. It is given as an instance of his vanity, that when he had erected some buildings for the accommodation of the frequenters of a fair, he inscribed on the front: “Gentium commodo, Camillus III.”

, a celebrated and learned lawyer, was the son of a rich merchant of Milan, according to Pancirolus, and born in that city in 1492. After having studied the liberal sciences under Janus Parrhasius at Milan, he attended the law-lectures of Jason at Pavia, and those of Charles Ruinus at Bologna. Then taking a degree in law in his twenty-second year, he followed his profession at the bar, in the city of Milan, till he was called to the law-chair by the university of Avignon. He discharged his office with so much capacity, that Francis I. thought he would be a very proper person to promote the knowledge of the law in the university of Bourges, and accordingly prevailed on him to remove thither in 1529; and the next year he doubled his salary, which before was six hundred crowns. Alciati acquired here great fame and reputation; he interspei’sed much polite learning in his explication of the law, and abolished that barbarous language, which had hitherto prevailed in the lectures and writings of the lawyers. Francis Sforza, duke of Milan, thought himself obliged to bring back to his native country a man who could do it so much honour; and this he compassed at last, by giving him a large salary and the dignity of a senator. Alciati accordingly went to teach the law at Pavia, but soon after removed to the university of Bologna, where he continued four years, and then returned to Pavia; from whence he went to Ferrara, being solicited thither by duke Hercules d'Este, who was desirous to render his university famous. It resumed its reputation under a professor so much followed; but at the end of four years Alciati left it, and returned to Pavia. Paul III. gave him an honourable reception as he passed by Ferrara, and offered him ecclesiastical preferment; but Alciati was contented with that of prothonotary, and would not give up his profession of the law. He seems to rejoice that he had refused Paul’s offers, in a letter to Paulus Jovius, whom the pope had a long time amused with fallacious promises: “I am very glad,” says he, “that I did not suffer myself to be deceived by this pope’s offers, who, under the promise of a great recompense, wanted to draw me to Rome.” The emperor created Alciati a count-palatin and a senator; and Philip, afterwards king of Spain, presented him with a golden chain as he passed by Pavia.

While the studies of M. d‘Alembert were confined to geometry, he was little known or celebrated in his native country. His connections were limited to a small society of select friends: he had never seen any man in high office except Messrs. d’Argenson. Satisfied with an income which furnished him with the necessaries of life, he did not aspire after opulence or honours; but his reputation at length made its way to the throne, and rendered him the object of royal attention and beneficence. He received also a pension from government, which he owed to the friendship of count d'Argenson.

, an eminent Italian poet of the last century, was born at Asti, in Piedmont, Jan. 17, 1749, of an ancient family, and sent for education to Turin, where he was principally under the care of the count Benoit Alfred, his father’s cousin. His progress, however, was for some time very slow, partly owing to bad health, and partly to temper; and when his tutor died, he left the academy at the age of sixteen, almost as ignorant as he entered it, and without having acquired a taste for any thingbut riding. His next passion was for travelling, in which he appeared to have no-other object than moving from one place to another. In less than two years he visited a great part of Italy, Paris, England, Holland, and returned to Piedmont, without having sought to know any thing, to study any thing, or to gratify any curiosity. His second tour was yet more extensive and more rapid: in eighteen months he travelled through Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Prussia, and returning through the Spa and Holland, went again to England. During this second visit to London, he engaged in affairs of gallantry, and discovered many oddities of behaviour, but in neither of his visits did he give himself the trouble to learn the language. After remaining in London seven months, he returned, with the utmost expedition, by Holland, France, Spain, and Portugal, and arrived at Turin, May 5, 1772. A violent attachment to a lady of quality of this place engrossed his mind for two years, but had the happy effect of first inspiring him with a taste for poetry and poetical composition. After some imperfect attempts, he wrote a sort of tragedy, called “Cleopatra,” which he procured to be acted at Turin, June 16, 1775, with a small piece “The Poets,” by way of farce, in which the author endeavoured to turn his own tragedy into ridicule. The success of these two pieces, although confined to only two representations, decided Alfieri to become an author, and proved the commencement of a new life. At this time, he knew French very imperfectly, scarcely any thing of Italian, and nothing of Latin. The French he determined to forget altogether, but to cultivate Italian and Latin, and study the best authors in both. The study, accordingly, of the Latin and the pure Tuscan languages, and of dramatic composition, upon a new plan of his own invention, occupied all his time, and gave employment to that activity and sprightliness of mind and fancy which had hitherto been dissipated on trifles. His first two tragedies were “Philip II.” and “Polinice;” and these were followed at short intervals, by “Antigone,” “Agamemnon,” &c. to the amount of fourteen, within less than seven years; and within the same space, he wrote several pieces in prose and verse, a translation of Sallust, “A Treatise on Tyranny,” “Etruria avenged,” in four cantos, and five “Odes” on the American revolution. He afterwards recommenced his travels, and added to his collection of tragedies, “Agis,” “Sophonisba,” “Brutus I.” “Brutus II.” and others. Although he had a dislike to France, he came thither to print his theatre, and with him the lady of his affections, the princess of Schomberg, the wife of the last prince of the house of Stuart, who, when set at liberty by the death of her husband, bestowed her hand on Alfieri. On his arrival in France, he found that nation ripe for a revolution, to the principles of which he was at first inclined, and expressed his opinion very freely in “Parigi Shastigliato,” an ode on the taking of the Bastille; but the horrors of revolutionary phrenzy which followed, induced him to disavow publicly the principles which he had professed, and he resolved to lose the property that he had acquired in France, rather than to appear to maintain them any longer. Accordingly he left France ia August 1792, and the following year, his property in the funds was confiscated, and his furniture, papers, and books sequestered and sold at Paris. In 1794, he published a declaration in the gazette of Tuscany, in which he avowed some of the works left behind him, and disavowed others which he thought might be found among his papers, or altered without his consent, and published as his. Among the latter was his “Etruria avenged,” and the “Treatise on Tyranny” above mentioned; but it is certain that he had caused an edition of these and some other pieces of the same stamp to be published at Kell, about the time he arrived in France, and now disavowed them merely because he had changed his opinions. From this time, ruminating on the unjust treatment he had received at Paris, he never ceased to express his contempt of the French nation in what he wrote, but he resumed his pen and his studies with more eagerness than ever. At the age of forty-eight he began the study of Greek, and continued it with his usual ardour, and the rest of his life was employed in making translations from that language, and in writing comedies, tragedies, and satires. His incessant labours at length brought on a complaint of which he died at Florence (where he had resided from the time of his leaving France), Oct. 8, 1803, and was interred in the church of St. Croix, where his widow erected a splendid monument to his memory, executed by Canova, between the tombs of Machiavel and Michael Angelo. The inscription was written by himself, and is as flattering as his life, written also by himself, and published at Paris, 1809, and in English at London, 1810, 2 vols. His posthumous works, in 13 volumes, were published in 1804, at Florence, although with London on the title: they consist of a number of translations, and some original dramas in a singular taste, and not very likely to be adopted as models. A French translation of his dramatic works was published at Paris, 1802, 4 vols. 8vo. Petitot, the translator, has added some judicious reflexions on the forms given to the Italian tragedy by Alfieri, and notwithstanding its weak parts, this collection is a mine which some new authors have frequently worked. His lofty expression, or attempt at expression, and his anxious search for forcible thoughts, sometimes render him obscure; and he appears to have encumbered his genius with more designs than it could execute. Of his personal character, various accounts have been given. In his “Life,” he is sufficiently favourable to himself; but there are few traits in his character that are not rather objects of warning than of imitation. From his youth he appears to have been the slave of passion and temper, averse to the restraints of a well-regulated mind, and consequently many of his opinions, whether good or bad, were hastily conceived, and hastily abandoned.

Algarottihad also studied the fine arts, and produced many excellent specimens of painting and engraving. In particular he designed and engraved several plates of heads in groupes, one of which, containing thirteen in the antique style, is dated Feb. 15, 1744. He travelled likewise over Italy, with a painter and draftsman in his suite; and what he has published on the arts discovers extensive knowledge and taste. Frederick II. who had become acquainted with his talents when prince-royal, no sooner mounted the throne, than he invited him to Berlin. Algarotti was then in London, and, complying with his majesty’s wish, remained at Berlin many years. Frederick conferred on him the title of count of the kingdom of Prussia, with reversion to his brother and descendants. He made him also his chamberlain, and knight of the order of Merit, bestowing on him at the same time many valuable presents, and other marks of his esteem; and after Algarotti left Berlin, the king corresponded with him for twenty-five years. The king of Poland, Augustus III. also had him for some time at his court, and gave him the title of privy-­counselloir of war. Nor was he held in less esteem by the sovereigns of Italy, particularly pope Benedict XIV. the duke of Savoy, and the duke of Parma. The excellence of his character, the purity of his morals, his elegant manners, and the eclat which surrounds a rich amateur of the arts, contributed to his celebrity perhaps as much as the superiority of his talents, and his acknowledged taste. Wherever he travelled he was respected equally by the rich, and the learned, by men of letters, by artists, and by men of the world. The climate of Germany having sensibly injured his health, he returned first to Venice, and afterwards to Bologna, where he had determined to reside, but his disorder, a consumption of the lungs, gained ground rapidly, and put an end to his life, at Pisa, March 3, 1764. He is said to have met death with composure, or, as his biographer terms it, with philosophical resignation. In his latter days he passed his mornings with Maurino (the artist who used to accompany him in his travels), engaged in the study of painting, architecture, and the fine arts. After dinner he had his works read to him, then printing at Leghorn, and revised and corrected the sheets: in the evening he had a musical party. The epitaph he wrote for himself is taken from Horace’s non omnis moriar, and contains only the few words, “Hicjacet Fr. Algarottus non omnis” The king of Prussia was at the expense of a magnificent monument in the Campo Santo of Pisa; on which, in addition to the inscription which Algarotti wrote, he ordered the following, “Algarotto Ovidii emulo, Newtoni discipulo, Fredericus rex,” and Algarotti’s heirs added only “Fredericus Magnus.” The works of Algarotti were published at Leghorn, 1765, 4 vols. 8vo; at Berlin, 1772, 8 vols. 8vo; and at Venice, 17 vols. 8vo, 1791--1794. This last, the most complete and correct edition, is ornamented with vignettes, the greater part of which were taken from the author’s designs. These volumes contain 1. Memoirs of his life and writings, and his poetry. 2. An analysis of the Newtonian system. 3. Pieces on architecture, painting, the opera, essays on vario is languages, on history, philology, on Des Cartes, Horace, &c. 4 and 5. Essays on the military art, and on the writers on that subject. 6. His travels in Russia, preceded by an Essay on the metals of that empire: the congress of Cytherea, the life of Pallavicini, the Italian poet; and a humorous piece against the abuse of learning. 7. Thoughts on different subjects of philosophy and philology. 8. Letters on painting and architecture. 9 and 10. Letters on the sciences. 11 to 16. His correspondence, not before published, with the literati of Italy, England, and France. 17. An unfinished critical essay on the triumvirate of Crassus, Pompey, and Gassar. Among his correspondents we find the names of the Italians, Manfredi and Zanotti, his first masters, Fabri of Bologna, Metastasio, Frugoni, Bettinelli, Frisi the celebrated mathematician and physician, Mazzuchelli, Paradisi, &c.; the Prussians, Frederic II. several princes of the same family, and Form ey, &c.; the English, lords Chesterfield and Hervey, Mr. Hollis, lady Montague, &c.; jand the French, Voltaire, Maupercuis, du Chastellet, mad. du Boccage,; &c. His Essays on painting, on the opera, his Letters to lord Hervey and the marquis Maffei, and his Letters, military and political, have been translated and published in English. His biographers have generally handed down his character without a blemish; aiui Fabroni, on whom ive mostly rely, is equally lavish in his praises. Wiule we take his personal merits from these authorities, we have evident proof from his works that he was an universal scholar, and wrote with facility and originality on every subject he took in hand. They present a greater variety of reading and thought than almost any scholar of the eighteenth century; but they are not without redundancy, and sometimes affectation. His fame is said to be fixed on a more solid basis in his own country, than in those where he has been viewed only througn the medium of translations.

In 1771, Ali sent Abou Dahab with 40,000 men to attempt the conquest of Syria, and wrote to count Orloff, the Russian admiral, then at Leghorn, making him large offers to form an alliance with him. The count in return thanked him, wished him success, and made him great promises, which were never realised. He also negotiated with Venice, promising to assist her to retake her possessions from the Turks; but the republic declined this bold enterprise. In the mean time Abou Dahab took some towns of Syria, and drove the Ottomans before him; but he had long meditated the ruin of Ali, his patron and his friend, and had accepted the command of the army, in order to gain it to his interest. Having secured them, he erected the standard of rebellion, withdrew the garrisons from the conquered places, and re-entered Egypt. Not daring to attack the capital, he kept along the Red Sea, crossed the deserts, and entered Upper Egypt. His revolt was now manifest; he gained the beys who commanded there, and marched towards Cairo. Ali repented his placing the command in the hands of a traitor. He collected an army, which he entrusted to Ismatjl bey, who likewise betrayed him and joined Abou Dahab. Upon this, Ali, by the advice of his friends, determined to retire to St. John of Acre. He wrote to count Orloff for assistance; and in the middle of the night, accompanied by the beys his friends, and 7,000 troops, he left Cairo, and tied across the deserts. He reached Gaza, but from agitation of mind was taken very ill: in this situation the venerable scheik Daker came to visit him, consoled him that his condition was not desperate, and that the Russian squadron was at hand. With this consolation, and the assistance of a Russian physician, in a few weeks he recovered.

A Russian squadron appearing before Acre, he wrote again to count Orloff for assistance, and sent also an ambassador to the empress. In August 1772, Ali took Yaffa and Rama. These successes inspired him with the hope of returning to Cairo. The chiefs of the janisaries in that capital also invited him to do so; and therefore collecting the garrisons of the conquered towns, he began his march with 52,250 mamalukes, 3,400 mograbi, and 650 horse. Abou Dahab met him with 12,000 men, and was defeated. Abou, by instilling into the minds of the Mahomruedans, that Ali designed to abolish their religion, and introduce Christianity, procured an army of 20,000 men. The janisaries, however, refused to join him. Ali was unprepared for this event; he abandoned himself to despair, and fell dangerously ill. His friends advised him to retire to St. John of Acre, but he declared he would sooner perish than retreat aw inch. On the 13th of April, 1773, the armies met. Both parties charged with fury, and notwithstanding the inferiority of Ali’s troops, they had at first the advantage; but the mograbi, corrupted hy the promises of Abou Dahab, deserted, and the fortune of the day was changed. Most of Ali’s friends fell round him; the survivors pressed him to retire, but he replied, that his hour was come. The mamalnkes bravely perished with their arms in their hands. Ali slew two soldiers who attempted to sieze him; and the lieutenant of Abou Dahab advancing, Ali, though wounded with two balls, shot him with a pistol. He fought with the utmost bravery, but, being beat down by the stroke of a sabre, was seized and carried to the tent of the conqueror, where he died of his wounds eight days after.

, count d'Abrantes, a Portugueze, was the first governor of India, to which place he was dispatched in 1505, by king Emanuel, with the high character of viceroy. His fleet had a dangerous passage out, and almost continual storms off the Cape of Good Hope, without being able to make it, but at last reached Quiloa. The king of that place having given some cause to suspect his conduct, Almeida resolved to besiege the city, and after landing 500 men, the natives fled, and the Portugueze entered and plundered it. The plunder was however deposited in one house, and shared among the soldiers, Almeida taking as his own share, only one arrow. He then began to build a fort, and offered the people the protection of the Portugueze, which they accepted, and received a king from them, who promised to be obedient to king Emanuel.

He distinguished himself by his learning at the synod of Dort, whither he. was sent with two other deputies of the Palatinate, Scultetus and Tossanus. He appears to have conceived great hopes soon after his return to Heidelberg, the elector Palatine having gained a crown by the troubles of Bohemia, but he met with a dreadful disappointment. Count Tilli took Heidelberg by storm in Sept. 1622, and allowed his soldiers to commit every species of outrage and violence. Alting escaped almost by a miracle, which is thus related: He was in his study, when news was brought that the enemy was master of the town, and ready to plunder it. Upon his bolting his door he had recourse to prayer. One of his friends, accompanied by two soldiers, advised him to retire by the back door into the chancellor’s house, which was protected by a strong guard, because count Tilli designed the papers that were lodged there should come entire into his hands. The lieutenant-colonel of the regiment of Hohenzollen was upon this guard, and addressing himself to Alting, said, “With this axe I have killed to-day ten men, and Dr. Alting shall be the eleventh, if I can discover where he has hid himself,” and concluded this barbarous speech by asking Alting, “who are you?” Alting, with great presence of mind, answered, “I have been regent in the college of Sapience.” This expression the savage murderer did not understand, and permitted him to escape. On this he contrived to retire to his family, which he had sent some time before to Heilbrun. He rejoined it at Schorndorf, but was not allowed to continue there more than a few months, owing to the illiberal conduct of some Lutheran ministers. In 1623 he retired with his family to Embden, and afterwards to the Hague, where the king of Bohemia engaged him to instruct his eldest son, but permitted him at the same time to accept a professorship of divinity at Groningen, which he entered upon, June 16, 1627, and kept to the day of his death.

The last years of his life were embittered by domestic afflictions, and by bodily disease. The loss of an affectionate daughter, and afterwards of his wife, preyed upon a constitution that haa been shaken by the vicissitudes of his former life., and brought on a lethargic disorder, of which be died, Aug. 25, 1644, leaving behind him the character of a man of great piety and learning; and it appears that few men of his time were more highly honoured for their personal worth. He went yearly to wait upou the king of Bohemia, and to inspect the studies of the royal family. He contributed very much to the collections that were made throughout all the Protestant countries for the churches of Germany. He was also employed in two other important commissions: one was the revisal made at Leyden of the new Dutch translation of the Bible; and the other the visitation of the county of Steinfurt. In the first he had some colleagues, but in the second he was the only general inspector, the count of Bentheim having sent him to regulate the churches, and particularly to counteract the progress of Socinianism, which had crept in. Alting, by his temperate character and his abilities as a reasoner, taking all his arguments from scripture, appears to have been well qualified for these and other important trusts assigned to him. He married at Heidelberg in 1614, and had seven children, of whom a daughter and two sons survived him. The eldest son was professor of civil law at Daventer; the other is the subject of the next article.

, an eminent divine, of the reformed church at Metz, was born March 17, 1617. He studied from the ninth or tenth year of his age in the Jesuits’ college, then the only one at Metz where there was an opportunity of being instructed in polite literature. In this college he gave such proofs of genius, that the heads of the society left nothing unattempted in order to draw him over to their religion and party, but he continued firm against their attacks, and that he might be the more enabled to withstand them, took the resolution of studying divinity, in which he was so indefatigable, that his father was often obliged to interpose his authority to interrupt his continual application, lest it suould injure his health. He went to Geneva in the year 1633, and performed his course of philosophy there under Mr. du Pattr, and his divinity studies under Spanheim, Diodati, and Tronchin, who had a great esteem for him. He left Geneva in April 1641, and offered himself to the synod of Charenton, in order to take upon him the office of a minister. His abilities were greatly admired by the examiners, and his modesty by the ministers of Paris; and the whole assembly was so highly satisfied with him, that they gave him one of the most considerable churches, which was unprovided for, that of Meaux, where he exercised his ministry till the year 1653, and became extremely popular, raising an extensive reputation by his learning, eloquence, and virtue, and was even highly respected by those of the Roman catholic communion. He displayed his talents with still greater reputation and success in his own country, where he was minister from the year 1653, till the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685. He retired to Francfort after that fatal blow; and having preached in the French church at Hanau, the whole assembly was so edified by it, that they immediately called together the heads of the families, in order to propose that he might be desired to accept of the office of minister among them. The proposition was agreed to; and they sent deputies who prevailed on him, and he began the exercise of his ministry in that church about the end of the year 1685. It was now that several persons who had quitted the French church, for some disgust, returned to it again. The professors of divinity, and the German and Dutch ministers, attended frequently upon his sermons. The count of Hanau himself, who had never before been seen in that church, came thither to hear Mr. Ancillon. His auditors came from the neighbouring parts, and even from Francfort, and people, who understood nothing of French, flocked together with great eagerness, and said, that they loved to see him speak; a degree of popularity which excited the jealousy of two other ministers, who at length rendered his situation so uneasy that he was induced to abandon voluntarily a place from which they could not force him. If he had chosen to rely upon the voice of the people, he might have still retained his situation, but it was his opinion that a faithful pastor ought not to establish his own interests upon any division between a congregation and its ministers, and as through his whole life he had been averse to parties, and had remonstrated often against cabals and factions, he would not take advantage of the disposition which the people were in towards him, nor permit them to act. Having therefore attempted every method which charity suggested without success, he resolved to quit Hanau, where he had to wrangle without intermission, and where his patience, which had supported several great trials, might possibly he at last overcome; and for these reasons he left it privately. He would now have returned to Francfort to settle, but in consideration of his numerous family, he preferred Berlin, where he received a kind reception from the elector of Brandenbourg. He was also made minister of Berlin, and had the pleasure of seeing his eldest son made judge and director of the French who were in that city, and his other son rewarded with a pension, and entertained at the university of Francfort upon the Oder, and at last minister in ordinary of the capital. He had likewise the satisfaction of seeing his brother made judge of all the French in the states of Brandenbourg, and Mr. Cayart, his son-in-law, engineer to his electoral highness. He enjoyed these circumstances undisturbed, till his death at Berlin, September 3, 1692, aged seventy-five years. His marriage was contracted in a very singular way: The principal heads of families of the church of Meaux seeing how much their minister distinguished himself, and hearing him sometimes saying, that he would go to Metz to see his father and relations, whom he had not seen for several years, were apprehensive lest they should lose him. They thought of a thousand expedients in order to fix him with them for a long time; and the surest way in their opinion was to marry him to some rich lady of merit, who had an estate in that country or near it. One of them recollected he had heard, that Mr. Ancillon having preached one Sunday in the morning at Charenton, he was universally applauded; and that Mr. Macaire especially, a venerable old gentleman, of very exemplary virtue and piety, and possessed of a considerable estate at Paris and about Meaux, had given him a thousand blessings and commendations, and said aloud to those who sat near him in the church, that he had but one daughter, who was an only child, and very dear to him; but if that gentleman, speaking of Mr. Ancillon, should come and ask her in marriage, he would give her with all his heart. Upon this, they went to ask him, whether he still continued in that favourable opinion of him; he replied, that he did; and accompanied that answer with new expressions of his esteem and affection for Mr. Ancillon; so that the marriage was concluded in the year 1649, and proved a very happy one, although there was a great disparity of years, the young lady being only fourteen.

, professor of history and Greek at Groningen, was born at Braunfels, in the county of Solras, August 10th, 1604. His father was minister to count de Solms-Braunfels, and Inspector of the churches which belong to that county, and his mother, daughter to John Piscator, a famous professor of divinity at Herborn, in the county of Nassau. He performed his humanity-studies at Herborn, and then studied philosophy at the same place, under Alstedius and Piscator, after which he went to Bremen, where he lived seven years. He was one of the most constant auditors of Gerard de Neuville, a physician and a philosopher; and, as he had a desire to attain a public professorship, he prepared himself for it by several lectures which he read in philosophy. He returned to his own country in 1628, where he did not continue long, but went to Groningen, on the invitation of his kind patron, Henry Alting. He read there, for some time, lectures upon all parts of philosophy, after which Alting made him tutor to his sons, and wheo they had no longer occasion for his instruction, he procured him the same employment with a prince Palatine, which lasted for three years; part of which he spent at Leyden, and part at the Hague, at the court of the prince of Orange. He was called to Groningen in 1634, to succeed Janus Gebhardus, who had been professor of history and Greek. He filled that chair with great assiduity and reputation till his death, which happened October 17, 1676. He was library -keeper to the university, and a great frierAi to Mr. Des Cartes, which he shewed both during the life and after the death of that illustrious philosopher. He married the daughter of a Swede, famous, among other things, for charity towards those who suffered for the sake of religion.

, the natural son of Charles IX. and Maria Touchet, was born April 28, 1575, and distinguished himself by his bravery during the reign of five kings. Being intended from his infancy for the order of Malta, he was, in 1587, presented to the abbey of Chaise-Dieu, and, in 1589, was made grand prior of France. Catherine de Medicis having bequeathed him the estates of Auvergne and Lauraguais, he quitted the order of Malta, with a dispensation to marry; and accordingly in 1591, married Charlotte, daughter of the constable Henry of Montmorenci. In 1606, Margaret de Valois applied to parliament, and set aside the will of Catherine of Medicis, and the estates were given to the dauphin, afterwards Louis XIII. Charles, however, continued to take the title of count d' Auvergne, until 1619, when the king bestowed on him the duchy of Angouleme. He was one of the first to acknowledge Henry IV. at St. Cloud, and obtained great reputation for his services in the battles of Arques, Ivry, &c. In 1602, being implicated in Biron’s conspiracy, he was sent to the Bastille, but obtained his pardon. Being, however, afterwards convicted of a treasonable attempt in concert with the marchioness de Verneuil, his uterine sister, he was arrested a second time in 1604, and next year condemned to lose his head, which Henry IV. commuted for perpetual imprisonment; but in 1616, we find him again at large, and, in 1617, at the siege of Soissons. Being appointed colonel of the light cavalry of France, and created a knight by order of the king, he was, in 1620, sent as the principal of an embassy to the emperor Ferdinand II. the result of which was printed in 1667, under the title of “Ambassade de M. le due d‘Angouleme, &c.” fol. The narrative is somewhat dry, but it contains many particulars of considerable interest in the history of that time. In 1628, the duke opened the famous and cruel siege of Rochelle, where he had the chief command until the arrival of the king. He also bore a part in the war of Languedoc, Germany, and Flanders. He died at Paris, Sept 24, 1650. Francoise de Nargonne, whom he married for his second wife, in 1644, died one hundred and forty-one years after her father-in-law Charles IX. on the 10th of August 1715, aged ninety-two. The duke d’Angouleme wrote, 1. “Memoires tres-particuliers du duc d‘Angouleme, pour servir à l’histoire des regnes de Henri III. et Henri IV.” 1662, 12mo. Bineau, the editor of this work, has added to it a journal of the negoeiations for the peace of Vervins, in 1598. The duke’s memoirs also form the first volume of the “Memoires particuliers pour servir a. l'Histoire de France,” 1756, 4 vols. 12mo, and the third volume of “Pieces fugitives pour servir, &c.” published by the marquis d'Aubais et Menard, 1759, 3 vols. 4to. 2. “Les harangues prononcees en l‘assemblie da M. M. les princes Protestants d’Allemagne,” 1620, 8vo. 3. “Le generale et fidele relation de tout ce qui s’est passé en l'Isle de Re, &c.” 1627, 8vo. 4. A translation of Diego de Torres’ history of the kingdoms of Morocco, Fee, &c. Besides these, Bouthillier, bishop of Troyes in the beginning of the eighteenth century, had a folio volume of manuscript letters, written by the duke d‘Angouleme, from 1633 to 1643, and another collection by his son, Louis Emmanuel de Valois, count d’Alais, and, after his father’s death, duke d'Angouleme, who died in 1653.

, count of Pergola, who rose through various ecclesiastical promotions to that of cardinal, was born in 1697, and died Sept. 24, 1767, esteemed for his learning, modesty, and other virtues. He published, J. “De titulis quos S. Evaristus Romania presbyteris distribuit,” Rome, 1725, 8vo. 2. “Ragioni della Sede apostolica sopra il Ducato di Parma e Piacenza esposte a‘ sovrani e principi Catholici dell’ Europa,” Rome, 1742, 4 vols. 4to. 3. “S. Athanasii interpretatio psalmorum,” Rome, 1746, folio, which he printed, for the first time, from a manuscript in the Barberini library, with a Latin translation and notes. 4. “Vetus Missale Romanum, proefationibus et notis illustratum,” Rome, 1756, 4to. He also cultivated Italian poetry, and there are several of his pieces in the tenth volume of the poems “Degli Arcadidilloma,” 1747, 8vo. Other works by him, separately printed, were collected and published in a folio vol. Rome, 1756.

, or Anvari, one of the most celebrated poets of Persia, was born in the twelfth century, and was incited to turn poet from the honours bestowed on that class by the sultan Sandjar. He presented a composition to that sultan, who admitted him to his court, and here Raschidi was his rival. These two poets were for some time of opposite parties; Anvari was in the camp of Sangiar when he attacked Alsitz, governor and afterwards sultan of the Kouarasmians, with whom Raschidi had shut himself up. Whilst the two sultans were assailing and repulsing each other, the two versifiers were skirmishing in their own method, reciprocally throwing at one another rhymes fastened to the end of an arrow. Our poet was at the same time an astrologer; but in his predictions he was particularly unfortunate, and his enemies took advantage of this to injure him with the sultan, and he was obliged to retire to the town of Balke, where he died in 1200. This Persian bard corrected the licentiousness that had been customary in the poetry of his country, but nothing of his remains except two small pieces, one of which is inserted in the Asiatic Miscellany, No. I. 1786, and translated by capt. Kirkpatrick; the other, translated into German by Chezy, was published in the secoud number of the Oriental Mine, a journal printed at Vienna, under the patronage and at the expense of count Rzewuski.

, Duke of Atri in the kingdom of Naples, and son of Julius Aqua viva, count of Converse no, added to the splendour of his birth a great share of learning, which rendered him very illustrious towards the end of the fifteenth, and beginning of the sixteenth century. He was at first addicted to the military art, and distinguished himself by his bravery, although he was unfortunate, and in the last battle in which he fought, was wounded and taken prisoner. When released he appears to have devoted his time to study and the conversation of men of letters, by whom he was highly esteemed. Alexander ab Alexandro dedicated to him his “Dies Geniales” and “Pontanus,” two of his works. He died in 1528, aged seventy-two years. His works were, an “Encylopædia,” left very imperfect; and Bayle says he composed a book “De re Equestri.” His best known work is “Disputationes de Virtute morali,” Helenop. 1609, 4to, which it seems doubtful whether Bayle ever saw. His brother Belisarius also became an author, and published a treatise “De Venatione,” and others “De Aucupio,” “De Principum liberis educandis,” and “De Certamine Singulari.” These were first printed at Naples, 1519, fol. and reprinted at Basil, 1578, 8vo, by Leunclavius, with Manuel Palæologus on the Education of Kings.

, Sieur de Porcheres, one of the first members of the French academy in the seventeenth century, was born in Provence, and was descended from the ancient family of Porcheres. He was the scholar and follower of Malherbe, and imitated him in the turn of his verse, and was also tutor to the son of Mr. de Chenoise, and afterwards to the son of the count Saint-Herau. The abbtj Bois-Robert, who was particularly eminent for the generous use which he made of his interest with cardinal Richelieu, procured him a pension of six hundred livres from that great man. On March 10, 1636, he spoke an oration in the French academy upon the “Love of the Sciences.” He retired at last into Burgundy, where he married, and died in 1640. He wrote a great number of verses, which were never printed. But there are others, which were published, as particularly his “Paraphrase upon the Psalms” of Degrees,“to which are added his” Poems upon divers subjects," Paris, 1633, 8vo. He had a brother, John, who had likewise a talent for poetry, and translated several of the Psalms into French verse, two editions of which have been published, the former at Grenoble in 1651, and the latter more complete at Marseilles in 1654.

, a Milanese count, the son of Horace Archinto and Leonora Tousa, was born about the end of the sixteenth century. He was employed in several political offices, and received from Philip III. king of Spain, the title of count de Barata. He died June 15, 1656. Much of his time had been devoted to the study of the antiquities of his country, and he formed a large collection of antiques, of which he published descriptions. His principal works are, 1. “Epilogati racconti delle aniichita, c nobilta dell a famiglia Archinti, &c. Aggiunlavi una breve expositione degli antichi marmi, che ne' palagi di questa famiglia si leggono,” Milan, 1648, fol. 2. “Collectanea antiquitatum in ejus domo,” fol. without date or place, and so rare as to be unknown to Argellati, who takes no notice of it in his library of Milanese writers; but it is frequently mentioned by Muratori.

, a good Latin poet of the sixteenth century, the second son of count Oderic, privy counsellor to the emperor Maximilian, was born Dec. 3, 1479, at Arco, a small town of the Tyrol, in the diocese of Trente, and an ancient fief of his family. He was at first page to the emperor Frederic III. the father of Maximilian; but devoting himself much to study, acquired a critical knowledge of the ancient languages, and spoke all the modern ones as easily as his own. He afterwards served in the army; but the death of his brother having enabled him to succeed to his paternal estates, he obtained leave to retire, and was afterwards in several public employments. Still the love of literature predominated, and induced him to form an intimacy with Paul Jovius, Annibal Caro, Flaminio, Fracastorius, and other eminent men of his time. He is thought to have died about the end of 1546. His poems were first published, at Mantua, in 1546, 4to, under the title of “Nicolai Archii comitis Numeri,” a very rare edition, but reprinted by Comino, with the poems of Fumano and Fracastorius, Padua, 1759, 2 vols. 4to. He wrote other works, which are yet in manuscript. One of his descendants, count Gumbattista D'Arco, imperial intendant at Mantua, and a member of the royal academy of that city, was also author of some works in great estimation, particularly a learned essay on the famous troubadour Sordello, and an eloge on count de Firmian (1783). He was a liberal patron of the arts, and Mantua is indebted to him for the fine original bust of Virgil.

, an Italian printer, and one of the most learned and laborious editors of his time, was born at Bologna about the end of the year 1685. His family, then one of the most ancient in that city, was originally of Florence. After having begun his studies at Bologna, he went to Florence, and became acquainted with many of the literati of that city, particularly the celebrated Magliabechi. From Florence he went to Lucca, and then to Leghorn, where he meant to embark for France, but the death of one of his uncles rendered it necessary for him to return to his own country. He first projected an edition of the works, already in print, or in manuscript, of Ulysses Aldrovandi, with additions, notes, and corrections, and engaged several learned persons to assist him, but death having removed the greater part of them in a few years, he was obliged to give up the undertaking. He then published a collection of the poems of Carlantonio Bedori, a Bolognese gentleman, at Bologna, 1715, 4to. Two years after, having been elected one of the magistrates of that city, known by the title of the tribunes of the people, when he came to resign his office, he made an eloquent address on the duties of the office, which his successors ordered to be registered among their acts. His next and most important undertaking was an edition of that immense historical collection, entitled “Scriptores Rerum Italicarum.” The learned Muratori having imparted to him the design he had conceived of collecting and publishing the ancient Italian historians, acknowledged at the same time that he had been obliged to abandon the plan from the impossibility of finding a press adequate to such an extensive undertaking, the art of printing, once so highly cultivated in Italy, having now greatly degenerated. Argellati being of opinion that Milan was the only place where a trial might be made with effect, to revive useful printing, immediately went thither, and communicated Muratori’s plan to count Charles Archinto, the patron of letters, and his own particular patron. Archinto formed a society of noblemen of Milan, called the Palatine Society, who undertook to defray the expence of the edition, sixteen of the members subscribing four thousand crowns each. Argellati then took every necessary step to establish a printing-office suited to this liberal patronage, and the “Scriptores Rerum Italicarum” was the first work printed, in which Argellati bore a considerable part, collecting and furnishing Muratori with most of the manuscripts, notices, and dedications of the first volumes. He superintended at the same time, the printing of other works, particularly an edition of Sigonius, 1738/6 vols. fol. The emperor Charles VI. to whom it was dedicated, and who had repaid him for the dedication of the first volume of the Italian historians, by the title of imperial secretary, and a pension of three hundred crowns, now doubled this pension. Argellati continued to publish, with incredible labour and dispatch, various editions of works of importance, as “Opere inedite di Ludovico Castelvetro,” 1727, 4to. “Grazioli, De antiquis Mediolani aedificiis,” 1736, fol. “Thesaurus novus veterum Inscriptionum,” by Muratori, 1739, fol. But we are more particularly indebted to him for, 1. “Bibliotheca scriptorum Mediolanensium,” Milan, 1745, 2 vols. fol. 2. “Biblioteca de' Volgarizzatori Italiani,” Milan, 5 vols. 4to, 1767, besides which he contributed a great number of essays and letters to various collections. He died at Milan Jan. 5, 1755, after having had the misfortune to lose his son, the subject of the following article.

, the name of two Spanish poets, brothers, and natives of Balbastro in Aragon, who descended from a family originally of Ravenna. Their poems were published under the title of “Rimas de Lupercio, i del doctor Bartolome Leonardo de Argensola,” Saragossa, 1634, 4to. Antonio, the Spanish biographer, speaks in high terms of this volume, and after him Baillet and Feutry declare that these brothers were the Horaces of Spain. Lupercio, or Lobergo-Leonardo d‘Argensola, the eldest, born about the year 1565, was gentleman of the chamber to cardinal Albert of Austria, secretary to the empress Maria of Austria, and secretary of state and of war under count de Lemes, the viceroy of Naples, where he went to reside in 1611, and where he died in 1613. He wrote three tragedies, Isabella, Phillis, and Alexander. Bartholomew Leonard d’ Argensola, the brother, born in 1566, was successively canon of the metropolitan church of Saragossa, chaplain to the empress Maria, and rector of Villa Hermosa. He accompanied his brother to Naples, and after his death, became historiographer of Aragon, and died at Saragossa, Feb. 26, 1631. Besides the poems printed with those of his brother, he wrote, 1. “Conquista delas islas Molucas,” Madrid, 1609, fol. 2. “Primera parte de los analesde Aragon que prosigue los de Zurita,” Saragossa, 1630, fol. and some other works enumerated by Antonio.

At about thirty years of age he began his Orlando; and cardinal Bembo, to whom he communicated his design, would have dissuaded him from writing in Italian, advising him to cultivate the Latin; to which Ariosto answered, that he would rather he the first among the Tuscan writers, than scarcely the second among the Latin. At the same time, it fortunately happened, that he had already written seme stanzas of his Orlando, in which he met with such encouragement, that he determined vigorously to prosecute his design. He chose the subject of Boyardo, which was very popular; and by adopting the fictions of Boyardo, Ariosto had not only an opportunity of bringing the romance of the count to a conclusion, but of celebrating, under the person of Rogero, the family of his patron.

, count de Camerano, a nobleman ef Asti in Piedmont, flourished about 1550. In his youth he followed the profession of arms, and was sent by the duke of Savoy, with four hundred men, to assist Maximilian II. when he held a diet to oppose the army of Soliman, an event which is said to have been commemorated by a medal, with the inscription, “Fredericus Asinarius co. Camerani.” Asinari amused his leisure hours with poetry, and submitted his compositions to the celebrated Annibal Caro and they were afterwards published in various collections. 1 “Two Sonnets,” in the second part of the “Scelta di Rime di diversi excellenti Poeti,” by Zabata, 1579, 12mo. 2. “Four Canzoni, and a Sonnet,” in the “Muse Toscane” of Gherard Borgogni, 1594, 8vo. 3. “Eighty-two pieces, sonnets, canzoni, madrigals,” &c. in Borgogni’s “Rime di diversi illustri Poeti,” Venice, 1599, 12mo. Among his other works, which remain in manuscript, there are, in the library of Turin, “Vari Sonetti e Canzoni” “II Tancredi,” a tragedy “Tre libri delle transformazioni” and “Tre libri dell‘ via d’Orlando.” Copies of these are also in the library of St. Mark at Venice. The tragedy of Tancred was printed at Paris, 1587, 8vo, under the title of “Gismonda,” one of the dramatis persons, and attributed to Torquato Tasso. Next year an edition was printed at Bergamo, 4to, in which this error was corrected, but another substituted by stating, that it was the performance of Ottavio Asinari, the father of our author and the editor, Gherard Borgogni, either was; or affected to be ignorant of the edition previously printed at Paris.

, the son of Antonio Aulisio, was born at Naples, Jan. 14, 1649 (or 1639, according to Diet. Hist.), studied Latin under Floriati and Martena, and made such rapid and successful progress in his other studies, that at the age of nineteen, he taught rhetoric and poetry with reputation. We are also told, that he understood, and could write and speak all the languages of the East and West, and that he acquired a knowledge of them without the aid of a master. He was equally well acquainted with the sciences, and yet with all this knowledge he was for a long time extremely poor, owing to the loss of his father and mother, and the charge of a younger brother and five sisters. At the age of twenty-six he taught as professorextraordinary, without any salary, but about eight years after he obtained the chair of the institutes, which was worth about one hundred ducats, and at forty he held that of the code, worth one hundred and forty. From his forty-sixth year to the end of his life, he was principal professor of civil law, with a salary of 1100 ducats. He died Jan. 29, 1717, in the sixty-eighth year of his age. As he had been a public teacher at Naples about fifty years, he acquired, according to custom, the title of Count Palestine, and was interred with the honours due to that rank. For twenty-three years, also, he had been superintendant of the school of military architecture, by order of Charles II. with a salary of twenty-five ducats per month. During all this time he lived a retired life, and had no ambition to exchange it for the bustle of ambition. In the course of his studies, he became a great admirer of Plato, and when his maternal uncle Leonardi di Capoa, wrote a work agreeable to the principles of Des Cartes, Aulisio became his antagoist but instead of argument, substituted satirical verses, which contributed little to his own fame, and excited the displeasure of his uncle’s learned friends. This dispute induced him to break off all correspondence with them, and employ his time on several works, particularly, 1. “De Gymnasii constructione De Mausolei architectura; de Harmonia Timaica, et numeric niedicis.” These three were printed in a quarto volume, Naples, 1694. 2. “Commentarii juris civilis ad tit. Pandect.” 3 vols. 4to. 3. “Delle Scuole sacre,” 1723, 4to. 4. “Historia deortu et progressu Medicinse,” Venice, 1700. His life is prefixed to the “Scuole sacre.”

, widow of the count d'Aunoy, and niece of the celebrated madame Desloges, died in 1705, She wrote with ease, though negligently, in the department of romance. Readers of a frivolous taste still peruse with pleasure her “Tales of the Fairies,” 4 vols. 12mo, and especially her “Adventures of Hippolytus earl of Douglas,” in 12mo. a piece containing much warmth and nature in the style, and abundance of the marvellous in the adventures. Her “Memoires historiques de ce qui s’est passe de plus remarquable en Europe depuis 1672, jusqu'en 1679,” are a medley of truth and falsehood. Her “Memoirs of the court of Spain,” where she had lived with her mother, in 2 vols. present us with no favourable idea of the Spanish nation, which she undoubtedly treats with two much severity, iter “History of John, de Bourbon, prince de Carency,” 1692j 3 vols. 12mo, is one of those historical romances that are the offspring of slender parts, in conjunction with alluring effusions of gallantry. Her husband, the count d' Annoy, being accused of high treason by three Normans, very narrowly escaped with his head. One of his accusers, struck with remorse of conscience, declared the whole charge to be groundless.

, a very able lawyer of the seventeenth century, was the son of the preceding, and was born at Heidelberg, and probably educated there. He was, however, celebrated for his knowledge of the civil law, when Heidelberg was taken by count Tilly in 1622, and the university dissolved. This obliged him to leave the place, but he appears to have returned soon after, and to have endeavoured to support himself for some time by giving private lessons to the few pupils whom the siege had not driven away. In 1624, he published his " Exercitationes ad partem posteriorem Chiliados Antonii Fabri, de erroribus interpretum, et de interpretibus juris,' 7 fol. The same year he entered into a correspondence with the learned Cuueus of Leyden, to whom he communicated his intention of leaving Heidelberg, as the university, then about to be restored, was to be composed of catholics, while he was disposed towards the principles of the reformed religion. He intimated also to Cuneus that he had no higher ambition, should he come to Leyden, than to give private lessons. During this correspondence an offer was made to Cuneus of a professorship in the academy of Franeker, and as he could not accept it, he took this opportunity of recommending Bachovius, but the latter had rendered himself obnoxious there by writing against Mark Lycklama, formerly one of the professors, and still one of the curators of the academy.

, bishop of Copenhagen, was born at Lunden in 1646. His father Olaus Bagger taught theology in the school of Lunden, but sent his son to Copenhagen for education. He afterwards travelled to Germany, the Netherlands, and England, studying under the most able masters in divinity and the oriental languages, and then returned to Copenhagen. When Lunden became a part of the Swedish dominions, the king established an academy there, and Bagger was appointed to teach the oriental languages. He had scarcely begun to give lessons, however, when by the advice of his friends of Copenhagen, he solicited and obtained, in 1674, the office of first pastor of the church of the Holy Virgin in that metropolis. In 1675, after the usual disputation, he got the degree of doctor, and on the death of John Wandalin, bishop of Zealand or Copenhagen, he was appointed to succeed him, at the very early age of twenty-nine. His promotion is said to have been in part owing to his wife Margaret Schumacher, the widow of Jacob Fabri, his predecessor, in the church of the Holy Virgin at Copenhagen, and to the brother of this lady, the count de Griffenfeld, who had great interest at court. Bagger, however, filled this high office with reputation, as well as that of dean of theology, which is attached to the bishopric of Copenhagen. He revised the ecclesiastical rites which Christian V. had passed into a law, as well as the liturgy, epistles, and gospels, collects, &c. to which he prefixed a preface. He also composed and published several discourses, very learned and eloquent, some in Latin, and others in the Danish tongue. He died in 1693, at the age of 47. By his second wife, he left a son Christian Bagger, who became an eminent lawyer, and in 1737 rose to be grand bailly of Bergen, and a counsellor of justice.

On his return he obtained the castle of count Leining Hartzburgh at Heidesheim, for his Pkilanthropinum^ and in 1778 it was consecrated by a solemn religious festival. His conduct here, however, was too obnoxious both in principle and practice, to permit him a long continuance, and his shocking treatment of his wife contributed to render the scheme abortive. His academy became in debt, and he took to flight, but was imprisoned at Dienheim. On his release he settled at Halle, as the keeper of a tavern and billiard table, and lived in open adultery with a woman who was his assistant, and for whom he turned his wife and daughter out of doors.

, an Italian count, and a man of learning, was a native of Placentia, where he was born July 3, 1654. After studying philosophy and the classics in the college of St. Francis Xavier at Bologna, he went to Rome, and passed through a course of theology, law, and mathematics. He was so pleased with Rome as to determine to take up his abode there and when the pope offered him the‘ place of nuncio at Brussels, and in Poland, he preferred a life of literary employment. Some time after, however, he accompanied cardinal d’Estrees to Paris, and the marchioness of Montecuculi to St. Germain and afterwards went to Poland, to be present at the election of a successor to king John Sobieski, then deceased. In 1698, duke Francis, of Parma, sent him to Madrid, as his deputy; and in 1710 Sophia Dorothy duchess of Placentia employed him in the same honourable office at Vienna, and at several courts in Germany, England, and Utrecht. On his return, he passed the rest of his life in a retired manner, and died Feb. 23, 1725. When in England he was elected a member of the royal society, with M. Bianchini. His rich cabinet of natural history, and his extensive library, were always open to men of learning, many of whom he assisted in their pursuits with great liberality. We know of none of his writings, except a discourse on the maps in the Atlas Historique, published at Amsterdam in 1719.

, brother to the preceding, and fifth son of the first lord viscount Harrington, was born in 1729, and entered very young into the service of the British navy, passing through the inferior stations of midshipman and lieutenant with great reputation. He first went to sea in the Lark, under the command of lord George Graham, and in 1744, he was appointed a lieutenant by sir William Rowley, then commanding a squadron in the Mediterranean. In 1746, he had the rank of master and commander in the Weazcl sloop, in which he took a French privateer off Flushing. During the same year, or in 1747, he became post-captain, by being appointed totheBellona frigate (formerly a French privateer) in which he took the Duke de Chartres outward bound East India ship, of 800 tons, and of superior force, after a severe engagement, in which the French lost many killed and wounded. After the peace of 1748, he had the command of the Sea-horse, a twenty-gun ship in the Mediterranean, and while there, was dispatched from Gibraltar to Tetuan, to 'negociate the redemption of some British captives, in which he succeeded. He had afterwards the command of the Crown man of war, on the Jamaica station, and was in commission during the greater part of the peace. When the war broke out again between Great Britain and France, in 1756, he was appointed to the command of the Achilles of 60 guns. In 1759, he signalized his courage in an engagement with the Count de St. Florentin, French man of war, of equal force with the Achilles she fought for two hours, and had 116 men killed or wounded, all her masts shot away, and it was with difficulty she was got into port. The Achilles had twenty-five men killed or wounded. In the Achilles, captain Barrington was after this dispatched to America, from whence she returned about the close of the year 1760. In the Spring of the ensuing year, captain Barrington served under admiral Keppel, at the siege of Belleisle. To secure a landing for the troops, it became necessary to attack a fort and other works, in a sandy bay, intended to be the place of debarkation; three ships, one of which was the Achilles, were destined to this service. Captain Barrington got first to his station, and soon silenced the fire from the fort and from the shore, and cleared the coast for the landing the troops, and although, soon obliged to re-embark, they were well covered by the Achilles, and other ships. Ten days after the troops made good their landing, at a place where the mounting the rock was, as the commanders expressed it, barely possible, and captain Barrington was sent home with this agreeable news. After the peace of 1763, captain Barrington in 1768 commanded the Venus frigate, in which ship the late duke of Cumberland was entered as a midshipman. In her he sailed to the Mediterranean, and as these voyages are always intended both for pleasure and improvement, he visited the most celebrated posts in that sea. Soon after his return, the dispute between Great Britain and Spain, respecting Falkland’s Island, took place, and on the fitting out of the fleet, captain Barrington was appointed to the command of the Albion, of 74 guns, and soon after made colonel of marines. He found some little difficulty, from a scarcity of seamen, in manning his ship, and had recourse to a humourous experiment. He offered a bounty. for all lamp-­lighters, and men of other trades which require alertness, who would enter; and soon procured a crew, but of such a description that they were, for some time, distinguished by the title of Barrington‘ s blackguards. He soon, however, changed their complexion. He had long borne the character of being a thoroughrbred seaman, and a rigid disciplinarian. His officers under him were the same, and they succeeded in making the Albion one of the best disciplined ships in the royal navy. The convention between the two courts putting an end to all prospect of hostilities, the Albion was ordered, as a guardship, to Plymouth; and in this situation captain Barrington commanded her for three years, made himself universally esteemed, and shewed that he possessed those accomplishments which adorn the officer and the man. In the former capacity he had so completely established his character, as to be looked up to as one who, in case of any future war, would be intrusted with some important command. In the latter, the traits of benevolence which are known, exclusive of those which he was careful to keep secret, shew, that with the roughness of a seaman, he possessed the benevolence of a Christian. An economical style of living enabled him to indulge his inclination that way, with a moderate income. On the breaking out of the war with France, captain Barrington, having then been thirty-one years a post-captain in the navy, was promoted to the rank of rear-admiral, and dispatched with a squadron to the West Indies. He found himself, on his arrival, so much inferior to the enemy, that he could riot preserve Dominica from falling into their hands. However, before the French fleet under D’Estaing could reach the West Indies, he was joined at Barbadoes by the troops under general Grant from America. He then immediately steered for St. Lucia, and the British troops had gained possession of a part of the island, when the French fleet, under the command of count D‘Estaing, appeared in sight. ’ Barrington lay in the Grand Cul de Sac, with only three ships-of the line, three of fifty guns, and some-frigates, and with this force, had not only to defend himself against ten sail of the line, many frigates, and American armed ships, but also to protect a large fleet of transports, having on board provisions and stores for the army, and which there had not yet been time to land; so that the fate of the army depended on that of the fleet. During the night the admiral caused the transports to be warped into the bay, and moored the men of war in a line without them. D'Estaing, elated with the hopes of crushing this small naval force under Barrington, attacked him next morning, first with ten sail of the line, but failing, he made a second attack with his whole force, and was equally unsuccessful, being only able to carry off one single transport, which the English had not time to warp within the line. This defence is among the first naval atchievements of the war. In an attack by land, on general Meadows’s intrenchments, the count was equally repulsed, and the island soon after capitulated. Admiral Byron shortly after arriving in the West Indies, Barrington, of course, became second in command only. In the action which took place between the British fleet and the French on the 6th of July, 1775, admiral Barrington, in the Prince of Wales, commanded the van division. The enemy were much superior to the English, but this discovery was not made till it was too late to remedy it. Admiral Barrington, in the Prince of Wales, with the Boyne and Sultan, pressed forward, soon closed with the enemy’s fleet, and bravely sustained their attack until joined by other ships. It was not, however, the intention of the French admiral to risk a general engagement, having the conquest of Grenada in view, and his ships being cleaner than those of the English, enabled him to choose his distance. The consequence was, that several of the British ships were very severely handled, whilst others had no share in the action. Barrington was wounded, and had twenty-six men killed, and forty-six wounded, in his own ship. Soon after this engagement, admiral Barrington, on account of ill-health, returned to England. These two actions established our admiral’s reputation, and he was looked on as one of the first officers in the English navy. The ferment of parties during the close of that war occasioned many unexpected refusals of promotion; and as admiral Barrington was intimately connected with lord Shelburne, col. Barre, and several other leading men in opposition, it was probably owing to this circumstance that he refused the command of the channel fleet, which was offered to him after the resignation of admiral Geary in 1780, and on his declining to accept it, conferred on admiral Darby. In 1782, he served, as second in command, under lord Howe, and distinguished himself at the memorable relief of Gibraltar. The termination of the war put a period to his active services. In February 1786, he was made lieutenant-general of marines; and on Sept. 24, 1787, admiral of the blue. During the last ten years of his life, his ill state of health obliged him to decline all naval command. He died at his lodgings in the Abbey Green, Bath, August 16, 1800.

Through the means of this patron, then become duke of Choiseul, and principal of the king’s ministers, in the room of cardinal de Bernis, our author, in 1758, was amply provided for, first hy pensions on the archbishopric of the Abbey and the treasure of St. Martin of Tours, and afterwards by the place of secretary-general of the Swiss; besides which he enjoyed a pension of 5000 livres on the Mercure. His attachment to his patron was highly honourable to him. In 1771, on the dismission of the duke de Choiseul, and his banishment to Chanteloup, our author did not hesitate to follow him: and when that minister was compelled to resign the office of general of the Swiss, he would have given up his place of secretary immediately, if his patron had not interfered. He went, however, to Paris, and offered the surrender of his brevet to the count d‘Affry, who refused to accept it, being willing to protect our author if he would give up his friend. This he, positively refused to do: upon which M. d’Affry, much to his honour, accepted the resignation, granting him 10,000 livres out of the annual profits of the place, and Barthelemi set off next day for Chanteloup.

Bayard continued about six months in the service of the duke of Savoy, by whom he was then presented to Charles VIII. who sent him to the count de Ligny, of the imperial house of Luxembourg, that he might be brought up in his family. At the age of seventeen years he carried away all the honour of a tournament, which the lord of Vaudrey, one of the roughest knights of his time, held in the city of Lyons. In 1494, Charles VIII. resolved to assert his right to the crown of Naples, and therefore passed into Italy at the head of a numerous army, consisting of the prime nobility of his kingdom: so great an expedition, says Berville (from whom this article is taken) was never fitted out with so much speed, splendour, and success. The conquest, however, was almost as soon lost as gained. Charles, as he was returning to France with less than 10,000 men, was attacked near Fornoue by an army of six times the number. Upon this occasion he behaved with the greatest intrepidity, and gained a complete victory, and Bayard distinguished himself in an extraordinary manner. He took a standard from a party of fifty men, and presented it to the king, who rewarded him with a present of 500 crowns.

The confidence with which he inspired the troops, and the love which they had for him, were not merely the effects of his courage: they knew that his prudence was not inferior to his valour, and that he never would expose them wantonly or rashly: he was besides so disinterested, that he left the booty wholly to others, without reserving any part of it for himself. One day, when he had taken 15,Ooo ducats of gold from the Spaniards, he gave half of them to capt. Terdieu, and distributed the rest among the soldiers who accompanied him in the expedition. With the same generous spirit he divided 2,400 ounces of silver plate, which he received as a present from the count de Ligny, among his friends and followers. Having defeated Audre, the Venetian general, he took Brisse, and a lady of that city presenting him with 2,500 pistoles, to prevent her house from being pillaged, Jie divided them into three parts; 1000 he gave to each of the two daughters of the lady, to help, as he said, to marry them, and the 500 which remained he caused to be distributed among the poor nunneries that had suffered most in the pillage of the place. In this lady’s house he lodged until he had recovered from a dangerous wound which he received in the action.

Bayard also made an expedition into Piedmont, where he took Prosper Colonnes, the pope’s lieutenant-general, prisoner. Chabannes, who was marshal of France, and Humbercourt and d‘Aubigny, two general officers, all much superior in rank to Bayard, gave up the honour of conducting the expedition to him, and served in it under his orders. But the defence of Mezieres completed the military reputation of this extraordinary man. This place was far from being in a condition to sustain a siege, and it had been resolved in a council of war to burn it, and ruin the adjacent country, that the enemy might find neither shelter nor subsistence. But Bayard opposed this resolution,­and told the king that no place was weak which had honest men to defend it. He then offered to undertake its defence, and engaged to give a good account of it. His proposal was accepted; and he went immediately and locked liimself up in the town. Two days after he had entered it, the count de Nassau, and capt.’ de Sickengen invested the place with 40,000 men. Bayard so animated his soldiers, sowed such dissention between the two generals who besieged him, and so effectually defeated all the attempts of the Imperialists, that in three weeks he obliged them to raise the siege, with the loss of many men, and without once making the assault. All France now resounded with the praises of Bayard: the king received him at Fervagues with caresses and encomiums of the most extraordinary kind: he created him a knight of his own order, and gave him, by way of distinction, a company of an hundred men armed in chief, which was scarce ever given but to princes of the blood.

Some time after Mr. Bayle’s conversion, Mr. Naudis de Bruguiere, a young gentleman of great wit and penetration, and a relation of his, happened to come to Toulouse, where he lodged in the same house with him. They disputed warmly about religion, and after having pushed the arguments on both sides with great vigour, they used to examine them over again coolly. These familiar disputes often puzzled Mr. Bayle, and made him distrust several opinions of the church of Rome; and he began to suspect that he had embraced them too precipitately. Some time after Mr. de Pradals came to Toulouse, whom Mr. Bayle’s father had desired to visit him, hoping he would in a little time gain his confidence; and this gentleman so far succeeded, that Bayle one day owned to him his having been too hasty in entering into the church of Rome, since he now found several of her doctrines contrary to reason and scripture. August 1670, he departed secretly from Toulouse, where he had staid eighteen months, and retired to Mazeres in the Lauragais, to a country-house of Mr. du Vivie. His elder brother came thither the day after, with some ministers of the neighbourhood; and next day Mr. Rival, minister of Saverdun, received his abjuration in presence of his elder brother and two other ministers, after which they obliged him instantly to set out for Geneva. Soon after his arrival here, Mr. de Normandie, a syndic of the republic, having heard of his great character and abilities, employed him as tutor to his sons. Mr. Basnage at that time lodged with this gentleman, and it was here Mr. Bayle commenced his acquaintance with him. When he had been about two years at Geneva, at Mr. Basnage’s recommendation he entered into the family of the count de Dhona, lord of Copet, as tutor to his children; but not liking the solitary life he led in this family, he left it, and went to Roan in Normandy, where he was employed as tutor to a merchant’s son; but he soon grew tired of this place also. His great ambition was to be at Paris; he went accordingly thither in March 1675, and, at the recommendation of the marquis de Ruvigny, was chosen tutor to messieurs de Beringhen, brothers to M. de Beringhen, counsellor in the parliament of Paris.

, of Arragon, of the family of the Bentivoglios of Bologna, but only collaterally related to that of the cardinal, was born at Ferrara, about the middle of the sixteenth century. He bore the titles of a nobleman of Ferrara, Venice, and Bologna, was marquis of Magliano and count of Antignato. He studied first in Italy, and afterwards at Paris, and then embraced a military life, and served in the rank of captain, in Flanders, in 1588. On his return to Italy, he made the tour of the different courts, and being at that of Modena when the duke Francis was about to depart for the siege of Pavia, he went with him as colonel of cavalry, and distinguished himself. To the science of arms he joined those of literature, was well acquainted with Greek, Latin, several modern languages, music, and architecture, both civil and military. He is said likewise to have invented some ingenious machinery for the Italian stage, his turn being particularly to dramatic poetry; and he was also a member of various academies. He died at Ferrara, February 1, 1685. On the Ferrara stage he produced three dramas: “L'Annibale in Capoa,” “La Filli di Tracia,” and “L‘Achille in Sciro’;” the latter was printed at Ferrara, 1663, 12mo. He wrote also “Tiridate,” represented on the Venetian stage, and printed 1668, 12mo; and a comedy in prose, “Impegni per disgracia,” which was published after his death, at Modena, 1687, His lyric poems are in various collections, but principally in “Rime scelte de' poeti Ferraresi.”

, an adventurer of very dubious, but not uninteresting character, one of the Magnates of the kingdoms of Hungary and Poland, was born in the year 1741, at Verbowa, the hereditary lordship of his family, situated in Nittria, in Hungary. After receiving the education which the court of Vienna affords to the youth of illustrious families, at the age of fourteen years, he fixed on the profession of arms. He was accordingly received into the regiment of Siebenschien, in quality of lieutenant; and joining the Imperial army, then in the field against the king of Prussia, was present at the battles of Lowositz, Prague, Schweidnitz, and Darmstadt. In 17,38, he quitted the Imperial service and hastened into Lithuania, at the instance of his uncle the starost of Benyowsky, and succeeded as his heir to the possession of his estates. The tranquillity, however, which he now enjoyed was interrupted by intelligence of the sudden death of his father, and that his brothers-in-law had taken possession of his inheritance. These circumstances demanding his immediate presence in Hungary, he quitted Lithuania with the sole view of obtaining possession of the property of his family; but his brothers-in-law by force opposed his entrance into his own castle. He then repaired to Krussava, a lordship dependant on the castle of Verbowa, where, after having caused himself to be acknowledged by his vassals, and being assured of their fidelity, he armed them, and by their assistance gained possession of all his effects; but his brothers, having represented him at the court of Vienna as a rebel and disturber of the public peace, the empress queen issued a decree in chancery against him, by which he was deprived of his property, and compelled to withdraw into Poland. He now determined to travel; but after taking several voyages to Hamburgh, Amsterdam, and Plymouth, with intention to apply himself to navigation, he received letters from the magnates and senators of Poland, which induced him to repair to Warsaw, where he joined the con?­federation then forming, and entered into an obligation, upon oath, not to acknowledge the king, until the confederation, as the only lawful tribunal of the republic, should have declared him lawfully elected to oppose the Russians by force of arms and not to forsake the colours of the confederation so long as the Russians should remain in Poland. Leaving Warsaw, in the month of December, he attempted to make his rights known at the court of Vienna; but disappointed in this endeavour, and deprived of all hope of justice, he resolved to quit for ever the dominions of the house of Austria. On his return to Poland, he was attacked, during his passage through the county of Zips, with a violent fever and being received into the house of Mr. Hensky, a gentleman of distinction, he paid his addresses and was married to one of his three daughters, but did not continue long in possession of happiness or repose. The confederate states of Poland, a party of whom had declared themselves at Cracow, observing that the count was one of the first who had signed their union at Warsaw, wrote to him to join them and, compelled by the strong tie of the oath he had taken, he departed without informing his wife, and arrived at Cracow on the very day count Panin made the assault. He was received with open arms by martial -Czarnesky, and immediately appointed colonel general, commander of cavalry, and quarter-master-general. On the 6th of July 1768, he was detached to Navitaig to conduct a Polish regiment to Cracow, and he not only brought the whole regiment, composed of six hundred men, through the camp of the enemy before the town, but soon afterwards defeated a body of Russians at Kremenka rechiced Landscroen, which prince Lubomirsky, who had joined the confederacy with two thousandregular troops, had attempted in vain and, by his great gallantry and address, contrived the means of introducing supplies into Cracow when besieged by the Russians but the count, having lost above sixteen hundred men in affording this assistance to the town, was obliged to make a precipitate retreat the moment he had effected his purpose; and being pursued by the Russian cavalry, composed of cossacks and hussars, he had the misfortune to have his horse killed under him, and fell at last, after receiving two wounds, into the hands of the enemy. Apraxin, the Russian general, being informed of the successful manoeuvre of the count, was impressed with a very high opinion of him, and proposed to him to enter into the Russian service but rejecting the overture with disdain, he was only saved from being sent to Kiovia with the other prisoners by the interposition of his friends, who paid 962 1. sterling for his ransom. Thus set at liberty, he considered himself as released from the parole which he had given t the Russians; and again entering the town of Cracow, he was received with the most perfect satisfaction by the whole confederacy. The town being no longer tenable, it became an object of the utmost consequence to secure another place of retreat and the count, upon his own proposal and request, was appointed to seize the castle of Lublau, situated on the frontier of Hungary; but after visiting the commanding officer of the castle, who was not apprehensive of the least danger, and engaging more than one half of the garrison by oath in the interests of the confederation, an inferior officer, who was dispatched to assist him, indiscreetly divulged the design, and the count was seized and carried into the fortress of Georgenburgh, and sent from thence to general Apraxin. On his way to that general, however, he was rescued by a party of confederates, and returned to Lublin, a town where the rest of the confederation of Cracow had appointed to meet, in order to join those of Bar, from which time he performed a variety of gallant actions, and underwent great vicissitudes of fortune. On the 19th of May, the Russian colonel judging that the count was marching towards Stry, to join the confederate parties at Sauok, likewise hastened his march, and arrived thither half a day before the count, whose forces were weakened by fatigue and hunger. In this state he was attacked about noon by colonel Brincken, at the head of four thousand men. The count was at first compelled^ to give way but, on the arrival of his cannon, he, in his turn, forced the colonel to retire, who at last quitted the field, and retreated towards Stry. The advantage of the victory served only to augment the misery of the count, who iivthis single action had threahundred wounded and two hundred and sixty-eight slain, and who had no other prospect before him than either to perish by hunger with his troops in the forest, or to expose himself to be cut to pieces by the enemy. On the morning of the 20th, however, by the advice of his officers and troops, he resumed his march, and arrived about ten o‘clock at the village of Szuka, where, being obliged to halt for refreshment, he was surprised by a party of cossacks, and had only time to quit the village and form his troops in order of battle on the plain, before he was attacked by the enemy’s cavalry, and soon, after by their infantry, supported by several pieces of cannon, which caused the greatest destruction among his forces. At length, after being dangerously wounded, the Russians took him prisoner. The count was sent to the commander in chief of the Russian armies, then encamped at Tam’pool, who not only forbade the surgeons to dress his wounds, but, after reducing him to bread and water, loaded him with chains, and transported him to Kiow. On his arrival at Polene, his neglected wound had so far endangered his life, that his conductor'was induced to apply to colonel Sirkow. the commanding officer at that place, and he was sent to the hospital, cured of his wounds, and afterwards lodged in the town, with an advance of fifty roubles for his subsistence. Upon the arrival, however, of brigadier Bannia, who relieved colonel Sirkow in his command, and who had a strong prejudice against the count, he was ac^ain loaded with chains, and conducted to the dungeon with the rest of the prisoners, who were allowed no other subsistence than bread and water. Upon his entrance he recognized several officers and soldiers who had served under him and their friendship was the only consolation he received in his distressed situation. Twentytwo days were thus consumed in a subterraneous prison, together with eighty of his companions, without light, and even without air, except what was admitted through an aperture which communicated with the casements. These unhappy wretches were not permitted to go out even on their natural occasions, which produced such an infection, that thirty-five of them died in eighteen or twenty days; and such were the inhumanity and barbarity of the commander, that he suffered the dead to remain and putrefy among the Ining. On the 16th of July the prison was opened, and one hundred and forty- eight prisoners, who had survived out of seven hundred and eighty-two, were driven, under every species of cruelty, from Polene to Kiow, where the strength of the count’s constitution, which had hitherto enabled him to resist such an accumulation of hardships and fatigue, at length gave way, and he was attacked with a malignant fever, and delirium. The governor, count Voicikow, being informed of his quality, ordered that i-.e should be separately lodged in a house, and that two roubles a day should he paid him for subsistence but when he was in a fair way of recovery, an order arrived from Petersburgh to send all the prisoners to Cazan, and this severity bringing on a relapse, the officer was obliged co leave the count at Nizym, a town dependant on the government of Kiow. At this place, a Mr. Lewner, a German merchant, procured him comfortable accommodation, superintended the restoration of his health, and on his departure made him a present of two hundred roubles, which he placed for safety in the hands of the officer until his arrival at Cazan, but who had afterwards the effrontery to deny that he had ever received the mont.y, accused the count of attempting to raise a revolt among the ^riauners, and caused him. to be loaded with chains and committed to the prison of Cazan, from which he was delivered at the pressing instances of marshal Czarnesky Potockzy, and the young Palanzky. He was then lodged at a private house, and being invited to dine with a man of quality in the place, he was solicited, and consented to join in a confederacy against the government. But on the 6th of November 1769, on a quarrel happening between two Russian lords, one of them informed the governor that the prisoners, in concert with the Tartars, meditated a design against his person and the garrison. This apostate lord accused the count, in order to save his friends and countrymen, and on the 7th, at eleven at night, the count not suspecting any such event, heard a knocking at his door. He came down, entirely undressed, with a candle in his hand, to inquire the cause; and, upon opening his door, was surprised to see an officer with twenty soldiers, who demanded if the prisoner was at home. On his replying in the affirmative, the officer snatched the candle out of his hand, and ordering his men to follow him, went hastily up to the count’s apartment. The count immediately took advantage of his mistake, quitted his house, and, after apprising some of the confederates that their plot was discovered, he made his escape, and arrived at Petersburgh on the 19th of November, where he engaged with a Dutch captain to take him to Holland. The captain, however, instead of taking him on-board tho ensuing morning, pursuant to his promise, appointed him to meet on the bridge over the Neva at midnight, and there betrayed him to twenty Russian soldiers collected for the purpose, who carried him to count Csecserin, lieutenantgeneral of the police. The count was conveyed to the fort of St. Peter and St. Paul, confined in a subterraneous dungeon, and after three days fast, presented with a morsel of bread and a pitcher of water; but, on the 22d of November 1769, he at length, in hopes of procuring his discharge, was induced to sign a paper promising for ever to quit the dominions of her imperial majesty, under pain of death.

The count having signed this engagement, instead of being set at liberty, was re-conducted to his prison, and there confined till 4th December 1769, when, about two hours after midnight, an officer with seven soldiers came to him and he was thrown upon a sledge to which two horses were harnessed, and immediately driven away with the greatest swiftness. The darkness of the night prevented the count from discerning the objects around him but on the approach of day-light he perceived that major Wynblath, Vassili Panow, Hippolitus Stephanow, Asaph Baturin, Ivan Sopronow, and several other prisoners, were the companions of his misfortunes and after suffering from the brutality of their conductor a series of hardships, in passing through Tobolzk, the capital of Siberia, the city of Tara, the town and river of Tomsky, the villages of Jakutzk and Judorua, they embarked in the harbour of Ochoczk, on the 26th October 1770, and arrived at Kamschatka on the 3d December following. The ensuing day they were conducted before Mr. Nilow, the governor; when it was intimated to them that they should be set at liberty on the following day, and provided with subsistence for three days, after which they must depend upon themselves for their maintenance that each person should receive from the chancery a musket and a lance, with one pound of powder, four pounds of lead, a hatchet, several knives and other instruments, and carpenter’s tools, with which they might build cabins in any situations they chose, at the distance of one league from the town but that they should be bound to pay in furs, during the first year, each one hundred roubles, in return for these advantages; that every one must work at the corvee one day in the week for the service of government, and not absent themselves from their huts for twenty-four hours without the governor’s permission and after some other equally harsh terms, it was added, that their lives being granted to them for no other purpose than to implore the mercy of God, and the remission of their sins, they could be employed only in the meanest works to gain their daily subsistence. Under these regulations the exiles settled the places of their habitations, built miserable huts to shelter, themselves from the inclemency of the weather, formed themselves into a congress, and after choosing the count de Benyowsky their chief or captain, they swore with great solemnity mutual friendship and eternal fidelity. Among the number of unhappy wretches who had long groaned under the miseries of banishment, was a Mr. Crustiew, who had acquired considerable ascendancy over his fellow-sufferers; and to obtain the particular confidence and esteem of this man was the first object of the count’s attention in which he sogn succeeded,. The pains and perils incident to the situation to which these men were reduced, were borne for some time in murmuring sufferance, until the accidental finding an old copy of Anson’s Voyage inspired them with an idea of making an escape from Kamschatka to the Marian islands; and the count, Mr. Panow, Baturin, Stephanow, Solmanow, majors Wynblath, Crustiew, and one Wasili, an old and faithful servant of the count’s, who had followed his master into exile, formed a confederacy for this purpose. While these transactions were secretly passing, the fame of count Benyowsky’s rank and abilities reached the ear of the governor and as he spoke several languages, he was after some time admitted familiarly into the house, and at length appointed to superintend the education of his son. and his three daughters. “One day,” says the count, ft while I was exercising my office of language-master, the youngest of the three daughters, whose name was Aphanasia, who was sixteen years of age, proposed many questions concerning my thoughts in my present situation^ which convinced me that her father had given them some information concerning my birth and misfortunes. I therefore gave them an account of my adventures, at which my scholars appeared to be highly affected, but the youngest wept very much. She was a beautiful girl, and her sensibility created much emotion in my mind but, alas, I was an exile" The merits of the count, however, soon surmounted the disadvantages of his situation, in the generous mind of miss Nilow, and the increasing intimacy and confidence which he daily gained in the family, joined to the advantages of a fine person and most insinuating address, soon converted the feelings of admiration into the flame of love; and on the llth of January 1771, madame Nilow, the mother, consented that her daughter should do the honours of an entertainment then in contemplation, and be publicly declared his future spouse. But the count, though he had cultivated and obtained the affections of his fair pupil, had acted more from policy than passion, and, intending to use her interest rather as a means of effectuating the meditated escape of himself and his companions, than as any serious object of matrimonial union, contrived to suspend the nuptials, by persuading the governor to make an excursion from Kamschatka to the neighbouring islands, with a view or under pretence of establishing a new colony. During these transactions the exiles were secretly at work; and in order to conceal their design from all suspicion, Mr. Crustiew and Mr. Panow were on the 30th of March deputed to wait on the governor with five and twenty of their associates, to request that he would be pleased to receive the title of Protector of the new colony; and the embassy was not only favourably received, but orders were given to prepare every thing that might be necessary for the execution of the project. At this crisis, however, an accident occurred which had nearly overturned the success of the scheme; and as it tends to discover the disposition of the count, we shall relate it in his own words.

On the 23d of April 1771 however, “Miss Aphanasia,” says the count, “came to me incognito. She informed me that her mother was in tears, and her father talked with her in a manner which gave reason to fear that he suspected our plot. She conjured me to be careful, and not to come to the fort if sent for. She expressed her fears that it would not be in her power to come to me again, but promised she would in that case send her servant and she entreated me at all events, if I should be compelled to use force against the government, I would be careful of the life of her father, and not endanger my own. I tenderly embraced this charming young lady, and thanked her T^ the interest she took in my preservation and as it appeared important that her absence should not be discovered, I begged her to return and recommend the issue of our intentions to good fortune. Before her departure I reminded her to look minutely after her father, and to send me a red ribband in case government should determine to arrest or attack me and, in the second place, that at the moment of an alarm, she would open the shutter of her window which looked to the garden, and cause a sledge to be laid over the ditch on that side. She promised to comply with my instructions, and confirmed her promises with vows and tears.”

The apprehensions of this faithful girl for the safety of the man she loved, were far from being without foundation; and on the 26th of April she sent the count two red ribbands, to signify the double danger to which she perceived he was exposed. The count, however, coolly prepared to brave the impending storm, and gave orders to the leaders of his associates, amounting in all to fifty-nine persons, to place themselves at the head of their divisions, and station themselves round his house, in readiness to act in the night, in case an attack should be made by the cossacks of the town, and soldiers of the garrison, who, it was rumoured, were busied in preparing their arms. At five o'clock in the evening, a corporal, with four grenadiers, stopped at the count’s door, demanding admittance in the name of the empress, and ordered him to follow the guard to the fort. The count, however, proposed, from a window, to the corporal, that he should enter alone and drink a glass of wine; but, on his being admitted, the door was instantly shut upon him, and four pistols clapped to his breast, by the terror of which he was made to disclose every thing that was transacting at the fort, and at length obliged to call the four grenadiers separately into the house, under pretence of drinking, when they were all five bound together, and deposited safely in the cellar.

This measure was, of course, the signal of resistance, and the count marshalling his associates, who had secretly furnished themselves with arms and ammunition by the treachery of the store-keepers, issued forth from the house to oppose, with greater advantage, another detachment who had been sent to arrest him. After levelling several soldiers to the ground, the count, by the mismanagement of their commander, seized their cannon, turned them with success against the fort itself, and, entering by means of the drawbridge, dispatched the twelve remaining guards who were then within it. “Madame Nilow and her children,” says the count, “at sight of me implored my protection to save their father and husband. I immediately hastened to his apartment, and begged him to go to his children’s room to preserve his life, but he answered that he would first take mine, and instantly fired a pistol, which wounded me. I was desirous nevertheless of preserving him, and continued to represent that all resistance would be useless, for which reason I entreated him to retire. His wife and children threw themselves on their knees, but nothing would avail he flew upon me, seized me by the throat, and left me no other alternative than either to give lip my own life, or run my sword through his body. At this period the petard, by which my associates attempted to make a breach, exploded, and burst the outer gate. The second was open, and I saw Mr. Panow enter at the head of a party. He entreated the governor to let me go, but not being able to prevail on him, he set me at liberty by splitting his skull.” The count by this event became complete master of the fort, and by the cannon and ammunition which he found on the rampart, was enabled, with the ready and active assistance of his now increased associates, to repel the attack which was made upon him by the cossacks; but flight, not resistance, was the ultimate object of this bold commander; and in order to obtain this opportunity, he dispatched a drum and a woman as a sign of parley to the cossacks, who had quitted the town and retired to the heights, with a resolution to invest the fort and starve the insurgents, informing them of his resolution to send a detachment of associates into the town to drive all the women and children into the church, and there to burn them all to death, unless they laid down their arms. While this embassy was sent, preparation was made for carrying the threat it contained into immediate execution; but by submitting to the proposal, the execution of this horrid measure was rendered unnecessary, and the count not only received into the fort fifty-two of the principal inhabitants of the town, as hostages for the fidelity of the rest, but procured the archbishop to preach a sermon in the church in favour of the revolution. The count was now complete governor of Kamschatka; and having time, without danger, to prepare every thing necessary for the intended departure, he amused himself with ransacking the archives of the town, where he found several manuscripts of voyages made to the eastward of Kamschatka. The count also formedt chart, with details, respecting Siberia and the sea-coast of Kamschatka, and a description of the Kurelles and Aleuthes islands. This chart has not survived the fate of its composer.

The conspirators, previous to their hostilities against the governor, had prudently secured a corvette of the name of St. Peter and St. Paul, which then rode at anchor in the port of Bolsha, and their subsequent success afforded them the means of providing her with such stores as were necessary for the intended voyage. On the llth of May 1771, the count, as commander in chief, attended by Mr. Crustiew as second, by sixteen of his fellow-captives as quarterguards, and by fifty-seven foremast men, together with twelve passengers and nine women, among whom was the lovely Aphanusia, disguised in sailor’s apparel, went on board this vessel; and on the next day weighed anchor, and sailed out of the harbour on a southern course, intending to continue their voyage to China. On the 20th of May, they anchored their vessel in a bay on the coast of Beering’s island, where they found the celebrated captain Ochotyn and his followers, who had also escaped from exile in Siberia, and were wandering in search of that settlement which, from their restless dispositions, they were doomed never to find.

The count, however, was not to be detained by the blandishments of friendship he departed from this island, and arrived, after experiencing many hardships and dangers at sea, at the harbour of Usilpatchar in Japan on the 2d of August from whence, not meeting with a very friendly reception, he again immediately set sail, and arrived oirSunday the 28th of August at the island of Formosa. The inhabitants of Formosa at first appeared inclined to treat him with respect and civility, particularly don Hieronymo Pacheco, formerly captain at the port of Cavith at Manilla, who had fled from that employment to the island of Formosa, in consequence of his having in a moment of rage massacred his wife and a Dominican whom he had found in her company but these professions were soon found to be deceitful; for on sending his men on shore to fetch water, they were attacked by a party of twenty Indians, many of them dangerously wounded, and Mr. Panow, the count’s most faithful friend, killed. Don Hieronymo, however, contrived to exculpate himself from any concern in this treachery, and to advise the count to seek revenge by a> conquest of the island but he contented himself with provoking the natives to a second attack, and repulsing them with considerable slaughter. His men, however, insisted on going in quest of the Indians, in order to make them feel their further vengeance. The remonstrances of the count were to no effect; and at length, complying with their desires, he requested don Hieronymo to guide them towards the principal residence of the nation who had given him so bad a reception, where, after a short and unequal conflict, he killed eleven hundred and fifty-six, took six hundred and forty-three prisoners, who had prostrated themselves on the ground to beg for mercy from their assailants, and set fire to their town. The prince of the country, notwithstanding this massacre of his subjects, was introduced to the count by his Spanish friend, and a cordiality at length took place between them to such a degree, that the count entered into a formal treaty for returning and settling at Formosa; but his secret motives for making this engagement appear to have been, the execution of a project he had silently conceived of establishing a colony on the island.

On Monday the 12th of September, the count and his associates sailed from Formosa on the Thursday following the coast of China appeared in sight; and two days afterwards his vessel was piloted into the port of Macao. At this place he was treated with great respect by the governor and the principal men of the town and on the 3d of October 1771, captain Gore, then in the service of the English East-India company, made an offer of services to him on the part of the directors, and a free passage to Europe, provided he would bind himself to entrust his manuscripts to the company, engage to enter into their service, and make no communication'of the discoveries he had made. But having accepted proposals from the French directors, the offers of captain Gore were rejected, and the count soon afterwards returned from. Macao to Europe on board a French ship.

He arrived on the 8th of August 1772, in Champagne, where the duke d'Aiguillon, the minister of France, then was “and he- received me,” says the count, “with cordiality and distinction, and proposed to me to enter the service of his master, with the offer of a regiment of infantry which I accepted, on condition that his majesty would be phased to employ me in forming establishments beyond the Cape.” In consequence of this condition, the duke his patron proposed to him from his majesty to form an establishment on the island of Madagascar, upon the same footing as he had proposed upon the island of Formosa, the whole scheme of which is published in his memoirs of his own life, and discovers vast knowledge of the interests of commerce, and a deep insight into the characters of men.

To a romantic mind and adventurous spirit such as the count possessed, a proposal like the present was irresistible and after receiving the most positive assurances from the French ministry, that he should constantly receive from them the regular supplies necessary to promote the success of his undertaking, he set sail on the 22d of March, 1773, from Port L‘Orient for Madagascar, under the treacherous auspices of recommendatory letters to Mr. De Ternay, governor of the isle of France, where he landed with a company of between four and five hundred men on the 22d of September following. Instead, however, of receiving the promised assistance at this place, the governor endeavoured by every means in his power to thwart the success of his enterprise and no other step remained for him, to take, than that of hastening for Madagascar. He accordingly set sail in the Des Torges, a vessel badly provided with those stores that were most likely to be of use, and came to an anchor at Madagascar on the 14th of February 1774. The opposition which he met from the several nations placed him in a dangerous situation but he at length, with great difficulty, formed an establishment on Foul Point, entered into a commercial intercourse, and formed treaties of friendship and alliance with the greater part of the inhabitants of this extensive island. But whether the count, whose commission only extended to open a friendly intercourse with the natives, was abandoned by the minister from the cruelty of neglect, whilst he was in the regular execution of the ’commands of his sovereign, or because his exorbitant spirit and ambition began to soar to more than an ordinary pitch of power and greatness, the following curious and extraordinary narrative of his subsequent conduct will manifestly shew.

The island of Madagascar, as is well known, is of vast extent, and is inhabited by a great variety of different nations. Among these is the nation of Sambarines, formerly governed by a chief of the name and titles of Rohandrian Ampansacab6 Ramini Larizon whose only child, a lovely daughter, had, it seems, been taken prisoner, and sold as a captive and from this circumstance, upon the death of Ramini, his family was supposed to be extinct. “On the 2d of February,” says the count, “M. Corbi, one of my most confidential officers, with the interpreter, informed me, that the old negress Susanna, whom I had brought from the isle of France, and who in her early youth had been sold to the French, and had lived upwards of fifty years at the isle of France, had reported, that her companion, the daughter of Ramini, having likewise been made a prisoner, was sold to foreigners, and that she had certain marks that I was her son. This officer likewise represented to me, that in consequence of her report the Sambarine nation had held several cabars to declare me the heir of Ramini, and consequently proprietor of the province of Manahar, and successor to the title of Ampansacabe, or supreme chief of the nation. This information appeared to me of the greatest consequence, and I determined to take the advantage of it, to conduct that brave and generous nation to a civilized state. But as I had no person to whom I could entruLo the secret of my mind, I lamented how blind the minister of Versailles was to the true interests of France. On the same day I interrogated Susanna on the report she had spread concerning my birth. The good old woman threw herself at my knees, and excused herself by confessing that she had acted entirely upon a conviction of the truth. For she said that she had known my mother, whose physiognomy resembled mine, and that she had herself been inspired in a dream by the Zahanhar to publish the secret. Her manner of speaking convinced me that she really believed what she said. J therefore embraced her, and told her that I had reasons for keeping the secret respecting my birth; but that nevertheless if she had any confidential friends she might acquaint them with it. At these words she arose, kissed my hands, and declared that the Sambarine nation was informed of the circumstances, and that the Rohandrian Raffangour waited only for a favourable moment to acknowledge the blood of Ramini.”

The fallacy to which the old woman thus gave evidence, feeble as the texture of it may appear to penetrating minds, was managed by the count with such profound dexterity and address, that he was declared the heir of Ramini, invested with the sovereignty of the nation, received ambassadors and formed alliances in the capacity of a king with other tribes, made war and peace, led his armies in person into the field, and received submission from his vanquished enemies. In this situation it is not wonderful that he should forget the allegiance he was under to the king of France; and, representing to his subjects the difficulties he had experienced from the neglect of the minister, and the probable advantages that might result by forming a new and national compact either with that or some other powerful kingdom in Europe, he persuaded them to permit him to return to Europe for that purpose and “on the llth of October, 1776,” says the count, “I took my leave to go on board and at this single mofnent of my life I experienced what a heart is capable of suffering, when torn from a beloved and affectionate society to which it is devoted.”

This account concludes his narrative; but among the memoirs and papers which fill the remaining part of the volume, it appears, that on his arrival in Europe his proposals to the court of France were rejected that he made subsequent offers of his service to the emperor of Germany, which met with no better success; and that on the 25th of December, 1783, he offered, in the character of sovereign of the island of Madagascar, terms for an offensive and defensive alliance with the king of Great Britain but this proposal was also declined. The ardour of the count, however, was not abated by these disappointments he pretended to look with contempt on kings who could be so blind to^the interests and advantages oftheir people and, sending for his family from Hungary, he sailed from London with some of his associates for Maryland, on the 14th of April, 1784, with a cargo of the value of near 4,00p/. sterling, consisting, it seems, of articles intended for the Madagascar trade. A respectable commercial house in Baltimore was induced to join in his scheme, and supplied him with a ship of 450 tons, whose lading was estimated at more than 1,000l. in which he sailed from that place on the 2.5th of Oct. 1784, and landed at Antangara on the island of Madagascar, on the 7th of July 1785, from whence he departed to Angouci, and commenced hostilities against the French by seizing their storehouse. Here he busied himself in erecting a town after the manner of the country, and from hence he sent a detachment of one hundred men to take possession of the French factory at Foul Point but they were prevented from carrying their purpose into execution by the sight of a frigate which was at anchor off the Point. In consequence of these movements, the governor of the isle of France sent a ship with sixty regulars 'on board, who landed and attacked the count on the morning of the 23d of May 1786. He had constructed a small redoubt defended by two cannon, in which himself, with two Europeans and thirty natives, waited the approach of the enemy. The blacks fled at the first fire, and Benyowsky, having received a ball in his right breast, fell behind the parapet whence he was dragged by the hair, and expired a few minutes afterwards.

, archbishop of Upsal, was born in Sweden in 1642, at a village called Benzeby, whence he took his name. His parents were of mean condition, but an uncle enabled him to pursue his studies at Upsal, where he was appointed tutor to the children of the count de la Gardie, grand chancellor of the kingdom, He afterwards travelled in Germany, France, and England, and on his return to his country, was appointed professor of history and morals. Having also made great progress in theological studies, he was created doctor of that faculty and appointed professor. In 1677 he was promoted to the bishopric of Strengnes, and in 1700, to the archbishopric of Upsal, which he held until his death, Feb. 17, 1709. He was twice married, and by his first wife had thirteen children, of whom three of the sons became archbishops of Upsal. Benzelius instructed Charles XII. in theological studies, and that prince preserved always a high esteem for him. The archbishop wrote an “Abridgment of Ecclesiastical History,” several dissertations on subjects of theology and ecclesiastical history, and a Latin translation, with notes, of many of the homilies of St. Chrysostom, which he made from manuscripts in the Bodleian library. He had also the superintendance of the edition of the Bible, in the Swedish language, which Charles XII. ordered to be published in 1703, with engravings, and which still bears the name of that monarch. Very few alterations, however, were introduced in this edition, as the divines of the time could not agree on certain disputed passages, and an entire new translation was reserved for the reign of Gustavus III.

, an Italian poetess, was born April 15, 1703, and appeared from her infancy capable of making a figure in the literary world. Her father, although of a genteel family of Piedmont, was ruined by various misfortunes, and at length setup a shoemaker’s shop in Venice, where he acquired some property. His daughter Louisa, one of a numerous family, discovered first a taste for embroidery, then for drawing and painting, in which she was instructed by the celebrated female artist Rosalba Camera; nor did she make less progress in literature, philosophy, and languages. She learned French of her father, and Latin under an excellent master, and in the course of this study she translated some of the comedies of Terence. Having conceived a particular taste for dramatic poetry, she received some instructions from Apostolo Zeno. As soon as her talents were known, places both lucrative and honourable were offei'ed to her at Rome, Poland, Spain, and Milan, but she would not quit Venice, her native country, and continued her studies until the age of thirty-five, when she married count Gaspard Gozzi, a noble Venetian, known in the literary world for his Italian dramas and other works. She lived with him very happily, and bore five children, whom she educated with great care. The time of her death is not mentioned. Her principal works are, 1. “Agide re di Sparta,” a musical drama, Venice, 1725, 12mo. 2. “LaTeba,” a tragedy, ibid. 1728, 8vo. 3. “L'Elenia,” musical drama, ibid. 1730, 12mo. 4. “Le Avventure del poeta,” comedy, ibid. 1730, 8vo. 5. “Elettra,” tragedy, ibid. 1743, 12mo. 6. “La Bradamante,” musical drama, ibid. 1747, 12mo. 7. “Le Commedie di Terenzio tradotto in versi sciolti,” ibid. 1733, 8vo. 8. Translations from Racine and other dramatic poets of France. 9. “Componimenti poetici dc-lle piu illustri rimatrici d'ogni secolo,” ibid. 1726, 12mo. Many of her sonnets and lesser pieces appeared from time to time in various collections.

, an eminent French antiquary, was born at Rheims, March 1, 1567, and not 1557, as asserted by Bayle, Moreri, and Niceron. After finishing his studies at the university of that city, he became preceptor to the children of count de St. Souplet, who always testified his respect for him on account of the pains he bestowed on their education. He then was admitted an advocate, and appointed law-professor and syndic of the city, a place which he filled during many of the elections. His talents and virtues were so highly estimated by his fellow-citizens, that as a mark of their confidence they employed him on their affairs at Paris. During his visits to that metropolis, he commenced a friendship with Dupuy and Peiresc, and formed an acquaintance with the president de Bellievre, who obtained for him the place of historiographer by brevet, with a pension of two hundred crowns. He was on a visit at the country-house of this celebrated magistrate, when he was attacked by a fever, which terminated fatally, August 18, 1623, in his fifty -seventh year. The president honoured him with an affectionate epitaph, which is printed in his two principal works. He is particularly known in the literary world by his “Histoire des grands chemins de l'empire Remain,” a work in which he was assisted by his friend Peiresc, who furnished him with many necessary documents. It was first printed in 4to, 1622, and in the course of a century became very scarce. In 1712 the first book of it was translated into English, and published at London, in 8vo, entitled “The general history of the Highways in all parts of the world, particularly in Great Britain.” In 1728, John Leonard, bookseller and printer at Brussels, published a new edition of the original, 2 vols. 4to, from a copy corrected by the author; and one yet more improved was printed at the same place, in 1736, 2 vols. 4to. They are both scarce, but the first is reckoned the best printed. It has also been translated into Latin by Henninius, professor in the university of Duisbourg, with learned notes, and the remarks of the abbé Du Bos, for Graevius’s antiquities, vol. X. but Bayle is mistaken in supposing that this work was translated into Latin and Italian by Benedict Baccliini, who, however, made some progress himself in a work “De viis antiquorum Romanorum in Italia,” and doubtless would have availed himself of Bergier’s labours. Besides this history of the Roman roads, Bergier had begun a history of Rheims, the manuscript of which the president de Bellievre wished Andre Duschesne to complete, but some obstruction arising on the part of the chapter of Rheims, who refused Duschesne access to their archives, he declined proceeding with the undertaking. The son of the author, however, John Bergier, unwilling that the whole should be lost, published the two books left complete by his father, with a sketch of the other fourteen of which it^as to consist. This wasentitled “Dessein de I'Histoire de Reims,” ibid. 1635, 4fo. Bergier was also author of 1. “Le point du Jour, ou Traite du Commencement des Jours et de l'endroit ou il est etabli sur la terre,” Rheims, 1629, 12 mo. The first, a Paris edition, 1617, wasentitled “Archemeron.” His object is to attain some general rule for avoiding the disputes respecting the celebration of the Catholic festivals. 2. “Le Bouquet royal,” Paris, 1610, 8vo; Rheims, 16:57, 4to, enlarged, an account of the devises and inscriptions which graced the entrance of Louis XIII. into Rheims. 3. “Police generale de la France,” 1617. 4. Various Latin and French poems inserted in the collections, but we cannot pronounce him very successful as a poet.

Having continued some years at Edinburgh, Mr. Berkenhout went to the university of Leyden, where he took the degree of doctor of physic, in 1765, as we learn from his “Dissertatio medica inauguralis de Podagra,” dedicated to his relation baron de Bielfeldt. Returning to England, Dr. Berkenhout settled at Isleworth in Middlesex, and in 1766, published his “Pharmacopoeia Medici,” 12mo, the third edition of which was printed in 1782. In 1769, he published “Outlines of the Natural History of Great Britain and Ireland,” vol. I.; vol. II. appeared in 1770, and vol. III. in 1771. The encouragement this work met with afforded at least a proof that something of the kind was wanted. The three volumes were reprinted together in. 1773, and in 1788 were again published in 2 vols. 8vo, under the title of “Synopsis of the Natural History of Great Britain, &c.” In 1771, he published “Dr. Cadogan’s dissertation on the Gout, examined and refuted” and in 1777, “Biographia Literaria, or a Biographical History of Literature; containing the lives of English, Scotch, and Irish authors, from the dawn of letters in these kingdoms to the present time, chronologically and classically arranged,” 4to, vol.1, the only volume which appeared. The lives are very short, and the author frequently introduces sentiments hostile to religious establishments and doctrines, which could not be very acceptable to English readers. The dates and facts, however, are given with great accuracy, and in many of the lives he profited by the assistance of George Steevens, esq. the celebrated commentator on Shakspeare. This was followed by “A treatise on Hysterical Diseases, translated from the French.” In 1778, he was sent by government with certain commissioners to treat with America, but neither the commissioners nor their secretary were suffered by the congress to proceed further than New- York. Dr. Berkenhout, however, found means to penetrate as far as Philadelphia, where the congress was then assembled. He appears to have remained in that city for some time without molestation but at last on suspicion that he was sent by lord North for the pui'pose of tampering with some of their leading members, he was seized and committed to prison. How long he remained a state prisoner, or by what means he obtained his liberty, we are not informed but we find from the public prints, that he rejoined the commissioners at New York, and returned with them to England. For this temporary sacrifice of the emoluments of his profession, and in consideration of political services, he obtained a pension. In 1780, he published his “Lucubrations on Ways and Means, inscribed to lord North,” proposing certain taxes, some of which were adopted by that minister, and some afterwards by Mr. Pitt. Dr. Berkenhout’s friends at that time appear to have taken some pains to point him out as an inventor of taxes. His next work was “An essay en the Bite of a -Mad Dog, in which the claim to infallibility of the principal preservative remedies against the Hydrophobia is examined.” In the year following Dr. Berkenhout published his “Symptomatology” a book which is too universally known to require any recommendation. In 1788, appeared “First lines of the theory and practice of Philosophical Chemistry,” dedicated to Mr. Eden, afterwards lord Auckland, whom the doctor accompanied to America. Of this book it is sufficient to say, that it exhibits a satisfactory display of the present state of chemistry. His last publication was “Letters on Education, to his son at Oxford,” 1791, 2 vols. 12mo but in 1779, he published a continuation of Dr. Campbell’s “Lives of the Admirals,” 4 vols. 8vo and once printed “Proposals for a history of Middlesex, including London,” 4 vols. fol. which, as the design dropt, were never circulated. There is also reason to suppose him the author of certain humorous publications, in prose and verse, to which he did not think fit to prefix his name, and of a translation from the Swedish language, of the celebrated count Tessin’s letters to the late king of Sweden. It is dedicated to the prince of Wales, his present majesty of Great Britain and was, we believe, Mr. Berkenhout’s first publication. He died the 3d of April 1791, aged 60.

When we reflect on the variety of books that bear his name, we cannot but be surprised at the extent and variety of the knowledge they contain. He was originally intended for a merchant; thence his knowledge of the principles of commerce. He was some years in one of the best disciplined armies in Europe thence his knowledge of the art of war. His translation of count Tessin’s Letters shew him to be well acquainted with the Swedish language, and that he is a good poet. His Pharmacopoeia Medici, &c. demonstrate his skill in his profession. His Outlines of Natural History, and his Botanical Lexicon, prove his knowledge in every branch of natural history. His First lines of Philosophical Chemistry have convinced the world of his intimate acquaintance with that science. His essay on Ways and Means proves him well acquainted with the system of taxation. All his writings prove him to have been a classical scholar, and it is known that the Italian, French, German, and Dutch languages were familiar to him. He was moreover a painter and played well, it is said, on various musical instruments. To these acquirements may be added, a considerable degree of mathematical knowledge, which he attained in the course of his military studies. An individual so universally informed as Dr, Berkenhout, is an extraordinary appearance in the republic of letters. In this character, which, we believe, was published in his life-time, there is the evident hand of a friend. Dr. Berkenhout, however, may be allowed to have been an ingenious and well-informed man, but as an author he ranks among the useful, rather than the original and the comparisons of his friends between him and the “admirable Chrichton” are, to say the least, highly injudicious.

, of the academy of the Ricovrati of Padua, was born at Rouen, and died at Paris in J7 12. She acquired some poetical fame, her works being everal times crowned by the French academy, and that of the Jeux floraux. Two of her tragedies were represented at the French theatre, “Laodamia,” in 1689, and “Brutus” in 1690. It is thought she composed these pieces conjointly with Fontenelle and the two Corneille’s, who were her relations. She wrote also some other poems with ease and delicacy. Some distinction is set upon her poetical petition, which has some wit, to Louis XIV. to ask for the 200 crowns, the annual gratification given her by that prince it is inserted in thfc “Recueil de vers choisis du pere Bouhours.” She discontinued writing for the theatre at the instance of madame de Pont-Chartrain, who gave her a pension. She even suppressed several little pieces, which might have given a bad impression of her manners and religion. Three romances are likewise ascribed to her “The count d'Amboise,” in 12mo “The miseries of Love;” and “Ines of Cordova,” 12mo. Some of the journalists have attributed to mademoiselle Bernard the account of the isle of Borneo, and others to FonteneHe. “It may be doubted,” says the abbé Trublet, “whether it be hers and it is to be wished that it is not.” It is an allegorical account of the religious disputes of that period. Beauchamps says she wrote the tragedy of “Bradamante,” represented in 1695, which is certainly the same with that in the works of Thomas Corneille. Her Eloge is in the “Histoire du Theatre Francois.”

, an opulent financier of France, was the son of Samuel Bernard, an engraver (mentioned by^trutt), whodied in 1687. He was born in 1651, but how educated, or by what means he raised his fortune, we are nor told Under the ministry of Chamillard he became a farmer general, and accumulated a capital of thirty-three mi i lions, of which he made a very liberal use, but seems to have been proudly aware of the superiority of lender 0ver borrower. When Louis XIV. wanted supplies, Bernard grained them, but always in consequence of his majesty’s applying to him in person. Louis XV. when in need of similar help, sent certain persons to Bernard, whose answer was, that “those who wanted his assistance might at least take the trouble to apply themselves.” He was accordingly presented to the king, who said many flattering things to him, and ordered the courtiers to pay him every mark of respect. Bernard was now called the saviour of the state all the courtiers entertained him in succession he dined with the marshal Noailles, and supped with the duchess of Tallard, and played and lost what they pleased. They sneered at his manners, which were citizen-like, and he lent the millions which they demanded. Bernard, however, was of a benevolent turn the poor of the military order were particularly the subjects of his bounty, and, frequently as they might apply, they never were refused, On his death it was found that he had lent ten millions, of which he never received a farthing in return. In his speculations he was both bold and successful. One day he had asked a person of distinction to dine with him, and had promised to treat him with some excellent mountain, not knowing at that time that his stock was exhausted. After dinner his servant announced this lamentable deficiency, and Bernard, not a little hurt at the unseasonable discovery, immediately dispatched one of his clerks to Holland, with instructions to purchase every drop of mountain in the port of Amsterdam, by which he afterwards gained an immense sum. Of his family, so little was known, that he was supposed to be of Jewish descent, but without any reason. He used to say, that if they would make him a chevalier, his name would no longer hurt their delicate feelings, and accordingly, he received letters of nobility. He then purchased several estates with titles, and among others, those of the counts of Coubert; and during the last years of his life, he was generally called the chevalier Bernard. One of his sons, president of one of the chambers of inquiry in parliament, bore the name of Rieux another was called the count de Coubert, and his grandson, Anne-Gabriel-Henry Bernard, assumed the title of marquis de Boulainvilliers. He married his daughter to Mole, first president, and thus became grandfather to the duchess de Cosse-Brissac and his family, by these revolutions, became allied to the great names of Biron, Duroure, and Boulainvilliers. Bernard was the friend of the keeper of the seals, Chauvelin, and remained faithful to him when disgraced. It is said that he was, or in his old age became superstitious, and fancied his life connected with that of a black fowl, of which he took great care, convinced that its death would be the prelude to his own. He lived, however, to the advanced age of eightyeight, dying in 1739. Another account informs us, that the greater part of his thirty-three millions was dissipated within ten years after his death, and that one of his sons, who was president of the parliament of Paris, died a bankrupt. Such vicissitudes are too common in all ages to excite much surprize.

, usually called major Bernardi, an adventurer of whom there is a very prolix, but not very interesting account in the Biographia Britannica, was born at Evesham, in 1657, and was descended from an honourable family which had flourished at Lucca in Italy, from the year 1097. His grandfather Philip, a count of the Roman empire, lived in England as resident from Genoa twenty-eight years, and married a native of this country. His father Francis succeeded to this office but, taking disgust at some measures adopted by the senate of Genoa, resigned, and retiring to Evesham, amused himself with gardening, on which he spent a considerable sum of money, and set a good example in that science to the town. John, his son, the subject of this article, of a spirited and restless temper, having received some harsh usage from his father, at the age of thirteen ran away to avoid his severity, and perhaps without any determinate purpose. He retained, notwithstanding, several friends, and was for some time supported by them, but their friendship appears to have gone little farther for soon after he enlisted as a common soldier in the service of the prince of Orange. In this station he showed uncommon talents and bravery, and in a short time obtained a captain’s commission in the service of the States. In April 1677, he married a Dutch lady of good family, with whom he enjoyed much conjugal happiness for eleven years. The English regiments in the Dutch service being recalled by James II. very few of them, but among those few was Bernard!, would obey the summons, and of course, he could not sign the association, into which the prince of Orange wished the regiments to enter. He thus lost his favour, and having no other alternative, and probably wishing for no other, he followed the abdicated James II. into Ireland who, soon after, sent him on some commission into Scotland, from whence, as the ruin of his master now became inevitable, he once more retired to Holland. Venturing, however, to appear in London in 1695, he was committed to Newgate March 25, 1696, on suspicion of being an abettor of the plot to assassinate king William, and although sufficient evidence could not be brought to prove the fact, he was sentenced and continued in prison by the express decree of six successive parliaments, with five other persons, where he remained for more than forty years. As this was a circumstance wholly without a precedent, it has been supposed that there must have been something in his character particularly dangerous, to induce four sovereigns and six parliaments to protract his confinement, without either legally condemning or pardoning him.

Berni’s character was in all respects a singular one, but in few deserving imitation. His morals as well as his writings were of the licentious cast, and as to his manners, indolence seemed to predominate. He had no pleasure in music, dancing, gaming, or hunting: his sole delight was, in having nothing to do, and stretching himself at full length on his bed. His chief exercise was to eat a little, and then compose himself to sleep, and after sleep to eat again. He observed neither days nor almanacks and his servants were ordered to bring him no news whether good or bad. That he was not, however, so entirely devoted to indolence, as we might, from the character which he has chosen to give of himself, be induced to believe, sufficiently appears from his numerous writings, and particularly from his having reformed and new-modelled the extensive poem of “Orlando Innamorato” of the count Bojardo. This work he is said to have undertaken in competition with the “Orlando Furioso” of Ariosto, which has given occasion to accuse Berni of presumption and of ignorance; but Berni was too well acquainted with the nature of his own talents, calculated only for the burlesque and ridiculous, to suppose that he could rival Ariosto. He has, however, both in this and in other parts of his writings, shewn that he could occasionally elevate his style; and the introductory verses to each canto of the Orlando Innamorato, which are generally his own composition, are not the least admired nor the least valuable parts of the work. That the alterations of Berni raised the poem of Bojardo into more general notice, may be conjectured from the various editions of the reformed work, which issued from the press soon, after its first appearance, and which are yet sought after with avidity. Some of these editions are, that of Venice, 1541,4to; of Milan, 1542, 8vo and Venice, with additions, 1545, 4to which last is in great request. There are two very correct modern editions that of Naples, but dated Florence, 1725, and that by Molini, Paris, 1768, 4 vols. 12mo. Berni’s other works are, 1. “Rime burlesche,” often reprinted with those of Casa, Mauro, Molza, and other poets of the same class. The first edition is that of Venice, 1538, 8vo. Another valuable edition is that of Grazzini, called Lasca, in 2 vols. Florence, 1548, and 1555, 8vo. This last volume is the most rare, being printed only once, and the other twice. 2. “La Catrina, atto scenico rusticale,” Florence, 1567, 8vo, written in the common dialect of the peasantry of Tuscany, like the “Nencia” of Barberhio, the “Cecco” of Varlongo, &c. It “was afterwards printed in a collection of comedies of the sixteenth century, Naples, 1731, 8vo. 3.” Carmina,“or Latin poems, to be found in the” Carmina quinque Etruscorura poetarum,“Florence, 1562, 8vo, and in the” Carmina illustrium poetarum Italorum," ibid, 1719, 8vo.

, a lawyer, philosopher, orator, and poet, of Ferrara, was born in 1610. After having pursued his studies with great success, and taken his law degrees, in the university of his native city, he was chosen professor of the belles lettres, then first secretary, and in that quality was sent to compliment pope Innocent X. on his election to the papal chair. He lived in considerable favour with that pope, as well as with Alexander VII. and Clement IX. his successors, and the dukes of Mantua, Charles I. and II. who conferred upon him the title of Count. His poetical talents were principally devoted to the drama and one of his plays “Gli Sforzi del Desiderio,” represented at Ferrara in 1652, was so successful, that the archduke Ferdinand Charles, struck with its popularity, no sooner returned home than he sent for the author and some architects from Ferrara, to build two theatres for similar representations. Berni was married seven times, and had, as might be expected, a numerous family, of whom nine sons and daughters survived him. He died Oct. 13, 1673. Eleven of his dramas, formerly published separately, were printed in one volume, at Ferrara, 1666, 12mo. He published also a miscellany of discourses, problems, &c. entitled “Accademia,” Ferrara, 2 vols. 4to, without date, and reprinted in 1658. Many of his lyric poems are in the collections.

, count of Lyons, and a cardinal and statesman of France, was born at MarceJ de l'Ardeche, May 22, 1715, of a noble and ancient family, but not very rich which circumstance induced his friends to bring him up to the church, as the most likely profession in which he might rise. In this they were not disappointed, as he gradually attained the highest ecclesiastical dignities. When young he was placed at the seminary of St. Sulpice in Paris, and after remaining there some years, he appeared in the world with every personal accomplishment that could introduce him into notice; but his morals appear to have been for some time an obstruction to promotion. The cardinal de Fleury, then prime-minister, who had the patronage of all favours, and who had promised him his countenance, thinking him of a spirit too worldly for the church, sent for him and gave him a lecture on his dissipated conduct, concluding with these words “You can have no expectations of promotion, while I live,” to which the young abbé“Bernis, making a profound bow, replied,” Sir, I can wait" Some think this bon mot, which became very current, was not original but it is certain that Bernis remained for a long while in a state not far removed from poverty, and yet contrived, by means of strict parsimony, to make a decent figure at the houses to which he was invited. Being a writer of verses, and consequently a dealer in compliments, he was always acceptable, and at length by madame Pompadour’s interest, was introduced to Louis XV. The good effects of this, at first, were only an apartment in the Tuileries, to which his patroness added the furniture, and a pension of fifteen hundred livres yet it soon led to greater matters. Having been appointed ambassador to Venice, he was remarked to have acquired the good opinion and confidence of a state rather difficult to please in appointments of this description, and of this they gave him a strong proof, in a contest they had with pope Benedict XIV. who appointed Bernis as his negociator. On this occasion the state of Venice approved the choice, the consequence of which was, that Bernis effected a reconciliation to the entire satisfaction of both parties. On his return, he became a great favourite at court, acquired considerable influence, and at length, being admitted into the council, was appointed foreign minister. But in this situation he was either unskilful or unfortunate the disasters of the seven years war, and the peace of 1763, were laid to his charge but according to Duclos, he was less to blame than his colleagues, and it is certain that in some instances he has been unjustly censured. It was said, in particular, that he argued for a declaration of war against Prussia, because Frederick the Great had ridiculed his poetry in the following line,

, minister of state in Denmark, was born at Hanover, May 13, 1712. Some relations he happened to have in Denmark invited him thither, where his talents were soon noticed, and employed by the government. After having been ambassador in several courts, he was placed by Frederick V. at the head of foreign affairs. During the seven years war (1755 62) he preserved a system of strict neutrality, which proved eminently serviceable to the commerce and internal prosperity of Denmark. In 1761, when the emperor of Russia, Peter III. threatened Denmark with war, and inarched his troops towards Holstein, Bernstorf exerted the utmost vigour in contriving means for the defence of the country, and the“sudden death of Peter having averted this storm, he employed his skill in bringing about an alliance between the courts of Copenhagen and St. Petersburgh. In 1767 he succeeded in concluding a provisional treaty, by which the dukedom of Holstein, which Paul, the grand duke of Russia, inherited by the death of Peter III. was exchanged for Oldenburgh, which belonged to the king of Denmark. This finally took place in 1773, and procured an important addition to the Danish territories. Soon after Bernstorf put a stop to the long contest that had been maintained respecting the house of Holstein having a right of sovereignty over Hamburgh, and that city vVas declared independent on condition of not claiming repayment of the money the city had advanced to the king of Denmark and the dukes of Holstein. These measures contributed highly to the reputation of count Bernstorf as a politician, but perhaps he derived as much credit from his conduct in other respects. He had acquired a large estate in the neighbourhood of Copenhagen, the peasants on which, as was the case in Denmark at that time, were slaves, and transferred like other property. Bernstorf, however, not only gave them their liberty, but granted them long leases, and encouraged them to cultivate the land, and feel that they had an interest in it. His tenants, soon sensible of the humanity and wisdom of his conduct, agreed to express their gratitude by erecting an obelisk in honour of him on the side of the great road leading to Copenhagen. Bernstorf was likewise a liberal patron of manufactures, commerce, and the fine arts. It was he who induced Frederick V. to give a pension for life to the poet Klopstock. On the death of that monarch, Bernstorf was continued in the ministry lor the first years of the new reign, until 1770, when Struenzee being placed at the head of the council, Bernstorf was allowed to resign with a pension. He then retired to Hamburgh, but, after the catastrophe of Struenzee, he was recalled, and was about to set out for Copenhagen when he died of an apoplexy, Feb. 19, 1772. The political measures of this statesman belong to history, but his private character has been the theme of universal applause. Learned, social, affable, generous, and high spirited, he preserved the affections of all who knew him, and throughout his whole administration had the singular good fortune to enjoy at the same time courtly favour and popular esteem. His nephew, count Andrew Peter Bernstorf, who was born in 1735, and eventually succeeded him as foreign minister for Denmark, displayed equal zeal and knowledge in promoting the true interests of his country, which yet repeats his name with fervour and enthusiasm. It was particularly his object to preserve the neutrality of Denmark, after the French revolution had provoked a combination of most of the powers of Europe; and as long as neutral rights were at all respected, he succeeded in this wise measure. His state papers on the” principles of the court of Denmark concerning neutrality,“in 1780, and his” Declaration to the courts of Vienna and Berlin," in 1792, were much admired. In private life he followed the steps of his uncle, by a liberal patronage of arts, commerce, and manufactures, and like him was as popular in the country as in the court. He died Jan. 21, 1797.

, one of the most eminent Italian scholars of the last century, was born at Mantua, July 18, 1718. After having studied among the Jesuits in his own country and at Bologna, he entered that society as a noviciate in 1736. He then commenced a new course of studies, including the belles lettres, from 1739 to 1744, at Brescia, where cardinal Quirini, count Mazzuchelli, count Duranti, and other learned men, formed an illustrious academy, and there he became first noticed by some poetical compositions for scholastic exercises. When sent to Bologna to pursue his theological course, he continued to court his muse, and wrote for the theatre of the college, his tragedy of “Jonathas.” The number of literary characters in this city surpashed that which he had found at Brescia. The Institute recently founded by count Marsigli, the Clementine academy of design, the school of the astronomical poet Manfredi, and the growing reputation of his learned and ingenious pupils Zanotti, Algarotti, &c. contributed to fix the attention of the literary world on Bologna. In this society Bettinelli completed his education, and attained the age of thirty. In 1748, he went to Venice to teach rhetoric, and was frequently employed in a similar manner in other places. His superiors intended him for a display of his oratorical talents, but the weakness of his lungs obliged him to decline this. In 1751, he was appointed director of the college of nobles at Parma, and remained here superintending "their poetical and historical studies for eight years, occasionally visiting the principal vines of Italy, on business, or for health. In 1755, ne travelled through part of Germany, to Strasburgh and Nancy, and returned through Germany to Italy, bringing with him two young princes, the sons or nephews of the prince of Hohenlohe, who had intrusted him with their education. The following year he took a trip to France with the eldest of these princes, and resided at Paris, in the college of Louis-le-Grand. It was during this trip that he wrote the celebrated letters of Virgil which were printed at Venice with those of Frugoni and Algarotti. The opinions, and we may add, the literary heresies, very ingeniously urged in these letters against the reputation of the two great luminaries of Italian poetry, and especially against Dante, created him many enemies, and what gave him most uneasiness, involved him with Algarotti. (See Algarotii). From Paris he made several excursions into Normandy, Lorraine, &c. and paid a visit to Voltaire. From Geneva he went to Marseilles, &c. and arrived at Parma in 1759. The same year he went to Verona, where he resided until 1767, and resumed his offices of preaching and education. He was afterwards for some years at Modena, and when the order of the Jesuits was suppressed, he was appointed professor of rhetoric. On his return to his own country, he applied to his literary pursuits with fresh ardour, and published many works, and having regretted that he had published so much without writing any thing to please the fair sex, doubtless owing to his ecclesiastical character, he afterwards endeavoured to make up for this. in some respect by publishing his correspondence between two ladies, his letters to Lesbia, and lastly, his twenty-four dialogues on love. These he published in 1796, when the war raged in all parts of Italy, and when the siege of Mantua by the French obliged him to leave it. He then removed to Verona, but in 1797, after the surrender of Mantua, he returned again, and although now almost in his eightieth year, resumed his literary labours with his accustomed spirit. In 1799, he began a new edition of his works, which was completed at Venice in 1801, in 24 vols. 12mo. He still preserved his usual gaiety and health at the age of ninety, until Sept. 13, 1805, when he died after fifteen days illness, with the firmness, says his biographer, of a philosopher and a Christian.

Having, in 1703, been appointed president of antiquities, he exhibited to the pope, a plan for forming a collection of sacred antiques, or an ecclesiastical museum, intended to furnish materials for ecclesiastical history but as this, would have been attended with very great expence, and the papal treasury was at this time very low, the scheme was abandoned. The pope, however, to console Bianchini, who had it very much at heart, gave him a canonry in the church of St. Mary Maggiore, and, in 1712, sent him to Paris with a cardinal’s hat for Armand de Rohan-Soubise, who was promoted to that dignity. The object was trifling, but the journey was important, as serving to introduce Bianchini to the literati of France, who received him with the utmost respect. At Paris he was constant in his attendance at the sittings of the academy of sciences, who had many years betore elected him an honorary member, and he presented them witii a very ingenious improvement in the construction of the larger telescopes, to prevent those of uncommon length from, bending in the middle, an inconvenience which had been thought without remedy. Reaumur wrote a description of this, which is inserted in the memoirs of the academy for 1713. Before returning to Rome, Bianchini took a trip to Lorraine, Holland, and Flanders, and thence into England, visiting and examining every museum and place where objects of curiosity were to be seen, and was every where received with the respect due to his talents. During his residence at Oxford, it is said that the university defrayed the expenses of his lodging such is his biographer’s ao count, by which is probably meant that he was invited to lodge in one of the colleges.

, a celebrated Italian philosopher and physician, was born at Bologna, Sept. 30, 1717. After having studied physic with great diligence and success, he was in his nineteenth year appointed medical assistant in one of the hospitals, and after four years, was, in 1742, admitted to the degree of doctor. In 1743 and 1744 he published a valuable translation into Italian of Winslow’s Anatomy, 6 vols. 8vo. In the last mentioned year, his reputation induced the landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt, prince and bishop of Augsburgh, to give him an invitation to reside with him, which Bianconi accepted, and remained there for six years. During this time he published “Due lettere di Fisica,” &c. Venice, 1746, 4to, addressed to the celebrated marquis MafFei, and wrote in French an “Essay on Electricity,” addressed to another learned friend, count Algarotti. He also began, in French, “Journal des nouveautes litteraires d' Italic,” printed at Leipsie, but with Amsterdam on the title, 1748, 1749, 8vo, which he continued to the end of a third volume. In 1730, he went to the court of Dresden, with a strong recommendation from pope Benedict XIV. to Augustus III. king of Poland, who received him into his confidence, and appointed him his aulic counsellor, and in 1760 sent him to France on a political affair of considerable delicacy, which he transacted with skill and satisfaction to his employer. In 1764, his majesty appointed him his resident minister at the court of Rome, where he felt his literary taste revive with its usual keenness, and was a contributor to various literary Journals. That of the “Effemeridi letterarie di Roma” owed its rise principally to him, and for sometime, its fame to his contributions. It was in this he wrote his eloges on Lupacchini, Piranesi, and Mengs, which last was published separately, with additions, in 1780. In his twelve Italian letters on the history of Cornelius Celsus, printed at Rome in 1779, he restores that celebrated physician to the age of Augustus, contrary to the common opinion, and to that of Tirasboschi (to whom they were addressed), who places him in what is called the silver age. He was projecting a magnificent edition of Celsus, a life of Petrarch, and some other literary undertakings, when he died suddenly at Perugia, Jan. 1, 1781, universally regretted. He left ready for the press, a work in Italian and French, on the circus of Caracalla, which was magnificently printed at Rome in 1790, with nineteen beautiful engravings.

, was born at Hamburgh March 31, 1717. Jn a journey which he made to Brunswick, he became acquainted with Frederick II. then prince royal, who, on coming to the throne, took him into his service, and sent him, as secretary of legation, with count de Truchses, Prussian ambassador to the court of St. James’s, but discovering that the baron’s talents were not calculated for diplomatic affairs, h, in 1745, appointed him preceptor to prince Augustus Ferdinand his brother; after that, in 1747, curator of the universities, and in 1748 he created him a baron, with the rank of privy-counsellor. The last years of his life he spent in study and retirement at Treban, in the country of Altenburgh, where he died April 5, 1770. He wrote

This ill-fated man, after his failure in physic and in printing, became an unsuccessful candidate for the place of secretary to the society for the encouragement of learning. He was then made saperintendant of the works belonging to the duke of Chandos at Cannons, and experienced those disappointments incident to projectors. He also formed schemes in agriculture, and wrote a treatise on the subject, which, we are told, was the cause of his being engaged in Sweden. In that kingdom he drained marshes, practised physic, and was even employed in that capacity for the king. At length he was involved in some state cabals, or, as some accounts inform us, in a plot with count Tessin, and was put to the torture, which not producing a confession, he was beheaded, Aug. 9, 1747. The British ambassador was recalled from Sweden in the same year, among other reasons, for the imputations thrown on his Britannic majesty in the trial' of Dr. Blackwell. Soon after this event, appeared “A genuine copy of a Letter from a merchant in Stockholm, to his correspondent in London, containing an impartial account of Dr. Alexander Blackwell, his plot, trial, character, and behaviour, both under examination and at the place of execution, together with a copy of a paper delivered to a friend upon the scaffold,” in which he denied the crime imputed to him. When Mrs. Blackwell died does not appear. An improved edition of her Herbal was published by Trew, the text in Latin and German, Nuremberg, 1750 1760, fol. and at Leipsic was published in 1794, 8vo, “Nomenclator Linnaeanus in Blackvellianum Herbarium per C. G. Greening,” a proof of the estimation in which this work is still held on the continent.

, was an artist of whose life we have very few particulars, till he was known at Rome, in the year 1716, being at that time painter to count Martinetz and his reputation, as a good painter of portrait in miniature, was well established in Italy. By the solicitation of Overbeke, he was induced to go to Amsterdam, and in that city was employed to paint small portraits for bracelets, rings, and snuff-boxes and although they were painted in water-colours, yet the colouring was as lively and as natural as if they had been painted in oil. However, as he found his sight much impaired by the minuteness of his work, he discontinued water-colour painting, and attempted the use of oil, with a reasonable degree of success. After he had resided for some years in the Low Countries, he went to England, and set up a new method of printing mezzotinto plates in colours so as to imitate the pictures of which they were copies. In this manner he executed in England several large plates, from pictures of the greatest masters, and disposed of the prints by lottery. But those who obtained the prizes (Mr. Strutt says) appear not to have held them in any very great estimation. “The prints,” he adds, “certainly possess some merit, exclusive of their novelty; but, in general, the colours are flat and dirty the effect is neither striking nor judiciously managed and the drawing is frequently very incorrect, especially in the extremities of his figures.” Mr. Pilkington speaks of them with greater approbation “The artist,” he says, “imitated his models with so much skill, such exact resemblance, such correctness of outline, such similarity of colour and expression, that at first they amazed every beholder who viewed them at a proper distance and many of those prints are still extant, which are much esteemed by persons of good taste.” And Mr. Wai pole observes, that some heads, coloured progressively, according to their several gradations, bear witness to the success and beauty of his invention. He had another merit to the public, with which few inventors begin; for he communicated his secret in a thin quarto, entitled “Coloritto, or the harmony of colouring in painting reduced to mechanical practice, under easy precepts and infallible rules.” His method was performed by several mezzotinto plates for one piece, each expressing different shades and parts of the piece in different colours. He was not, however, it is said, the original inventor of that manner of managing colours, but took it from Lastman and others, who, with, much greater regularity of morals, equal capacities, and more discreet conduct, had before undertaken it without success. Le Blond, whose head was continually full of schemes, next set on foot a project for copying the cartoons of Raphael in tapestry, and made drawings from the pictures for that purpose. Houses were built and looms erected at the Mulberry Ground at Chelsea but the expences being too great, or the contributions not equal to the first expectations, the scheme was suddenly defeated, and Le Blond disappeared, to the no small dissatisfaction of those who were engaged with him. From hence he went to Paris, where, Basan informs us, he was in the year 1737; and in that city he died, 1740, in an hospital. Le Blond was also author of a treatise, in French, on ideal beauty. It was published in 1732, and has since been translated into English.

, a celebrated French mathematician and military engineer, was born at Ribemond in Picardy, in 1617. While he was yet but young, he was chosen regius professor of mathematics and architecture at Paris. Not long after, he was appointed governor to Lewis-Henry de Lomenix, count de Brienne, whom he accompanied in his travels from 1652 to 1655, of which he published an account. He enjoyed many honourable employments, both in the navy and army; and was entrusted with the management of several negociations with foreign princes. He arrived at the dignity of marshal de camp, and counsellor of state, and had the honour to be appointed mathematical preceptor to the Dauphin. He was a member of the royal academy of sciences, director of the academy of architecture, and lecturer to the royal college in all which he supported his character with dignity and applause. Blondel was no less versed in the knowledge of the belles lettres than in the mathematical sciences, as appears by the comparison he published between Pindar and Horace, 1675, 12mo, and afterwards reprinted in Rapin’s miscellaneous works. He died at Paris, the 22d of February, 1686, in the sixty-ninth year of his age. His chief mathematical works were 1. “Cours d' Architecture,” Paris, 1675, folio. 2. “Resolution des quatre principaux problemes d' Architecture,” Paris, 1676, fol. 3. “Histoire du Calendrier Romain,” Paris, 1682, 4to. 4. “Cours de Mathematiques,” Paris, 1683, 4to. 5. “L'Art de jetter des Bombes,” La Haye, 1685, 4to. Besides a “New method of fortifying places,” and other works. Blondel had also many ingenious pieces inserted in the memoirs of the French academy of sciences, particularly in the year 1666.

, an eminent Italian scholar, was born at Bologna in 1488, of a noble family. In his studies he made uncommon proficiency, and had distinguished himself at the early age of twenty by his very learned work on Plautus. According to the custom of the age, he attached himself to various princes, but at first to the celebrated Albert Pio, count of Carpi. Having become imperial orator at the court of Rome, he obtained by his talents and knowledge of business, the titles of chevalier and count Palatine, and was intrusted with some important functions, such as that of bestowing the degree of doctor, of creating notaries, and even legitimizing natural children. At Bologna he was professor of Greek and Latin, rhetoric and poetry, and was chosen one of the Auziani in 1522. Having acquired a handsome fortune, he built a palace, and in 1546 founded an academy in it, named from himself Academia Bocchiana, or Bocchiale. It was also called Ermatena, agreeable to its device, on which was engraven the two figures of Mercury and Minerva. He also established a printing-office in his house, and he and his academicians employed themselves in correcting the many beautiful editions which they printed. Bocchi was a good Hebrew scholar, and well versed in antiquities and history, particularly that of his own country. The senate of Bologna employed him on writing the history of that city, and bestowed on him the title of Historiographer. Cardinal Sadolet, the two Flaminio’s, John Phil. Achillini, and Lcl. Greg. Giraldi, were among his particular friends, who have all spoken very favourably of him in their works. This last was much attached to him, and it is supposed that he meant to express this attachment by giving him the name of Phileros (loving friend), or Philerote, which is on the title of some of his works. Bocchi died at Bologna, Nov. 6, 1562. He wrote, 1. “Apologia in Plautum, cui accedit vita Ciceronis authore Plutarcho,” Bologn.

, a learned professor of the university of Helmstadt, was born in 1722, at Wernigerode. After having been educated at home, with great care, by his father, who was judge of that city, and counsellor to the count Stolberg of Wernigerode, he went in 1739 to the school of Closter-Bergen, near Magdeburgh, then superintended by Steinmez, and in 1741, took his leave of this school, in a Latin oration, “De societatibus hujus sevi notabilioribus.” He then went to Halle, and having early imbibed a taste for oriental languages and sacred philology, he attached himself particularly to the two Michaelis’s, father and son, who were then professors in that university. From Halle, he went to Leipsic, where he studied Arabic, Syriac, Chaldaic, Samaritan, Ethiopian, and rabbinical Hebrew. On his return to Halle in 1747, he maintained a thesis for his doctor’s degree, under the presidency of Michaelis the father, “On the antiquity of the Hebrew language” and then opened a course of lectures which were much admired. Notwithstanding this success, however, he left Halle, after a residence of two years, and settled at Helmstadt. Here he became a most popular teacher, his lectures being attended by an unusual number of students; and in 1754, the uniYersity secured his services by appointing him professor extraordinary of oriental languages. About this time, happening to meet with some works in which the study of the Armenian, Coptic, and Turkish languages was recommended, he had a great desire to add these to his stock, and not having been able to obtain the assistance of Jablonski for the Coptic, he determined to learn the others without a master. Having begun this task at his lisure hours, in 1756, he made such rapid progress as to be able to publish, before the conclusion of the year, the first two chapters of St. Matthew translated from the Turkish into Latin, with a critical preface on the history and utility of the Turkish language and the first four chapters of the same evangelist translated from the Armenian into Latin, with some considerations on the Armenian language. These two little works, which were published, the first at Bremen, and the other at Halle, were criticised with some severity, perhaps not unjust; but the zeal and industry of the author, although not altogether successful in these attempts, were still the subject of admiration, and were not unrewarded. In 1760 he obtained a pension and in 1763, lest he should accept of the offer of a professorship made to him by the university of Giessen, that of Helmstadt conferred on him the title of professor in ordinary of philosophy, with an augmentation of salary. His various works in the mean time amply confirmed their choice, and extended his reputation throughout Europe. Of his private life we have no further account, although it was prolonged for many years after this period, as he died of an apoplexy, March 7, 1796. His principal works are, 1. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Æthiopici interpretis in Bibliis polyglottis Anglicanis editum cum Graeco, c.” Halle, 1748, 4to, with a preface by Michaelis on the Ethiopian translation of the New Testament. 2. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Persica, &c.” Helmstadt, 17.50, 4to. 3. Persian translations of Mark, Luke, and John, 1751, 4to. published separately. 4. “Evangelium secundum Marcum ex versione Arabica, &c.” Lerngow, 1752, 4to. 5. “Novum Testamentum ex versione jEthiopica, &c. in Latinum,” Brunswick, 1753 55, 2 vols. 4to. 6. “Fragmenta Veteris Test, ex versione Æthiopici interpretis, et alia quaedam opuscula Æthiopica,” Wolfenb. 1755, 4to. 7. “Pseudo-critica Millio-Bengeliana,” Halle, 1767, 8vo, pointing out some inaccuracies in the variorum editions of the New Testament by these eminent critics. Bode is considered by his countrymen as a man of most extensive learning, but as destitute of elegance as a writer, either in Latin or German, and as unacquainted with the art of enlivening his subject.

In 1588 he was sent to the Hague, to manage the queen’s affairs in the United Provinces, where, according to an agreement between the queen and the states, he was admitted one of the council of state, and took his place next to count Maurice, giving his vote in every proposition made to that assembly. In this station he behaved greatly to the satisfaction of his royal mistress, and the advancement of the public service. A more particular account of sir Thomas’s negociations with the states may be seen in Camden’s “Annals of queen Elizabeth,” under the year 1595, and in a short piece, written by sir Thomas himself, and published by Mr. Thomas Hearne in his notes upon that passage of Camden, entitled “An account of an Agreement between queen Elizabeth and the United Provinces, wherein she supported them, and they stood not to their agreement.”

, an eminent German critic and historian, and counsellor to the emperor and to the elector of Mentz, was born in 1611, at Cronheim in Franconia, and was during a long life reputed one of the ablest men Germany had produced, particularly in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, in history, and political and legal knowledge. He was only twenty when thought worthy of being appointed professor of eloquence at Strasburgh, and in 1640 was made a canon of St. Thomas. Christina, queen of Sweden, invited him to Upsal in 1648, to be professor of eloquence, and the following year conferred on him the place of historiographer of Sweden, with a pension of eight hundred crowns, which she generously continued when his health obliged him to return to Strasburgh. He was then elected professor* of history at Strasburgh, and in 1662 the elector of Mentz appointed him his counsellor. The year after, the emperor Ferdinand III. bestowed the' same honour upon him, with the title of count Palatine. Louis XIV. offered him a pension pf two thousand livres, but the court of Vienna, unwilling to lose him, induced him to decline it, and made up his loss by another pension of six hundred rix-dollars. Boeder, honoured and enriched by so many favours, pursued his studies with unremitting ardour, until his death in 1692. He published with notes or commentaries, editions of Herodian, Strasburgh, 1644, 8vo Suetonius, ibid. 1647, 4to Manilius, ibid. 1655, 4to Terence, ibid, 1657, 8vo Cornelius Nepos, Utrecht, 1665, 12mo; Polybius, 1666, 1670, 1681, 4to; part of Tacitus, Velleius Paterculus, Virgil, Herodotus, and Ovid. His other works were 1 “De Jure Galliae in Lotharingiam,” Strasburgh, 1663, 4to, a refutation of the treatise on the rights of the French king to Lorraine. 2. “Annotationes in Hippolytum a Lapide,” ibid. 1674, 4to, a refutation of the work entitled “De ratione status imperii Romano-Germanici,” by Chemnitz or James de Steinberg. 3. “Dissertatio de scriptoribus Graecis et Latinis, ab Homero usque ad initium XVI seculi,” ibid. 1674, 8vo, and reprinted by Gronovius in the tenth vol. of his Grecian antiquities. 4. “Bibliographia historico-politico-philologica,” 1677, 8vo. 5. “Historia Belli Sueco-Danici annis 1643 1645,” Stockholm, 1676, Strasburgh, 1679, 8vo. 6. “Historia universalis ab orbe comlito ad J. C. nativitatem,” ibid. 1680, 8vo, with a dissertation on the use of history. 7. “Notitia sacri imperii Romani,” ibid. 1681, 8vo. 8. An edition with notes and improvements, of Picolomini’s Latin history of Frederic III. ibid. 1685, fol. reprinted 1702. 9. “De rebus saeculi post Christum XVI. liber memorialis,” Kiel, 1697, 8vo: 10. “Historia universalis IV saeculorum post Christum,” 1699, 8vo, reprinted at Rostock, 4to, with a life of the author, by J. Theophilus Moller. 11. Various “Letters” in Jaski’s collection, Amsterdam, 1705, 12mo. 12. “Commentatio in Grotii librum de jure belli ac pacis,” Strasburgh, 1705, 1712, 4to. He was a most enthusiastic admirer of Grotius. 13. “Bibliographia critica,” Leipsic, 1715, 8vo, enlarged by J. Gottlieb Krause the former editions of this work were very defective. 14. “Dissertations, and smaller pieces,” published by J. Fabricius, ajt Strasburgh, 1712, 4 vols. 4to, on history, politics, morals, criticism, many of them very valuable.

There is yet a third class of writings connected with the name of Boerhaave, in which he acted principally as editor. Among these we may enumerate 1. The count Marsigli’s “Histoire physique de la Mer,” Amst. 1725, fol. 2. Vaillant’s “Botanicon Parisiense,” Lej'deu, 1727, 4to. 3. Swammerdam’s “Historia Insectorum, sive Biblia Naturae,” Amst. 1737, 2 vols. fol. translated into Latin by Gaubius, with a preface by Boerhaave. These, however, are not to be considered as new editions, for they were never published before, and the world was now, for the first time, indebted for them to Boerhaave’s zeal for the promotion of science. Swammerdam’s work was purchased and printed entirely at his own expence. It was not by his talents only, but by his fortune also, that he sought to advance science; and his liberal patronage of Linr.-jeus and Artedi was amply acknowledged by both; but as in his first interview with the former there are some characteristic traits unnoticed by B jerhaave’s biographers, we shall in this place extract Stoever’s account, from his life of Linmeus.

, count of Scandiano, an Italian poet, was born at the castle of Scandiano, near Reggio in Lombardy, about the year 1434. He studied at the university of Ferrara, and remained in that city the greater part of his life, attached to the ducal court. He was particularly in great favour with the duke Borso and Hercules I. his successor. He accompanied Borso in a journey to Rome in 1471, and the year following was selected by Hercules to escort to Ferrara, Eleonora of Aragon, his future duchess. In 1481 he was appointed governor of Reggio, and was also captain-general of Modena. He died at Reggio, Dec. 20, 1494. He was one of the most learned and accomplished men of his time, a very distinguished Greek and Latin scholar, and at a time when Italian poetry was in credit, one of those poets who added to the reputation of his age and country. He translated Herodotus from the Greek into Italian, and Apuleius from the Latin. He wrote also Latin poetry, as his “Carmen Bucolicum,” eight eclogues in hexameters, dedicated to duke Hercules I. Reggio, 1500, 4 to Venice, 1528; and in Italian, “Sonetti e Canzoni,” Reggio, 1499, 4to; Tenice, 1501, 4to, in a style rather easy than elegant, and occasionally betraying the author’s learning, but without affectation. Hercules of Este was the first of the Italian sovereigns who entertained the court with a magnificent theatre on which Greek or Latin comedies, translated into Italian, were performed. For this theatre Boiardo wrote his “Timon,” taken from a dialogue of Lucian, which may be accounted the first comedy written in Italian. The first edition of it, according to Tiraboschi, was that printed at Scandiano, 1500, 4to. The one, without a date, in 8vo, he thinks was the second. It was afterwards reprinted at Venice, 1504, 1515, and 1517, 8vo. But Boiardo is principally known by his epic romance of “Orlando Innamorato,” of which the celebrated poem of Ariosto is not only an imitation, but a continuation. Of this work, he did not live to complete the third book, nor is it probable that any part of it had the advantage of his last corrections, yet it is justly regarded as exhibiting, upon the whole, a warmth of imagination, and a vivacity of colouring, which rendered it highly interesting: nor is it, perhaps, without reason, that the simplicity of the original has occasioned it to be preferred to the same work, as altered or reformed by Francesco Berni (See Brrni). The “Orlando Innamorato” was first printed at Scandiano, about the year 1495, and afterwards at Venice, 1500, which De Bure erroneously calls the first edition. From the third book where Boiardo 1 s labours cease, it was continued by Niccolo Agostini, and of this joint production numerous editions have been published.

, count, known in the latter part of his life by the name of Osman Bashaw, descended from a family related to the blood royal of France, was born in 1672, and entered himself at the age of sixteen, in the service of that crown, and married the daughter of marshal de Biron. He made the campaign in Flanders in 1690, but soon after left the French army, and entered into the Imperial service under prince Eugene, who honoured him with an intimate friendship. The intrigues of the marquis de Prie, his inveterate enemy, ruined his credit however at the court of Vienna, and caused him to be banished the empire. He then offered his service to the republic of Venice, and to Russia; which being de^ clined, his next tender was to the grand Signior, who gladly received him: it was stipulated that he should have a body of 30,000 men at his disposal; that a government should be conferred on him, with the rank of bashaw of three tails; a salary of 10,000 aspers a day, equal to 45,000 livres a year; and that in case of a war, he should be commander in chief. The first expedition he engaged in after his arrival at Constantinople, was to quell an insurrection in Arabia Petraea, which he happily effected; and at his return, had large offers made him by Kouli Khan, which he did not choose to accept. Some time after, he commanded the Turkish army against the emperor, over whose forces he gained a victory on the banks of the Danube. But success does not always protect a person against disgrace; for Bonneval, notwithstanding his service, was first imprisoned, and then banished to the island of Chio. The sultan, however, continued his friend; and the evening before his departure made him bashaw general of the Archipelago, which, with his former appointment of beglerbeg of Arabia, rendered him one of the most powerful persons in the Ottoman empire. In this island, he found a retirement agreeable to his wishes, but did not long enjoy it, being sent for back, and made topigi or master of the ordnance, a post of great honour and profit. He died in this employment, aged 75, in 1747; and wrote the memoirs of his own life, which were published in London in 1755, 2 vols. 12 mo, and give but an indifferent idea of his personal character.

These labours induced M. Prasslin, the minister of the marine, to wish for the aid of his talents in the French navy, and after some opposition from official etiquette, he appointed him sub-lieutenant, in which character he first appeared in 1768; but nothing occurred of consequence until 1771, when the French and English were employed in many inventions for the discovery of the longitude at sea, and the French government having determined to try the accuracy of some improved chronometers, the academy of sciences appointed Borda and Pingre to sail for that purpose in the Flora frigate. The result of their voyage was published at Paris in 1778, entitled, “Voyage fait par ordre du Roy en 1771 et 1772, &c.” 2 vols. 4to. He was afterwards employed to determine the position of the Canary Isles, and being promoted to the rank of lieutenant, sailed in 1776, and in the course of his voyage, performed its immediate object, with others. Being appointed majorgeneral to the naval armament which served under Count D'Estaign in America, his experience led him to discover many defects in the construction of vessels, which he thought might be easily remedied. He considered the want of uniformity in the construction of ships, which were to act together, as a great defect, because a great discordance arose in their movements and in the exeeution of signals. Upon his return to France he communicated this idea to government, who immediately resolved to carry it into effect, and his profound knowledge and patriotic exertions did not fail to be acknowledged not only by France, but by the best-informed men in England. The reputation which he had now acquired enabled him to be further serviceable to his country, by drawing up a plan for the schools of naval architecture, of which he may justly be termed the founder, as he not only suggested the idea, but formed the scheme for regulating these seminaries, and laid down the rules for the instruction of the pupils admitted into them.

, a French sculptor, was the son of a sculptor and architect, and born at Chaumont in Bassigni in 1698. He was drawn by an irresistible passion for these two arts, but confined himself at length to the former. After having passed some time at Paris under the younger Coustou, and obtained the prize at the academy in 1722, he was carried to Rome at the king’s expence. Upon his return from Italy, where his talents had been greatly improved, he adorned Paris with his works: a list of them may be seen in a life of him, published in 1762, 12mo, by the count de Caylus, but some of them no longer exist, particularly his fine equestrian statue of Louis XV. formerly in the square named after that monarch. In 1744 he obtained a place in the academy; and, two years after, a professorship. He died July 17, 1762, a loss to the arts, and much lamented; for he is described as a man of great talent, disinterested spirit, and of most amiable manners. Music was his object in the hours of recreation, and his talents in this way were very considerable. Count Caylus, in his “Tableaux tires de l‘Iliade et de l’Odysse d'Homere,” mentions Bouchardon, with honour, among the tew artists who borrowed their subjects from Homer, and relates the following anecdote: “This great artist having lately read Homer in an old and detestable French translation, came one day to me, his eyes sparkling with fire, and said, * Since I have read this book, men seem to be fifteen feet high, and all nature is enlarged in my sight'.” This anecdote, however, does not give a very high idea of the education of a French artist, and a professor of the art.

, a French historian and miscellaneous writer, was born at Quimper, Nov. 4, 1690, and entered among the Jesuits in 1706. In 1710, after finishing his course of philosophy, he taught Latin at Caen, and afterwards rhetoric at iSevers. From that time he remained principally in the college of Louis le Grand at Paris, until his death, Jan. 7, 1743, employing himself in writing. Besides the part which he took for many years in the “Memoires de Trevoux,” he wrote: i. “Anacr^on and Sappho,” dialogues in Greek verse, Caen, 1712, 8vo. 2. “Recueil d' observations physiques tirees des meilleurs ecrivains,” Paris, 1719, 12mo, to which were added two more volumes, 1726 and 1730, by Grozelier. 3. “Histoire des guerres et des negociations qui precederent le traite de Westphalie sous le regne de Louis XIII. &c.” 1727, 4to, and 2 vols. 12mo, taken from the Memoirs of count d'Avaux, the French ambassador. This history still enjoys high reputation in F.rance. 4. “Exposition de la Doctrine Chretienne par demandes et par reponses,” 1741, 4to, and some other theological tracts that are now forgotten. 5. “Histoire du traite de Westphalie,” 2 vols. 4to, and 4 vols. 12mo, a superior work to that mentioned before, and highly praised by all French historians. It did not appear until after his death, in 1744. Besides these he wrote several pieces of a lighter kind, as an ingenious romance, entitled “Voyage Merveilleux du prince FanFeredin dans la Romancie, &c.” 1735, 12mo “Amusement philosophique sur le Langagedes Betes,”1739,12mo, which, being censured for its satire, the author was banished for some time to la Fleche, and endeavoured to defend himself in a letter to the abbe Savaletta. He wrote also some comedies of very little merit, but his reputation chiefly rests on his historical works.

, a lawyer, poet, and historian, was born at Strasburgh, in 1448, and after prosecuting his first studies in that city, removed to Basil, where he took his master’s degree in arts, and superintended the education of youth, as public professor, both at Basil and Strasburgh. Here he arrived at the highest honours of the law, being made count Palatine, and counsellor and chancellor of Strasburgh. He died in 1520, leaving a great many works on subjects of law and'divinity, some volumes of poetry, and the celebrated “Ship of Fools,” which has chiefly perpetuated his memory. It was originally written in the German language. Locher, his disciple, tran shite d it into Latin, Strasburgh, 1497, 4to. A French translation of it by Bouchet and Riviere, was published at Paris, in small folio, in the same year, entitled “La nef des folz du monde.” Our countryman Alexander Barclay (See Barclay) was the author of the English metrical version printed by Pynson in 1509. The bibliographical history of Brandt’s work may be seen in our authorities.

, a famous physician, was born at Ferrara, in 1500, of a noble family. His knowledge was not confined to medicine. In consequence of his having maintained at Paris, for three days successively, theses “de omni scibile,” the surname of Musa was given him by Francis I. He was physician to that prince, who made him chevalier of the order of St. Michael; to the emperor Charles V. who bestowed on him the title of count palatine; and to Henry VIII. of England. He was not of less consequence in his own country. Successively first physician to the popes Paul III. Leo X. Clement VII. and Julius III. cherished and favoured by all the other princes of Italy, and particularly the dukes of Ferrara, he was proceeding in this brilliant career, when he died at Ferrara in 1555, at the age of 55, after having long been a professor of medicine there with universal applause; leaving a great number of works, principally on medicine, and among others, 1. “Commentaries on the aphorisms of Hippocrates and Galen,” printed at Basle, in 1542, folio. 2. “Index refertissimus in Galeni libros,” Venice, 1623, fol. which Castro, in his Biblioth. Med. styles “opus indefessse elucubrationis & utilitatis inexplicabilis.”

This lady, whose article we have retained from the former edition, principally on account of her character, a tolerable specimen of the vanity of a Frenchwoman, married M. de Flecelles, count de Bregy, lieutenant-general in the army, counsellor of state, envoy extraordinary in Poland, and afterwards embassador in Sweden.

, a German lawyer and poet, was born at Lubeck, Sept. 22, 1680, and after having studied and taken his degrees in the civil and canon law, settled and practised at Hamburgh, where his merit soon raised him to the senatorial dignity, to which the emperor, without any solicitation, added the rank of Aulic counsellor, and count Palatine. These counts Palatine were formerly governors of the imperial palaces, and had considerable powers, being authorized to create public notaries, confer degrees, &c. Brockes published in five parts, from 1724 to 1736, 8vo, “Irdisches Vergnugen in Gott, &c.” or “Earthly Contentment in God,” consisting of philosophical and moral poems, which were much praised by his countrymen. He also published translations from Marini, and other Italian poets, into German, and had some thoughts of translating Milton, as he had done Pope’s Essay on Man, a proof at least of his taste for English poetry. His works form a collection of 9 vols. 8vo, and have been often reprinted. He appears to have carefully divided his time between his public duties and private studies, and died much esteemed and regretted, Jan. 16, 1747.

, better known under the name of Farinello, was born the 24th of January, 1705, at Andria, in the kingdom of Naples, of a family noble, though poor. From the patent of his knighthood of the order of Calatrava, it appears that he was indebted for the lasting agreeableness of his voice, not to a voluntary mutilation from the thirst of gain, but that he was obliged to undergo the cruel operation on account of a dangerous hurt he received in his youth, by a fall from a horse. He owed the first rudiments of the singing art to his father Salvatore Brosco, and his farther formation to the famous Porpora. At, that time there flourished at Naples three wealthy brothers of the name of Farina, whose family is now extinct. These persons vouchsafed him their distinguished patronage, and bestowed on him the name of Farinello. For some time his fame was confined to the convivial concerts of his patrons, till it happened that the count of Schrautenbach, nephew of the then viceroy, came to Naples. To celebrate his arrival, -the viceroy and his familiar friend Antonio Caracciolo, prince della Torella, caused the opera of “Angelica and Medoro” to be represented, in which Metastasio and Farinello plucked the first laurels of their immortal fame.

, a celebrated general of the eighteenth century, was the son of Ulysses, baron de Brown, colonel of a regiment of cuirassiers in the service of the emperors Leopold and Joseph, created in 1716, by the emperor Charles VI. a count of the holy Roman empire, his younger brother George receiving the like dignity at the same time, who was general of foot, counsellor of war, and a colonel of a regiment of infantry, under Charles -VI. They were of an ancient and noble family in Ireland. The subject of the present memoir was born at Basle, Oct. 24, 1705-. After having passed through the lessons of a school at Limerick in Ireland, he was called to Hungary at ten years of age, by count George de Brown, his uncle, and was present at the famous siege of Belgrade in 1717; about the close of the year 1723, he became captain in his uncle’s regiment, and then lieutenant-colonel in 1725. He went to the island of Corsica in 1730, with a battalion of his regiment, and contributed greatly to the capture of Callansana, where he received a wound of some consequence in his thigh. He was appointed chamberlain to the emperor in 1732, and colonel in 1734. He distinguished himself in the war of, Italy, especially in the battles of Parma and Guastalla, and burnt, in presence of the French army, the bridge which the marechal de Noailles had thrown across the Adige. Being appointed general in 1736, he favoured, the year following, the retreat of the army, by a judicious manoeuvre, and saved all the baggage at the memorable day of Banjaluca in Bosnia, Aug. 3, 1737. This signal piece of service procured him a second regiment of infantry, vacant by the death of count Francis de Wallis. On his return to Vienna in 1739, the emperor Charles VI. raised him to the dignity of general-neld-marechal-lieute.^ nanr, and gave him a seat in the Aulic council of war. After the death of that prince, the king of Prussia having entered Silesia, count de Brown, with but a small body oi troops, disputed with him every foot of ground for the space of two months. He commanded in 1741 the infantry of the right wing of the Austrian army at the battle of Molvitz; and, though wounded, made a handsome retreat. He then went into Bavaria, where he commanded the van of the same army, made himself master of Deckendorf, an4 took much of the enemy’s baggage, and forced the French to quit the banks of the Danube, which the Austrian army afterwards passed in perfect safety; in commemoration of which, a marble pillar was erected on the spot, with the following inscription: “Theresise Austriacae Augustse Duce Exercitus Carolo Alexandro Lotharingico, septemdecirn superatis hostilibus VilHs, captoque Deckendorfio, renitentibus undis, resistentibus Gallis, Duce Exercitus Ludovico Borbonio Contio, transivit hie Danubium Ulysses Maximilianus, S. R. I. Comes de Brown, Locumtenens Campi Marashallusj Die 5 Junii, A. D. 1743.” The queen of Hungary sent him the s^me year to Worms, in quality of her plenipotentiary to the king of Great Britain: where he put the finishing Hand to the/ treaty of alliance between the courts of Vienna, London, and Turin, and she declared him her actual privy counsellor at her coronation qf Bohemia. The count de Brown, in 1744, followed prince Lobkovitz jnto Italy, took the city of Veletri the 4th of August, notwithstanding the great superiority of the enemy in numbers, penetrated into their camp, defeated several regiments, and took a great many prisoners. Being recalled to Bavaria, he performed several military exploits, and returned to Italy in 1746. He drove the Spaniards out of the Milanese; and, having joined the army of the prince de Lichtenstein, he commanded the left wing of the Austrian troops at the battle of Placentia, the 15th of June 1746; and routed the right wing of the enemy’s army, commanded by the marechal de Maillebois. After this famous battle, the gaining of which was due to him, he commanded in chief the army ordered against the Genoese, made himself master of the pass of la Bochetta, though defended by 4000 men, and took possession of the city of Genoa. Count Brown then went to join the troops of the king of Sardinia, and, in conjunction with him, took Montalbano and the territory of Nice. He passed the Var the 30th of November, in opposition to the French troops, entered Provence, and captured the isles of Saint-Marguerite and Saint-Honorat. He had nearly made himself master of all Provence, when the revolution at Genoa and the army of the marechal de Belleisle obliged him to make that fine retreat which acquired him the admiration of all good judges of. military tactics. He employed the rest of the year 1747 in defending the states of the house of Austria in Italy. The empress-queen of Hungary, in reward of his signal campaigns in Italy, made him governor of Transylvania in 1749. In 1752 he had the government of the city of Prague, with the general command of the troops of that kingdom; and the king of Poland, elector of Saxony, honoured him in 1755 with the order of the white eagle. The king of Prussia having invaded Saxony in 1756, and attacked Bohemia, count Brown marched against him; he repulsed that prince at the battle of Lobositz the 1st of October, although he had but 26,800 men, and the king of Prussia was at the head of at least 40,000. Within a week after this engagement, he undertook that celebrated march into Saxony, for delivering the Saxon troops shut up between Pirna and Konigstein: an action worthy of the greatest general whether ancient or modern. He afterwards obliged the Prussians to retreat from Bohemia; for which service he obtained the collar of the golden fleece, with which he was honoured by the empress March 6, 1757. Shortly after this count Brown went into Bohemia, where he raised troops with the utmost expedition, in order to make head against the king of Prussia, who had entered it afresh at the head of his whole army. On May 6th was fought the famous battle of Potshernitz, or of Prague, when count Brown was dangerously wounded. Obliged to retire to Prague, he there died of his wounds, the 26th of June 1757, at the age of 52. The count was not only a great general, he was an equally able negotiator, and well skilled in politics. He married, Aug. 15, 1726, Maria Philippina countess of Mar tinitz, of an illustrious and ancient family in Bohemia, by whom he had two sons. The life of this excellent commander was published in two separate volumes, one in German, the other in French, printed at Prague in 1757.

, a Latin historian and poet, was born at Egra in Bohemia, 1518. He was devoted to books from his childhood, and especially to poetry; in which he so happily succeeded, that he could make a great number of verses, and those not bad ones, extempore. He began early to publish some of them on several subjects; and acquired so much reputation, that he attained to the poetical crown, to the dignity of poet laureat, and of count palatine, which honour he received at Vienna from Ferdinand of Austria, king of the Remaps, in 1552. His business in that city was to present a work to Maximilian, king of Hungary, which he had dedicated to him, the “First century of the German monasteries.” In his return from Vienna, he stopped at Passau; where, finding a patron in Wolfgang bishop of Salms, he resolved to settle, and to remove his library and family. He hoped that he could better go on there with a great work he had undertaken, which was, “The history of all the bishoprics and bishops of Germany.” He had travelled much, and looked into several records *and libraries, to gather materials for his purpose. How long he staid there does not appear; but he was at Basil in June 1553, and lived in the citadel of Oporin. Arx Oporina: the usual way of speaking of that famous printer’s house, which stood on a rising ground. Here he published writings he had finished at Passau, some in prose, and others in verse. Bruschius was married, but had no children. He was far from being rich; but his poetical patrons assisted him, and he received presents also from the abbots and abbesses, whose monasteries he described. He was particularly well received by the abbess of the convent of Caczi, and obtained some presents from her, which, Melchior Adam says, was owing to his having described the antiquities of that convent. The liberalities of some abbots, while he was with Oporin at Basil, enabled him to buy a new suit of clothes; but when he found that appearing well dressed in the streets procured him many marks of respect from the vulgar, he tore his new finery to pieces, “as slaves (says the same author) that had usurped their master’s honours.”

, chevalier and count of Nanay, was born near Livarot, in Normandy, March 2, 1752, and died on his estate at Nangay, Sept. 18, 1787. He was minister plenipotentiary in most of the courts of Germany, and having a great taste -for history, politics, and antiquities, passed much of his time in pursuits calculated to gratify it. He published the following works, all of which were well received by his countrymen: i. “Tableau de gouvernement de PAllemagne,” 1755, 12mo. 2. “Origines, ou Pancien gouvernement de la France, de l‘Allemagne, et de l’Italie,” Hague, 1757, 4 vols. 8vo. 3. “L‘Histoire ancienne des peuples de l’Europe,” 1772, 12 vols. 12mo. 4. “Heche rches sur l‘Histoire d’Allemagne,” 1772, 2 vols. fol. 5. “Maximes du gouvernement monarchique,” 1789, 4 vols. 8vo, and several other dissertations on subjects of history and politics. He was also author of a tragedy named “Charlemagne,” printed, and of another, “Rosamond,” which remains in manuscript.

, an Italian historian, was born at Lucca in 1710, of a reputable family, and first embraced the ecclesiastical state. His studies being finished, he went to Rome, and during a stay of some years in that city, attracted the notice of the cardinal de Polignac, who was desirous of gaining his attachment, but whom he refused, to accompany into France. Not meeting iif the church with the advantages he had promised himself, he gave it up, in order to bear arms in the service of the king of the Two Sicilies, which, however, did not prevent his devoting himself to the study of the belles-lettres. He wrote in Latin the history of the war of Velletri in 1745, between the Austrians and Neapolitans, in which he was employed, under the title of “De rebus ad Velitras gestis commentarius,” 1746, 4to. This obtained him a pension from the king of Naples, and the rank of commissary general of artillery. But his most considerable work is the history of the war in Italy, which appeared in 1750 and 1751, under this title, “Debello Italico commentarii,” 4to, in three books, for which he got the title of count to himself and his descendants. These two histories are much esteemed for the correctness of the narration and the purity of the Latinity, and have been several times reprinted. The count de Buonamici also composed a treatise “De scientia militari,” but which has not hitherto been published. He died in 1761, at Lucca, the place of his nativity, whither he was come for the benefit of his health. The name of Castruccio being very famous in the history of Lucca, he adopted it on his going into the Neapolitan service, instead of his baptismal name, which was FrancisJoseph-Mary. His work on the war in Italy was translated into English, and published in 1753 at London by A. Wishart, M. A. under the title of “Commentaries of the late war in Italy,” 8vo.

, an eminent geographer, was born at Stadthagen in Germany in 1724. After having been instructed in the learned languages, mathematics, and astronomy, by M. Hauber, at Copenhagen, he went, in 1744, to study divinity at Halle. In 1746, he published his first work, “An Introduction to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Philippians,” which was followed by his “Lectures” on Isaiah and on the New Testament. Having been employed, in 1748, to superintend the education of the son of count Lynar, he accompanied that nobleman to Petersburgh in 1749, and in the course of this journey planned his new system of geography, for the completion of which he went in 1752 to Copenhagen. Here he edited a periodical work on the state of the arts and sciences in Denmark. In 1759, he accepted the office of extraordinary professor of philosophy at Gottingen, with a salary of 200 rix-dollars to enable him to complete his geography. In consequence of the death of Mosheim, he wished to succeed to the theological chair of Gottingen, but he had so openly avowed the principles of the new German theological school, that he was not only denied the professorship, but ordered afterwards to abstain from lecturing on the subject, or publishing any thing not approved of by the privy council of Hanover. This, however, did not prevent his being appointed professor of philosophy in 1759; and in 1761 he became pastor to a Lutheran congregation at Petersburgh, where he established a public school, sanctioned by Catherine the empress. He had a dispute soon after with his congregation, and removed to Altona. In 1766, he was appointed director of a school at Berlin, where he passed the remainder of his life. He died in 1793, and according to his own desire, was buried in his garden, where he had formerly buried his wife, In his own delineation of his character, he acknowledges, that though he was candid and open-hearted, affable, ready to assist others, and of a compassionate disposition, he had behaved with harshness to many persons, and on various occasions. He expresses his confidence in * the Supreme Being, his firm faith in the Saviour of the world, and his satisfaction with the dispensations of providence. His temper, he says, was warm, and occasionally irritable; and his firmness had sometimes assumed the appearance of obstinacy; and his quickness had betrayed him occasionally into precipitation. “I am moderate,” says he, “in all things; contented with little, and master of my appetites. In my intercourse with the world I expect too much from myself; I am therefore often dissatisfied with my own conduct; and on that account wish to confine my intercourse within a very narrow circle, and to shun society. I am free from pride, but not void of ambition, though I often struggle with this passion, and on reflection endeavour to suppress it. I am so much attached to labour, that it seems to me a requisite to life, and that my impulse to it is greater than to any sensual pleasure whatever.” Thiebault, in his “Original Anecdotes of Frederic the Great,” assures us that in no country he met with a man whose vanity was equal to that of Busching. “I have heard,” says Thiebault, “of two or three persons in Europe, who said there were, in their time, no more than three great men, Voltaire, Frederic, and themselves. To these persons M. Busching cannot be compared, for he never acknowledged any man to be so great as himself; in short, his excessive vanity rendered him absolutely intolerable.”

His lordship married Margaretta- Cecilia Munter, daughter of William Munter, counsellor of the court of Holland, by his wife Cecilia Trip, of Amsterdam; and by her left issue only two daughters; the lady Sarah, married to Charles, second duke of Richmond; and the lady Margaret, married to Charles John count Bentinck, second son to William earl of Portland, by his second wife. His lordship dying on July 17, 1726, was buried in Westminsterabbey. Her ladyship survived him till August, 1749, when she departed this life at the Hague, from whence her corpse was brought the next month, and interred by his lordship’s in Westminster-abbey. As they left no male issue, the titles of viscount and earl became extinct, and the barony of Oakley devolved on Charles, his brother, second lord Cadogan, who died in 1776.

, a learned civilian, was born near Tottenham, in Middlesex, in 1557. His father was Cæsar Adelmar, physician to queen Mary and queen Elizabeth lineally descended from Adelmar count of Genoa, and admiral of France, in the year 806, in the reign of Charles the Great. This Cæsar Adelmar’s mother was daughter to the duke de Cesarini, from whom he had the name of Cæsar which name Mary I. queen of England, ordered to be continued to his posterity and his father was Peter Maria Dalmarius, of the city of Trevigio in Italy, LL. D. sprung from those of his name living at Cividad del Friuli. Julius, who is the subject of this article, had his education in the university of Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. May 17, 1575, as a member of Magdalen hall. Afterwards he went and studied in the university of Paris where, in the beginning of 1581, he was created D. C. L. and had letters testimonial for it, under the seal of that university, dated the 22d of April, 1531. He was admitted to the same degree at Oxford, March the 5th, 1583; and also became doctor of the canon law. In the reign of queen Elizabeth, he was master of requests, judge of the high court of admiralty, and master of St. Catherine’s hospital near the Tower. On the 22d of January, 1595, he was present at the confirmation of Richard Vaughan, bishop of Bangor, in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, London. Upon kingJames’s accession to the throne, having before distinguished himself by his merit and abilities, he was knighted by that prince, at Greenwich, May 20, 1603. He was also constituted chancellor and under- treasurer of the exchequer and on the 5th of July, 1607, sworn of his majesty’s privy council. January 16th, in the eighth of king James I. he obtained a reversionary grant of the office of master of the rolls after sir Edward Phillips, knight; who, departing this life September 11, 1614, was succeeded accordingly by sir Julius, on the 1st of October following; and then he resigned his place of chancellor of the exchequer. In 1613 he was one of the commissioners, or delegates employed in the business of the divorce between the earl of Essex and his countess; and gave sentence for that divorce. About the same time, he built a chapel at his house, <on the north side of the Strand, in London, which was consecrated, May 8, 1614. As he had been privy-counsellor to king James I. so was he also to his son king Charles I.; and appears to have been custos rotulorum of the county of Hertford. We are likewise informed by one author, that he was chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster. After having thus passed through many honourable employments, and continued in particular, master of the rolls for above twenty years, he departed this life April 28, 1636, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. He lies buried in the church of Great St. Helen’s within Bishopgate, London, under a fair, but uncommon monument, designed by himself; being in form of a deed, and made to resemble a ruffled parchment, in allusion to his office as master of the rolls. With regard to his character, he was a man of great gravity and integrity, and remarkable for his extensive bounty and charity to all persons of worth, or that were in want: so that he might seem to be almoner-general of the nation. Fuller gives the following instance of his uncommon charity “A gentleman once borrowing his coach (which was as well known to poor people as any hospital in England) was so rendezvouzed about with beggars in London, that it cost him all the money in his purse to satisfy their importunity, so that he might have hired twenty coaches on the same terms.” He entertained for some time in hisr house the most illustrious Francis lord Bacon, viscount St. Alban’s. He made his grants to all persons double kindnesses by expedition, and cloathed (as one expresses it) his very denials in such robes of courtship, that it was not obviously discernible, whether the request or denial were most decent. He had also this peculiar to himself, that he was very cautious of promises, lest falling to an incapacity of performance he might forfeit his reputation, and multiply his certain enemies, by hisoiesign of creating uncertain friends. Besides, he observed a sure principle of rising, namely, that great persons esteem better of such they have done great courtesies to, than those they have received great civilities from; looking upon this as their disparagement, the other as their glory.

It is impossible by any means to contract the numberless tricks and stratagems of this grand impostor, in almost every part of Europe, within the limits prescribed to the articles of this work. His astonishing ingenuity in every species of fiction and deceit, exceeds all that has been recorded in the annals of ancient or modern roguery, insomuch that he was held for a real prodigy by every one to whose ears his fame had reached. His impostures in each of the places he visited would fill a considerable volume; and we must content ourselves with adding, that, for some enormities committed at Rome, he was thrown into the castle of St. Angelo, where he died towards the latter end of 1794; referring such readers as would wish to know more of him to the Italian original, published at Rome by the apostolical chamber, under the title of “Compendium of the Life and Actions of Giuseppe Balsamo, otherwise called count Cagliostro, extracted from the documents of the process carried on against him at Rome in the year 1790,” &c.

, was born in 1525 at Montrichard in Touraine, of a poor family, and was at first a protestant divine, attached to Catherine of Bourbon, sister of Henry IV. but was deposed in a synod on a charge of practising the arts of magic, and for having written a book in favour of public stews. This sentence accelerated his abjuration, which he delivered at Paris in 1595, and died in 1610, at the age of eighty-five, doctor of Sorbonne, and professor of Hebrew in the college royal. Caiet was of a kind and officious disposition, and was so unfortunate as to have for his enemies all whom he had obliged. His slovenly dress, his manner of life, and his absurd attempts to discover the philosopher’s stone, drew upon him no less contempt than his learning brought him respect. Notwithstanding his humble and shabby exterior, Henry IV. continued to admit him to court, not without wishing, however, to avoid it, which he shewed by presenting him with a small estate in the country, a philosophical retreat sufficient to satisfy the ambition of a scholar. The Calvinists, whom he had deserted, endeavoured to expose his principles and conduct, and as after his abjuration he had had a conference with Du Moulin, this was a fresh reason for their animosity. Caiet did not remain silent, but published, in 1603, against Du Moulin, the book emphatically entitled “The fiery Furnace, and the reverberatory Furnace, for evaporating the pretended waters of Silofim (the title of Du Moulin’s work), and for strengthening the fire of purgatory.” The intimacy between the count de Soissons and the sister of Henry IV. proceeded such lengths, that they ordered Caiet to marry them immediately. On his refusal to do it, the prince threatened to kill him. “Kill me then,” replied Caiet; “I had much rather die by the hand of a prince than by that of the hangman.”

While he was secretary of state, he had obtained a patent for him and his heirs to be absolute lord and proprietor (with the royalties of a count-palatine) of the province of Avalon in Newfoundland. This name he gave it from Avalon in Somersetshire, whereon Glastonbury stands, the first-fruits of Christianity in Britain, as the other was in that part of America. He laid out 2500l. in advancing this new plantation, and built a handsome house in Ferryland. After the death of king James he went twice to Newfoundland. When M. de PArade, with three French men of war, had reduced the English fishermen there to great extremity, lord Baltimore, with two ships manned at his own expence, drove away the French, taking sixty of them prisoners, and relieved the English; but still finding his plantation very much exposed to the insults of the French, he at last determined to abandon it. He then went to Virginia; and having viewed the neighbouring country, returned to England, and obtained from Charles I. (who had as great a regard for him as James had) a patent to him and his heirs for Maryland on the north of Virginia. He died at London, April 15, 1632, before the grant was made out; but his son Cecil Calvert, lord Baltimore, who had been at Virginia, took it out in his own name, and the patent bears date June 20, 1632. He was to hold it of the crown of England in common soccage> as of the manor of Windsor; paying yearly, on Easter r l uesday, two Indian arrows of those parts at the castle of Windsor, and the fifth part of the gold and silver ore that should be found therein. King Charles himself gave that province the name of Maryland, in honour of his queen Henrietta Maria. The first colony sent thither consisted of about 200 people, Roman catholics, the chief of whom were gentlemen of good families. The Baltimore family were in danger of losing their property on account of their religion, by the act which requires all Roman catholic heirs to profess the protestant religion, on pain of being deprived of their estates: but this was prevented by their professing the protesunt religion.

, a Spanish artist, and styled the Michel Angelo of Spain, because he excelled in painting, sculpture, and architecture, was born in the city of Grenada in 1600, where his father, an eminent architect, educated him in his own profession, and when his instructions in this branch were completed, he applied himself to the study of sculpture, and made an uncommon progress in a very short time. He next went to Seville, and for eight months studied under Pacheco, and afterwards under Juan del Castillo, in whose academy he executed many noble paintings for the public edifices in Seville, and at the same time gave some specimens of his excellence in statuary, which were highly admired, particularly a “Madonna and Child,” in the great church of Nebriga, and two colossal figures of San Pedro and San Pablo. Count Olivarez was the means of his coming to Madrid, where he was made first royal architect, king’s painter, and preceptor to the prince, don Balthazar Carlos of Austria. Here, as architect, he projected several additional works to the palaces, some public gates to the city, and a triumphal arch erected on the entrance of Mariana, second queen to Philip IV. As a painter, he executed many celebrated compositions in the churches and palaces of Madrid. While in the height of his fame an event happened which involved him in much trouhle. Returning home one evening, he discovered his wife murdered, his house robbed, while an Italian journeyman, on whom the suspicion naturally fell, had escaped. The criminal judges held a court of inquiry, and having discovered that Cano had been jealous of this Italian, and also that he was known to be attached to another woman, they acquitted the fugitive gallant, and condemned the husband. On this he fled to Valencia, and being discovered there, took refuge in a Carthusian convent about three leagues from that city, where he seemed for a time determined upon taking the order, but afterwards was so imprudent as to return to Madrid, where he was apprehended, and ordered to be put to the torture, which he suffered without uttering 3r single word. On this the king received him again into favour, and as Cano saw there was no absolute safety but within the pale of the church, he solicited the king with that view, and was named residentiary of Grenada. The chapter objected to his nomination, but were obliged to submit, and their church profited by the appointment, many sculptures and paintings being of his donation. The last years of his life he spent in acts of devotion and charity. When he had no money to bestow in alms, which was frequently the case, he would call for paper, and give a beggar a drawing, directing him where to carry it for sale. To the Jews he bore an implacable antipathy. On his death-bed he would not receive the sacraments from a priest who attended him, because he had administered them to the converted Jews; and from another he would not accept the crucifix presented to him in his last moments, telling him it was so bungling a piece of work that he could not endure the sight of it. In this manner died Alonso Cano, at the age of seventy-six, in 1676; a circumstance, says his biographer, which shows that his ruling passion for the arts accompanied him in the article of death, superseding even religion itself in those moments when the great interests of salvation naturally must be supposed to occupy the mind to the exclusion of every other idea.

M. Cassini published in the volumes of Memoirs of the French academy a prodigious number of pieces, chiefly astronomical, too numerous to particularize in this place, between the years 1735 and 1770; consisting of astronomical observations and questions; among which are observable, Researches concerning the parallax of the Sun, the Moon, Mars, and Venus; on astronomical refractions, and the effect caused in their quantity and laws by the weather; numerous observations on the obliquity of the ecliptic, and on the law of its variations. In short, he cultivated astronomy for fifty years, of the most important for that science that ever elapsed, for the magnitude and variety of objects, in which he commonly sustained a principal share. M. Cassini was of a very strong and vigorous constitution, which carried him through the many laborious operations in geography and astronomy which he conducted. An habitual retention of urine, however, rendered the last twelve years of his life very painful and distressing, till it was at length terminated by the small-pox, the 4th of September, 178*, in the seventy-first year of his age; being succeeded in the academy, and as director of the observatory, by his only son, the present count John Dominic Cassini who is the fourth in order by direct descent in that honourable station.

In 1764, when the throne of Poland had become vacant by the death of Augustus III. in the October of the preceding year, Catherine displayed her political talents and influence in the advancement of her early favourite count Poiu'atowsky to that dignity. At this time she made a tour through Esthonia, Livonia, and Courland; but during her absence on this expedition, an insurrection broke out in the prison of the dethroned Ivan, which threatened the stability of her own throne. But this was soon quelled by the murder of that unhappy prince. What share the empress had in this affair is not very clear, but the event was certainly in her favour, and she now proceeded in her improvements, and in the establishment of useful institutions, endeavouring to soften the manners of her subjects by instruction. She also seemed determined to be at once both conqueror and legislatrix, and it is certain that the laws of the Russian empire were much simplified under her reign, and the administration of justice rendered milder and more impartial. Her purpose was to form a solid, and not an arbitrary legislation. Her whole plan was directed to prevent all those who governed under her from exercising a capricious and cruel authority, by subjecting them to invariable laws, which no authority should be able to infringe, but in this, when they were at a distance, she was not always successful. She also continued to cultivate and encourage the arts and sciences; to make her empire an asylum to the learned and ingenious and the transit of Vqihis, which happened in 1769, afforded an opportunity of exhibiting as well the munificence of Catherine as the attention she paid to astronomy. About the middle of the year 1767, the empress conceived the useful project of sending several learned men to travel into the interior of her immense territories, for the purpose of determining the geographical position of the principal places, of marking their temperature, and of examining into the nature of their soil, their productions, their wealth, as well as the manners and characters of the several people by whom they are inhabited. The selection of the learned travellers destined for this expedition, the helps that were granted them, and the excellent instructions that were given them, will be a lasting honour to the academy of sciences, by which they were appointed. About this time, viz. in 1768, the court of Catherine became the asylum of the sciences, to which she invited learned men from every part of Europe. She encouraged artists and scholars of all denominations; she granted new privileges to the academy of sciences, and exhorted the members to add the names of several celebrated foreigners to those which already conferred a lustre on their society. Nor was she less attentive to the academy of arts, by increasing the number of its pupils, and adding such regulations as tended more than ever to the attainment of the end for which it was endowed. For the further encouragement of the fine arts in her dominions, the empress assigned an annual sum of 5000 rubles for the translation of foreign works into the Russian language. The improvement of the state of physic was another important object of her concern; and in order to give the highest possible sanction to the salutary practice of inoculating for the small pox, she herself submitted to the operation under the care of an English practitioner, and she persuaded the grand duke to follow her example. In 1768, Dr. T Dimsdale, of Hertford, was invited to Russia for the purpose of introducing inoculation:. upon the recovery of trie grand duke, Catherine rewarded his services by creating him a baron of the Russian empire, and appointed him counsellor of state and physician to her imperial majesty, with a pension of 500l. a year, to be paid him in England; besides 10,000l. sterling, which he immediately received; and she also presented him with a miniatnre picture of herself, and another of the grand duke, as a memorial of his services. Her majesty likewise expressed her approbation of the conduct of his son, by conferring on him the same title, and ordering him to be presented with a superb gold snuff-box, richly set with diamonds. On December 3, 1768, a thanksgiving service was performed in the chapel of the palace on account of her majesty’s recovery and that of the grand duke from the small-pox: and the senate decreed, that this event should be solemnized by an anniversary festival, which has been regularly observed ever since.

As to the character of Catherine, it may be sufficiently estimated by the history of her actions. Her reign, for herself and her court, had been brilliant and happy; but the last years of it were particularly disastrous for the people and the empire. She governed too much by her favourites; and these, with their dependents and subordinate officers, became petty despots. The two most celebrated of these favourites were count Gregory Orlof and prince Potemkin; the former was a coarse vulgar man, of surprising muscular strength and brutal manners; the other shone with some splendour, and his memory still enjoys in Russia that sort of fame which is attached to conquests and military exploits. They and her other favourites are supposed to have received from her, in the course of her reign, nearly an hundred millions of roubles, with vast estates.

, the first duke of Devonshire, was born Jan. 25, 1640. He made the tour of Europe, under the care of Dr. Killigrew, afterwards master of the Savoy. In 1661 he was chosen to represent the county of Derby, and continued a member of the long parliament till its dissolution. Sept. 21, 1663, he was created M. A. of the university of Oxford, by the special command of the chancellor. In 1665 he went a volunteer on board the fleet under the duke of York, and in 1669 accompanied Mr. Montague in his embassy to France. Being accidentally at the opera in Paris, three officers of the French king’s guard, intoxicated with liquor, came upon the stage, and one of them coming up to him with a very insulting question, he gave him a severe blow on the face; upon which they all drew, and pushed hard upon him. He set his back against one of the scenrs, and made a stout defence, receiving several wounds; till a sturdy Swiss, belonging to the ambassador Montague, caught him up in his arms, and threw him over the stage into the pit. In his fall one of his arms caught upon an iron spike, which tore out the flesh. The three assailants were, by the king’s command, sent to prison, and not released but by his intercession. In 1677 he distinguished himself in the house of commons, by a vigorous opposition to the measures of the court. The year following he assiduously promoted an inquiry into the murder of sir Edmundbury Godfrey, and other particulars of the popish plot; and was one of the committee appointed to draw up articles of impeachment against the treasurer Dan by. In the parliament which met in the spring of 1679, he again represented Derby. This year he was chosen one of the king’s new privy-council: but soon finding that his attendance at the board would be wholly ineffectual, he, in conjunction with lord Russel and others, desired leave to withdraw. The county of Derby again elected him their representative in that parliament which met Oct. 21, 1680. The articles of impeachment against the chief justice Scroggs, for his arbitrary and illegal proceedings in the court of king’s bench, were carried up by him to the house of lords. When the king declared his resolution not to consent to a bill of exclusion, lord Cavendish made a motion, that a bill might be brought in for the association of all his majesty’s protestant subjects. He was also one of those who openly named the evil counsellors, and promoted the address to his majesty to remove them from all offices, and from his majesty’s councils and presence for ever. He shewed the same steadiness and zeal in the next parliament, in which also he represented Derbyshire. When parliaments were kid aside, though he was as obnoxious to the court as any, he was not afraid of meeting and conversing with his noble friends; but he condemned a bold overture which was made at one of those meetings, and declared, with great earnestness, that he would never more go with them. At the lord Russel’s trial, when it was almost as criminal to be a witness for him as to be his accomplice, he dared to appear to vindicate him in the face of the court. He afterwards sent him a message by sir James Forbes, that he would come and change clothes with him in the prison, and stay there to represent him, if he thought he could make his escape, but lord Russei was too generous to accept of this proposal. He prosecuted the immediate murderers of his friend Mr. Thynne to condign punishment, and brought the great abettor of it, count Koningsmark, to his trial, who happened to be acquitted by a jury prepossessed, or rather prepared, in favour of him. Lord Cavendish felt great indignation at the discharge of the count, which he thought owing to corruption; and knowing that an appeal to single combat was anciently the last resort in law for convicting a murderer, he obtained the favour of a noble peer to go in his name to count Koningsmark to charge the guilt of blood upon him, and to offer to prove it in the open field; but this method of trial the count thought fit to decline. In Nov. 1684 he became, by the decease of his father, earl of Devonshire. In the reisrn of James he was the same man in greater honour, and in greater zeal and concern for his country. He had been very much affronted within the verge of the court by colonel Culpepper; but restrained his resentment at the time, and pardoned him upon condition he should never more appear at Whitehall, but when, immediately after the defeat of the duke of Mon mouth, the colonel was encouraged to come publicly to court, and was rising to some degree of favour, the earl of Devonshire meeting him in the king’s presencechamber, and receiving from him, as he thought, an insulting look, took him by the nose, led him out of the room, and gave him some di>dainful blows with the head of his cane. For this bold act he v\as prosecuted in the king’s-bench upon an information, and had an exorbitant fine of 30,000l. imposed upon him; and, though a peer, was committed to the king’s-bench prison till he should make payment of it. He was never able to bear any confinement he could break from; and therefore escaped. only to go home to his scat at Chatsworth. Upon the news of his being there, the sheriff of Derbyshire had a precept to apprehend him, and bring him with his posse to town. But he invited the sheriff in, and kept him a, prisoner of honour, till he had compounded for his own liberty, by giving bond to pay the full sum of 3O,000l. This bond was found among the papers of king James, and given up by king William.

, a very celebrated amateur and patron of the arts, was horn at Paris Oct. 31, 1692. He was the eldest of the two sons of John, count de Caylus, lieutenant-general of the armies of the king of France, and of the marchioness de Villette. His ancestors were particularly distinguished in the twelfth century; and his mother was a descendant of the celebrated D'Aubigne, who was the friend and historian of Henry IV. His parents were particularly attentive to the education of their son. The father instructed him in the profession of arms, and in athletic“exercises, and his mother watched over and fostered the virtues of his mind, a delicate task, which she discharged with singular success. The countess was the niece of madame de Maintenon, and was remarkable for the solidity of her understanding, and the charms of her wit. She was the author of a pleasant miscellany, entitled” Mes Souvenirs," a collection of anecdotes of the court of Louis XIV. which her son used to relate to her to amuse her during her illness. She was ever careful to inspire her son with the love of truth, justice, and generosity, and with the nicest sentiments of honour. The amiable qualities and talents of the mother appeared in the son, but they appeared with a bold and masculine air. In his natural temper he was gay and sprightly, had a taste for pleasure, a strong passion for independence, and an invincible aversion to the servile etiquette and constrained manners of a court.

The count was only twelve years of age when his father died at Brussels, in Nov. 1704. After finishing his exercises, he entered into the corps of the Mousquetaires; and in his first campaign in 1709, he distinguished himself by his valour in such a manner, that Louis XIV. commended him in the presence of all the court; and rewarded his merit with an ensigncy in the gendarmerie. In 1711 he commanded a regiment of dragoons, which was called by his own name; and he signalized himself at the head of it in Catalonia. lu 1713, he was at the siege of Fribourg, where he was exposed to imminent danger in the bloody attack of the covered way. Had he been disposed to enter into the views of his family, the favour of madame de Maintenon, and his own personal merit, could not fail to have raised him to the highest honours; but the peace of Rastade left him in a state of inactivity ill-suited to his natural temper.

His inclination soon led him to travel into Italy, although without perhaps any higher object than to pass some part of his time in variety, but his curiosity became powerfully excited by the wonders of that country, where antiquity produces so many objects to improve taste and excite admiration. The eyes of the count were not yet learned, but they were struck with the sight of so many beauties, and soon became acquainted with them. After a year’s absence, he returned to Paris, with so strong a passion for travelling, and for antiquities, as induced him to quit the army. Italy had enlightened his taste and in that country of the arts he perceived that he was born to cultivate them.

About eight months after, he set out for the Levant. When he arrived at Smyrna, he availed himself of a few days delay, and visited the ruins of Ephesus. It was in vain that the dangers attending a journey of this kind were represented to him. The formidable Caracayali had put himself at the head of a troop of robbers, and spread consternation over all Natolia, but our adventurer was superior to fear, and saved himself by a stratagem. Having procured a mean garb, and taking nothing with him that could attract attention, or tempt any robber, he put himself under the protection of two of Caracayali’s band, who had come from Smyrna. He made an agreement with them, but they were to have no money till they returned; and, as they had an interest in protecting and taking care of him, never were guides more faithful. They introduced him, with his interpreter, to their chief, who received him very graciously, and even assisted him in gratifying his curiosity. The chief informed him, that at no great distance, there were ruins worthy of being visited, and accommodated him with a pair of fine Arabian horses. The count soon found the ruins, which were those of Colophon. He was particularly struck with the remains of a theatre, the seats of which being scooped out of a hill that looks towards the sea, the spectator, beside the pleasure of the representation^, enjoyed a delightful prospect. The next day he examined the site of the ancient Ephesus, which he has described in one of his Memoirs. He passed the streights of the Dardanelles to indulge himself with a view of those plains which make so rich and beautiful an appearance in Homer’s poems. He did not expect to meet with any yestiges of ancient Ilium; but he flattered himself with the hopes of walking on the banks of the Xanthus, and the Simois; these rivers, however, had disappeared. The vallies of Mount Ida, drenched with the blood of so many heroes, were now a dreary waste, scarce affording nourishment to a few puny oaks, whose branches crept upon the ground, and died almost as soon as they appeared.

From the Levant he was recalled in February 1717, by the tenderness of his mother, and from that time he never left France, unless to make two excursions to London. The countess de Caylus died in 1729, aged fifty-six. When the count settled at Paris, he applied himself to music, drawing, and painting. He wrote, too, some works of the lighter kind, but it was chiefly for the amusement of his friends; in these he discovered spirit and ingenuity, but did not aim at correctness or elegance of style. In order to judge of the works of art, he had taste, that instinct, says his eulogist, superior to study, surer than reasoning, and more rapid than reflection. With one glance of his eye, he %vas able to discover the defects and the beauties of every piece. The academy of painting and sculpture admitted him as an honorary member in 1731, and the count, who loved to realize titles, spared neither his labour, his credit, nor his fortune, to instruct, assist, and animate the artists. He wrote the lives of the most celebrated painters ^ind engravers that have done honour to this illustrious academy; and in order to extend the limits of the art, which seemed to him to move in too narrow a circle, he collected in three different works, new subjects for the painter, which he had met with in the works of the ancients. One of these, entitled “Tableaux tire’s de L‘lliade, et de L’Odysse d'Homere,” published in 1757, is mentioned by Dr. Warton in his “Essay on Pop,” in terms of praise. In this he has exhibited the whole series of events contained in these poems, arranged in their proper order has designed each piece, and disposed each figure with much taste and judgment. He seems justly to wonder, that artists have so seldom had recourse to this great store-house of beautiful and noble images, so proper for the employment of their pencils, and delivered with so much force and distinctness, that the painter has nothing to do but to substitute his colours for the words of Homer. He complains that a haphael, and a Julio Romano, should copy thr crude and unnatural conceptions of Ovid’s Metamorpnoses, and Apuleius’s Ass; and that some of their sacred subjects were ill-chosen. Among the lew who borrowed their subjects from Homer, he mentions Bouchardon with the honour he deserves, and relates the anecdote which we have already given in the life of that sculptor.

The zeal of writers, who propose to instruct mankind, is not always disinterested; they pay themselves for their instructions by the reputation which they expect to derive from them. Count Caylus did not despise this noble recompense, but he loved the arts on their own account, as plainly appeared from the many private instances of his generosity to those who were possessed of talents, but were not the favourites of fortune; he even searched for such in those retreats where indigence kept them in obscurity. He anticipated their wants, for he had few himself; the whole of his luxury consisted in his liberality. Though his income was much inferior to his rank, he was rich for the artists; and when towards the close of his life, his fortune was increased by that of his uncle, the duke de Caylus, he added nothing to his expense, had no new wants, but employed the whole of his fortune for the benefit of literature and the arts. Besides the presents which he made from time to time to the academy of painting and sculpture, he founded an annual prize in it for such of the pupils as should succeed best in drawing, or modelling a head after nature, and in giving the truest expression of the characteristical features of a given passion. He encouraged the study of anatomy and perspective by generous rewards; and if he had lived longer, he would have 'executed the design which he had formed, of founding a new prize in. favour of those who should apply themselves with most success to these two essential branches of. the art.

Count de Caylus was engaged at the same time in another enterprize, still more honourable for the Roman grandeur, and more interesting to the French nation. In, the last age, Des Godetz, under the auspices of Colbert, published the Antiquities of Rome. The work was admired by all Europe, and gave birth to that indefatigable emulation which carried able and ingenious travellers to Spalatra, Balbec, and even to the burning sands of Palmyra, in order to visit the famous ruins of so many magnificent buildings, and to present them to our view. It is this that has made us spectators of the monuments of Athens, that mother of learning, of arts, and sciences; where, in spite of the injuries of time and barbarism, so many illustrious sculptors and architects still live in the ruins of their edifices, in like manner as so many incomparable authors still breathe in the valuable fragments of their writings. The same Colbert had framed the design of engraving the Roman antiquities that are still to be seen in the southern provinces c c France. By his orders, Mignard, the architect, had made drawings of them, which count de Caylus had the good fortune to recover. He resolved to finish the work projected by Colbert, and to dedicate it to that great minister; and so much had he this glorious enterprize at heart, that he was employed in it during his last illness, and recommended it warmly to M. Mariette, by whom it was in part executed.

The confidence which all Europe placed in the knowledge and taste of count de Caylus, has contributed to decorate and embellish it. The powers of the north more than once consulted him, and referred the choice of artists to him for the execution of great undertakings. It is to his protection that Bouchardon, the sculptor, so highly admired in France, was indebted for the noblest opportunities of displaying his talents; and to him Paris was indebted for those master-pieces of art which were once two of its noblest ornaments, the equestrian statue of Louis XV. and the fountain in the Rue de Crenelle.

But nothing seemed more flattering to him than his discovery of encaustic painting. A description of Pliny’s, but too concise to give him a clear view of the matter, suggested the idea of it; and he availed himself of the friendship and skili of M. Majault, a physician in Paris, and an excellent chemist; and by repeated experiments, found out the secret of incorporating wax with differents tints and colours, of making it obedient to the pencil, and thus rendering paintings immortal. M. Muntz afterwards made many experiments to bring this art to perfection, and published in English a work entitled " Encaustic, or Count Caylus’s method of painting in the manner of the ancients. To which is added, a sure and easy method of fixing of Crayons, London, 1760, 8vo. The experience and practice of artists since have, however, proved that the discovery of the encaustic is more curious than useful where wax is employed.

Still, in the hands of count Caylus, literature and the arts lent each other a mutual aid, and in the course of his studies he contributed above forty dissertations to the Memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres. Never was there an academician more zealous for the honour of the society to which he belonged. He was particularly attentive to the artists; and to prevent their falling into mistakes from an ignorance of costume, which the ablest of them have sometimes done, he founded a prize of jive hundred livres, the object of which is to explain, by means of authors and monuments, the usages of ancient nations; with this view it was that he collected, at a very great expence, antiquities of every kind. Nothing that was ancient seemed indifferent to him. Gods and reptiles, the richest metals, the most beautiful marble monuments, pieces of glass, fragments of earthen vases, in a word, every thing found a place in his cabinet. The entry to his house had the air and appearance of ancient Egypt: the first object that presented itself was a fine Egyptian statue, of five feet five inches; the stair-case was adorned with medallions and curiosities from China and America. In his apartment for antiques, he was seen surrounded with gods, priests, Egyptian magistrates, Etruscans, Greeks and Romans, with some Gaulic figures that seemed ashamed to shew themselves. When he wanted room he sent his whole colony to the royal depositary for antiques, and in a very little time his apartment illed with new inhabitants, who Hocked to him from different nations. This happened twice during his life; and the third collection, in the midst of which he ended his days, was, by his orders, carried, after his death, to the same depository. In order that the world might partake of these treasures with him, he caused them to be engraved, with learned descriptions, in his valuable work “Recueil d‘Antiquites d’Egyptiennes, Etrusques, &c.” 7 vols. 4to, embellished with eight hundred plates.

His curiosity, though excessive, he was always careful to proportion to his income. He had too much pride to be burthensome to his friends. His name, which was known in every country where letters are respected, procured him a great number of correspondents. All the antiquaries, those who thought themselves such, and those who were desirous of being thought such, were ambitious of corresponding with him. They flattered themselves they were entitled to the character of learned men when they could show a letter from count Calus; “c'etoit pour eux,” says the author of his eloge, “un brevet d'antiquaire.” His literary talents were embellished with an inexhaustible fund of natural goodness, an inviolable zeal for the honour of his prince and the welfare of his country, an unaffected and genuine politeness, rigorous probity, a generous disdain of flatterers, the warmest compassion for the wretched and the indigent, the greatest simplicity of character, and the utmost sensibility of friendship.

The strength of his constitution seemed to give him hopes of a long life: but in the month of July, 1764, a humour settled in one of his legs, which entirely destroyed his health. Whilst he was obliged to keep his bed he seemed less affected by what he suffered, than with the restraint upon his natural activity. When the wound was closed he resumed his usual occupations with great eagerness, visited his friends, and animated the labours of the artists, while he himself was dying. Carried in the arms of his domestics, he seemed to leave a portion of his life in every place he went to. He expired Sept. 5, 1765. By his death his family became extinct, and literary France lost one of her greatest benefactors. He was interred in the chapel of St. Germain L'Auxerrois, where his tomb was that of an antiquary. It was a sepulchral antique, of the most beautiful porphyry, with ornaments in the Egyptian taste. From the moment that he had procured it he had destined it to grace the place of his interment. While he awaited the fatal hour, he placed it in his garden, where he used to look upon it with a tranquil, but thoughtful eye, and pointed it out to the inspection of his friends. He has even given a description of it in the 7th volume of his Antiquities, which was published after his death by Le Beau, to whom we owe this interesting account of him. Count Caylus’s character is to be traced in the different occupations which divided his cares and his life. In society he had all the frankness of a soldier, and a politeness which had nothing in it of deceit or circumvention. Born independent, he applied to studies which suited his taste. His disposition was yet better than his abilities; the former made him beloved, the latter entitled him to respect. Many anecdotes are related of his charity and humanity, and particularly of his generous patronage of rising merit; but this article has already extended to its full proportion, and we must refer to our authorities for more minute particulars.

The works of count Caylus, besides those already mentioned are, 1. “Nouveaux Sujetsde Peintureetde Sculpture,” 1755, 12mo. 2. “Mcmoires sur la peinture a Pencaustique,” 1755, 8vo. 3. “Description d‘un tableau representant le Sacrifice d’Jpbigenie,” 1757, 12mo. 4. “Histoire d'Hercule le Thebain,” taken from different authors, 1758, 8vo. 5. “Discours sur les Peintures Antiques.” 6. “The Lives of Mignard, Le Moine, and Bouchardon.” He wrote also some “Romances” and “Tales” during his hours of relaxation, which were in general well received, and have more spirit and humour than we should expect from a professed, and we may add, an incessant antiquary.

In 1606, Cervantes returned from Valladolid to Madrid, where he passed the last ten years of his life. In 1610, his second patron, don Pedro Fernandez de Castro, count of Lemos, was named viceroy of Naples, and from thence continued to him his protection and liberality: and the cardinal don Bernardo de Sandoval y Rojas, archbishop of Toledo, after the example of his cousin the count of Lemos, assigned him a pension, that he might bear with less inconvenience the troubles of old age. Although Madrid was now Cerva:es’s home, he passed certain seasons in Esquivias, either to take care of some effects of his wife, or to avoid the noise of the court, and to enjoy the quiet of the village, which afforded him opportunity to write more at his ease. Availing himself of this convenience, he hastened, as he was advanced in years, to publish the greater part of his works. He printed his “Novels” in 1613; his “Journey tq Parnassus” in 16 14-; his “Comedies and Interludes” in 1615; and in the same year the second part of his “Don Quixote.” He finished also his “Persilas and Sigismunda,” which was not published till after his death. In the mean time an incurable dropsy seized him, and gave him notice of his approaching dissolution, which he saw with Christian constancy and with a cheerful countenance. He has minutely described this in the prologue to his posthumous work. One of his late biographers says, that good-nature and candour, charity, humanity, and compassion for the infirmities of man in his abject state, and consequently an abhorrence of cruelty, persecution, and violence, the principal moral he seems to inculcate in his great work, were the glorious virtues and predominant good qualities of his soul, and must transmit his name to the latest ages with every eulogium due to so exalted a character. At length, on the same nominal day with his equally great and amiable contemporary Shakspeare, on the 23d of April, 16 16, died Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, in the sixty-ninth year of his age, and was buried in the church of the Trinitarian nuns in Madrid.

The last act of Cervantes’ s life was to write a dedication of his novel of “Persilas and Sigismunda” to his patron, the count of Lemos. As this appeared in the last edition of this Dictionary, and illustrates in some respect the character of the writer, we shall conclude this sketch with it.

was descended from an ancient family, and born at Odington in Gloucestershire, 1616. He was educated at Gloucester; became a commoner of St. Edmund-hall in Oxford in 1634; took both his degrees in arts; and was afterwards appointed rhetoric reader. During the civil war in England, he made the tour of Europe. In 1658 he married the only daughter of Richard Clifford, esq. by whom he had nine children. In 1668 he was chosen F. R. S. and in 1669 attended Charles earl of Carlisle, sent to Stockholm with the order of the garter to the king of Sweden, as his secretary. In 1670 the degree of LL. D. was conferred on him at Cambridge, and two years after he was incorporated in the same at Oxford. He was appointed to be tutor to Henry duke of Grafton, one of the natural sons of Charles II. about 1679; and was afterwards appointed to instruct prince George of Denmark in the English tongue. He died at Chelsea in 1703, and was buried in a vault in the church-yard of that parish; where a monument was soon after erected to his memory, by Walter Harris, M. D. with a Latin inscription, which informs us, among other things, that Dr. Chamberlayne was so desirous of doing service to all, and even to posterity, that he ordered some of the books he had written to be covered with wax, and buried with him; which have been since destroyed by the damp. The six books vanity or dotage thus consigned to the grave, are, 1. “The present war paralleled; or a brief relation of the five years’ civil wars of Henry III. king of England, with the event and issue of that unnatural war, and by what course the kingdom was then settled again; extracted out of the most authentic historians and records,” 1647. It was reprinted in 1660, under this title, “The late war paralleled, or a brief relation,” &c. 2. “England’s wants; or several proposals probably beneficial for England, offered to the consideration of both houses of parliament,” 1667. 3. “The Converted Presbyterian; or the church of England justified in some practices,” &c. 1668. 4. “Anglix Notitia or the Present State of England with divers reflections upon the ancient state thereof,” 1668. The second part was published in 1671, &c. This work has gone through many editions; the first twenty of wkich were published by Dr. Edward Chamberlain, and the rest by his son. 5. “An academy or college, wherein young ladies or gentlewomen may, at a very moderate expence, be educated in the true protestant religion, and in all virtuous qualities that may adorn that sex, &c.” 1671. 6. “A Dialogue between an Englishman and a Dutchman, concerning the last Dutch war,‘ ’ 1672. He translated out of Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese, into English, 1.” The rise and fall of count Olivarez the favourite of Spain.“2.” The unparalleled imposture of Mich, de Molina, executed at Madrid,“1641. 3.” The right and title of the present king of Portugal, don John the IVth." These three translations were printed at London, 1653.

The abbe set out for the place of his destination in the month of November 1760. After encountering a variety of almost incredible difficulties, he arrived at Tobolsk, where ignorance and superstition prepared new danger for him. The simple Russians, attentive to all his actions, beheld his preparations with the utmost terror; the observatory which he caused to be erected, and the instruments he transported thither, increased their alarm; and the overflowing of the river Irtish, which inundated part of the city, a natural consequence of the thaw that took place, served still more to confirm them in their suspicions. The governor of Tobolsk, a man of education, to whom the world is indebted for a correct chart of the Caspian, was obliged to give the abb a guard for his protection. The moment so long wished for, and purchased by such fatigue and peril, being at length arrived, the abbe", on the 5th of June, made every necessary preparation for observing the transit; but the pleasure which he anticipated from the success of his expedition was not free from a mixture of pain, for the sky, during the night, became quite overcast. This was a new source of uneasiness to the abbe; but luckily for science, a favourable wind, which sprung up at sun-rise, revived his hopes, by withdrawing the veil that obscured the object of his researches. The observation was made with the necessary precision, in presence of M. Ismailof, count Poushkin, and the archbishop of Tobolsk: and the academy of sciences at Paris, as well as that of Petersburg, received the particulars of this event soon after by a courier whom M. Ismailof immediately dispatched. The glory of this observation had preceded the abbé, and prepared new honours for him at St. Petersburg. The empress, with a view of inducing him to settle there, made him an offer, by means of baron de Breteuil, of the distinguished place which had been occupied by M. Delisle. But choosing rather to pass his days at home, he rejected the offers made him. On his arrival in France hebegan, to prepare an account of his journey, which was published in 1768, in 3 vols. 4to, elegantly printed and adorned with engravings. Besides the account of the particular object of his journey, the philosopher finds in it the history of mankind and of nature; and the statesman the political system and interest of nations. The great labour required to prepare this work for publication did not interrupt the abba’s astronomical pursuits. He enriched the memoirs of the academy with several instructive pieces; and that which he presented in 1767 is the more valuable, as it confirms the experiments made upon electricity at Tobolsk, and demonstrates the identity of the electric fluid with lightning.

The evening before his departure from Paris, being at supper with count de Merci, the Imperial ambassador, several of his friends represented to him, that he ought not to undertake such a voyage, and offered to lay a considerable wager that he would never return. “Were I certain,” replied the abbé“,” that I should die the next morning after I had made my observation, I would not hesitate a moment, nor be in the least deterred from embarking." An heroic sentiment, which paints in a few words the character of this learned man.

, was born at Paris in 1541. Though his parents were in narrow circumstances, yet discovering their son’s capacity, they were particularly attentive to his education. After making a considerable proficiency in grammar-learning, he applied to logic, metaphysics, moral and natural philosophy, and afterwards studied civil and common law at the universities of Orleans and Bourges, and commenced doctor in that faculty. Upon his return to Paris, he was admitted an advocate in the court of parliament. He always declared the bar to be the best and most improving school in the world; and accordingly attended at all the public hearings for five or six years: but foreseeing that preferment in this way, if ever attained at all, was like to come very slow, as he had neither private interest, nor relations among the solicitors and proctors of the court, he gave over that employment, and closely applied to the study of divinity. By his superior pulpit eloquence, he soon came into high reputation with the greatest and most learned men of his time, insomuch that the bishops seemed to strive which of them should get him into his diocese; making him an offer of being theological canon or divinity lecturer in their churches, and of other dignities and benefices, besides giving him noble presents. He was successively theologal of Bazas, Aqcs, Lethoure, Agen, Cahors, and Condom, canon and schoolmaster in the church of Bourdeaux, and chanter in the church of Condom. Queen Margaret, duchess of Bulois, entertained him for her preacher in ordinary; and the king, though at that time a protestant, frequently did him the honour to be one of his audience. He was also retained by the cardinal d'Armagnac, the pope’s legate at Avignon, who had a great value for him; yet amidst all these promotions, he never took any degree or title in divinity, but satisfied himself with deserving and being capable of the highest. After about eighteen years absence from Paris, he resolved to end his days there; and being a lover of retirement, vowed to become a Carthusian. On his arrival at Paris, he communicated his intention to the prior of the order, but was rejected, notwithstanding his most pressing entreaties. They told him that he could not be received on account of his age, then about forty-eight, and that the order required all the vigour of youth to support its austerities. He next addressed himself to the Celestines at Paris, but with the same success, and for the same reasons: in this embarrassment, he was assured by three learned casuists, that as he was no ways accessary to the non -performance of his vow, it was no longer binding; and that he might, with a very safe conscience, continue in the world as a secular. He preached, however, a course of Lent sermons at Angers in 1589. Going afterwards to Bourdeaux, he contracted a very intimate friendship with Michael de Montagne, author of the well known Essays, from whom he received all possible testimonies of regard; for, among other things, Montagne ordered by his last will, that in case he should leave no issue-male of his own, M. Charron should, after his decease, be entitled to bear the coat of arms plain, as they belonged to his noble family, and Charron, in return, made Montagne’s brotherin-law his residuary legatee. He staid at Bourdeaux from 1589 to 1593; and in that interval composed his book, entitled, “Les Trois Verge’s,” which he published in 1594. These three truths are the following 1. That there is a God and a true religion 2. That of all religions the Christian is the only true one 3. That of all the Christian communions the Roman catholic is the only true church. This work procured him the acquaintance of M. de Sulpice, Bishop and count of Cahors, who sent for him and offered him the places of his vicar-general and canon theological in his church, which he accepted. He was deputed to the general assembly of the clergy in 1595, and was chosen first secretary to the assembly. In 1599 he returned to Cahors; and in that and the following year composed eight discourses upon the sacrament of the Lord’s supper; and. others upon the knowledge and providence of God, the redemption of the world, the communion of saints, and likewise his “books of Wisdom.” Whilst he was thus employed, the bishop of Condom, to draw him into his diocese, presented him with the chaptership in his church; and the theologal chair falling vacant about the same time, made him an offer of that too, which -Charron accepted, and resolved to settle there. In 1601 he printed at Bourdeaux his books “of Wisdom,” which gave him a great reputation, and made his character generally known. October 1603, he made a journey to Paris, to thank the Bishop of Boulogne; who, in order to have him near himself, had oifered him the place of theologal canon. This he was disposed to accept of; but the moisture and coldness of the air at Boulogne, and its nearness to the sea, not only made it, he said to a friend, a melancholy and unpleasant place, but very unwholesome too; adding, that the sun was his visible god, as God was his invisible sun. At Paris he began a new edition of his books “of Wisdom,” of which he lived to see but three or four sheets printed, dying Nov. 16, 1603, of an apoplexy. The impression of the new edition of his book “of Wisdom,” with alterations by the author, occasioned by the offence taken at some passages in the former, was completed in 1604, by the care of a friend; but as the Bourdeaux edition contained some things that were either suppressed or softened in the subsequent one, it was much sought after by the curious. Hence the booksellers of several cities reprinted the book after that edition; and this induced a Paris bookseller to print an edition, to which he subjoined all the passages of the first edition which had been struck out or corrected, and all those which the president Jeannin, who was employed by the chancellor to examine the book, judged necessary to be changed. This edition appeared in 1707. There have been two translations of it into English, the last by George Stanhope, D. D. printed in 1697. Dr. Stanhope says, that M. Charron “was a person that feared God, led a pious and good life, was charitably disposed, a person of wisdom and conduct, serious and considerate; a great philosopher, an eloquent orator, a famous and powerful preacher, richly furnished and adorned with the most excellent virtues and graces both moral and divine; such as made him very remarkable and singular, and deservedly gave him the character of a good man and a good Christian; such as preserve a great honour and esteem for his memory among persons of worth and virtue, and will continue to do so as long as the world shall last.” From this high praise considerable deductions may surely be made. Charron’s fame has scarcely outlived his century; his book on “Wisdom” certainly abounds in ingenious and original observations on moral topics, but gives a gloomy picture of human nature and society. Neither is it free from sentiments very hostile to revealed religion, but so artfully disguised as to impose on so orthodox a divine as dean Stanhope.

, grandson of the preceding Chemnitz, the reformer, was bora at Stettin May 9, 1605, and after completing his education, served in the army, first in Holland, and afterwards in Sweden, where his merit raised him from the rank of captain to that of counsellor of state, and historiographer of Sweden. Queen Christina also granted him letters of nobility, with the estate of Holstaedt in that country, where he died in 1678. He wrote, in six books, an account of the war carried on by the Swedes in Germany, which was published in 2 vols. folio, the first at Stettin in 1648, and the second at Holme in 1653; the whole in the German language: the second volume is most highly esteemed, owing to the assistance the author received from count Oxenstiern. The abbe Lenglet mentions a Latin edition, at least of the first volume, entitled “Beilum Germanicum ab ejus ortu anno 1612, ad mortem Gustavi Adolphi anno 1632.” Chemnitz is also said to be the author of “De ratione Status Imperii Romano- Germanici,” which was published at Stettin in 1640, under the assumed name of Hyppolitus a Lapide. Its object is to impugn the claims of the house of Austria, and it was answered by an anonymous writer, Franefort, 1657, by Bruggeman, at Jena, 1667, and by Henry Boeder, at Strasbtirgh, in 1674. It was afterwards translated into French by Bourgeois de Chastelet, under the title of “Des Interets des princes d'Allemagne,” Friestad, 1712, 2 vols. 12mo, and by Samuel Formey, as late as 1762, under the title of “Les vrais interets de l'Allemagne,” Hague, with notes and applications to the then state of German politics.

, countess de la Suze, a French poetess, whose works have been printed with those of Pellison and others in 1695, and 1725 in 2 volumes 12mo, was the daughter of Gaspar de Coligni, the third of that name, marshal of France, and colonel-general of infantry. She was very early married, in 1643, when she could not be more than seventeen, to Thomas Hamilton, earl of Haddington, according to Moreri, but we find no mention of this in the Scotch peerage. After his death she espoused the count de la Suze, of an illustrious house in Champaigne. But this second match proved unfortunate, owing to the furious jealousy of the count her husband, whose severities towards her made her abjure protestantism, and profess the catholic faith, which occasioned queen Christina of Sweden to say, “that she had changed her religion, that she might not see her husband, neither in this world nor the next.” Their antipathy became so great that the countess at last disannulled the marriage; and to induce the count to accede to it, she offered 25,000 crowns, which he accepted. She then gave herself up to the study of poetry, and became much admired by the geniuses of her time, who made her the subject of their eulogiums. Her fort lay in the elegiac strain, and those works of hers which have come down to us have at least a delicate turn of sentiment. Her other poems are songs, madrigals, and odes. The wits of her time gave her the majesty of Juno with Minerva’s wit and Venus’s beauty in some verses, attributed to Bouhours: but her character in other respects appears not to have been of the most correct kind. She died at Paris, March 10, 1673.

It was perhaps lord Shaftesbury’s misfortune, that those who were angry with him, have transmitted to posterity the history of the times in which he lived, and of that government in which he had so large a share. Marchmont Needham published a severe pamphlet against him, entitled “A packet of advices and animadversions, sent from London to the men of Shaftesbury, which is of use for all his majesty’s subjects in the three kingdoms,” Lond. 1676; and much of it is transferred verbatim into the account given of him by the Oxford historian. He was also represented as having had the vanity to expect to be chosen king of Poland; and this made way for calling him count Tapsky, alluding to the tap, which had been applied upon the breaking out of the ulcer between his ribs, when he was chancellor. It was also a standing jest with the lower form of wits, to style him Shiftsbury instead of Shaftesbury, The author who relates this, tells us also, that when he was chancellor, one sir Paul Neal watered his mares with rhenish and sugar: that is, entertained his mistresses. In his female connections he was very licentious; and it is recorded, that Charles II. who would both take liberties and bear them, once said to the earl at court, in a vein of raillery and good humour, and in reference only to his amours, “I believe, Shaftesbury, thou art the wickedest fellow in my dominions:” to which, with a low bow and very grave face, the earl replied, “May it please your majesty, of a subject I believe I am;” at which the merry monarch laughed heartily.

, a learned Italian Jesuit, was born in Alexandria de la Paglia in 17u4. He was the second son of the count of Calamandrana, descended from an ancient and noble family, originally from Nice. He was educated in the Jesuits’ college at Rome, and in 1718 entered the society, where his progress in learning was so rapid that in the twentieth year of his age he was employed as a teacher in the college of Viterbo, and then gradually preferred to those of Fermo and Ancona, and lastly to that of Rome. Although regularly instituted in universal literature, he evinced a peculiar predilection for oratory, poetry, and history. At the age of twenty-three he firs appeared before the public in an elegant discourse on the political and literary merit of the founder of the Roman college, pope Gregory XIII. which was soon followed by an equally elegant Latin satire, “In fatuos numerorum divinatores, vulgo Caballistas.” This procured him admission into the academy of the Arcadia, by the name of Panemo Cisseo, under which he afterwards published several of his poetical works.

The other works of.sir Robert Cotton, not already mentioned, are, 1. “A relation of the proceedings against Ambassadors, who have miscarried themselves, and exceeded their commission.” “2. That the sovereign’s person is required in the great councils or~ assemblies of the states, as well at the consultations as at the conclusions.” 3. “The argument made by the command of the house of commons, out of the acts of parliament and authority of law expounding the same, at a conference of the lords, concerning the liberty of the person of every freeman.” 4. “A brief discourse concerning the power of the peers and commons of parliament in point of judicature.” These lour are printed in “Cottoni Posthuma.” 5. “A short view of the long life and reign of Henry III. king of England,” written in 1614, and presented to king James I. printed in 1627, 4to, and reprinted in “Cottoni Posthuma.” 6. “Money raised by the king without parliament, from the conquest until this day, either by imposition or free gift, taken out of records or ancient registers,” printed in the “Royal treasury of England, or general history of taxes, by captain J. Stevens,” 8vo. 7. “A narrative of count Gondomar’s transactions during his embassy in England,” London, 1659, 4to. 8. “Of antiquity, etymology, and privileges of castles.” 9. “Of towns.” 10. “Of the measures of Land.” 11. “Of the antiquity of Coats of Arms.” All printed in Hearne’s Discourses, p. 166, 174, 178, 182. He wrote books upon several other subjects, that remain still in ms. namely, Of scutage; of enclosures, and converting arable land into pasture; of the antiquity, authority, and office of the high steward and marshal of England; of curious collections; of military affairs; of trade; collections out of the rolls of parliament, different from those that were printed under his name, in 1657, by William Pry nne, esq. He likewise made collections for the history and antiquities of Huntingdonshire; and had formed a design of writing an account of the state of Christianity in these islands, from the first reception of it here to the reformation. The first part of this design was executed by abp. Usher, in his book “De Britannic-arum ecclesiarum primordiis,” composed probably at the request of sir Robert Cotton, who left eight volumes of collections for the continuation of that work. Two of sir Robert’s speeches are printed in the Parliamentary History. A “Treatise of the Court of Chancery,” in ms. by sir Robert Cotton, is often cited in disputes concerning the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery, and the authority of the Master of the Rolls, as a ms. in lord Sorners’s library. A copy of it, however, is in Mr. Hargrave’s Collection of Law Mss. The “Cottoni Posthuma,” so often mentioned above, was published by James Howell, fol. 1651, 1672, and 1679. The first of these editions contains a life of Henry III. omitted in the subsequent editions. Mr. Petyt, however, terms this a fictitious work (Petyt’s ms. vol. II. p. 281.), yet it contains several valuable and curious particulars.

, son of the preceding, was born at Paris February 12, 1707, and died there April 12, 1777, at the age of 70. It is said that his father being one day asked, in a large company, which of his works he thought the best? “I don't know,” answered he, “which is my best production; but this (pointing to his son, who was present) is certainly my worst.” “It is,” replied the son, with vivacity, “because no Carthusian had a hand in it:” alluding to the report, that the best passages in his father’s tragedies had been written by a Carthusian friar, who was his friend. His father had gained his fame as a manly and nervous writer; the son was remarkable for the ease, elegance, and caustic malignity of his conversation and writings, and might be surnamed the Petronius of France, as his father had been characterised by that of the Æschylus. The abbe Boudot, who lived on familiar terms with him, said to him one day in reply to some of his jokes: “Hold thy tongue! Thy father was a great man; but as for thee, thou art only a great boy.” “Crebiilon the father,” says M. d'Alembert, “paints in the blackest colours the crimes and wickedness of man. The son draws, with a delicate and just pencil, the refinements, the shades, and even the graces of our vices; that seducing levity which renders the French what is called amiable, but which does not signify worthy of being beloved; that restless activity, which makes them feel ennui even in the midst of pleasure; that perversity of principles, disguised, and as it were softened, by the mask of received forms; in short, our manners, at once frivolous and corrupt, wherein the excess of depravity combines with the excess of ridiculousness.” This parallel is more just than the opinion of L'Advocat, who says that the romances of Crebiilon are extremely interesting, because all the sentiments are drawn from a sensible heart, but it is plain that this “sensible heart” is full of affectation, and that the author describes more than he feels. However this may be, Crebiilon never had any other post than that of censor-royal. He is said to have lived with his father as with a friend and a brother; and his marriage with an English woman, whom Crebiilon the father did not approve, only produced a transient misunderstanding. The principal works of the son are: 1. Letters from the marchioness to the count of ***, 1732, 2 vols. 12rno. 2. Tanzai and Neadarne“, 1734, 2 vols. 12mo. This romance, abounding in satirical allusions and often unintelligible, and which caused the author to be put into the bastille, was more applauded than it deserved. 3.” Les egarements du coeur & de Tesprit,“1736, three parts, 12mo. 4.” The Sopha,“a moral tale, 1745, 1749, 2 vols. 12mo, grossly immoral, as most of his works are. For this he Was banished from Paris for some time. 5.” Lettres Atheniennes,“177I,4vols. 12mo. 6.” Ah! que?i conte“1764, 8 parts, 12mo. 7.” Les Heureux Orphelins,“1754, 2 vols. 12mo. 8.” La Nuit & le Moment,“1755, 12mo. 9.” Le hasard du coin du feu,“1763, 12mo. 10.” Lettres de la duchesse de ***,' &c. 1768, 2 vols. 12mo. 11. “Lettres de la marquise de Pompadour,” 12mo, an epistolary romance, written in an easy and bold style; but relates few particulars of the lady whose name it bears. The whole of his works have been collected in 7 vols. 12mo, 1779.

In 1673, the year after her father died, she went to Paris, and was then engaged in an edition of Callimachus, which she published in 1674, in 4to. Some sheets of that work having been shewn to Huetius, preceptor to the dauphin, and other learned men at court, a proposal was made to her of preparing some Latin authors for the use of the dauphin; which, though she rejected at first, she at last Undertook, and published an edition of Florus in 1674, in 4to. Her reputation being now spread over all Europe, Christina of Sweden ordered count Coningsmark to make her a compliment in her name; upon which mademoiselle le Fevre sent the queen a Latin letter with her edition of Florus. Her majesty wrote her an obliging answer; and not long after wrote her another letter, to persuade her to quit the protestant religion, and made her considerable offers to settle her at court. This, however, she declined, and proceeded in the task she had undertaken, of publishing authors for the use of the dauphin, the next of which was “Sextus Aurelius Victor,” Paris, 1681, 4to; in which same year also she published a French translation of the poems of Anacreon and Sappho with notes, which met with great applause; so great, as to make Boileau declare, that it ought to deter any person from attempting to translate those poems into verse. She published, for the use of the dauphin, Eutropius, Paris, 1683, 4to, which was afterwards printed at Oxford, 1696, 8vo; and Dictys Cretensis & Dares Phrygius, Paris, 1684, 4to, which was afterwards printed, cum notis variorum, at Asnst. 1702, 8vo. She had also published French translations of the Amphitryo, Epidicus, and Iludens, comedies of Plautus, Paris, 1683, 3 vols. 12mo, and of the Plutus and Clouds of Aristophanes, 1684, 12mo, with notes, and an examen of all these plays according to the rules of the theatre. She was so charmed with the Clouds of Aristophanes, it seems, that, as we learn from herself, she had read it over 200 times with pleasure.

, count, and professor of law at Padua, was born at Ancona in 1696, and arrived at high reputation as a lawyer. Among his works are, 1. “De Forensi scribendi ratione.” 2. “De servitutibus praediorum interpretationes per epistolas,” &c. He died in November 1747, at the age of fifty-two, lamented on account of his learning and virtues.

Dante’s first prospect of better fortune opened in 1308, when Henry, count of Luxemburgh was raised to the empire. In hopes of being restored to his native country, he attached himself to the interests of the new emperor, in whose service he is supposed to have written his Latin work “De Monarchia,” in which he asserts the rights of the empire against the encroachments of the papacy. In 131 J, he instigated the emperor to lay siege to Florence, in which enterprize, says one of his biographers, he did not chuse to appear in person, from motives of respect to his native country. But the emperor was repulsed by the Florentines; and his death, which happened next year, deprived Dante of all hopes of re-establishment in his native country. After this disappointment he is supposed to have spent several years in roving about Italy, in a state of poverty and dependance; till he found an honourable establishment at Ravenna, by the friendship of Guido NoVelio de Polenta, lord of that place, who received tbl? illustrious exile with the most endearing liberality, continued to protect him during the few remaining years of his life, and extended his munificence even to the ashes of the poet.

, a brave warrior in the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, and created earl of Dariby by king Charles I. was the second son of sir John Danvers, knight, by Elizabeth his wife, daughter and coheir to John Nevil the last lord Latimer. He was born at Dantesey in Wiltshire, on the 28th of June, 1573. After an education suitable to his birth, he went and served in the Low Country wars, under Maurice count of Nassau, afterwards prince of Orange; and was engaged in many military actions of those times, both by sea and land. He was made a captain in the wars of France, occasioned in that kingdom by the League; and there knighted for his good service under Henry IV. king of France. He was next employed in Ireland, as lieutenantgeneral of the horse, and serjeant-major of the whole army, under Robert earl of Essex, and Charles Baron of Montjoy, in the reign of queen Elizabeth. Upon the accession of king James I. he was, on account of his family’s deserts and sufferings, advanced, July 21, 1603, to the dignity of a peer of this realm, by the title of Baron of Dantesey: and in J 605, by a special act of parliament, restored in blood as heir to his father, notwithstanding the attainder of his elder brother, sir Charles Danvers, knight. He was also appointed lord president of Munster in Ireland; and in 1620 made governor of the Isle of Guernsey for life. By king Charles I. he was created earl of Danby, February 5, 1625-6; and made of his privy council; and knight of the order of the garter. Being himself a man of learning, as well as a great encourager of it, and observing that opportunities were wanting in the university of Oxford for the useful study of botany, he purchased for the sum of two hundred and fifty pounds, five acres of ground, opposite Magdalen college, which had formerly served for a burying-place to the Jews (residing in great numbers at Oxford, till they were expelled England by king Edward I. in 1290), and conveyed his right and title to that piece of land to the university, on the 27th of March, 1622. The ground being first considerably raised, to prevent its being overflowed by the river Cherwell, the heads of the university laid the first stones of the walls, on the 25th of July following. They were finished in 1633, being fourteen feet high: and cost the noble benefactor about five thousand pounds. The entrance into the garden is on the north side under a stately gate, the charge of building which amounted to between rive and fix hundred pounds. Upon the front of that gateway, is this Latin inscription: Gloriie Dji Opt. Max. Honori Caroli Regis, in usum Acad. et Keipub. Henricus Comes Danby, D.D. MDCXXXII. For the maintenance of it, and of a gardener, the noble founder left, by will, the impropriate rectory of Kirkdale in Yorkshire: which was afterwards settled for the same purpose, by his brother and heir sir John Danvers, knt. The earl of Danby’s will bore date the 14th of December, 1640.

Darcy, though estranged from it by circumstances, loved and respected his old country: the friend and protector of every Irishman who came to Paris, he could not help feeling a secret pride, even in the successes of that enemy, against whom he was so often and so honourably to himself employed. Of his personal history, it yet remains to be added, that in the seven years’ war he served in the regiment of Fitz-James; and in 1770 was appointed mareschal de-camp, and the same year the academy of sciences admitted him to the rank of pensionary. In 1777 he married a niece who was brought up under his care at Paris, and then took the name of Count Darcy. He died two years after this marriage, Oct. 18, 1779. Condorcet wrote his cloge, published in the History of the Academy, and seems throughout anxious to do justice to his talents and character, a circumstance, which, we are told, was very highly honourable to Condorcet, as he had been most unjustly the continual object of Darcy’s aversion and hatred. Darcy’s essays, printed in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences, are various and very ingenious, and are contained in the volumes for the years 1742, 1747, 1749, 1750, 1751, 17-52, 1753, 1754, 1758, 1759, 1760, 1765, and in tom. I. of the “Savans Etrangers.”

, an Irish poetical writer, was the second son of Robert De la Cour, esq. of the county of Cork, in Ireland, and born at Killowen, near Blarney, in that county, in 1709. He was educated at the university of Dublin, where to his classical studies he added an uncommon predilection for poetry, and before he had reached his twenty-first year, produced a poem entitled “Abelard to Eloisa,” in imitation of Pope, which was thought to possess a considerable portion of the spirit and harmony of that master. From this time he proceeded to publish shorter poems and sonnets, which were all favourably received; and in 1733 appeared his principal work, “The Prospect of Poetry.” So creditable a publication, and at such an age, gained him much and deserved applause; and in this list of admirers he had to count on some of the best judges in both countries.

In 1755 he was employed under the chevalier Douglas, in transacting a negociation of the most delicate and important nature at the court of Petersburg!), by which, after many years suspension of all intercourse, a reconciliation was effected between the courts of France and Russia. After some years residence at Petersburg!], D‘Eon joined his regiment, then serving under marshal Broglio on the Rhine, and during the campaign of 1762, acted as aid-ducamp to that celebrated olKcer. When the duke de Nivernois came over to England, as ambassador, to negociate the peace of 1763, D’Eon appeared as his secretary; and so far procured the sanction of the government of England, that he was requested to carry over the ratiticat.on of the treaty between the British court and that of Versailles, in consequence of which the French king invested him with the order of St. Louis. He had also behaved, in the character of secretary, so much to the satisfaction of the duke, that that nobleman, upon his departure for France, in May 1763, procured D‘Eon to be appointed minister-pleriiputeutiary in his room. In October following, however, the count de Guerchy having arrived here as ambassador from the court of Versailles, the chevalier received orders, or rather was requested, to act as secretary or assistant to the new ambassador. This, we are told, mortified him to such a degree, that, asserting that the letter of recall, which accompanied it, was a forgery, he refused to deliver it; and by this step drew on himself the censure of his court. On this, either with a view of exculpating himself, or from a motive of revenge, he published a succinct account of all the negociations in which he had been engaged, exposed some secrets of the French court, and rather than spare. his enemies, revealed some things greatly to the prejudice of his best friends. Among other persons very freely treated in this publication was the count de Guerchy, for which D’Eon was prosecuted and convicted in the court of King’s Bench, in July 1764. It was but natural that this conduct should draw down the resentment of the court of France, and the chevalier either feared or affected to fear the greatest danger to his person. Reports were spread, very probahly by himself, that persons were sent over here to apprehend him secretly, and carry him to France. On this occasion he wrote four letters, complaining of these designs, as known to him by undoubted authority. The one he sent to lord chief justice Mansfield, the second to the earl of Bute, the third to earl Temple, and the fourth to Mr Pitt. Of these personages he requested to know, whether, as he had contracted no debt, and behaved himself in all things as a dutiful subject, he might not kill the first man who should attempt to arrest him, &c. In March 1764 he took a wiser step to provide for his safety, if there had been any cause for his fears, by indicting the count de Guerchy for a conspiracy against his life, but this came to nothing; and the chevalier, not having surrendered himself to the court of King’s-bench to receive judgment for the libel on the count de Guerchy, was, in June 1765, declared outlawed. The chevalier, however, still continued in England until the death of Louis XV.

In 1785 he returned to England, where he continued to reside till his death. He was deprived of his pension in consequence of the French revolution, although in June 1792, he presented a petition to the national assembly (as madame D‘Eon) desiring to be employed in their service as a soldier, to have his seniority in the army, and permission to raise a legion of volunteers for the service of his country. This petition was probably disregarded, as he remained in England, where his circumstances became embarrassed. For a few years he gained a subsistence by the sale of part of his effects, and by a public exhibition of his skill in fencing, which was the greater object of curiosity, from the general belief that it was a female performance. When incapable of these exertions by years and infirmities, ho was relieved by occasional contributions. For the two last years, he scarcely ever quitted his bed, his health gradually declined, and at length an extreme state of debility ensued, which terminated in his death, May 21, 1810. Immediately after, the corpse being examined by professional gentlemen and others, was discovered to be that of a man, yet it is said that there were peculiarities in his person which rendered the doubts that had so long subsisted respecting his sex the less extraordinary, and appeared to have given facility to his occasional assumption of the female character before his final adoption of it. He had assumed the female character at Petersburg!! for the purposes of political intrigue about the year 1750, when only twenty-two years of age, and had occasionally adopted it during his first residence in England; but it may be doubted whether all this will be sufficient to explain the mysteries of the chevalier’s conduct, or the more strange conduct of the court of France. The chevalier D’Eon, who was distinguished as a scholar, and was well acquainted with the ancient and most of the modern languages, had a very valuable library, part of which he sold for the roller' of his necessities, and part has been sold since his death. His works according to the Diet. Historique are: l. “JMemoires,” 8vo and 4to, relative to his disputes with the count de Guerchy. 2. “Histoire des Papes.” 3. “Histoire politique.de la Pologne.” 4. “Recherches sur les royaumesde Naples etdeSicile.” 5. “Recherches sur le Commerce et la Navigation.” 6. “Pensees sur le Celibat, et les maux qu'il cause a la France,” against the celibacy of the French clergy. 7. “Memoires sur la Rus-sie ct son Commerce avcc les Anglois.” 8. “Histoire d'Eudoxie Feeclerona.” 9. “Observations sur le royaimie d'Angleterre, son government, ses grands officiers,” &c. 10. “Details sur l‘Ecosse, sur les possessions de l’Angleterre en Amerique.” 11. “Sur la regie de bles en France, les mendians, les domains des rois,” c. 12. “Details sur toutes les Parties des Finances de France.” 13. “Situation de la France dans Plnde avant la paix de 1763.” 14. “Loisirs du Chevalier D'Eon,” 1775, 13 vols. 8vo, a brief statistical account or' the principal countries in Europe. He left behind some Mss. among which are ample materials for a life of himself. These are now in the hands of a gentleman who is preparing them for publication, and who communicated some particulars to Mr. Lysons, of which we have partly availed ourselves in this sketch. This intended biographer concludes a very favourable character of the chevalier in these words: “In religion, Mons. D‘Eon was a sincere catholic, but divested of all bigotry: few were so well acquainted with the biblical writings, or devoted more time to the study of religious subjects. The shades in his character were, the most inflexible tenacity of disposition, and a great degree of pride and self-opinion; a general distrust and suspicion of others; and a violence of temper which could brook no opposition. To these ’failings may be traced the principal misfortunes of his life; a life in which there was much labour and suffering, mixed with very little repose.” The French editor of his life, in noticing the poverty in which he died, adds, that it does him the more honour as he had refused the offers of the English government to turn their manifestoes against his country into French.

, a native of Ireland, was born in 1724. Being intended for trade, he was some time placed with a linen-draper in Dublin; but disliking his business, he quitted it and his country about 1751, and commenced author in London. Soon after he arrived at the metropolis, he indulged an inclination which he had imbibed for the stage, and appeared in the character of Gloucester in “Jane Shore,” but with so little success, that he never repeated the experiment. After this attempt he subsisted chiefly by his writings; but being of an expensive disposition, running into the follies and excesses of gallantry and gaming, he lived almost all his time the slave of dependence, or the sport of chance. His acquaintance with people of fashion, on beau Nash’s death, procured him at length a more permanent subsistence. He was chosen to succeed that gentleman in his offices of master of the ceremonies at Bath and Tunbridge. By the profits of these he might have been enabled to place himself with ceconomy in a less precarious state; but his want of conduct continued after he was in the possession of a considerable income, by which means he was at the time of his death, March 7, 1769, as necessitous as he had been at any period of his life. He translated one piece from the French of the king of Prussia, called “Sylla,” a dramatic entertainment, 1753, 8vo; “A Voyage to the Moon,” from the French of Bergerac, 1753; “Memoirs of the Count de Beauval,” from the French of the marquis d'Argens,“1754, 12mo;” The third Satire of Juvenal translated intoJEnglish VC.rse,“1755, 4to and he edited an edition of Dryclen’s poetical works, with a life and notes, 1762, 4 vols. ^vo, a beautifully printed work, which had very little success. In 1759 he published a” View of the Stage,“under the na^e of Wilkes in 1762,” The Battle of Lora,“a poem in 1763,” A Collection of Voyages,“2 vols. 12mo, and some other compilations, with and without his name, which, indeed, in ibe literary world, was of little consequence. The most amffsing of his works, was his” Letters written from Liverpool, CilSSter, &c." 2 vols. 12mo. Derrick lived rather to amuse than instruct the public, and his vanity and absurdities were for many years the standing topics of the newspaper wits. A few, not unfavourable, anecdotes of Derrick are given in Boswell’s Life of Johnson.

, a French nobleman, born at Paris in 1602, was, like the English lord Rochester, a great wit, a great libertine, and a great penitent. He made a vast progress in his studies under the Jesuits, who, perceiving his genius, endeavoured to get him into their society; but his family would not listen to their proposal, and he soon himself began to treat them with ridicule. While very young, his father procured him the place of a counsellor in the parliament of Paris, where his wit was aumired but he would never report a cause; for he used to say that it was a sordid occupation, and unworthy of a man of parts, to read wrangling papers with attention, and to endeavour to understand them. It is said, indeed, that on one occasion, when his clients were urgent for a decision, he sent for both parties, burnt the papers before them, and paid down the sum that was the cause of the dispute, to the amount of four or five hundred livres. One account says, that he left this place from the following cause. Cardinal Richelieu falling in love with the celebrated beauty Marion de Lorme, whose affections were entirely placed on our Des Barreaux, proposed to him by a third hand, that if he would resign his mistress, he should have whatever he should desire. Des Barreaux answered the proposal in a jesting way, feigning to believe the cardinal incapable of so much weakness. This enraged the minister so highly, that he persecuted Des Barreaux as long as he lived, and forced him not only to quit his place, but even to leave the kingdom. But another account says that his resignation of the bar was voluntary, and with a view to become a man of pleasure, which appears to be more probable. During his career, however, he made a great number of Latin and French verses, and. some pleasing songs; but never pursued any thing seriously, except good cheer and diversions, and being very entertaining in company, he was in high request with men of wit and taste. He had his particular friends in the several provinces of France, whom he frequently visited, and it was his practice to shift his quarters, according to the seasons of the year. In winter, he went to seek the sun on the coasts of Provence; and passed the three worst months in the year at Marseilles. The house which he called his favourite, was that of the count de Clermont de Lodeve, in Languedoc; where, he used to say, good cheer and liberty were on their throne. Sometimes he went to Balzac, on the banks of the Charante but his chief residence was at Chenailles on the Loire. His general view in these ramblings was to search out the best fruits and the best wines in the climates: but sometimes, to do him justice, his object was more intellectual, as, when he went into Holland, on purpose to see Des Cartes, and to improve hr the instructions of that great genius. His friends do not deny that he was a great libertine; but pretend, that fame, according to custom, had said more of him than is true, and that, in the latter part of his life, he was convinced of the reality of religion. They say, that he did not disapprove the truths of Christianity, and wished to be fully convinced of them; but he thought nothing was so dim'cult to a man of wit as to be a true believer. He was born a catholic, but paid little attention either to the worship or doctrines of the Romish religion; and he used to say, that if the Scriptures are to be the rule of our actions and of our belief, there was no better religion than the protestant. Four or five years before his death, we are told that he entirely forsook his vicious courses, paid his debts, and, having never been married, gave up the remainder of his estate to his sisters; reserving to himself for life an annuity of 4000 livres. He then retired to Chalon on the Soane, which he said was the best and purest air in France; hired a small house, and was visited by the better sort of people, particularly by the bishop, who afterwards spoke well of him. He died in that city, May 9. 1673, having made the famous devout sonnet two or three years before his death, which begins, “Grand Dieu, tes jugemens,” &c. But Voltaire has endeavoured to deprive him of the merit of this, by ascribing it to the abbe de Levau. It is, however, the only one of Des Barreaux’s poems, which in general were in the style of Sarazin and Chapelle, that has obtained approbation, Dreux du Radier, in his “Recreations historiques,” asserts that it is an imitation of a sonnet by Desportes, who published it in 1G03; and if so, the imitation must be allowed greatly to surpass the original.

, a French adventurer, of whose private life little is known, and whose public history is not of the most reputable kind, requires, however, some notice, as the author of various publications, and an agent in some political transactions which once were deemed of importance. He styled himself advocate in the parliament of Bourdeaux. The first notice of him occurs about 1763, when he had a concern in the quarrel between the count de Guerchy, ambassador extraordinary from the court of France, and the chevalier D‘Eon, (see D’EoN). About this time D‘Eon published a letter to the count de Guerchy, by which we learn that De Vergy solicited his (D’Eon’s) acquaintance, which he declined unless he* brought letters of recommendation, and that De Vergy, piqued at the refusal, boasted of being perfectly well known to the count de Guerchy, which proved to be a falsehood. This produced a quarrel between D‘Eon and De Vergy, and a pamphlet in answer to D’Eon’s letter, and another answer under the title of “Centre Note.” After the more celebrated quarrel between de Guerchy and D‘Eon, De Vergy published a parcel of letters from himself to the due de Cboiseul, in which he positively asserts that the count de Guerchy prevailed with him to come over to England to assassinate D’Eon. He even went farther, and before the grand jury of Middlesex, made oath to the same effect. Upon this deposition, the grand jury found a bill of intended murder against the count de Guerchy; which bill, however, never came to the petty jury. The king granted a noli prosequi in favour of De Guerchy, and the attorney-general was ordered to prosecute De Vergy, with the result of which order we are unacquainted; but it is certain that De Vergy, in his last will, confesses his concern in a plot against D'Eon, and intimates that he withdrew his assistance upon finding that it was intended to affect the chevalier’s life. After the above transaction, we find him in 1767, publishing “Lettre centre la Raison,” or, “A Letter against Reason, addressed to the chevalier D'Eon,” in which he repeats some of the hacknied doctrines of the French philosophical school, and professes himself a free-thinker. This was followed by a succession of novels, entitled “The Mistakes of the Heart;” “The Lovers” “Nature” “Henrietta;” “The Scotchman;” and “The Palinode,” written in remarkably good English, and with much knowledge of human nature; but scarcely one of them is free from the grossest indelicacies. He wrote also, in 1770, “A Defence of the duke of Cumberland,” a wretched catchpenny. De Vergy died Oct. 1, 1774, aged only forty-two, and remained unburied until March, his executor waiting for directions from his family. He had desired in his will that his relations would remove his body to Bourdeaux, but it was at last interred in St. Pancras church-yard.

“Canticum Avicennas de Medicina, ex Arab. Lat. reddit.” 1649, 4to. “Dissertationes duae, prior de motu cordis et sanguinis, altera de lacte ac nutrimento foetus in utero,” 1651, 4to.- In this he defends the circulation of the blood, as described by our countryman Harvey. “Synopsis Medicine universali?,” 1649, &c. Deusingius died in the winter of 1666, of a pleuritic affection, occasioned by taking a long journey, in very severe weather, to visit the count of Nassau, to whom he was physician.

When the famous battle in 1666 was fought between the English and Dutch for three days, he was sent by the States to take a full account of the affair; and he drew up one from the best authorities he could obtain, which is justly esteemed a master-piece in its kind, and a proof of his being as capable of recording great actions as of achieving them. In 1667, finding a favourable conjuncture for executing the great design of the warm republicans, he established the perpetual edict, by which the office of stacltholder was for ever abolished, and the liberty of Holland, as it was supposed, fixed on an eternal basis. In 1672, when the prince of Orange was elected captain and admiral-general, he abjured the stadtholdership. A tumult happened at Dort, and the people declared they would have the prince for stadtholder; to which place he came in person on their invitation, and accepted the office. Most of the other towns and provinces followed the example and seditions arose from these pretences, that the De Witts plundered the state, and were enemies to the house of Orange. The pensionary begged his dismission from the post; which was granted, wiih thanks for his faithful services. He did not affect business, when he saw it was no longer in his power to benefit the public; and he deplored in secret the misfortunes of his country, which, from the highest prosperity, fell, as it were, all at once to the very brink of ruin. The invasion of the French, their rapid progress, their own intestine divisions, spread every where terror and confusion; and the prince of Orange’s party heightened these confusions, in order to ruin the De Witts. The mob were encouraged to pull down a house, in which the pensionary was supposed to lie sick; an attempt was made to assassinate the two brothers on the same day, in different places; the count de Monthas, who had married their sister, was ordered to be arrested in his camp as a traitor, though he had behaved with the greatest bravery. Cornelius De Witt, on the accusation of Ticklaer, a barber, of a design of poisoning the prince, was imprisoned and condemned to exile, though his judges could not declare him guilty. The same ignominious wretch persuaded the people, that he would be rescued out of prison; upon which they instantly armed, and surrounded the place, where it unfortunately happened the pensionary was with his brother. They broke open the doors, insisted on their walking down, and barbarously murdered them. They carried their dead bodies to the gallows, where they hung the pensionary a foot higher than his brother; afterwards mangling their bodies, cut their cloaths in a thousand pieces, and sent them about the country, as trophies of conquest; and some of them, it is said, cut out large pieces of their flesh, which they broiled and ate.

The contents of this whole work are thus explained in the preface by Diodorus himself; “Our six first books,” says he, “comprehend all that happened before the war of Troy, together with many fabulous matters here and there interspersed. Of these, the three former relate the antiquities of the barbarians, and the three latter those of the Greeks. The eleven next include all remarkable events in the world, from the destruction of Troy to the death of Alexander the Great. And lastly, the other twentythree extend to the conquest of Julius Caesar over the Gauls, when he made the British ocean the northern bounds of the Roman empire.” Since Diodorus speaks of Julius Caesar, as he does in more places than one, and always according to the pagan custom, with an attribute of some divinity, he cannot be more ancient than he. When Eusebius writes in his Chronicon, that Diodorus lived under this emperor, he seems to limit the life of the former by the reign of the latter; yet Suidas prolongs his days even to Augustus; and Scaliger observes in his “Animadversions upon Eusebius,” that Diodorus must needs have lived to a very great age; and that he was alive at least half the reign of Augustus, since he mentions on the subject of the olympiads, the Roman bissextile year: now this name was not used before the fasti and calendar were corrected; which was done by Augustus, to make the work of his predecessor more perfect. Diodorus has met with a different reception from the learned. Pliny affirms him to have been the first of the Greeks who wrote seriously, and avoided trifles: “primus apud Graccos desiit nugari,” are his words. Bishop Montague, in his preface to his “Apparatus,” gives him the praise of being an excellent author; who, with great fidelity, immense labour, and uncommon ingenuity, has collected an “Historical Library,” in which he has exhibited his own and the studies of other men. This history, without which we should have been ignorant of the antiquities and many other particulars of the little town of Agyrium, or even of Sicily, presents us occasionally with sensible and judicious reflections. Diodorus takes particular care to refer the successes of war and of other enterprises, not to chance or to a blind fortune, with the generality of historians; but to a wise and kind providence, which presides over all events. Yet he exhibits proofs of extraordinary credulity, as in his description of the Isle of Panchaia, with its walks beyond the reach of sight of odoriferous trees; its fountains, which form an infinite number of canals bordered with flowers; its birds, unknown in any other part of the world, which warble their enchanting notes in groves of uninterrupted verdure; its temple of marble, 4000 feet in length, &c. The first Latin edition of Diodorus is that of Milan, 1472, folio. The first of the text was that of Henry Stephens, in Greek, 1559, finely printed: Wesseling’s, Amsterdam, Gr. and Lat. with the remarks of different authors, various lections, and all the fragments of this historian, 1745, 2 vols, folio, was long accounted the best, but is not so correct as was supposed. Poggius translated it into Latin, the abbe Terasson into French, and Booth into English, 1700, fol. Count Caylus has an ingenious essay on this historian in vol. XXVIL of the “Hist. de l'academie des Belles Lettres,” and professor Heyne has a still more learned and elaborate memoir in “The Transactions of the Royal Society of Gottingen,” vol. V. on the sources of information from which Diodorus composed his history. This was afterwards inserted among the valuable prolegomena to Heyne’s edition of Diodorus, 1798, &c. 10 vols. 8vo, which is now reckoned the best.

, Ditmar, or Diethumar, bishop of Mersburgh, in Misuia, was the son of Sigefroy, count of Saxony, and was born in the year 976. In his eighteenth or twentieth year, he embraced the monastic life, in the convent of St. John of Magdeburgh; and after he had executed the office of prior in another religious house, the emperor Henry II. advanced him in 1018, to the bishopric of Mersburgh. In 1027 he began his Chronicle, in seven books, which includes the history of the emperors Henry I. Otto I. II. and III. and Henry II. which is thought to be very faithful and accurate. Reinar Reineccius published an edition of it at Francfort, in 1584, fol. with a life of the author; and it has been also added to the collection of the German historians. Other editions, Francfort, 1600, and Helmstadt, 1664, followed; but the best is that of Leibnitz, among his writers on the history of the house of Brunswick, Hanover, fol. It was also translated into German, and published in 1606, 4to. Dithmar, after holding his bishopric a little more than ten years, died Oct. 1, 1028, revered for his piety.

This new principle being now established, he was soon able to construct object-glasses, in which the different refrangibility of the rays of light was corrected, and the name of achromatic was given to them by the late Dr. Bevis, on account of their being free from the prismatic colours, and not by Lalande, as some have said. As usually happens on such occasions, no sooner was the achromatic telescope made public, than the rivalship of foreigners, and the jealousy of philosophers at home, led them to doubt of its reality and Euler himself, in his paper read before the academy of sciences at Berlin in 1764, says, “I am not ashamed frankly to avow that the first accounts which were published of it appeared so suspicious, and even so contrary to the best established principles, that I could not prevail upon myself to give credit to them;” and he adds, *' I should never have submitted to the proofs which Mr. Dollond produced to support this strange phenomenon, if M. Clairaut, who must at first have been equally surprized at it, had not most positively assured me that Dpllond’s experiments were but too well founded.“And when the fact could be no longer disputed, they endeavoured to find a prior inventor, to whom it might be ascribed; and several conjecturers were honoured with the title of discoverers. But Mr. Peter Dollond in the paper we have just mentioned, has stated and vindicated, in the most unexceptionable and convincing manner, his father’s right to the first discovery of this improvement in refracting telescopes, as well as of the principle on which it was founded. In so doing he has corrected the mistakes of M. de la Lande in his account of this subject; those of M. N. Fuss, professor of mathematics at St. Petersburg, in his” Eulogy on Euler,“written and published in 1783; and those of count Cassini, in his” Extracts of the Observations made at the Royal Observatory at Paris in the year 1787;" and it must appear to every impartial and candid examiner, that Mr. Dollond was the sole discoverer of the principle which led to the improvement of refracting telescopes.

, a French Jesuit, a native of Vernon, who died at Orleans Sept. 21, 1716, filled several high offices belonging to his order, and was said to have been the author of the famous problem levelled at the cardinal de Noailles, “Whom are we to believe? M. de Noailles, archbishop of Paris, condemning the exposition of faith, or M. de Noailles, bishop of Chalons, approving the moral reflections?” alluding to an apparent change in Noailles* opinions of the disputes between the Jansenists and Jesuits. Doucin was a member of the club or cabal which the Jansenists called the Norman cabal, and which was composed of the Jesuits Tellier, Lallemand, and Daniel; and his zeal and activity were of great service to them. During the dispute on the famous bull Unigenitus, he was sent to Rome, and was a powerful advocate for that measure. He wrote a very curious piece of ecclesiastical history, entitled “Histoire de Nestorianisme,” Paris, 1698, 4to another, entitled “Histoire de I'Origenisme,” 4to, and “Memorial abrege touchant l'etat et les progres de Jansenistne en Hollande,” written in 1697, when he accompanied the count de Creci to the congress at Ryswick. He was also the author of many pamphlets of the controversial kind, strongly imbued with the spirit of party.

, an English gentleman of considerable learning and genius, of the seventeenth century, was a teacher of poetry and rhetoric in the English college at Doway, in 1618. He was invited thither by Dr. Kellison, the president, who was then providing professors to teach such young men as had been drawn from the protestant religion in England, and had hitherto been educated in the schools of the Jesuits. Drury was for some time a prisoner in England, on account of his religion, but about 1616 was released at the intercession of count Gondemar, the Spanish ambassador in England, to whom he dedicated his Latin plays. These plays, three in number, entitled “Aluredus sive Alfretius,” a tragi-comedy “Mors,” a comedy; and “Reparatus sive depositum,” a tragi-comedy, were printed together at Doway, in 1628, 12mo, and often reprinted. There is a copy of his “Aluredus” in the British Museum, printed separately, of the date 1620, 16mo. These plays, Dodd informs us, were exhibited with great applause, first privately, in the refectory of the college of Doway, and afterwards in the open court or quadrangle in the presence of the principal persons of the town and university.

, born at Dinant in Bretagne, about the close of 1705, the son of a hatter, received a distinguished education at Paris. His taste for literature obtained him admission to the most celebrated academies of the metropolis, of the provinces, and of foreign countries. Being chosen to succeed Mirabaud, as perpetual secretary of the French academy, he filled that post as a man who was fond of literature, and had the talent of procuring it respect. Though domesticated at Paris, he was appointed in 1744 mayor of Dinant; and in 1755 had a patent of nobility granted him by the king, in reward for the zeal which the states of Bretagne had shewn for the service of the country. That province having received orders to point out such subjects as were most deserving of the favours of the monarch, Duclos was unanimously named by the tiers-6tat. He died at Paris, March 26, 1772, with the title of historiographer of France. His conversation was at once agreeable, instructive and lively. He reflected deeply, and expressed his thoughts with, energy, and illustrated them by well selected anecdotes. Lively and impetuous by nature, he was frequently the severe censor of pretensions that had no foundation. But age, experience, intercourse with society, a great fund of good sense, at length taught him to restrict to mankind in general those hard truths which never fail to displease individuals. His austere probity, from whence proceeded that bluntness for which he was blamed in company, his beneficence, and his other virtues, gave him a right to the public esteem. “Few persons,” says M. le prince de Beauvau, “better knew the duties and the value of friendship. He would boldly serve his friends and neglected merit on such occasions he displayed an art which excited no distrust, and which would not have been expected in a man who his whole life long chose rather to shew the truth with force, than to insinuate it with address.” At first he was of the party which went under the name of the philosophers; but the excesses of its leader, and of some of his subalterns, rendered him somewhat more circumspect. Both in his conversation and in his writings he censured those presumptuous writers, who, under pretence of attacking superstition, undermine the foundations of morality, and weaken the bands of society. Once, speaking on this subjert, “these enthusiastic philosophers,” said he, “will proceed such lengths, as at last to make me devout.” Besides, he was too fond of his own peace and happiness to follow them in their extravagancies, and placed no great value on their friendship or good will. “Duclos est a la fois droit et adroit,” said one of his philosophical friends, and it was in consequence of this prudence, that he never would publish any tiling of what he wrote as historiographer of France. “Whenever I have been importuned,” said he, “to bring out some of my writings on the present reign, I have uniformly answered, that I was resolved neither to ruin myself by speaking truth, nor debase myself by flattery. However, I do not the less discharge my duty. If I cannot speak to my contemporaries, I will shew the rising generation what their fathers were.” Indeed, we are told that he did compose the history of the reign of Lewis XV. and that after his death it was lodged in the hands of the minister. The preface to this work may be seen in the first vol. of the “Pieces inte>essantes” of M. de la Place. Duclos’s works consist of some romances, which have been much admired in. France; 1. “The Confessions of count ***.” 2. “The baroness de Luz.” 3. “Memoirs concerning the Manners of the eighteenth Century;” each in 1 vol. 12mo. 4. <l Acajou;“in 4to and 12mo, with plates. In the Confessions he has given animation and action to what appeared rather dry and desultory in his” Considerations on the Manners.“Excepting two or three imaginary characters, more fantastical than real, the remainder seems to be the work of a master. The situations, indeed, are not so well unfolded as they might have been; the author has neglected the gradations, the shades; and the romance is not sufficiently dramatical. But the interesting story of madame de Selve proves that M. Duclos knew how to finish as well as to sketch. His other romances are inferior to the” Confessions.“The memoirs relating to the manners of the eighteenth century abound in just observations on a variety of subjects. Acajou is no more than a tale, rather of the grotesque species, but well written. 5.” The History of Lewis XI.“1745, 3 vols. 12mo; and the authorities, an additional volume, 1746, contain curious matter. The style is concise and elegant, but too abrupt and too epigrammatical. Taking Tacitus for his model, whom, by the way, he approaches at a veryhumble distance, he has been less solicitous about the exact and circumstantial particularization of facts, than their aggregate compass, and their influence on the manners, laws, customs, and revolutions of the state. Though his diction has been criticised, it must be confessed that his lively and accurate narration, perhaps at the same time rather dry, is yet more supportable than that ridiculous pomp of words which almost all the French authors have employed in a department where declamation and exaggeration are the greatest defects. 6.” Considerations on the Manners of the present Century,“12mo; a book replete with just maxims, accurate definitions, ingenious discussions, novel thoughts, and well-drawn characters, although the style is sometimes obscure, and there is here and there an affectation of novelty, in which a writer of consummate taste would not have indulged; but these defects are amply compensated by a zeal for truth, honour, probity, beneficence, and all the moral and social virtues. Lewis XV. said of this book,” It is the work of a worthy man.“7.” Remarks on the general Grammar of PortRoyal.“In these he shews himself a philosophical grammarian. 7.” Voyage en Italie,“1791, 8vo. This trip he took in 1767 and 1768. 8.” Memoirs secrets sur les regnes de Louis XIV et Louis XV. 1791," 2 vols. 8vo, in which are many curious anecdotes and bold facts. He wrote also several dissertations in the Memoirs of the academy of belles-lettres, which contain much eruuiti Hi, qualified by the charms of wit, and ornamented by a diction clear, easy, correct, and always adapted to the subject. Duclos had a greater share than any other in the edition of 1762 of the Dictionary of the French Academy; in which his usual accuracy and judgment are everywhere apparent and he had begun a continuation of the history of that society. His whole works were collected for the first time, and printed at Paris in 1806, 10 vols. 8vo, with a life by M. Auger, and many pieces left by him in manuscript. This edition appears to have revived his fame in France, and made him be enrolled among her standard authors.

, an eminent prelate, was born Feb. 6, 1533, at Buda, and educated by his uncle, who was bishop of Vaccia, or Veitzen, and out of respect to him he took the name of Shardellet. In 1560 the emperor Ferdinand II. admitted Dudith into his council, and appointed him bishop of Tina. He was sent soon after to the council of Trent, in the name of the emperor, and all the Hungarian clergy; and there made a very eloquent speech, April 9, 1568, which was heard with great pleasure. But this was not the case with another speech which he delivered in that place on July 6; for, though he shewed great zeal for the pope, and exclaimed strongly against Luther, yet he expressed himself so freely, both there and in his common conversation, on the necessity of episcopal residence, and in favour of marriage among the clergy, and administering the cup in the sacrament, that the legates, apprehensive of his drawing many prelates to his opinion, wrote to the pope, informing him, that Dudith was a dangerous man, and that it was necessary he should leave Trent. Upon tnis the pope solicited the emperor to recall him, which he accordingly did: but Ferdinand, far from blaming his conduct, rewarded it with the bishopric of Chonat, and soon after gave him that of five churches. This prince dying 1564, Dudith was sent by Maximilian II. into Poland, whither he nad been sent before by Ferdinand, and privately married lleyna Strazzi, maid of honour to the queen, resigning his bishopric. Rome cited him, excommunicated him, and even condemned him to the flames as an heretic, yet he despised her threats, and remained in security. After the death of his first wife, by whomhehadthreechildren, he married in 1579, a lady descended from an illustrious Polish family, widow of count John Zarnow, and sister of the famous Sborowits, by whom also he had children. Dudith, at length, openly professed the reformed religion, and even became a Socinian, according to most authors, particularly of the modern school^ who seem proud of their convert; but the fact is denied by the writer of his life, who, on the contrary, asserts, he disputed strongly against Socinus. He then settled at Breslaw in Silesia, where he died February 23, 1589, aged 56. Dudith, according to the representations both of his friends and enemies, was a handsome well-made man, of a peaceable disposition; civil, affable, regular in his conduct, very charitable to the poor, and benevolent towards all mankind. He had a taste for the classics, and so great a veneration for Cicero, that he wrote all that orator’s works, three times over, with his own hand. He likewise understood several languages, and was well acquainted with history, philosophy, mathematics, physic, law, and divinity. He left a great number of works: the principal are, “Dissertationes de Cometis,” Utrecht, 1665, 4to; two discourses, delivered at the council of Trent; an apology for the emperor Maximilian II. &c. published with other tracts, and his Life by Reuter, 1610, 4to. He published also, the Life of cardinal Pole, translated from the Italian of Beccatelli. Several of Dudith’s letters and poems occur in the collections.

, a brave French officer, count of Orleans and of Longueville, and the natural son of Louis duke of Orleans, who was assassinated by the duke of Burgundy, was born Nov. 23, 1407, and began his career, during the war which the English carried on in France, by the defeat of the earls of Warwick and Suffolk, whom he pursued to the gates of Paris. Orleans being besieged by the English, he bravely defended that town, until Joan of Arc was enabled to bring him succours. The raising of the siege was followed by a train of successes, and Dunois had almost the whole honour of driving the enemy out of Normandy and la Guienne. He gave them the fatal blow at Castillon, in 1451, after having taken from them Blaie, Fronsac, Bourdeaux,and Bayonne. Charles VII. owed his throne to the sword of Dunois; nor was he ungrateful, for he bestowed on him the title of restorer of his country, made him a present of the comté of Longueville, and honoured him with the office of grand chamberlain of France. He was held in equal esteem by Louis XI. Count cle Dunois, under the reign of that prince, entered into the league of what was called the Public-good, of which, by his conduct and experience, he became the principal supporter. The hero died Nov. 24, 1468, aged 61, regarded as a second du Guesclin, and not less dreaded by the enemies of his country, than respected by his fellowcitizens, for his valour, which was always guided by prudence, for his magnanimity, his beneficence, and every rirtue that enters into the character of a truly great man.

, a political writer of much note in France and England, and a citizen of Geneva, was born in 1749, of an ancient family in Switzerland, who had been distinguished as magistrates and scholars. At the age of twenty-two he was appointed, through the interest of Voltaire, professor of belles-lettres at Cassel, and about that time he published two or three historical tracts. He was afterwards concerned with Linguet in the publication of the “Annales Politiques,” at Lausanne. In 1783 he went to Paris, where, during the three years’ sitting of the first French assembly, he published an analysis of their debates, which was read throughout all Europe, and considered as a model of discussion no less luminous than impartial. While he intrepidly attacked the various factions, he neither dissembled the faults nor the exaggerations of their adversaries. In the month of April, 1792, he left Paris on a confidential mission from the king to his brothers, and the emperor of Germany. In consequence of his quitting Paris, his estate in France, and his personal property, were confiscated; and among other losses, he had to regret that of a valuable library, and a collection of Mss. including a work of his own, nearly ready for the press, on the political state of Europe before the French revolution. Whilst resident at Brussels with the archduke Charles, in 1793, he published a work on the French revolution, which was warmly admired by Mr. Burke, as congenial with his own sentiments, and indeed by every other person not influenced by the delusions which brought about that great event. In 1794 he returned to Switzerland, which he was obliged to leave in 1798, the French, to whom he had rendered himself obnoxious by his writings, having demanded his expulsion. The same year he came to England, where he published a well-known periodical journal called the “Mercure Britannique,” which came out once a fortnight, nearly to the time of his death. This event took place at the house of his friend count Lally Tollendal, at Richmond, May 10, 1800. His “Mercure,” and other works, although of a temporary nature, contain facts, and profound views of the leading events of his time, which will be of great importance to future historians, and during publication contributed much to enlighten the public mind.

, a celebrated French cardinal, sprung of a noble family of Issoire, in Auvergne, appeared first at the bar of Paris. he was afterwards made lieutenant-general of the bailiwic of JMontferrant, then attoiv ney-general at the parliament of Toulouse. Rising from one post to another, he came to be first president of the parliament of Paris in 1507, and chancellor of France in 1515. He set out, it is said, by being solicitor at Cognac for the countess of Angouleme, mother of Francis I. This princess entrusted to him the education of her son, whose confidence he happily gained. Some historians pretend that Duprat owed his fortune and his fame to a bold and singular stroke. Perceiving that the count d'Angouleme, his pupil, was smitten with the charms of Mary, sister of Henry VIII. king of England, the young and beautiful wife of Louis XII. an infirm husband, who was childless; and finding that the queen had made an appointment with the young prince, who stole to her apartment during the night, by a back staircase; just as he was entering the chamber of Mary, he was seized all at once by a stout man, who carried him off confounded and dumb. The man immediately made himself known it was Duprat. “What!” said he sharply to the count, “you want to give yourself a master! and you are going to sacrifice a throne to the pleasure of a moment!” The count d'Angouleme, far from taking this lesson amiss, presently recollected himself; and, on coming to the crown, gave him marks of his gratitude. To settle himself in the good graces of this prince, who was continually in quest of money, and did not always find it, he suggested to him many illegal and tyrannical expedients, such as selling the offices of the judicature, and of creating a new chamber to the parliament of Paris, which, composed of twenty counsellors, formed what was called la Tournelle. By his influence also the taxes were augmented, and new imposts established, contrary to the ancient constitution of the kingdom, all which measures he pursued without fear or restraint Having attended Francis I. into Italy, he persuaded that prince to abolish the Pragmatic Sanction, and to make the Concordat, by which the pope bestowed on the king the right of nominating to the benefices of France, and the king granted to the pope the annates of the grand benefices on the footing of current revenue. While this concordat, which was signed Dec. 16, 1515, rendered him odious to the magistrates and ecclesiastics, he soon reaped the fruits of his devotion to the court of Rome; for, having embraced the ecclesiastical profession, he was successively raised to the bishoprics of Meaux, of Albi, of Valence, of Die, of Gap, to the archbishopric of Sens, and at last to the purple, in 1527. Being appointed legate a latere in France, he performed the coronation of queen Eleonora of Austria. He is said to have aspired to the papacy in 1534, upon the death of Clement VII.; but his biographers are inclined to doubt this fact, as he was now in years and very infirm. He retired, as the end of his days approached, to the chateau de Nantouillet, where he died July 9, 1535, corroded by remorse, and consumed by diseases. His own interests were almost always his only law. He sacrificed every thing to them; he separated the interests of the king from the good of the public, and sowed discord between the council and the parliament; while he did nothing for the dioceses committed to his charge. He was a long time archbishop of Sens, without ever appearing there once. Accordingly his death excited no regret, not even among his servile dependents. However, he built, at the HotelDieu of Paris, the hall still called the legate’s-hall. “It would have been much larger,” said the king, “if it could contain all the poor he has made.”

Before he quitted Turin, Mr. M'Kenzie’s interest with the duke of Northumberland, then lord lieutenant of Ireland, procured him the promise of a deanery in that kingdom, which he declined accepting; but soon after received from the same noble patron a presentation to the rectory of Elsdon in Northumberland, then worth 800l. a year; which induced him, in 1766, to return to England, where he received a present of 1000l. from the king, and was highly delighted with the reception he met with at Northumberland-house. In 1768 he performed an extensive tour through the continent with lord Algernon Percy, the duke of Northumberland’s son. In the course of this tour, some conversation at Genoa with the marchioness of Babbi, gave rise to a work which Mr. Dutens afterwards published at Rome under the title of “The Tocsin,” and afterwards at Paris, under the title of “Appel au bons sens.” After this tour was finished, he resided for some time at Paris, where he published several works, and lived in a perpetual round of splendid amusements. In 1776 he returned to London, and lived much with the Northumberland family, and with his early patron Mr. M'Kenzie, until lord Montstuart was appointed envoy-extraordinary to the court of Turin, whom he accompanied as his friend, but without any official situation, except that when lord Montstuart was called to England upon private business, he again acted for a short time as charge des affaires. After this, according to his memoirs, his time was divided for many years between a residence in London, and occasional tours to the continent, with the political affairs of which he seems always anxious to keep up an intimate acquaintance. At length the death of his first friend and patron placed him in easy if not opulent circumstances, as that gentleman left him executor and residuary legatee with his two nephews, lord Bute and the primate of Ireland. The value of this legacy has been estimated at 15,000l. which enabled Mr. Dutens to pass the remainder of his life in literary retirement and social intercourse, for which he was admirably qualified, not only by an extensive knowledge, but by manners easy and accommodating. In the complimentary strain of a courtier few men exceeded him, although his profuse liberality in this article was sometimes thought to lessen its value. He died at his house in Mount-street, Grosvenor-square, May 23, 1812, in his eighty-third year. Not many days before his death, he called, in a coach, on many persons of eminence with whom he had corresponded, for the sole purpose of returning the letters he had received from them. His publications, not already noticed were, 1 “Explications des quelques Medailles de peuple, de villes, et des rois Grecques et Pheniciennes,” 1773, 4to. 2. The same translated. 3. “Itineraire des Routes les plus frequentées; ou Journal d‘un Voyage aux Villes principales de l’Europe,” often reprinted. 4. “Histoire de ce qui s’est passe” pour establissement d'une Regence en Angleterre. Par M. L. D. Ne D. R. D. L. Ge. Be.“1789, 8vo; in which he adopted the sentiments of Mr. Pitt’s administration on the important question of the regency, which, he says, lost him the favour of a great personage. 5.” Recherches sur le terns le plus recule de l'usage des Voutes chez les Anciens,“1795. He wrote also the French text of the second volume of the Marlborough gems, a task for which he was well qualified, as he was an excellent classical antiquary and medallist. In 1771 he translated” The manner of securing all sorts of brick buildings from fire,“&c. from the French of count d'Espie. His last publication, in 1805, was his own history, in” Memoires d'un Voyageur," &c. of which we have availed ourselves in this sketch but, although this work may often amuse the reader, and add something to the knowledge of human nature, it will not perhaps create an unmixed regard for the character of the writer.

Seated one day at the foot of a tree, absorbed in his reflections, and surrounded by maps of geography, which he examined with the most eager attention, a gentleman suddenly approached him, and asked with an air of surprise what he was doing. “Studying geography,” said he. “And do you understand any thing of the subject r” “Most assuredly I never trouble myself about things I do not understand.” “And what place are you now seeking for?” “I am trying to find the most direct way to Quebec.” “For what purpose?” “That I might go there, and continue my studies in the university of that town.” < But why need you go for this purpose to the end of the world? There are universities nearer home, superior to that of Quebec; and if it will afTord you any pleasure, I will point them out to you." At this moment they were joined by a large retinue belonging to the young princes of Lorraine, who were hunting in the forest with count Vidampiere and baron Pfutschner, their governors. A variety of questions were put to Duval, which he answered with equal precision and good sense, and without being out of countenance. In consequence of this interview, Leopold, duke of Lorraine, took him under his protection, and when he was brought to the court at Luneville, the duke received him in the midst of a numerous assembly, whom this singular event had collected. He answered every question that was put to him, without being confused, notwithstanding the novelty of the scene to him, and the important part he had to act; and the duke committed the care of his establishment at the college of Pont-a-Mousson to baron Pfutschner. Here his natural taste for study, added to his desire of answering the expectations of his illustrious patron, made him redouble his zeal. History, geography, and antiquities, were the studies he preferred, and in which his new guides were peculiarly qualified to assist him. He lived two years in this house; and the improvement he made was so great, that duke Leopold, as a recompense, and to give him an opportunity of still further progress, permitted him in 1718 to make a journey to Paris in his suite. On his return the next year the duke appointed him his librarian, and conferred on him the office of professor of history in the academy of Luneville.

, a German historian and antiquary, was born at Duingen in the duchy of Brunswick, Sept. 7, 1674. Alter studying for some time at Brunswick and Helmstadt, where he made very distinguished progress in the belles lettres and history, he became secretary to the count de Flemming in Poland; and there became acquainted with the celebrated Leibnitz, by whose interest he was appointed professor of history at Helmstadt. After Leibnitz’s death, he was appointed professor at Hanover, where he published some of his works. Although this place was lucrative, he here contracted debts, and his creditors having laid hold of a part of his salary to liquidate some of these, he privately quitted Hanover in 1723, where he left his family, and the following year embraced the religion of popery at Cologne. He then passed some time in the monastery of Corvey in Westphalia; and the Jesuits being very proud of their convert, sent him advantageous offers to settle at Vienna, Passau, or Wurtzbourg. He chose the latter, and was appointed the bishop’s counsel, historiographer, and keeper of the archives and library, and the emperor afterwards granted him letters of nobility. Pope Innocent XIII. seems also to have been delighted with his conversion, although his embarrassed circumstances appear to have been the chief cause of it. He died in the month of February 1730; and whatever may be thought of his religious principles, no doubt can be entertained of his extensive learning and knowledge of history. He wrote, 1. “Historia studii etymologici linguae Germanicas,” Hanover, 1711, 8vo. 2. “De usu et pr&stantia studii etymologici linguae Gerjnanicse.” 3. “Corpus historicum medii aevi,” Leipsic, 1723, 2 vols. fol. a work on which the abbé Lenglet bestows high praise, as very curious and well -digested. 4. “Origines Habsburgo-Austriacae,” Leipsic, 1721, folio. 5. “Leges Francorum et Hipuariorum,” &c. ibid. 1730, fol. 6. “Historia genealogica principumSaxonite superioris, necnon origines Aulialtiiue et Sabaudicae,” ibid. 1722, fol. 7. “Caihechesis theotisca monachi Weissenburgensis, interpretatione illustrate.” 8. “Leibnitzii collectanea etymologica.” 9. “Brevis ad historian! Germanise introductio.” 10. “Programma de antiquissimo Helmstadiistatu,” Helmstadt, 1709. 11. “De diplomate Caroh magui pro scholis Osnaburgensibus Grsecis et Latinis.” 12. “Animadversiones historical et criticae in Joannis Frederic! Schannati dicecesim et hierarchiam Fuldeusem.” 13. “Annales Franciae orientalis et episcopatus Wurceburgensis,” 2 vols. 1731. 14. “De origine Germanorum,” Gottingen, 1750, 4to. He wrote also some numUtnatical tracts, &c.

, one of the principal lords of the bow Countries, was born in 1522 of an illustrious family in Holland, and served with great distinction in the armies of the emperor Charles V. whom he followed into Africa in 1544. Being appointed general of horse under Philip II. he signalized himself at the battle of St. Quentin in 1557, and that of Graveliwes in 1553. But, after the departure of Philip for Spain, unwilling, as he said himself, to fight for the re-establishment of the penal laws, and the inquisition, he took a part in the troubles which broke out in the Low Countries. He nevertheless made it his endeavour to dispose the governess of those provinces, and the nobles combined against her, to terms of peace and moderation. He even took an oath to that princess to support the Romish religion, to punish sacrilege, and to extirpate heresy; but his connections with the prince of Orange and the chief nobles of that party, brought him into suspicion with the court of Spain. The duke of Alva having been sent by Philip II. into the Low Countries to suppress the rebels, ordered his head to be struck off at Brussels, the 5th of June 1568, as well as that of Philip de Montmorency, comte de Horn. The count Egmont was then in his 46th year; and submitted to death with resignation, professing himself of the communion of the church of Rome. The ambassador of France wrote to his court, that “he had seen that head fall, which had twice made France to tremble.” The same day that the count Egmont was executed, his wife, Sabina of Bavaria, came to Brussels, for the purpose of consoling the countess of Aremberg on the death of her husband; and as she was discharging this office of affection and. charity, the afflicting tidings were announced to her of the condemnation of the count her husband. The count of Egmont had written to Philip II. protesting to him, “that he had never attempted any thing against the catholic religion, nor contrary to the duty of a good subject;” but this justification was deemed insufficient. Besides, it was thought necessary to make an example; and Philip II. observed on occasion of the deaths of the counts Egmont and Horn, that he struck off their heads, because “the heads of salmons were of greater accoufct than many thousands of frogs.” The posterity of count Egmont became extinct in the person of Procopius Francis, count Egmont, general of the horse, and of the dragoons of the king of Spain, and brigadier in the service of the king of France, who died without children at Fraga in Arragon, in 1707, at the age of 38. Maximilian d' Egmont, count 9f Buren, a general in the army of Charles V. of the same family, but of a different branch, displayed his courage and conduct in the wars against Fi%ncis I.; but besieged Terouane in vain, and died of a quinsey at Brussels in 1543. The president De Thou says, that he was great both in war and in peace, and praises his fidelity and magnificence. His physician, Andrew Vesalius, having, as it is pretended, foretold him the time of his death, he made a great feast for his friends, and distributed rich presents among them. When the entertainment was over, he put himself to bed, and died precisely at the time foretold him by Vesalius.

Emmius died at Groningen, Dec. 9, 1625, leaving a family behind him; for he had been twice married. Til the last years of his life he composed the three volumes o his “Vetus Grsecia illustrata,” or ancient Greece illustrated the first of which contains a geographical description of Greece the second, the history of it; the third, the particular form of government in every state. This work was committed to the press in his life-time; bur, through the delays of the printers, not published till after his death, in 1626, 3 vols. 8vo. He had published several considerable works before this; as, his “Opus Chronologicum novum,” Groningen, 1619, fol. and some genealogical works, which contain the history of Rome and an universal history, written in a very elaborate method his “Decades rerum Frisicarum,” in which we do not find him unreasonably prepossessed in favour of his native country: on the contrary, he confuted vigorously the idle tales related by the historians of Friesland, concerning the antiquities of their nation; and this love of truth raised him a great many enemies. This work was printed at Leyden, 16 1C, fol. an edition of great rarity. He wrote also a History of William Lewis count of Nassau, governor of Friesland; in which we meet, not only with a panegyric on that prince, but also a short history of thf United Provinces, from 1577 to 1614. This was printed at Groningen, 1621, 4to. He had theological controversies with Daniel Hoffman, and wrote an abridgment of the life and errors of David George, the enthusiast, in German, and not in Latin, as Clement has proved in his Bibl. Curieuse. When he died, he was about composing the history of Philip of Macedon; in order to shew the United Provinces by what fraudulent and indirect means Philip had oppressed the liberty of Greece, and had already carried this history to the 15th year of Philip’s reign.

, of Oppyck, in Holland, was born there in the latter part of the sixteenth century, and acquired great reputation for his knowledge of the oriental languages. He was also an able lawyer and divine, and took his degree of doctor in the latter faculty. He studied the oriental languages under Drusius and Erpenius, and after having been professor of theology and Hebrew at Harderwich for eight years, was, in 1627, made professor of Hebrew at Leyden, on which occasion he delivered an harangue on the dignity and utility of the Hebrew language, and it was his constant endeavour to diffuse a knowledge of that language, and of the Arabic and jSyriac, among his countrymen, that they might be the better enabled to combat the objections of the Jews to the Christian religion. In 1639, count Maurice, governor of Bresil, appointed him his counsellor. He died in June 1648, very soon after he had begun a course of theology at Leyden. He lived in much intimacy with Lewis de Dieu, Daniel Heinsius, and the Buxtorfs, who speak very highly of him. He offered at one time to superintend the printing of a Talmudical dictionary in Holland, and endeavoured to bring the younger Buxtorf to Leyden, who had undertaken to defend the vowel points against Lewis Cappel. We also find him corresponding with our excellent archbishop Usher. Constantine’s works are, 1 “Coinmentarius ad codicem Babylouicum, seu Tractatus Thalmudicus de mensuris Templi,” Leyden, 1630, 4to. 2. “Versio et Notae ad Paraphrasin Joseph! Jachiadae in Danielem,” Amst. 1633, 4to. 3. “Itinerarium D. Benjaminis,” Heb. and Lat. Leyden, 8vo. 4. “Moysis Kimchi Grammatica Chaldaica,” ibid. 8vo. 5. “Confutatio Abarbanelis et Alscheichi in caput liii. Isaia-,” ibid. 1631, 8vo, and Franc. 1685. 6. “Commentarius in Tractatum Thaimudicum, qui dicitur Porta, de legibus Hebraeorum forensibus,” Heb. and Lat ibid. 1637, 4to. 7. “Commentariuf ad Betramum de Republica Hebrseorum,” 1641, 8vo.

, a German divine and philologer, was born at Nuremberg March 24, 1663. After studying at Altorf, where, in 1684, he took his degree of master of arts, and received the poetic crown, he went to Jena, and, as adjunct of the faculty of philosophy, taught the classics with great reputation. He afterwards travelled through Germany and Holland, and on his return assisted his father, who was pastor of the fauxbourg of Wehrd in Nuremberg. Having carried on a correspondence with the most eminent scholars of his time, and now acquired reputation by his works, he was invited by the celebrated Magliabechi to become librarian to the grand duke of Florence; and among other advantages, he was promised the unmolested exercise of his religion, which was the protestant; and he would probably have accepted so liberal an offer, if he had not at the same time,been appointed inspector of the schools at Altorf, on which charge he entered in 1691. Four years afterwards he was recalled to Nuremberg, as deacon of the church of St. Mary, and professor of eloquence, poetry, history, and the Greek languages in the college of St. Giles, to which office, in 1705, was added that of pastor of St. Clare. But these offices do not appear to have been profitable, if, as we are told, he found himself in such circumstances as to be obliged to sell a good part of his valuable and curious library. Here, however, he seems to have remained until his death, Sept. 24, 1722. Some of his philological dissertations were printed in 1700, in the “Syntagma secundnm dissertationum Philologicarum,” Rotterdam, 8vo. His “Epigenes sive commentarius in fragmenta Orphica” was published at Nuremberg in 1702, 4to. He also published a new edition, Utrecht, 1689, of the “Orphei Argonautica, hymni, et de lapidibus Poema,” with notes; and an edition of “Matthei Devarii de particulis Grrecae Linguae, liber singularis,” Amst. 1700, 12 mo. He translated into German Allix on the Truth of the Christian Religion, and on the coming of the Messiah; and count Marsigli’s Letter on Mineral Phosphorus. He wrote a life of himself, which was prefixed to some of his sermons printed after his decease.

, marshal of France, and viceroy of America, was born at A gen, in 1627, and served a long time in Holland, under prince Maurice, with whom he acted as agent of France, and proved at once a good general and an able negociator. Being appointed ambassador extraordinary to England, in 1661, he had an affront offered to him there, Oct. 10 of that year, by the baron de Vatteville, ambassador from Spain, which his sovereign not only disavowed, but issued orders to his ministers at foreign courts, not to contest with the ambassadors of France in any public ceremonies. Count d‘Estrades having negotiated in 1662 the sale of Dunkirk, was commissioned to receive that town from the hands of the English. Though Charles II. had signed the treaty, the parliament strongly opposed its execution, and the English garrison refused to evacuate the place. But the count d’Estrades (according to the French historian’s account) judiciously distributed considerable sums of money; and the governor and the garrison embarked for London. On their passage they met the packet conveying to them the order of parliament not to surrender Dunkirk to the French; but the affair was already settled, owing to the active and ingenious address of d'Estrades. Being returned to Paris, he was dispatched again to London, in 1666, in quality of ambassador extraordinary; and the year following went over to Holland, invested with similar powers, and there concluded the treaty of Breda. He distinguished himself not less in 1673, when sent ambassador extraordinary to the conferences of Nimegucn for the general peace. He died the 26th of February, 1686, at the age of seventy-nine. He had been appointed two years before, governor to the duke of Chartres, and superintendant of his finances. The negociations of the count d'Estrades were printed at the Hague, 1742, in 9 vols. 12mo, which is merely an extract from the originals, which form 22 vols. folio, the thinnest of which is of 900 pages. John Aymon published some of them at Amsterdam, in 1709, 12mo.

, born in 1660, succeeded John, count d'Estrees, his father, in the post of vice-admiral of France, which he filled with great reputation in the maritime parts of the Levant. He bombarded Barcelona and Alicant in 1691, and commanded in 1G97 the fleet at the siege of Barcelona; being appointed in 1701 lieutenant-general of the naval forces of Spain by Philip V. a station which he held together with that of vice-admiral of France, and thus had the command of the Spanish and French fleets. Two years afterwards, in 1703, he was made marshal of France, and took the name of marechal des Cceuvres. This dignity was followed by those of grandee of Spain, and knight of the golden fleece; all which he merited by his heroic but prudent courage. Though the abb de St. Pierre describes him as a man of a capricious temper, he had an excellent disposition, and was capable of strong attachments. The French academy, that of sciences, and that of inscriptions, admitted him of their societies. Amidst the tumultuous occupations of war, he never forgot the cultivation of letters. He died at Paris, Dec, 28, 1737, in the seventy-seventh year of his age, equally lamented by the citizen, the scholar, and the philosopher. He left no issue by his wife, Lucia Felicia de Noailles.

, marshal of France, and minister of state, was born at Paris, July 1, 1695, the son of François Michel le Tellier de Courtanvaux, captaincolonel of the Cent-Suisses, son of the marquis de Louvois and Marie Anne Catherine d‘Estrees, daughter of John count d’Estrees, vice-admiral and marshal of France. He first bore arms in the short war which the duke of Orleans, regent, declared against Spain, and served under the command of the marechal de Berwick. Having attained by his services the rank of field-marshal and inspector- general of cavalry, he signalized himself in the war of 1741. The blockade of Egra, the passage of the Meine at Selingstadt, the battle of Fontenoi, the siege of Mons, that of Charleroi, &c. were among the exploits in which he was concerned. He had the greatest share in the victory of Laufeldt; and marshal Saxe, an excellent judge of military merit, trusted him on various occasions with the most critical manoeuvres. On the breaking out of the war in 1756, Louis XV. who had promoted him to the rank of marshal of France, Feb. 24, 1757, appointed him to the command of the army in Germany, consisting of upwards of 100,000 men. He set out in the beginning of spring, after having shewn the monarch the plan of operations. “At the beginning of July,” said he, “I shall have pushed the enemy beyond the Weser, and shall be ready to penetrate into the electorate of Hanover;” and, not content with effecting this, he gave battle to the duke of Cumberland at Hastembeck, the 26th of July; after this, he was replaced by marshal Richelieu, who profited by the advantages that had been gained, to obtain the capitulation of Closterseven, by which the Hanoverians engaged to remain neuter during the rest of the war. Marshal d‘Estrees, recalled by intrigues at court, and sent to Giessen, after the battle of Minden, took no share in the command, but contented himself with giving useful advice to M. de Contades. He obtained the brevet of duke in 1763, and he died the 2d of January, 1771, at the age of seventy-six. Marshal d’Estrees left no children.

, a Roman empress (wife to Theodosius the younger), whose proper name was Athenais, was the daughter of Leontius, an Athenian philosopher, and born about the year 400. Her father took such care of her education, that she became at length so accomplished in learning, that, at his death, he left his whole estate to his two sons, except an hundred pieces of gold, which he bequeathed to his daughter, with this declaration, that “her own good fortune would be sufficient for her.” This compliment, however, did not satisfy her, and having gone to law with her brothers, without success, she carried her cause to Constantinople, where she was recommended to Pulcheria, sister of the emperor Theodosius the younger, and became her favourite. In the year 421 she embraced Christianity, and changed her name from Athenais to Eudocia 3 and the same year was married to the emperor, through the powerful recommendation of his sister; by which event her father’s prophecy appeared to be fulfilled. Amidst all the grandeurof her new situation, she still continued to lead a very studious and philosophic life, spending much of her time in reading and writing; and lived very happily till the year 445, when an apparently trifling accident exposed her to the emperor’s jealousy. The emperor, it is said, having sent her an apple of an extraordinary size, she sent it to Paulinus, whom she respected on ac­"count of his learning. Paulinus, not knowing from whom it came, presented it to the emperor who, soon after seeing the empress, asked her what she had done with it. She, being apprehensive of raising suspicions in her husband, if she should tell him that she had given it to Paulinus, very unwisely declared that she had eaten it, which excited a suspicion of her intimacy with Paulinus, that seemed to be confirmed by her confusion on his producing the apple. He also put Paulinus to death. Upon this she went to Jerusalem, where she spent many years in building and adorning churches, and in relieving the poor. It is said that even when here, the jealousy of Theodosius pursued her, and that hearing she visited the priest Severus and the deacon John, he sent Saturninus with orders to put them both to death. Eudocia was so irritated at this barbarous persecution, that she for once stained the purity of her own life, by procuring Saturninus to be murdered. Dupin says, she did not return while the emperor lived; but Cave tells us, that she was reconciled to him, returned to Constantinople, and continued with him till his death; after which, she went again to Palestine, where she spent the remainder of her life in pious works. She died about A. D. 460; and, as Cave says, upon her death-bed, took a solemn oath, by which she declared herself entirely free from any stains of unchastity.

After making peace with the Turks, he had a long suspension from those glories which constantly attended his rictorious sword: for, in the war which ensued between the emperor and the king of Spain, count Merci had the command of the army in Italy, and Eugene had no share in it, any farther than in council; and at the conclusion of it, when he was appointed the emperor’s first plenipotentiary in the treaty of Vienna, in 1725. We next find him engaged in a new scene of action, in the war between the emperor his master and the kings of France, Spain, and Sardinia, in which, from 1733 to 1735, he experienced various success. This illustrious hero died at Vienna, April 10, 1736, in his seventy-third year. He was found dead in his bed, though he had been very gay the night before with company, whom he had entertained at supper, without making the least complaint; and it was supposed that he was choaked by an immoderate defluxion of rheum, with which, it seems, he was sometimes troubled.

, a very eminent mathematician, was born at Basil, on the 14th of April, 1707: he was the son of Paul Euler and of Margaret Brucker (of a family illustrious in literature), and spent the first year of his life at the village of Richen, of which place his father was protestant minister. Being intended for the church, his father, who had himself studied under James Bernoulli!, taught him mathematics, as a ground-work of his other studies, or at least a noble and useful secondary occupation. But Euler, assisted and perhaps secretly encouraged by John Bernoulli, who easily discovered that he would be the greatest scholar he should ever educate, soon declared his intention of devoting his life to that pursuit. This intention the wise father did not thwart, but the son did not so blindly adhere to it, as not to connect with it a more than common improvement in every other kind of useful learn-, ing, insomuch that in his latter days men often wondered how with such a superiority in one branch, he could have been so near to eminence in all the rest. Upon the foundation of the academy of sciences at St. Petersburgh, in, 1723, by Catherine I. the two younger Bernouillis, NichoJas and Daniel, had gone thither, promising, when they set out, to endeavour to procure Euler a place in it: they accordingly wrote to him soon after, to apply his mathetics to physiology, which he did, and studied under the best naturalists at Basil, but at the same time, i. e. in 1727, published a dissertation on the nature and propagation of sound; and an answer to the question on the masting of ships, which the academy of sciences at Paris judged worthy of the accessit. Soon after this, he was called to St. Petersburgh, and declared adjutant to the mathematical class in the academy, a class, in which, from the circumstances of the times (Newton, Leibnitz, and so many other eminent scholars being just dead), no easy laurels were to be gathered. Nature, however, who had organized so many mathematical heads at one time, was not yet tired of her miracles and she added Euler to the number. He indeed was much wanted the science of the calculus integralis, hardly come out of the hands of its creators, was still too near the stage of its infancy not to want to be made more perfect. Mechanics, dynamics, and especially hydrodynamics, and the science of the motion of the heavenly bodies, felt the imperfection. The application of the differential calculus, to them, had been sufficiently successful; but there were difficulties whenever it was necessary to go from the fluxional quantity to the fluent. With regard to the nature and properties of numbers, the writings of Fermat (who had been so successful in them), and together with these all his profound researches, were lost. Engineering and navigation were reduced to vague principles, and were founded on a heap of often contradictory observations, rather than a regular theory. The irregularities in the motions of the celestial bodies, and especially the complication of forces whitfh influence that of the moon, were still the disgrace of geometers. Practical astronomy had jet to wrestle with the imperfection of telescopes, insomuch, that it could hardly be said that any rule for making them existed. Euler turned his eyes to all these objects he perfected the calculus integralis he was the inventor of a new kind of calculus, that of sines he simplified analytical operations and, aided by these powerful help-mates, and the astonishing facility with which he knew how to subdue expressions the most intractable, he threw a new light on all the branches of the mathematics. But at Catherine’s death the academy was threatened with extinction, by men who knew not the connection which arts and sciences have with the happiness of a people. Euler was offered and accepted a lieutenancy on board one of the empress’s ships, with the promise of speedy advancement. Luckily things changed, and the learned captain again found his own element, and was named Professor of Natural Philosophy in 1733, in the room of his friend John Bernouilli. The number of memoirs which Euler produced, prior to this period, is astonishing, but what he did in 1735 is almost incredible, An important calculation was to be made, without loss of time; the other academicians had demanded some months to do it. Euler asked three days—in three days he did it; but the fatigne threw him into a fever, and the fever left him not without the loss of an eye, an admonition which would have made an ordinary man more sparing of the other. The great revolution, produced by the discovery of fluxions, had entirely changed the face of mechanics; still, however, there was no complete work on the science of motion, two or three only excepted, of which Euler felt the insufficiency. He saw, with pain, that the best works on the subject, viz. “Newton’s Principia,” and “Herman’s Phoronomia,” concealed the method by which these great men had come at so many wonderful discoveries, under a synthetic veil. In order to lift this up, Euler employed all the resources of that analysis which had served him so well on so many other occasions; and thus uniting his own discoveries to those of other geometers, had them published by the academy in 1736. To say that clearness, precision, and order, are the characters of this work, would be barely to say, that it is, what without these qualities no work can be, classical of its kind. It placed Euler in the rank of the first geometricians then existing, and this at a time when John Bernouilli was still living. Such labours demanded some relaxation; the only one which Euler admitted was music, but even to this he could not go without the spirit of geometry with him. They produced together the essay on a new theory of music, which was published in 1739, but not very well received, probably, because it contains too much geometry for a musician, and too much music for a geometrician. Independently, however, of the theory, which is built on Pythagorean principles, there are many things in it which may be of service, both to composers, and to makers of instruments. The doctrine, likewise, of the genera and the modes of music is here cleared up with all the clearness and precision which mark the works of Euler. Dr. Burney remarks, that upon the whole, Euler seems not to have invented much in this treatise; and to have done little more than arrange and methodize former discoveries in a scientific and geometric manner. He may, indeed, not have known what antecedent writers had discovered before; and though not the first, yet to have imagined himself an inventor. In 1740, his genius was again called forth by the academy of Paris (who, in 1738, had adjudged the prize to his paper on the nature and properties of fire) to discuss the nature of the tides, an important question, which demanded a prodigious extent of calculations, aud an entire new system of the world. This prize Euler did not gain alone; but he divided it with Maclaurin and D. Bernouilli, forming with them a triumvirate of candidates, which the realms of science had not often beheld. The agreement of the several memoirs of Euler and Bernouilli, on this occasion, is very remarkable. Though the one philosopher had set out on the principle of admitting vortices, which the other rejected, they not only arrived at the same end of the journey, but met several times on the road; for instance, in the determination of the tides under the frozen zone. Philosophy, indeed, led these two great men by different paths; Bernouilli, who had more patience than his friend, sanctioned every physical hypothesis he was obliged to make, by painful and laborious experiment. These Euler’s impetuous genius scorned; and, though his natural sagacity did not always supply the loss, he made amends by his superiority in analysis, as often as there was any occasion to simplify expressions, to adapt them to practice, and to recognize, by final formulae, the nature of the result. In 1741, Euler received some very advantageous propositions from Frederic the Second (who had just ascended the Prussian throne), to go and assist him in forming an academy of sciences, out of the wrecks of the Royal Society founded by Leibnitz. With these offers the tottering state of the St. Petersburgh academy, under the regency, made it necessary for the philosopher to comply. He accordingly illumined the last volume of the “Melanges de Berlin,” with five essays, which are, perhaps, the best things in it, and contributed largely to the academical volumes, the first of which was published in 1744. No part of his multifarious labours is, perhaps, a more wonderful proof of the extensiveness and facility of his genius, than what he executed at Berlin, at a time when he contrived also that the Petersburgh acts should not suffer from the loss of him. In 1744, Euler published a complete treatise of isoperimetrical curves. The same year beheld the theory of the motions of tb.e planets and comets; the well-known theory of magnetism, which gained the Paris prize; and the much-amended translation of Robins’ s “Treatise on Gunnery.” In 1746, his “Theory of Light and Colours” overturned Newton’s “System of Emanations;” as did another work, at that time triumphant, the “Monads of Wolfe and Leibnitz.” Navigation was now the only branch of useful knowledge, for which the labours of analysis and geometry had done nothing. The hydrographical part alone, and that which relates to the direction of the course of ships, had been treated by geometricians conjointly with nautical astronomy. Euler was the first who conceived and executed the project of making this a complete science. A memoir on the motion of floating bodies, communicated to the academy of St. Petersburgh, in 1735, by M. le Croix, first gave him this idea. His researches on the equilibrium of ships furnished him with the means of bringing the stability to a determined measure. His success encouraged him to go on, and produced the great work which the academy published in 1749, in which we find, in systematic order, the most sublime notions on the theory of the equilibrium and mo. tion of floating bodies, and on the resistance of fluids. This was followed by a second part, which left nothing to be desired on the subject, except the turning it into a language easy of access, and divesting it of the calculations which prevented its being of general use. Accordingly in 1773, from a conversation with admiral Knowles, and other assistance, out of the “Scientia Navalis,” 2 vols. 4to, was produced, the “Theorie complette de la Construction et de la Manoeuvre des Vaisseaux.” This work was instantly translated into all languages, and the author received a present of 6000 livres from the French king: he had before had 300l. from the English parliament, for the theorems, by the assistance of which Meyer made his lunar tables . And now it was time to collect into one systematical and continued work, all the important discoveries on the infinitesimal analysis, which Euler had been making for thirty years, and which lay dispersed in the memoirs of the different academies. This, accordingly, the professor undertook; but he prepared the way by an elementary work, containing all the previous requisites for this study. This is called “An Introduction to the analysis of Infinitesimals,” and is a work in which the author has exhausted all the doctrine of fractions, whether algebraical or transcendental, by shewing their transformation, their resolution, and their developernent. This introduction was soon, followed by the author’s several lessons on the “calculus integralis, and differentialis.” Having engaged himself to count Orlow, to furnish the academy with papers sufficient to fill their volumes for twenty years after his death, the philosopher is likely to keep his word, having presented seventy papers, through Mr. Golofkin, in the course of his life, and left two hundred and fifty more behind him; nor is there one of these that does not contain a discovery, or something that may lead to one. The most ancient of these memoirs form the collection then published, under the title of “Opuscula Analytica.” Such were Euler’s labours, and these his titles to immortality His memory shall endure till science herself is no more! Few men of letters have written so much as Euler no geometrician, has ever embraced so many objects at one time or has equalled him, either in the variety or magnitude of his discoveries. When we reflect on the good such men do their fellow-creatures, we cannot help indulging a wish (vain, alas as it is) for their illustrious course to be prolonged beyond the term allotted to mankind. Euler’s, though it has had an end, was very long and very honourable; and it affords us some consolation for his loss, to think that he enjoyed it exempt from the ordinary consequences of extraordinary application, and that his last labours abounded in proofs of that vigour of understanding which marked his early days, and which he preserved to his end. Some swimmings in the head, which seized him on the first days of September, 1783, did not prevent his laying hold of a few facts, which reached him through the channel of the public papers, to calculate the motions of the aerostatical globes; and he even compassed a very difficult integration, in which the calculation had engaged him . But the decree was gone forth: on the 7th of September he talked with Mr. Lexell, who had come to dine with him, of the new planet, and discoursed with him upon other subjects, with his usual penetration. He was playing with one of his grand-children at tea-time, when he was seized with an apoplectic fit. “I am dying,” said he, before he lost his senses; and he ended his glorious life a few hours after, aged seventy-six years, five months, and three days. His latter days were tranquil and serene. A few infirmities excepted, which are the inevitable lot of an advanced age, he enjoyed a share of health which allowed him to give little time to repose. Euler possessed to a great degree what is commonly called erudition he had read all the Latin classics was perfect master of ancient mathematical literature and had the history of all ages, and all nations, even to the minutest facts, ever present to his mind. Besides this, he knew much more of physic, botany, and chemistry, than could be expected from any man who had not made these sciences his peculiar occupation. “I have seen,” says his biographer, Mr. Fuss, “strangers go from him with a kind of surprise mixed with admiration; they could not conceive how a man, who for half a century had seemed taken up in making and publishing discoveries in natural philosophy and mathematics, could have found means to preserve so much knowledge that seemed useless to himself, and foreign to the studies in which he was engaged. This was the effect of a happy memory, that lost nothing of what had ever been entrusted to it nor was it a wonder that the man who was able to repeat the whole Æneis, and to point out to his hearers the first and last verses of every page of his own edition of it, should not have lost what he had learned, at an age when the impressions made upon us are the strongest. Nothing can equal the ease with which, without expressing the least degree of ill-humour, he could quit his abstruse meditations, and give himself up to the general amusements of society. The art of not appearing wise above one’s fellows, of descending to the level of those with whom one lives, is too rare in these days not to make it a merit in Euler to have possessed it. A temper ever equal, a natural and easy chearfulness, a species of satirical wit, tempered with urbane humanity, the art of telling a story archly, and with simplicity, made his conversation generally sought. The great fund of vivacity which he had at all times possessed, and without which, indeed, the activity we have just been admiring could not have existed, carried him sometimes away, and he was apt to grow warm, but his anger left him as quickly as it came on, and there never has existed a man to whom he bore malice. He possessed a precious fund of rectitude and probity. The sworn enemy of injustice, whenever or by whomsoever committed, he used to censure and attack it, without the least attention to the rank or riches of the offender. Recent examples of this are in the recollection of all who hear me.” As he was filled with respect for religion, his piety was sincere, and his devotion full of fervour. He went through all his Christian duties with the greatest attention. Euler loved all mankind, and if he ever felt a motion of indignation, it was against the enemy of religion, particularly against the declared apostles of infidelity. He was of a very religious turn of mind. He published a New Demonstration of the Existence of God, and of the Spirituality of the Soul, which last has been admitted into several divinity schools as a standard book. With scrupulous exactness he adhered to the religion of his country, that of Calvinism, and, fortified by its principles, he was a good husband, a good father, a good friend, a good citizen, a good member of private society.

Mr. Evelyn’s next publication was the most important of all his works: 15. “Sylva; or, a dicourse of Foresttrees, and the propagation of timber in his majesty’s dominions 5 as it was delivered in the royal society the 15th of October, 1662, Upon occasion of certain queries propounded to that illustrious assembly by the honourable the principal officers and commissioners of the navy.” To which is annexed, “Pomona, or, an appendix concerning fruit-trees, in relation to cider, the making and several ways of ordering it: published by express order of the royal society,” Lond. 1664, fol. This was the first work written by the command, and published in virtue of an order, of the royal society, signed by the lord viscount Brouncker, their president, and dedicated to the king. The second edition of it was published in 1669, with a new dedication to king Charles II. dated from Sayes-court, Aug. 24; the first paragraph of which deserves the reader’s notice. “Sir, This second edition of Sylva, after more than a thousand copies had been bought up and dispersed of the first impression, in much less than two years space (which booksellers assure us is a very extraordinary thing in volumes of this bulk), conies now again to pay its homage to your serene majesty, to whose auspices alone it owes the favourable acceptance which it has received in the world. But it is not that alone which it presumes to tell your majesty, but to acquaint you that it has been the sole occasion for furnishing your almost exhausted dominions with more, I dare say, than two millions of timber-trees, besides infinite others, which have been propagated within the three nations at the instigation and by the direction of this work; and that the author of it is able, if need require, to make it out by a competent volume of letters and acknowledgments, which are come to his hands, from several persons of the most eminent quality, many of them illustrious, and divers of them unknoun to him, in justification of what he asserts; which he the rather preserves with the more care, because they are testimonials from so many honourable persons ‘of the benefit they have received from the endeavours of the royal society, which now-a-days passes through so many censures; but she has yet your majesty for her founder and patron, and is therefore the’ less concerned, since no man of worth can lightly speak ill of an assembly v.hich your majesty has thought fit to dignify by so signal a relation to it.” The third edition, with great additions and improvements, was published in 1G79; the fourth in 1705, and the fifth in 1729, both very incorrect. In 1776 a new edition of the “Sylva” was published in 4to, by Dr. Andrew Hunter, of York, a gentleman eminently qualified for the undertaking. Under the care of this gentleman the work appeared with every possible advantage; and was enriched by the judicious editor with ample and copious notes, and adorned with a set of fine engravings. A head of Mr. Evelyn is prefixed, drawn and engraved by Battolozzi. Dr. Hunter’s edition of the Sylva has been four times reprinted. The edition of 1812 contains the deceased editor’s last corrections . 16. “A parallel of the antient architecture with the modern, in a collection of ten principal authors who have written upon the five orders, viz. Palladio and Scammozzi, Serlio and Vignola D. Barbaro and Cataneo L. B. Alberti and Viola, Bullant and De Lorme compared with one another. The three Greek orders, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian, comprise the first part of this treatise, and the two Latin, Tuscan and Composite, the latter written in French by Roland Freart, sieur de Chambray made English for the benefit, of builders to which is added, an account of architects and architecture^ in an historical and etymological explanation of certain terms, particularly affected by architects; with Leon Baptista Alberti’s treatise of statues,” London, 1664, folio. This work, as well as the former, is dedicated to king Charles II.; and the dedication dated from Sayes-court, August 20th, contains^some curious facts. After an apology for prefixing his royal name to a translation, our author proceeds thus: “I know none, indeed, to whom I could more aptly inscribe a discourse of building, than to so royal a builder, whose august attempts have already given so great a splendour to our imperial city, and so illustrious an example to the nation It is from this contemplation, sir, that after I had, by the commands of the royal society, endeavoured the improvement of timber and the planting of trees, I have advanced to that of building, as its proper and mutual consequent, not with a presumption to incite or instruct your majesty, which were a vanity unpardonable, but, by it, to take occasion of celebrating your majesty’s great example, who use your empire and authority so worthily, as fortune seems to have consulted her reason, when she poured her favours upon you; so as I never cast my eyes on that generous designation in the epigram, Ut donem pastor K tedificem, without immediate reflection on your majesty, who seem only to value those royal advantages you have above others, that you may oblige, and that you may build. And certainly, sir, your majesty has consulted the noblest way of establishing your greatness, and of perpetuating your memory, since, while stones can preserve inscriptions, your name will be famous to posterity; and, when those materials fail, the benefits that are engraven in our hearts will outlast those of marble. It will be no paradox, but a truth, to affirm, that your majesty has already built and repaired more in three or four years, notwithstanding the difficulties and the necessity of an extraordinary ceconomy for the public concernment, than all your enemies have destroyed in twenty, nay than all your majesty’s predecessors have advanced in an hundred, as I could easily make out, not only by what your majesty has so magnificently designed and carried on at that your ancient honour of Greenwich, under the conduct of your most industrious and worthy surveyor, but in those splendid apartments and other useful reformations for security and delight about your majesty’s palace at Whitehall the chargeable covering first, then paving and reformation of Westminster-hall care and preparation for rebuilding St. Paul’s, by the impiety and iniquity of the late confusions almost dilapidated; what her majesty the queen-mother has added to her palace at Somerset-house, in a structure becoming her royal grandeur, and the due veneration of all your majesty’s subjects, for the lioirnir she has done both this your native city, and the whole nation. Nor may I here omit, what I so much desire to transmit to posterity, those noble and profitable amoenities of your majesty’s plantations, wherein you most resemble the divine architect, because your majesty has proposed in it such a pattern to your subjects, as merit their imitation and protoundest acknowledgments, in one of the most worthy and kingly improvements tbat nature is capable of. 1 know not what they talk of former ages, and of the now contemporary princes with your majesty these things are visible and should I here descend to more particulars, which yet were not foreign to the subject of this discourse, I would provoke the whole world to produce me an example parallel with your majesty, for your exact judgment and marvellous ability in all that belongs to the naval architecture, both as to its proper terms and more solid use, in which your majesty is master of one of the most noble and profitable arts that can be wished, in a prince to whom God has designed the dominion of the ocean, which renders your majesty’s empire universal; where, by exercising your royal talent and knowledge that way, you can bring even the antipodes to meet, and the poles to kiss each other; for so likewise, not in a metaphorical but natural sense, your equal and prudent government of this nation has made it good, whilst your majesty has so prosperously guided this giddy bark, through such a storm, as no hand, save your majesty’s, could touch the helm, but at the price of their temerity.” There is also another dedication to sir John Denham, knight of the bath, superintendent and surveyor of all his majesty’s buildings and works, in which there are several matters of fact worth knowing, as indeed there are in all Mr. Evelyn’s dedications; for, though no man was naturally more civil, or more capable of making a compliment handsomely, yet his merit was always conspicuous in his good manners; and he never thought that the swelling sound of a well-turned period could atone for want of sense. It appears from the dedication of the second edition of the Sylva to king Charles II. that there was a second edition of this work also in the same year, viz. 1669, as there was a third in 1697, which was the last in the author’s life-time. In this third edition, which is very much improved, “the account of Architects and Architecture,” which is an original work of Mr. Evelyn’s, and a most excellent one of its kind, is dedicated to sir Christopher Wren, surveyor to his majesty’s buildings and works; and there is in it another of those incidental passages that concern the personal history of our author. Having said in the first paragraph, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be found again in the noble works of that great architect, which, though a very high, is no unjust compliment, more especially, continues our author, St. Paul’s church and the Monument; he then adds, “I have named St. Paul’s, and truly not without admiration, as oft as I recall to mind, as frequently I do, the sad and deplorable condition it was in, when, after it had been made a stable of horses and a den of thieves, you, with other gentlemen and myself, were, by the late king Charles, named commissioners to survey the dilapidations, and to make report to his majesty, in order to a speedy reparation. You will not, I am sure, forget the struggle we had with some who were for patching it up any how, so the steeple might stand, instead of new-building, which it altogether needed: when, to put an end to the contest, five days after (August 27, Sept. 1666), that dreadful conflagration happened, out of whose this phoenix is risen, and was by providence designed for you. The circumstance is too remarkable, that I could not pass it over without notice. I will now add no more, but beg your pardon for this confidence of mine, after I have acquainted you that the parallel to which this was annexed being out of print, I was importuned by the bookseller to add something to a new impression, but to which I was no way inclined; till, not long since, going to St. Paul’s, to contemplate that august pile, and the progress you have made, some of your chief workmen gratefully acknowledging the assistance it had afforded them, I took this opportunity of doing myself this honour.” The fourth edition of this work, printed long after our author’s death, viz. in 1733, was in folio, as well as the rest; to which is added “The Elements of Architecture,” by sir Henry Wotton, and some other things, of which, however, hints were met with in our author’s pieces. 17. “Mwrtyj/ov Tjjj AvaiMos; that is, another part of the mystery of Jesuitism, or the new heresy of the Jesuits, publicly maintained at Paris, in the college of Clermont, the twelfth of December, 1661, declared to all the bishops of France, according to the copy printed at Paris. Together with the imaginary heresy, in three letters; with divers other particulars relating to this abominable mystery never before published in English;” Lond. 1664, 8vo. This, indeed, has not our author’s name to it; but that it is really his, and that he had reasons for not owning it more publicly, appears from a letter from him to Mr. Boyle. 18. “Kalendarium Hortense, or the gardener’s almanac, directing what he is to do monthly throughout the year, and what fruits and flowers are in prime,” Lond. 1664, 8vo. The second edition of this book, which seems to have been in folio, and bound with the Sylva and Pomona, as it was in the third edition, was dedicated to Cowley, with great compliments from our author to that poet, to whom it had been communicated before; which occasioned Cowley’s addressing to John Evelyn, esq. his mixed essay in verse and prose, entitled “The Garden.” This passed through at least nine editions. The author made many additions as long as he lived and the best was that printed by way of appendix to the fourth and last edition of the Sylva in his life-time. 19. “The history of the three late famous impostors, viz. Padre Ottotnano, pretended son and heir to the late grand signior; Mahomet Bei, a pretended prince of the Ottoman family, but, in truth, a Wallachian counterfeit: and Sabbatai Sevi, the supposed Messiah of the Jews, in the year 1666; with a brief account of the ground and occasion of tjie present war between the Turk and the Venetian: together with the cause of the final extirpation, destruction, and exile, of the Jews out of the empire of Persia,” Lond. 1668, 8vo. This piece is dedicated to Henry earl of Arlington, and the dedication is subscribed J. E. and, if Mr. Wood had seen it, he would not have said, “I know nothing yet to the contrary but this may be a translation.” The nature and value of this little piece were much better known abroad: one of the best literary journals, “Act. Eruditorum Lipsiensiutn,” A. D. 1690, p. 605, having given, though at some distance of time, a very just character of it, with this very remarkable circumstance, that the pretended Mahomet Bei was at that very juncture in the city of Leipsic. There is added, at the end of this piece, an account of the extirpation of the Jews in Persia during the reign of Shah Abbas the second, which is not so large or perfect as the rest; of which circumstance the author gives a hint, and does not press any thing farther than he is supported by authorities. He mentions a person, who, the very year that the book was published, took upon him the title of brother to the famous count Serini, and that he had the misfortune to be shipwrecked in the west of England, by which he imposed upon persons of quality, till, by unluckily calling for drink upon the road in very audible English, he discovered the cheat. He farther remarks, with regard to Sabbatai Sevi, that he was the twenty-fifth false Messiah that had attempted to impose upon the Jews, even according to their own account. 20. “Public employment and an active life preferred to solitude, in a reply to a late ingenious essay of a contrary title,” Lond. 1667, in 8vo. This was written in answer to a discourse of sir George Mackenzie’s, preferring solitude to public employment, which was at the time of its publication much admired; and, as our author apprehended this might prove an encouragement to indolence and timidity, he therefore wrote against it. We have in the Transactions of the royal society a character of this, and thie piece before mentioned, which follows the account given of the second edition of the “Sylva,” Philosoph. Trans. No. 53; and the reader will find some ingenious strictures on “Public employment, &c.” in vol. 1. of the Censura Literaria, by one who knows well how to improve solitude. 21. “An idea of the perfection of painting, demonstrated from the principles of art, and by examples conformable to the observations which Pliny and Quintilian have made upon the most celebrated pieces of the ancient painters, paralleled with some works of the most famous modern painters, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael, Julio Romano, and N. Poussin. Written in French by Roland Freart, Sieur de Cambray, and rendered English by J. E. esquire, fellow of the royal society;” Lond. 1668, 8vo, This translation is dedicated to Henry Howard, of Norfolk, heir apparent to that dukedom and the dedication is dated from Say es-court, June the 24th, 1668, 8vo. This piece, like most of Mr. Evelyn’s works, is now become exceeding scarce. In the preface he observes, that the reader will find in this discourse divers useful, remarks, especially where the author “treats of costume, which we, continues he, have interpreted decorum, as the nearest expression our language would bear to it. And I was glad our author had reproved it in so many instances, because it not only grows daily more licentious, but even ridiculous and intolerable. But it is hoped this may universally be reformed! when our modern workmen shall consider, that neither the exactness of their design, nor skilfulness in colouring, ha.s been able to defend their greatest predecessors from just reproaches, who have been faulty in this particular. I could exemplify in many others, whom our author has omitted; and there is none but takes notice what injury it has done the fame of some of our best reputed painters, and how indecorous it is to introduce circumstances, wholly improper to the usages and genius of the places where our histories are supposed to. have beeq acted.” Mr. Evelyn then remarks, that this was not only the fault of Bassano, who would be ever bringing in his wife, children, and servants, his dog and his cat, and very kitchen-stuff, after the Paduan mode; but of the great Titian himself, Georgipn, Tintoret, and the rest; as Paulo Veronese is observed also to have done, in his story of Pharaoh’s daughter drawing Moses out of the river, attended with a guard of Swisses. Malvogius likewise, in a picture then in the king’s gallery at Whitehall, not only represents our first parents with navels upon their bellies, but has placed an artificial stone fountain, carved with imagery, in the midst of his paradise. Nor does that excellent and learned painter, Rubens, escape without censure, not only for making most of his figures of the shapes of brawny Flemings, but for other sphalmata and circumstances of the like nature, though in some he has acquitted himself to admiration, in the due observation of costume, particularly in his crucifixes, &c. Raphael Urbino was, doubtless, one of the first who reformed these inadvertencies; but it was more conspicuous in his latter than in his former pieces. “As for Michael Angelo,” continues Mr. Evelyn, “though I heartily consent with our critic in reproving that almost idolatrous veneration of his works, who hath certainly prodigiously abused the art, not only in the table this discourse arraigns him for, but several more which I have seen; yet I conceive he might have omitted some of those embittered reproaches he has reviled him with, who doubtless was one of the greatest masters of his time, and however he might succeed as to the decorum, was hardly exceeded for what he performed in sculpture and the statuary art by many even of the ancients themselves, and haply by none of the moderns: witness his Moses, Christus in Gremio, and several other figures at Rome to say nothing of his talent in architecture, and the obligation the world has to his memory, for recovering many of its most useful ornaments and members out of the neglected fragments, which lay so long buried, and for vindicating that antique and magnificent manner of building from the trifling of Goths and barbarians.” He observes next, that the usual reproach of painting has been the want of judgment in perspective, and bringing more into history than is justifiable upon one aspect, without turning the eye to each figure in particular, and multiplying the points of sight, which is a point even monsieur Freart, for all the pains he has taken to magnify that celebrated Decision of Paris, has failed in. For the knowing in that art easily perceive, that even Raphael himself has not so exactly observed it, since, instead of one, as monsieur Freart takes it to be, and as indeed it ought to have been, there are no less than four or five; as du Bosse hath well observed in his treatise of “The converted painter,” where, by the way also, he judiciously numbers amongst the faults against costume, those landscapes, grotesque figures, &c. which we frequently find abroad especially for, in our country, we have few or none of those graceful supplements of steeples painted, horizontally and vertically on the vaults and ceilings of cupolas, since we have no examples for it from the ancients, who allowed no more than a frett to the most magnificent and costly of those which they erected. But, would you know whence this universal caution in most of their works proceeded, and that the best of our modern painters and architects have succeeded better than others of that profession, it must be considered, that they were learned men, good historians, and generally skilled in the best antiquities; such were Raphael, and doubtless his scholar Julio; and, if Polydore arrived not to the glory of letters, he yet attained to a rare habit of the ancient gusto, as may be interpreted from most of his designs and paintings. Leon Baptist Alberti was skilled in all the politer parts of learning to a prodigy, and has written several curious things in the Latin tongue. We know that, of later times, Rubens was a person universally learned, as may be seen in several Latin epistles of his to the greatest scholars of his age. And Nicholas Poussin, the Frenchman, who is so much celebrated and so deservedly, did, it seems, arrive to this by his indefatigable industry “as the present famous statuary, Bernini, now living,” says Mr. Evelyn, “has also done so universal a mastery, that, not many years since, he is reported to have built a theatre at Rome, for the adornment whereof he not only cut the figures and painted the scenes, but wrote the play, and composed the music, which was all in recitative. And I am persuaded, that all this is not yet by far so much as that miracle and ornament of our age and country, Dr. Christopher Wren, were able to perform, if he were so disposed, and so encouraged, because he is master of so many admirable advantages beyond them. I alledge these examples partly to incite, and partly to shew the dignity and vast comprehension of this rare art, and that for a man to arrive to its utmost perfection, he should be almost as universal as the orator in Cicero, and the architect in Vitruvius. But, certainly, some tincture in history, the optics and anatomy, are absolutely requisite, and more, iri the opinion of our author, than to be a steady designer, and skilled in the tempering and applying of colours, which, amongst most of our modern workmen, go now for the only accomplishments of a painter.”

Secundus having nearly attained the age of twenty-one, and being determined, as it would seem; to comply as far as possible with the wishes of his father, quitted Mechlin, and went to France, where at Bourges, a city in the Orleanois, he studied the civil law under the celebrated Andreas Alciatus, who was particularly endeared to our author by his general acquaintance with polite literature, and especially by his taste in poetry. Having studied a year tinder this eminent civilian, and taken his degrees, he returned to Mechlin, where he remained only a very few months. In 1533 he went into Spain with warm recommendations to the count of Nassau and other persons of high rank; and soon afterwards became secretary to the cardinal archbishop of Toledo, in a department of business which required no other qualifications than what he possessed in a very eminent degree, a facility in writing with elegance the Latin language. It was during his residence with this cardinal that he wrote his “Basia,” a series of amatory poems, of which the fitih, seventh, and ninth carmina of Catullus seem to have given the hint. Secundus was not, however, a servile imitator of Catullus. His expressions seem to be borrowed rather from Tibullus and Propertius; and in the warmth of his descriptions he has the disgrace to exceed all former writers.

M. de St. Evremond distinguished himself in the army by his politeness and wit, as well as by his bravery; and his accomplishments procured him the esteem of the mareschals d'Etrées and Grammont, of viscount Turenne, of the count de Moissens, afterwards mareschal de Albret, of count Palluau, afterwards marescUal de Clerembaut, and of the marquis de Crequi, who also became a mareschal of France. He had a share in the confidence of these distinguished noblemen, and they always testified their friendship towards him. In 1640, M. de St. Evremond was at the siege of Arras; and, in the ensuing year, he obtained a post in the horse, which gave him fresh opportunities of signalizing himself. Soon after the duke of Enguien, afterwards prince of Condé, became so much pleased with his conversation, that he made him lieutenant of his guards, that he might have him constantly near him. He often read with him and sometimes communicated to him his most secret projects, and entrusted him with affairs of the greatest moment. After the campaign of Rocroy, in 1643, M. de St. Evremond wrote a kind of satire against the French academy, which was published in 1650, and entitled, “The Comedy of the Academicians for reforming the French tongue .”

In 1644 he made the campaign of Fribourg; and the following year he received a dangerous wound at the battle of Notlingen. Being ordered to head a squadron, and to post himself below an eminence which was possessed by the enemy, he was there exposed, for three hours together, to all the fire of their small shot, and a battery of four field-pieces; so that he lost there most of his men, and was himself wounded in the left knee. His wound was so dangerous, that for six weeks he was supposed to be past recovery; but, by the skill of his surgeons, and the excellency of his constitution, his cure was at length effected. Thirty years after, however, his wound opened afresh in, London; but, being properly treated, he felt no inconvenience from it, excepting that his left leg was somewhat weaker than the other. After the taking of Fumes, in 1646, the duke of Enguien appointed M. de St. Evremond to carry the news of it to court; and having, at the same time, opened to him his design of besieging Dunkirk, charged him to propose it to cardinal Mazarin, and to settle with him every thing which was necessary for the execution of that undertaking. M. de St. Evremond managed this business with so much dexterity, that he prevailed on the prime minister to agree to every thing which was required by the duke of Enguien. But, in 1648, he lost the post which he had near that nobleman, now, by the death of his father, become prince of Conde. This prince took great delight in discovering what was ridiculous in the characters of his acquaintance; and often indulged himself in laughing at their foibles in private, in company with the count de Moissens and M. de St. Evremond. But the prince of Conde, who took great pleasure in ridiculing others, was not fond of being ridiculed himself. He was informed, that St. Evremond and the count had found out, that there was somewhat ridiculous even in him; that his extreme solicitude to discover the foibles of others was in itself a species of the ridiculous; and that they sometimes amused themselves with laughing at his highness. This excited in him so much resentment, that he took from M. de St. Evremond the lieutenancy of his guards, and would have no farther correspondence with the count de Moissens. It is, however, supposed, that a reconciliation would have been effected, if they had not been separated by the civil war, which about this time took place in France. When the prince of Conde" returned into France, after the Pyre nean treaty, M. de St. Evremond went to wait upon him, and was very favourably received. The prince offered him his protection; and afterwards, on several occasions, gave him assurances of his affection and esteem.

In 1649 M. de St. Evremond went into Normandy, to visit his relations. About this time the parliament of Paris had declared against cardinal Mazarin; and the duke of Beaufort, the prince of Conti, and the duke of Longueville, following their example, the latter retired to his government of Normandy, where he assembled the nobility, and very earnestly endeavoured to prevail on St. Evremond to engage in his party. With this view he was offered the command of the artillery; but this office he declined; and has given a facetious account of his refusal in a satirical piece written by him about this time, entitled, “The duke of Longueville’s Retreat to his Government of Normandy.” He says, “They had a mind to bestow the command of the ordnance on St. Evremond; and, to speak the truth, considering his affection for St Germain’s (where the king then was), he would have been glad to have served the court, by accepting a considerable employment, of the business of which he knew nothing. But, having promised count de Harcourt to take no employment, he kept his word, not only from a principle of honour, but that he might not be like the Normans, most of whom had broken their promise. From these considerations, he was induced generously to refuse the money that was offered to him, but which would never have been paid him.”

In 1654, M. de St. Evremond served in Flanders; and about three years after fought a duel with the marquis de Fore. He continued in the service in Flanders till the suspension of arms, which was agreed upon between France and Spain in 1659. The following year, he came over into England with count de Soissons, who was sent on an embassy to congratulate Charles II. on the restoration; and, when cardinal Mazarin set out from Paris with a great retinue, in order to negociate a treaty with the first minister of the king of Spain, St. Evremond was one of those who accompanied him. He afterwards sent a letter concerning the conferences to the marquis de Crequi, in which he informed him, that the cardinal had sacrificed the honour and interests of France to his own private views. In one part of this letter he said, “It is the cardinal’s maxim, that a minister does not so much belong to the state as the state to the minister; and, for this reason, if God grant bim but a few years, he will get all the estates in the kingdom into his own hands.” This letter of St. Evremond, concerning the Pyreneau treaty, became the occasion of his banishment from France. After the death of the cardinal, a copy of the letter fell into the hands of some of the courtiers who had been connected with him. They represented to his majesty the danger of allowing private men to judge of state affairs, and to censure the conduct of ministers. Their representations made such an impression on the mind of Lewis, that he immediately ordered M. de St. Evremond to be committed to the Bastile. But St. Evremoud had no inclination to pay a second visit to that fortress; and, therefore, having received private information of the design, found means to make his escape out of France, and arrived in Holland about the end of the year 1661.

St. Evremond also, drew his own character, in a letter to the count de Grammont. It is as follows: “He was a philosopher equally removed from superstition and from impiety a voluptuary, who had no less aversion from debauchery than inclination for pleasure a man who had never felt the pressure of indigence, and who had never been in possession of affluence. He lived in a condition despised by those who have every thing, envied by those who have nothing, and relished by those who make their reason the foundation of their happiness. When he was young, he hated profusion, being persuaded that some degree of wealth was necessary for the conveniences of a long life. When he was old, he could hardly endure ceconomy; being of opinion, that want is little to be dreaded when a man has but little time left to be miserable. He was well pleased with nature, and did not complain of fortune. He hated vice, was indulgent to frailties, and lamented misfortunes. He sought not after the failings of men with a design to expose them; he only found what was ridiculous in them for his own amusement. He had a secret pleasure in discovering this himself; and would, indeed, have had a still greater in discovering this to others^ had he not been checked by discretion. Life, in his opinion, was too short to read all sorts of books, and to burden one’s memory with a multitude of things at the expence of one’s judgment. He did not apply himself to the most learned writings, in order to acquire knowledge; but to the most rational, to fortify his reason. He sometimes chose the most delicate, to give delicacy to his own taste; and sometimes the most agreeable, to give the same turn to his own genius. It remains that he should be described such as he was in friendship and in religion. In friendship he was more constant than a philosopher, and more sincere than a young man of good nature without experience. With regard to religion, his piety consisted more in justice and charity than in penance or mortification. He placed his confidence in God, trusting in his goodness, and hoping, that in the bosom of his providence, he should find his repose and his felicity.” He was interred in Westminster- abbey, in the nave of the church near the cloister, where a monument was erected to his memory by his friends, with an inscription, in which he is highly praised. It is said to have been written by Dr. Garth. Dr. Atterbury, who looked on St. Evreniond as an infidel, appears to have had objections to his being buried in the abbey, for which he is reflected upon, with petulant malignity, by one of the editors of the last edition of the Biographia Brttannica.

, a man of considerable learning, but unfortunately connected with the French prophets, was a native of Switzerland, whither his family, originally Italians, were obliged to take refuge, for religion’s sake, in the beginning of the reformation. He was born Feb. 16, 1664. His father intending him for the study of divinity, he was regularly instructed in Greek and Latin, philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy; learned a little of the Hebrew tongue, and began to attend the lectures of the divinity professors of Geneva: but his mother being averse to this, he was left to pursue his own course, and appears to have produced the first fruits of his studies in some letters on subjects of astronomy sent to Cassini, the French king’s astronomer. In 1682 he went to Paris, where Cassini received him very kindly. In the following year he returned to Geneva, where he became particularly acquainted with a count Fenil, who formed the design of seizing, if not assassinating the prince of Orange, afterwards William III. This design Faccio having learned from him communicated it to bishop Burnet about 1686, who of course imparted it to the prince. Bishop Burnet, in the first letter of his Travels, dated September 1685, speaks of him as an incomparable mathematician and philosopher, who, though only twenty-one years old, was already become one of the greatest men of his age, and seemed born to carry learning some sizes beyond what it had hitherto attained. Whilst Dr. Calamy studied at the university of Utrecht, Faccio resided in that city as tutor to two young gentlemen, Mr. Ellys and Mr. Thornton, and conversed freely with the English. At this time he was generally esteemed to be a Spinozist; and his discourse, says Dr. Calamy, very much looked that way. Afterwards, it is probable, that he was professor of mathematics at Geneva. In 1687 he came into England, and was honoured with the friendship of the most eminent mathematicians of that age. Sir Isaac Newton, in particular, was intimately acquainted with him. Dr. Johnstone of Kidderminster had in his possession a manuscript, written by Faccio, containing commentaries and illustrations of different parts of sir Isaac’s Principia. About 1704 he taught mathematics in Spitafnelds, and obtained about that time a patent fora species of jewel-watches. When he unfortunately attached himself to the new prophets, he became their chief secretary, and committed their warnings to writing, many of which were published. The connexion of such a man with these enthusiasts, and their being supported, likewise, by another person of reputed abilities, Maximilian Misson, a French refugee, occasioned a suspicion, though without reason, that there was some deep contrivance and design in the affair. On the second of December, 1707, Faccio stood in the pillory at Charing-cross, with the following words affixed to his hat: “Nicolas Fatio, convicted for abetting and favouring Elias Marion, in his wicked and counterfeit prophecies, and causing them to be printed and published, to terrify the queen’s people.” Nearly at the same time, alike sentence was executed upon Elias Marion, one of the pretended prophets, and John d'Ande, another of their abettors. This mode of treatment did not convince Faccio of his error; and, indeed, the delusion of a man of such abilities, and simplicity of manners, was rather an object of compassion than of public infamy and punishment. Oppressed with the derision and contempt thrown upon himself and his party, he retired at last into the country, and spent the remainder of a long life in silence and obscurity. He died at Worcester in 1753, about eightynine years old. When he became the dupe of fanaticism, he seems to have given up his philosophical studies and connections. Faccio, besides being deeply versed in all branches of mathematical literature, was a great proficient in the learned and oriental languages. He had read much, also, in books of alchymy. To the last, he continued a firm believer in the reality of the inspiration of the French prophets. Dr. Wall of Worcester, who was well acquainted with him, communicated many of the above particulars to Dr. Johnstone, in whose hands were several of Faccio’s fanatical manuscripts and journals; and one of his letters giving an account of count Fenil’s conspiracy, and some particulars of the author’s family was communicated to the late Mr. Seward, and published in the second volume of his Anecdotes. In the Republic of Letters, vol. I. we find a Latin poem by Faccio, in honour of sir Isaac Newton; and in vol. XVIII. a communication on the rules of the ancient Hebrew poesy, on which subject he appears to have corresponded with Whiston. There are also many of his original papers and letters in the British Museum; and among them a Latin poem, entitled “N. Facii Duellerii Auriacus Throno-Servatus,” in which he claims to himself the merit of having saved king William from the above-mentioned conspiracy.

In 1528, he had the same success in promoting the reformation in the city of Aigle, and soon after in the bailU wick of Morat. He went afterwards to Neufchatel in 1529, and disputed against the Roman catholic party with so much strength, that this city embraced the reformed religion, and established it entirely Nov. 4, 1530. He was sent a deputy to the synod of the Waldenses, held in the valley of Angrogne. Hence he went to Geneva, where he laboured against popery: but the grand vicar and the other clergy resisted him with so much fury, that he was obliged to retire. He was called back in 1534 by the inhabitants, who had renounced the Roman catholic religion; and was the chief person that procured the perfect abolition of it the next year. He was banished from Geneva with Calvin in 1533, and retired to Basil, and afterwards to Neufchatel, where there was great probability of a large evangelical harvest. From thence he went to Metz, but had a thousand difficulties to encounter; and was obliged to retire into the abbey of Gorze, where the count of Jurstemberg protected him and the new converts. But they could not continue there long; for they were besieged in the abbey, and obliged at last to surrender, after a capitulation. F. rel very happily escaped, though strict search was made alter him, having been put in a cart among the sick and infirm. He took upon him his former functions of a minister at Neufchatel, whence he took now and then a journey to Geneva. When he went thither in 1553, he was present at Servetus’s execution. He went again to Geneva in 1564, to^take his last leave of Calvin, who was dangerously ill. He took a second journey to Metz in 1565, being invited by his ancient flock, to witness the success of his lubours, but returned to Neufchatel, and died there Sept. 13, or, as Dupin says, Dec. 3, in the same year.

, a French wit and poet, was born in 1600 at Bourg en Bresse, and going very young to Paris, attached himself to Vaugeias, Boisrobert, and Coeffetau; and was afterwards made secretary to the count d'Harcourt, and then steward of his house. Faret was one of the first members of the French academy, and employed to settle its statutes. He was very intimate with St. Amand, who celebrates him in his verses, as an illustrious debauchee, inertly to furnish a rhyme to Cabaret. He was at length appointed secretary to the king, and died at Paris in September 1640, leaving several children by two marriages. His works are, a translation of Eutropius; “L'Honnete Homme,” taken from the Italian of Castiglione, J2mo; “Vertus necessaires a un Prince;” and several poems in the collections of his time. He also left a life of Rene II. dhke of Lorraine, and Memoirs of the famous count d'Harcourt, ms.

, a brave English officer, the descendant of a very ancient family, was born in 1728 at Shipdenhall, near Halifax, in Yorkshire, which, for many centuries, had been in the possession of his ancestors, and is now the property and residence of their lineal descendant. His father dying when he was very young, his education was superintended by an uncle, a very worthy clergyman. He was brought up at a free school in Lancashire, where he was well grounded in classical learning, and became also a remarkable proficient in mathematics. He has very frequently been heard to declare, that, from his earliest youth, he always felt the strongest predilection for the army, which his mother and nearest relations constantly^ endeavoured to dissuade him from; but, finding all their arguments ineffectual, they either bought, or he had an ensigncy given him, in general Oglethorpe’s regiment, then in Georgia; but the war being then going on in Flanders, he gave up his ensigncy, and went there as a volunteer, furnished with letters from the late marquis of Rockingham and Mr. Lascelles (afterwards lord Harewood) to the commander and several others of the officers. This step was at the time frequently taken by young men of spirit of the first rank and fortune, fte entered as a volunteer, but messed with the officers, and was very soon presented with a pair of colours. Some time after, he married a lady of good fortune and family, and, at the pressing entreaties df her friends, he most reluctantly resigned his commission; which he had no sooner done, than he felt himself miserable, and his new relations finding that his propensity to a military life was invincible, agreed to his purchasing an ensigncy in the third regiment of guards. Having now obtained the object of his most anxious wishes, he determined to lose no opportunity of qualifying himself for the highest situations in his favourite profession. With this view he paid the most unremitting attention to his duty, and every hour he could command was given up to the study of the French and German languages, in which (by the assistance of his classical learning) he soon became such a proficient as not only to understand and write both, grammatically and elegantly, but to speak them fluently. When he was a lieutenant in the guards, he translated from the French, “The Reveries; Memoirs upon the Art of War, by field-marshal count Saxe,” which was published in 1757, in 4to, and dedicated “To the general officers.” He also translated from the German, “Regulations for the Prussian cavalry,” which was also published in 1757, and dedicated to major-general the earl of Albemarle, colonel of the king’s own regiment of dragoons. And he likewise translated from the German, “llegulations for the Prussian Infantry,” to which was gelded “The Prussian Tactics,” which was published in 1759, and dedicated to lieutenant-general the earl of Rothes, colonel of the third regiment of foot guards. Having attained the situation of adjutant in the guards, his abilities and unremitting attention soon became conspicuous; and, on the late general Elliot’s being ordered to, Germany in the seven years war, he offered to take him as his aid-de-camp, which he gladly accepted, as it gave him an opportunity of gaining that knowledge which actual service could alone impart. When he served in Germany, his ardour, intrepidity, and attention to all the duties of his situation, were such, that, on the death of general Elliot, he had immediately offers both from the late prince Ferdinand, the commander in chief, and the late marquis of Granby, to be appointed aid-de-camp. By the advice of a noble earl (who hinted to him that the German war would not last for ever) he accepted the offer of the latter, after making due acknowledgements for the honour intended him by the former. In this his new situation his ardour and attention were, if possible, increased, which gained him the friendship of all those attached to lord Granby, particularly of a noble lord who, being fixed upon to bring to England the account of the battle of Warburgh, gave up his appointment to captain Fawcett; an instance of generous friendship which he always spoke of with the most heartfelt gratitude. On his arrival in England, he was introduced by the then great minister to his late majesty king George the Second, who received him most graciously, and not the less so on his giving the whole account in German. Soon after he was promoted to a company in the guards, with the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the army, and became military secretary to, and the intimate and confidential friend of lord Granby. His manners were formed with equal strength and softness; and to coolness, intrepidity, and extensive military knowledge, he added all the requisite talents of a man of business; and the most persevering assiduity, without the least ostentation. Notwithstanding the most unassuming modesty, his abilities were now so generally known, that he was fixed upon as the most proper person to manage and support the interest of his country, in settling many of the concerns of the war in Germany; and by that means necessarily became known to the great Frederic of Prussia, from whom he afterwards had the most tempting offers, which he declined without hesitation, preferring the service of his king and country to every other consideration.

, a French lady, daughter of Aymar de la Vergne, marechal-de-camp, and governor of Havre-deGrace, bat more distinguished by her wit and literary productions than by her family, was married to the count de Fayette in 1655, and died in lt'i.93. She cultivated letters and the fine arts; and her hotel uas the rendezvous of all who were most distinguished for literary taste. The duke de la Rochefuucault, Huetius, Mennge, La Fontaine, Segrais, were those she saw most frequently. The last, when obliged to quit the house of Mad. de Montpensier, found an honourable retreat with her. The author of “The Memoirs of madame de Maintenon,” has not spoken favourably of this lady, nor represented her manners to be such as from her connections we should suppose. But madame de Sevigne, who had better opportunities of knowing her, and is more to be relied on than the author of the memoirs, has painted her very differently. This lady says, in a letter to her daughter, “Mad. la Fayette is a very amiable and a very estimable woman; and whom yon will love when you shall have time to be with her, and to enjoy the benefit of her sense and wit; the better you luiow her, the more you will like her.”

His chief works are, 1. “Entretiens sur les Vies et sur les Ouvrages des plus excellens Peintres anciens et modernes:” 1666 1688, 5 vols. 4to. 2. “Les Principes de l'Architecture, de la Sculpture, et de la Peinture, avec un dictionaire des termes propres de ces artes,” 1676, and 1691, 4to. 3. “De l'origi.ne de la Peinture, avec plusieurs pieces detachers,” 1660. 4. “Several Descriptions, as that of Versailles, of Entertainments given by the king, and of several Pictures,” collected into one vol. in 12mo., 5 “The Conferences of the royal academy of painting,” in one vol. 4to. 6. “The Description of the Abbey de la Trappe,” in 12mo. He also left some translations: viz. “An Account of what passed in Spain, when the count duke of Olivares fell under the king’s displeasure,” translated out of Italian “The Castle of the Soul,” written by St. Teresa, translated from the Spanish “The Life of pope Pius V.” translated from the Italian.

, an eminent Latin poet, whose family name was Zarrabini, was born at Serevalle in 1498. His father, John Anthony, who first changed the family name to Flaminio on entering a literary society at Venice, was himself a man of learning, and professor of belles-lettres in different academies in Italy, and has left some works both in prose and verse, particularly twelve books of letters, in which are many particulars of literary history. He bestowed great pains on the instruction of his son, and sent him, when at the age of sixteen, to Rome, with a poem addressed to Leo X. exhorting him to make war against the Turks, and a critical work entitled “Annotationum Sylvae.” Leo appears to have been so pleased with the appearance of young Flaminio, as to request that he might remain at Rome, promising to encourage his studies there; but although this did not take place, in his after-visits to Rome, the pope patronized him with great liberality, and Flaminio answered every expectation that had been formed of his talents. In 1515 he accompanied the count Castiglione to Urbino, where he resided some months, and was held in the highest esteem by that accomplished nobleman for his amiable qualities and great endowments, but particularly for his. early and astonishing talents for Latin poetry. In this year he published at Fano, the first specimen of his productions, with a few poems of Marullus, not before printed, in a very rare volume in 8vo. entitled, “Michaelis Tardaaniotas Marulli Neniae. Ejusdem epigrammata nunquarn alias impressa. M. Antonii Flaminii carminum libellus. Ejusdem Ecloga Thyrsis.” Of these poems some have been printed, often with variations, in the subsequent editions of his works; but several pieces appear there which are not to be found in the edition by Mancurti, published at Padua, by Comino, in 1727, which is considered as the most complete; whence it is probable this early publication of Flaminio was not known to his editors.

, a celebrated French ecclesiastical historian, was the son of an advocate, and born at Paris. Dec. 6, 1640. He discovered early a strong inclination, for letters, but applied himself particularly to the law, in. consequence of which he was made advocate for the parliament of Paris in 1658, and attended the bar nine years. He then took orders, for which he was more eagerly disposed, and more highly qualified by virtues as well as learning; and in 1672 was made preceptor to the princes of Conti. In 1680 he had the care of the education of the count de Vermandois, admiral of France. After the death of this prince, which happened in about four years, the king preferred him to the abbey of Loc-Dieu, belonging; to the Cistercians, and in the diocese of Rhodez. In 1689 the king made him sub-preceptor to the dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, and Berri, in which important employment he acted under the celebrated Fenelon. In 1696 he was admitted a member of the French academy. In 1706, when the education of the three princes was finished, the king gave him the rich priory of Argenteuil, belonging to the Benedictines, in the diocese of Paris, upon which promotion he resigned the abbey of Loc-Dieu. If he had possessed ambition to solicit the greatest situations, he would have obtained them, but his disinterestedness was equal to his other virtues. He was a hermit in the midst of the court. In 1716 he was chosen confessor to Louis XV. in which situation it was said of him that his only fault wati that of being seventy-five years old; and on July 14, 1725, he died, in his eighty-third year.

, an eminent physician, was born at Hinters, in Staffordshire, about 1649, and received his education at the university of Oxford, where the degree of doctor of physic was conferred upon him, on the 8th of July, 1680. He settled himself in the practice of his profession at Litchfield, in his native county; where his indefatigable attention to the sick, and the consequent practical skill which he attained, not only procured for him the confidence of the inhabitants, but gained him a reputation so extensive, that his sovereign honoured him with knighthood, as a reward for his talents. He was a great friend to the use of cold bathing, and left no means untried, by which he might disseminate the knowledge of its utility and safety, and bring the practice into general vogue: he particularly recommended it in chronic rheumatisms, and in nervous disorders, and he maintained that consumptions had prevailed extensively in England only since the practice of baptizing children by immersion had been relinquished. This recommended his work in a very particular manner to the attention of the Baptists, whose historian, Crosby, has made some extracts from it in corroboration of the propriety of baptism by immersion. It appears to have been by sir John’s advice, that Dr. Johnson, when an infant, was sent up to London to be touched by queen Anne for the evil; a proof that he had not surmounted the prejudices of his age. Sir John died Feb. 1, 1734. The following are the titles of his different publications: 1. “The Touchstone of Medicines,” London, 1687, 8vo. 2. “The Preternatural state of the Animal Humours described by their sensible qualities,” London, 1696, 8vo, in which he maintained the doctrine of fermentation. 3; “An Enquiry into the right use of Baths,” London, 1697, 8vo. This work afterwards appeared under different titles, such as “Ancient Psychrolusy revived,” London, 1702 and the subject was more amply treated in another edition “History of hot and cold Bathing, ancient and modern, with an Appendix by Dr. Baynard,” London, 1709, and again in 1715, and 1722. It was also in some measure renewed in his “Essay to restore the dipping of infants in their baptism,” 1721. 4. His next work was “A Treatise on the Asthma,” first published in 1698, and re-published in 1717 and 1726. He was himself the subject of asthma from the age of puberty, yet lived to be an old man. 5. “The Physicians’ Pulsewatch,” 1707 and 1710, in 2 vols. 8vo. Sir John Floyer was one of the first to count the pulsations of the arteries; for although the pulse had been the subject of observation from ancient times, the number of beats in a given time had not been attended to. 6. “Medici na Geronomica; of preserving old men’s health; with an appendix concerning the use of oil and unction, and a letter on the regimen of younger years,” Lond. 1724. Several of these treatises were translated into the continental languages.

The duke of Orleai6 sending de Vendome again into Italy in 1706, Folard had orders to throw himself into Modena, to defend it against prince Eugene; where he acquitted himself with his usual skill, but was very near being assassinated. The description which he has given of the conduct and character of the governor of this town, may be found in his “Treatise of the Defence of Places,” and deserves to be read. He received a dangerous wound on the thigh at the battle of Blenheim, or Malplaquet, and was some time after made prisoner by prince Eugene. Being exchanged in 1711, he was made governor of Bourbourg. In 1714, he went to Malta, to assist in defending that island against the Turks. Upon his return to France, he embarked for Sweden, having a passionate desire to see Charles XII. He acquired the esteem and confidence of that celebrated monarch, who sent him to France to negociate the reestablishment of Jarnes II. upon the throne of England; but, that project being dropped, he returned to Sweden, followed Charles XII. in his expedition to Norway, and served under him at the siege of Frederickshall, where that prince was killed, Dec. 11, 1718. Folard then returned to France, and made his last campaign in 1719, under the duke of Berwick, in quality of colonel. From that time he applied himself intensely to the study of the art military, as far as it could be studied at home; and built his theories upon the foundation of his experience and observations. He contracted an intimacy with count Saxe, who, he then declared, would one day prove a very great general. He was chosen a fellow of the royal society at London, in 1749; and in 1751, made a journey to Avignon, where he died in 1752, aged eighty-three years. He was the author of several works, the principal of which are, 1. “Commentaries upon Polybius,” in 6 vols. 4to. 2. “A Book of new Discoveries in War.” 3. “A Treatise concerning the Defence of Places, &c.” in French. Those who would know more of this eminent soldier, may consult a French work entitled, “Memoires pour servir a THistoire de M. de Chevalier de Folard. Ratisbone, 1753,” 12mo. As a man of letters, he drew his knowledge from ancient authors, which as a military man he explains with great clearness. The form of his writings is not so pleasing as the matter. The abundance of his ideas led him into too great a profusion of words. His style is negligent, his reflections detached, and his digressions either useless, or too long; but he was undoubtedly a man of genius.

, an eminent Italian architect, but perhaps more justly celebrated for his knowledge of mechanics, was born at Mili, on the lake of Lugano, in 1543, and came to Rome in his twentieth year, to study architecture. Sixtus V. to whom his merits were known when he was cardinal Montalti, was no sooner raised to the tiara, than he made him his architect. Among other great designs for ornamenting the city of Rome, this pontiff had conceived the project of digging out and re-erecting the famous obelisk, formed of one entire piece of granite, originally from Egypt, which had formerly decorated the circus of Nero, but was now partly buried near the wall of the sacristy of St. Peter’s. For this purpose he called together the ablest artists, engineers, and mathematicians, to consider of the means by which this vast relic of Roman grandeur, which was thirty-six feet high, and weighed above a million of pounds, could be removed, and placed on its pedestal in the front of the piazza of St. Peter’s. The machinery employed by the Egyptians in preparing this obelisk, or of conveying il to Rome, were so forgotten, that even tradition preserved no probable conjecture; but the ingenuity of Fontana was completely successful. He first produced before the pope a model of the machinery to be employed, and demonstrated the practicability of the operation; and having made all the necessary erections, the obelisk was raised and safely transported to the piazza, about 150 yards distance, and placed on its pedestal amidst the acclamations of the astonished populace of Rome, on Sept. 10, 1586, the same day that the duke of Luxembourg, ambassador from Henry IV. made his entry into the city. It is said that Fontana undertook this work with the alternative of losing his head if it did not succeed, and that he had provided horses at every gate at Rome, to aid his escape, in case of any accident. Be this as it may, the pope revyarded him munificently. He created him a knight of the golden spur, gave him titles of nobility, and caused medals to be struck to his honour. To all this he added a pension of 2000 crowns, with reversion to his heirs; 3000 crowns as a gift, and all the materials employed on the undertaking, the value of which was computed at 20,000 crowns. Besides the erection of this obelisk, on which Fontana’s fame chiefly rests, he constructed three others, and built for the pope a superb palace near St. John of Lateran, and the library of the Vatican, and repaired some of the ancient monuments of art in Rome. His forte, indeed, was rather in mechanics than in original architecture, in which last he is said to have committed many mistakes; and either this, or the envy which his great enterprize created, is supposed to have raised him enemies, who at length persuaded pope Clement VIII. to dismiss him from his office of pontifical architect. In 1592, however, he was invited to Naples by the viceroy, the count Miranda, who made him royal architect and chief engineer. In that city he built the royal palace and some other considerable edifices, and died there in 1607. He published an account of the removal of the obelisk, entitled “Delia transportatione dell' Obelisco Vaticano e delle fabriche Sixto V.” Rome, 1590, fol. reprinted at Naples in 1603. He had a brother, John, who assisted him in his works at Rome, but who excelled chiefly in hydraulic machinery. He died at Rome in the year 1614.

, an Austrian lawyer, was born in 1598. He published a political work at the age of nineteen, entitled “Hypomnemata politica,” and spoke a congratulatory harangue at Padua in the name of the German youth, in the presence of John Cornaro, who was just elected doge of Venice, with which the latter was so much pleased, that he honoured Forstner with the order of St. Mark. Forstner went afterwards into France, and returned to Germany, where, having been some time counsellor to the count de Hohenloe, and his envoy at Vienna, he became vice-chancellor, then chancellor of Montbeliard. He was afterwards employed in the negociations for the peace of Munster, and discovered so much prudence, and such great abilities, that the count de Traumandorf, the emperor’s plenipotentiary, procured him the rank of aulic counsellor. He died October 28, 1667, and left, besides his “Hypomnemata politica,” 1623, 8vo, “De principatu Tiberii, Notæ politicæ ad Taciturn,” a collection of his Letters on the Peace of Munster; “Omissorum Liber;” “Epistola apologetica ad amicum, contra secreti Temeratores, et Epistola de moderno Imperii statu;” and two historical letters, in tom. XIV. of Schelhorn’s Amœnitates Litterariæ.

, count of Belle-Isle, more known by the name of marechal Bellisle, grandson of the preceding, was born in 1684. Politics and history attracted his attention from his very infancy, to which studies he afterwards added that of mathematics. He had hardly finished his education when Louis XIV. gave him a regiment of dragoons. He signalized himself at the siege of Lisle, received other steps of promotion, and at the peace returned to court, where the king entirely forgot the faults of the grandfather in the merits of his descendant. When war again broke out, after the death of Louis XIV. he proceeded to distinguish himself, but a change of ministry put a check to his career. He shared the disgrace of the minister Le Blanc, was for a time im-prisoned in the Bastile, and then banished to his own estate. In this retreat he composed a complete justification of himself, was recalled to court, and from that time experienced only favour, fortune, and promotion. In the war of 1733, he obtained a principal command in Flanders, distinguished himself before Philipsburg, and commanded during the rest of the campaign in Germany. In 1735 he was decorated with the order of the Holy Ghost, and was the confidential adviser of the minister, cardinal Fleury. About this time, taking advantage of an interval of peace, he wrote memoirs of all the countries in which he had served: but on the death of the emperor Charles VI. in 1740, he urged the cardinal to declare war. Ambition prompted this advice, and his ambition was not long without gratification. In 1741, he was created marechal of France. The witlings attacked him on his elevation, but he despised their efforts: “These rhymers,” said he, “would gain their ends, should I do them the honour to be angry.” At the election of the emperor in 1742, marechal Bellisle was plenipotentiary of France at the diet of Francfort, where his magnificence was no less extraordinary than the extent of his influence in the diet. He appeared rather as a principal elector than an ambassador, and secured the election of Charles VII. Soon after, by the desertion of the Prussians and Saxons, the marechal found himself shut up in Prague, and with great difficulty effected a retreat. He was obliged to march his army over the ice, and three thousand troops left in Prague were compelled to surrender, though with honour. On his return to Francfort, Charles VII. presented him with the order of the golden fleece, having already declared him a prince of the empire. In December 1743, as he was going again into Germany, he was taken prisoner at Elbingerode, a small town encircled by the territory of Hanover, and was carried into England, where he remained till August 1744. He then served against the Austrians in Provence; and, returning to Versailles to plan the campaign of 1748, was created a peer of France. He had enjoyed the title of duke of Gisors, from 1742. Afterthe peace in 1743, his influence at court continued to increase, and in 1757 he became prime minister; but in this situation he lived only four years; falling a victim, it is said, to his application to business, his sorrow for the misfortunes of France, and his anxious cares to extricate her from them. This patriotic character coincides with other anecdotes related of him. Having lost his brother, whom he tenderly loved, at a very critical period of public affairs, he suppressed his private grief as soon as possible, saying, “I have no brother; but I have a country, let me exert myself to save her.” He died in January, 1761, at the age of 77.

In Sept 1793, he obtained the adoption of a project for the regulation of weights and measures, was chosen secretary in October, and in December following president of the Jacobins, who denounced him for his silence in the convention. This he answered by pleading his avocations and chemical labours, by which, he who had been born without any fortune, had been able to maintain his father and sisters. In Sept. 1794, he became a member of the committee of public safety, and was again elected to it in Feb. 1795. Besides proposing some improvements in the equipment of the armies, which were then contending with all the powers of Europe, he was particularly engaged in schools and establishments for education, to which new names, as polytechnic, normal, &c. were given, that they might consign to oblivion as much as possible the ancient instituti&ns of France. The re-election of two thirds of the convention removed him to the council of elders, on$. of the fantastical modes of government established in I?y5, where, in November, he had to refute several charges levelled against him respecting the murder of Lavoisier. He was afterwards nominated professor of chemistry, and a member ofthe institute; and in May 1797, Jeft the council. Dyring the time he could spare from his public employments, he continued to cultivate his more honourable studies, and had attained the highest rank among the men of science whom the revolutionary tribunals had spared, when he died Dec. 16, 1809. At this period he was a counsellor of state for life, a count of the empire, a commander of the legion of honour, directorgeneral of public instruction, a member of the national institute, professor of chemistry in the medical and polytechnic schools, and in the museum of natural history, and a member of most of the learned societies of Europe.

He afterwards was employed in reading lectures: he explained the Greek fathers to some, and the Hebrew and Syriac languages to others. After. that, he undertook the education of the sons of the duke d'Antin, who were committed to his care, and studied in the college of Harcourt. He was at the same time received an advocate; but the law not being suited to his taste, he returned to his former studies. He then contracted an acquaintance with the abbé Bignon, at whose instigation he applied himself to the Chinese tongue, and succeeded beyond his expectations, for he had a prodigious memory, and a particular turn for languages. He now became very famous. He held conferences at his own house, once or twice a week, upon subjects of literature; at which foreigners, as well as French, were admitted and assisted. Hence he became known to the count de Toledo, who was infinitely pleased with his conversation, and made him great offers, if he would go into Spain; but Fourmont refused. In 1715 he succeeded M. Galland to the Arabic chair in the royal college. The same year he was admitted a member of the academy of inscriptions; of the royal society at London in 1738; and of that of Berlin in 1741. He was often consulted by the duke of Orleans, who had a particular esteem for him, and made him one of his secretaries. He died at Paris in 1743.

, an eminent political writer, was a native of Rovigno in Italy, and spent several years at Rome, where he was greatly esteemed by Sessa, ambassador of Philip II. king of Spain. He was employed in civil as well as military affairs, and acquitted himself always with great applause; yet he had like to have been ruined, and to have even lost his Hfe, by his enemies. This obliged him to withdraw to Naples; and still having friends to protect his innocence, he proved it at length to the court of Spain, who ordered count de Benevento, viceroy of Naples, to employ him, and Frachetta lived in a very honourable manner at Naples, where a handsome pension was allowed him. He gained great reputation by his political works, the most considerable of which is that entitled “II Seininario de Governi di Stato, et di Guerra.” In this work he has collected, under an hundred and ten chapters, about eight thousand military and state maxims, extracted from the best authors; and has added to each chapter a discourse, which serves as a commentary to it. This work was printed twice, at least, by the author, reprinted at Venice in 1647, and at Genoa in 1648, 4to; and there was added to it, “II Principe,” by the same writer, which was published in 1597. The dedication informs us, that Frachetta was prompted to write this book from a conversation he had with the duke of Sessa; in which the latter observed, among other particulars, that he thought it as important as it was a difficult task, to inform princes truly pf such transactions as happen in their dominions. His other compositions are, “Discorso della Ragione di Stato: Discorso della Ragione di Guerra: Esposizione di tutta l'Opera di Lucrezio.” He died at Naples in the beginning of the seventeenth century, but at what age is unknown.

, an eminent German physician, was born at Naumburg, in Upper Saxony, May 3, 1643. His father, although living as a simple peasant, was of a noble family. After going through his school education, George went to Jena at the age of eighteen, and was crowned a poet by count palatine llichter, in consequence of his extraordinary talent for writing verses in the German, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew Jauguages. But he exhibited still greater talents during his course of medical studies, and the canons of Naumburg, who recognized his merits, afforded him liberal means of subsistence while he applied himself to this science. Before he took his doctor’s degree^(in 1666), he was deemed eligible to give lectures in botany, chemistry, and anatomv, and acquired great reputation. In 1672, the elector palatine appointed him to the vacant professorship of medicine at Heidelberg, and a few years afterwards nominated him his own physician. But the troubles occasioned by the war obliged him in 1688, to retire to Francfort on the Main. John George III. elector of Saxony, then received him into his service, and appointed him professor of medicine at Wittemberg; an office which he filled with so much eclat, that the principal professorship, and the title of dean of the faculty at Leipsic, were soon offered to him. This, however, he refused, by the instigation of his friends, who sought to retain him at Wittemberg. The two succeeding electors likewise loaded this physician with so many favours, that it was supposed he could never dream of quitting Heidelberg. Nevertheless, he was induced by the offers of Christian V. king of Denmark, to remove to Copenhagen, where he was received most graciously by the royal family, and was honoured with the title of Aulic counsellor, which was continued to him by Frederick IV. the successor of Christian. Death, however, terminated his brilliant career on the 16th of June, 1704, in the six-" tieth year of his age.

Franck was a member of several learned societies, and was ennobled by the emperor Leopold in 1692, and in 1693 was created count palatine, by the title of “De Franckenau.” His principal works are, 1. “Institutionum Medicarum Synopsis,” Heidelberg, 1672. 2. “Lexicon Vegetabilium usualium,” Argentorati, T672. This was re-published several times. In the edition of Leipsic, 161)8, the title of “Flora Francica” was given to it. 3, ?' Bona nova Anatomica,“Heidelberg, 1680. 4.” Parva Bibliotheca Zootomica,“ibid. 1680. 5.” De caVumniis in Medicos et Medicinam,“ibid. 1686. 6. * De Medicis Philologis,” Wittebergse, 1691. 7. “De palingenesis, five resuscitatione artiBciali planlarum, hominum, et amuialiuiii, e sure cineribus, liber singularis,” Hala-, 1717, edited by Nehring. 8. “Satyra; Medictc XX.” Leipsic, 1722. These pieces, which had begun to appear in 1673, were published by his son, George Frederic Franck, whp was also a teacher of medicine at Wittemberg, and wrote several works qn botany and physip.

, a learned physician, was born at Nieder Wesel, in the duchy of Cleves, Oct. 30, 1581 but his relations being compelled, by the troubles of the times, to retire to Osnaburg, he began his classical studies there. He was afterwards sent to Cologne, Wesel, and Helmstadt; but his disposition being early turned to medicine, as a profession, he studied at Rostock, afterwards returned to Helmstadt to attend the lectures of Duncan Liddell and of Francis Parcovius; he likewise derived much advantage from the lectures of the celebrated Meibomius, in whose house he resided in the capacity of tutor to his son, and was soon thought fit to give private lectures to the younger students on the practice of physic. He afterwards lectured in public as professor extraordinary; and in 1604, at the age of twenty-three, he obtained the ordinary professorship in the university, which office he filled during four years. He then took his degree of doctor, and went to the court of Philip Sigismund, duke of Brunswick Lunenburg, and bishop of Osnaburg, who had appointed him his principal physician. About 1622, Ernest, duke of Holstein and earl of Schawenburg, offered him the same office, with the addition of the chief medical professorship in the university which he had lately founded at Rinteln; but his patron would not permit him. to accept it. This prince-bishop dying in 1623, his nephew, duke Frederic Ulric, gave Freitag the option of being his chief physician, or of resuming his professorship at Helmstadt. He con*­tinued at Osnaburg, where the new bishop retained him as his physician, and also appointed him one of his chamberlains. He also served his successor in the same capacity, but was dismissed in 1631, on account of his refusal to become a catholic. He found protection and patronage, however, under Ernest Cassimir, count of Nassau, and. the counts of Bettheim, who procured for him the vacant professorship in the university of Groningen. He fulfilled this new appointment with great reputation, and continued to distinguish himself by the success of his practice till the decline of his life, which was accelerated by a complication of maladies. Dropsy, gout, gravel, aud fever, terminated his life Feb. 8, 1641.

The Milanese government, duly sensible of the superior merit of Mr. Frisi, and most likely jealous of so many honours received by him in Tuscany, induced him to return to his native place, by tendering him the chair of mathematics in the Palatine schools of that metropolis. This offer was made in 1764, and was soon accepted by Mr. Frisi, who flattered himself that he should there be of greater assistance to his family than he had been in a foreign place; it was here he wrote his two capital works, “De gravitate universali,” in three books, and the “Cosmographia Physica et Mathematica,” in 2 vols. both of which were afterwards published at Milan, in 1768 and 1774. Many years had now elapsed without his being involved in any of those quarrels which were the result of his temper; but as he was threatened with an event of this kind soon after his return to Milan, he was advised by his friends to escape the storm by a temporary peregrination. He consequently made the tour of several European countries; and it was during this excursion, that he attained the friendship of some of the greatest characters in those times, especially in England and France, and acquired many literary honours; but the danger of incurring new evils was inherent to his nature. The famous periodical work entitled “The Coffee-house,” was at that time publishing by some of the most eminent Milanese literati, among whom was Mr. Frisi himself, who had already been appointed royal censor of new literary publications. In this capacity he did not scruple to give his approbation to a pernicious work which was supposed to have issued from the above-mentioned society, and when the book was afterwards suppressed by ecclesiastical and civil authority, he had the imprudence, or rather the effrontery, to become its apologist. Sensible, perhaps at last, of the dangers to which he had exposed himself, he resolved to spend some years in retirement. A new field of exertions, however, was opened to him in his retreat, which proved more beneficial to society, and more honourable to himself, than any he had before cultivated. His uncommon talents in hydrpnymics were already celebrated in Italy, and as many hydrostatical operations had been projected at the time by the several Italian governments, he became the chief director, and almost the oracle of such undertakings. The Venetian senate, and the late Pius VI. also, wished in latter times to have his opinion on the projects which they had respectively adopted for the course of the river Brenta, and for the draining of the Pontine marshes. But even in these honourable commissions, he disgusted every person in power with whom he had to deal, and the necessity of applying to a man of his temper was frequently the subject of regret. In 1777, the Milanese government recalled him from obscurity, and appointed him director of the newly-founded school of architecture; and from this period he became as active in the republic of letters as ever. He published in the same year, 1777, his “Course of Mechanics,” for the use of the royal school; in 1781 his “Philosophical Tracts,” and from 1782 to 1784, his “Opera Varia,” 3 vols. 4to and in the interval from 1778 to 1783, he wrote the eulogies of Galileo, Cavalieri, Newton, the empress Maria Theresa, and of count Firmian. His eulogies on Galileo and Cavalieri have been pronounced by Montuclas “two finished specimens of scientific biography.” Frisi died Nov. 22, 1784, a man of unquestionable learning, but, unhappily for himself, of an impetuous and turbulent disposition.

He was in France, at Melun sur Seine, about April 20, 1366; perhaps private reasons might have induced him to take that road to Bourdeaux, where he was on All Saints’ day of that year, when the princess of Wales was brought to bed of a son, who was afterwards Richard II. The prince of Wales setting out a few days afterwards for the war in Spain, Froissart accompanied him to Dax, where the prince resided some time. He had expected to have attended him during the continuance of this grand expedition; but the prince would not permit him to go farther; and shortly after his arrival, sent him back to the queen his mother. Froissart could not have made any long stay in England, since in the following year, 1368," he was at different Italian courts. It was this same year, that Lionel duke of Clarence, son of the king of England, espoused Joland, daughter of Galeas II. duke of Milan. Froissart, who probably was in his suite, was present at the magnificent reeeption which Amadeus count of Savoy, surnamed the count Verd, gave him on his return: he describes the feasts on this occasion, which lasted three days; and does not forget to tell us that they danced a virelay of his composition. From the court of Savoy he returned to Milan, where the same count Amadeus gave him a good cotardie, a sort of coat, with twenty florins of gold; and from thence to Bologna and Ferrara, where he Feceived f forty ducats from the king of Cyprus, and then to Rome. Instead of the modest equipage he travelled with into Scotland, he was now like a man of importance, travelling on a handsome horse attended by a hackney.