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

The first publication that made him noticed, was his “Testament politiquedu Cardinal Alberoni,” one of those fictions that were very common in France and Holland on the death of any minister of state of great eminence. Of this kind were the Testaments of Richelieu, Mazarin, Colbert, Louvois, &c. vehicles for political sentiment, but of no authority as to the parties whose names are assumed. The reputation he acquired by this work, which was well enough written to deceive Voltaire into the opinion that it was the production of one long acquainted with the courts and politics of Europe, encouraged Maubert to publish “Histoire politique de siecle,” 1757, 2 vols. 4to. About this time, or soon after, we find him in England, where he boasts of the patronage of lord Bolingbroke, and his friend Mr. Henry Furnese, one of the lords of the admiralty, who endeavoured to procure him a place in that office at the head of which the duke of Newcastle then was, but that the death of his protector put an end to his hopes. In this account are some of those blunders which French writers seem to delight to commit, in speaking of the affairs of England. Mr. Furnese was a commissioner of the treasury for a year, and the duke of Newcastle first lord; but, whatever truth or falsehood there may be in his account of his connexions here, Maubert was at last obliged to make a precipitate retreat, being taken for a spy, and once more landed in Holland, where he published several political pamphlets, for which, such was his tergiversation, he was paid by that very count Bruhl who had prosecuted him some years before. At length he became obnoxious here too, and was obliged to go to Brussels, where he became editor of the Brussels Gazette, a paper, that under his management was for some time proverbial for want of veracity, marked hostility to the principles of liberty, and ignorance of the real state of the political affairs it professed to discuss or narrate. This character applied also with peculiar justice to Maubert’s “Historical and Political Mercury,” two numbers of which were translated and published in English in 1760, and to his other political pamphlets, “Testament politique de Walpole;” “Ephruimjustifie,” &c. As to the conclusion of his life, there are many reports, but they all agree that he died at Altona in 1767.

, a French translator, and in some degree a poet, was born at Noyon, in 1619, and for a time followed the profession of an advocate but being disgusted with the lavi r went into the church, where he became an abbe, and canon of the cathedral of Rheims. In that city he died in 1708, at the age of ninety. His works consist chiefly of translations, which are written in a pure, but not an animated style. The principal of them are these: 1. “The Philippics of Demosthenes.” 2. “The Euthydemus, and the greater Hippias of Plato.” 3. Some Orations of Cicero. 4. “The Rationarium Temporum of father Petau,” 1683, 3 vols. 12mo. 5. “Sanderus’s History of the English Schism,” 1678, 2 vols. 12mo. 6. “The Lives of cardinal Pole and Campeggio.” 7. “The Homilies of St. Chrysostom, addressed to the people of Antioch.” Maucroix was intimately connected with Boileau, Racine, and particularly with La Fontaine; in conjunction with whom, he published in 1685, a collection of their miscellaneous works, in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1726 were published, “Les nouvelles Oeuvres de Maucroix,” among which are some poems, more remarkable for a certain natural style, than for brilliancy of imagination.

, a divine of some eminence in France, was born at Vire in Normandy, in 1634. He at first taught the learned languages in the society to which he belonged, and afterwards was employed entirely in preaching, and in missions. He produced also several useful works, and died at Paris, Jan. 19, 1709. His principal productions are, 1. “A Treatise on Religion, against the Atheists, the Deists, and the new Pyrrhonians,” written in French; the best edition is that of 1698. 2. “A translation of the Psalms, in French verse,” of no great excellence. 3. “Miscellanies,” among which is some poetry, of various merit. 4. Excellent analyses of most of the tooks of the New Testament, in 8 vols. 12mo. These still maintain their character. 5. “Meditations for an ecclesiastical retreat of ten days,” 12mo. 6. “A Disserta.­tion on the Gout,” 12mo, 1689. Father Mauduit was candid as a scholar, and exemplary as a minister.

, a celebrated French mathematician and philosopher, was born at St. Malo in 1698, and at first educated there. In 1714 he studied in the college of La Marche, at Paris, where he discovered a strong inclination for mathematics. He fixed, however, on no profession until he arrived at his twentieth year, when he entered into the army, and during the space of five years in which he remained in it, pursued his mathematical studies with great vigour. In 1723 he was received into the royal academy of sciences, and read his first performance, a memoir upon the construction and form of musical instruments. When he commenced his travels, his first visit was to England, and during his residence at London he became a zealous admirer and follower of Newton. His next excursion was to Basil in Switzerland, where he formed a friendship with the celebrated John Bernouilli and his family, which continued till his death. At his return to Paris he applied himself to his favourite studies with greater zeal than ever. And how well he fulfilled the duties of an academician, may be seen in the Memoirs of the academy from 1724 to 1744; where the most sublime questions in the mathematical sciences, received from his hand that elegance, clearness, and precision, so remarkable in all his writings. In 1736 he was sent to the polar circle to measure a degree of the meridian, in order to ascertain the figure of the earth; in which expedition he was accompanied by Messrs. Clairault, Camus, Monnier, Outhier, and Celsus, the celebrated professor of astronomy at Upsal. This business rendered him so famous, that on his return he was admitted a member of almost every academy in Europe.

He went soon after to Berlin; but as the reform of the academy which the king of Prussia then meditated was not yet mature, he repaired to Paris, where his affairs called him, and was chosen in 1742 director of the academy of sciences. In 1743 he was received into the French academy; which was the first instance of the same person, being a member of both the academies at Paris at the same time. Maupertuis again assumed the soldier at the siege of Fribourg, and was pitched upon by marshal Coigny and the count d'Argenson to carry the news to the French king of the surrender of that citadel. Maupertuis returned to Berlin in 1744, when a marriage was negociated and brought about by the good offices of the queen mother, between our author and mademoiselle de Borck, a lady of great beauty and merit, and nearly related to M.de Borck, at that time minister of state. This determined him to settle at Berlin, as he was extremely attached to his new spouse, and regarded this alliance as the most fortunate circumstance of his life.

The works which he published were collected into 4 volumes, 8vo, published at Lyons in 1756, where also a new and elegant edition was printed in 1768. These contain the following works: 1. Essay On Cosmology. 2. Discourse on the different Figures of the Stars. 3. Essay on Moral Philosophy. 4. Philosophical reflections upon the Origin of Languages, and the signification of words. 5. Animal Physics, concerning Generation, &c. 6. System of Nature, or the formation of bodies. 7. Letters on various subjects. 8. On the progress of the Sciences. 9. Elements of Geography. 10. Account of the expedition to the Polar Circle, for determining the figure of the Earth; or the measure of the Earth at the Polar Circle. 11. Account of a Journey into the heart of Lapland, to search for an ancient Monument. 12. On the Comet of 1742. 13. Various Academical Discourses, pronounced in the French and Prussian academies. 14. Dissertation upon Languages. 15. Agreement of the different Laws of Nature, which have hitherto appeared incompatible. 16. Upon the Laws of Motion. 17. Upon the Laws of Rest. 18. Nautical Astronomy. 19. On the Parallax of the Moon. 20. Operations for determining the figure of the Earth, and the variations of Gravity. 21. Measure of a Degree of the meridian at the Polar Circle.

, grandson of the count de Pontchartrain, who was minister under Louis XIV. was born in 1701, anJ obtained an appointment of secretary at court so early as 1715. He was superintendant of the king’s household in 1718, and of the marine in 1723. In 1738 he was appointed minister of state, and was in all situations full of genius, activity, and sagacity. Being exiled to Bourges in 1749, by the intrigues of a lady very powerful at court, he made no secret of the manner in which he felt that change. “The first day,” said he, “I was piqued, the second I was contented.” When he arrived at the place of his exile, he talked in a lively manner of the dedications he should lose, and of the disappointments of the authors who had wasted their fine phrases upon him. He continued to amuse himself with the pleasures of society, and enjoyed the invariable esteem of many Valuable friends, and of the public. Being recalled to the ministry in 1774, by Louis XVI. who treated him with unbounded confidence, he disdained to revenge any former neglect oy ill offices, and lived rather with the ease of a rich private gentleman, than with the ostentation of a minister. His views of objects were rapid, yet were generally considered as profound; though in recommending the conduct which France pujsued with respect to America, at the time of the revolt of that country, he certainly laid the foundation for the destruction of the French monarchy. He was, however, a man of much public spirit, and one who contributed not a little to the improvement of the French marine. His correspondence was a model of precision, expressing much meaning in very few words. He died at the age of eighty, Nov. 21, 1781. He left some curious “Memoirs,” of which there are three editions, published in 1790 and 1792, 4 vols. 8vo, by the editor Soulaire.

, an eminent French accoucheur, was born at Paris, where he applied with great industry to the study and practice of surgery, for many years, especially in the great hospital, the Hotel-Dieu. He had already acquired there so much experience in the obstetrical department before he commenced public practice, that he rose almost at once to the head of his profession. His reputation was farther increased by his writings, and maintained by his prudent conduct and acknowledged skill during a series of years; after which he quitted practice entirely, and retired into the country, where he died Oct. 17, 1709, at an advanced age. His works, which are more useful for the facts than the reasoning they contain, are, 1. “Traite des Maladies des Femmes grosses, et de celles qui sont accouchées,” Paris, 1688, 4to, which has been often reprinted, and translated into Latin, as well as into most' of the modern European languages. 2. “Aphorismes touchant l'Accouchement, la Grossesse, et les Maladies des Femraes,” ibid. 1694, a summary of the preceding. 3. “Observations sur la Grossesse et l'Accouchement des Femmes, et sur leurs Maladies, et celles des Enfans nouveaux ne*s,” ibid. 1695, 4to. This may be considered as a second volume of the first treatise. 4. “Dernieres Observations sur les Maladies des Femmes . grosses et accouchées,” 1708, ibid. 4to which contains an additional collection of cases. The whole of these works were collected and reprinted together after his death, in 1712, and subsequently, with figures.

, usually called Maximus Tyrius, to distinguish him from several other Maximuses of antiquity, though chiefly distinguished by his eloquence, has obtained some degree of celebrity as a philosopher. According to Suidas, he lived under Commodus; according to Eusebius and Syncellus, under Antoninus Pius, in the second century; perhaps he flourished under Antoninus, and reached the time of Commodus, in both whose reigns he is said to have made a journey to Rome, but spent his life chiefly in Greece. We have extant of Maximu> Tyrius forty-one “Dissertations, upon various arguments;” a manuscript copy of which was first brought out of Greece into Italy by Janus Lascaris, and presented to Lorenzo de Medici. From this copy a Latin translation was made, and published by Cosmus Paccius, archbishop of Florence, in 1519. The work was then published in Greek by Henry Stephens, in 1557 in Greek and Latin by Daniel Heinsius, in 1607 byJ. Davies, of Cambridge, in 1703; by Markland in 1740, 4to; and by Reiske, in 1774, 8vo. The French have two good translations by Formey, 1764, and by Dounous, 1802. Isaac Casaubon, in the epistle dedicatory of his “Commentaries upon Persius,” calls Maximus Tyrius “mellitissimus Platonicorum;” and Peter Petit (in his “Misc. Observat.” lib. i. c. 20.) represents him as “auctorem imprimis elegantem in Philosophia, ac disertum.” He has spoken a good deal of himself in his thirtyseventh dissertation, and seemingly in a style of panegyric. Upon this account his editor Davies has accused him of vanity, but Fabricius has defended him by observing, that Davies did not sufficiently attend to Maximus’s purpose in speaking thus of himself; “which was,” he says, “not at all with a view of praising himself, but to encourage and promote the practice of those lessons in philosophy, which they heard from him with so much applause.” These dissertations are for the most part written upon Platonic principles, but sometimes lean towards scepticism.

, a French historian of the seventeenth century, was a protestant, and passed the chief part of his life in the courts of Germany. He died September 22, 1681. He calls himself in the titles of his works Seigneur de Sallettes, chevalier of the order of St. Michael, counsellor secretary to the elector of Mentz, and counsellor to the duke of Wirtemberg, titles which, Marchand remarks, do not very well agree with that of “teacher of the French language in the college of Tubingen.” His writings are now considered as feebly written, and are little known or consulted, but they had a degree of reputation in their day. The principal of them are, 1. “Etat de l'Empire,” State of the Empire, or an abridgment of the public law of Germany, 12 mo. 2. “Science des Princes,” which is an edition of the political considerations of Gabriel Naudee; with reflections added by du May, 1683, 8vo. 3. “The prudent Voyager,” 1681, 12mo.

, a French poet, and one of the forty of the French academy, was the son of a counsellor of the parliament of Toulouse, and born in 1582. He was secretary to queen Margaret, and pleased the court of that princess by his wit and gaiety. Noailles, the ambassador to Rome, took him with him in 1634-; and pope Urban VIII. was very much pleased with him. Returning to France, he made his court to the great, but was too sanguine in the expectations he formed from them; which lead in general to disappointment. This was his case. He commended cardinal Richelieu, in order to obtain something; and abused him for giving him nothing. He had the same success at the court of Anne of Austria; and, after a variety of disappointments, he retired to his province, where he died in 1646. He wrote songs, odes, epigrams, some of them rather licentious, and a poem, entitled, “Philander,” &c. Malherbe says of him, and it has generally been allowed, that his verses were well turned, but wanted force.

, cardinal, and first minister of state in France, was born at Piscina, in the province of Abruzzo, in Italy, on July 14, 1602. His abilities enabled him to make a considerable figure, even in his early years, whilst he was studying the belles lettres, in which he had the happiness of being instructed by the abbe Jerome of Colonna, who afterwards became a cardinal. This illustrious person went to reside in the university of Alcala in Spain, whither he was followed by Mazarin, who applied himself to the law, and at his return to Italy, took his doctor’s degree. He went afterwards to the court of Rome, where he became acquainted with cardinal Sacchetti, whom Urban VIII. sent into Lombardy. It was through his means, that Mazarin was instructed in every particular relating to the interest of the difff rent princes who were then at war respecting Cassel and Montserrat. Soon after this, the cardinal Antonio Barberini, nephew to the pope, came into the Milanese and Piedmont, in the character of legate, to conclude a peace. Mazarin embraced his cause so warmly, that he was ordered to remain upon the spot with the nuncio James Pancirole, and to assist him in his endeavours to conclude this great affair. He here scrutinized closely the designs of the French, the imperialists, the Spaniards, the duke of Mantua, and the duke of Savoy; and took such measures as might best reconcile and strengthen their various interests. When it happened that peace had been concluded at Ratisbon on the 3d of October, but the French and Spaniards refused to accept it in Italy, Mazarin, who perceived that By such an opposition his care would have proved nugatory, sought for new expedients to render the peace general, and to prevent these two armies from coming to an engagement. The Spaniards, who were besieging Cassel, had made entrenchments for six miles round, and were determined vigorously to defend themselves against the French, who approached extremely near, with an intention to force their lines. On Oct. 26, 1630, the Spaniards waited only for the signal to fire, and the forlorn hope of the French army had been drawn out to force their lines; when Mazarin, after offering an accommodation in many forms, quitted the Spanish trenches, and, riding on a full gallop towards the French, waved his hat to them, crying out, “Peace! peace!” He then addressed himself to the commander in chief, the marshal duke de Schomberg, and gave in such proposals as were accepted by the generals, and followed by the peace concluded in the April following. The nuncio Pancirole and Mazarin were joint agents for the pope; but all the credit of the negociation was given to the latter.

, a very able French mathematician and astronomer, was born at Laon in 17 44, where his father was an architect, and at one time a man of considerable property. At an early age he discovered a strong inclination for mathematical pursuits, and while he was under the instruction of his tutors, corresponded with Lalande, whom he was desirous of assisting in his labours. In 1772, Mechain was invited to Paris, where he was employed at the depot of the marine, and assisted M. Darquier in correcting his observations. Here his merit brought him acquainted with M. Doisy, director of the depot, who gave him a more advantageous situation at Versailles. At this place he diligently observed the heavens, and, in 1774, sent to the Royal Academy of Sciences “A Memoir relative to an Eclipse of Aldebaran,” observed by him on the 15th of April. He calculated the orbit of the comet of 1774, and discovered that of 1781. In 1782, he gained the prize of the academy on the subject of the comet of 1661, the return of which was eagerly expected in 1790; and in the same year he was admitted a member of the academy, and soon selected for the superintendance of the Connoissance des Tems. In 1790, M. Mechain discoveredhis eighth comet, and communicated to the academy his observations on it, together with his calculations of its orbit. In 1792 he undertook, conjointly with M. Delambre, the labour of measuring the degrees of the meridian, for the purpose of more accurately determining the magnitude of the earth and the length of a metre. In the month of June 1792, M. Mechain set out to measure the triangles between Perpignan and Barcelona; and notwithstanding that the war occasioned a temporary suspension of his labours, he was enabled to resume and complete them during the following year. He died on the 20th of September 1805, at Castellon de la Plana, in the sixty-second year of his age. Lalande deplores his loss as that of not only one of the best French astronomers, but one of the most laborious, the most courageous, and the most robust. His last observations and calculations of the eclipse of the sun on the llth of February, are inserted in the Connoissance des Tems for the year 15; and he also published a great many in the Ephemerides of M. Bode, of Berlin, which he preferred to a former work after Lalande became its editor. A more extensive memoir of his labours may be seen in Baron von Zach’s Journal for July 1800, and Lalande’s History of Astronomy for 1804.

, a very learned lawyer and pensionary of Rotterdam was born at Leyden in 1722; of his early history, pursuits, &c. our authorities give no account, nor have the bibliographers of this country, to whom he is so well known, supplied this deficiency. All we know is, that he died December 15, 1771, in the forty-ninth year of his age, after a life spent in learned research and labour, which produced the following works: 1. “De rebus mancipi et nee mancipi.” Leyden, 1741, 4to. 2. “Specimen calculi fluxionalis,” ibid. 1742, 4to. 3. “Specimen animadversionum in Cazi institutiones,” Mantuae Carpetunorum (i. e. Madrid), reprinted with additions by the author, at Paris, 1747, 8vo. 4. “Conspectus novi thesauri juris civilis et canonici,” Hague, 1751, 8vo. This conspectus was immediately followed by the work itself. 5. “Novus Thesaurus juris civilis,” &c. 1751—1753, 7 vols. folio; a book of high reputation, to which his son John added an eighth volume, in 1780. 6. “Conspectus OriginumTypographicarum proxime in lucem edendarum,” 1761, 8vo. This prospectus is very scarce, as the author printed but a very few copies: it is however in demand with collectors, as containing some things which he did not insert in the work itself. The abbé Gouget published a French translation, with some additions, in 1762. The entire work appeared in 1765, under the title of, 7. “Origines Typographic^,” Hague, 2 vols. 4to. An analysis of this valuable work was dratvn up by Mr.Bowyer, and printed in “The Origin of Printing, in tsvo Essays, 1. The substance of Dr. Middleton’s Dissertation on the origin of printing in England. 2. Mr. Meerman’s account of the first invention of the art,” 1774, 8vo. This volume was the joint composition of Messrs. Bowyer and Nichols. Meerman’s partiality to Haerlem, as the origin of printing, was attacked with much severity by Heinecken, who being a German, betrayed as much partiality to Mentz and Strasburgh. It seems, however, now to be agreed among t) pographical antiquaries, that Heinecken paid too little attention to the claims of Haerlem, and Meerman infinitely too much. The dissertation of the latter, however, has very recently been reprinted in France, by Mons. Jansen, with useful notes, and a catalogue of all the books published in the Low Countries during the fifteenth century.

, a French historian, of Irish extraction, as his name sufficiently denotes, was born in 1721 at Salle in the Cevennes. He addicted himself very early to letters, and the' history of his life is only the history of his publications. He produced in 1752, 1. “The origin of the Guebres, or natural religion put int;o action.” This book has too much of the cast uf modern philosophy to deserve recommendation, and has now become very scarce. 2. In 1755 he published “Considerations on the Revolutions of Arts,” a work more easily to be found; and, 3. A small volume of “Fugitive Pieces” in verse, far inferior to his prose. In the ensuing year appeared, 4. His “Memoirs of the Marchioness de Terville, with the Letters of Aspasia,” 12rno. The style of these memoirs is considered as affected, which, indeed, is the general fault prevalent in his works. In his person also he is said to have been affected and finical; with very ready elocution, but a mode of choosing both his thoughts and expressions that was rather brilliant than natural. His style, however, improved as he advanced in life. In 1759 he gave the world a treatise on, 5. “The origin, progress, and decline of Idolatry,” 12mo; a production in which this improvement in his mode of writing is very evident. It is still more so in his, 6. “Picture of modern History,” “Tableau de THistoire moderne,” which was published in 1766, in 3 vols. 12mo. Hts chief faults are those of ill- regulated genius, which is very stronglyapparent in this work it is eloquent, full of those graces of elocution, and richness of imagination, which are said to have made his conversation so peculiar but it becomes fatiguing from an excessive ambition to paint every thing in brilliant colours. He speaks of every thing in the present tense, and he embellishes every subject with images and allusions. He died Jan. 23, 1766, before this most considerable of his works was quite ready for publication. He was married, and his wife is said to have been a woman who in all respects did honour to the elegance of his taste. All his writings are in French.

, a French engraver and designer, particularly celebrated for a mode of engraving peculiar to himself, and of his own invention, that of forming a whole head by one line of the graver, swelling it in various places to produce the shades. A head of our Saviour, formed of one spiral line, beginning at the tip of the nose, is his most famous work in this style. There are also portraits by him, of pope Clement VIII. and of the marquis Justiniani, and a set of the Justiniani gallery, all of which are highly esteemed. Charles II. was desirous of inviting him to settle in England; but an attachment to his country, and a happy marriage in it, fixed him at home. He was born at Abbeville in 1601, and died at Paris in 1688.

His “Memoirs” were accidentally found in the castle of Edinburgh, in 1660, somewhat imperfect, and injured by time and civil confusion. They passed thence into the hands of sir James Melvil of Halhill, the author’s grandson, from whom the editor George Scott received them, and published them in 1683, in folio, under this title, “The Memoirs of sir James Melvil, of Halhill, containing an impartial account of most of the remarkable affairs of state, during the last age, not mentioned by other historians: more particularly relating to the kingdoms of England and Scotland, under the reigns of queen Elizabeth, Mary queen of Scots, and king James: in all which transactions the author was personally and publicly concerned. Now published from the original manuscript.” There is an epistle to the reader, prefixed by the editor, from which we have" made this extract. It is remarkable, that nobody knew how these memoirs came to be deposited in the castle of Edinburgh, or when they were so: and also, that they were preserved almost entire, in a place which could not secure the public records of the kingdom from the rude incursions of civil discord. Notwithstanding some mistakes, owing to the advanced age of the writer^ they are much esteemed, and have been reprinted both in French and English.

, called, from his great learning, the Varro of his times, was born at Angers, Aug. 15, 1613. He was the son of William Menace, the king’s advocate at Angers; and discovered so early an inclination to letters, that his father was determined to spare no cost or pains in his education. He was accordingly taught the belles lettres and philosophy, in which his progress fully answered the expectations of his father, who, however, thought it necessary to divert him from too severe application, by giving him instructions in music and dancing; but these were in a great measure thrown away, and he had so littie genius for music, that he never could learn a tune. He had more success in his first profession, which was that of a barrister at law, and pleaded various causes, with considerable eclat, both in the country, and in the parliament of Paris. His father had always designed him for his profession, the law, and now resigned his place of king’s advocate in his favour, which Menage, as soon as he became tired of the law, returned to him. Considering the law as a drudgery, he adopted the vulgar opinion that it was incompatible with an attention to polite literature. He now declared his design of entering into the church, as the best plan he could pursue for the gratification of his love of general literature, and of the company of literary men; and soon after he had interest to procure some benefices, and among the rest the deanery of St. Peter at Angers. In the mean time his father, displeased at him for deserting his profession, would not supply him with the money which, in addition to what his livings produced, was necessary to support him at Paris. This obliged him to look out for some means of subsistence there, independent of his family; and at the recommendation of Chapelain, a member of the French academy, he was taken into the family of cardinal de Retz, who was then only coadjutor to the archbishop of Paris. In this situation he enjoyed the repose necessary to his studies, and had every day new opportunities of displaying his abilities and learning. He lived several years with the cardinal; but having received an affront from some of his dependants, he desired of the cardinal, either that reparation might be made him, or that he might be suffered to depart. He obtained the latter, and then hired an apartment in the cloister of Notre Dame, where he held every Wednesday an assembly, which he called his “Mercuriale.” Here he had the satisfaction of seeing a number of learned men, French and foreigners; and upon other days he frequented the study of Messieurs du Puy, and after their death that of Thuanus. By his father’s death, which happened Jan. 18, 1648, he succeeded to an estate, which he converted into an annuity, for the sake of being entirely at leisure to pursue his studies. Soon after, he obtained, by a decree of the grand council, the priory of Montdidier; which he resigned also to the abbe de la Vieuville, afterwards bishop of Rennes, who procured far him, by way of amends, a pension of 4000 livres upon two abbeys. The king’s consent, which was necessary for the creation of this pension, was not obtained for Menage, till he had given assurances to cardinal Mazarin, that he had no share in the libels which had been dispersed against that minister and the court, during the troubles at Paris. This considerable addition to his circumstances enabled him to prosecute his studies with more success, and to publish la great many works, which he generally did at his own expence. The excessive freedom of his conversation, however, and his total inability to suppress a witty thought, whatever hiight be the consequence of uttering it, created him many enemies; and he had contests with several men of eminence, who attacked him at different times, as the abbe d'Aubignac, Boileau, Cotin, Salo, Bohours, and Baillet. But all these were not nearly so formidable to him, as the danger which he incurred in 1660, by a Latin elegy addressed to Mazarin; in which, among his compliments to his eminence, it was pretended, that he had satirized a deputation which the parliament had sent to that minister. It was carried to the grand chamber by the counsellors, who proposed to debate upon it; but the first president, Lamoignon, to whom Menage had protested that the piece had been written three months before the deputation, and that he could not intend the parliament in it, prevented any ill consequences from the affair. Besides the reputation his works gained him, they procured him a place in the academy della Crusca at Florence; and he might have been a member of the French academy at its first institution, if it had not been for his “Requete des dictionnaires.” When the memory of that piece, however, was effaced by time, and most of the academicians, who were named in it, were dead, he was proposed, in 1684, to fill a vacant place in that academy, and was excluded only by the superior interest of his competitor, M. Bergeret: there not being one member, of all those who gave their votes against Menage, who did not own that he deserved the place. After this he would not suffer his friends to propose him again, nor indeed was he any longer able to attend the academy, if he had been chosen, on account of a fall, which had put his thigh out of joint; after which he scarcely ever went out of his chamber, but held daily a kind of an academy there. In July 1692, he began to, be troubled with a rheum, which was followed by a defluxion on the stomach, of which he died on the 23d, aged seventy- nine.

He composed several works, which had much reputation in their day 1. “Origines de la langue Franchise,” 1650, 4to a very valuable work, reprinted in folio after his death, in 1694, enlarged by himself, but this has sunk under the much improved edition by Jault, Paris, 1750, 2 vols. fol. 3. “Miscellanea,” 1652, 4to; a collection of pieces in Greek, Latin, and. French, prose as well as verse, composed by him-at different times, and upon different subjects; among which is “La requete des dictionnaires,” an ingenious piece of raillery, in which he makes all the dictionaries complain that the academy’s dictionary will be their utter ruin, and join in an humble petition to prevent it. It was not written from the least malignity against the academy, but merely to divert himself, and that he might not lose several bon mots which came into his head upon that occasion. He suppressed it for a long time; but at last it was stolen from him, and published by the abbé Montreuil, without his knowledge, and prevented him, as we have observed, from obtaining a place in the academy, at its first institution; which made de Monmor say, “that he ought to be obliged to be a member, on account of that piece, as a man, who has debauched a girl, is obliged to marry her.” 3. “Osservazioni sopra TAminta del Tasso,” 1653, 4to. 4. “Diogenes Laertius Graece et Latine cum commentario,” Lond. 1664, in folio. Menage published his first edition at Paris, in 8vo, 1662, and sent it to bishop Pearson in London, who wrote him a complimentary letter of thanks, which is inserted in the London edition, which is now a rare and expensive book. Meibom’s edition of 1692 contains Menage’s annotations, &c. 5. “Poemata,” 1656, 12mo. They were often reprinted; and what is remarkable, his Italian poetry has been said to be esteemed even in Italy, although Menage could not speak two wordsin Italian. Baretti, however, condemns without mercy the Italian verses both of Menage and lleignier. MorhohY pretends that he has borrowed greatly from the Latin poems of Vincent Fabriciusj and several have accused him of plundering the ancients. We ought not, perhaps, to omit here, tbat having, according to the custom of poets, chosen mademoiselle de la Vergne, afterwards countess de la Fayette, for his poetical mistress, he gave lieu in Latin, inadvertently we may suppose, the name of Laverna, the goddess of thieves and this gave occasion to the following epigram:

, better known by the name of Marsilius of Padua, the place of his birth, was one of the most celebrated philosophers and lawyers of the 14th century. He was educated at the university of Orleans; was afterwards made counsellor to the emperor Louis of Bavaria; and wrote an apology entitled “Defensor pacis,” for that prince, in 1324. In this extraordinary work, for such at that time it might well be deemed, he boldly maintained that the pope ought to submit to the emperor, not only in temporal affairs, but also in what regards the outward discipline of the church. He described in strong colours, the pride, the luxury, and other irregularities of the court of Rome; and shewed at large, that the pope could not, by divine right, claim any powers or prerogatives superior to those of other bishops. John XXII. at that time filled the papal chair, and was so provoked at this doctrine of Marsilius, as well as his manner of propagating it, that he issued out a long decree, in which he endeavoured to refute it, and by which he excommunicated the author, in 1327. Dupin relates, that on this book being translated into French without the author’s name, pope Gregory XL complained of it to the faculty of divinity at Paris when the faculty declared, by an authentic act, that none of their members had any hand in that translation and that neither Marsilius of Padua, nor John de Jande, who was likewise thought to have been concerned in the work, belonged to their body. Besides the “Defensor pacis, seu de re imperatoria et pontifica, adversus usurpatam Romani Pontificis jurisdictionem, libri tres,” Marsilius wrotea treatise entitled “De translatione imperil” and also another, “De jurisdictione imperial! in causis matrimonialibus.” He died at Monternalto, in 1328; and, however his memory may have been honoured elsewhere, was ranked at Rome among the heretics of the first class.

, a French magistrate and antiquary, was one of several authors of the name of Menard who obtained considerable reputation in France. Claude, who was born in 1582, had a situation in the magistracy of Angers (lieutenant de la prevote), and was distinguished for his knowledge and virtue. Having had the misfortune to lose his wife towards the latter end of his career, he quitted the world, became an ecclesiastic, and led a very austere life. He was passionately attached to the study of antiquities, and rescued from oblivion several curious pieces. He died Jan. 20, 1652, at the age of seventytwo. He published, 1. “Joinville’s History of St. Louis,” 1617, 4to, with notes full of erudition and judgment. 2. “The two books of St. Austin against Julian,” which he discovered in the library at Angers. 3. “Researches concerning the body of St. James the greater,” who, as is pretended, was buried in the collegiate church of Angers. The credulity of this casts some shade upon his other works. It is also heavily written. 4. “History of Bertrand du Gueschiin,” 1618, 4to. The learning of this author was great, but his style was heavy and bad.

, a counsellor in the presidial court at Nismes, was born at Tarascon, in 1706, and died in 1767. He lived chiefly at Paris, and employed himself in the study of history and antiquities, and in writing books, which, though approved for their learning, did not rescue him from the inconveniences of poverty. They are these: 1. “The civil, ecclesiastical, and literary History of the city of Nismes,” 7 vols. 4to, published in 1750, and the following years. This work has no fault but that of prolixity. 2. “Mceurs et Usages cles Grecs,” 1743, 12mo, a small and useful compilation. 3. “The Amours of Calisthenes and Aristoclea,” 1766, 12mo, a novel, in which the author has skilfully painted the manners of Greece. 4. “A collection of fugitive pieces, illustrative of French history,” 3 vols. 4to, published in 1748. The materials were communicated to him by the marquis d'Aubais. There was also a chronologer, named Peter Menard, who died the first year of the last century a James Menard, a lawyer of the sixteenth century and one or two more of interior note.

The books he wrote were very numerous, and very learned; one of which, in particular, had it been as well executed as planned, would have been very curious and entertaining. Its title is the following: “De Charlataneria eruditorum declamationes duae; cum notis variorum. Accessit epistola Sebastiani Stadelii ad Janum Philomusum, de circumforanea literatorum vanitate, Leipsic, 1715,” 8vo. It has been said that there never was a worse book with a better title. It has, however, been translated into French, and is entitled “De la Charlatanerie des par M. Mencken: avec des remarques critiques de differens auteurs, Hague,” 1721, in Bvo. Mencke’s design here was to expose the artifices used by false scholars to raise to themselves a name; but, as he glanced so evidently at certain considerable persons that they could not escape being known, some pains were taken to have his book seized and suppressed: which, however, as usual, made the fame of it spread the faster, and occasioned editions to be multiplied. In 1723 he published at Leipsic, “Bibliotheca Menckeniana,” &e. or, “A catalogue of all the books and manuscripts in all languages, which had been collected by Otto and John Mencke, father and son.” Mencke himself drew up this catalogue, which is digested in an excellent method, with a design to make his library, which was very magnificent and valuable, public: but in 1728 he thought proper to expose it to sale and for that purpose published catalogues, with the price of every book marked. Mencke had a considerable share in the “Dictionary of learned men,” printed at Leipsic, in German, in 1715, folio, the plan of which he had formed, and furnished the persons employed in it with the principal materials, and wrote the articles of the Italians and English. He continued the <c Acta eruditorum," as he had promised his father upon his death-bed, for twenty-five years, ancl published 33 volumes, including the supplements and the indexes.

, a Jewish philosophical writer, was born at Dessau, in Anhalt, in 1729. After being educated under his father, who was a schoolmaster, he devoted every hour he could spare to literature, and obtained as a scholar a distinguished reputation; but his father ber ing unable to maintain him, he was obliged, in search of labour, or bread, to go on foot, at the age of fourteen, to Berlin, where he lived for some years in indigence, and frequently in want of necessaries. At length he got employment from a rabbi as a transcriber of Mss, who, at the same time that he afforded him the means of subsistence, liberally initiated him into the mysteries of the theology, the jurisprudence, and scholastic philosophy of the Jews. The study of philosophy and general literature became from this time his favourite pursuit, but the fervours of application to learning were by degrees alleviated and animated by the consolations of literary friendship. He formed a strict intimacy with Israel Moses, a Polish Jew, who, without any advantages of education, had become an able, though self-taught, mathematician and naturalist. Hg very readily undertook the office of instructor of Mendelsohn, in subjects of which he was before ignorant; and taught him the Elements of Euclid from his own Hebrew version. The intercourse between these young men was not of long duration, owing to the calumnies propagated against Israel Moses, which occasioned his expulsion from the communion of the orthodox; in consequence of this he became the victim of a gloomy melancholy and despondence, which terminated in a premature death. His loss, which was a grievous affliction to Mendelsohn, was in some measure supplied by Dr. Kisch, a Jewish physician, by whose assistance he was enabled to attain a competent knowledge of the Latin language. In 1748 he became acquainted with another literary Jew, viz. Dr. Solomon Gumperts, by whose encouragement and assistance he attained a general knowledge of the living and modern languages, and particularly the English, by which he was enabled to read the great work of our immortal Locke in his own idiom, which he had before studied through the medium of the Latin language. About the same period he enrolled the celebrated Lessing among his friends, to whom he was likewise indebted for assistance in his literary pursuits. The scholar amply repaid the efforts of his intructor, and soon became his rival and his associate, and after his death the defender of his reputation against Jacobi, a German writer, who had accused Lessing of atheism. Mendelsohn died Jan. 4, 1785, at the age of fifty-seven, highly respected and beloved by a numerous acquaintance, and by persons of very different opinions. When his remains were consigned to the grave, he received those honours from his nation which are commonly paid to their chief rabbies. As an author, the first piece was published in 1755, entitled “Jerusalem,” in which he maintains that the Jews have a revealed law, but not a revealed religion, but that the religion of the Jewish nation is that of nature. His work entitled “Phaedon, a dialogue on the Immortality of the Soul,” in the manner of Plato, gained him much honour: in this hepresents the reader with all the arguments of modern philosophy, stated with great force and perspicuity, and recommended by the charms of elegant writing. From the reputation which he obtained by this masterly performance, he was entitled by various periodical writers the “Jewish Socrates.” It was translated into French in 1773, and into the English, by Charles Cullen, esq. in 1789. Among his other works, which are all creditable to his talents, he wrote “Philosophical Pieces;” “A Commentary on Part of the Old Testament;” “Letters on the Sensation of the Beautiful.”

, an Augustine friar of the province of Castille, was chosen by the king of Spain to be ambassador to the emperor of China, in 1584. He was made bishop of Lipari in Italy in 1593, bishop of Chiapi in New Spain in 1607, and bishop of Propajan in the West Indies in 1608. He wrote “A History of China,” in Spanish, which has been translated into several languages. A general idea of it may be taken from the mere title of the French translation, published at Paris, in 1589, which runs thus “The history of the great kingdom of China, in the East Indies, in two parts the first containing the situation, antiquity, fertility, religion, ceremonies, sacrifices, kings, magistrates, manners, customs, laws, and other memorable things of the said kingdom; the second, three voyages to it in 1577, 1579, and 1581, with the most remarkable rarities either seen or heard of there; together with an itinerary of the new world, and the discovery of New Mexico in 1583.”

, of Dijon, one of the most learned and curious antiquaries of his time, was born in 1564, and died in 1634, at the age of seventy. His principal works are, 1. “Medals, Coins, and ancient Monuments of the emperors of Rome,” folio. 2. " Illustrious Medals of the ancient emperors and empresses of Rome,' 7 4to. They are both written in French, and are not much esteemed, according to the Diet. Hist.; but Moreri says that all modern antiquaries speak of them with the highest praise (grands eloges).

, a Jesuit, was born at Lyons in 1633. Besides his skill in the ancient languages, and acquaintance with the classic authors, he had a particular talent for heraldry, and for the arrangement and marshalling of all splendid ceremonies, such as canonizations, &c. so that his plans for those occasions were sought with great avidity. The fertility of his imagination constantly displayed itself in an incredible variety of inscriptions, devices, medals, and other ornaments. He travelled in Italy, Flanders, Germany, and England; and in all places gained improvement and amusement. His memory was so prodigious, that, in order to try it, Christina queen of Sweden, pronounced in his presence at Lyons, and had written down, 300 unconnected words, the strangest she could think of, and it is said that he repeated them all exactly in the same order. This wonderful memory supplied him with an inexhaustible fund of anecdotes; and he spoke Greek and Latin with as much facility as French. He died Jan. 31, 1705, being then seventy-four. His works that remain are, 1. “History of Louis the Great, by medals, emblems, devices, &c.” 2. “Consular History of the city of Lyons,” 1693, folio. 3. Several small treatises on devices, medals, heraldry, &c. particularly his “Methode de Blason,” an edition of which was published at Lyons, in 1770, 8vo, with many additions to the original work. 4. “La Philosophic des Images,” 1694, 12mO, with several others of smaller consequence, which are all enumerated by Niceron.

, a celebrated modern painter, was born at Aussig in Bohemia, in 1726. His lather was painter to Augustus 111. king of Poland, and he, observing the talents of his son for the same art, took him to Rome in 1741. After studying about four years, the young painter returned to Dresden, where he executed several works for Augustus with uncommon success. But his greatest patron was Charles III. king of Spain, who having, while only king of Naples, become acquainted with Mengs and his merits, in 1761, within two years after his accession to the throne of Spain, settled upon him a pension of 2000 doubloons, and gave him an house and an. equipage. Mengs, nevertheless, did not go to Spain, but resided chiefly at Rome, where he died in 1779. The labours of his art, grief for the loss of a most beautiful and amiable wife, and the injudicious medicines of an empiric, his countryman, who pretended to restore his health, are said to have occasioned his death. His character was very amiable, with no great fault but that which too commonly attends genius, a total want of reconomy; so that, though his profitsin various ways,forthe last eighteen years of his life, were very considerable, he hardly left enough to pay for his funeral. In his address, he was timid and aukward, with an entire ignorance of the world, and an enthusiasm for the arts, which absorbed almost all his passions. He left five daughters, and two sons, all of whom were provided for by his patron the king of Spain. He was an author as well as a painter, and his works were published at Parma in 1780, by the chevalier d'Azara, with notes, and a life of Mengs, in 2 vols. 4to, which were translated into English, and published in 2 vols. 1796, 8vo. They consist chiefly of treatises and letters on taste, on several painters, and various subjects connected with the philosophy and progress of the arts. They were partly translated into French, in 1782, and more completely in 1787. All that is technical on the subject of painting, in the work of his friend Winckelman, on the history of art, was supplied by Mengs. He admired the ancients, but without bigotry, and could discern their faults as well as their beauties. As an artist, Mengs seems to have been mostly admired in Spain. In this country, recent connoisseurs seem disposed to under-rate his merit, merely, as it would appear, because it had been over-rated by Azara and Winckelman. The finest specimen of his art in this country is the altar- piece of All Souls Chapel, Oxford. The subject of this picture is our Saviour in the garden it consists of two figures in the foreground, highly finished, and beautifully painted. It was ordered by a gentleman of that college whilst on his travels through Spain; but being limited to the price, he was obliged to choose a subject of few figures. This gentleman relates a singular anecdote of Mengs, which will further show the profundity of his knowledge and discernment in things of antiquity. While Dr. Burney was abroad collecting materials for his History of Music, he found at Florence an ancient statue of Apollo, with a bow and riddle in his hand: this, he considered, would be sufficient to decide the long-contested point, whether or not the ancients had known the use of the bow. He consulted many people to ascertain the certainty if this statue were really of antiquity; and at last Mengs was desired to give his opinion, who, directly as he had examined it, without knowing the cause of the inquiry, said, “there was no doubt but that the statue was of antiquity, but that the arms and fiddle had been recently added.” This had been done with such ingenuity that no one had discovered it before Mengs; but the truth of the same was not to be doubted.

, or Menin, a most celebrated German orientalist, was born in Lorraine, then subject to the emperor, in 1623; and for copiousness of learning, elegance of genius, and profound knowledge of languages, particularly those of the East, proved undoubtedly one of the principal ornaments of the age in which he lived. He studied at Rome under Giattino. When he was about thirty, his love of letters induced him to accompany the Polish ambassador to Constantinople, where he studied the Turkish language under Bobovius and Ahmed, two very skilful teachers. So successful was he in this study, that when he had been there only two years, the place of first interpreter to the Polish embassy at the Porte was promised to him. When the place became vacant, he was accordingly appointed to it, and obtained so much credit by his conduct, that, after a time, he was sent for into Poland, and again sent out with full powers as ambassador to the Porte. For his able execution of this office, he was further honoured, by being naturalized in Poland, on which occasion he added the Polish termination of ski to his family name, which was Menin. Being desirous afterwards to extend his sphere of action, he went to the court of the emperor, as interpreter of oriental languages, in 1661. Here also, as in other instances, his talents and behaviour obtained the highest approbation; on which account he was not only sent as interpreter to several imperial ambassadors at the Porte, but was entrusted in many important and confidential services, and, in 1669, having paid a visit to the holy sepulchre at Jerusalem, was made one of the knights of that order. After his return to Vienna he was advanced to further honours; being made one of the counsellors of war to the emperor, and first interpreter of oriental languages. He died at Vienna, at the age of seventy-five, in 1698. His great work, 1. The “Thesaurus linguarum orientalium,” was published at Vienna, in 1680, in 4 yols. folio: to which was added, in 1687, another volume, entitled “Complenaentum Thesauri linguarum orientalium, seu onomasticum Latino-Turcico-Arabico-Persicum.”* The former volumes having become extremely scarce, partly on account of the destruction of a great part of the impression in the siege of Vienna by the Turks in 1683, a design was formed some time ago in England of reprinting the work, by a society of learned men, among whom was sir William Jones. But as this undertaking, probably on account of the vast expenee which must have been incurred, did not proceed, the empress queen, Maria Theresa, who had heard of the plan, took it upon herself, and with vast liberality furnished every thing necessary for its completion. In consequence of this, it was begun to be splendidly republished at Vienna in 1780, with this title, “Francisci a Mesgnien Meninski Lexicon Arabico-Persico-Turcicum, adjecta ad singulas voces et phrases interpretatione Latina, ad usitatiores, etiam Italica,” and has been completed in four volumes, folio. In this edition, say the editors, the Lexicon of Meninski may be said to be increased, diminished, and Amended. Increased, because many Arabic and Persian words are added, from Wankuli and Ferhengi, the best Arabic and Persic Lexicographers whom the East has produced; and, from Herbelot, are inserted the names of kingdoms, cities, and rivers, as well as phrases in common use among the Turks, &c. diminished, because many useless synonyma are omitted, which rather puzzled than assisted the student; as well as all the French, Polish, and German interpretations, the Latin being considered as sufficient for all men of learning amended, with respex?t to innumerable typographical errors which, from a work of this naturej Ho care can perhaps altogether exclude, Brunei remarks, however, that this edition does not absolutely supplant the preceding, as the grammar and onomasticon are not reprinted in it. There is a Vienna edition of the grammar, entitled “Institutiones linguae Turcicae,” 1756, in quarto, two vols. in one; but the onomasticon must still be sought in the original edition. The other works of Meninski were occasioned chiefly by a violent contest between him and J. B. Podesta, in which much acrimony was employed on both sides. These it is hardly worth while to enumerate, but they may all be seen in the account of his life from which this article is taken. It should be observed however, that, in 1674, Podesta published a book entitled “Prodromus novi linguarum Orientalium collegii, jussu Aug. &c. erigendi, in Univ. Viennensi” to which Meninski opposed, 2. “Meninskii Antidotum in Prodromum novi ling*, orient collegii, &c.” 4to. But such was the credit of his antagonist in the university, that soon after there came out a decree, in the name of the rector and consistory, in which that antidote of Meninski’s is proscribed and prohibited, for six specific reasons, as impious and infamous. Meninski was defended against this formidable attack by a friend, in a small tract, entitled “Veritasdefensa, seu justitia causae Dn. F. de M. M. [Meninski] contra infame decretum Universitatis Viennensis, anno 1674, 23 Novernbris, &c. ab Amico luci exposita, anno 1675,” in which this friend exposes, article by article, the falsehood of the decree, and exclaims strongly against the arts of Podesta. This tract is in the British Museum. Podesta was oriental secretary to the emperor, and professor of those languages at Vienna but is described in a very satirical manner by the defender of Meninski “Podesta, natura Semi-Italus, statura nanus, caecutiens, balbus, imo bardus repertus, aliisque vitiis ac stultitiis plenus, adeoque ad discendas linguas Orientales inhabilis.” A list of the works of Podesta, is, however, given by the late editors of Meninski.

On the death of his father, he returned to Scotland, and soon afterwards entered into the army at the commencement of the seven-years war, during the greatest part of which he served in Germany under prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, and was in one of the six British regiments of infantry, that gained such reputation for their gallantry at the memorable battle of Minden. The regiment in which he afterwards served, being reduced at the peace of Paris, he returned to Aberdeen, where he married Miss Katherine Douglas, sister to the present lord Glenbervie, a beautiful and accomplished woman, with whom he lived many years in much happiness. In order to fill up the vacant hours of his then unemployed situation, he devoted his time chiefly to books, and, in particular, recommenced the study of the Greek language (of which he had acquired the rudiments at college) with such assiduity, that his intimate friend, Dr. Beattie, was of opinion there were not six gentlemen in Scotland, at that time, who knew Greek so well as major Mercer. Then it was likewise, that by attention to the purest models of antiquity, he corrected that partiality for French literature, which he had strongly imbibed by his early habits of study at Paris.

, or Mercerus, a celebrated philologer, uas a native of Usez in Languedoc. He was bred to. the study of jurisprudence, which he quitted for that of the learned languages, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Chaldee; and in 1549, succeeded Vatablus in the professorship of Hebrew in the royal college at Paris. Being obliged to quit the kingdom during the civil wars, he retired to Venice, where his friend Arnoul du Ferrier resided as French ambassador; but returned with him afterwards to France, and died at Usez, his native place, in 1572. He was a little man, worn by excess of application, but with a voice which he could easily make audible to a large auditory. His literature was immense, and among the proofs of it are the following works: 1. “Lectures on Genesis, and the Prophets,” Geneva, 1598, folio. 2. “Commentaries on Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Canticles,” 1573, 2 vols. folio, which have been much esteemed. 3. “Tables of the Chaldee Grammar,” Paris, 1550, 4to. These are all written in Latin. He was considered as inclined to Calvinism. His son Josiah Le Mercier, an able critic, who died December 5, 1626, published an excellent edition of “Nonnius Marcellus;” notes on Aristae ­netus, Tacitus, DictysCretensis, and Apuleius’s book “De Deo Socratis,” and an “Eulogy,” on Peter Pithon; some of his letters are in Goldast’s collection. Salmasius was his son-in-law.

, perpetual secretary of the academy of sciences at Berlin, was born at Leichstal, near Basil, Sept. 27, 1723, of a reputable family, and received a learned education, with the particulars of which, however, we are unacquainted. In 1750 he was invited from Holland to Berlin, on the recommendation of Maupertuis, and died in that city Feb. 12, 1807, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. The best known of his works were French translations of Claudian, and of Hume’s Essays, the latter, published at Amsterdam, 1759 1764, 5 vols. 12mo, enriched with commentaries and refutations of the most objectionable principles. He translated also some of Michaelis’s works. The Memoirs of the Academy of Berlin contain several of his pieces on philosophical subjects and on geometry. One of the best is a parallel between the philosophy of Leibnitz and Kant, which was much noticed on its first appearance. Merian bore an estimable private character, and preserved all the activity and vigour of youth to a very advanced age. A few days before his death he officiated as secretary at a sitting of the academy, to celebrate, according to custom, the memory of the Great Frederic.

The drawings of this lady have a delicacy and a beauty of colour, which have seldom been equalled, and her designs are still in high estimation, notwithstanding the great attention which has since been paid to the accurate execution of such works. She published, 1. “The origin of Caterpillars, their nourishment and changes” written in Dutch; Nuremberg, 1679–1688, in 2 vols. 4to. This was afterwards translated into Latin, and published at Amsterdam, in 1717, 4to. This work, much augmented by herself and daughters, with thirty-six additional plates and notes, was published in French by John Marret, Amsterdam, 1730, folio, under the title of, “Histoire des Insectes d'Europe.” 2. “Dissertatio de Generatione et Metamorphosibus insectorum Surinamensium,” Anise. 1705, folio. This contains only sixty plates. To some of the later editions twelve plates were annexed, by her daughters Dorothea and Helena. There is an edition of this in folio, French and Dutch, printed at Amsterdam, in 1719. Another in French and Latin, 1726; and another in Dutch, in 1730. There have been also editions of the two works united, under the title of “Histoire des Insectes de PEurope et de PAmerique,” Amst. 1730; Paris, 1768 1771. Many of the original drawings of this artist are in the British Museum, in two large volumes, which were purchased by sir Hans Sloane, at a large price. The current opinion is, that he gave five guineas for each drawing; but this is not sufficiently authenticated. Of these volumes, one contains the insects of Surinam, the other those of Europe, and among them are many designs which have never been engraved. Among those of the Surinam insects are several, which, though very elegantly finished, appear evidently, on examination, to be painted on impressions taken from the wet proofs of the engravings. Those of Europe are, perhaps, entirely original drawings. In the engraved works, much less justice has been done to the European insects than to those of America. Matthew Merian, the father of this lady, published many volumes of topographical engravings and collections of plates in sacred history.

It was supposed that Merlin did not die, but was laid asleep by magic, and was, after a long period, to awake and live again. Spenser alludes to this fable also. Extravagant prophecies, and other ridiculous works are ascribed to Merlin, and some authors have written Commentaries on them, as ridiculous as the text. In the British Museum is “Le compte de la vie de Merlin et de ses faiz, et compte de ses prophecies,” 2 vols. fol. on vellum, without date or place. There is a French edition, 3 vols. small folio, black letter, dated 1498. There are also other French and Italian editions. In English we have 46 The Life of Merlin, surnamed Ambrosius. His prophesies and predictions interpreted: and their truth made good by our English annals, published by T. Heywood," Lond. 1641, 4to. This was Hey wood the actor, of whom some notice is taken in our seventeenth volume.

Mr. Merry was an accomplished gentleman, and for many years highly esteemed by a numerous circle of friends of rank and learning, but in his latter years he unfortunately became enamoured of those loose and theoretical principles which produced the French revolution; and this change gave a sullen gloom to his character, which made him relinquish all his former connexions, and attach himself to company far beneath his talents, and unsuitable to his habits. There is reason to think, however, that his mind recovered somewhat of its better frame after he had resided a few months in America, and had leisure to reflect on what he had exchanged for the gay visions of republican fancy. Mrs. Merry, who married Mr. Warren, the manager of a theatre in America, died in 1808.

, a learned French writer, was born at Oyse, in the province of Maine, Sept. 8, 1588. He cultivated the belles lettres at the college of la Flche; and afterwards went to Paris, and studied divinity at the Sorbonne. Upon his leaving the schools of the Sorbonne, he entered himself among the Minims, and received the habit of that order, July 17, 1611. In 1612 he went to reside in the convent of Paris, where he was ordained priest. He then applied himself to the Hebrew language, which he learned of father John Bruno, a Scotch Minim. From 1615 to 1619, he taught philosophy and theology in the convent of Nevers; and then returned to Paris, where he spent the remainder of his life. Study and conversatioa were afterwards his whole employment. He held a correspondence with most of the principal men of his time; being as it were the very centre of communication between literary men of all countries, by the mutual correspondence which he managed between them; and was in France what Mr. Collins was in England. He omitted no opportunity to engage them to publish their works; and the world is obliged to him for several excellent discoveries, which would probably have been lost, but for his encouragement; and on all accounts he had the reputation of being one of the best men, as well as philosophers, of his time. He was the chief friend and literary agent of Des Cartes, in particular, with whom he had contracted a friendship while he studied at la Flche, which continued to his death. He was that philosopher’s chief agent at Paris. Thus, when Mersenne gave out in that city, that Des Cartes was erecting a new system of physics upon the foundation of a vacuum, and found the public very indifferent to it on that very account, it was said, that he immediately sent intelligence to Des Cartes, that a vacuum was not then the fashion at Paris; which made that philosopher change his system, and adopt the old doctrine of a plenum. In the mean time, Mersenne’s residence at Paris did not hinder him from making several journies into foreign countries; for he went to Holland in 1629, and stayed a year there; and he was in Italy four times; in 1639, 1641, 1644, and 1646. He fell sick, in 1648, of an abscess in the right side, which the physicians took to be a bastard pleurisy and bled him several times to no purpose. At last it was thought proper to open the side but he expired in the midst of the operation, when he was almost sixty years of age. He ordered the physicians at his death to open his body, which they did, and found an abscess two inches above the place where they had opened his side; so that, if the incision had been made at the proper place, his life might possibly have been saved.

, a French divine, was born at Beauvais, August 22, 1677. After having been a literary professor for several years, in the college of that place, he was invited by his friends to Paris, and there soon became coadjutor to Coffin, then principal of the college of Beauvais. His zeal for some points, not approved at court, particularly his opposition to the bull Unigenitus, having undermined his favour there, he quitted the college in 1728, and lived the remainder of his days in literary retirement, though still at Paris; and from this time employed himself in several considerable works. This mode of life was so congenial to his feelings, which were of a candid and tranquil kind, that he attained the age of eighty-six, and died Feb. 19, 1763. He wrote, 1. for the use of his pupils, while employed in the college, his “Exposition de la doctrine Chretienne,” 6 vols. 12mo. This work, though written with clearness and precision, contained some passages not approved at Rome, and therefore was condemned by Clement XIII. in 1761. 2. “Abrege de THistoire, & de la morale de PAncien Testament,” Paris, 1728, 12mo; highly commended by Rollin. a. “Abrége de l‘Histoire de l’Ancien Testament, avec des eclaircissemens et des reflexions,” Paris, 10 vols. in 12mo. This is also a useful work, and, as may be supposed, chiefly an extension of the former plan. 4. An edition of the New Testament, with short notes. 5. “La constitution Unigenitus avec des remarques,” 12mo, 6. “Lettres a un Ami sur la constitution Unigenitus” also in 12mo. 7: “Entretiens sur la Religion,” 12mo. This author had also a large share in the lives of the saints, published by the abbe Goujet; and in the Missal of Paris.

, a very eccentric French author and physician, was born at St. Maloes in 1709. He studied physic under Boerhaave, after which he removed to Paris, and became an army-surgeon in the French guards. The duke of Grammont, who was his protector, being taken very ill at the siege of Fribourg, he began, in his attendance upon him, to speculate upon the nature of the soul, and to perceive, as he fancied, that it is mortal. He wrote “The Natural History of the Soul,” which being highly impious in its doctrines, raised a storm against him from which his patron with difficulty could defend him. He then turned his pen against his brethren, and wrote “Penelope, or the Machiavel in medicine,” in 3 vols. 12mo. The rage of the faculty, in consequence of this satire, drove him out of France; and he retired to Leyden, where he published “L'Homme Machine,” a treatise of materialism, in which the philosophy is as incorrect and ill argued as it is pernicious. But he declaims with an ardour too likely to captivate weak minds, and draw them over to his opinions. This book could not obtain toleration even in Holland; it was publicly burnt, and the author obliged, in 1748, to fly for refuge to Berlin, and at this court he was protected, made a member of the academy, and honoured with places under the king. Here he lived in tranquillity, till his violent system of bleeding, very like that of Dr. Sangrado, put an early period to his life, as it had to those of several patients; and he died in 1.751, being then only 48. His works were published collectively at Berlin the same year, in one vol. 4to, and two 12mo. The same kind of false philosophy pervades them all. The king of Prussia, however, conferred on him a very singular honour, even after his death; for he wrote his funeral oration, which he caused to be pronounced in the academy by one of his secretaries. Voltaire said of him, that he was a madman who wrote in a state of intoxication.

, an eminent artist, was born at Brussels in 1634. He was a disciple of Peter Snayers, a battle painter of considerable note, and his early progress gave strong promise of his future eminence. His ingenious pictures attracted the attention of M. Colbert, the minister of Louis XIV., who induced V. Meulen to settle in Paris; and soon afterwards introduced him to the king, who appointed him to attend and paint the scenes of his military campaigns, gave him a pension of '2000 livres, and paid him besides for his performances. He made sketches of almost all the most remarkable events that occurred in these expeditions of Louis; designing upon the spot the encampments, marches, sieges, &c. of the armies the huntings of the king; the assembling of the officers, &c.: from these he composed his pictures, which are skilfully arranged, with great bustle, animation, and spirit, and executed with a very agreeable, though not always a natural tone of colour, and with a sweet and delicate pencil. Some of his pictures exhibit uncommon skill and taste in composition. Frequently the scene he had to paint was flat and insipid, such as a marshy country before long extended walls; even these he contrived to render agreeable by his judicious management of the chiaroscuro, and the pleasing groups which he displayed with his figures, which, though dressed in the stiff uncouth frippery of the French court of that period, are handled with so much delicacy and corresponding taste, that they never fail ^o please. He was particularly skilful in pourtraying the actions of the horse, of which he has left behind him a number of excellent studies, drawn with great care from nature. His pictures frequently include a great extent of country, and an immense number of objects. His perfect knowledge of perspective enabled him to manage the objects and distances with the greatest ease and effect, so that the eye accompanies the figures without confusion, and assigns to each its due action and distance. He lived not beyond the age of 56, but left a great number of pictures, most of which are in France, but they are not very unfrequent in this country.

, was born at a little town of that name, situated on the river Loire, near Orleans, in 1280, and on account of his 'lameness acquired the name of Clopinel. His range of study appears to have been very extensive, including philosophy, astronomy, chemistry, arithmetic, but above all, poetry. His talents recommended him to the court of Philip le Bel, which he enlivened by his wit, but often at the same time, created enemies by his satirical remarks. He is supposed to have died about 1364. His name is preserved on account of the share he had in the celebrated “Roman de la Rose” (see Lorris), which the French esteem the most valuable piece of their old poetry. It is, says Warton, far beyond the rude efforts of all their preceding romancers. John of Meun’s share in this poem, however, is inferior in poetical merit to that of Lorris, as he had little of his predecessor’s inventive and poetical vein; but it has strong satire and great liveliness. Chaucer, who translated all that was written by William of Lorris, gives only part of the continuation of John de Meun. Some other works are attributed to the latter, which are of little value unless as curiosities.

It seems almost needless to observe, that the shamefully obscene Latin work, entitled “Meursius de elegantiis Latinae linguae,” was not written either by this author or his son; but was, as the French biographers assures us, the production of Nicolas Chorier, an attorney at Grenoble. It probably had the name of John Meursius prefixed by way of throwing a ridicule upon the grave and learned professor. His son produced, as we have said, some learned works, but not such as to rival those of his father.

, a historian of some note in Spain, when history was mere compilation, was a native of Seville, of a family of some rank, and liberally educated. His inclination being principally for historical studies, he was made chronographer, perhaps what we should call, historiographer to Charles V. He is also said to have been a poet. Antonio has collected from various authors, his contemporaries, opinions highly favourable to his learning and knowledge. The only fault imputable seems to be that of mixing Latin words too frequently with his Spanish. He died about 1552. His principal work, for which he is known in this country, is entitled “Silvade varia Leccion,” which with the additions of the Italian and French translators, was published at London under the title of the “Treasury of ancient and modern Times,” fol. The original was first printed at Seville, in black-letter, in 1542, fol. often reprinted, and translated into most European languages, with additions. His other writings were, a “History of the Caesars,” Seville, 1545, fol. likewise translated by W. T. and enlarged by Edward Grimeston, Lond. 1623. foL 2. “Colloquies o Dialogos,” or “Laus Asini,” in imitation of Lucian and Apuleius, Seville 1547, 8vo, often reprinted and translated into Italian. 3. “Parenesis de Isocrates.” He left some Mss. and an unfinished life of Charles V.

, an eminent French historian, was born at Ry, near Argentau in Lower Normandy, in 1610. He was educated in the university of Caen, where he discovered an early inclination for poetry; and had himself so high an opinion of his talent in that art, that he thought he should be able to raise both a character and a fortune by it. But, upon going to Paris, he was dissuaded from pursuing poetry, by Vauquelin des Yveteaux, who had been the preceptor of Louis XIII. and advised to apply himself earnestly to history and politics, as the surest means of succeeding in life. In the mean time, that gentleman procured him the place of commissary of war, which he held for two or three campaigns, and then quitted it. Upon his return to Paris, he resolved to spend the remainder of his life there; and, changing the name of his family as being an obscure one, he took the name of Mezerai, which is a cottage in the parish of Ry. But his little stock of money made him apprehensive that he should not be able to continue long at Paris; and therefore, to support himself, he had recourse to writing satires against the ministry, articles which were then extremely well received, and for which he had naturally a turn. M. Larroque, in his Life of Mezerai, assures us, that he was author of all the pieces published against the government under the name of Sandricourt. They are written in a low and burlesque style, and adapted merely to please the populace. Larroque has given us the titles of nineteen of these pieces, but would not give those of others which Mezerai wrote, either during the minority of Louis XIV. or against cardinal Richelieu; “because,” he says, “they ought to be forgotten, out of reverence to the persons whom they attacked.”

By these satires Mezerai gained a considerable sum in less than three years; and being now in easy circumstances, applied himself, at the age of twenty-six, to compile an “History of France.” Cardinel Richelieu, hearing of his character and circumstances, made him a present of two hundred crowns, with a promise to remember him afterwards. He published the first volume of his history in 1643, which extends from Pharamond to Charles VI.; the second in 1646, which contains what passed from Charles VI. to Charles IX.; and the third in 1651, which comprehends the history from. Henry Hi. till the peace of Vervins, in 1598; all in folio. This history procured him a pension from the king. It was received with extraordinary applause, as if there had been no history of France before: and perhaps there was none more agreeable as to Teracity. In 1668, he published, in 3 vols. 4to, an “Abridgement of the history of France:” in which there being several bold passages, which displeased Colbert, that minister ordered Perrault, of the French academy, to tell Mezerai, in his name, that “the king had not given him a pension of 4000 livres to write in so free a manner; that his majesty had indeed too great a regard to truth, to require his historiographers to disguise it, out of fear or hope; but that he did not think they ought to take the liberty of reflecting, without any necessity, upon the conduct of his ancestors, and upon a policy which had long been established, and confirmed by th.e suffrages of the whole nation.” Upon this remonstrance, the author promised to retouch the passages complained of, which he did in a new edition, 1672, in 6 vols. 12mo. In this, however, he was so unfortunate as neither to satisfy the public, who were displeased to see the truth altered, nor the minister, who retrenched half his pension. Mezerai was extremely piqued at this, and complained of Colbert in such severe terms, as induced that minister to deprive him of the remainder of his pension. Mezerai then declared that he would write history no longer; and that the reason of his silence might not be concealed, he put the last money which he recieved as historiographer, into a box by itself with this note “Here is the last money I have received of the king he has ceased to pay me, and 1 to speak of him either good or ill.” * Mezerai had designed at first to revise his great work; but some friends giving him to understand that a correct abridgement would be more acceptable, he followed their advice, as we have related, and spent ten whole years in drawing it up. The first edition of it “met with greater applause than even his larger work, and was much sought after by foreigners as well as Frenchmen. Learned men, and critics in historical matters, have remarked many errors in it; but he did not value himself at all upon correctness; and used to tell his friends, who reproached him with the want of it, that” very few persons could perceive the difference between a history that is correct and one that is not so; and that the glory which he might gain by greater accuracy was not worth the pains it would cost."

In 1649, he was admitted a member of the French academy, in the room of Voiture; and, in 1675, chosen perpetual secretary of that academy. Besides the works abovementioned, he wrote a “Continuation of the general history of the Turks,” in which he is thought not to have succeeded “L'Origine des Francois,” printed at Amsterdam, in 1682 “Les Vanites de la Cour,” translated from the Latin of Johannes Sarisburiensis, in 1640; andaFrench translation of “Grotius de Veritate Christianse Religionis,” in 1644. He died July 10, 1633, aged seventy-three. He was, according to Larroque, a man who was subject to strange humours. He was extremely negligent in his person, and so careless in his dress, that he had more the appearance of a beggar than a gentleman. He was actually seized one morning by the archers des pauvres, or parish officers; with which mistake he was highly diverted, and told them, that “he was not able to walk on foot, but that, as soon as a new wheel was put to his chariot, he would attend them wherever they thought proper.” He used to study and write by candle-light, even at noon-day in summer; and always waited upon his company to the door with a candle in his hand. He had a brother, father Eudes, a man of great simplicity and piety, whom he insidiously drew in to treat of very delicate points before the queen ­mother, regent of the kingdom, who was of the Medici family; and to lay down some things relating to government and the finances, which could not fail of displeasing that princess; and must have occasioned great trouble to father Eudes, if the goodness of the queen had not excused the indiscretion of the preacher. But of all his humours, none lessened him more in the opinion of the public, than the unaccountable fondness he conceived for a man who kept a public house at Chapellein, called Le Faucheur. He was so taken with this man’s frankness and pleasantry, that he used to spend whole days with him, notwithstanding the admonition of his friends to the contrary; and not only kept up an intimate friendship with him during his life, but made him sole legatee at his death. With regard to religion, he affected Pyrrhonism; which, however, was not, it seems, so much in his heart as in his mouth. This appeared from his last sickness; for, having sent for those friends who had been the most usual witnesses of his licentious talk about religion, he made a sort of recantation, which he concluded by desiring them “to forget what he might formerly have said-upon the subject of religion, and to remember, that Mezerai dying, was a better believer than Mezerai in health.” These particulars are to be found in his life by M. Larroque: but the abbe Olivet tells us, that he “was surprised, upon reading this life, to find Mezerai’s character drawn in such disadvantageous colours.” Mezerai was certainly a man of many singularities, and though agreeable when he pleased in his conversation, yejfc full of whim, and not without ill-nature. It was a constant way with him, when candidates offered themselves for vacant places in the academy, to throw in a black ball instead of a white one: and when his friends asked him the reason of this unkind procedure, he answered, “that it was to leave to posterity a monument of the liberty of the elections in the academy.” As an historian, he is valued very highly and deservedly for his integrity and faithfulness, in relating facts as he found them; but for this solely: for as to his style, it is neither accurate nor elegant, although he had been a member of the French academy long before he wrote his “Abridgment.”

, a very able scholar, was born at Bresse in 1581. At the age of twenty he was admitted into the order of Jesuits, but on his recovery from an illness, he returned to a secular life again. About this time, he resided occasionally both at Paris and Rome; and at Rome wrote a small collection of Italian poems, in competition with Vaugelas, who was there at the same time; among which there are imitations of the most beautiful similies in the eight first books of the ^neid. He published also Latin and French poetry in 1621, and translated some of Ovid’s epistles, which he illustrated with commentaries, esteemed more valuable than his translation. He is also said to have been well versed in the controversies, both in philosophy and religion; and an able algebraist and geometrician. Of the latter we have a proof in his edition of “Diophantus,” enriched with a very able commentary and notes, Paris, 1621, and reprinted several times in Germany. Des Cartes had a very high opinion of his knowledge in mathematical science. Such was his fame at one time, that he was proposed as preceptor to Louis XIII. upon which account he left the court in great haste, and declared afterwards, that he never felt so much pain upon any occasion in his life: for that he seemed as if he had had already upon his shoulders the weight of a whole kingdom. He was, though absent, made a member of the French academy, when in its infancy; and, when it came to his turn to make a discourse in it, he sent up one, which was read to the assembly by Mr. de Vaugelas. He died at Bourg in Bresse, Feb. 26, 1638. He left several Mss. in a finished state, but which have never been printed, and had brought a translation of all Plutarch’s works with notes almost to a conclusion when he died.

, a celebrated biblical critic, and professor of divinity and the oriental languages, was born at Halle, in Lower Saxony, in 1717. His first education was private, but in 1729 he was sent to the public school of the orphan-house, where he studied diviniiy and philosophy, and at the same time he occasionally attended the lectures of his father, who was professor of divinity and the oriental languages. During the latter part of his time at school, he acquired a great facility in speaking Latin, and in thinking systematically, from the practice of disputation, in which one of the masters frequently exercised him. In 1733, he entered into the university of Halle, where he applied himself to the study of mathematics, metaphysics, theology, and the oriental languages. He also prepared himself for pulpit services, and preached with great approbation at Halle and other places. In 1739 he took a degree in philosophy, and soon after was appointed assistant lecturer under his father, having shewn how well qualified he was for that situation, by publishing a small treatise “De Antiquitate Punctorum Vocalium.” In 1741 he left his own country with a view of visiting England, and passing through Holland, became acquainted with the celebrated Schultens, from whom he received many marks of the most friendly attention. Upon his arrival in England, he engaged to officiate for the German, chaplain to the court, who was at that time in an infirm state of health, and continued to preach at the palace-chapel nearly a year and a half. During this period he visited the university of Oxford, greatly increased his knowledge of the oriental languages, and formed an intimacy with some of the first literary characters of that age, particularly with Dr. Lowth, afterwards bishop of London, on some of whose lectures “De Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum” he attended. Upon his return to Halle, he resumed his labours as assistant to his father, and delivered lectures on the historical books of the Old Testament, the Syriac and Chaldee languages, and also upon natural history, and the Roman classics; but seeing no prospect of a fixed establishment, he left Halle in 1745, and went to Gottingen, in the capacity of private tutor. In the following year he was made professor extraordinary of philosophy in the university of Gottingen, and, in 1750, professor in ordinary in the same faculty. In 1751 he was appointed secretary to the newly instituted Royal Society of Gottingen, of which he afterwards became director, and about the same time was made aulic counsellor by the court of Hanover. During 1750, he gained the prize in the Royal Academy of Berlin, by a memoir “On the Influence of Opinions on Language, and Language on Opinions.” While the seven years’ war lasted, Michaelis met with but little interruption in his studies, being exempted,in common with the other professors, from military employment; and when the new regulations introduced by the French in 1760, deprived them of that privilege, by the command of marshal Broglio it was particularly extended to M. Michaelis. Soon after this, he obtained from Paris, by means of the marquis de Lostange, the manuscript of Abulfeda’s geography, from, which he afterwards edited his account of the Egyptians; and by the influence of the same nobleman, he was chosen correspondent of the “Academy of Inscriptions at Paris,” in 1764, and elected one of the eight foreign members of that institution. In 1760, the professor gave great offence to the orthodox clergy, by publishing his “Compendium of dogmatic Theology,” consisting of doctrinal lectures which he had delivered by special licence from the government. Shortly after this, Michaelis shewed his zeal for the interests of science and literature, by the part which he took in the project of sending a mission of learned men into Egypt and Arabia, for the purpose of obtaining such information concerning the actual state of those countries, as might serve to throw light on geography, natural history, philology, and biblical learning. He first conceived the idea of such a mission, which he communicated by letter to the privy counsellor Bernstorf, who laid it before his sovereign Frederic V. king of Denmark. That sovereign was so well satisfied of the benefits which might result from the undertaking, that he determined to support theexpence of it, and he even committed to Michaelis the management of the design, together with the nomination of proper travellers, and the care of drawing up their instructions. Upow the death of Gesner in 1761, Michaelis succeeded in the office of librarian to the Royal Society, which he held about a year, and was then nominated to the place of director, with the salary for life of the post, which he then resigned. Two years afterwards he was invited by the king of Prussia to remove to Berlin, but his attachment to Gottingen led him to decline the advantages which were held out to him as resulting from the change. In 1766 he was visited at Gottingen by sir John Pringle, whom he had known in England, and Dr. Franklin. With the first he afterwards corresponded on the subject of the leprosy, spoken of in the books of Moses, and on that of Daniel’s prophecy of the seventy weeks. The latter subject was disscussed in the letters which passed between them during 1771, and was particularly examined by the professor. This correspondence was printed by sir John Pringle in 1773, under the title of “Joan. Dav. Michaelis de Epistolse, &c. LXX. Hebdomadibus Danielis, ad D. Joan. Pringle, Baronettum; primo privatim missse, nunc vero utriusque consensu publice editae.” In 1770, some differences having arisen between Michaelis and his colleagues in the Royal Society, he resigned his directorship. In 1775 his well-established reputation had so far removed the prejudices which had formerly been conceived against him in Sweden, that the count Hbpkin, who some years before had prohibited the use of his writings at Upsal, now prevailed upon the king to confer upon him the order of the polar star. He was accordingly decorated with the ensignia of that order, on which occasion he chose as a motto to his arms, “libera veritas.” In 1782 his health began to decline, which he never completely recovered; in 1786 he was raised to the rank of privy counsellor of justice by the court of Hanover; in the following year the academy of inscriptions at Paris elected him a foreign member of that body; and in 178S he received his last literary honour by being elected a member of the Royal Society of London. He continued his exertions almost to the very close of life, and a few weeks before his death, he shewed a friend several sheets in ms. of annotations which he had lately written on the New Testament. He died on the 22d of August, 1791, in the seventy- fifth year of his age. He was a man of very extensive and profound erudition, as well as of extraordinary talents, which were not less brilliant than solid, as is evident from the honours which were paid to his merits, and the testimony of his acquaintance and contemporaries. His application and industry were unwearied, and his perseverance in such pursuits as he conceived would prove useful to the world, terminated only with the declension of his powers. His writings are distinguished not only by various and solid learning, but by a profusion of ideas, extent of knowledge, brilliancy of expression, and a frequent vein of pleasantry. In the latter part of his life he was regarded not only as a literary character, but as a man of business, and was employed in affairs of considerable importance by the courts of England, Denmark, and Prussia. His works are very numerous, and chiefly upon the subjects of divinity and oriental languages. A part of them are written in Latin, but by far the greater number in German. Of the Conner class there are these 1. “Commentatio de Battologia, ad Matth. vi. 7.” Bremen, 1753, 4to. 2. “Paralipomena contra Polygamiam,” ibid. 1758, 4to. 3. “Syntagma commentationum,” Goett. 1759 1767, 4to. 4. “Curse in versionem Syriacam Actuurn Apostolorum,” Goett, 1755, 4to. 5. “Compendium Theologize dogmatics?,” ib. 1760, 8 vo. 6. “Commentationes resize soc. Scientiarum Goettingerrsis, per annos 1758 1762,” Bremen, 1775, 4to. 7. “Vol. II. Ejusdem, 1769.” 8. “Spicilegium Geographies Hebrseorum exterae, post Bochartum,” Goett. 1769 1780, 2 torn. 4to. 9. “Grammatica Chaldaica,” ib. 1771, 8vo. 10. “Supplementa ad Lexicon Hebraicum,” 1784 1792, 6 torn. 4to. 11. “Grammatica Syriaca,” Halae, 1784, 4to. The following are in German: 12. “Hebrew Grammar,” Halle, 1778, 8vo.13. “Elements of Hebrew accentuation,” ib. 1741, 8vo. 14. “Treatise on the Law of Marriage, according to Moses,” Goett. 1768, 4to. 15. “Paraphrase and Remarks on the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Titus, Timothy, and Philemon,” Bremen, 1769, 4to. 16. “Introduction to the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament,” Bremen, 1750, 8vo. 17. “Prophetical plan of the preacher Solomon,” ib. 1762, 8vo.18. “Thoughts on the Doctrine of Scripture concerning Sin,” Hamb. 1752, 8vo. 19. “Plan of typical Divinity,” Brem. 1763, 8vo. 20. “Criticism of the means employed to understand the Hebrew language.” 21. “Critical Lectures on the principal Psalms which treat of Christ,” Frankf. 1759, 8vo. 22. “Explanation of the Epistle to the Hebrews,” Frankf. 1784, 2 vols. 4to, 2$. “Questions proposed to a society of learned Men, who went to Arabia by order of the king of Denmark,” ib. 1762, 8vo. 24. “Introduction to the New Testament,' 7 a second edition, Goett. 1788, 2 vols. 4to. 25.” Miscellaneous Writings,“two parts, Frankf. 1766 8, 8vo. 26.” Programma concerning the seventy-two translators,“Goett. 1767, 8vo. 27.” Dissertation on the Syriac language, and its use,“Goett. 1768, 8vo. 28.” Strictures concerning the Protestant Universities in Germany,“Frankf. 1775, 8vo. 29.” Translation of the Old Testament,“Goett. 1769 83, 13 parts. 30.” Fundamental Interpretation of the Mosaic Law,“Frankf. 1770-5, 6 parts, with additions, 8vo. 31.” Of the Seventy Weeks of Daniel,“Goett. 1772, 8vo. 32.” Arabic Grammar and Chrestomathy,“ib. 1781, 8vo. 33.” Oriental and exegetical Library,“Frankf. 1771—89, 24 parts, and two supplements, 8vo. 34.” New Oriental and exegetical Library,“Goett. 1786 91, 9 parts. 35.” Of the Taste of the Arabians in their Writings,“ib. 1781, 8vo. 36.” Dissertation on the Syriac Language and its uses, together with a Chrestomathy,“ib. 1786, 8vo. 37.” On the Duty of Men to speak Truth,“Kiel, 1773, 8vo. 38.” Commentary on the Maccabees,“Frankfort, 1777, 4to. 39.” History of Horses, and of the breeding of Horses in Palestine,“&c. ib. 1776, 8vo. 40.” Thoughts on the doctrine of Scripture concerning Sin and Satisfaction,“Bremen, 1779, 8vo. 41.” Illustration of the History of the Burial and Resurrection of Christ,“Halle, 1783, 8vo. 42.” Supplement, or the fifth Fragment of Lessing’s Collections,“Halle, 1785, 8vo. 43.” German Dogmatic Divinity,“Goett. 1784, 8vo. 44.” Introduction to the Writings of the Old Testament,“Hamb. 1787, 1st vol. 1st part, 4to: 45.” Translation of the Old Testament, without remarks,“Goett. 1789, 2 vols. 4to. 46.” Translation of the New Testament,“ib. 1790, 2 vols. 4to 47.” Remarks for the unlearned, relative to his translation of the New Testament,“ib. 1790 92, 4 parts, 4to. 48.” Additions to the third edition of the Introduction to the New Testament,“ibid. 1789, 4to. 49.” Ethics," a posthumous work, published by C. F. Steudlin, Goett. 1792, 2 parts, 8vo.

In 1772, he formed that collection of fugitive poetry, which was published in four volumes by George Pearch, bookseller, as a continuation of Dodsley’s collection. In this Mickle inserted his “Hengist and Mey,” and the “Elegy on Mary queen of Scots.” He contributed about the same time other occasional pieces, both in prose and verse, to the periodical publications, when he could spare leisure from his engagements at the Clarendon press, and from a more important design which he had long revolved in his mind, and had now the resolution to carry into execution in preference to every other employment. This was his justly celebrated translation of the “Lusiad” of Camoens, a poem which he is said to have read when a boy in Castera’s French translation, and which at no great distance of time he determined to familiarize to the English, reader. For this purpose he studied the Portuguese language, and the history of the poem and of its author, and without greatly over-rating the genius of Camoens, dwelt on the beauties of the “Lusiad,” until he caught the author’s spirit, and became confident that he could transfuse it into English with equal honour to his original andto himself. But as it was necessary that the attention of the English public should be drawn to a poem at this time very little known, he first published proposals for his translation to be printed by subscription, and afterwards sent a small specimen of the fifth book to be inserted in the Gentleman’s Magazine, which was then, as now, the common vehicle of literary communications. This appeared in the Magazine for March 1771, and a few months after he printed at Oxford the first boo.k of the “Lusiad.” These specimens were received with indulgence sufficient to encourage him to prosecute his undertaking with spirit; and that he might enjoy the advantages of leisure and quiet, he relinquished his situation at the Clarendon press, and retired to an old mansion occupied by a Mr. Tomkins, a farmer at Forrest- hill, about five miles from Oxford. Here be remained until the end of 1775, at which time he was enabled to complete his engagement with his numerous subscribers, and publish the work complete in a quarto volume printed at Oxford.

Soon after the publication of the “Lusiad,” he returned to London, and was advised by some who probably in this instance consulted his fame less than his immediate interest, to write a tragedy, The story of his tragedy, which was entitled “The Siege of Marseilles,” was taken from the French history in the reign of Francis I. When completed, his friends recommended it to Garrick, wbo allowed its general merit, but complained of the want of stage effect, and recommended him to take the advice of Dr. Warton. This able critic was accordingly called in, with his brother Thomas, and with Home the author of “Douglas.” In compliance with their opinion, Mickle made great alterations, and Thomas Warton earnestly recommended the tragedy to Garrick, but in vain; and Mickle, his biographers inform us, was so incensed at this, that he resolved to appeal to the judgment of the public by printing it.

, an historical and portrait painter, was born at Troyes, in Champagne, in 1610. He was the disciple of Vouet, but quitted his school at an early period of his life, and went to Rome, anxious to see and study the works of Raphael, Michael Angelo, and the Caracci. He there lived with Du Fresnoy, and they studied together the noble works of art which that city presented to them; they also travelled together to Florence and Venice, that they might leave no source of improvement unsought which the extraordinary talents of their great predecessors had prepared and left for their study and imitation. Mignard’s residence at Rome, which he prolonged for twenty- two years, and the style he acquired of composition and drawing by the imitation of the Roman masters, together, obtained for him the appeHation of the Roman; but to judge candidly, one would imagine that the former was the principal cause of that denomination; for his style of design savours too much of the flutter of the French school, instead of the chaste simplicity of Raphael and the best of the Romans. He enjoyed, however, a full share of favour and fortune during his life. He painted portraits of the popes Urban VIII. and Alexander VII. together with those of many of the nobility of Rome.

Louis XIV. hearing of his fame and abilities, sent for him to Paris, and is said to have sat to him for his portrait ten times. Almost all the illustrious nobles of the French court followed the example of their sovereign, and were painted by Mignard. His style of execution in these portraits is wrought up with all the false taste and pompous parade which distinguished that vicious period of the French nation; in his pictures every thing seems in motion; even. when the scene is laid in a close room, the draperies are flying about as in a high wind. With these and other defective points in his character as an artist, Mignard must be allowed to be the best portrait-painter of the French school. The king ennobled him; and, after Le Brun’s death, appointed him his principal painter, and the director of the manufactories of Seve and the Gobelins. He lived to the age of eighty-five, dying in 1695. He had an elder brother, whose name was Nicholas, a skilful painter, but who never rose to equality with him.

, a learned French canonist, was born at Paris, March 17, 1698. In his younger years he went through a complete course of education, and even then gave proofs of those talents in theology and general literature which constituted the reputation of his future life. After studying with care and success the Oriental languages, the holy Scriptures, the fathers, church history, and the canon law, he received his degree of doctor of divinity in April 1722. After this his attention was particularly directed to the history and antiquities of the laws and customs of his country, which made him often be consulted by political and professional men, and procured him the esteem and confidence, among others, of the celebrated chancellor D'Aguesseau. Mignot, however, amidst these advantages, which opened an easy way to promotion, indulged his predilection for a retired life, and was so little desirous of public notice that he seldom, if ever, put his name to his works; but he was not allowed to remain in obscurity, and, although somewhat late in life, he was elected a member of the academy of inscriptions, to whose memoirs he furnished some excellent papers on topics of ancient history. He died July 25, 1771, in the seventythird year of his age, leaving the following works, which were all much esteemed in France: 1. “Trait 6 des prets de commerce,” Paris, 1759, 4 vols. 12mo. To this he added a 5th vol. in 1767, that he might answer the abbé, La Porte, who had opposed his opinions respecting usurious interest. 2. “Les Droits de l'etat et du prince sur les biens du clerge,” 1755, 6 vols. 12mo. 3. “Histoire des demeles de Henry II, avec St. Thomas de Cantorbery,” 1756, 12mo, a work, if well executed, of some importance in English history. 4. “Histoire de la reception du Concile de Trente dans les etats catholiques,” Amst. 1756, 2 vols. 12mo. 5. “Paraphrase sur les Psaumes,” and some paraphrases on other parts of the Bible. He published also a few religious works, a Memoir on the liberties of the Gallican church, and “La Verite de l'Histoire de PEglise de St. Omer,” 1754, 4to, a work improperly attributed to the abbe de Bonnaire. There was another abbe* Mignot, who died in 1790, the nephew of Voltaire, and who, fearing that the remains of his uncle would not be allowed Christian burial, had him interred in his abbey of Selliere. He wrote a history of the Ottoman empire, and a translation of Quintus Curtius.

The emoluments of his preferment, however, being not very considerable, he was encouraged, by the success of his first play, above mentioned, to have recourse to dramatic writing. This step being thought inconsistent with his profession, produced some warm remonstrances from a prelate on whom he relied for preferment, and who, finding him resolute, withdrew his patronage. Our author greatly aggravated his offence afterwards by publishing a ridiculous character, in a poem, which was universally considered as intended for the bishop. He then proceeded with his dramatic productions, and was very successful, until he happened to offend certain play-house critics, who from that time regularly attended the theatre to oppose any production known to be his, and finally drove him from the stage. About this time he had strong temptations to employ his pen in the whig interest; but, being in principle a high church-man, he withstood these, although the calls of a family were particularly urgent, and all hopes of advancement in the church at an end. At length, however, the valuable living of Upcerne was given him by Mr. Carey of Dorsetshire, and his prospects otherwise began to brighten, when he died April 23, 1744, at his lodgings in Cheyne-walk, Chelsea, before he had received a twelvemonth’s revenue from his new benefice, or had it in his power to make any provision for his family. As a dramatic writer, Baker thinks he has a right to stand in a very estimable light; yet the plays he enumerates are now entirelyforgotten. Besides these, he wrote several political pamphlets, particularly one called “Are these things so” which was much noticed. He was author also of a poem called “Harlequin Horace,” a satire, occasioned by some ill treatment he had received from Mr. Rich, the manager of Covent- Garden theatre; and was likewise concerned, together with Mr. Henry Baker, F. R. S. in a complete translation of the comedies of Moliere, primed together with the original French, and published by Mr. Watts. After his death was published by subscription a volume of his “Sermons,” the profits of which his widow applied to the satisfaction of his creditors, and the payment of his debts; an act of juctice by which t>he left herself and family almost destitute of the common necessaries of life.

, a late French historian, was born at Besanc,on, in March 1726, and belonged, for some time, to the order of Jesuits. He was one of those who were appointed to preach, and continued so to do after he had quitted that society. But the weakness of his voice, his timidity, and the embarrassed manner of his delivery, obliged him to relinquish that duty. The marquis of Felino, minister of the duke of Parma, founded a professorship of history, and Millot, through the interest ef the duke of Nivernois, was appointed to it. A revolt having arisen among the people of Parma, while he was there, in consequence of some innovations of the minister, Millot very honourably refused to quit him. It was represented that by so doing he risked his place. “My place,” he replied, “is to attend a virtuous man who is my benefactor, and that office I am determined not to lose.” After having held this professorship, with great reputation for some time, he returned into France, and was appointed preceptor to the duke D‘Enghien. He was still employed in this duty in 1785, when he was removed by death, at the age of fifty-nine. Millot was not a man who shone in conversation; his manner was dry and reserved, but his remarks were generally able and judicious. D’Alembert said of him, that he never knew a man of so few prejudices, and so few pretensions. His works are carefully drawn up, in a pure, natural, and elegant style. They are these: 1. “Elements of the History of France, from Clovis to Louis XV.” 3 vols. 12mo; an abridgment made with remarkable judgment in the selection of facts, and great clearness in the divisions and order. 2. “Elements of the History of England, from the time of the Romans to George II.” This work has the same characteristic merits as the former. 3. “Elements of Universal History,” 9 vols. 12mo. It has been unjustly said, that this is pirated from the general history of Voltaire. The accusation is without foundation; the ancient part is perfectly original, and the modern is equally remarkable for the selection of facts, and the judicious and impartial manner in which they are related. 4. “History of the Troubadours,” 3 vols. 12mo. This work was drawn up from a vast collection of materials made by M. de St. Palaye, and, notwithstanding the talents of the selector, has still been considered as uninteresting. 5. “Political and military Memoirs towards the History of Louis XIV. and XV. composed of original documents collected by Adrian Maurice, duke of Noailles, mareschal of France,” 6 vols. 12mo There are extant also, by Millot, “Discourses on Academical Subjects,” and, “Translations of some select ancient Orations, from the Latin Historians.” All these are written in French. Notwithstanding a few objections that have been made to him, as being occasionally declamatory, there is no doubt that Millot is a valuable historian, and his elements of French and English history have been well received in this country in their translations.

In 1638, on the death of his mother, he obtained his father’s leave to travel, and about the same time a letter of instructions from sir Henry Wotton, then provost of Eton, but who had resided at Venice as ambassador from James I. He went first tp Paris, where, by the favour of lord Scudainore, he had an opportunity of visiting Grotius, at that time residing at the French court as ambassador from Christina of Sweden. From Paris he passed into Italy, of which he had with particular diligence studied the language and literature; and, though he seems to have intended a very quick perambulation of the country, he staid two months at Florence, where he was introduced to the academies, and received with every mark of esteem. Among other testimonies may be mentioned the verses addressed to him by Carlo Dati> Erancini, and others, whicfe, prove that they considered a visit from Milton as no common honour. From Florence he went to Sienna, and from Sienna to Rome, where he was again received with kindness by the learned and the great. Holstenius, the keeper of the Vatican library, who had resided three years at Oxford, introduced him to cardinal Barberini; and he, on one occasion, at a musical entertainment, waited for him at the door, and led him by the hand into the assembly. Here it is conjectured that Milton heard the accomplished and enchanting Leonora Baroni sing, a lady whom he has honoured with three excellent Latin epigrams. She is also supposed to have been celebrated by Milton in her own language, and to have been the object of his love in his Italian sonnets. While at Rome, Selvaggi praised Milton in a distich, and Salsilfl in a tetrastic, on which he put some value by printing them before his poems. The Italians, says Dr. Johnson, were gainers by this literary commerce; for the encomiums with which Milton repaid Salsilli, though not secure against a stern grammarian, turn the balance indisputably in Milton’s favour.

Milton’s next employment was to answer the celebrated Salmasius, who, at the instigation of the exiled Charles II. had written a defence* of his father and of monarchy. Salmasius was an antagonist worthy of Milton, as a general scholar, but scarcely his equal in that species of political talent which rendered Milton’s services so important to the new government. Salmasius’s work was entitled “Defensio Kegia,” and Milton’s “Defensio pro populo Anglicano,” which greatly increased Milton’s reputation abroad, and at home we may be certain would procure him no small share of additional favour. That his work includes a very great portion of controversial bitterness, may be attributed either to the temper of the times, or of the writer, as the reader pleases; but the former was entirely in his favour, and his triumph was therefore complete. Of Salmasius’s work, the highest praise has been reserved to our own times, in which the last biographer of Milton has compared it to Mr. Burke’s celebrated book on the French revolution.

, a learned man, who held the place of perpetual secretary to the French academy, was born in Provence in 1674, and lived to the age of eighty-six. He is chiefly known, as an author, by 1. “A translation of Tasso’s Jerusalem delivered,” which has gone through several editions, but has since been superseded by a better, written by M. le Brun. Mirabauu took upon him, rather too boldly, to retrench or alter what he thought unpleasing in his author, 2. “A translation of the Orlando Furioso,” which has the same faults. He wrote also a little tract entitled “Alphabet de la Fee Gracieuse,” 1734, 12mo. His eulogium at the academy was drawn up by M. de Buffon, and is full of high encomiums.

, well known both by his writings, and the active part he took in bringing about the French revolution, was born in 1749, of a noble family. Throughout life he displayed a spirit averse to every restraint, and was one of those unhappy geniuses in whom the most brilliant talents serve only as a scourge to themselves and all around them. It is told by his democratical panegyrists, as a wonderful proof of family tyranny, under the old government, that not less thau sixty- seven lettres de cachet had been obtained by Mirabeau the father against this son, and others of his rela-' tives. It proves at least as much, what many anecdotes confirm, that, for his share of them, the son was not less indebted to his own ungovernable disposition, than to the severity of his parent. The whole Course of his youth was passed in this manner. Extravagance kept him always poor; and this species of paternal interference placed him very frequently in prison. It may be supposed also, that the part taken by the government in these unpleasant admonitions, did not tend to attach young Mirabeau to that system. The talents of Mirabeau led him frequently to employ his pen, and his publications form the chief epochas of his life. His first publication was, 1. “Essai sur le Despotisme,” “An Essay on Despotism,” in 8vo. Next, in one of his confinements, he wrote, 2. a work “On Lettres de Cachet,” 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Considerations sur Pordre de Cincinnatus,” 8vo; a remonstrance against the order of Cincinnatus, proposed atone time to be established in America. The public opinion in America favoured this remonstrance, and it proved effectual. 4. His next work was in favour of the Dutch, when Joseph II. demanded the opening of the Scheld, in behalf of the Brabanons. It is entitled, “Doutes sur la liberte* de PEscaut,” 8vo. 5. “Lettre a Pempereur Joseph II. sur son reglement concernant P Emigration,” a pamphlet of forty pages, in 8vo. 6. “De la Caisse d'Escompte,” a volume in 8vo, written against that establishment. 7. “De la Banque d'Espagne,” 8vo a remonstrance against establishing a French bank in Spain. A controversy arising on this subject, he wrote again upon it. 8. Two pamphlets on the monopoly of the water company in Paris, Soon after writing these hewent to Berlin, which was in 1786, and was there when Frederic II. died. On this occasion also he took up his pen, and addressed to his successor a tract entitled, 9. “Lettre remise a Frederic Guillaume II. roi regnant de Prusse, le jour de son avenement au trone.” This contained, says his panegyrist, “non pas des eloges de lui, mais des eloges du peuple; non pas des voeux pour lui, mais des vceux pour le peuple; non pas des conseils pour Jui, mais des conseils pour le bonheur du peuple.”

Though the marquis of Tweedale resigned the place of secretary of state, in consequence of the rebellion in 1745, yet Mr. Mitchell still kept in favour. He had taken care, during that memorable period, to keep up a correspondence with some eminent clergymen in Scotland, and from time to time communicated the intelligence he received; which assiduity was rewarded wiih a seat in the House of Commons in 1747, as representative for the burghs of BamfF, Elgin, Cullen, Inverurie, and Kiiitore. In 1751 he was appointed his majesty’s resident at Brussels, where, continuing two years, he in 1753 came to London, was created a knight of the bath, and appointed ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary at the court of Berlin. There, by his polite behaviour, and a previous acquaintance with marshal Keith, he acquired sufficient influence with his Prussian majesty to detach him from the French interest. This event involved the court of France in the greatest losses, arising not only from vast subsidies to the courts of Vienna, Petersburg!], and Stockholm, but also from the loss of numerous armies. Sir Audrew generally accompanied the great Frederick through the course of his several campaigns, and when, on the memorable 12th of August, 1759, the Prussian army was totally routed by count SoltikofT, the Russian general, it was with difficulty that he could be prevailed upon to quit the king’s tent, even while all was in confusion.

, an ingenious French painter, born at Paris about 1688, was the pupil of Galloche. Though born without the least traces of a genius for painting, it is incredible what lengths his perseverance, and continual reflections on the theory and practice of his art, carried him. His manner of designing was never correct, but it was pleasing; and the heads of his women remarkably graceful. His best pictures are, the nativity at S. Roche; a transfiguration; the flight into Egypt; a St. John in the desert at St. Eustace’s; the assumption of the virgin, in fresco, at St. Sulpice; the conversion of St. Paul at St. Germain-des-Pres; the apotheosis of Hercules at Versailles, the saloon of which he was four years in painting, and, for reward, the king granted him a pension of 3000 livres. The end of his days was tarnished by the crime of suicide, which he committed in a melancholy fit June 4, 1737, aged 49 years.

, a very learned French minister of the Protestant religion, was born at Caen in 1624. He became extremely skilled in the Greek, Latin, and Oriental tongues, and professed divinity with high reputation at Leyden, in which city he died in 1689. Several dissertations of his are printed together, and entitled “Varia sacra,” in 2 vols. 4to; besides which, he wrote other works.

, a French poet, born at Chaumon in Bassigny in 1602, was admitted into the society and confidence of the Jesuits, and is said to have been the first Jesuit of France who acquired any fame by writing poetry in his native language. He was not, however, a poet of the first order; he was rather & college student, possessed of an ardent imagination, but devoid of taste; who, instead of restraining the hyperbolical flights of his genius, indulged them to the utmost. His greatest work was “Saint Louis, ou la Couronne reconquise sur les Infidelles,” an epic poem, in eighteen books. Boileau being asked his opinion of him, answered, “that he was too wrong-headed to be much commended, and too much of a poet to be strongly condemned.” He wrote many other poems of a smaller kind, and several works in prose, on divinity, and other subjects. He died at Paris, the 22d of Aug. 1672.

was permitted to have a long run. ridiculed; but Moliere, in the Tar‘­When Lows XIV. expressed to the tuftV,’ has attacked even the priests.“required the players also to bring their children to the rehearsals, that he might form his opinion of different passages from the natural expressions of their emotions. Moliere, who diverted himself on the theatre by laughing at the follies of mankind, could not guard against the effects of his own weakness. Seduced by a violent passion for the daughter of La Bejart, the actress, he married her, and was soon exposed to all the ridicule with which he had treated the husbands who were jealous of their wives. Happier in the society of his friends, he was beloved by his equals, and courted by the great. Marshal de Vivonne, the great Conde*, and even Lewis XIV. treated him with that familiarity which considers merit as on a level with birth. These flattering distinctions neither corrupted his understanding nor his heart. A poor man having returned him a piece of gold which he had given him by mistake,” In what a humble abode,“he exclaimed,” does Virtue dwell Here, my friend, take another.“When Baron informed him of one of his old theatrical companions whom extreme poverty prevented from appearing, Moliere sent for him, embraced him, and to words of consolation added a present of twenty pistoles and a rich theatrical dress.” When he was in the height of his reputation, Racine, who was just then come from Languedoc, and was scarcely known in Paris, went to see him, under pretence of consulting him about an ode which he had just finished. Moliere expressed such a favourable opinion of the ode, that Racine ventured to shew him his first tragedy, founded on the martyrdom of Theagenes and Chariclea, as he had read it in the Greek romance. Moliere, who had an honest consciousness of superiority, which exalted him above envy, was not sparing either of praise or of counsel. His liberality carried him still farther: he knew that Racine was not in easy circumstances, and therefore lent him a hundred louis-d'ors; thinking it a sufficient recompence to have the honour of producing a genius to the public, which, he foresaw, would one day be the glory of the stage. The French have very justly placed Moliere at the head of all their comic authors. There is, indeed, no author, in all the fruitful and distinguished age of Lewis XIV. who has attained a higher reputation, or who has more nearly reached the summit of perfection in his own art, according to the judgment of all the French critics. Voltaire boldly pronounces him to be the most eminent comic poet of any age or country nor, perhaps, is this the decision of mere partiality for, upon the whole, who deserves to be preferred to him When Louis XIV. insisted upon Boileau’s telling him who was the most original writer of his time, he answered, MoHere Moliere is always the satirist only of vice or folly. He has selected a great variety of ridiculous characters peculiar to the times in which he lived, and he has generally placed the ridicule justly. He possessed strong comic powers he is full of mirth and pleasantry and his pleasantry is always innocent. His comedies in verse, such as his “Misanthrope” and Tartuffe,“are a kind of dignified comedy, in which vice is exposed, in the style of elegant and polished satire. His verses have all the flow and freedom of conversation, yet he is said to have passed whole days’ in fixing upon a proper epithet or rhime. In his prose comedies, though there is abundance of ridicule, yet there is never any thing to offend a modest ear, or to throw contempt on sobriety and virtue. Together with those high qualities, Moliere has also some defects, which Voltaire, though his professed panegyrist, candidly admits. He is acknowledged not to be happy in the unravelling of his plots. Attentive more to the strong exhibition of characters, than to the conduct of the intrigue, his unravelling is frequently brought on with too little preparation, and in an improbable manner. In his verse comedies, he is sometimes not sufficiently interesting, and too full of long speeches; and in his risible pieces in prose, he is censured for being too farcical. Few writers, however, if any, ever possessed the spirit, or attained the true end of comedy, so perfectly, upon the whole, as Moliere. His” Tartuffe,“in the style of grave comedy, and his” Avare," in the gay, are accounted his two capital productions.

At the time of his death, Moliere was intended for a vacant place in the French academy. More than a century afterwards the academicians placed his bust in their hall, the gift of D'Alembert, and from the many inscriptions proposed, the following was adopted:

And when the place of his interment was lately pulled down, his remains were removed to the garden of the Museum, and placed among the honorary monuments there, in 1799. Of the numerous editions of Moliere, the French bibliographers point out, as the best, that by Bret, 1773, 6 vols. 8vo, with the engravings of the younger Moreau, and a splendid one by Didou 1792, 6 vols. 4to.

, a Spanish priest, and by some reckoned the founder of the sect of Quietists, was born in the diocese of Saragossa in 1627, and appears to have resided mostly at Rome, where his ardent piety and devotion procured him a considerable number of disciples of both sexes. In 1675 he published his “Spiritual Guide,” -written in Spanish, which was honoured with the encomiums of many eminent personages, and was republished in Italian in several places, and at last at Rome in 1681. It was afterwards translated into French, Dutch, and Latin (the last by professor Franke at Halle in 1687), and passed through several editions in France, Holland, and Italy. It was at Rome, however, where its publication in 1681 alarmed the doctors of the church. The principles of Molinos, which, Mosheim remarks, have been very differently interpreted by his friends and enemies, amount to this, that the whole of religion consists in the perfect tranquillity of a mind removed from all external and finite things, and centered in God, and in such a pure love of the Supreme Being, as is independent of all prospect of interest or reward; or, in other words, “the soul, in the pursuit of the supreme good, must retire from the reports and gratifications of sense, and, in general, from all corporeal objects, and, imposing silence upon all the motions of the understanding and will, must be absorbed in the Deity.” Hence the denomination of Quietists was given to the followers of Molinos; though that of Mystics, which was their vulgar title, was more applicable, and expressed their system with more propriety, the doctrine not being new, but rather a digest of what the ancient mystics had advanced in a more confused manner. For this, however, Molinos was first imprisoned in 1685, and notwithstanding he read a recantation about two years afterwards, was sentenced to perpetual imprisonment, from which he was released by death in 1696. Madame Guyon was among the most distinguished of his disciples, and herself no inconsiderable supporter of the sect of Quietists.

, an able mathematical and medical writer, was born at Rheims about 1536, of a family which possessed jthe estate of Monantheuil in the Vermandois, in Picardy. He was educated at Paris in the college de Presles, under Kamus, to whose philosophical opinions he constantly adhered. Having an equal inclination and made equal progress in mathematics and medicine, he was first chosen professor of medicine, and dean of that faculty, and afterwards royal professor of mathematics. While holding the latter office he had the celebrated De Thou and Peter Lamoignon among the number of his scholars. During the troubles of the League, he remained faithful to his king, and even endangered his personal safety by holding meetings in his house, under pretence of scientific conversations, but really to concert measures for restoring Paris to Henry IV. He died in 1606, in the seventieth year of his age. His works are, 1 “Oratio pro mathematicis artibus,” Paris, 1574, 4to. 2. “Admonitio ad Jacobum Peletarium de angulo contactus,” ibid. 1581, 4to. 3. “Oratio pro suo in Regiam cathedram ritu,” ibid. 1585, 8vo. 4. “Panegyricus dictus Henrico IV. statim a felicissima et auspicatissima urbis restitutione,” &c. ibid. 1594, translated into French in 1596. 5. “Oratio qua ostenditur quale esse debeat collegium professorum regiorum,” &c. ibid. 15&6, 8vo. 6.“Commentarius in librum Aristotelis Tt^I Tuv /x>i%avjv,” Gr. and Lat. ibid. 1599, 4to. 7. “Ludus latromathematicus,” &c. ibid. 1597, 8vo, and 1700. 8. “De puncto primo Geometriae principio liber, 7 ' Leyden, 1600, 4to. This was at one time improperly attributed to his son, Thierry. 9.” Problematis omnium quse & 1200 annis inventa sunt nobilissimi demonstratio," Paris, 1600. He left some other works, both ms. and printed, of less consequence.

, a Spanish physician, was born at Seville in the early part of the sixteenth century. He received his education at the university of Alcala de Henarez, and settled in practice at Seville, where he died in 1578. The first of his writings related to a controverted question, and was entitled “Desecanda venain Pleuritide inter Graecos et Arabes concordia,” Hispal. 1539. This was followed by a tract, “De Rosa et partibus ejus; de succi Rosarum temperatura,” &c. But his reputation was chiefly extended by his work, in the Spanish language, concerning the medicinal substances imported from the new world, entitled “Dos Libros de las cosas que se traen de las Indias Occidentales, que sirven al uso de Medicina,” Sevilla, 1565. It was reprinted in 1569 and 1580, and to the latter edition a third book was added. Charles PEcluse, or Clusius, translated this work into Latin, with the title of “Simplicium Medicamentorum ex novo orbe delatorum, quorum in Medicina usus est, Historia,” Antw. 1574, and improved it by his annotations, and by the addition of figures. This work was also translated into Italian, French, and English, the latter by Frampton, 1580, 4to. Although the descriptions are inaccurate, the work had at least the merit of exciting the public attention to medicines heretofore little known. Monardes also published three works in Spanish, which were translated into Latin by l'Ecluse, with the title of “Nicolai Monardi Libri tres, magna Medicinae secreta et varia Experimenta continentes,” Lugd. 1601. The first of these relates to the lapis bezoardicus; the second, to the use and properties of steel, which he was the first after Rhazes to recommend as a deobstruent, according to Dr. Freind; and the third, to the efficacy of snow. His name is perpetuated by the botanical genus Monarda, in the class diandria of Linnæus.

, great grandson of the preceding, and a major-general in the army, was born about 1728, and was the son of John Monckton, the first viscount Galway, and baron of Killard, by his wife the lady Elizabeth Manners, daughter to John second duke of Rutland. He was sent with a detachment to Nova Scotia in 1755, and served under general Wolfe against Quebec. He dislodged a body of the enemy from the point of Levi, and formed a plan for landing the troops near the heights of Abraham, and assisted in the execution for conducting the right wing at the oattle of Quebec, where he was dangerously wounded. He received the thanks of the House of Commons, and afterwards went to New York, where he recovered of his wounds. He was also at the taking of Martinico, and was sometime governor of Portsmouth, where Fort Monckton was so called in honour of him. He died in 1782, leaving the character of a brave, judicious, and humane officer. In his account of the taking of Martinico in 1762, he mentions an attack made by the French troops from Morne Gamier on some of our posts, in which they were repulsed, and such was the ardour of our troops, that they passed the ravine with the enemy, seized their batteries, and took post there. It is also said that on this occasion the English party had no colours with them when they took possession of the batteries, and supplied the want of them by a shirt and a red waistcoat. From the many instances which have been given of General Monckton’s liberality, the following may be selected as deserving to be remembered. When the troops were sent to Martinico, general Amherst took away the usual allowance of baugh and forage- money. General Monckton, knowing the difficulties which subaltern officers have to struggle with in the best situation, felt for their distress, and in some degree to make it up to them, ordered the negroes which were taken, to be sold, and the money divided among the subalterns. On finding that it would not produce them five pounds a-piece, he said he could not offer a gentleman a less sum, and made up the deficiency, which was about 500l. out of his own pocket. He kept a constant table of forty covers for the army, and ordered that the subalterns chiefly should be invited, saying, he had been one himself; and if there was a place vacant, he used to reprimand his aid-de-camp.

, a member of the French academy, was born at Paris in 1687. He was a very elegant writer, and his works have gone through various editions. His principal performances are, “An Essay on the necessity and means of Pleasing,” which is an ingenious book of maxims. He wrote “Les Ames Rivales,” an agreeable romance, containing lively and just descriptions of French manners. He was also author of various pieces of poetry, small theatrical pieces, complimentary verses, madrigals, &c. Moncrif died at Paris in 1770, at the age of eighty-three, and left behind him a great character for liberality, and amiable manners.

, an ingenious and learned Frenchman, and one of the best writers of his time, was born at Paris in 1674. At sixteen he entered into the congregation of the fathers of the oratory, and was afterwards sent to Mans to learn philosophy. That of Aristotle then obtained in the schools, and was the only one which was permitted to be taught; nevertheless Mongault, with some of that original spirit which usually distinguishes men of uncommon abilities from the vulgar, ventured, in a public thesis, which he read at the end of the course of lectures, to oppose the opinions of Aristotle, and to maintain those of Des Cartes. Having studied theology with the same success, he quitted the oratory in 1699; and soon after went to Thoulouse, and lived with Colbert, archbishop of that place, who had procured him a priory in 1698. In 1710 the duke of Orleans, regent of the kingdom, committed to him the education of his son, the duke of Chartres; which important office he discharged so well that he acquired universal esteem. In 1714, he had the abbey Chartreuve given him, and that of Vilieneuve in 1719. The duke of Chartres, becoming colonel-general of the French infantry, chose the abbe* Mongault to fill the place of secretary-general made him also secretary of the province of Dauphiny and, after the death of the regent, his father, raised him to other considerable employments. All this while he was as assiduous as his engagements would permit in cultivating polite literature; and, in 1714, published at Paris;, in 6 vols. 12mo, an edition of “Tully’s Letters to Atticus,” with an excellent French translation, and judicious comment upon them. This work has been often reprinted, and is justly reckoned admirable; for, as Middleton has observed, in the preface to his “Life of Cicero,” the abbe Mongault “did not content himself with the retailing the remarks of other commentators, or out of the rubbish of their volumes with selecting the best, but entered upon his task with the spirit of a true critic, and, by the force of his own genius, has happily illustrated many passages which all the interpreters before him had given tip as inexplicable.” He published also a very good translation of “Herodian,” from the Greek, the best edition of which is that of 1745, in 12mo. He died at Paris, Aug. 15, 1746, aged almost seventy-two.

He was a member of the French academy, and of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres; and was fitted to do honour to any society. In the first volume of the “Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions” there are two fine dissertations of his one “upon the divine honours paid to the governors of the Roman provinces, during the continuance of the republic;” the other, “upon the temple, which Cicero conceived a design of consecrating to the memory of his beloved daughter Tullia, under the title of Fanum.”

, an eminent French astronomer and mathematician, was born at Paris, Nov. 23, 1715. His education was chiefly directed to the sciences, to which he manifested an early attachment; and his progress was such that at the age of twenty-one, he was chosen as the co-operator of Maupertuis, in the measure of a degree of the meridian at the polar circle. At the period when the errors in Flamsteed’s catalogue of the stars began to be manifest, he undertook to determine anew the positions of the zodiacal stars as being the most useful to astronomers. In 1743 he traced at St. Sulpice a grand meridian line, in order to ascertain certain solar motions, and also the small variations in the obliquity of the ecliptic.

During his long career he was considered among his friends as the soul of astronomy, and made numerous proselytes to this study by his advice, example, and instructions. It is to him we chiefly owe the early progress of two celebrated astronomers, Lalande and Pingre. Le Monnier died in 1799, in the 84th year of his age. He had a brother, Lewis William, a very able experimental philosopher, but who is not to be confounded with an abbe of that name who translated Terence and Persius into French, and who was the author of fables, tales, and epistles. The latter died in 1796.

, a learned French poet, was born in Dijon, the capital of Burgundy, June 15, 1641, He was a man of parts and learning, had a decided taste for poetry; and, in 1671, had a fair opportunity of displaying his talents. The subject of the prize of poetry, founded by the members of the French academy at this time, was, “The Suppressing of Duelling by Lewis XIV.” As this was the first contest of the kind, the candidates were numerous and eager; but la Monnoye succeeded, and had the honour of being the first who won the prize Founded by the French academy; by which he gained a reputation that increased ever after. In 1673, he was a candidate for the new prize, the subject of which was, “The protection with which his Gallic majesty honoured the French academy;” but his poem came too late. He won the prize in 1675, on “The glory of arms and learning under Lewis XIV;” and that also of 1677, on “The Education of the Dauphin.” On this occasion, the highest compliment was made him by the abbe* Regnier; who said, that “it would be proper for the French academy to elect Mr. de la Monnoye upon the first vacancy, because, as he would thereby be disqualified from writing any more, such as should then be candidates would be encouraged to write.” It was indeed said, that he discontinued to write for these prizes at the solicitation of the academy; a circumstance which, if true, reflects higher honour on him than a thousand prizes. He wrote many other successful pieces, and was no less applauded in Latin poetry than in the French. Menage and Bayle have both bestowed the highest encomiums on his Latin poetry. His Greek and Italian poems are likewise much commended by the French critics.

But poetry was not la Monnoye’s only province: to a perfect skill in poetry, he joined a very accurate and extensive knowledge of the languages. He was also an acute critic: and no man applied himself with greater assiduity to the study of history, ancient and modern. He was perfectly acquainted with all the scarce books, that had anything curious in them, and was well versed in literary history. He wrote “Remarks on the Menagiana:” in the last edition of which, printed in 1715, in 4 vols. 12mo, are included several pieces of his poetry, and a curious dissertation on the famous book “De tribus Impostoribus.” His “Dissertation on Pomponius Laetus,” at least an extract of it, is inserted in the new edition of Baillet’s “Jugemens des Sgavans,” published in 1722, with a great nnmber of remarks and corrections by la Monnoye. He also embellished the “Anti-Baillet of Menage;” with corrections and notes. He was a great benefactor to literature, by his own productions, and the assistance which he communicatd very freely, upon all occasions, to other authors. Among others, he favoured Bayle with a great number of curious particulars for his “Dictionary,” which was liberally acknowledged. He died at Paris, Oct. 15, 1728, in his 88th year. Mr. de Sallingre published at the Hague “A Collection of Poems by la Monnoye,” with his eulogium, to which we owe many of the particulars given above. He also left behind him “A Collection of Letters,” mostly critical several curious “Dissertations” three hundred “Select Epigrams from Martial, and other Poets-, ancient and modern, in French verse;” and several other works in prose and verse, in French, Latin, and Greek, ready for the press. A collection of his works in 3 vols. 8vo, was published in 1769. He deserved that the French academy should admit into their list a person on whom they had so often bestowed their laurels, and he might, doubtless, have obtained that honour sooner, had he sued for it: but, as he declined sueh solicitation, he was not elected till 1713, on the death of abbe Regner des Marias. He married Claude Henriot, whom he survived, after living many years with her in the strictest amity; as appears from a copy of his verses, and also from the epitaph he wrote for himself and his wife. He had accumulated a very curious and valuable library, but was obliged, by the failure of the Missisippi scheme, to propose selling it, in order to support his family. This the duke de Villeroi hearing, settled an annual pension of 6000 livres upon him; for which he expressed his gratitude, in a poem addressed to that nobleman. It is said, however, that the duke did it only upon condition, that himself should inherit the library after the death of la Monnoye, who accepted the terms.

Notwithstanding his long and faithful services, he had the misfortune to fall into disgrace; and, through the resentment of some powerful courtiers, was imprisoned in the Tower in 1616: but, after having been examined by the chief justice Coke and secretary Winwood, he was discharged. He wrote a vindication of his conduct, entitled “Concerning the insolences of the Dutch, and a Justification of sir William Monson” and directed it to the lord chancellor Ellesmere, and sir Francis Bacon, attorneygeneral and counsellor. His zeal against the Dutch, and his promoting an inquiry into the state of the navy, contrary to the inclination of the earl of Nottingham, then lord high admiral, seems to have been the occasion of his troubles. He had also the misfortune to bring upon himself a general and popular odium, in retaking lady Arabella Steuart, after her escape out of England in June 1611, though it was acting agreeably to his orders and duty. This lady was confined to the Tower for her marriage with William Seymour, esq. as was pretended; but the true cause of her confinement was, her being too high allied, and having a title or claim to the crown of England. Sir William, however, soon recovered his credit at court: for, in 1617, he was called before the privy council, to give his opinion, how the pirates of Algiers might be suppressed, and the town attacked. He shewed the impossibility of taking Algiers, and was against the expedition; notwithstanding which, it was rashly undertaken by Villiers duke of Buckingham. He was also against two other undertakings, as ill-managed, in 1625 and 162$, namely, the expeditions to Cadiz and the isle of Rhee. He was not employed in these actions, because he objected to the minister’s measures; but, in 1635, it being found necessary to equip a large fleet, in order to break a confederacy that was forming between the French and the Dutch, he was appointed vice-admiral in that armament, and performed liis duty with great honour and bravery. After that he was employed no more, but spent the remainder of his days in peace and privacy, at ins seat at Kinnersley in Surrey, where he digested and finished his “Naval Tracts,” published in Churchill’s “Collection of Voyages.” He died there, Feb. 1642-3, in his seventy-third year, and left a numerous posterity, the ancestors of the present noble family of Monson, baron Monson of Burton, in the county of Lincoln.

, an eminent French historian, was descended of a noble family, but the names of his parents, and the period of his birth have not been discovered. The place of his birth was probably Picardy, and the time, prior to the close of the fourteenth century. No particulars of his 'early years are known, except that he evinced, when young, a love for application, and a dislike to indolence. The quotations also from Sallust, Livy, Vegetius, and other ancient authors, that occur in his Chronicles, shew that he must have made some progress in Latin literature. He appears to have been resident in Cambray when he composed his history, and passed there the remainder of his life. In 1436 he was nominated to the office of lieutenant du Gavenier of the Cambresis; the gavenier was the collector or receiver of the annual dues payable to the duke of Burgundy, by the subjects of the church in the Cambresis, for the protection of them as earl of Flanders. Monstrelet also held the office of bailiff to the chapter of Cambray from 1436 to 1440, when another was appointed. The respect and consideration which he had now acquired, gained him the dignity of governor of Cambray in 1444, and in the following year he was nominated bailiff of Wallaincourt. He retained both of those places until his death, which happened about the middle of July, in 1453. His character in the register of the Cordeliers, and by the abbot of St. Aubert, was that of “a very honourable and peaceable man;” expressions, says his biographer, that appear simple at first sight, but which contain a real eulogium, if we consider the troublesome times in which Monstrelet lived, the places he held, the interest he must have had sometimes to betray the truth in favour of one of the factions which then divided France, and caused the revolutions the history of which he has published during the life of the principal actors.

, an English lady of distinguished talent, by marriage related to the Sandwich family, was the eldest daughter of Evelyn Pierrepoint, duke of Kingston, and the laoy Mary Fielding, daughter of William earl of Denbigh. She was born about 1690, and lost her mother in 1694. Her capacity for literary attainments was such as induced her father to provide her with the same preceptors as viscount Newark, her brother; and under their tuition, she made great proficiency in the Greek, Latin, and French languages. Her studies were afterwards superintended by bishop Burnet, and that part of life which by females of her rank is usually devoted to trifling amusements, or more trifling “accomplishments,” xvas spent by her in studious retirement, principally at Thoresby and at Acton, near London. Her society was confined to a few friends, among whom the most confidential appears to have been Mrs. Anne Wortley, wife of the hon. Sidney Montagu, second son of the heroic earl of Sandwich. In this intimacy originated her connection with Edward Wortley Montagu, esq. the eldest son of this lady; and after a correspondence of about two years, they were privately married by special licence, which bears date August 12, 1712. Mr. Wortley was a man possessed of solid rather than of brilliant parts, but in parliament, where at different periods of his life he had represented the cities of Westminster and Peterborough, and the boroughs of Huntingdon and Bossiney, he acquired considerable distinction as a politician and a speaker. In 1714 he was appointed one of the lords commissioners of the treasury, and on this occasion his lady was introduced to-the court of George I. where her beauty, wit, and spirit were universally admired. She lived also in habits of familiar acquaintance with two of the greatest geniuses of the age, Addison and Pope; but it did not require their discernment to discover that, even at this time, she was a woman of very superior talents.

, only son of the preceding lady Mary, was born in October 1713, and in the early part of his life seems to have been the object of his mother’s tenderest regard, though he afterwards lost her favour. In 1716, he was taken by her on his father’s embassy to Constantinople, and while there, was, as we have noticed in her life, the first English child on whom the practice of inoculation was tried. Returning to England with his parents in 1719, he was placed at Westminsterschool, where he gave an* early sample of his wayward disposition, by running away, and eluding every possible search, until about a year after he was accidentally discovered at Blackwall, near London, in the character of a vender offish, a basket of which he had then on his head. He had bound himself, by regular indenture, to a poor fisherman, who said he had served him faithfully, making his bargains shrewdly, and paying his master the purchasemoney honestly. He was now again placed at Westminster-school, but in a short time escaped a second time, and bound himself to the master of a vessel which sailed for Oporto, who, supposing him a deserted friendless boy, treated him with great kindness and humanity. This treatment, however, produced no corresponding feelings; for the moment they landed at Oporto, Montague ran away up the country, and contrived to get employment for two or three years in the vintage. Here at length he was discovered, brought home, and pardoned but with no better effect than before. He ran away a third time after which, his father procured him a tutor, who made him so far regular that he had an appointment in one of the public offices and, in 1747, he was elected one of the knights of the shire for the county of Huntingdon but in his senatorial capacity he does not appear to have any way distinguished himself; nor did he long retain his seat, his expences so far exceeding his income, that he found it prudent once more to leave England, about the latter end of 1751. His first excursion was to Paris, where, in a short time, he was imprisoned in the Chatelet, for a fraudulent gambling transaction: how he escaped is not very clear, but he published a defence of himself, under the title of “Memorial of E. W. Montague, esq. written by himself, in French, and published lately at Paris, against Abraham Payba, a Jew by birth, who assumed the fictitious name of James Roberts. Translated into English from an authentick copy sent from Paris,” 1752, 8vo.

, an eminent French, writer, was born at the castle of Montaigne, in the Perigord, Feb. 8, 1533. His father, seigneur of Montaigne, and mayor of Bourdeaux, bestowed particular attention on his education, perceiving in him early proofs of talents that would one day reward his care. His mode of teaching him languages is mentioned as somewhat singular at that time, although it has since been frequently practised. He provided him with a German attendant, who did not know French, and who was enjoined to speak to him in Latin, and in consequence young Montaigne is said to have been a master of that language at the age of six years. He was taught Greek also as a sort of diversion, and because his father had heard that the brains of children may be injured by being roused too suddenly out of sleep, he caused him to be awakened every morning by soft music. All this care he repaid by the most tender veneration for the memory of his father. Filial piety, indeed, is said to have been one of the most remarkable traits of his character, and he sometimes displayed it rather in a singular manner. When on horseback he constantly wore a cloak which had belonged to his father, not, as he said, for convenience, but for the pleasure it gave him. “II me semble m'envelopper de lui,” “I seem to be wrapped up in my father;” and this, which from any other wit would have been called the personification of a pun, was considered in Montaigne as a sublime expression of filial piety.

At the age of thirteen he had finished his course of studies, which he began at the college of Bourdeaux, under Grouchy, the celebrated Buchanan, and Muret, all learned and eminent teachers, and his progress bore proportion to their care. Being designed for the bar by his father, he married the daughter of a counsellor of parliament at Bourdeaux, when in his thirty-third year, and for some time himself sustained that character, but afterwards abandoned a profession to which he probably was never cordially attached. His favourite study was that of human nature, to pursue which he travelled through various parts of France, Germany, Swisserland, and Italy, making his observations on every thing curious or interesting in society, and receiving many marks of distinction. At Rome, in 1581, he was admitted a citizen; and the same year he was chosen mayor of Bourdeaux, and in this office gave such satisfaction to his fellow-citizens, that in 1582 they employed him in a special mission to courj; on important affairs, and after his mayoralty expired, they again elected him into the same office. In 1588 he appeared to advantage at the assembly of the states of Blois, and although not a deputy, took a share in their proceedings and cabals. During one of his visits at court, Charles IX. decorated him with the collar of the order of St. Michael, without any solicitation, which, when young, he is said to nave coveted above all things, it being at that time the highest mark of honour among the French nobility, and rarely bestowed.

His reputation is founded on his “Essays,” which were at one time extremely popular, and which are still read with pleasure by a numerous class of persons. La Harpe says of him, “As a writer, he has impressed on our language (the French) an energy which it did not before possess, and which has not become antiquated, because it is that of sentiments and ideas. As a philosopher he has painted man as he is; he praises without compliment, and blames without misanthropy.” In 1774 was published at Rome (Paris), “Memoirs of a Journey into Italy,” &c. by Montaigne, the editor of which has given us a few less known particulars of the author. He says that “with a large share of natural vivacity, passion, and spirit, Montaigne’s life was far from being that of a sedentary contemplatist, as those may be inclined to think, who view him only in the sphere of his library and in the composition of his essays. His early years by no means passed in the arms of leisure. The troubles and commotions whereof he had been an eye-witness during five reigns, which he had seen pass successively before that of Henry IV. had not in any degree contributed to relax that natural activity and restlessness of spirit. They had been sufficient to call it forth even from indolence itself. He had travelled a good deal in France, and what frequently answers a better purpose than any kind of travel, he was well acquainted with the metropolis, and knew the court. We see his attachment to Paris in the third book of his Essays. Thuanus likewise observes, that Montaigne was equally successful in making his court to the famous duke of Guise, Henry of Lorraine, and to the king of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. king of France. He adds, that he was at his estate at Blois when the duke of Guise was assassinated, 1558. Montaigne foresaw, says he, that the troubles of the nation would only end with the life of that prince, or of the king of Navarre; and this instance we have of his political sagacity. He was so well acquainted with the character and disposition of those princes, so well read in their hearts and sentiments, that he told his friend Thuanus, the king of Navarre would certainly have returned to the religion of his ancestors (that of the Romish communion) if he had not been apprehensive of being abandoned by his party. Montaigne, in short, had talents for public business and negociation, but his philosophy kept him at a distance from political disturbances; and he had the address to conduct himself without offence to the contending parties, in the worst of times.”

More recently, in 1799, his memory has been revived in France by an extravagant eloge from the pen of a French lady, Henrietta Bourdic-viot, who assures us that it was in the works of Montaigne that she acquired the knowledge of her duties.“But we rather incline to the more judicious character given of this author by Dr. Joseph Warton.” That Montaigne,“says this excellent critic,” abounds in native wit, in quick penetration, in perfect knowledge of the human heart, and the various vanities and vices that lurk in it, cannot justly be denied. But a man who undertakes to transmit his thoughts on life and manners to posterity, with the hope of entertaining and amending future ages, must be either exceedingly vain or exceedingly careless, if he expects either of these effects can be produced by wanton sallies of the imagination, by useless and impertinent digressions, by never forming or following any regular plan, never classing or confining his thoughts, never changing or rejecting any sentiment that occurs to him. Yet this appears to have been the conduct of our celebrated essayist; and it has produced many awkward imitators, who, under the notion of writing with the fire and freedom of this lively old Gascon, have fallen into confused rhapsodies and uninteresting egotisms. But these blemishes of Montaigne are trifling and unimportant, compared with his vanity, his indecency, and his scepticism. That man must totally have suppressed the natural love of honest reputation, which is so powerfully felt by the truly wise and good, who can calmly sit down to give a catalogue of his private vices, publish his most secret infirmities, with the pretence of exhibiting a faithful picture of himself, and of exactly pourtraying the minutest features of his mind. Surely he deserves the censure Quintilian bestows on Demetrius, a celebrated Grecian statuary, that he was nimius in veritate, ct similitudinis quam pulchritudinis amantior; more studious of likeness than of beauty."

The first edition of Montaigne’s Essays was published by himself in 1580, 8vo, in two books only, which were augmented afterwards to the present number. Of the subsequent editions, those by P. Coste are reckoned the best, and of these, Tonson’s edition, 1724, in 3 vols. 4to, is praised by the French bibliographers, as the most beautiful that has ever appeared. We have also two English translations. Montaigne’s life was first written by the president Bouhier, and prefixed to a supplementary volume of his works in 1740. Montaigne appeared once as the editor of some of the works of Stephen de la Boetie, in 1571; and ten years afterwards translated the “Natural Theologie” of Raimond de Sebonda, a learned Spaniard, and prefixed prefaces to both.

Arias was one of the most learned divines of the sixteenth century. He was a master of the Hebrew, Chaldaic, Syriac, Arabic, and Greek and Latin languages, and spoke fluently in German, French, and Portuguese. He was sober, modest, pious, and indefatigable. His company was sought by the learned, the great, and the pious; and his conversation was always edifying. Besides the Antwerp Polyglot, he was the author of, 1. “Index correctorius Lib. Theologicorum, Catholici regis anthoritate editus,” Antwerp, 1571, 4to. 2. “Commentaria in duodecim prophetas minores,” ibid. 1571, 4to; reprinted 1582. 3. “Elucidationes in quatuor Evangelia & in Act. Apost.” ibid. 1575, 4to. 4. “Elucidationes in omnia S. S. apostolorum scripta, &c.” ibid. 1588, 4to. 5. “De optimo imperio, sive in Librum Josue commentarius,” ibid. 1583. 6. “De varia Republica, sive Comment, in librum Judicum,” ibid. 1592, 4to. 7. “Antiquitatum Judaicarum, lib. novem,” Leyden, 1593. 8. “Liber generationis et regenerationis Adam, sive historia generis humani,” Antwerp, 1593, 4to; a second' part in 1601. y. “Davidis, aliorumque Psalmi ex Heb. in Lat. carmen conversi,” ibid. 1574, 4to. 10. “Conimentarii in triginta priores Psalmos,” ibid. 1605: with a few other works enumerated by Antonio and Niceron.

, a French naturalist, was born in 1720, at Semur, in Auxois. He spent the early part of his youth at Dijon, and afterwards came to Paris, where he made himself known as a man of science. He continued with reputation, the “Collection Academique,” a periodical work, which gave a view of every thing interesting contained in the “Memoirs” of the different learned societies in Europe. He was chosen by Buffon to be his associate in his great work on natural history, and the continuation of his ornithology was committed to him. He is described by Buffon, “as of all men, the person whose manner of seeing, judging, and writing, was most conformable to his own.” When the class of birds was finished, Montbeliard undertook that of insects, relative to which he had already furnished several articles to the New Encyclopedia, but his progress was cut short by his death, which took place at Semur, Nov. 28, 1785.

, a very celebrated Austrian general, was born in 1608, of a distinguished family in the Modenese. Ernest Montecuculi, his uncle, who was general of artillery in the imperial troops, made him pass through aJl the military ranks, before he was raised to that of commander. The young man’s first exploit was in 1634, when at the head of 2000 horse, he surprised 10,000 Swedes who were besieging Nemeslaw, in Silesia, and took their baggage and artillery; but he was shortly after defeated and made prisoner by general Bannier. Having obtained his liberty at the end of two years, he joined his forces to those of J. de Wert, in Bohemia, and conquered general Wrangel, who was killed in the battle. In 1627, the emperor appointed Montecuculi marechal de camp general, and sent him to assist John Casimir, king of Poland. He defeated Razolzi, prince of Transylvania, drove out the Swedes, and distinguished himself greatly against the Turks in Transylvania, and in Hungary, by gaining the battle of St. Gothard, in 1664. Montecuculi commanded the imperial forces against France in 1673, and acquired great honour from the capture of Bonn, which was preceded by a march, conducted with many stratagems to deceive M. Turenne. The command of this army was nevertheless taken from him the year following, but he received it again in 1675, that he might oppose the great Turenne, on the Rhine. Montecuculi had soon to bewail the death of this formidable enemy, on whom he bestowed the highest encomiums: “I lament,” said he, “and I can never too much lament, the loss of a man who appeared more than man; one who did honour to human nature.” The great prince of Cond6 was the only person who ould contest with Montecuculi, the superiority which M. de Turenne’s death gave him. That prince was therefore sent to the Rhine, and stopped the imperial general’s progress, who nevertheless considered this last campaign as his most glorious one; not because he was a conqueror, but because he was not conquered by two such opponents as Turenne and Conde. He spent the remainder of his life at the emperor’s court, devoting himself to the belles lettres; and the academy of naturalists owes its establishment to him. He died October 16, 1680, at Linez, aged seventy-two. This great general left some very excellent “Memoires” on the military art; the best French edition of which is that of Strasburg, 1735; to which that of Paris, 1746, 12mo, is similar.

, a very celebrated French writer, was descended of an ancient and noble family of Guienne, and born at the castle of Brede near Bourdeaux, Jan. 18, 1639. The greatest care was taken of his education; and, at the age of twenty, he had actually prepared materials for his “Spirit of Laws,” by a well-digested extract from those immense volumes which compose the body of the civil law; and which he had studied both as a civilian and a philosopher. Maupertuis informs us that he studied this science almost from his infancy, and that the first product of his early genius was a work, in which he undertook to prove, that the idolatry of most part of the pagans did not deserve eternal punishment, but this he thought fit to suppress. In Feb. 1714, he became a counsellor of the parliament of Bourdeaux, and was received president amortier, July 13, 1716, in the room of an uncle, who left him his fortune and his office. He was admitted, April 3, 1716, into the academy of Bourdeaux, which was then only in its infancy. A taste for music, and for works of entertainment, had, at first, assembled the members who composed it; but the societies for belles lettres being grown, in his opinion, too numerous, he proposed to have physics for their chief object; and the duke de la Force, having, by a prize just founded at Bourdeaux, seconded this just and rational proposal, Bourdeaux acquired an academy of sciences.

Montesquieu is said not to have been eager to shew himself to the public, but rather to wait for “an age ripe for writing.” It was not till 1721, when he was thirty-two years of age, that he published his “Persian Letters.” The description of oriental manners, real or supposed, of the prirle and phlegm of Asiatic love, is but the smallest object of these “Letters;” which were more particularly intended as a satire upon French manners, and treat of everai important subjects, which the author investigates rather fully, while he only seems to glance at them. Though this work was. exceedingly admired, yet he did not openly declare himself the author of it. He expresses himself sometimes freely about matters of religion, and therefore as soon as he was known to be the author, he had to encounter much censure and serious opposition, for at that time the philosophizing spirit was not tolerated in France. In 1725, he opened the parliament with a speech, the depth and eloquence of which were convincing proofs of his great abilities as an orator; and the year following he quitted his charge.

A place in the French academy becoming vacant by the death of monsieur de Sacy, in 1728, Montesquieu, by the advice of his friends, and supported also by the voice of the public, offered himself for it. Upon this, the minister, cardinal Fleury, wrote a letter to the academy, informing them, that his majesty would never agree to the election of the author of the “Persian Letters” that he had not himself read the book but that persons in whom he placed confidence, had informed him of its dangerous tendency. Montesquieu, thinking it prudent immediately to encounter this opposition, waited on the minister, and declared to him, that, for particular reasons, he had not owned the “Persian Letters,” but that he would be still farther from, disowning a work, for which he believed he had no reason to blush; and that he ought to be judged after a reading, and not upon information. At last, the minister did what he ought to have begun with; he read the book, loved the author, and learned to place his confidence better. The French academy, says D'Alembert, was not deprived of one of its greatest ornaments, nor France of a subject, of which superstition or calumny was ready to deprive her; for Montesquieu, it seems, had frankly declared to the government, that he could not think of continuing in France after the affront they were about to offer, but should seek among foreigners for that safety, repose, and honour, which he might have hoped in his own country. He was received into the academy, Jan. 24, 1728; and his discourse upon that occasion, which was reckoned a very fine one, is printed among his works. As before his admission into the academy, he had giveatip his civil employments, and devoted himself entirely to his genius and taste, he resolved to travel, and went first, in company with lord Waldegrave our ambassador, to Vienna, where he often saw prince Eugene; in whom he thought he could discover some remains of affection for his native country. He left Vienna to visit Hungary; and, passing thence through Venice, went to Rome. There he applied himself chiefly to examine the works of Raphael, of Titian, and of Michael Angelo, although he had not made the fine arts a particular study. After having travelled over Italy, he came to Switzerland, and carefully examined 1 those vast countries which are watered by the Rhine. He stopped afterwards some time in the United Provinces; and, at last, went to England, where he stayed three years, and contracted intimate friendships with many of the most distinguished characters of the day. He in particular received many marks of attention from queen Caroline. In the portrait of Montesquieu, written by himself, and published lately among some posthumous pieces, he gives the following proof of his gallantry in reply “Dining in England with the duke of Richmond, the French envoy there La Boine, who was at table, and was ill qualified for his situation, contended that England was not larger than the province of Guienne. I opposed the envoy. In the evening, the queen said to me, `I am informed, sir, that you undertook our defence against M. de la Boine.‘ `Madam,’ I replied, `I cannot persuade myself that a country over which you reign, is not a great kingdom.'”

The admirers of Montesquieu have wished that he had applied himself to the writing of history; but it may be doubted whether his imagination would not have proved too lively for that attention to facts and authorities which is absolutely necessary to historical narrative. He had, however, finished the history of Lewis XI. of France, and the public was upon the point of reaping the benefit of his labours, when a singular mistake deprived them of it. Montesquieu one day left the rough draught and the copy of this history upon his table, when he ordered his secretary to burn the draught, and lock up the copy. The secretary obeyed in part, but left the copy upon the table: Montesquieu returning some hours after into his study, observed this copy, which he took for the draught, and threw it into the fire. On this and the preceding anecdote, one of his countrymen, in the true spirit of French compliment, observes, “that the elements, as well as men in power, seemed jealous of his superior merit, as water and fire deprived us of two of his most valuable productions.”

In 1751, a literary dispute arose concerning the translation of the Bible into French: the question was, whether the second person singular, which is dismissed in all polite conversation, should be preserved Fontenelle was on the affirmative side, as well as Montesquieu. Remarks were written on this determination, in which the writer, among other things, observes, “That the author of the Persian Letters with his eastern taste, could not fail being an advocate for thou.”

, a Scotch historian, was born at Salmonet, between Airth and Grange, on the suuch-side of the Firth-of-Forth, whence he was called abroad Salmonettus Scoto-Britannus. Of his life we fcave been able to discover very few particulars. The tradition is, that he was obliged to leave Scotland upon his being suspected of adultery with the wife of sir James Hamilton of Preston-field. Monteith appears to have been a chaplain of cardinal de Retz, who also made him a canon of Notre Dame, and encouraged him in writing his history. See Joli, Memoires, torn. Ij. page 86, where he is called “homme scavant & de merite.” Cardinal de Retz also mentions him, vol. III. p. 323. His brother was lieutenant-colonel of Douglas’s regiment (the royal), and killed in Alsace. In the privilege for printing Monteith’s History, granted the 13th of September 1660, to Jaques St. Clair. de Roselin, he is styled “le defunct St. Montet” In the title-page he is called Messire. This work embraces the period of Scotch history from the coronation of Charles I. to the conclusion of the rebellion. In his preface he professes the utmost impartiality, and as far as we have been able to look into the work, he appears to have treated the history of those tumultuous times with much candour. His leaning is of course to the regal side of the question. In 17.35 a translation of this work, which was originally published in French, and was become very rare, was executed at London in one vol. fol. by J. Ogilvie, under the title of a “History of the Troubles of Great Britain.” The author was held in high esteem by Menage, who wrote two Latin epigrams in his praise. The time of his death we have not been able to discover. He must be distinguished from a Robert Monteith, the compiler of a scarce and valuable collection of all the epitaphs of Scotland, published in 1704, 8vo, under the title of “An Theater of Mortality.”

In 1709 Montfaucon published Philo-Juda&us an a contemplative life, in French, “Le Livre de Philon de la vie contemplative, &c.” translated from the Greek with notes, and an attempt to prove that the Therapeutee of whom Philo- speaks were Christians. Having sent a copy of this to president Bouhier, the latter returned him a polite letter of thanks, but stated that he could not agree with, him in his opinion respecting the religion of the Therapeutse. This brought on a correspondence which was published at Paris in 17 12, 12mo, under the title of “Lettres pour & contre sur la fameuse question, si les solitaires appelles Therapeutes etoient Chretiens.” The learned Gisbert Cuper was also against the opinion of Montfaucon on this question; and it is, we believe, now generally thought that his arguments were more ingenious than convincing. In 1710^ Montfaucon published an “Epistola” on the fact, mentioned by Rufinus, that St. Athanasius baptised children when himself a child. In this work he investigates the date of the death of St. Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and that of the death of St. Athanasius. This was followed in 1713 by an edition of what remains of the “Hexapla of Origen,” 2 vols. folio, and a fine edition of the works of St. Chrysostom, begun in 1718, and completed in 1738 in 13 vols. folio.

, a celebrated mathematician, was born at Lyons in the year 1725, and giving early indications of a love of learning, was placed under the instructions of the Jesuits, with whom he acquired an intimate acquaintance with the ancient and modern languages, and some knowledge of the mathematics. At the age of sixteen he went to Toulouse to study the law, and was admitted an advocate, though without much intention of practising at the bar. Having completed his studies, he went to Paris, cultivated an acquaintance with the most distinguished literary characters, and it was owing to his intercourse with them, that he was induced to undertake his “History of the Mathematical Sciences.” But in the interim he published new editions, with additions and improvements, of several mathematical treatises which were already held in the highest estimation. The first of these was “Mathematical Recreations,” by M. Ozanam, which has been since translated into English, and published in London, in 4 vols. 8vo. To all the works which he edited, after Ozanam’s, he gave the initials of his name. He also contributed his assistance for some years to “The French Gazette;” and in 1755 he was elected a member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Berlin. In the following year, when the experiment of inoculation was about to be tried on the first prince of the blood, Montucla translated from the English an account of all the recent cases of that practice, which had been sent from Constantinople, by lady Mary Wortley Montague. This translation he added to the memoir of De la Condamine on the subject. Previously to this publication, he had given to the world his “History of Inquiries relative to the Quadrature of the Circle.” The encouragement which this met with from very able judges of its merit, afforded him great encouragement to apply with ardour to his grand design, “The History of the Mathematics;” and in 1758 he published this “History,” in two volumes, 4to, which terminates with the close of the 17th century. It answered the expectations of all his friends, and of men of science in all countries, and the author was instantly elevated to a high rank in the learned world. His fame was widely diffused, and he was pressed from all quarters to proceed with the mathematical history of the 18th century, which he had announced for the subject of a third volume, and for which he had made considerable preparations; but he was diverted from his design, by receiving the appointment of secretary to the Intendance at Grenoble. Here he spent his leisure hours chiefly in retirement, and in scientific pursuits. In 1764, Turgot, being appointed to establish a colony at Cayenne, took Montucla with him as his “secretary,” to which was added the title of “astronomer to the king,” and although he returned without attaining any particular object with regard to the astronomical observations, for which he went out, he had an opportunity of collecting some valuable tropical plants, with which he enriched the king’s hothouses at Versailles. Soon after his return, he was appointed chief clerk in an official department, similar to that known in this country by the name of the “Board of Works,” which he retained till the place was abolished in 1792, when he was reduced to considerable pecuniary embarrassments. Under the pressure of these circumstances, he began to prepare a new and much enlarged edition of his “History,” which he presented to the world in 1799, in two volumes, quarto. In this edition are many important improvements; and many facts, which were barely announced in the former impression, are largely detailed and illustrated in this. After the publication of these two volumes, the author proceeded with the printing of the third; but death terminated his labours, when he had arrived at the 336th page. The remainder of the volume, and the whole of the fourth, were printed under the inspection of Lalande. Montucla had been a member of the National Institute from its original establishment. He had obtained various employments under the revolutionary government, though he was but meanly paid for his labour, and had to struggle with many difficulties to furnish his family with the bare necessaries of life. At length he was reduced to seek the scanty means of support by keeping a lottery-office, till the death of Saussure put him in the possession of a pension of about one hundred pounds per annum, which he enjoyed only four months. He died in December 1799, in the 75th year of his age. He was a man of great modesty, and distinguished by acts of generosity and liberality, when it was in his power. He was also friendly, cheerful, and of very amiable manners.

, a medical and miscellaneous writer, was the son of the rev. Charles Moore, a minister of the English church at Stirling, in Scotland, where this, his only surviving son, was born in 1730. His lather dying in 1735, his mother, who was a native of Glasgow, and had some property there, removed to that city, and carefully superintended the early years of her son while at school and college. Being destined for the profession of medicine, he was placed under Mr. Gordon, a practitioner of pharmacy and surgery, and at the same time attended such medical lectures as the college of Glasgow at that time afforded, which were principally the anatomical lectures of Dr. Hamilton, and those on the practice of physic by Dr. Cullen, afterwards the great ornament of the medical school of Edinburgh. Mr. Moore’s application to his studies must have been more than ordinarily successful, as we find that in 1747, when only in his seventeenth year, he went to the continent, under the protection of the duke of Argyle, and was employed as a mate in one of the military hospitals at Maestricht, in Brabant, and afterwards at Flushing. Hence he was promoted to be assistant to the surgeon of the Coldstream regiment of foot guards, comman-ded by general Braddock, and after remaining during the winter of 1748 with this regiment at Breda, came to England at the conclusion of the peace. At London he resumed his medical studies under Dr. Hunter, and soon after set out for Paris, where he obtained the patronage of the earl of Albemarle, whom he had known in Flanders, and who was now English ambassador at the court of France, and immediately appointed Mr. Moore surgeon to his household. In this situation, although he had an opportunity of being with the ambassador, he preferred to lodge nearer the hospitals, and other sources of instruction, xvith which a more distant part of the capital abounded, and visited lord Albemarle’s family only when his assistance was required. After residing two years in Paris, it was proposed by Mr. Gordon, who was not insensible to the assiduity and improvements of his former pupil, that he should return to Glasgow, and enter into partnership with him. Mr. Moore, by the advice of his friends, accepted the invitation, but deemed it proper to take London in his way, and while there, went through a course under Dr. Smellie, then a celebrated accoucheur. On his return to Glasgow, he practised there during the space of two years, but when a diploma was granted by the university of that city to his partner, now Dr. Gordon, who chose to prescribe as a physician alone, Mr. Moore still continued to act as a surgeon; and, as a partner appeared to be necessary, he chose Mr. Hamilton, professor of anatomy, as his associate. Mr. Moore remained for a considerable period at Glasgow; but when he had attained his fortieth year, an incident occurred that gave a new turn to his ideas, and opeqed new pursuits and situations to a mind naturally active and inquisitive. James George, duke of Hamilton, a young nobleman of great promise, being affected with a consumptive disorder, in 1769, he was attended by Mr. Moore, who has always spoken of this youth in terms of the highest admiration; but, as his malady baffled all the efforts of medicine, he yielded to its pressure, after a lingering illness, in the fifteenth year of his age. This event, which Mr. Moore recorded, together with the extraordinary endowments of his patient, on his tomb in the buryingplace at Hamilton, led to a more intimate connection with this noble family. The late duke of Hamilton, being, like his brother, of a sickly constitution, his mother, the duchess f Argyle, determined that he should travel in company with some gentleman, who to a knowledge of medicine added an acquaintance with the continent. Both these qualities were united in the person of Dr. Moore, who by this time had obtained the degree of M. D. from the university of Glasgow. They accordingly set out together, and spent a period of no less than five years abroad, during which they visited France, Italy, Switzerland, and Germany. On their return, in 1778, Dr. Moore brought his family from Glasgow to London; and in the course of the next year appeared the fruits of his travels, in “A View of Society and Manners in France', Switzerland, and Germany,” in 2 vols. 8vo. Two years after, in 1781, he published a continuation of the same work, in two additional volumes, entitled “A View of Society and Manners in Italy.” Having spent s6 large a portion of his time either in Scotland or on the continent, he could not expect suddenly to attain an extensive practice in the capital; nor indeed was he much consulted, unless by his particular friends. With a view, however, to practice, he published in 1785, his “Medical Sketches,” a work which was favourably received, but made no great alteration in his engagements; and the next work he published was “Zeluco,” a novel, which abounds with many interesting events, arising from uncontrouled passion on the part of a darling son, and unconditional compliance on that of a fond mother. While enjoying the success of this novel, which was very considerable, the French revolution began to occupy the minds and writings of the literary world. Dr. Moore happened to reside in France in 1792, and witnessed many of the important scenes of that eventful year, but the massacres of September tending to render a residence in Paris highly disagreeable, he returned to England; and soon after his arrival, began to arrange his materials, and in 1795, published “A View of the Causes and Progress of the French Revolution,” in 2 vols. 8vo, dedicated to the Duke of Devonshire. He begins with the reign of Henry IV. and ends with the execution of the royal family. In 1796 appeared another novel, “Edward: various Views of Human Nature, taken from Life and Manners chiefly in England.” In 1800, Dr. Moore published his “Mordaunt,” being “Sketches of Life, Characters, and Manners in various Countries including the Memoirs of a French Lady of Quality,” in 2 vols. 8vo. This chiefly consists of a series of letters, written by “the honourable John Mordaunt,” while confined to his couch at Vevay, in Switzerland, giving an account of what he had seen in Italy, Germany, France, Portugal, &c. The work itself comes under no precise head, being neither a romance, nor a novel, nor travels: the most proper title would perhaps be that of “Recollections.” Dr. Moore was one of the first to notice the talents of his countryman the unfortunate Robert Burns, who, at his request, drew up an account of his life, and submitted it to his inspection.

In consequence of a disagreement with the viceroy, who had occasioned the recall of general Stuart, colonel Moore arrived in England in Nov. 1795, and was immediately appointed a brigadier-general in the West Indies, and attached to a brigade of foreign corps, which consisted of Choiseul’s hussars, and two corps of emigrants. On Feb. 25, 1796, he received an order to take charge of, and embark with general Perryn’s brigade, going out with the expedition to the West Indies, under sir Ralph Abercrombie; that officer having unexpectedly sailed in the Vengeance, 74, and left his brigade behind. General Moore, although he had no previous intimation that he was to embark, hurried to Portsmouth, and having time only to prepare a few necessaries, sailed for the West Indies with the fleet at day-light on the 28th, with no other baggage than a small portmanteau, and not one regiment of his own brigade was in the fleet. On his arrival at Barbadoes, on the 13th of April, 1796, having had an opportunity of waiting on the commander-in-chief, sir Ralph Abercrombie, that sagacious and attentive observer very soon distinguished him, and in the course of the operations against St. LuciCj wjiich immediately followed, employed him in very arduous and difficult service which occurred. He had, in particular, opportunities, during the siege of Morne Fortunée at St. Lucie, which lasted from the 26th of April to the same day in May, of eminently distinguishing himself; and his conduct, as sir Ralph expressed in his public orders, was the admiration of the whole army. Sir Ralph, immediately on the capitulation, bestowed the command and government of the island on general Moore, who did all he could to induce sir Ralph to keep him with the army, and employ him in the reduction of the other islands, but without effect. Sir Ralph, in a manner, forced this important command upon him, at the same time giving him the most flattering reasons for wishing him to accept of it. The admiral and general sailed from St. Lucie on the 3d of June, leaving brigadier-general Moore in a situation which required, from what remained to be done in such a climate, perhaps more military talent, and a greater degree of exertion and personal risk, than even there had been occasion for during the reduction of the island; for, although the French commanding officer, and the principal post in the island, had surrendered, numerous bands of armed negroes remained in the woods; yet he at length succeeded in completely reducing these. Having, however, had two narrow escapes from violent attacks of yellovr fever, the last rendered it necessary that he should be relieved from the command of the island, and he returned to England in the month of July or August 1797. In Nov. following, sir Ralph Abercrombie having been appointed commander of the forces in Ireland, desired that brigadier-­general Moore might be put upon the staff in that country, which was done, and he accompanied sir Ralph to Dublin on the 2ddayof December 1797. During the period immediately preceding the rebellion in 1798, Moore had an important command in the south of Ireland, which was very disaffected, and was also the quarter where the enemy were expected to make a landing. His head-quarters were at Bandon, and his troops, amounting to 3000 men, were considered as the advanced corps of the south. When the rebellion broke out, he was employed first under major-general Johnstone, at New Ross, where the insurgents suffered much, and immediately afterwards was detached towards Wexford, at that time in the hands of the rebels. He had on this occasion only the 60th yagers, or sharp shooters, 900 light infantry, 50 of Hompesch’s cavalry, and six pieces of artillery. With these he had not marched above a mile before a large body of rebels appeared on the road, marching to attack him. He had examined the ground, as well as the short time would allow, in the morning, and thus was able to form his men to advantage. The rebels attacked with great spirit, but, after an obstinate contest, were driven from the field, and pursued with great loss. They amounted to about 6000 men, and were commanded by general Roche, a priest. After the action, the two regiments under lord Dalhousie arrived from Duncannon fort. It then being too late to proceed toTaghmone, which was his intention, the brigadier took post for the night on the ground where the action began. Next day on his march he was met by two men from Wexford with proposals from the rebels to lay down their arms, on certain conditions. As general Moore had no power to treat, he made no answer, but proceeded on to Wexford, which he delivered from the power of the rebels, who had piked or shot forty of their prisoners the day before, and intended to have murdered the rest if they had not been thus prevented.

Brigadier-general Moore continued to serve in Ireland, where he succeeded to the rank of major-general, and had a regiment given him, until the latter end of June 1799, when he was ordered to return to England to be employed in the expedition under sir Ralph Abercrombie, which sailed August 13, and was destined to rescue Holland from the tyranny of the French' government. The general result, owing to circumstances which could not be foreseen, was unfavourable; but the English troops had an opportunity of displaying the greatest valour, and none were more distinguished than those under the more immediate command of general Moore, who, after being twice wounded, in the hand, and in the thigh, received a musket-ball through his face, by which he was disabled, and was brought from the ground with some difficulty. He was now carried back to his quarters, a distance of ten miles, and as soon, as he could be moved, he was taken to the Helder, where he embarked on board the Amethyst frigate, and arrived at the Nore on the 24th; from thence he proceeded to London. Soon after his return to England from the Helder, a second battalion was added to the 52d regiment, of which the command was bestowed oa him by the king, in the most gracious manner. Being of an excellent constitution, and temperate habits, his wounds closed in the course of five or six weeks. He joined his brigade at Chelmsford on the 24th of December, 1799. In the early part of 1800 it had been intended to send a body of troops to the Mediterranean under sir Charles Stuart; he wrote to general Moore, and proposed to him to serve under him, which was accepted with the greatest pleasure. It was at first intended that sir Charles should take out of England 15,000 men, but it was afterwards found that the regiments allotted for this service, and which had been part of the expedition to Holland, were insufficient, and only amounted to 10,000 effective. About the middle of March, the first division, amounting to 5000 men, embarked under major-general Pigot. At this time a change took place in the plan of the expedition; sir Charles had some disagreement with ministers, and resigned his situation. Sir Ralph Ahercrombie was appointed to the command, and majorgeneral Moore was named as one of his major-generals, with Hutchinson and Pigot, who sailed about the end of April* with the 5000 men. There was little opportunity during this expedition, the success of which was prevented by various unforeseen occurrences, for any exertions in which general Moore could distinguish himself, until, the armies being ordered to separate, his troops were ordered to go to Egypt under sir Ralph Abercrombie. Having arrived at Malta, major-general Moore was sent to Jaffa to visit the Turkish army, and form a judgment as to what aid was to be expected from it; but the result being unfavourable, sir Ralph determined to land in the bay of Aboukir, and march immediately upon Alexandria. Any satisfactory detail of this memorable expedition would extend this article too far we shall therefore confine oui selves to that part in which major-general Moore was more particularly concerned. As soon as the landing was begun, he, at the head of the grenadiers and light infantry of th< 40th, with the 23d and 28th regiments in line, ascencle< the sand-hill. They did not fire a shot until they gained the summit, when they charged the enemy, drove ther and took four pieces of cannon, with part of their hor& The French retreated to the border of a plain, where g< neral Moore halted, as upon the left a heavy fire of mus quetry was kept up. Brigadier-general Oakes, with tl left of the reserve, consisting of the 42d Highlanders, tin 58th regiment, and the Corsican rangers, landed to th< left of the sand-hill, and were attacked by both infantn and cavalry, which they repulsed and followed into thi plain, taking three pieces of artillery. The guards an< part of general Coote’s brigade landed to the left of tl reserve; they were vigorously opposed, but repulsed tt tenerhy, and followed them into the plain. The want ol cavalry and artillery (for it was some time before the gui that were landed could be dragged through the sand) saved the enemy from being destroyed. This was one of the most splendid instances of British intrepidity that perhaps ever happened. The enemy had eight days to assemble and prepare, and the ground was extremely favourable to them. The loss of the enemy was considerable, that of the British amounted to 600 killed and wounded, of which the reserve lost 400. In the course of the afternoon the rest of the army landed, and the whole moved forward a couple of miles, where they took post for the night.

On the morning of the 9th, major-general Moore and lieutenant-colonel Anstruther, the quarter-master-general, went forward with the 92d Highlanders, the Corsican, rangers, and some cavalry, to look fora new position. The country was unequal, sandy, and thickly interspersed with palm and date trees. He posted the 92d at a place about two miles in front, where there was a small redoubt, and where the space became more narrow than any where else, by the sea and lake Madie running up on each side. He then went forward with the cavalry, until they were met by a strong patrole of the" enemy, on which they retired. On reporting to sir Ralph, he directed major-general Moore to take post with the reserve on the ground where he had placed the 92d by noon he had taken possession of the post with the reserve, and placed his out- posts. On the lOth there was some skirmishing with the out-posts of the reserve and the enemy’s cavalry. The main body of the army was detained in their post-position till, by the exertions of the navy, the stores and provisions were landed and forwarded to them. On the llth sir Ralph went to the reserve, the brigade of guards moved forward, and took post half way between them and the rest of the army. The lake Madie was ordered to be examined, with a view to the practicability of conveying the army stores by it, which it was afterwards found could be done. On the 12th the army moved forward in two columns, each composed of a wing. The reserve, in two columns, formed the advanced guard to each column. The enemy’s cavalry retired, skirmishing as the army advanced. The army halted at a tower that they found evacuated, from the top of which a body of infantry was seen advancing. The line was instantly formed, and the army advanced with the utmost regularity and steadiness. The enemy, on seeing this movement, first halted, and afterwards retired to some heights which terminated a plain, where the British army took post for the night, and lay on their arms. Majorgeneral Moore had the direction of the advanced posts; and the 90th and 92d regiments, though not belonging to the reserve, were placed under his orders for the night. The out- posts of the enemy and the advanced guard of the British were so near each other, that it was impossible that either army could move without bringing on a general action. At six o'clock in the morning of the 13th the army moved forward in two columns from the left, each composed of a line. The reserve, in one column from the left, marched on the right of the other two, to cover the flank. Sir Ralph’s intention was to attack the enemy’s right, and, if possible, to turn it. The 90th and 92d regiments formed the advanced guards to the two columns of the army, and, having got too far a-head of the columns, were attacked by the main body of the enemy, and suffered severely before the columns could come to their support. These two regiments, however, maintained their ground, and defeated a body of cavalry that attempted to charge them. The action now became general along the line; the French, being forced back, retreated, covered by a numerous artillery, halting and firing wherever the ground favoured them. The British army advanced rapidly without artillery, as their guns, being dragged through sand by the seamen, could not keep up with the infantry. The reserve remained in column on the right flank covering the two lines, and though mowed down by the enemy’s cannon in front, and exposed to musketry from hussars and light infantry on their flank, continued to move forward with such steadiness and regularity, that at any time during the action and pursuit, they could have been wheeled to a flank without an interval. The two lines advanced with equal order until they reached a rising ground, where there were the ruins of an ancient building of considerable extent; from this height they saw the enemy retreating in confusion through a plain, under cover of the fortified heights in front of Alexandria. Sir Ralph followed them into the middle of the plain, where a consultation was held, and it was then intended that general Hutchinson, with part of the second line, which had been least engaged, should attack the enemy’s right, while major-general Moore, with the reserve supported by the guards, attacked their left near the sea.

General Hutchinson had a considerable circuit to make to get to the ground where he was to make his attack, and the attack of the reserve was to be regulated by his. When he got to his ground, the position of the French was found to be so strongly defended by a numerous artillery, and covered besides by the guns on the fortified heights near Alexandria, that the attempt was given up, and as the army were in their present position exposed to the enemy’s cannon without being able to retaliate, a position on the height in the rear was marked out, to which the army fell back as the evening advanced. This severe action cost the British army 1300 in killed and wounded. The situation of the British army at this period was certainly a very critical one, as it was quite evident that government had been deceived in their estimate of the French forces. Sir Raiph, therefore, was well aware of the difficult task he had to perform. The camp of the British was about four or five miles from Alexandria. In front of the reserve, which, formed the right of the army, was a very extensive ancient ruin, which the French called Caesar’s camp; it was twenty or thirty yards retired from the right flank of the redoubt, and commanded the space between the redoubt and the sea. In this redoubt and ruin major-general Moore had posted the 28th and 58th regiments. On the 21st the attack was made by the French, who were driven back by his troops, but he received a shot in the leg. The result, however, was, that every attack the French made was repulsed with great slaughter. In the early part of the action, and in the dark, some confusion was unavoidable, but wherever the French appeared, the British went boldly up to them, even the cavalry breaking in had not in the least dismayed them. As the day broke, the foreign brU gaJe, under brigadier-general, afterwards sir John Stuart, who fought the battle of Maida, came to the second line to the support of the reserve, shared in the action, and behaved with great spirit. Day-light enabled major-general Moore to get the reserve into order, but there was a great want of ammunition. The guns could not be fired for a very considerable time, otherwise the French must have suffered much more severely, while retreating from their different unsuccessful attacks, than they did. The enemy’s artillery continued to gall the British severely with shot and shells, after the infantry and cavalry had been repulsed. The British could not return a shot. Had the French attacked again, the British had nothing but their bayonets, which they unquestionably would have used, as never was an army more determined to do their duty. But the enemy laad suffered so severely, that the men could not be got to make another attempt. They continued in front at a distant musket-shot, until the ammunition for the English guns was brought up to enable them to fire, when theyvery soon retreated. While the attacks were made on the British right, a column attacked the guards on the left of the reserve, but were repulsed with loss. The French general, Menou, had concentrated the greatest part of the force in Egypt for this attack; the prisoners stated his force in the field at about 13,000 men, of whom between three and four thousand were killed or wounded. The British army lost about 1300 men, of which upwards of 500 belonged to the reserve. This battle commenced at half past four in the morning, and terminated about nine. The French made three different attacks, with superior numbers, the advantage of cavalry, and a numerous and well-served artillery. The British infantry here gave a decided proof of their superior firmness and hardihood. Sir Ralph, who always exposed his person very much, in this last battle carried the practice perhaps farther than he bad e?er done before. Major-general Moore met hjnv early in the anion, close in the rear of the 42d, without any of the officeFS of his family; and afterwards, when the French cavalry charged the second time, and penetrated the 42d, major-general Moore saw him again and waved to him to retire, but he was instantly surrounded by the hussars; he received a cut from a sabre ou the breast, which penetrated his clothes and just grazed the flesh. He received a shot in the thigh, but remained in the field until the battle was over, when he was conveyed on board the Foudroyant. Major-general Moore, at the close of the action, had the horse killed under him that major Honeyroan had lent him. Wnen the battle was over, the wound in his leg became so stiff and painful, that as soon as he could get a hurse, he gave the command of the reserve to coloi ei Spencer, and retired with brigadier-general Oakes, who commanded the reserve under him, and who was wounded in the leg also, to their tents in the rear. Brigadier-general Oakes was wounded nearly at the same time, and in the same part of the leg that major-general Moore was, but they both continued to head the reserve until the battle was over. When the surgeon had dressed their wounds, finding that they must be some time incapable of action, they returned to the Diadem troop-ship. Sir Ralph Abercrombie died of his wound on board the Foudroyant on the 28th day of March, and the command devolved on major-general Hutchinson. It is unnecessary here to detail the operations in Egypt that followed the battle of the 2 1st, as major-general Moore was confined on hoard the Diadem with his wound until the I Oth of May, when he was removed to Rosetta for the benefit of a change of air. He suffered very severely the ball had passed between the two bones of his leg he endured a long confinement and much torment, from inflammation and surgical operations. When at length he could move on crutches, and was removed to Rosetta, where he got a house on the banks of the Nile, agreeably situated, he began to recover rapidly, and afterwards continued to serve in the army of Egypt until after the surrender of Alexandria, when he returned to England, where he received the honour of knighthood, and the order of the bath. On the renewal of the war, the talents and services of sir John Moore pointed him out as deserving of the most important command. It was not, however, until 1808 that he was appointed to the chief command of an army to be employed in Spain, and Gallicia or the borders of Leon were fixed upon as the place for assembling the troops. Sir John was ordered to send the cavalry by land, but it was left to his own discretion to transport the infantry and artillery either by sea or land. He was also assured, that 15,000 men were ordered to Corunna, and he was directed to give such orders to sir David Baird, their commander, as would most readily effect a junction of the whole force. Both, however, soon discovered that little reliance could be placed on the Spaniards; and they had not got far into the country before their hopes were completely disappointed. Sir John Moore soon began to anticipate the result which followed. In the mean time the French army had advanced, and taken possession of the city of Valladolid, which is but twenty leagues from Salamanca. Sir John had been positively informed that his entry into Spain would be covered by 60 or 70,000 men; and that Burgos was the city intended for the point of union for the different divisions of the British army. But already not only Burgos, but Valladolid, was in possession of the enemy; and he found himself with an advanced corps in an open town, at three marches distance only from the French army, without even a Spanish piquet to cover his front He had at this time only three brigades of infantry, without a gun, in Salamanca. The remainder, it is true, vyere moving up in succession, but the whole could not arrive in less than ten days. At this critical time the Spanish main armies, instead of being united either among themselves, or with the British, were divided from each other almost by the whole breadth of the peninsula. The fatal consequences of this want of union were but too soon made apparent; Blake was defeated, and a report reached sir David Baird that the French were advancing upon his division in two different directions, so as to threaten to surround him. He, consequently, prepared to retreat upon Corunna; but sir John Moore, having ascertained that the report was unfounded, ordered sir David to advance, in order, if possible, to form a junction with him. On the 28th of November he received information that there was now no army remaining, against which the whole French force might be directed, except the British; and it was in vain to expect that they, even if they had been united, could have resisted or checked the enemy. Sir John Moore, therefore, determined to fall back on Portugal, to hasten the junction of general Hope, who had gone towards Madrid, and he ordered sir David Baird to regain Corunna as expeditiously as possible; and when he had thus determined upon a retreat, he communicated his design to the general officers, who, with the exception of general Hope, seemed to doubt the wisdom of his decision; he would, however, have carried it into execution, if he had not been induced, by pressing solicitations, and representations of encouragement, to advance to Madrid, which he was told not only held out, but was capable of opposing the French for a considerable length of time. Sir John, therefore, anxious to meet the wishes of his troops, by leading them against the enemy, determined to attack Soult, the French general, who was posted at Saldanha, by which he thought he should draw off the French armies to the north of Spain, and thus afford an opportunity for the Spanish armies to rally and re-unite. Soult was probably posted in that spot with so small a body of men for the purpose of enticing the British army farther into Spain, while Bonaparte, in person, with his whole disposable force, endeavoured to place himself between the British army and the sea. At length the two armies met; and the superiority of the British cavalry was eminently displayed in a most brilliant and successful skirmish, in which 600 of the imperial guards of Bonaparte were driven off the field by half the number of British, Reaving 55 killed and wounded, and 70 prisoners, among whom was general Le Febre, the commander of the imperial guard.

Yet, notwithstanding this and other advantages gained over the enemy, a retreat was become indispensably necessary: sir John’s troops did not amount to more than 27,000, while the French on the lowest calculation were 70,000, and so closely did this army, under Bonaparte, pursue the English, that the distance between them was scarcely thirty miles, while sir John was rather incommoded than benefited by the Spanish troops, and the Spanish peasantry offered no assistance to his troops, harassed by fatigue, and in want of every necessary. The difficulties and anxieties of the British commander were also increased by the relaxation which took place in the discipline of the army, arising from various causes, which compelled him to issue such orders as might unequivocally point out his knowledge of the extent to which the want of discipline Lad proceeded, the persons to whom he principally attributed it, and his positive and unalterable determination to punish it in the most severe and exemplary manner. At Lugo sir John Moore was anxious to engage the enemy; and he was satisfied that the general orders he had now given, had produced such an effect in his army, as to give an earnest of victory. A slight skirmish ensued, in which, the British rushed forward with charged bayonets, and drove the enemy’s column down the hill with considerable slaughter. After this, marshal Soult, having experienced the talents of the general, and the intrepidity of the troops he had to encounter, did not venture to renew the attack; from this it was concluded that his intention was to harass the British as much as possible during their march, and to defer his attack till the embarkation. Under these circumstances, the general quitted his ground in the night, leaving fires burning to deceive the enemy. The French did not discover their retreat till long after day-light, so that the British army got the start of them considerably. On the llth of January the whole of the British reached Corunna, the port where they hoped to embark, not, however, without the probability of a battle; and notwithstanding they were disappointed in not finding the transports at Corunna, the British army rejoiced that before they quitted the shores of Spain they should have an opportunity to front their enemies. The enemy gave no particular indipations of attack till about noon of the 16th of January: at this time sir John Moore was giving directions for the embarkation; but the moment intelligence was brought that the enemy’s line were getting under arms, he struck spurs to his horse, and flew to the field. The advanced piquets were already beginning to fire at the enemy’s light troops, who were pouring rapidly down the hill on the right wing of the British. Early in the action, sir David Baird, leading on his division, had his arm shattered with a grape-shot, and was forced to leave the field. At this instant the French artillery plunged from the heights, and the two hostile lines of infantry mutually advanced beneath a shower of balls. They were still separated from each other by stone-walls and hedges. A sudden and very able movement of the British gave the utmost satisfaction to sir John Moore, who had been watching the manoeuvre, and he cried out, “That is exactly what I wished to be done.” He then rode up to the 50th regiment, commanded by majors Napier and Charles Banks Stanhope, who had got over an inclosure in their front, and were charging most valiantly. The general, delighted with the gallantry of the two majors, who had been recommended by himself to the military rank they held, exclaimed, “Well done the 50th! Well done my majors!” The plaudits of their general and beloved friend excited them to new efforts, and they drove the enemy out of the village of Elvina with great slaughter. In the conflict, major Napier, advancing too far, was severely wounded and taken prisoner, and major Stanhope received a ball through his heart, which instantly put an end to a most valuable life. So instantaneous must have been the death of major Stanhope, that a sense of pain had not torn from his countenance the smile which the bravery of his soldiers and the applause of his commander had excited.

Sir John Moore proceeded to the 42d, and addressed them in these words, a Highlanders, remember Egypt.“They rushed on, driving the French before them. He sent captain Hardinge to order up a battalion of guards to the left flank of the Highlanders, upon which the oflicer commanding the light company, conceiving that, as their ammunition was nearly expended, they were to be relieved by the guards, began to fall back; but sir John, discovering the mistake, said,” My brave 42d, join your comrades, ammunition is coming, and you have your bayonets." They instantly obeyed, and moved forward. While the general was speaking, a cannon ball struck him to the ground. He raised himself, and sat up with an unaltered countenance, looking most intently at the Highlanders, who were warmly engaged; captain Hardinge assured him the 42d were advancing, upon which his countenance immediately brightened. The general was carried from the field, and on the way he ordered captain Hardinge to report his wound to general Hope, who assumed the command. Many of the soldiers knew that their two generals were carried off the field, yet they continued the fight till they had achieved a decisive and hrilliant victory, over a very superior force.

The account of this disaster was brought to sir David Baird while the surgeons were dressing his shattered arm. He ordered them instantly to desist, and run to attend on sir John Moore. When they arrived, he said to them, “you can be of no service to me, go to the soldiers, to whom you may be useful.” As the soldiers were carrying him slowly along in a blanket, he made them turn him round frequently to view the field of battle, and to listen to the firing, and was pleased when the sound grew fainter. On his arrival at his lodgings he was in much pain, and could speak but little, but at intervals he said to colonel Anderson, who for one-and-twenty years had been his friend and companion in arms “Anderson, you know that I always wished to die in this way.” He frequently asked “are the French beaten” and at length, when he was told they were defeated in every point, he said, te It is a great satisfaction for me to know we have beaten the French.“” I hope the people of England will be satisfied, I hope my country will do me justice." Having mentioned the name of his venerable mother, and the names of some other friends for whose welfare he seemed anxious to offer his last prayers, the power of utterance was lost, and he died in a few minutes without a struggle.

, a French surgeon, was born in Paris in 1697, where his father was surgeon-major to the invalids. Sauveur received his literary education at the college Mazarin, and was instructed in his profession by his father at the hospital of the Invalids. He rose to the mastership of the company of St. Come (which was afterwards erected into the Royal Academy of Surgery), and was appointed demonstrator of surgical operations to that body in 1725. In 1728 he appeared as an author on the subject of lithotomy, and published his “Traite de la Taille au haut appareil, &c.” the high operation being then universally practised by the surgeons of Paris. But, in the following year he was commissioned by the Academy of Sciences to visit London, with a view of witnessing the lateral operation, as performed by Cheselden with so much success; and on his return to Paris, he introduced that mode of cutting for the stone, at the hospital of La Charite, which brought a crowd of pupils to his hospital, and multiplied his professional honours. He was admitted a member of many foreign societies, especially the Royal Society of London, into which he was admitted in 1728, and the academies of Stockholm, Petersburg!!, Florence, Bologna, and Rouen; and was nominated pensioner and professor of anatomy to the Royal Academy of Sciences at home. He held likewise several medical appointments in the army; and in 1751, was honoured with knighthood, of the order of St. Michael. He died in 1773, at the age of seventy-six.

, M. A. and F. S. A. a learned and indefatigable antiquary and biographer, the son of Stephen Morant, was born at St. Saviour’s in the isle of Jersey, Oct. 6, 1700; and, after finishing his education at Abingdon-school, was entered Dec. 16, 1717, of Pembrokecollege, Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. June 10, 1721, and continued till Midsummer 1722; when he was preferred to the office of preacher of the English church at Amsterdam, but never went to take possession. He took the degree of M. A. in 1724, and was presented to the rectory of Shellow Bowells, April 20, 1733; to the vicarage of Bromfield, Jan. 17, 1733-4; to the rectory of Chicknal Smeley, Sept. 19, 1735; to that of St. Mary’s, Colchester, March 9, 1737; to that of Wickham Bishops, Jan. 21, 1742-3; and to that of Aldham, Sept. 14, 1745. All these benefices are in the county of Essex. In 1748 he published his “History of Colchester,” of which only 200 copies were printed at the joint expence of Mr. Bowyer and himself. In 1751, Mr. Morant was elected F. S. A. In February 1768, he was appointed, by the lords subcommittees of the House of Peers, to succeed Mr. Blyke, in preparing for the press a copy of the rolls of parliament; a service to which he diligently attended to his death, which happened Nov. 25, 1770, in consequence of a cold, caught in returning by water from the Temple to Vauxhall, in his way to South Lambeth, where he resided for the convenience of attending to his parliamentary labours; for which, as a native of Jersey, and excellently skilled in the old Norman French, he was particularly well qualified. This work, after his death, devolved on Thomas Astle, esq. F. R. and A. Ss. who had married his only daughter, and who communicated to Mr. Nichols the following exact account of Mr. Morant’s writings, from a list of them drawn up by himself. 1. “An Introduction to the Reading of the New Testament, being a translation of that of Mess, de Beausobre and Lenfant, prefixed to their edition of the New Testament,” 1725, 1726, 4to. 2. “The Translation of the Notes of Mess, de Beausobre and Lenfant on St. Matthew’s Gospel,” 1727, 4to. N. Tindal translated the text printed therewith. 3. “The Cruelties and Persecutions of the Romish Church displayed, &c.” 1728, 8vo, translated into Welsh by Thomas Richards, curate of Coy church in Glamorganshire, 1746, with the approbation of Dr. Gilbert, the bishop of Landaff. 4. “1 epitomised those Speeches, Declarations, &c. which Rapin had contracted out of Rushworth in the Life of King James I. King Charles I. &c.” 1729, 1730. 5. “Remarks on the 19th Chapter of the Second Book of Mr. Selden’s Mare Clausum.” Printed at the end of Mr. Fallens “Account of Jersey,” 1731. 6. “1 compared Rapin’s History with the 20 volumes of Rymer’s Fcedera, and Acta Publica, and all the ancient and modern Historians, and added most of the notes that were in the folio edition,” 1728, 1734. This is acknowledged at the end of the preface in the first volume of Rapin’s History. 7. “Translation of the Notes in the Second Part of the Othman History, by Prince Cantemir,” 1735, fulio. 8. Revised and correeled “The History of England, by way of Question and Answer,” for Thomas Astley, 1737, 12mo. 9. Revised and corrected “Hearne’s Ductor Historicus,” and made large additions thereto, for J. Knapton. 10. “Account of the Spanish Invasion in 1588, by way of illustration to the Tapestry Hangings in the House of Lords and in the King’s Wardrobe. Engraved and published by J. Pine,” 1739, folio. 11. “Geographia Antiqua & Nova; taken partly from Dufresnoy’s ‘ Methode pour etudier la Geographic;’ with Ceilarius’s Maps,” 1742, 4to. 12. “A Summary of the History of England,” folio, and “Lists at the end of Mr. TindaPs Continuation of Rapin’s History, in vol. III. being 55 sheets. Reprinted in three volumes,” 8vo. 13. “The History and Antiquities of Colchester,” 1748, folio; second edition, 1768. 14. “All the Lives in the Biographia Britannica marked C. 1739, 1760, 7 vols. folio. I also composed Stiliingfleet, which hath no mark at the end.” 15. “The History of P:ssex,” 1760, 1768, 2 vols. folio. 16. “I prepared the Rolls of Parliament for the Press” (as far as the 16 Henry IV.) Other works in ms.: 17. “An Answer to the first Part of the Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion, in a Letter to a Friend, 1724. Presented in ms. to Edmund Gibson, bishop of London.” Never printed. This was the beginning of Mr. Morant’s acquaintance with the bishop, whom he acknowledged as his only patron, and who gave him several livings in the county of Essex. 18. “The Life of King Edward the Confessor.” 19. About 150 Sermons.

In 1688 he accompanied his highness in his expedition into England; and, upon his advancement to the throne, was sworn of the privy council, made one of the lords of the bedchamber, and, in order to attend at the coronation as an earl, advanced to the dignity of earl of Monmouth, April 9, 1689, having the clay before been constituted first commissioner of the treasury. He had likewise the command of the royal regiment of horse, which the city of London had raised for the public service, and of which his majesty was colonel: but, in the beginning of Nov. 1690, he was removed from his post in the treasury. On Juno 19, 1697, upon the death of his uncle Henry earl of Peterborough, he succeeded to that title; and, upon the accession of queen Anne, was designed for the West-Indies, being invested with the commission of captain-general and governor of Jamaica, and commander of the army and fleet for that expedition. In March 1705, he was sworn of the privy-council; and the same year declared general and commander in chief of the forces sent to Spain, and joint admiral of the fleet with sir Cloudsley Shovell, of which, the year following, he had the sole command, sir Cloudsley remaining in the British seas. His taking Barcelona with an handful of men, and relieving it afterwards, when greatly distressed by the enemy; his driving out of Spain the duke of Anjou and the French army, which consisted of twenty-five thousand men, though his own troops never amounted to ten thousand; the possession he gained of Catalonia, of the kingdoms of Valencia, Arragon, and Majorca, with part of Murcia and Castile, and thereby giving opportunity to the earl of Galway of advancing to Madrid without a blow; were all astonishing instances of valour, prudence, and conduct in military affairs, and, together with his wit, ready address, and singularities of character, made him be considered as one of the ablest servants of the public, and one of the most extraordinary characters of his time.

, a preacher of some celebrity among the French protestants, was the son of a Scotchman, who was principal of the college at Castres in Languedoc, and born there in 1616. When he was about twenty, he was sent to Geneva to study divinity; and finding, upon his arrival, that the chair of the Greek professor was vacant, he became a candidate for it. and gained it against competitors greatly beyond himself in years. Having exercised this office for about three years, he succeeded Spanheim, who was called away to Leyden, in the functions of divinity-professor and minister of Geneva. As he was a favourite preacher, and a man of great learning, he appears to have excited the jealousy of a party which was formed against him at Geneva. He had, however, secured the good opinion of Salmasius, who procured him the divinity-professor’s place at Middlebourg, together with the parish-church, which occasioned him to depart from Geneva in 1649. The gentlemen of Amsterdam, at his arrival in Holland, offered him the professorship of history, which was become vacant by the death of Vossius; but, not being able to detach him from his engagements to the city of Middlebourg, they gave it to David Blondel, yet, upon a second offer, he accepted it about three years after. In 1654, he left his professorship of history for some time to take a journey into Italy; where it is said he was greatly noticed by the duke of Tuscany. During his stay in Italy, he wrote a beautiful poem upon the defeat of the Turkish fleet by the Venetians, and was honoured with a chain of gold by the republic of Venice. He returned to his charge; and, after some contests with the Walloon synods, went into France, to be ordained minister of the church of Paris. But here he met with many opponents, his character, as is said, being somewhat ambiguous both in regard to faith and morals. He succeeded, however, in being received minister of the church of Paris, although his reputation continued to be attacked by people of merit and consequence, who presented him again to the from whose censures he escaped with great difficulty, and had again to encounter in 1661. About this time he went to England, and on his return six months afterwards, the complaints against him were immediately renewed. He died at Paris, in the duchess of Rohan’s house, in September 1670.

, an eminent English divine and philosopher, was the second son of Alexander More, esq. and born at Grantham in Lincolnshire, Oct. 12, 1614. His parents, being zealous Calvinists, took especial care to breed up their son in Calvinistic principles; and, with this design, provided him with a private master of their own persuasion, under whose direction he continued till he was fourteen years of age. Then, at the instigation of his uncle, who discerned in him very uncommon talents, he was sent to Eton-school, in order to be perfected in the Greek and Latin tongues; carrying with him, a strict charge not to recede from the principles in which he had been so carefully trained. Here, however, he abandoned his Calvinistic opinions, as far as regarded predestination; and, although his uncle not only chid him severely, but even threatened him with correction, for his immature philosophizing in such matters; yet he persisted in his opinion. In 1631, after he had spent three years at Eton, he was admitted of Christ’s college in Cambridge, and, at his own earnest solicitations, under a tutor that was not a Calvinist. Here, as he informs us, “he plunged himself immediately over head and ears in philosophy, and applied himself to the works of Aristotle, Cardan, Julius Scaliger, and other eminent philosophers;” all which he read over before he took his bachelor of arts’ degree, which was in 1635. But these did not answer his expectations; their manner of philosophising did not fall in with his peculiar turn of mind; nor did he feel any of that high delight, which he had promised himself from these studies. This disappointment, therefore, induced him to search for what he wanted in the Platonic writers and mystic divines, such as Marsilius Ficinus, Plotinus, Trismegistus, &c. where his enthusiasm appears to have been highly gratified. Among all the writings of this kind, there was none which so much affected him as the “Theologia Germanica,” once a favourite book with Luther. This was written by one John Taulerus, a Dominican monk, in the fourteenth century; and who, being supposed by the credulity of that age to be favoured with revelations from heaven, was styled the “illuminated divine.” He preached chiefly at Cologne and Strasburg, and died in 1631. His book, written in German, was translated into Latin, first by Surius, and afterwards by Sebastian Castalio; and it went through a great number of editions from 1518 to 1700, when it was printed in French at Amsterdam.

At the age of twenty-one, he had a seat in parliament, and shewed great independence of spirit, in 1503, by opposing a subsidy demanded by Henry VII. with such strength of argument, that it was actually refused by the parliament: on this Mr. Tyler, one of the king’s privycouncil, went presently from the house, and told his majesty, that a beardless boy had defeated his intention. The king resented the matter so highly, that he would not be satisfied, till he had some way revenged it: but as the son, who had nothing, could lose nothing, he devised a causeless quarrel against the father; and, sending him to the Tower, kept him there till he had forced a fine of 100l. from him, for his pretended offence. It happened soon after, that More, coming on a suit to Fox, bishop of Winchester, one of the king’s privy-council, the bishop called him aside, and with much apparent kindness, promised, that if he would be ruled by him, he would not fail to restore him to the king’s favour. It was conjectured, perhaps unjustly, that Fox’s object was to draw from him some confession of his offence, so that the king might have an opportunity of gratifying his displeasure against him. More, however, if this really was the case, had too much prudence to be entrapped, and desired some time to consider the matter. This being granted, he obtained a conference with Mr. Whitford, his familiar friend, then chaplain to the bishop, and afterwards a monk of Sion, and related what the bishop proposed. Whitford dissuaded him from listening to the bishop’s motion: “for,” says he, “my lord and master, to serve the king’s turn, will not stick to consent to the death of his own father.” After receiving this opinion, which Fox does not seem to have deserved, More became so alarmed, as to have some thoughts of visiting the continent. With this view he studied the French tongue, and cultivated most of the liberal sciences, as music, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and history; but the death of Henry VII. rendered the precaution unnecessary, and he again resumed his profession.

, a French advocate, counsellor of the aides of Provence, historiographer of France, and librarian to the queen, was born at St. Florentine, Dec. 20, 1717. Of his early life we have little account, but it appears that he quitted his professional engagements in the country when young, and came to Paris to indulge his taste for study and speculation. Having acquired considerable fame by his writings, he was appointed historiographer of France, and was long employed in collecting and arranging all the charters, historical documents, and edicts and declarations of the French legislature from the time of Charlemagne to the present day. This vast collection being reduced to order was put under his especial care, under the title of “Depot des chartres et de legislation:” whether it was dispersed at the revolution does not appear. He also employed his pen on a variety of subjects, some arising from temporary circumstances, and others suggested probably in the course of his researches. Among these are: 1. “Observateur Holiandais,” a kind of political journal, consisting of forty-five papers, written against the measures of the English court, at what period we know not, as our authority does not specify its date. 2. “Memoire pour servir a l'histoire des Cacouac,” 1757, 12mo, a satire, which was probably of a beneficial tendency, as it created him enemies among the irreligious writers of France. 3. “Memoires pour servir a Phistoire de riotre temps,” 1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Devoirs d'un prince,” 1775, 8vo, reprinted 1782. In this he is said to have exposed the dangers of a corrupt court, and to have predicted its ruin from that torrent of corruption which would one day overwhelm both the flatterers and the flattered. 5. “Principes de morale politique et du droit public, ou Discours sur l'histoire de France,” 1777 1789, 21 vols. 8vo. This, which is his principal work, attracted much attention by the boldness and freedom of some of his opinions, but these he did not carry so far as to enable us to class him among the revolutionary writers; for while some critics in France consider him as never separating the cause of the people from that of the prince, others condemn him for writing under ministerial influence, and inclining to the support of arbitrary power. It was his maxim that every thing should be done for the people, but nothing by them, and that the best state of France would be that in which the people received their laws from the absolute will of a chief. Upon account of these sentiments he is said to have been refused a place in the French academy; yet he was not guillotined, as has been reported, but survived all the horrors of the revolution, and died quietly at Chambouci, near St. Germain-en-Laye, in 1799. His personal character is represented as very amiable. He was a good father, a good husband, and a friend to religion and peace.

is the name of a family well known among the eminent French printers, although we are not sure that they were all closely related. The first, William, an excellent scholar in the early part of the sixteenth century, was corrector of the press of Louis Tilletan, and then succeeded Turnebus as director of the royal printing-office, in 1555. He employed his attention principally on Greek authors, and his editions are much esteemed. He also wrote critical commentaries on “Cicero de finibus,” Paris, 1545, 4to; and compiled a Greek- Latin- and French dictionary. He died in 1564. He appears to have injured his property by the expences of his undertakings, as we find Turnebus addressing a letter to Charles IX. king of France, recommending his widow and children to his majesty’s bounty. The next we meet with, Frederic the elder, a native of Champagne, was king’s printer at Paris, and interpreter to his majesty for the Greek and Latin languages; he composed several works, and died at Paris in 1583, at about the age of 60, leaving a son, known as Frederic Morel the younger, the most celebrated of the family, who succeeded his father, in 1581, as -king’s printer in the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French tongues. He was well versed in these languages, and translated from the Greek, and published, from the manuscripts in the king’s library, a number of authors, particularly the fathers, with annotations of his own. He sacrificed every thing to study, and being informed that his wife was in the act of expiring, he refused to quit his pen till he had finished what he was about, and by that time news was brought him that she was dead; to which he coolly replied, “I am sorry for it she was a good woman.” He died in 1638, at the age of 78. He had a brother Claude, who was nominated king’s printer in 1602, and published valuable editions of several Greek fathers, and other authors, to which he prefixed learned prefaces of his own composition. He died in 1626, while he was engaged in an edition of St. Athanasius and Libanius, which was completed by his son Claude, who succeeded to the business. Charles, another son of Frederic, exercised the same office with credit, which he resigned, in 1639, to his brother Giles. The latter printed an edition of Aristotle, Greek and Latin, in four volumes folio, and the great Bibliotheca Patrum, in 17 volumes.

, a French divine, and the first compiler of the “Great Historical Dictionary,” which still goes by his name, was born at Bargemont, a small village in Provence, in 1643. He was educated in classical learning at Draguignan, under the fathers of the Christian doctrine. He studied rhetoric in the college of Jesuits at Aix, where he also performed his course of philosophy; and thence removing to Lyons, studied divinity. When he was but eighteen, he composed a small allegorical work, entitled “Le pais d'Amour;” and, in 1666, a collection of French poems, which he called “Doux plaisirs de la Poesie:” to which works he put only the first letters of his name, L. M. He applied himself diligently to the Italian and Spanish languages; and this latter enabled him to translate Rodriguez’s treatise on Christian perfection. It was printed at Lyons in 1677, in 3 vols. 8vo, under the title, “Pratique de la Perfection Chrétienne & Religieuse, traduite de l’Espagnol d'Alphonse Rodriguez.” After he had taken orders, he preached on controversial points at Lyons for five years, with great success; and here formed the plan of his “Historical Dictionary,” the first edition of which appeared at Lyons in 1674. In this he professed to collect and digest into alphabetical order, whatever seemed to him curious in sacred and profane history, so that hence information might he had upon all kinds of subjects in a moment: and every body was amazed to see so laborious a work from so young a man.

The same year he was taken into the family of the bishop of Apt, in Provence, whom he attended the year following to Paris; and was soon introduced to the prelates, who held their assembly in St. Germain en Laye, and to the learned men in the metropolis. While he was engaged in the second edition of his “Dictionary,” his friends recommended him to M. de Pompone, secretary of state, who invited him to his house, in 1678. He might have expected great advantages from the patronage of that minister; but his intense application to his “Dictionary” injured his health in such a manner that he never recovered it. M. de Pompone having resigned his post in 1679, Moreri took the opportunity of retiring to his own house, in order to complete his work, but his health declining rapidly, he died July 10, 1680, aged 37. Besides the writings above mentioned, he put the “Lives of the Saints” into more elegant French, and added methodical tables for the use of preachers, with chronological tables; and, in 1671, be published at Lyons the following book, “Relations nouvelles du Levant, ou Traités de la Religion, du Gouvernment, & des Coutumes, des Parses, des Anneniens, & des Gaures, composés par le P. G. D. C. C. (P. Gabriel du Chinon, Capuchin), & donnés au public par le sieur L. M. P. D. E. T.” (that is, Louis Moreri, Pretre, Docteur en Theologie.)

, a learned ecclesiastic, was born at Blois, of protestant parents, in 1591. He was instructed in the belles lettres at Rochelle, and afterwards went to Leyden, where he attained a critical knowledge of the Greek, Latin, and Oriental tongues, and applied himself to philosophy, law, mathematics, and divinity. Returning to France, he went to settle at Paris, where he gained an acquaintance with cardinal du Perron, and was induced by him to embrace the Roman catholic religion. Some time after, he entered into the congregation of the oratory, lately established, and began to make himself known by his learning and his works. In 1626 he published some “Exercita'ions upon the original of Patriarchs and Primates, and the ancient usage of ecclesiastical censures, dedicated to pope Urban VIII.” He undertook, in 1628, the edition of the “Septuagint Bible,” with the version made by Nobilius; and put a preface to it, in which he treats of the authority of the Septuagint; commends the edition of it that had been made at Rome by order of Sixtus V. in 1587, which he had followed; and maintains, that we ought to prefer this version to the present Hebrew text, because this has been, he says, corrupted by the Jews. Before this work was ready to appear, he gave the public, in 1629, a “History,” written in French, of the deliverance of the church by the emperor Constantine, and of the greatness and temporal sovereignty conferred on the Roman church by the kings of France; but this performance was not well received at Rome, and Morin was obliged to promise that he would alter and correct it. He published, soon after, “Exercitations upon the Samaritan Pentateuch;” for the sake of establishing which, he attacks the integrity of the Hebrew text. The Polyglott being then printing at Paris, Morin took upon himself the care of the Samaritan Pentateuch; but his endeavours to exalt this, together with the Greek and Latin versions of the Bible, at the expence of the Hebrew, made him very obnoxious to some learned men; and he was attacked by Hottinger and Buxtorf in particular. This, however, enhanced his merit at the court of Rome; and cardinal Barberini invited him thither, by order of the pope, who received him very graciously, and intended to employ him in the re-union of the Greek to the Roman church, which was then in agitation. He was greatly caressed at Rome, and intimate with Lucas Holstenius, LeoAllatius, and all the learned there. After having continued nine years at Rome, he was recalled, by order of cardinal Richelieu, to France, where he spent the remainder of his life in learned labours, and died of an apoplexy at Paris, Feb. 28, 1659.

, a French physician and botanist, of singular character, was born at Mans, July 11, 1635, of parents eminent for their piety, who, although he was one of a numerous family of sixteen children, omitted nothing in his education which their fortune could supply. Botany was the study that appeared to have taken possession of his inclinations, as soon as the bent of his genius could be discovered. A country person who supplied the apothecaries of the place, was his first master, and was paid by him for his instructions with the little money that he could procure, but he soon made himself master of all this man knew, and was obliged to enlarge his acquaintance with plants, by observing them himself in the neighbourhood of Mans. Having finished his grammatical studies, he travelled on foot to Paris, and after going through the usual course of philosophy, was determined, by his love of botany, to the profession of physic. From this time he engaged in a course of life, which was never exceeded either by the ostentation of*a philosopher, or the severity t)f an anchoret, for he confined himself to bread and water, and at most allowed himself no indulgence beyond fruits. This regimen, extraordinary as it was, had many advantages it preserved his health it gave him an authority to preach diet and abstinence to his patients and it made him rich without the assistance of fortune.

, a learned French protestant, was the son of Isaac Morin, a merchant of Caen, and born in that city, Jan. 1, 1625. Losing his father at three years of age, his mother designed him for trade; but his taste for learning beginning to show itself very early, she determined to give him a liberal education. Accordingly he studied the classics and philosophy at Caeu, and then removed to Sedan, to study theology under Peter du Moulin, who conceived a great friendship for him. He afterwards pursued the same studies under Andrew Rivet, and made a great proficiency in the Oriental languages under Golius. Returning to his country in 164-9, he became a minister of two churches in the neighbourhood of Caen, where he was much distinguished by his uncommon parts and learning, and had several advantageous offers made him from other countries, but he preferred his own. In 1664, he was chosen minister of Caen; and his merits soon connected him in friendship with Huetius, Segrais, Bochart, and other learned townsmen. The revocation of the edict of Nantz, in 1685, obliging him to quit Caen, he retired with his wife and three children to Leyden, but soon after was called to Amsterdam, to be professor of the Oriental tongues in the university there; to which employment was joined, two years after, that of minister in ordinary. He died, after a long indisposition both of body and mind, May 5, 1700.

But there appears very good reason to give him the merit of an invention of much greater importance, that of the steam-engine; a contrivance which, assisted by modern improvements, is now performing what a century ago would have seemed miraculous or impossible. Yet it appears that he has been hitherto entirely unknown to the world at large. In 1699, captain Savery obtained a paten for this invention; aud he has consequently occupied al the honour of the discovery. But in that noble assemblage of Mss. the Harleian collection, now in the British Museum, the strongest testimony appears that the real inventor was Samuel Morland. That the first hint of the idnd was thrown out by the marquis of Worcester, in his “Century of Inventions,” is allowed; but obscurely, like the rest of his hints. But Morland wrote a book upon the subject; in which he not only shewed the practicability of the plan, but went so far as to calculate the power of different cylinders. This book is now extant in manuscript, in the above collection. It was presented to the French king in 1683, at which time experiments were actually shewn at St. Germain’s. The author dates his invention in 1682; consequently seventeen years prior to Savery’s patent. It seems, however, to have remained obscure both in France and England, till 1699, when Savery, who probably knew more of Morland’s invention than he owned, obtained a patent; and in the very same year, M. Amontons proposed something similar to the French academy, probably as his own.

, lord of Plessis Marly, an illustrious French protestunt, privy-counsellor of Henry IV. and governor of Saumur, was born at Buhi or Bishuy, in the French Vexin, in 1549. He was descended from an ancient and noble family, which had, in course of time, divided itself into several brandies, and produced many great aiKi eminent men. His father, James de Morn ay, had done great services to the royal family in the wars; but in the time of peace led a very retired life, and was much attacnecl to the religion of his country He designed Philip for the church, as he was a younger son, with a view to succeed his uncle Bertin de Mornay, who was dean of Beauvais and abbe of Saumur, and who had promised to resign those preferments to him; but this plan was rendered abortive by the death of the uncle. In the mean time his mother, who was the daughter of Charles du Bee Cre^pin, vice-admiral of France, and chamberlain to Francis II. was secretly a protestant, and had taken care to inspire her son insensibly with her own principles. His father died when he was not more than ten years of age; and his mother, making open profession of the protestant religion in 1561, set up a lecture in her own house, xvhich confirmed hirn in it. His literary education was all the while carrying on with the utmost care and circumspection he had masters provided for him in all languages and sciences and the progress he made in all was what might be expected from his very uncommon parts and application.

In 1596 he published a piece entitled “The just Procedures of those of the Reformed Religion;” in which he removes the imputation of the present troubles and dissentions from the protestants, and throws the blame on those who injuriously denied them that liberty, which their great services had deserved. In 1598 he published his treatise “upon the Eucharist;” which occasioned the conference at Fontainbleau in 1600, between Du Perron, then bishop of Evreux, afterwards cardinal, and M. du Plessis; and raised his reputation and credit among the protestants to so great a height, that he was called by man)* “the Protestant Pope.” In 1607 he published a work entitled “The Mystery of Iniquity, or the History of the Papacy;” which was written, as most of his other works were, first in French, and then translated into Latin. Here he shews by what gradual progress the popes have risen to that ecclesiastical tyranny, which was foretold by the apostles; and what opposition from time to time all nations have given them. This seems to have been a work of prodigious labour; yet it is said, that he was not above nine months in composing it. About this time, also, he published “An Exhortation to the Jews concerning the Messiah,” in which he applies a great deal of Hebrew learning very judiciously; and for this he was complimented by the elder Buxtorf. There are several other lesser pieces of his writing; but his capital work, and for which he has been most distinguished, is his book “Upon the Truth of the Christian Religion;” in which he employs the weapons of reason and learning with great force and skill against Atheists, Epicureans, Heathens, Jews, Mahometans, and other Infidels, as he tells us in his title. This book was dedicated to Henry IV. while he was king of Navarre only, in 1582; and, the year after, was translated by himself into Latin. “As a Frenchman,” says he, in his preface tp the reader, “I have endeavoured to serve my own country first; and, as a Christian, the universal kingdom of Christ next.” Baillet observes, with justness, that “the Protestants of France had great reason to be proud of having such a man as Mornay du Plessis of their party; a gentleman, who, besides the nobleness of his birth, was distinguished by many fine qualities both natural and acquired.”

, a distinguished French writer in the seventeenth century, to be classed with those whose scepticism and indelicacies have disgraced their talents, was born at Paris in 1588, of a family of gentlemen of the long robe. He was himself educated for the bar, and long held the office which his father resigned to him, of substitute procurator-general to the parliament; but his love of polite literature induced him to desert his profession, and employ his time in study and writing. By this he acquired such reputation as to be received into the French academy in 1639, of which he was accounted one of the ablest members. When a tutor was to be appointed for Louis XIV. in 1644, it was generally supposed that La Alothe le Vayer would have been the man, and it certainly was so intended by cardinal Richelieu, both on account of an excellent work he had published on the education of the dauphin, and the reputation his other writings had acquired to him; but the queen having determined not to bestow the place on a married man> the design was dropt. It is probable that the queen’s object, in refusing a married man, was to prefer an ecclesiastic, of whose religious principles she might be secure; for those of Le Vayer were already more than suspected by his work De la Vertu de Payens."

Having thus failed in obtaining the first situation in which a man of letters could be placed, he succeeded, in 1647, in being appointed to what might be considered as the second, that of preceptor to Philip, then duke of Anjou, and afterwards duke of Orleans, the king’s brother. He had also conferred on him the titles of historiographer of France and counsellor of state. By his first wife he had an only son, who died in 1664, in the thirty-fifth year of his age. His wife also being dead long before, he is said to have been so much afflicted at the loss of his son, as to determine to marry again, which he did the same year, 1664, at the age of seventy-six He died in 1672, aged eightyfour. He was a voluminous writer, and upon all subjects, ancient, modern, sacred and profane. We cannot, perhaps, to some of our readers, give a better idea of his works, than by comparing them to those of Bayle. We find in them the same scepticism and the same indecencies; and on this account Bayle expatiates on his character with congenial pleasure. In his private character, he was somewhat of a humourist, but his moral conduct was more correct than might have been expected from his writings. He is mentioned hy Guy Patin as a Stoic, who would neither praise nor be praised, and who followed his own fancies and caprices without any regard to the opinions of the world, and his dress and usual demeanour distinguished him from other men. In the court he lived like a philosopher, immersed in books, simple and regular in his manner of living, and void of ambition and avarice. His treatise which we have mentioned, “On the Virtue of Pagans/' was answered by Arnauld. La Mothers bookseller complaining that his book did not sell,” I know a secret,“said the author,” to quicken the sale:" he procured an order from government for its suppression, which was the means of selling the whole edition. His works were collected in two volumes folio; and there was an edition, we believe the last, printed at Dresden, in 1756, in 14 vols. 8vo, so lowpriced, in the French catalogues, that there seems now little value placed on them.

, an ingenious French writer, was born at Paris, Jan. 17, 1672. He was educated in a seminary of Jesuits, and afterwards entered on the study of the law, which he quitted for the stage, as in his opinion affording the more brilliant prospect. His first attempt, however, a comedy, miscarried, and he felt the disgrace so acutely as to throw himself into the celebrated monastery of La Trappe, where he fancied he could comply with its austerities; but after a few months he returned to the world, and produced some operas and pastorals, which had considerable success. His lyric efforts were particularly applauded, and he now published a volume of odes; but in these, says D'Alembert, “the images are scanty, the colouring feeble, and the harmony often neglected.” Dr. Warton had pronounced, long before, that these odes, although highly praised by Sanadon, and by Fontenelle, were fuller of delicate sentiment, and philosophical reflection, than of imagery, figures, and poetry. There are particular stanzas eminently good, but not one entire ode. So far the French and English critics seem to agree. We learn also, from D'Alembert, that La Motte’s odes were soon effaced by those of the celebrated Rousseau, who, with less wit, perhaps, than La Motte, had superior qualifications for the higher poetry. Yet, when these rivals became competitors for a seat in the academy in 1710, La Motte was preferred, from his having friends who loved him, while Rousseau, from his repulsive temper, did not possess one. La Motte succeeded Corneille in the academy, and, like him, was at this time nearly blind. He very ingeniously made use of this calamity, in his discourse at his reception, to interest his auditors. After having spoken of the merit of his predecessor, he proceeded “You have beheld him faithful to your duties till extreme old age, infirm as he was, and already deprived of sight. The mention of this circumstance makes rne feel the condition to which I am myself reduced. What age ravished from my predecessor, I have lost from my youth. I must, however, confess, that this privation of which I complain, will no longer serve me as an excuse for ignorance you, gentlemen, have restored me my sight you, by associating me with yourselves, have laid all books open to me; and, since I am able to hear you, I no longer envy the happiness of those who can read.” La Motte soon after became totally deprived of sight. He next ventured to appear on a theatre more worthy of a poet’s ambition, and produced the tragedy of the “Maccabees,” concealing his name. The critics found a great deal of merit in it while this concealment lasted and some went so far as to conceive it a posthumous work of Racine but when he discovered himself, they withdrew their praises, or changed them into censures; and the tragedy, being really of the mediocre kind, disappeared from the stage. It was followed by others, of which “Ines de Castro” obtained a permanent place on the stage, notwithstanding many attacks from wit, malice, and arrogance; all which he bore with good-humour. He was one day in a coffee-house, in the midst of a swarm of literary drones, who were abusing his work without knowing the author. He patiently heard them a long time in silence, and then called out to a friend who accompanied him, “Let us go and yawn at the fiftieth representation of this unfortunate piece.” At another time, when told of the numerous criticisms made on his tragedy, “It is true,” said he, “it has been much criticised, but with tears.”

He wrote also six comedies, of which the “Magnifique” still pleases by the ingenuity of its details, and the charms of its style. All his cornddies are written in prose: and when he produced his tragedy of “Œdipus,” after having first written it in verse, he turned it into prose, which gave occasion to the publication of his system of prose tragedies, so ingeniously supported, and so warmly refuted; the result of the controversy was, that all the menof let ers in France deckled in favour of verse. In 1714, he published his translation of Homer’s Iliad, in which he was still less successful then in his anti- poetical paradoxes. He presumed also to write against Homer, and was answered by madame Dacier; but by this, says D'Alembert, he offered Homer a less injury than by translating him into French verse. He had attacked the subject, the disposition-, and the entire plan of the Iliad, with much ingenuity, but he did not render sufficient justice to the sublime beauties of Homer, and still less was he able to transfer these beauties to his version. He substituted a bare skeleton to the monster he meant to combat; and as he had raised the public laughter against his adversaries, he exposed himself to their shafts by an unskilful travesty of the object of their worship. The powerful diversion he afforded them by this mistake lost him almost all his advantages; and the French Iliad consoled madam Dacier for the ridicule which had been thrown upon her by the answer of la Motte to her criticisms, which was undoubtedly a very witty and ingenious defence of a bad cause. Some years after, in 1719, he produced his “Fables,” which were praised for invention and moral, while it was allowed that they were in other respects not to be compared with those of La Fontaine. Besides these he wrote, at different times, many other species of poetry, eclogues, cantatas, psalms, hymns, &c. of which, as well as his other productions, D'Alembert says, “he wished to make verses, and felt that nature tiad not made him a poet he wished to compose odes, and felt that he had more good sense than warmth, more reason than enthusiasm; he wished to write tragedies, and saw himself at an immense distance from Corneille and Racine; he wished to produce fables, and felt that his genius, the character of which was artful refinement, would in vain aim at the charming simplicity of la Fontaine.” If, however, La Motte’s verses are not master-pieces of poetry, his prosewritings may be regarded as models of style. The talent of writing prose well is a merit that scarcely any French poet possessed before la Motte. His answer to madame Dacier, entitled “Reflections on Criticism,” and his prefaces to his works, are master-pieces of elegance. All his academical discourses, delivered on different occasions, were excellent; but the most applauded was his eulogy on Lewis XIV. pronounced at a public sitting after the death of that prince, which, of all the funeral orations made on him, is the only one which is not yet entirely forgotten.

, a celebrated French lady, was born in Normandy about 1615. She was the daughter of a gentleman who belonged to the court; and her wit and amiable manners recommended her to Anne of Austria, who kept her constantly near her. Cardinal Richelieu, who was always jealous of the favourites of this princess, having disgraced her, she retired, with her mother, to Normandy, where she married Nicolas Langlois, lord of Motteviile, an old man, who died in about two years. After the death of Richelieu, Anne of Austria, having been declared regent, recalled her to court. Here gratitude induced her to write the history of this princess, which has been printed several times under the title of “Memoires pour servir a I‘Histoire d’Anne d' Austriche” in 5 and 6 volumes, 12mo. These Memoirs describe the minority of Lewis XIV. and are written in a natural, unaffected style; and, says Gibbon, it is a proof of the author’s sincerity, that though she had a very high opinion of her mistress, the candour with which she relates facts, shews us Anne of Austria as she really was. Madame de Motteviile died at Paris, Dec. 29, 1689, aged seventyfive. There was a very great confidence and even intimacy between Henrietta, the widow of our Charles I. and madame de Motteviile.

The next opportunity which Du Moulin had to give his advice, was attended with more serious consequences to him. The council of Trent had just broken up, anrl the question was, whether its proceedings should be recognized in France. The papal ambassadors, and those of the most powerful princes in Europe, were for this measure but it was opposed by the leading members of the French king’s administration, who were of opinion that it would render those civil dissentions which had been in some degree quieted, and that the council of Trent had made certain regulations contrary to the liberties and royal privileges of France, which they could by no means approve. In a council held at Fontainbleau, Feb. 27, 1564-, this subject occasioned a very warm altercation between the chancellor Hospital and the cardinal of Lorraine; and chiefly by the persuasive influence of the former, it was determined that the proceedings of the council of Trent should not be published in France. Du Moulin, being solicited for his advice on this occasion, published his “Conseil sur le fait du, Concile de Trente,” Lyons, 1564, 8vo, in which he takes a very enlarged view of all the decrees of that memorable council, and shews them to be at variance with the opinions of the fathers of the church, and hostile to the liberties of France. The warmth of his temper leading him to use the plainest expressions, as was the custom with the writers of the age, he afforded ample ground for a fresh persecution by his enemies. They now accused him of exciting sedition, and disturbing the public tranquillity, and were so successful in these misrepresentations, that some of those who were the first to advise him to publish the above work, now gave him up, and even the parliament with all the esteem which most of the members entertained for him, was obliged to issue an order to imprison him, nor did he recover his liberty but upon condition that he should print nothing without the king’s permission. Scarcely had he escaped from this danger, when he was attacked by the protestant party, who forgetting his services in the common cause against the see of Rome, could never forgive him for having deserted the profession he once made of being an adherent of Calvin, and ordered his works to be burnt at Geneva. He had indeed about this time given them more reason than they ever had before, by representing their ministers as coming into France for no other purpose than to introduce a spirit of discord and insubordination, and under pretence of an imaginary liberty, to reduce the constitution of the kingdom to a republican form.

, a very celebrated French protestant minister, and of the same family with Charles da Moulin, was born at Vexin Oct. 18, 1568. He imbibed the rudiments of literature at Sedan; and, when he arrived at twenty years of age, was sent to finish his education in England, where he became a member of Christ college in Cambridge. After a residence of four years in England, he went to Holland in the retinue of the duke of Wirtemberg, but was shipwrecked in his passage, and lost all his books and baggage. This occasioned his elegant poem entitled “Votiva Tabula,” which did him great credit, and procured him many friends. The French ambassador became one of his patrons (for Henry IV. at that time sent protestant ambassadors into protestant countries), and recommended him to the queen- mother, by whose interest he obtained the professorship of philosophy at Leyden, then vacant. This he held for five or six years; and among other disciples, who afterwards became celebrated, be had Hugo Grotius. He read lectures upon Aristotle, and disciplined his scholars in the art of disputing; of which he made himself so great a master, that he was enabled to enter with great spirit and success into the controversies with the catholics. Scaliger was very much his patron; and when Du Moulin published his Logic at Ley. den in 1596, said of the epistle prefatory, “haec epistola non est hujus sevi.” He taught Greek also in the divinity schools, in which he was extremely well skilled, as appears from his book entitled “Novitas Papismi,” where he exposes cardinal Perron’s ignorance of that language.

, a French mathematician, born in the province of Auvergne about 1643, became a professor of rhetoric and mathematics in different seminaries belonging to the Jesuits, and was at length appointed professor- royal at the university of Toulouse. He died, in 1713, a sacrifice to his exertions in the cause of humanity, during the dreadful pestilential disorder which then raged at Toulouse. To very profound as well as extensive erudition, he united the most polished and amiable manners, and the most ardent piety, which made him zealous in his attempts to reform the age in which he lived. He was a considerable writer: his most celebrated pieces are, “New Elements of Geometry, comprised in less than fifty Propositions;” “A Parallel between Christian Morality and that of the Ancient Philosophers;” “An Explanation of the Theology of the Pythagoreans, and of the other learned Sects in Greece, for the Purpose of illustrating the Writings of the Christian Fathers” and “A Treatise on French Poetry.”

, a celebrated German traveller and writer, was born in 1705, in Herforden, in Westphalia, and was educated at the age of seventeen at llinteln and Leipsic, at which last place he so distinguished himself, that professor Mencke obtained for him the place of adjunct in the historical class of the academy founded at Petersburgh by Peter the Great. In tbat city he was some time employed in teaching Latin, geography, and history, and as assistant secretary to the institution. In 1728, he was made under-keeper of the imperial library, and in 1730 he was chosen professor of history. He now applied for leave of absence, in order to gratify his wish of seeing foreign countries. In the year 1731 he visited London, and was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and after his return to Petersburgh he was appointed to accompany Gmelin and De l'Isle de la Croyere on their travels through Siberia, which occupied ten years, during which they travelled 4480 German miles, or more than three times that number of English miles. An account of their travels was published by Gmelin, in four volumes, 8vo. After this, Mullef, who was not rewarded in any degree equal to the labours and sufferings which he had undergone, undertook, at the desire of prince Jusupof, “A Dissertation on the Trade of Siberia,” which, though written, or at least begun, in 1744, was not published till 1750, and then only the first part. In 1747, he was appointed historiographer of the Russian empire, and in 1754 he was nominated by the president to be the secretary of the Academy of Sciences, and was employed in superintending the publication of their transactions, and in other literary undertakings. In 1763, he was appointed director ^of the school for foundlings, established by Catherine at Moseow, and in 1766, he was appointed keeper of the archives in that city, with an additional salary of 1000 roubles. From this period till his death, which took place in 1783, he devoted himself entirely to the pursuits of literature, having been previously raised to the rank of counsellor of state, and invested with the order of Wladimir. Mr. Coxe, in his Travels, vol. I. in speaking of Muller, who was then living, says, “He collected during his travels the most ample materials for the history and geography of this extensive empire, which was scarcely known to the Russians themselves before his valuable researches were given to the world in various publications. His principal work is” A Collection of Russian Histories,“in nine volumes octavo, printed at different intervals at the press of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. The first part came out in 1732, and the last in 1764. This storehouse of information pnd literature in regard to the antiquities, history, geography, and commerce of Russia, and many of the neighbouring countries, conveys the most indisputable proofs of the author’s learning, diligence, and fidelity. To this work the accurate and indefatigable author has successively added many other valuable performances upon similar subjects, both in the German and Russian languages, which elucidate various parts in the history of this empire.” Mr. Coxe adds, that he spoke and wrote the German, Russian, French, and Latin tongues, with surprizing fluency; and read the English, Dutch, Swedish, Danisn, and Greek, with great facility His memory was surprising; and his accurate acquaintance with the minutest incidents of the Russian annals almost surpassed belief. His collection of state papers and manuscripts were all arranged in the exactest order, and classed into several volumes, distinguished by the names of those illustrious personages to whom they principally relate; such as Peter L, Catherine I. Menzikof, Osterman, &c."

, a Spanish historian, was born in 1745 at Museros, a village near Valentia, and studied in the university of Madrid. From his earliest years he discovered a taste superior to what was inculcated in the usual course of academic studies, and made uncommon progress in the sciences and in polite literature. At the age of twenty-two, he wrote prefaces to the Rhetoric of Louis of Grenada, and the Logic of Vernei, in both which he displayed great erudition. He was afterwards, doubtless from having turned his thoughts to that branch, appointed by government cosmographer of the Indies, and filled this office with distinguished ability, until the prime minister Galvez, by order of the king, employed him on a history of America. This undertaking he commenced in 1779, and obtained access, not only to all the papers and documents preserved in the archives of the India department at Madrid, and in the Escurial, but likewise, on a farther recommendation of his Catholic majesty, to all the public and private libraries at Simancas, Seville, Salamanca, Valladolid, Grenada, &c. &c. and even in the Torre di tombo at Lisbon, and other places to which preceding writers had not obtained access. This research occupied above five years, in the course of which he collected a vast mass, in one hundred and thirty volumes, of original and hitherto undescribed documents, letters of Columbus, Pizarro, Ximenes, &c. from which he composed his “Historia del nuovo Mondo,” published at Madrid, 1795, in fol. and which is known in this country by a translation published in 1797, in one vol. 8vo. This volume is divided into six books; in the first two the author describes the imperfect state of geographical knowledge among the ancients the accessions which it received in the middle ages the voyages of discovery made by the French, Portuguese, and Spaniards, previously to the time of Columbus, with the circumstances that produced his conjectures respecting the existence of a new continent, &c. The third and remaining books commence and continue the history of his discoveries to 1500. More of this work, however, has not appeared. The author, we are told, had finished nearly three books of the second volume, at the time of his death, July 19, 1799, and we do not find that he has had a successor, for which perhaps the subsequent political state of his country may account. Before this he acquired great reputation by his other works; namely, 1. “De recto philosophies recentis in theologia 'usu, dissertatio,” Valent. 1767. 2. “De scriptorum gentilium lectione, et profanarum disciplinarum studiis ad Christianaepietatisnormam exigendis,” ibid. 1768. 3. “Institutiones philosophies,” ibid. 1768. 4. “A Treatise on the Philosophy of Aristotle,” &c. 1768, &C.

, a learned Italian antiquary, and one of the most voluminous writers of his age and country, was born at Vignola in the duchy of Modena, Oct. 21, 1672. He was educated at Modena, and his inclination leading him to the church, as a profession, he went through the regular courses of philosophy and divinity, but without neglecting polite literature, to which he was early attached. Bacchiiri recommended the ecclesiastical writers to his attention, and he at length became so devoted to general reading, as to pay little attention to his destined profession. In 1695, the knowledge of books which he had accumulated, procured him the place of one of the librarians of the celebrated Ambrosian collection at Milan; and although he had by this time received his doctor’s degree and been admitted into orders, it was now that he entered upon that course of study and research which distinguished him in future life. His first publication was vols. I and II. of his “Anecdota Latina,” printed at Milan in 1697 and 1698, 4to. In 1700 he went to Modena to take possession of the office of keeper of the archives of the house of Este, and that of librarian to the duke of Modena, his patron. Here he remained for some years, with the exception of an interruption occasioned by the war in 1702, when the French took possession of Modena. The same year that he came here he was editor of “Vita et Rime di Carlo M. Maggi,” printed at Milan, 5 vols. and in 1703 published his “Primi disegni della Republica Letteraria d'ltalia;” this was followed by “Prolegomena, &c. in librum, cui titulus, Elucidatio Augustiniange de divina gratia doctrinae,” Cologn, 1705; “Lettere ai generosi e cortesi Letterati d'ltalia,” Venice, 1705; “Delia Perfetta Poesia Italiana, &c.” 2 vols. a very ingenious dissertation on Italian poetry, which occasioned a prolonged controversy, now no longer interesting. Two editions, however, were afterwards published, with critical notes by Salvini, the one in 1724, 2 vols. 4to. and the other, which is esteemed the best, in 1748. He published also at Bologna in 1707, “Lettera in disesa del March. G. G. Orsi;” and “Introduzione alle paci private,” Modena, 1708. In the same year he first began to write tinder the assumed name of Lamindo Pritanio, “Riflessioni SDpra il buon gusto, &c.” of which a second part appeared at Naples in 1715. After this appeared, under his proper name, “Osservazioni sopra una lettera intitolata, II dominio temporale della sede Apostolica sopra la citta di Comacchio,” &c. Modena, 1708; and “Epistola ad Jo. Albert. Fabricium,” 1709. In this last year he published another of his valuable collections under the title of “Anecdota Grseca,” Gr. & Lat. 4to, which, as well as his “Anecdota Latina,” (completed in 4 vols. at Padua, 1713) were taken from Mss. in the Ambrosian library. He published also before 1715 some other works of lesser value, which, however, showed how intense his labours were, for he had accepted of some preferments in the church, the duties of which he performed with great assiduity, and wai particularly distinguished for his humane care of the poor, who indeed shared the greater part of the profits of his benefices, and the rest went to the repairs or furniture of the churches under his care.

His works were collected, and printed in 5 vols. 8vo, at Verona, in 1727 30; a selection from them by Checotius, in 1741 but the best edition is that of the learned Ruhnkenius, printed at Leyden, in 1789, 4 vols. 8vo. They consist of orations, poems, epistles, various readings, and translations of Greek authors, Aristotle in particular. He composed with great purity and elegance; and he pronounced his orations with a grace which charmed his hearers. His poems, which have been highly applauded, were, as already noticed, published under the title of tf Juvenilia," at Paris, in 1552, and were reprinted in Latin and French, in 1682. He was the editor of several of the classics, which he enriched with notes. All his works are written in elegant Latin, but they are now thought to be more creditable to his judgment than his genius.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was born at Clooniquin, in the county of Roscommon, in Ireland, Dec. 27, 1727. His father, Richard Murphy, who was a merchant, perished in 1729, in one of his own trading-vessels for Philadelphia, probably in a violent storm, but no intelligence of the ship, or any of its passengers or crew, ever transpired. From this time the care of the subject of the present article devolved upon his mother, who, in 1735, removed, with her children, to London but Arthur was sent, at the age of ten, to the English college at St. Omer’s, where he remained six years and made very extraordinary proficiency in Greek and Latin, a love for which he retained all his life, and particularly improved his acquaintance with the Latin classics. On his return to England, in 1744, he resided with his mother till August 1747, when he was sent to Cork, to an uncle Jeffery French, in whose counting-house he was employed till April 1749. After this his uncle destined him to go to Jamaica to overlook a large estate which he possessed in that island; but his inclination was averse to business of every kind, and he returned to his mother in London, in 1751. Here he either first contracted, or began at least to indulge, his predominant passion for the theatre, although placed in the counting-house of Ironside and Belchier, bankers. In October 1752, he published the first number of “The Gray’s-Inn Journal,” a weekly paper, which he continued for two years, and which served to connect him much with dramatic performers and writers, as well as to make him known to the public as a wit and a critic. On the death of his uncle, he was much disappointed in not finding his name mentioned in his will, and the more so as he had contracted debts, in faith of a good legacy, to the amount of three hundred pounds. In this embarrassed state, by the advice of the celebrated Foote, he went on the stage, and appeared for the first time in the character of Othello. Jn one season, by the help of strict economy, he paid off his debts, and had at the end of the year four hundred pounds in his pocket. With this sum he determined to quit the stage, on which, as a performer, notwithstanding the advantages of a fine person, and good judgment, he made no very distinguished figure, and never used to be more offended than when reminded of this part of his career.

His health continued to decline; but his mental faculties remained to the last very little impaired; he was glad to receive visitors, and talk upon the events of the time. Of the French revolution he is reported to have said, that it was an extraordinary event and, as it was without example, so it was without a prognostic no conjectures could be formed of its consequences. He lived to March 20, 1793, and departed this life in the eightyninth year of his age. He left no children; and the earldom, which was granted again by a new patent, in 1792, descended on his nephew, lord Stormont, together with his immense fortune. His will was dated April 17, 1782; it was written in his own hand, upon little more than a half sheet of paper. It begins thus: “When it shall please Almighty God to call me to that state, to which, of all I now enjoy, I can carry only the satisfaction of my own conscience, and a full reliance on his mercy, through Jesus Christ: I desire that my body may be interred as privately as may be; and, out of respect for the place of my early education, I should wish it to be in Westminster abbey.” He was buried, about nine o'clock in the morning of March 28, in the same vault with his countess, who died April 10, 1784, in Westminster-abbey, between the late earl of Chatham and lord Robert Manners.

, an eminent mathematician and natural philosopher, was born at Leyden in 1692. He appears first to have studied medicine, as he took his doctor’s degree in that faculty in 1715, but natural philosophy afterwards occupied most of his attention. After visiting London, where he became acquainted with Newton and Desaguliers, probably about 1734, when he was chosen a fellow of the royal society, he returned home, and was appointed professor of mathematics and natural philosophy at Utrecht, which he rendered as celebrated for those sciences as it had long been for law studies. He was afterwards placed in the same chair at Leyden, and obtained great and deserved reputation throughout all Europe. Besides being elected a member of the Paris academy and other learned bodies, the kings of England, Prussia, and Denmark, made him tempting offers to reside in their dominions; but he preferred his native place, where he died in 1761. He published several works in Latin, all of them demonstrating his great penetration and accuracy: 1. “Disputatio de Aeris praesentia in humoribus animalibus,” Leyd. 1715, 4to. 2. “Epitome Elementorum Pbysico-mathematicorum,” ib. 1729, 4to. 3. “Physicx, experimentales, et geometries Dissertationes: ut et Ephemerides meteorologicae Utrajectenses,” ibid. 1729, 4to. 4. “Tentamina Experinientorurn naturalium, in academia del Cimento, ex Ital. in Lat. conversa,” ibid. 1731, 4to. 5. “Elementa Physicsc,” 1734, 8vo, translated into English by Colson, 1744, 2 vols. 8vo. His “Introduction to Natural Philosophy,” which he began to print in 1760, was completed and published at Leyden in 1762 by M. Lulofs, after the death of the author. There is a French translation, of Paris, 1769, 3 vols. 4to. Musschenbroeck is also the author of several papers, chiefly on meteorology, printed in the volumes of the “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences” for 1734, 1735, 1736, 1753, 1756, and 1760.

, so called from the village of Nancel, his native place, between Noyon and Soissons, was born in 1539. He studied at the college de Presles at Paris, and was employed to teach Greek and Latin there when scarcely eighteen years of age, probably by the interest of Peter Ramus, principal of the college, who conceived very highly of his talents. He was afterwards proKssor in the university of Douay, where he made two pei.:ches “On the excellence and importance of the Greek Language.” Being invited to return to Paris, he was again professor in the college de Presles, and took a doctor’s degree in physic. He went afterwards to practise at Soissons; but principally at Tours, which he found an eligible situation. He was lastly appointed physician to the abbey of Fontevrauld, in 1587; and died there in 1610, leaving a son, who wrote some sacred tragedies. His principal works are, 1. “Stichologia Grseca Latinaque informanda et reformanda,” 8vo. In this work he endeavours to subject the French poetry to the rules of the Greek and Latin, for the purpose, as he says, of rendering it more difficult and less common; a whimsical project, which, it may be supposed, did not succeed. 2. A treatise “On the Plague,” 8vo. 3. “Tr. de Deo, de immortalitate animse contra Galenum, et de sede anima? in corpore,” 8vo. 4. “Declamationuin Liber, eas complectens orationes quas vel ipse juvenis habuit ad populum, vel per discipulos recitavit,” &c. 8vo. 5. “Petri Kami vita,” 8vo. This Life is curious and interesting, and the best of Nancel’s works.

, a French historian, who flourished in the fourteenth century, was a Benedictine monk of the abbey of St. Denis, and supposed to have taken his name from the place where he was born. He wrote the lives of St. Lewis, and of Philip le Hardi, and two chronicles; the first from the creation to 1300, the second a chronicle generally of the kings of France. The lives were printed, for the first time, in Pithou’s collection in 1596, and the chronicle from 1113, in the “Spicilegium” of D. Luc d' Archery. The life of St. Lewis was again reprinted along with Joinville’s history of the same prince, with a glossary, &c. by J. B. Mellot, Ch. Sallier, and J. Capperonier, at Paris in 1761, fol.

He continued, however, to serve his country upon many considerable occasions, and was appointed by the senate to write the “History of Venice;” an employment which is given only to the principal nobility of that republic. He published the first part; and the second was in the press, when he died, Nov. 5, 1678, in his 63d year. His “History of Venice” was much esteemed, and translated into French. There is an English translation of the first part, by sir Robert Honey wood, 1673, fol. There are some partialities in his history, and his style is considerably embarrassed with parentheses, but it is still a favourite with his countrymen. He also published “An Account of his second Ambassage into France in 1660,” and composed other pieces, which are extant in manuscript only. Several authors have spoken advantageously of him.

, a celebrated protestant divine, born in 1511, at Straubingue, in Bavaria, acquired considerable celebrity by his satirical Latin verses against several customs of the catholic church, and died in 1578. His most celebrated poem is entitled “Regnum papisticum,” 1553, and 1559, 8vo. The former is the most rare edition, but not so complete as that of 1559, which sometimes contains two other pieces, the “Sylva Carminum,” and “Sylvula Carminum” “Pamachius Tragedia,” 1538, 8vo “Incendia sive Pyrgopolinices Tragedia,” 1538, 8vo; “Agricultura sacra,” 1551, 8vo; “Hieremias Tragedia,” 1551, 8vo; “Mercator Tragedia,” 1560, 8vo. There are two editions of the French translation of the “Converted Merchant,” 1558, 8vo, and 1561, 12mo, and a third 1591, 12mo, in which is Beza’s “Comedie du Pape malade.” All the above are scarce, and highly prized by collectors. Naogeorge also left commentaries on St. John’s Epistles, and several other works.

In this situation things were when Nash first came into the city; and, hearing the threat of this physician, he humourously assured the people, that if they would give him leave, he would charm away the poison of the doctor’s toad, as they usually charmed the venom of the tarantula, by music. He therefore was immediately empowered to set up a band of music against the doctor’s reptile; the company very sensibly increased, Nash triumphed, and the sovereignty of the city was decreed to him by every rank of people. None could possibly conceive a person more fit to fill this employment than Nash: he had some wit, but it was of that sort which is rather happy than permanent. He was charitable himself, and generally shamed his betters into a similitude of sentiment, if they were not naturally so before. His first care, when made master of the ceremonies, or king of Bath, as it is called, was to promote a music subscription, of one guinea each, for a band, which was to consist of six performers, who were to receive a guinea a week each for their trouble. He allowed also two guineas a week for lighting and sweeping the rooms, for which he accounted to the subscribers by receipt. By his direction, one Thomas Harrison erected a handsome assembly-house for these purposes. A better band of music was also procured, and the former subscription of one guinea was raised to two. Harrison had three guineas a week for the room and candles, and the music two guineas a man. The money Nash received and accounted for with the utmost exactness and punctuality. The balls, by his direction, were to begin at six, and to end at eleven. Nor would he suffer them to continue a moment longer, lest invalids might commit irregularities, to counteract the benefit of the waters. The city of Bath, by such assiduity, soon became the theatre of summer amusements for all people of fashion; and the manner of spending the day there must amuse any but such as disease or spleen had made uneasy to themselves. In this manner every amusement soon improved under Nash’s administration. The magistrates of the city found that it was necessary and useful, and took every opportunity of paying the same respect to his fictitious royalty, that is generally extorted by real power. His equipage was sumptuous, and he used to travel to Tunbridge in a postchariot and six greys, with out-riders, footmen, French horns, and every other appendage of expensive parade. He always wore a white hat; and, to apologize for this singularity, said he did it purely to secure it from being stolen; his dress was tawdry, and not perfectly genteel; he might be considered as a beau of several generations; and, in his appearance, he, in some measure, mixed the fashions of a former age with those of his own. He perfectly understood elegant expence, and generally passed his time in the very best company, if persons of the first distinction deserve that title.

, a learned French writer and bibliographer, was born at Paris in the beginning of February 1600, and having discovered a strong inclination in his earliest years for reading, his parents determined to give him every benefit of education. After studying Latin, and being initiated in the principles of religion, in a community of the religious, he was sent to the university, where he made such proficiency in humanity and philosophy, as to be admitted to the degree of master of arts much before the usual age. He then, principally by the advice of his friends, began to study with a view to the church; but this was not agreeable to his sentiments, which were more free in matters of religion than consisted with a cordial profession of the prevailing tenets. He therefore soon preferred the study of medicine, and in 1626 attended the lectures with such application as to acquire a name in the world. Henry de Mesmes, president-a-mortier, hearing of him, appointed him to that for which it appeared afterwards he was best qualified, the office of librarian; and it was for this patron’s use that he wrote his excellent little work, entitled “Avis pour dresser une Bibliotheque,” printed at Paris in 1627, and again in 1644, with Louis Jacob’s “Traite des plus belles Bibliotheques.”

, professor of civil law at Geneva, about 1724, was created a citizen of Geneva in 1726, and died there in 1760. He published “Four letters on Ecclesiastical Discipline,” Utrecht, 1740;“A description of the Government” of the Germanic Body,“Geneva, 1742, 8vo, and a few other professional tracts. His eldest son, Louis Necker, a pupil of D'Alembert’s, became professor of mathematics at Geneva in 1757, but quitted that city for Paris, where he entered into partnership with the bankers Girardot and Haller, the son of the celebrated physician; and in 1762 settled at Marseilles, whence in 1791 he returned to Geneva. In 1747 he published” Theses de Electricitate,“4to, and wrote in the French Encyclopaedia, the articles of Forces and Friction. There is also a solution of an algebraical problem by him in the” Memoirs des savans etrangers," in the collection of the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences. He died about the end of the last century.

, a celebrated statesman and financier of France, brother to the preceding Louis Necker, was born at Geneva in 1732. After such an education as might qualify him for business, he was in his fifteenth year sent to Paris, where he was employed, first in the bankinghouse of Vernet, and then in that of Thelluson, of which last he became first cashier, and afterwards a partner. Upon the death of Thelluson he established a bank of his own, in partnership with Girardot and Haller, in which, we have just noticed, his brother had a concern. In 1776, when the French finances were in a disordered state, he was appointed director, and soon after comptroller-general of that department. Besides his reputation for financial knowledge and probity, which was now at its height, he had in the reign of Louis XV. adjusted some differences subsisting between the East India company and the crown in such a manner as to obtain, what rarely occurs in such cases, the approbation of both parties. His appointment to the comptrollership of the finances was hailed as an instance of enlargement of mind and liberality of sentiment, and as honourable to the reign of Lewis XVI.; Necker being the first protestant since the revocation of the edict of Nantes, who had held any important place in the French administration. Of the wisdom of his plans, in this critical situation, various opinions have been entertained, which this is not the place to examine, but it seems generally agreed that his intentions were pure, and his conduct disinterested. He refused all emolument for his services, and advanced a large sum to government from his private property, which he never drew from the public funds. His administration was generally popular, but he had enemies at court, and alter having filled the office of minister of finance for five years, he resigned. Previously to this he had published his “Compte Rendu,” in explanation of his financial system, which was followed by a work entitled “De P Administration des Finances.” This was read and circulated with great avidity, and unhappily scattered opinions on matters of government, by which the people knew not how to profit. M. Calonne, who was his successor, made an attack, before the assembly of notables, upon the veracity of his statements. Necker drew up a reply, which he transmitted to the king, who intimated that if he would forbear making it public, he should shortly be restored to his place. This he refused, and appealed to the nation by publishing his defence, which was so displeasing to the court, that he was exiled to his country-seat at St. Ouen, at the distance of 120 miles from the capital. During his retreat he wrote his work entitled “De l'Importance des Opinions R6ligieuses,” in which he speaks of religion like one who felt its power operating on his own mind, and who was fully convinced of its importance both to individuals and society. Calonne, however, and Brienne, another minister, finding it impossible to lessen the deficiencies of the revenue, thev resigned in their turn; and in August 1788, Necker was reinstated in his former post, to the apparent satisfaction of the court, as well as to the joy of the people; but the acclamations of the latter could not banish from his mind the difficulties with which he had to struggle. He was aware that de Calonne and the archbishop of Sens had both sunk under the public distress, and the impracticability of raising the necessary supplies; and he well knew that the evil was not diminished, and unless some expedient could be hit on to re-establish public credit, he foresaw his own fate must be similar to that of his predecessors. first intentions were to recal the banished members of the parliament of Paris, and to restore that body to its functions; to replenish the treasury, which he found almost empty; and to relieve the scarcity of corn under which the kingdom, and the capital in particular, then laboured. His next plan was the convocation of the states-general, which had been already promised by the king, and which, in fact, proved the immediate fore-runner of the revolution. Necker was particularly blamed for having consented that the number of members of the tiers etat should be equal to that of the nobles and clergy united, as the nobility and clergy would very naturally insist on voting by orders, while the tiers etat would contend with equal obstinacy for a plurality of voices. The consequences were therefore exactly such as had been foreseen. When the assembly of the states opened, Necker addressed them in a studied speech that pleased no party; even the tiers etat, already taught the sentiments of democracy, resented his saying that the meeting was the effect of royal favour, instead of a right. Nor was he more successful in the plan of government which he drew up, and which the king was to recommend in a speech, for this underwent so many alterations that he absented himself when it was delivered. At this time the prevalence of the democratic party was such as to induce the king to assemble troops around Paris, which measure Necker opposed, and on July 11, 1789, was therefore ordered to quit the kingdom within twenty ­four hours. This he immediately obeyed, and went to Brussels. As soon as his absence was known, the populace assembled, destroyed the Bastille, and proceeded to such other outrages, that the king thought it necessary to recal Necker to appease their fury. He accordingly returned in triumph, but his triumph was short. The populace was no longer to be flattered with declamations on their rights, nor was Necker prepared to adopt the sentiments of the democratic leaders, while it became now his duty to propose financial expedients that were obnoxious to the people. He that had just before been hailed as the friend of the people, was now considered as an aristocrat, and his personal safety was endangered. In this dilemma he desired to resign, offering to leave, as pledges for his integrity, the money which he had advanced to government, viz. about 80,000l. sterling, and his house and furniture. His resignation being accepted, he left Paris, and in his retreat he was more than once insulted by the very people whu, but a few months before, had considered him as their saviour. Gibbon, who passed four days with him at this period, says, “I could have wished to have exhibited him as a warning to any aspiring youth possessed with the demon of ambition. With all the means of private happiness in his power, he is the most miserable of human beings; the past, the present, and the future, are equally odious to him. When I suggested some domestic amusements, he answered, with a deep tone of despair, * in the state in which I am, I can feel nothing but the blast which has overthrown me.'” Shortly after this, his mind was diverted from public disappointment by the more poignant grief of domestic calamity; his wife died, after a long illness, in which he had attended her with the most affectionate assiduity. He now had recourse to hia favourite occupation of writing, and several works of different kinds were the product of his solitary hours. His principal pieces are entitled “Sur I' Administration de M. Necker, par lui-meme;” “Reflections,” &c. which were intended to benefit the king during his captivity and trial; “Du Pouvoir Exécutif,” being an essay that contained his own ideas on the executive part of government; “Dernieres Vue’s de Politiques, et de Finance,” of which the chief object was to discuss what was the best form of government France was capable of receiving. Besides these, he published a “Course of Religious Morality,” and a novel, written at the suggestion of his daughter, entitled “The fatal Consequences of a single Fault.” Though deprived of three- fourths of his fortune, he had sufficient for all his wants, and also to indulge his benevolent disposition. He had been placed on the list of emigrants, but the directory unanimously erased his name, and when the French army entered Swisserland, he was treated by the generals with every mark of respect. His talents and conduct have been alike the subject of dispute, and perhaps the time is not yet come when the latter can. be fully understood. It is well known that all who suffered by the revolution blamed Necker as a principal cause of that event; but it may be questioned whether any talents, guided by the utmost probity and wisdom, could have averted the evils that had been prepared by so long a course of infatuation. Necker passed the latter years of his life in the rational pursuits of a philosopher and a man of sound judgment and true taste, His only daughter, who married the baron de Stael, ambassador from Sweden to France, and who has made herself known to the literary world by several publications, published some “Memoirs of the Character and Private Life of her Father,” written in a high style of panegyric.

In 1740 he was employed by his superiors on a mission to England, and had the direction of the school erected at Twyford, near Winchester, for the education of the Roman catholic youth. In 1744 he was appointed professor of philosophy in the English college at Lisbon, where, on account of his bad health, he remained only fifteen months. After his return he passed several years at London and Paris, chiefly employed in microscopical observations, and in other branches of experimental philosophy. The results of these observations and experiments were published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1749, and in a volume in 12mo at Paris in 1750; and an account of them was also given by Buffon, in the first volumes of his natural history. There was an intimate connection subsisted between Mr. Needham and this illustrious French naturalist: they made their experiments and observations together; though the results and systems which they deduced from the same objects and operations were totally different.

Mr. Needham’s papers inserted in the Philosophical Transactions were, 1. Account of chalky tubulous concretions, called Malm; vol.XLII. 2. Miscroscopical observations on Worms in Smutty Corn; vol. XLII. 3. Electrical Experiments lately made at Paris; vol. XLIV. 4. Account of M. Buffon’s Mirror, which burns at 66 feet; ibid. 5. Observations upon the generation, composition, and decomposition of Animal and Vegetable substances; vol. XLV. 6. On the Discovery of Asbestos in France; vol. LI. His works printed at Paris, in French, are, 1. “New Microscopical Discoveries,” 1745. 2. “The same enlarged,” 1750. 3. “On Microscopical, and the Generation of Organized Bodies,” 1769, 2 vols. Besides these he had a considerable share in the controversy that was carried on about sixty years ago at Paris and Rome respecting the origin of the Chinese. He had seen a famous bust at Turin, on the breast and forehead of which several characters were visible, which some antiquaries supposed to be Egyptian. Mr. Needham having compared them with the characters of a Chinese dictionary in the Vatican, printed at Pekin, in 26 vols, (entitled Ching Zu Tung) perceived a striking resemblance between the two. He drew from this resemblance an argument in favour of the opinion of the late De Guignes (see de Guignes), concerning the origin of the Egyptians, Phenicians, and Chinese, or rather concerning the descent of the latter from the former, and pronounced, without hesitation, that the bust was Egyptian. The process of this discovery, or rather opinion, he published in 1761, in a pamphlet entitled “De Inscriptione quadam Ægyptiaca Taurini inventa, et characteribus Ægyptiis olim et Sinis cornmunibus exarata; idolo cuidam antiquo in regia, universitate servato, ad utrasque academias, Londinensem et Fajrisiensem, rerum antiquarum investigation! praspositas, data Eptstola,” 8vo. Several others subscribed to this, opinion, but it is more generally thought that the conclusion respecting the descent of the Chinese from the Egyptians does not follow from the premises. The very candid and fair manner, however, in which Mr. Needham proceeded in his comparison of the characters on the bust tyith thos.e in the dictionary, was acknowledged in an attestation very honourable to his probity, signed by several of the, literati at Rome, and by two of our countrymen then resident there, sir Richard Lyttelton and the late duke of Grafton.

, a celebrated bishop of the catholics in Holland, known by the title of bishop of Castoria, was born at Gorcum in 1626. He entered the congregation of the oratory at Paris, and, having finished his plan of education there, went to be professor of philosophy at Saumur, then of divinity at Mechlin, and was afterwards archdeacon of Utrecht, and apostolical provincial. James de la Torre, archbishop of Utrecht, being dead, M. de Neercassel was elected in his place by the chapter of that city; but, Alexander VII. preferring M. Catz, dean of the chapter of Harlem, they agreed between them, as a means to preserve peace, that M. Catz should govern the diocese of Harlem under the title of archbishop of Philippi, and M. de Neercassel that of Utrecht, under that of bishop of Castoria. This agreement being approved by the nuncio of Brussels, they were both consecrated in the same day at Cologn, September 9, 1662; but, M. Catz dying a year after, M. de Neercassel remained sole bishop of all the catholics in Holland, of which there were above four hundred thousand. He governed them with great prudence, and, after having discharged the duties of his office in the most exemplary manner, died June 8, 1686, aged sixty, in consequence of the fatigues attending the visitation of his churches. This prelate left three tracts in Latin, the first “On reading of the Holy Scriptures;” to which he has added a dissertation “On the Interpretation of Scripture;” the second “On the worship of the Saints and the Holy Virgin;” the third, enticed “Amor Prerii tens.” This last is a treatise on the necessity of the love of God in the sacrament of penitence. The two first have been translated into French by M. le Roy, abbot of Haute- Fontaine, 2 vols. 8vo, and the third by Peter Gilbert, a Parisian, 1741, 3 vols. 12mo. The best Latin edition of “Amor Pcenitens” is that of 1684, 2 vols. 8vo; the second part of the Appendix, which is in this edition, was written by M. Arnauld, and only approved by M. de Neercassel. The above three tracts having some expressions which were thought to favour the errors of Jansenius, an attempt was made to get the “Amor Prenitens” condemned at Rome but pope Innocent XL to whom the application was addressed, declared that “the book contained sound doctrine, and the author was a holy man.”

In April 1798, sir Horatio Nelson hoisted his flag in the Vanguard, and as soon as he had rejoined earl St. Vincent, he was dispatched to the Mediterranean, that he might ascertain the object of the great expedition fitting out at Toulon. He sailed with a small squadron from Gibraltar, on the 9th of May, to watch this armament. On the 22 d, a sudden storm in the gulph of Lyons carried away all the top-masts of the Vanguard; the fore-mast went into three pieces, and the bow-sprit was sprung. Captain (afterwards sir Alexander) Ball took the ship in tow, to carry her into St. Pietros, Sardinia. Nelson, apprehensive that this attempt might endanger both vessels, ordered him to cast off; but that excellent officer, possessing a spirit very like that of his commander, replied that he was confident he could save the Vanguard, and by God’s help he would do it. Previously to this, there had been a coolness between these brave seamen but from that moment, Nelson became fully sensibje of the extraordinary merit of captain Ball, and a sincere friendship subsisted between them during the remainder of their lives. Being compelled to refit, the delay enabled him to secure his junction with the reinforcement which lord St. Vincent had sent to join him, under commodore Trowbridge. That officer brought with him no instructions to Nelson, as to the course he was to steer, nor any positive account of the enemy’s destination every thing was left to his own judgment. The first news was, that they had surprised Malta. He formed a plan for attacking them while at Gozo; but on the 22d, intelligence reached him that they had left that island on the 16th, the day after their arrival. He then pursued them to Egypt, but he could not learn any thing of them during his voyage; and when he reached Alexandria, the enemy were not there. He then shaped his course for the coast of Caramania, and steered from thence along the southern side of Candia, carrying a press of sail both night and day, with a contrary wind. Irritated that they should have eluded his vigilance, the tediousness of the night made him impatient, and the officer of the watch was repeatedly called upon to declare the hour, and convince his admiral, who measured time by his own eagerness, that it was not yet break of day. “It would have been my delight,” said he, “to have tried Bonaparte on a wind.” Baffled in his pursuit, Nelson returned to Sicily, took in stores at Syracuse, and then made for the Morea. There, on the 28th of July, he learnt that the French had been seen about a month before, steering to the south-east from Candia. He resolved to return, and immediately, with every sail set, stood again for the coast of Egypt. On the 1st of August, they came in sight of Alexandria; and at four in the afternoon, captain Hood, in the Zealous, made signal for the French fleet. For several preceding days, the admiral had scarcely taken either food or sleep: he now ordered his dinner to be served, while preparations were making for battle; and when his officers rose from, table, and went to their separate stations, he said to them, “Before this time to-morrow I shall have gained a peerage or Westminster- abbey.” It has never been explained, why Bonaparte, having effected his landing, should not have ordered the fleet to return. It is, however, certain, that it was detained by his express command; though after the death of Brueys, he accused 4iim of having lingered there, contrary to his received orders. That admiral, not being able to enter the port of Alexandria, had moored his fleet in Aboukir bay, in a strong and compact line of battle; the headmost vessel being as close as possible to a shoal on the north-west, and the rest of the fleet forming a kind of curve along the line of deep water, so as not to be turned by any means on the south-west. The French admiral had the advantage of numbers in ships, in guns, and in men: he had thirteen ships of the line and four frigates, carrying 1196 guns, and 11,230 men; whereas the English had the same number of ships of the line, and one 50 gun ship, carrying 1012 guns, and 8068 men. They had, however, Nelson for chief-in-command, who, in all cases, was a mighty host in himself. During the whole cruize, it had been Nelson’s practice, whenever circumstances would admit of it, to have his captains on board the Vanguard, and fully explain to them his own ideas of the best modes of attack, whatever might be the situation of the enemy. His officers, therefore, were well acquainted with his principles of tactics and such was his confidence in their abilities and zeal, that the only plan arranged, in case they should find the French at anchor, was for the ships to form as most convenient for their mutual support, and to anchor by the stern. When he had fully explained his intended plan, captain Berry exclaimed with transport, “If we succeed, what will the world say” “There is no if.” replied the admiral “that we shall succeed is most certain: who may live to tell the story is a very different question.”

The position of the enemy presented the most formidable obstacles, but the admiral viewed these with the eye of a seaman determined on an attack; and it instantly struck him, that where there was room for an enemy’s ship to swing, there was room for one of ours to anchor. No further signal was necessary than those which had already been made. The admiral’s designs were as fully known to his whole squadron, as was his determination to conquer or perish in the attempt. The action commenced at sunset, at half past 6 o'clock, with an ardour that cannot be described. The Goliath, captain Foley, and the Zealous, captain Hood, received the first fire from the enemy. It was received with silence. On board every one of the British ships, the crew were employed aloft in furling sails, and below in tending the braces, and making ready for anchoring; a wretched sight for the French, who, with all their advantages, were on that element upon which escape was impossible. Their admiral, Brueys, was a brate and able man, yet he had, in a private letter, boasted that the English had* missed him, “because, not rinding themselves superior in numbers, they did not think it prudent to try their strength with him.” The moment was now come in which he was to be fatally undeceived. The shores of the bay of Aboukir were soon lined with spectators, who beheld the approach of the English, and the awful conflict of the hostile fleets, in silent astonishment. The two first ships of the French line were dismasted within a quarter of an hour after the action, and the others suffered so severely, that victory was even now regarded as certain. The third, the fourth, and the fifth, were taken possession^ of at half past eight. In the mean time, Nelson had received a severe wound on the head from a piece of iron, called a langridge shot; the skin of his forehead, being cut with it at right angles, hung down over his face. A great effusion of blood followed; but, as the surgeon pronounced there was no immediate danger, Nelson, who had retired to the cabin and was beginning to write his dispatches, appeared again on the quarter-deck, and the French ship the Orient being on fire, gave orders that boats should be sent to the relief of her men. Her commander Brueys was dead of his wounds, and the ship soon after blew up. The firing recommenced with the ships to the lee-ward of the centre, and continued until three in the morning. At day-break, the two rear-ships of the enemy were the only ships of the line that had their colours flying, and immediately stood out to sea, with two frigates The Zealous pursued, but as there was no other ship in a condition to support her, she was recalled. These, however, were all that escaped; and the victory was the most complete and glorious in the annals of naval history, uniting indeed, as was said in the House of Commons, all those qualities by which other victories had been most distinguished.

He went on however in his career, and it is to be deeply regretted that the proceeding which immediately followed, has been thought to detract from the glories of his former life. He now set sail for Sicily, and on his arrival at Naples, was received as a deliverer by their majesties and the whole kingdom. But soon after the subjects of that monarch, discontented at his conduct, and supported by the French, drove him from his capital, after which they established, or rather proclaimed, “The Parthenopean Republic.” The zeal of cardinal Ruffo, however, who successfully mingled the character of a soldier with that of a priest, proved signally efficacious towards the restoration of the exiled monarch. Having marched to Naples at the head of a body of Calabrians, he obliged “the patriots,” as they were termed, who were in possession of all the forts, to capitulate; and to this treaty the English, Turkish, and Russian commanders acceded. On the appearance of lord Nelson, however, Ferdinand publicly disavowed “the authority of cardinal Ruffo to treat with subjects in rebellion,” and the capitulation was accordingly violated, with the exception of the prisoners in Castella Mare alone, which had surrendered to the English squadron under commodore Foote. For this part of lord Nelson’s conduct much has been pleaded, but the general opinion was that it could not be justified.

During the peace which followed, he retired to an estate lately purchased by himself, at Merton in Surrey; but no sooner was this short peace dissolved, than his lordship was called upon to take the command of the ships in the Mediterranean. He accordingly repaired thither, on board the Victory, May 20, 1303, and formed the blockade of Toulon with a powerful squadron. Notwithstanding all the vigilance employed, a fleet escaped out of this port on the 30th of March, 1805, and shortly after formed a junction with the Cadiz-squadron, sir John Orde being obliged to retire before such a superiority in point of numbers. The gallant Nelson no sooner received intelligence of this event, than he followed the enemy to the West-Indies; and such was the terror of his name, that they returned without effecting any thing worthy of mention, and got into port after running the gauntlet through sir Robert Calder’s squadron. The enemy having thus again eluded his pursuit, he returned almost inconsolable to England; and hearing that the French had joined the fleet from Ferrol, and had got safe to Cadiz, he again offered his services, which were readily accepted by the first lord of the admiralty, who gave him a list of the navy, and bade him choose his own officers. He accordingly reached Portsmouth, after an absence of only twenty-five days; and such was his impatience to be at the scene of action, that, although a strong wind blew against him, he worked down channel, and, after a rough passage, arrived off Cadiz, on his birth-day, Sept. 29, on which day the French admiral, Villeneuve, received orders to put to sea the first opportunity. In point of preparation the two fleets were supposed to be on an equality; but in respect to force, the French were the stronger in the proportion of nearly three to two, they having thirty-four ships of the line of 74 guns, and under lord Nelson there were but twenty-four of the same rank: in frigates they out-numbered him in a similar proportion. Early in the month of October, lord Nelson received information which led him to imagine the enemy would soon put to sea. He had already arranged a plan, according to which he determined to fight. He was aware of the mischief of too many signals, and was resolved never to distract the attention of his fleet on the day of action by a great number of them. On the 4th of October he assembled the admirals and captains of the fleet into the cabin of his ship, the Victory, and laid before them a new and simple mode of attack. Every man comprehended his method in a moment, and felt certain that it must succeed. It proved irresistible.

The first life of this illustrious man which appeared was drawn up by Fontenelle, from materials furnished by sir Isaac’s nephew, and published in the memoirs of the French Academy. Why none of his countrymen executed such an undertaking we shall not inquire. This, however, is the life from which all succeeding biographers have extracted their materials, and it formed the ground-work of the long, but somewhat confused account, that has hitherto appeared in this dictionary. But, like almost all the eloges, published in the memoirs of the French Academy, it seems better calculated to display the abilities, and answer the private views of FonteneUe, than to convey accurate information. Mr. Edmund Tumor has lately favoured the world with the original life of Newton, drawn tip by Mr. Conduitt, for the information of FonteneUe, and with a most interesting letter of Dr. Stukely on the same subject, from the Mss. in the possession of the earl of Portsmouth. But although Mr. Tumor’s “Collections for the Town and Soke of Grantham,” the work to which we allude, was published in 1806, Dr. Thomson was the first who availed himself of it, to enrich his valuable “History of the Royal Society.” In the preceding account, therefore, we have generally followed Dr. Thomson, who has unquestionably the merit of giving the public the most accurate and elegant account of the personal history of sir Isaac, a man, said Dr. Johnson, who, had he flourished in ancient Greece, would have been worshipped as a divinity.

Dissatisfied with the hypothetical grounds on which former philosophers, particularly Des Cartes, had raised the structure of natural philosophy, Newton adopted the manner of philosophising introduced by lord Bacon, and determined to raise a system of natural philosophy on the basis of experiment. He laid it down as a fundamental rule, that nothing is to be assumed as a principle, which is not established by observation and experience, and that no hypothesis is to be admitted into physics, except as a question, the truth of which is to be examined by its agreement with appearances. “Whatever,” says he, “is not deduced from phenomena, is to be called an hypothesis: and hypotheses, whether physical or metaphysical, whether of occult qualities or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy.” In this philosophy, propositions are drawn from phenomena, and are ' rendered general by induction. This plan of philosophising he pursued in two different methods, the Analytic and the 8301thetic; collecting from certain phenomena the forces of nature, and the more simple laws of these forces; and then proceeding, on the foundation of these, to establish the rest. In explaining, for example, the system of the world, he first proves, from experience, that the power of gravitation belongs to all bodies then, assuming this as an established principle, he demonstrates, by mathematical reasoning, that the earth and sun, and all the planets, mutually attract each other, and that the smallest parts of matter in each have their several attractive forces, which are as their quantities of matter, and which, at different distances, are inversely as the squares of their distances. In investigating the theorems of the “Principia,” Newton made use of his own analytical method of fluxions; but, in explaining his system, he has 'followed the synthetic method of the ancients, and demonstrated the theorems geometrically. The following, we presume, is a correct list of the works of Newton, published before or after his death. 1. Several papers relating to his “Telescope,” and his “Theory of Light and Colours,” printed in the Philosophical Transactions, numbers 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85., 83, 96, 97, 110, 121, 123, 128; or vols. Vj, VII, VIII, IX, X, XL 2. “Optics, or a Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, and Inflections, and the Colours of Light,” 1704, 4to; a Latin translation by Dr. Clarke, 1706, 4 to.; and a French translation by Pet. Coste, Amst. 1729, 2 vols. 12mo; beside several English editions in 8vo. 3. “Optical Lectures,” 1728, 8vo; also in several Letters to Mr. Oldenburg, secretary of the Royal Society. 4. “Lectiones Opticse,” 1729, 4to. 5. “Naturalis Philosophise Principia Mathematica,” 1687, 4to; a second edition in 17 13, with a Preface, by Roger Cotes; the third edition in 1726, under the direction of Dr. Pemberton; an English translation, by Motte, 1729, 2 vols. 8vo, printed in several editions of his works, in different nations, particularly an edition, with a large Commentary, by the two learned Jesuits, Le Seur and Jacquier, in 4 vols. 4to, in 1739, 1740, and 1742. 6. “A System of the World,” translated from the Latin original, 1727, 8vo this was at first intended to make the third book of his Principia; an English translation by Motte, 1729, 8vo. 7. Several Letters to Mr. Flamsteed, Dr. Halley, and Mr. Oldenburg, 8. “A Paper concerning the Longitude,” drawn up by order of the House of Commons, ibid. 9. “Abrege de Chronologic,” &c. 1726, under the direction of the abbe Conti, together with some observations upon it. 10. “Remarks upon the Observations made upon a Chronological Index of Sir I. Newton,” &c. Philos. Trans, vol. XXXIII. See also the same, vol. XXXIV and XXXV, by Dr. Halley. 11. “The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms amended,” &c. 1728, 4to. 12. “Arithmetica Universalis,” &c. under the inspection of Mr. Whiston, Cantab. 1707, 8vo. Printed, Dr. Hutton thinks, without the author’s consent, and even against his will: an offence which it seems was never forgiven. There are also English editions of the same, particularly one by Wilder, with a Commentary, in 1769, 2 vols. 8vo; and a Latin edition, with a Commentary, by Castilion, 2 vols. 4to, Amst. &c. 13. “Analysis per Quantitatum Series, Fluxiones, et Differentias, cum Enumeratione Linearum Tertii Ordinis,” 1711, 4to, under the inspection of W. Jones, eaq. f. ft. S.; the last tract had been published before, together with another on the Quadrature of Curves, by the method of fluxions, under the title of “Tractatus duo de Speciebus & Magnitudine Figurarum Curvilinearum,” subjoined to the first edition of his Optics in 1704; and other letters in the Appendix to Dr. Gregory’s Catoptrics, &c. 1735, 8vo; under this head may be ranked “Newtoni Genesis Curvarum per Umbras,” Leyden, 1740. 14. Several Letters relating to his Dispute with Leibnitz, upon his right to the invention of Fluxions printed in the “Commercium Epistolicum D. Johannis Collins & aliorum de Analyst Promota, jussu Societatis Regise editum,” 1712, 8vo. 15. Postscript and Letter of M. Leibnitz to the Abbe Conti, with Remarks, and a Letter of his own to that Abbe, 1717, 8vo. To which was added, Raphson’s History of Fluxions, as a Supplement. 16. “The Method of Fluxions, and Analysis by Infinite Series,” translated into English from the original Latin; to which is added, a Perpetual Commentary, by the translator Mr. John Colson, 1736, 4to. 17. “Several Miscellaneous Pieces, and Letters,” as follow L A Letter to Mr. Boyle upon the subject of the Philosopher’s Stone. Inserted in the General Dictionary, under the article Boyle, II. A Letter to Mr. Aston, containing directions for his travel?, ibid, under our author’s article; III. An English translation of a Latin Dissertation upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jews* Inserted among the miscellaneous works of Mr. John Greaves, vol. IL published by Dr. Thomas Birch, in 1737, 2 vols. 8vo. This Dissertation was found subjoined to a work of sir Isaac’s, not finished, entitled “Lexicon Propheticum;” IV. Four Letters from sir Isaac Newton to Dr. Bentley, containing some arguments in proof of a Deity, 1756, 8vo, very acutely reviewed by Dr. Johnson in the Literary Magazine, and afterwards inserted in his works V. Two Letters to Mr. Clarke, &c. iSi “Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John,” 1733, 4to. 19. “I*. Newtoni Elementa Perspective Universalis,” 1746, 8vo. 20. “Tables for purchasing College Leases,” 1742, 12mo. 21. “Corollaries,” by Whiston. 22. A collection of several pieces of our author’s, under the following title, “Newtoni Is. Opuscula Mathematica Philos. & Philol. collegit J. Castilioneus,” Laus. 1744, 4to, 8 tomes. 23. “Two Treatises of the Quadrature^ Curves, and Analysis by Equations of an Infinite Number of Terms, explained: translated by John Stewart, with a large Commentary,” 1745, 4to. 24. “Description of an Instrument for observing the Moon’s Distance from the Fixed Stars at Sea,” Philos. Trans, vol. XLII. 25. Newton also published “Barrow’s Optical Lectures,” 1699, 4to; and “Bern. Varenii Geographia,” &c. 1681, 8vo. 26. The whole works of Newton, published by Dr. Horsley, 1779, 4to, in 5 volumes.

, a celebrated French antiquary ia the seventeenth century, was descended of a good family at Dijon, where his brother was proctor-general of the chamber of accounts, and born in 1623. Being inclined to the church, he became an ecclesiastic, and was made a canon in the holy chapel at Dijon but devoted himself wholly to the study and knowledge of antique monuments. Having laid a proper foundation of learning at home, he resigned his canonry, and went to Rome, where he resided many years; and, after his return to France, he held a correspondence with almost all the learned men in Europe. Perhaps there never was a man of letters, who had so frequent and extensive a commerce with the learned men of his time as the abbe Nicaise, nor with men of high rank. The cardinals Barbarigo and Noris, and pope Clement XL were among his regular correspondents. This learned intercourse took up a great part of his time, and hindered him from enriching the public with any large works; but the letters which he wrote himself, and those which he received from others, would make a valuable “Commercium Epistolicum.” The few pieces which he published are, a Latin dissertation “De Nummo Pantheo,” dedicated to Mr. Spanheim, and printed at Lyons in 1689. The same year he published an explication of an antique monument found at Guienne, in the diocese of Aach; but the piece which made the greatest noise was “Les Sirenes, ou discours sur leur forme et figure,” Paris, 1691, 4to; “A discourse upon the form and figure of the Syrens,” in which, following the opinion of Huet, bishop of Auvranches, he Undertook to prove, that they were, in reality, birds, and not fishes, or sea-monsters. He translated into French, from the Italian, a piece of Bellori, containing a description of the pictures in the Vatican, to which he added, “A Dissertation upon the Schools of Athens and Parnassus,” two of Raphael’s pictures. He wrote also a few letters in the literary journals, and a small tract upon the Ancient music; and died while he was labouring to present the public with the explanation of that antique inscription which begins “Mercurio et Minervæ Arneliæ, &c.” which was found in the village of Villy, where he died in Oct. 1701, aged 78.

, a Greek historian, was born about the close of the thirteenth century, and flourished in the fourteenth, under the emperors Andronicus, John Palacologus, and John Cantacuzenus. He was a great favourite of the elder Andronicus, who made him librarian of the church of Constantinople, and sent him ambassador to the prince of Servia. He accompanied Andronicus in his misfortunes, and attended at his death; after which he repaired to the court of the younger Andronicus, where he appears to have been well received; and it is certain, that, by his influence over the Greeks, that church was prevailed on to reject any conference with the legates of pope John XXII. But, in the dispute which arose between Barlaam and Palamos, happening to take the part of the former, he maintained it so zealously in the council that was held at Constantinople in 1351, that he was cast into prison, and continued there till the return of John Palseologus, who released him; after which he held a disputation with Palamos, in the presence of that emperor. He compiled the Byzantine history in a barbarous style, and very inaccurately, from 1204, when Constantinople was taken by the French, to the death of Andronicus the younger, in 1341. Besides this work, he is the author of some others. His history, with a Latin translation by Jerome Wolf, was printed at Basil in 1562, and again at Geneva in 1615. We have also a new version of it, and a new edition more correct than any of the preceding, printed at the Louvre in 1702, by Boivin the younger, the French king’s librarian, 2 vols. fol. This edition contains, in the first volume, the thirty-eight books of Gregoras, which end with the year 1341; and in the second are the thirteen following, which contain a history of ten years. There are still fourteen remaining to be published; as also fourteen other pieces of Gregoras. Gregoras also wrote Scholia upon “Synesius de Insomniis,” published by Turnebus in 1553; the version of which, by John Pichon, is printed among the works of the same Synesius.

, a celebrated patriarch of Constantinople, of the ninth century, was distinguished for his zealous defence of the worship of images, against the emperor Leo the Armenian, who banished him in the year 815, to a monastery, where he died in the year 828, aged seventy. His works are, “An Abridgment of History,” from the death of the emperor Mauritius to Constantino Copronymus, printed at the Louvre, 1648, fol. It forms part of the Byzantine history, and has been translated into French by president Cousin. It is said to be accurate, but written in a dry and concise style. An “Abridgment of Chronography,” which is at the end of Syncellus; and several other works in Greek, which may be found in P. Labbe’s Councils, or the Library of the Fathers. Cardinal Baronius has inserted this patriarch’s “Confession of Faith” in torn. XI. of his Annals. He is supposed by Lardner and others, to have been the author of “The Stichometry,” a catalogue of the books of sacred scripture, which, ifof no other use, at least shews that the Jewish canon was generally esteemed sacred by Christians, and that the other books of the Old Testament, which are now deemed “Apocryphal,” were not of equal authority, though sometimes read in the churches, and quoted by Christian writers.

, one of the most useful French biographers, was born at Paris, March 11, 1685. He was of an ancient and noble family, who were in very high repute about 1540. He studied with success in the Mazarine college at Paris, and afterwards at the college Du Plessis. He appears to have been of a serious turn of mind, and of great modesty, and from a dread of the snares to which he might be exposed in the world, de termined to quit it for a religious life. On this subject he consulted one of his uncles, who belonged to the order of Barnabite Jesuits. This uncle examined him; and, not diffident of his election, introduced him as a probationer to that society at Paris. He was received there in 1702, took the habit in 1703, and made his vows in 1704, at the age of nineteen. After he had professed himself, he was sent to Montargis, to study philosophy and theology, a course of both which he went through with credit, although he confesses that he never could relish the scholastic system then in vogue. His superiors then, satisfied with his proficiency and talents, sent him to Loches, in Touraine, to teach the classics and rhetoric. Here his devout behaviour and excellent conduct as a teacher, made him be thought worthy of the priesthood, which he received at Poitiers in 1708, and as he was not arrived at the age to assume this orders a dispensation, which his uncommon piety had merited, was obtained in his favour. The college of Montargis having recalled him, he was their professor of rhetoric during two years, and philosophy during four. In spite of all these avocations, he was humanely attentive to every call and work of charity, and to the instruction of his fellow-creatures, many of whom heard his excellent sermons, pure and unadorned in style, but valuable in matter, which he delivered not only from the pulpits of most of the churches within the province, but even from those of Paris. In 1716 his superiors invited him to that city, that he might have an opportunity of following, with the more convenience, those studies for which he always had expressed the greatest inclination. He not only understood the ancient, but almost all the modern languages; a circumstance of infinite advantage in the composition of those works which he has given to the public, and which he carried on with great assiduity to the time of his death, which happened after a short illness, July 8, 1738, at the age of fifty-three. His works are, 1. “Le Grand Fébrifuge; or, a dissertation to prove that common Water is the best remedy in Fevers, and even in the Plague; translated from the English of John Hancock, minister of St. Margaret’s, London, in 12mo.” This treatise made its appearance, amongst other pieces relating to this subject, in 1720; and was attended with a success which carried it through three editions; the last came out in 1730, in 2 vols. 12mo, entitled “A Treatise on common Water;” Paris, printed by Cavelier. 2. “The Voyages of John Ouvington to Surat, and divers parts of Asia and Africa; containing the History of the Revolution in the kingdom of Golconda, and some observations upon Silk- Worms,” Paris, 1725, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “The Conversion of England to Christianity, compared with its pretended Reformtion;” a work translated from the English, and written by an English catholic, Paris, 1729, 8vo. 4. “The Natural History of the Earth, translated from the English of Mr. Woodward, by Mons. Nogues, doctor in physic with an answer to the objections of doctor Camerarius containing, also, several letters written on the same subject, and a methodical distribution of Fossils, translated from the English, by Niceron,” Paris, 1735, 4to. 5. “Memoirs of Men illustrious in the republic of letters, with a critical Account of their Works. Paris,” 12uio. The first volume of this great work appeared in 1727; the others were given to the public in succession, as far as the thirty-ninth, which appeared in 1738. The fortieth volume was published after the death of the author, in 1739. Since that event three others were added, but in these are many articles of which Niceron was not the author. It is not easy to answer all the objections which may be offered to a work of this kind. The author himself, in one of his prefaces, informs us that some of his contemporaries wished for a chronological order; some for the order of the alphabet; some for classing the authors according to the sciences or their professions, and some according to the countries in which they were born. As his work, however, appeared periodically, he thought himself justified in giving the lives without any particular order, according as he was able to procure materials. That the French critics should dwell upon the unavoidable mistakes in a work of this magnitude, is rather surprizing, for they have produced no such collection since, and indeed Niceron has been the foundation, as far as he goes, of all the subsequent accounts of the same authors. Chaufepie only treats him with respect while he occasionally points out any error in point of date or fact.

, a Greek historian, was born at Chone, or Colossus, a town in Phrygia. He flourished in the thirteenth century, and was employed in several considerable affairs at the court of the emperors of Constantinople. When that city was taken by the French in 1204, he withdrew, together with a young French captive, whom he afterwards married at Nice in Bithynia, and died there in 1206.

, a celebrated Dominican, was born at Gironna, in Catalonia, about 1320. He was made inquisitor general by Innocent VI. about 1356, and afterwards chaplain to Gregory XL and judge of heretical causes. He died Jan. 4, 1399, leaving a precious monument of inquisitorial tyranny, entitled “Directorium Inquisitorium,” or the Inquisitor’s Directory, the best editions of which are those with corrections, particularly that “cum comment. Fran. Pegnse,” printed at Rome, 1587, fol. This book, says L'Avocat, contains the most pernicious and horrible maxims, according to which, not only private persons, but princes and kings, may be condemned secretly by the inquisition, without being permitted to speak in their own defence, and afterwards put to death by poison, or other means. It is astonishing, adds this liberal ecclesiastic, that a work which inculcates such dietestable principles should have been printed at Barcelona, afterwards at Rome, and at Venice. The commentary, he says, is as pernicious as the text. The French have an abridgment of the work, by the abbé Morellet, 1762, 12mo.

, a learned doctor of the Sorbonne, and Dominican, was born in 1594, at Monza, a village in the diocese of Verdun, near Stenay. After taking a doctor’s degree in 1632, he taught theology in tl?e house of his order at Paris, for about twenty years. He was elected prior in 166 1, and died May 7, 1673, aged seventyeight. He was the editor of a good edition of the “Summary” of St. Thomas, with notes, and of all that doctor’s works, Lyons, 1660, 19 vols. fol. He also published five Dissertations on several points of ecclesiastical discipline, againstM.de Launoi, 12mo; “Judicium, seu censorium suffragium de propositions Antonii Arnaldi,” &c. 4to, which last he likewise published in French by the title of “Avis deliberatif,” &c. 4to. This relates to the much contested proposition of M. Arnauld, that “Grace failed in St. Peter,” and it was answered by M. Arnauld, Nicole, and de la Lane. He was the author of other works, in which are some singular opinions, but which are now of little consequence. He must, however, be distinguished from Philip Nicolai, a learned divine, who died in 1608, and from Melchior Nicolai, a celebrated professor of divinity at Tubingen, who died in 1659. Both these wrote commentaries and controversial treatises, noticed in “Freheri Theatrum,” and our other authorities.

, a very celebrated French mathematician, was born at Paris, December 23, 1683. His early attachment to the mathematics induced M. Montmortto take the charge of his education, and initiate him in the higher geometry. He first distinguished himself by detecting the fallacy of a pretended quadrature of the circle. A M. Mathulon was so confident that he had discovered this quadrature, as to deposit in the hands of a public notary at Lyons, the sum of 3000 livres, to be paid to any person who in the judgment of the academy of sciences, should demonstrate the falsity of his solution. M. Nicole having undertaken the task, the academy’s judgment was, that he had plainly proved that the rectilineal figure which Mathulon had given as equal to the circle, was not only unequal to it, but that it was even greater than the polygon of 32 sides circumscribed about the circle. It was the love of science, however, and not of money, which inspired Nicole on this occasion, for he presented the prize of 300O livres to the public hospital of Lyons. The academy named Nicole eleve-mechanician, March 12, 1707; adjunct in 1716, associate in 1718, and pensioner in 1724, which he continued till his death, which happened January 18, 1758, at seventy-five years of age.

, father of the celebrated Peter Nicole, was descended of a reputable family, and born at Chartres, in Get, 1600. He applied himself to the law, and made a good proficiency in it; so that he became an advocate in parliament, and judge official to the bishop of Chartres. As a pleader, however, he is said to have been more flowery than solid, and he injured his reputation by interspersing his pleadings with verses and scraps of romances, which his son took care afterwards to burn. It does not appear that he published much, unless part if not the whole of a French translation of Quintilian, printed at Paris, in 1642, and dedicated to Mr. Seof, bishop of Chartres. The abbé de Marolles says that he had several times received verses in Latin and French from our advocate, who died at Chartres in 1678.

, cousin-german of the preceding, was son of Nicolas Nicole, receiver of the town of Chartres, where he was born Sept. 4, 1611; and became one of the king’s council, and president in the elections of Chartres. He died Nov. 22, 1685. He was a good Greek, Latin, and Italian scholar, and had a talent for French poetry; which, however, he abused, the greatest part of his poems being grossly indelicate. Of these he published a collection at Paris, 1660, in 2 vols. 12mo, with a dedication to the king, under the title of “The Works of the President Nicole.” This collection appeared again after his death, enlarged with several new pieces, some of which are upon subjects of piety, in 1693, at Paris. They consist chiefly of translations of several works of “Ovid,” “Horace,” “Persius,” “Martial,” “Seneca the Tragedian,” “Claudian,” and others, “A Translation of an Elegy and Ode of Anacreon,” and of “A Poem upon the Loves of Adonis, by the cavalier Marin, &c.”

, a celebrated French divine, was born at Chartres, Oct. 6, 1625. He was the son of John Nicole above mentioned, who, discovering him to be a youth of promising talents, gave him his first instructions in grammar, and so grounded him in classical knowledge, that at the age of fourteen he was qualified to go to Paris, and commence a course of philosophy; and at its completion, in about two years, he took the degree of M. A. July 23, 1644. He afterwards studied divinity at the Sorbonne, in 1645 and 1646 and, during this course, learned Hebrew, improved himself farther in Greek, acquired a knowledge of Spanish and Italian. He also devoted part of his time to the instruction of the youth put under the care of messieurs de Port-royal. As soon as he had completed three years, the usual period, in the study of divinity,he proceeded bachelor in that faculty in 1649, on which occasion he maintained the theses called the Tentative, He afterwards prepared himself to proceed a licentiate;, but was diverted from it by the dispute which arose about the five famous propositions of Jansenius, added to his connections with Mr. Arnauld. By this means he was at more leisure to cultivate his acquaintance with gentlemen of the Port-royal, to which house he now retired, and assisted Mr. Arnauld in several pieces, which that celebrated divine published in his own defence. They both went to M. Varet’s house at Chatillon near Paris, in 1664, and there continued to write, inconcert. Nicole afterwards resided at several places, sometimes at Port-royal, sometimes at Paris, &c. He was solicited to take holy orders but, after an examination of three weeks, and consulting with M. Pavilion, bishop of Aleth, he remained only a tonsured priest. It has been asserted by some, that having failed to answer properly when examined for the subdeaconship, he considered his being refused admission to it, as a warning from heaven. He continued undisturbed at Paris till 1677, when a letter which he wrote, for the bishops of St. Pons and Arras, to pope Innocent XI. against the relaxations of the casuists, drew upon him a storm, that obliged him to withdraw. He went 6rst to Chartres, where his father was lately dead; and, having settled his temporal affairs, he repaired to Beauvais, and soon after took his leave of the kingdom, in 1679. He retired first to Brussels, then went to Liege, and, after that, risited Orval, and several other places. A letter, dated July 16, 1679, which he wrote to Harlai, archbishop of Paris, facilitated his return to France: and Robert, canon of the church of Paris, obtained leave of that archbishop, some time after, for Nicole to come back privately to Chartres. Accordingly he repaired immediately to that, city, under the name of M. Berci, and resumed his usual employments. The same friend afterwards solicited a permission for him to return to Paris, and having obtained it at length in 1683, he employed his time in the composition of various new works. In 1693, perceiving himself to be grown considerably infirm, he resigned a benefice, of a very moderate income, which her had at Beauvais; and after remaining for about two years more in a very languishing state, died of the second stroke of an apoplexy, Nov. 16, 1695, aged 70 years.

After his return from Portugal, in 1561, Nicot retired from public, and devoted himself to literary employment. In 1567 he published an edition of the life of Aimon, a Benedictine of the abbey of Fleury, which Dupin has improperly attributed to Pichon. He also improved Aimar de Rangonnet’s French Dictionary, so as to render it almost a new work. It did not appear, however, until after his death, when it was entitled “Tresor de la langue Frangaise tant ancienne que moderne,” 1606, fol. and was reprinted at least four times. Nicot died at Paris May 5, 1600. He left several Mss. particularly a kind of history or dictionary of navigation.

, a French historian of the ninth century, the son of Angilbert, abbot of St. Riquier, and of Bertha, daughter of Charlemagne, was born before the year 790, and was probably educated at the court of his grandfather. He appears to have been distinguished both as a soldier and politician, and was occasionally employed by Charles the Bald, king of France, as a negociator. His history contains an account of the divisions between the sons of Louis le Debonnaire, in four books, of which the first three were written in the year 842, and the fourth is lost. It was published in 1594, by M. Pithou, in his “Annalium et Historiæ Francorum Scriptores,” &c. and has since been translated by Duchesne and Bouquet, in their collection of French Historians, and by Cousin in his “History of the Western Empire.”

, a French academician and dramatic writer, was born at Paris in 1692. Being the nephew of a farmer-general, he might have acquired opulence, by so valuable a connection, but he preferred the study of polite literature. His first work was a criticism on the fables of La Motte, who was his friend, but who never objected to any liberties of that kind which his friends might take with him. When La Motte advanced his famous paradox on the in utility of versification in tragedy, &c. Nivelle joined la Faye as one of his opponents, and published an “Epitre a Clio,” 1733, 12mo, which was much admired, and in which he has taken considerable freedoms with La Motte. As a dramatic writer, Nivelle brought into fashion what the French call the comedies larmoy antes, or comedies in which there are more scenes of tenderness than of wit and humour. Of these his “Prejuge a la mode” “Ecole des Amis,” and “Melanide,” are still much admired in France as are his “Ecole des Meres,” and “La Gbuvernante,” although not received at first so favourably. He wrote many other dramatic pieces, with moderate success, which with his other works, were published at Paris, in 1762, 5 vols. 12mo. La Harpe ranks him among the authors who have done honour to the French theatre. He died May 14, 1754, in the sixty-second year of his age.

, was born at Paris, Dec. 16, 1716. After he had served in the army some time, he was appointed ambassador to Rome, then to Berlin, and lastly, in 1763, was entrusted with the important negociation of the definitive treaty of peace at London, where he was highly respected, as a prudent and enlightened minister, who united amenity of manners with the dignity of his station. After his return to Paris, he devoted himself entirely to letters, and by some publications he obtained an admission into the French academy, and that of inscriptions. This worthy and excellent man lived to be a sufferer from the revolution, and was committed to prison during the tyranny of Robespierre, in which he was forced to remain till 1796. He died Feb. 25, 1798, at the age of eighty-two. Of his works, his “Fables” have not been thought to preserve the reputation they had originally, when handed about in private. Many of them, however, equal any of the French productions of that class. An English translation, very ably executed, was published in 1799. The duke’s reflections on the genius of Horace, Boileau, and Rousseau, are highly esteemed; and his “Dialogues of the Dead,” “Moral Letters,” “Lives of the Troubadours,” &c. are distinguished proofs of an acute and well-cultivated mind. He was very conversant in English literature, and translated Pope’s “Essay on Man,” and Horace Walpole’s “Modern Gardening,” of which, in imitation of Walpole, he printed only a few copies for friends. Didot, while the author was alive, printed a fine edition of his works, in 1796, 8 vols. 8vo, the demand for which, according to Brunet, is not great.

By another ordinance, in 1703, he likewise condemned the resolution of the “Case of Conscience,” which had been signed by forty doctors of the Sorbonne, in favour of Jansenius, the same year, respecting the distinction between the fact and the right. These maintained, that the five propositions, though rightfully condemned by the decrees of the popes, yet were not in fact taught by Jansenius, as was declared in those decrees. In the same spirit of pastoral vigilance, he did not content himself with preserving the sacred depositum of faith inviolate among the full-confirmed Catholics, but made it his business also to instruct the new converts, by a letter addressed particularly to them. With the like care, when Mr. Simon, an author of great fame, published his French version of the “New Testament,” with a paraphrase and notes, which were thought by our prelate of a bad tendency, he considered himself bound in duty to prohibit the reading of that book, in order to prevent the ill effects it might occasion by falling into the hands of the simple and unwary. In June 1700 he was created a cardinal, at the nomination of the French king, and assisted in the conclave held that year, in which Clement XI. was elected pope having, a little before, in the same year, sat president in an assembly of the clergy, where several propositions, concerning doctrine and manners, were condemned. He also presided afterwards in several of these general assemblies, both ordinary and extraordinary. In 1715, he was appointed president of the council of conscience at Rome, notwithstanding he had refused to accept the constitution Unigenitus.

This celebrated bull brought our cardinal into a great deal of trouble on this account. Pasquin Quesnel, one of the fathers of the oratory, publishing his New Testament, with moral reflections upon every verse, in 1694, our cardinal, then bishop of Chalons, gave it his approbation, and recommended it to his clergy and people in 1695; and, after his removal to Paris, procured a new edition, corrected, to be printed there in 1699. But as the book contained some doctrines in favour of Jansenism, the Jesuits took the alarm, and, after writing several pieces, charging the author with heresy and sedition, obtained, in 1708, a decree of pope Clement XI. condemning it in general. Although this decree could neither be received nor published in France, not being conformable to the usage of that kingdom, the book was condemned, without mentioning the decree, by some French bishops, at whose solicitation Lewis XIV. applied to his holiness to condemn it by a constitution in form, which was granted; and, in 1715, appeared the famous constitution “Unigenitus,” condemning the “Moral Reflections,” and 101 propositions extracted from the work. The pope also condemned all such writings as had been already published, or should hereafter be published in its defence. But the king’s letters patent, for the publication of this bull, were not registered in the parliament without several modifications and restrictions, in pursuance of a declaration made by a great number of bishops, that they accepted it purely and simply, although at the same time they gave some explications of it in their pastoral instructions. Cardinal Noailles, and some other prelates, not thinking these explications sufficient, refused absolutely to accept it, till it should be explained by the pope in such a manner as to secure from all danger the doctrine, discipline, and liberty, of the schools, the episcopal rights, and the liberties of the Gallican church. The faculty of divines at the Sorbonne declared, that the decree which was made March 5, 1714, for accepting the bull, was false. The four bishops also of Mirepoix, Seine’s, Montpelier, and Boulogne, appealed from it, March 4, 1717 and the same day the faculty of divines at Paris adhered to their appeal. This example was followed by several faculties of divines, monasteries, curates, priests, &c, and cardinal deNoailles, having appealed, about the same time, with the four bishops, published his appeal in 1718. However, he retracted this appeal, and received the constitution some time before his death, which happened in his palace at Paris, May 4, 1729.

, canon and theologal of Seez, the son of John le Noir, counsellor to the presidial of Alenon, was a celebrated preacher at Paris, and in the provinces, about the middle of the seventeenth century; but, having had a quarrel afterwards with M. de Mendavi, his bishop, in consequence of the boldness with which he censured not only the doctrine, but the conduct of his superiors, he was banished in 1663, confined in the Bastille in 1683, and condemned April 24, 1684, to make amende honorable before the metropolitan church at Paris, and to the gallies for life. This punishment, however, being changed to perpetual imprisonment, M. le Noir was afterwards carried to St. Malo, then to the prisons of Brest, and, lastly, to those of Nantes, where he died April 22, 1692, leaving several works, which are curious, but full of intemperate abuse. The principal are, A collection of his Requests and Factums, folio; a translation of “L'Echelle du Clottre” “Les Avantages incontestable de PEglise sur les Calvinistes,” 8vo “L‘Herésie de la Domination Episcopate qu’on etablit en France,” 12mo “Les nouvelles Lumieres politiques pour le Gouvernement de l'Eglise, ou TEvangile nouveau du cardinal Palavicini dans son Histoiredu Concile de Trente,” Holl. 1676, 12mo. This work occasioned the French translation of cardinal Palavicini’s history to be suppressed.

, a French abbe, and member of most of the literary societies of Europe, was born at Pimpre“, in the district of Noyon, Nov. 19, 1700. Notwithstanding the obscurity in which his finances obliged him to live, he soon acquired fame as an experimental philosopher. M. Dufay associated him in his electrical researches; and M. de Reaumur assigned to him his laboratory and these gentlemen may be considered as his preceptors. M. Dufay took him along with him in a journey he made into England; and Nollet profited so well of this opportunity, as to institute a friendly and literary correspondence with some of the most celebrated men in this country. The king of Sardinia gave him an invitation to Turin, to perform a course of experimental philosophy to the duke of Savoy. From thence he travelled into Italy, where he collected some good observations concerning the natural history of the country. In France he was master of philosophy and natural history to the royal family; and professor royal of experimental philosophy to the college of Navarre, and to the schools of artillery and engineers. The academy of sciences appointed him adjunct-mechanician in 1739, associate i 1742, and pensioner in 1757. Nollet died the 24th of April, 1770, regretted by all his friends, but especially by his relations, whom he always succoured with an affectionate attention; but his fame, as an electrician, in which character he was best known, did not survive him long. His’ works are, 1.” Recueils de Lettres sur TElectricite;“1753, 3 vols. 12mo. '2.” Essai sur l'Electricite des corps;“1 vol. 12mo. 3. Recherches sur les causes particulieres des Phenomenes Electriques,” 1 vol. 12mo. 4. “L'Art des Experiences,” 1770, 3 vols. 12mo. In these are contained his theory on electricity, which he maintained with the most persevering obstinacy against all the arguments of his antagonists, who were perhaps all the eminent electrical philosophers of Europe. It is no easy matter to form a very adequate notion of this theory, which has been long since abandoned by every person. When an electric is excited, electricity flows to it from all quarters, and when thus effluent (as he termed it), it drives light bodies before it. Hence the reason why excited bodies attract. When the electricity is effluent, the light bodies are of course driven from the electric, which in that state appears to repel. He conceived every electric to be possessed of two different kinds of pores, one for the emission of the electric matter, and the other for its reception. Besides his papers in the “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences” from 1740 to 1767, we have in our “Philosophical Transactions,” the result of a great number of experiments, made by the abbe Nollet, on the eflect produced by electricity on the flowing of water through capillary tubes; on the evaporation of liquids; the transpiration of vegetables; and the respiration of animals. These last experiments have been often repeated since, but the results drawn by the abbe are not considered as established.

, the biographer of Charles XII. of Sweden, was born at Stockholm in 1677. After entering the church, he was appointed an army chaplain, and accompanied the troops for some years. There is little else in the accounts of him that is interesting. Having had many opportunities of acquiring the necessary knowledge and information, he was selected to write the life of Charles XII, which was published at Stockholm in 1740, in 2 vols, folio, and afterwards translated into the German and French languages. The author of it died in 1744. Voltaire, who also wrote a life of Charles XII. speaks with little respect of Nordberg’s labours; and indeed the work seems rather a collection of useful materials than a well-digested narrative.

When the war broke out between England and Spain, count Danneskiold-Samsoe proposed to the king, that several of his officers of his majesty’s navy should go as volunteers into the service of the powers at war; and chose Norden in particular, to accompany his own nephew, count Ulric Adolphus, then a captain of a man of war, in such expeditions as should be undertaken by the English. On their arrival in London, Norden, whose fame had preceded him, was received with distinguished favour; several of the most considerable men at court, and even the prince of Wales, hearing of the designs he made in Egypt, were curious to see them, and shewed him great kindness. The following summer, he accompanied the count on an expedition under sir John Norris; and, in 1740, he again went on-board the fleet destined to America, under the command of sir Chaloner Ogle, with a design to reinforce admiral Vernon. After this, Norden spent about one year in London in great esteem, and was admitted a member of the Royal Society. On this occasion he gave the public an idea of some ruins and colossal statues, entitled, tf Drawings of some Ruins and Colossal Statues, at Thebes of Egypt; with an account of the same, in a Letter to the Royal Society,“1741. This essay, with the plates belonging to it, heightened the desire which men of curiosity had before conceived of seeing that work entire, of which this made only a small part. About this time he found his health declining; and proposed to the count to take a tour to France, and to visit the coasts and ports of that kingdom, in hopes a change of climate might have been a means of recovering his health: but he died at Paris in 1742, much regretted as a person who had done honour to his country, and from whom the world had great expectations. His” Travels" were translated from the Danish into French by Des Roches de Parthenais, and published at Copenhagen in 1755, 2 vois. fol. This was followed by an English translation, both in fol. and 8vo, by Dr. Peter Templeman. This edition was decorated with the original plates, which are extremely numerous, and were procured by Mr. Lockyer Davis.

, an ingenious artist, was the son of Robert Norgate, D. D. master of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, and in his youth shewed a great inclination to heraldry and limning, in both of which he became very eminent, but his talent in illuminating the initial letters of patents, was chiefly admired. His judgment in paintings also was considered very great, for which reason he was employed by the earl of Arundel, that celebrated collector of antiquities, to purchase pictures for him in Italy. Returning by Marseilles, and by some accident being disappointed of the remittances he expected, and totally unknown there, he was observed by a French gentleman, who, after inquiring into his circumstances, furnished him with the means of returning to his own country on foot. He was afterwards one of the clerks of the signet to ’Charles I. and as such attended his majesty to the North in 1640. He was also made Windsor herald for his great skill in heraldry, in which office he died, at the heralds’ college, Dec. 23, 1650, and was buried at St. Bennet’s, Paul’s Wharf, leaving the character of an honest, amiable, and accomplished man. Lloyd tells us that he left manuscripts to several of his friends to be published, but his intention in that point has not been executed. His letters, giving an account of the expedition against the Scotch in 1639, are among Dr. Birch’s “Historical Letters,” 3 vols. ms. in the British Museum, Ayscough’s catalogue. As an illuminator, the evidence of his abilities is a curious patent discovered some years ago. The late earl of Stirling received from a relation an old box of neglected writings, among which he found the original commission of Charles J. appointing his lordship’s predecessor, Alexander earl of Stirling, the celebrated poet, commander in chief of Nova Scotia, with the confirmation of the grant of that province made by James I. In the initial letter are the portraits of the king sitting on the throne, delivering the patent to the earl, and round the border representations in miniature of the customs, huntings, fishings, and productions, of the country, all in the highest preservation, and so admirably executed, that it was believed of the pencil of Vanclyck. But Mr. Walpole ascribes it to Norgate, who was allowed the best illuminator of that age.

, lord Guilford, lord keeper of the great seal in the reigns of Charles II. and James II. was the second son of the preceding, and was born about 1640. He had his grammar learning, in which he was a great proficient, at Bury-school, whence he was admitted a fellowcommoner of St. John’s college, in Cambridge, in 1653. His conversation is said to have been remarkably agreeable and facetious, while his diligent advancement in his studies afforded him more solid claims on the esteem of the society. But, as he was originally designed for the law, after two or three years spent at the university, he was removed to the Middle Temple. Here he applied with great diligence to the main object, yet continued to improve himself in history, classics, and languages. He acquired French, Italian, Spanish, and Dutch, and became not only a good lawyer, but was esteemed very accomplished in mathematics, philosophy, and music. He used to say, that, if he had not diverted his attention by these studies, and by the practice of music particularly, he should never have been a lawyer. He used to spend much of his early vacations with his grandfather, who loved to hear him talk of philosophy, and the news of London. The biographer of the Norths informs us that he made him “play at backgammon, and fid lie, whenever he thought fit; and the course of life altogether was not displeasing to a young person, for here was fishing, billiards, hunting, visiting, and all the country amusements.”

, a miscellaneous writer and translator of the last century, was a native of Ireland, who merits some notice, although we have not been able to recover many particulars of his history. He appears to have resided the greater part of his life in London, and employed his pen on various works for the booksellers, principally translations. In 1765 he received the degree of LL. D. from the university of Aberdeen. He died at his apartments in Gray’s Inn, April 27, 1772, with the character of a man of learning, industry, and contented temper. The first of his translations which we have met with, was that of Burlamaqui’s “Principles of Politic Law,” 1752, 8vo. This was followed by the abbe de Condillac’s “Essay on the origin of Human Knowledge,” 1756, 8vo. Macquer’s “Chronological abridgment of the Roman History,” 1759, 8vo; and Henault’s “Chronological abridgment of the History of France,” 1762, 2 vols. 8vo. In 1766 he travelled on the continent for the purpose of collecting materials for his “History of Vandalia,” which he completed in 3 vols. 4to, in 1776. This tour also occasioned his publishing “Travels through Germany,” &c. 2 vols. 8vo. We find him afterwards appearing as compiler or translator of a “Historyof France” “New Observations on Italy;” “The present state of Europe;” the “Life of Benv^nuto Cellini” Grossley’s “Tour to London” a French Dictionary, &c. &c. His translations were generally admired for elegance and accuracy; his principal faifure was in tjr^translation of Rousseau' “Emilius,” but it seems doubtful whether he translated this, or only permitted his name to be used.

Among the dissertations which the duties of his professorship required, were four curious ones, containing a historical view of the attempts made in all ages to unite seas and rivers by means of canals. These were published collectively in 1775, under the title of “Jungendorum marium fluminumque omnis sevi molimina.” Another of his printed dissertations, printed in 1773, had for its subject “De Latinos linguae medii a3vi mira barbaric.” Others appeared in the “Miscellanea Argentoratensia,” which he conducted from 1770 to 1773, particularly a treatise on the value of money among the ancient Romans, in which he entered into a rigorous examination of Eisenschmid’s calculations of the coins, weights, and measures of antiquity. During a visit to his brother in the mountains of Lorrain, he amused himself with studying the patois of the natives, and in an “Essai stir le Patois Lorrain,” &c. 1776, 12mo, showed its derivation from the language of the ancient Romans, and its relation to the other patois, and to the old French.

In 1778 he obtained a release from the labours of his father’s school, by being appointed professor extraordinary in the university, with a salary which indemnified him for the loss of his other place; and in March 1782, he succeeded to the chair of logic and metaphysics, which office he retained as long as the old university existed. To his publications he added between these years, an edition of “Vibius Sequester de fluminibus, fontibus,” &c. 1778, 8vo; an edition of Ovid’s “Tristia;” “Glossarium Germanicum medii aevi, potissimum dialecti Suevicae,” 1781—1784, 2 vols. fol. from the papers of professor Sherz, with illustrations and several dissertations on subjects of German antiquity; and a splendid and correct edition of Horace, 1788, 4to. In 1780 he first printed his Strasburgh almanack, and an almanack of the department of the Lower Rhine. Soon after the French republicans had begun their disorganizing work, Oberlin suffered in the calamities inflicted upon his native city, which he bore with resignation. In his latter days, life passed in more tranquillity, and during some visits he made to Paris, he was received as his great merit deserved. He died at Strasburgh, Oct. 10, 1806, in his seventy-second year.

He was a man of great simplicity of character, cheerful, benevolent, and virtuous. His whole life was- a course of unintermitted occupation, which he rendered easy to himself by an exact order in the minutest concerns, and the regular distribution of time and business. He was never opulent, but, by a prudent ceconomy was enabled to live in a decent competence. Literary honours were justly bestowed on him. He was a corresponding member of the French academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and of the academies of Rouen and Cortona,' the Societies of Antiquaries of London and Cassei, and of the National Institute, &c.

, a learned German, was descended from a family, which came originally from Schlestadt, and had been raised to nobility in the person of his great-grandfather by the emperor Rodolphus II. in 1604. Ulric was born, July 23, 1646, at Strasburg, where he had the first part of his education, and then proceeded to study the sciences at Montbelliard and Altorf. He inherited both the inclination and taste of his ancestors, who were all distinguished by the posts they held, either in the university, or in the senate of Strasburg. The study of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues was almost the first amusement of his infancy; and he learned, with equal facility, French, Spanish, and Italian. At fifteen^ he was so good a rhetorician, that he composed and pronounced a Latin speech in public, with universal applause. The method prescribed by his preceptors was, to suffer him to read only the ancient authors, and to derive the principles of eloquence from the purest sources, Demosthenes, Cicero, Quintilian, Longinus, &c. He also pursued the same plan, in his course of philosophy; Plato, Aristotle, and Pythagoras, being principally recommended to him. His general knowledge at length settled in jurisprudence and history: in both which he excelled, and filled the chairs of both in the university with great distinction, being admired, not more for the great extent of his knowledge, than for his perspicuity in communicating it. He gave an account of all ages as if he had lived in them; and of all laws as if he had been the maker of them. With all this, he spoke of such subjects as he knew best, like a man who sought rather to be informed than to decide. As soon as he had taken his licentiate’s degree, he resolved to travel for farther improvement. In this view, he went first to Vienna in Austria, with Mr. Kellerman, the Muscovite ambassador, and visited the libraries and learned men wherever he came. He commenced author at nineteen, when he published a kind of “Commentary upon Scipio’s Dream,” and “A Dissertation upon the Principles of Civil and Political Prude-nee.”

Among his other publications, not hitherto mentioned, were, “Dissertatio de abdicatione Caroli V. imperatoris;” “De electione Imperatoris Romana Germanici;” “De imitate reipublicae in sacro Romano imperio;” “De Clenodiis S. Rom. Imperil;'” “De legibus agrariis Pop. Romani;” “De verae philosophise origine;” “De philosophia Celtica” “De extraordinariis populi Romani imperils” “De ratione belli” “Sacra Termini” De censu Augusti“” De legione fulminatrice M. Antonini PhiL Imperatoris.“All these were published together in 1676, 4to. To these we may add his edition of Grotius” De Jure Belli," fol. 1696, &c. He left a son, who, at the time of his father’s death, was twenty-six years of age, and succeeded him in the post of praetor-royal of Strasburg, by the appointment of the French king.

In 1707 he published in 12mo, from the Italian of Leo Modena, a Venetian Rabbi, “The History of the present Jews throughout the world; being an ample, though succinct, account of their customs, ceremonies, and manner of living at this time:'? to which is subjoined a” Supplement concerning the Carraites and Samaritans, from the French of Father Simon.“In 1703, a little curious book, entitled” The Improvement of Human Reason, exhibited in the Life of Hai Ebn Yokclhan, written above 500 years,

As to his literary character, it is certain that he was extremely well skilled in all the ancient languages, and particularly the Oriental; so that the very learned Reland thought it not too much to declare, that he was “vir, si quis alius, harum literarum peritus.” He was, likewise, very knowing in modern languages, as in the French, Spanish, Italian, &c. and, upon the whole, considered as a linguist, we may presume that very few have exceeded him.

Mr. Oldenburg continued to publish the Transactions as before, to No. CXXXVI, June 25, 1677, after which the publication was discontinued till Jan. following; then resumed by his successor in the secretary’s office, Mr. Nehemiah Grew, who carried it on till Feb. 1678. Our author dying at his house at Charlton, near Greenwich, in Kent, in August that year, was interred there. Besides the works already mentioned, he translated into English, 1. “The Prodromus to a Dissertation by Nich. Steno, concerning Solids naturally contained within Solids,” &C.1671, 8vo. 2. “A genuine explication of the Book of Revelations,' 7 &c. 1671, 8vo, written by A. B. Piganius.” The Life of the Duchess of Mazarine," in 8vo, translated from the French. He left a son, named Rupert, from prince Rupert his godfather, and a daughter, named Sophia, by his wife, who was daughter and sole heir to the famous John Dury, a Scotch divine.

, a learned traveller, whose German name was Oelschlager, was born in 1599, or 1600, at Aschersieben, a small town in the principality of Anhalt. 43is parents were very poor, and scarcely able to maintain him, yet by some means he was enabled to enter as a student at Leipsic, where he took his degrees in arts and philosophy, but never was a professor, as some biographers have asserted. He quitted Leipsic for Holsteiu, where the duke Frederic, hearing of his merit and capacity, wished to employ him. This prince having a wish to extend the commerce of his country to the East, determined to send an embassy to the Czar Michael Federowitz, and the king of Persia, and having chosen for this purpose two of his counsellors, Philip Crusius and Otto Bruggeman, he appointed Olearius to accompany them as secretary. Their travels lasted six years, during which Olearius collected a great fund of information respecting the various countries they visited. The Czar of Moscovy on his return wished to have retained him in his service, with the appointment of astronomer and mathematician; not, however, his biographers tell us, so much on account of his skill in these sciences, as because the Czar knew that Olearius had very exactly traced the course of the Volga, which the Russians then wished to keep a secret from foreigners. Olearius had an inclination, however, to have accepted this offer, but after his return to the court of Holstein, he was dissuaded from it, and the duke having apologized to the Czar, attached him to himself as mathematician and antiquary. In 1643, the duke sent him on a commission to Moscow, where, as before, his ingenuity made him be taken for a magician, especially as on this occasion he exhibited a camera obscura. In 1650 the duke appointed him his librarian, and keeper of his curiosities. The library he enriched with many Oriental Mss. which he had procured in his travels, and made also considerable additions to the duke’s museum, particularly of the collection of Paludanns, a Dutch physician, which the duke sent him to Holland ta purchase; and he drew up a description of the whole, which was published at Sleswick in 1666, 4to. He also constructed the famous globe of Gottorp, and an armillary sphere of copper, which was not less admired, and proved how much mathematics had been his study. He died Feb. 22, 1671. He published, in German, his travels, 1647, 1656, 1669, fol. Besides these three editions, they were translated into English by Davies, and into Dutch and Italian. The most complete translation is that, in French, by Wicquefort, Amst. 1727, 2 vols. fol. who also translated Olearius’s edition of Mandelso’s “Voyages to Persia,” c. fol. Among his other and less known works, are some lives of eminent Germans “The Valley of Persian Roses,” from the Persian; “An abridged Chronicle of Holstein,” &c

O'Leary (Arthur), a Roman Catholic clergyman, was a native of Ireland, whence, when young, he embarked for France; studied at the college of St. Malo, in Briianny, and at length entered into the Franciscan order of Capuchins. He then acted, for some time, as chaplain to the English prisoners during the seven years war, for which he received a small pension from the Frenrh government, which he retained till the French revolution. Having obtained permission to go to Ireland, he obtained, by his talents, the notice and recompence of the Irish government; and took an early opportunity of shewing the superiority of his courage and genius, by principally attacking the heterodox doctrines of Michael Servetus, revived at that time hy a Dr. Blair, of the city of Cork. After this, in 1782, when there was a disposition to relax the rigour of the penal laws against the Roman Catholics, and establish a sort of test-oath, he published a tract entitled “Loyalty asserted, or the Test- Oath vindicated,” in which, in opposition to most of his brethren, he endeavoured to prove that the Roman Catholics of Ireland might, consistently with their religion, swear that the pope possessed there no temporal authority, which was the chief point on which the oath hinged; and in other respects he evinced his loyalty, and his desire to restrain the impetuous bigotry of his brethren. His other productions were of a various and miscellaneous nature; and several effusions are supposed to have come from his pen which he did not think it necessary or perhaps prudent to acknowledge. He was a man singularly gifted with natural humour, and possessed great acquirements. He wrote on polemical subjects without acrimony, and on politics with a spirit of conciliation. Peace indeed seems to have been much his object. Some years ago, when a considerable number of nocturnal insurgents, of the Romish persuasion, committed great excesses in the county of Cork, particularly towards the tithe- proctors of the protestant clergy, he rendered himself extremely useful, by his various literary addresses to the deluded people, in bringing them to a proper sense of their error and insubordination. This laudable conduct did not escape the attention of the Irish government; and induced them, when he quitted Ireland, to recommend him to men of power in this country. For many years he resided in London, as principal of the Roman Catholic chapel in Soho-square, where he was highly esteemed by people of his religion. In his private character he was always cheerful, gay, sparkling with wit, and full of anecdote. He died at an advanced age in January, 1802, and was interred in St. Pancras church-yard. His works are, 1. “Several Addresses to the Catholics of Ireland.” 2. “Remarks on Mr. Wesley’s Defence of the Protestant Association.” 3. “Defence of his conduct in the affair of the insurrection in Munster,” 1787. 4. “Review of the important Controversy between Dr. Carrol and the rev. Messrs. Wharton and Hopkins.” 5. “Fast sermon at St. Patrick’s chapel, Soho, March 8, 1797.” 6. A Collection of his Miscellaneous Tracts, in 1 vol. 8vo. 7. “A Defence of the Conduct and Writings of the rev. Arthur O'Leary, &c. written by himself, in answer to the illgrounded insinuations of the right rev. Dr. Woodward, bishop of Cloyne,” 1788, 8vo. The bishop, in his controversy with Mr. O'Leary, acknowledges that he represents matters strongly and eloquently, and that, “Shakspeare like, he is well acquainted with the avenues to the human heart;” and Mr. Wesley calls him an “arch and lively writer.” His style was certainly voluble, bold, and figurative but deficient in grace, manliness, perspicuity, and sometimes grammar; but he was distinguished as a friend to freedom, liberality, and toleration and was highly complimented on this account by Messrs. Grattan, Flood, and other members of the Irish parliament, in their public speeches.

, an elegant French writer, and classical editor, was the son of a counsellor of the parliament of Besangon y and born at Salins, March 30, 1682. After having finished his early studies with much applause, he entered thse society of the Jesuits, but left them, to their great regret, at the age of thirty-three. Before this they had conceived so high an opinion of hid merit, as to recommend him to be tutor to the prince of Asturias, but the abbe preferred a life of independence and tranquillity. Some time after, he came to Paris, and profited by the conversation of the few eminent survivors of the age of Louis XIV. On his arrival here he found the men of literature engaged in the famous dispute relative to the comparative merits of the ancients and moderns, but had the good sense to disapprove of the sentiments and paradoxes of Perrauk, and Terrasson, La Mothe, and Fontenelle. His first object appears to have been the study of his own language, which he wrote in great purity. In 1723 he was elected a member of the French academj-, and from this time devoted himself to the life of a man of letters.

His next employment was a continuation of the history of the French academy, from 1652, where Pelisson left off, to 1700. This he published in 1729, 4to, and the following year, in 2 vols. 12mo. Having been always a diligent student of the grammar of the French language, he published some works on that subject, which were much approved in France, although, like a few other of his detached pieces, they are less interesting to an English reader. He had however, long meditated what has rendered his name dear to scholars of all nations, his edition of Cicero, which has served as a standard of correctness and critical utility. It appeared first in 1740, 9 vols. 4to, splendidly printed at the expence of the French govern ­jnent. It is formed on the editions of Victorius, Manntius, Lambinus, and Gruter, and has the *' Clavis Ernestina." This truly valuable edition was reprinted at Geneva, 1758, y vols. 4to, and at Oxford, with the addition of various readings from twenty-nine manuscripts, collated by Hearne, and others more recently examined, 1783, 10 vols. 4to. The abbe* Olivet, whose personal character appears to have been as amiable as his labours were valuable, died of a fit of apoplexy, Oct. 8, 1768.

, a person of whose history little is known, was a relation of the celebrated Calvin, and the first who translated the Bible into French, which he printed at Neufchatel, in 1535, fol. His translation is not very accurate, but it was improved in subsequent editions by Calvin, Beza, and others, and formed the foundation of what was called the Geneva translation. The edition of 1540, 4to, called “La Bible de l'Epee,” is very scarce, Olivetan died in 1538, in consequence, as some say, of having been poisoned at Rome.

Soon after this, some disputes between him and count de Tarouca, plenipotentiary at the imperial court from that of Lisbon, induced him to give up his post as secretary. What the nature of these disputes were, we are not informed, but it appears that they exposed him to the hostility of a powerful party of that nobleman’s relations and friends at the court of Lisbon, while his growing attachment to Protestantism making him less guarded in his expressions, the inquisition of Lisbon found a pretence to censure him. Accordingly, when the first volume of the “Memoirs of his Travels” was published at Amsterdam m 1741, though much esteemed by the Portuguese in general, it was soon prohibited by the inquisition; and the three volumes of his “Letters, familiar, historical, political, and critical,” printed at the Hague, in 1741 and 1742, underwent the same fate. These works being writ-r ten in the Portuguese language, a stop was thus put to the sale of them; but his “Memoires concernant le Portugal,” Hague, 1741—1743, 2 vols. 8vo, in the French language, were well received by the public, and gained him great reputation.

His mind becoming easier by degrees, he returned to his favourite studies, and through the course of the year 1751, he published his “Amusements Periodiques,” a monthly publication, in which he entered with great freedom into the controversy between the protestant and Romish churches, and they were therefore soon prohibited both in Portugal and Rome. In 1753 he retired to a house at Kentish town, where he divided his time between the care of a small garden, the pursuit of his studies, and the conversation of several learned friends who frequently visited him. When the news arrived of the dreadful earthquake at Lisbon in December 1755, he published his “Discours Pathetique” early in 1756, addressed to his countrymen, but particularly to the king of Portugal. The rapid sale of several editions of this work, both in French and English, in the course of a few weeks, was no inconsiderable proof of its merit; but while it made him more known and esteemed in this and other countries, it drew upon him the resentment of some of his countrymen, and particularly of the inquisitors, who now laid a prohibition on all his works in geaeral. Even his brother, Thomas de Aquinas, a Benedictine monk, wrote to exhort him to retract his errors. This occasioned the chevalier to publish a second part, or “Suite de Discours pathetique,” 1757, in which he not only answered the objections made to the “Discours,” but inserted his brother’s letter, with a suitable answer.

, a Greek author, and a Platonic philosopher, wrote commentaries upon Plato’s “Politics,” which are lost; but his name is still known, by his treatise entitled “Stratageticus,” on the duty and virtues of the general of an army, which has been translated into Latin, Italian, French, and Spanish. The first edition in Greek was published, with a Latin translation, by Nicolas Rigault, at Paris, 1599, 4to but the reprint of this in 1600, 4 to, with the notes of Æmilius Forms, is preferred. There is also a good edition by Schwebelius, Nuremberg, 1762, fol. The time when our author flourished is not precisely fixed, only it is certain that he lived under the Roman emperors. His book may determine the point, if Q. Veranius, to whom it is dedicated, be the same person of that name who is mentioned by Tacitus, who lived under the emperors Claudius and Nero, and died in the reign of the latter, being then Legatus Britannia? but this is not certain.

, an eminent divine, was born Oct. 3, 1651 at Beringhen, a small town in the county of Liege, He was admitted a licentiate in divinity at Louvain in 1681, and afterwards taught theology in the college of Adrian, and at the seminary of Malines; but was driven from thence by Humbert de Precipiano, archbishop of that city, for his attachment to the Jansenists; and was banished in 1704, having declared himself one of Steyaert’s principal adversaries; but, after two years, Louvain becoming part of the emperor’s dominions, M. Opstraet was appointed principal of the college de Faucon, which office he held till his death, November 29, 1720. His Latin works are numerous, and in request among the disciples of Jansenius and Father Quesnel, but are rather scarce in France. The principal are, “A Theological Dissertation on the Method of administering the Sacrament of Penitence,” against Steyaert; “Vera Doctrina de Baptismo LaborantiunV' 3 vols. 12mo, against Steyaert;” Theological Instructions for young divines;“” The good Shepherd,“which treats on the duties of pastors, and has been translated into French, 2 vols. 12mo;” The Christian Divine,“translated into French by M. de S. Andre de Beauchene, under the title of,” Le Directeur d'un jeune The*ologien,“1723, 12mo;” Theological Instructions concerning human Actions,“3 vols. 12mo;” A System of dogmatical, moral, practical, and scholastic Theology," in 3 vols, with others enumerated in our authorities.

, a learned doctor of the Sorbonne, and grand master of the college de Navarre in the fourteenth century, was a native of Caen, and preceptor to Charles V. who made him bishop of Lisieux in 1377. He died in 1382. His principal works are, 1. “A Discourse on the Disorders of the Court of Rome.” 2. An excellent treatise “De Communicatione Idiomatum.” 3. A tract on coinage, in the library of the Fathers. 4. A learned and curious treatise “De Antichristo,” printed ift torn. IX. of P. Martenne’s “Amplissima Collectio,” &c. A French translation of the Bible is also attributed to him, but equally so to Raoul de Presle, and to Guyars des Moulins. He translated into French, by order of Charles V. Aristotle’s books “de Ccelo” and “de Mundo,” his “Ethics” and “Politics” and also Petrarch “dei Rimedi dell‘una et l’Altra Fortuna.”

When Orleannois was laid waste by the overflowing of the Loire in 1733, the duke, by his speedy help, saved a multitude of men who were perishing in the water, and furnished even the necessary grain for sowing the lands. It is universally known that, in 1739 and 1740, his liberality had no bounds but the people’s wants. He extended his alms not only to the poor catholics in Berlin, and throughout Silesia, but to those of the Indies and America. This great man also founded charity-schools in several places, and communities of men and women for the instruction of youth; a college at Versailles; a divinity chair in the Sorbonne, for explaining the Hebrew text of the holy scriptures. At Orleans he established foundations of midwives, and of surgeons for cutting for the stone. He purchased several very useful secrets, which he made public; and his gardens were filled with scarce and valuable simples from the most remote climates, for the relief of the sick. Anxious about. the public good to his last moments, he bequeathed to the seminary of the Trentetrois, a sum sufficient for the re-establishment of the scholarships; and from that time the young divines of this seminary have been taught Hebrew in the Sorbonne. These charitable occupations did not prevent his acquiring great learning. He applied with incredible success to the study of St. Thomas, Estius, the most valuable treatises in defence of religion, the fathers, the best ecclesiastical authors, the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Greek languages, that he might have the satisfaction of reading the hoi? scriptures in the original text. He also devoted some time to studying history, geography, botany, chemistry, natural philosophy, and painting. So rapid was his progress, that, in the last seven or eight years of his life, he cited texts of scripture almost always from memory, with the variations of the Hebrew, Greek, anoWulgate. The Greek fathers were as familiar to him as the Latin; and he explained with facility Plato’s Dialogues, and other profane authors. The duke of Orleans honoured the literati with his patronage, and encouraged them by his bounty, preferring those whose researches contributed to the glory of religion, or the public welfare. In the codicil of his* will., he leaves an annuity to the abb Frangois, and explains his motive in the following terms: “Being desirous to take upon myself to return the obligation which the public are under to S. abbe” Francois, author of a late work on the proofs of our religion, and to enable him to continue such useful labours, I give and bequeath to the foresaid S. Abbe Francois, five hundred livres annual-rent and annuity.“Ivlothwiths’tanding the immense sums which this prince spent, both in France and in foreign counrries, he discharged the accumulated debts of his own house,” restored its exhausted finances, and considerably increased its domains. Though humble and plain in his private life, he was grand and noble on public occasions. It is well known with how much magnificence he went into Alsace to espouse the queen in his majesty’s name; how liberal he was to the soldiers while colonel-general of the French infantry, and in what manner he celebrated the dauphin’s birth, the marriage of the duke of Chartres, &c. Gay and lively in conversation, he became serious the moment that any one began to talk to him on business. His austerities and application to study having brought on a long and painful illness, he waited for the approach of death with an incredible firmness and courage, speaking of it with the greatest tranquillity. He died February 4, 1752, aged forty-eight years and six months, universally regretted. He left many works in manuscript, principally literal translations, paraphrases, and commentaries on part of the Old Testament; a literal translation of the Psalms from the Hebrew, with a paraphrase, and notes; several dissertations against the Jews; a literal translation of St. Paul’s Epistles from the Greek, with a paraphrase, notes, and pious reflections, and several other curious treatises and dissertations on different subjects. His modesty would not permit him to print any of his writings he bequeathed them, with his library, to the Dominicans.

, a Jesuit who acquired a considerable reputation in his own country as a historian, was born at Bourges in 1644. He was a teacher of the belles lettres in different colleges for several years, and became a celebrated preacher. Some separate lives which he published, in an agreeable style, and with judicious reflections, first attracted the public attention, but his reputation chiefly arose from his historical writings. Voltaire says that father D'Orleans was the first who chose revolutions for his subject, and adds, that the idea was not more happy than the execution. His “History of the Revolutions of England” met with the universal approbation of the French critics, and would have been, says Palissot, a perfect model, had the author concluded with the reign of Henry V11I, but after that he was no longer allowed to be impartial. English critics, however, have a less favourable opinion of his qualifications for writing such a history; and Echard, who translated part of the work, “History of the Revolutions in England under the family of the Stuarts, from 1603 to 1690,” 1711, 8vo, has very properly cautioned his readers against the author’s prejudices. Father D'Orleans, whose private character is represented as very amiable, died in the prime of life iti 1698. His works are, l.the history already mentioned, “Histoire des Revolutions d'Angleterre,” Paris, 1693, 3 vols. 4to, afterwards reprinted in 4 vols. 12ino, with heads. Francis Turpin published a continuation in 1786, in 2 vols. 8vo. 2. “Histoire des Revolutions d' Espagne,” ibid. 1734, 3 vols 4to. This, left incomplete by the author, was finished by Brumoy and Rouille, but it had not the same success as his revolutions of England, which his countrymen are willing to impute to the subject being less interesting. 3. “Histoire de M. Constance, premier minister du roi de Siam, et de la derniere revolution de cet etat,” ibid. 1692, 12mo. 4. “Histoire des deux conquerants Tartares Chimchi et Camhi, qui ont subjugue la Chine,” ibid. 1689, 8vo. 5. The lives, published separately, of Spinola, 1693, 12mo; of P. Cotton, 1688, 4to of Ricci, 1693, 12mo; of Mary of Savoy and the infanta Isabella, 1696, 12mo, and of Stanislaus Kostka, 1712, reprinted in 1727, with the life of Louis de Gonzaga. 6. “Sermons et instructions Chretiennes sur diverses matieres,” 1696, 2 vols. 12mo.

This was the first step towards making his fortune; for the same friend being afterwards made archbishop of Thoulouse, and appointed by Henry III. ambassador in ordinary at the court of Rome in 1580, engaged D‘Ossat to be secretary to the embassy; and the archbishop dying in 1581, his secretary was employed in the same character by cardinal d’Este, protector of the French affairs at Rome. He continued in this service till the death of the cardinal protector, in 1586; who by will left him 4000 crowns, and offered him a diamond worth 20,000 crowns, to keep as a security till the legacy should be paid; but D‘Ossat generously refused the pledge, though he had no hopes of ever receiving the legacy. Before this time he had entered into the church, and been ordained priest; and during his residence with the cardinal, acquired a knowledge of the intrigues of the court of Rome, and displayed so much political ability, that he was -continued in the secretaryship under cardinal de Joyeuse, who succeeded d’Este. This was done by the express command of Henry ill. that he might be a kind of political tutor to that cardinal, who, being then only twenty-six years of age, had not gained sufficient experience; and he conducted himself so agreeably to Joyeuse, that he presented him in 1588 to the priory of St. Martyn du Vieux Bellesme; and the same year he was a second time invested with the post of counsellor to the praesidial court of Melun, which he had obtained before he left Paris.

Upon Henry the Fourth’s abjuring the Protestant religion in 1593, the papal absolution for him was obtained by D‘Ossat; which was deemed a master-stroke of his abilities. The favour was strongly opposed both by the Spaniards and the princes of the house of Lorrain, and also by the Hugonots, who were naturally averse to their beloved prince’s being reconciled to the see of Rome; but every difficulty was removed by the artful management of D’Ossat, who dissipated all the scruples of Clement VIII. a pope by nature extremely diffident; so that the affair was resolved on before the arrival of James Davy, afterwards cardinal Du Perron, who, indeed, by the figure that he made, quickened the execution . The king, in consideration of this service, nominated D‘Ossat, in 1596, to the bishopric of Rennes, to which the bull was signed gratuitously by the pope. Sept. 1597, he was appointed counsellor of state, on which occasion he took the oath before the duke of Luxemburg, then the French ambassador at Rome; who, having leave to return home in 1598, the superintendency of the French affairs was committed to D’Ossat, till another ambassador should be appointed; and, May the following year, he was created a cardinal. The king had solicited this favour for some time, his low birth being made an objection. Nor indeed was his fortune even now equal to this high station; but he resolved not to lay aside the modesty and temperance he had hitherto observed, and in that spirit refused an equipage and some fine furniture which were sent him three weeks after his promotion, by cardinal de Joyeuse, in whose house he had received the compliments of the cardinals upon his election. The legacy, however, already mentioned, of cardinal d'Este, happened unexpectedly to be paid to him the following year, 1600; and so seasonably, that, as he himself declared, he should otherwise have been almost ruined. Some time after, the pope gave him the abbey of Nant, in Rouerge. Upon cardinal de Joyeuse returning to France this year, he was appointed vice-protector of the French nation; and in that quality was affable, easily accessible, and kind to those who had occasion to apply to him. All these preferments were highly agreeable to Henry IV. who the same year added to them the bishopric of Bayeux, the revenues of which were richer than those of Rennes. This, however, he resigned in 1603, finding the affairs of the court would not permit him to reside in his diocese; and he had scarcely made this sacrifice when he died, March 13, 1604, in his 68th year. His corpse was interred in the church of St. Lewis, at Rome, where there is a monument erected to his memory.

In 1700, the clergy of Neufchatel chose Mr. Ostervald for their dean, an annual office to which he was frequently re-elected, and held it at one time for three successive years. In 1700, also, the London society for the propagation of the Gospel chose him a member, and had before so far honoured him as to cause his “Abridgment of the Sacred History” prefixed to his Catechism, to be translated into Arabic, in order to be sent to the East Indies. The year that he was first chosen dean was distinguished by the introduction of a new version of the Psalms in the churches, and various regulations of great utility in the modes of theological study and discipline, in all which he took an active part. He began also from this time to give a complete course of instructions to divinity students, which he carried on for forty-five years with great success and approbation. Such indeed was the fame of his lectures, that some of his pupils, eager to diffuse their usefulness more extensively, published some part of them, without either his knowledge or consent. In this way his “Ethica Christiana” was published in Latin, at London, in 1727, and often reprinted both in Dutch and French. A “Compendium Theologiae,” and “Trait4 du Ministere Sacre,” were also published in the same manner. Against all these Ostervald advertised, that they were published without his knowledge, and that he would not be responsible for their errors. Even this, however, had very little effect on the sale, so highly was every thing valued of which he was the reputed author; and, after all, there were not any errors faund in them which could affect his reputation. The last mentioned treatise was published in English in 1781, by the rev. Thomas Stevens, who considered it as the most complete that had then appeared, under the title of “Lectures on the exercise of the Sacred Ministry.”

In 1703 Ostervald went to Zurich with his son John Rodolphus, whom he placed for education under his friend Mr. Ott; from Zurich he went to Basil to visit his friend Werenfels, and other learned men of that place; and to Geneva, where he saw for the last time his friends Tronchin, Pictet, and Turretin. In all these places he preached to crowded audiences, attracted by the reputation of his talents for the pulpit. These were afterwards (in 1707) admired by an audience of royal and noble personages drawn to Neufcliatel to settle the sovereignty of that state, in consequence of the death of the duchess de Nemours. The decision was in favour of the king of Prussia, before whom he preached with such eloquence on the duties of subjects to their sovereign, that his majesty requested his sermons might be printed; but this was declined on the part of Ostervald. This year, however, he published his “Traite contre PImpurite,” which was translated into English, under the title of “A Discourse against the sin of Uncleaiiness,” and went through many editions both in English, French, and German. In 1708 he again, accompanied by Werenfels, went to Geneva, where they lodged with their friend Alphonsus Turretin the younger in this journey he fell in with the son of bishop Burnet. In November of next year he had the satisfaction to see his eldest son appointed pastor at Basil.