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

, a distinguished German writer, was born at Kamenz, in Pomerania, in 1729. His father, who was a man of talents and learning, had destined himself to an academical life, but was called to take charge of a congregation at Kamenz, the place of his nativity. Here he was in correspondence with the most famous preachers of his time, published some works of his own, and translated several treatises of AbjJ. Tillotson. He also left behind him a manuscript refutation of some prejudices against the reformation. There can be no doubt but the example and cares of so learned and thoughtful a father had no inconsiderable influence on the early turn which Lessing shewed for literature. When, in his sixth year, his father chose to have his picture drawn, in which he was to be represented sitting under a tree playing with a bird, young Lessing shewed his utter dislike to the plan, and said, “if I am to be painted, let me be drawn with a great heap of books about me, otherwise I had rather not be painted at all;” which was accordingly done. He passed five entire years at the high-school at Meissen, to which, by his own account, he was indebted for whatever learning and solidity of thinking he possessed. Though the Latin poetry belongs to the officiis perfectis of a scholar in this academy, and the German poetry to the imperfectis, yet he pursued the latter much more than the former, and celebrated the battle of Kesseldorf in German verse, at the request of his father. Professor Klemm particularly encouraged him to the-study of mathematics and philosophy while Grabner, the rector of the academy, wrote to his father concerning them “He is a colt that requires a double allowance of provender. The lessons that are found too difficult for others, are but child’s play to him. We shall hardly be sufficient for him much longer.” Being removed to Leipsic, he soon displayed his inclination to write for the stage, and likewise made great proficiency in the bodily exercises of horsemanship, fencing, dancing, and leaping. Mr. Weisse was his first and principal friend at this place; and their friendship was only dissolved by death. Lessing frequented the college-exercises but little, and that irregularly: none of the professors gave him satisfaction, excepting Ernesti, whose lectures he sometimes attended; but he was himself an extensive reader, and was especially partial to the writings of Wolff in German. He kept up a great intimacy with Naumann, the author of “Nimrod,” on account of his possessing many singular qualities, which were always more agreeable to Lessing, than the common dull monotony of character, even though mingled with some weaknesses and defects. Under Kastner he exercised himself in disputation; and here began his close connection with Mylius, whose works he after-, wards published. His intercourse with this free-thinker, and with the company of comedians, however, gave great uneasiness to his parents. His first literary productions appeared in a Hamburgh newspaper. In company with M. Weisse, he translated “Hannibal,” the only tragedy of Marivaux, into rhyming Alexandrines. His comedy of the “Young Scholar,” which he had begun while a schoolboy, was finished at Leipsic, from an actual event that happened to a young scholar disappointed in his hopes of the prize from the academy at Berlin. His father about this time thought proper to recall him home for a time, in order to wean him from the bad company he was thought to frequent. In this interval, he composed a number of Anacreontics on love and wine. One day, his pious sister coming into his room, in his absence, saw these sonnets, read them over, and, not a little angry that her brother could so employ his time, threw them into the fire. A trifling burst of resentment was all he felt on the occasion. He took a handful of snow, and threw it into her bosom, in order to cool her zeal. He now went back to Leipzig; which place he soon after quitted, going by Wittenberg to Berlin. This gave his father fresh uneasiness; and produced those justificatory letters of his son, which at least display the frankness of his character. At Berlin, in conjunction with Mylius, he compiled the celebrated “Sketch of the History and Progress of the Drama.” The father of a writer who had been sharply criticised in this work, made complaint of it to Lessing’s father. To this person he wrote in answer: “The critique is mine, and I only lament that I did not make it more severe. Should Gr. complain of the injustice of my judgment, I give him full liberty to retaliate, as he pleases on my works.” One of his first acquaintances in Berlin was a certain Richier de Louvain, who, in 1750, from a French teacher, was become secretary to Voltaire, with whom he brought our author acquainted. From Berlin he went to Wittenberg, where he plied his studies with great diligence, and took the degree of master, but remained only one year, and then returned to Berlin. At Berlin he undertook the literary article for the periodical publication of Voss, in which employment he both wrote and translated a great variety of pieces, and formed several plans which were never executed. Among others, he agreed with Mendelsohn to write a journal, under the title of “The best from bad Books:” with the motto taken from St. Ambrose, “Legimus aliqua ne legantur.” “We read some books to save others the trouble.” Jn 1755, he went back to Leipzic, and thence set out upon a journey, in company with a young man of the name of Winkler: but this was soon interrupted, and brought op a law-suit, in which Lessing came off conqueror. He now, in order to please his sister, translated “Law’s serious Call,” which was finished and published by Mr. Weisse. At the beginning of 1759, Lessing went again to Berlin, where he very much addicted himself to gaming. This has been attributed to his situation at Breslaw, where he was in the seven years war for some time in quality of secretary to general Tauenzien. Even the care for his health was conducive to it. “Were I able to play calmly,” said he, “I would not play at all; but it is not without reason that I play with eagerness. The vehement agitation sets my clogged machine in motion, by forcing the fluids into circulation; it frees me from a bodily torment, to which I am often subject.” His intimate friends among the learned at Breslaw were Arletius and Klose. Here he was attacked by a violent fever. Though he suffered much from the disease, yet be declared that his greatest torment arose from the conversations of his physician, old Dr. Morganbesser, which he could scarcely endure when he was well. When the fever was at its height, he lay perfectly quiet, with great significance in his looks. This so much struck his friend standing by- the bed, that he familiarly asked him what he was thinking of? “I am curious to know what will pass in my mind when I am in the act of dying.” Being told that was impossible, he abruptly replied: “You want to cheat me.” On the day of his reception into the order of free-masons at Hamburgh, one of his friends, a zealous free-mason, took him aside into an adjoining room, and asked him, “Is it not true, now, that you find nothing among us against the government, religion, or morals” “Yes,” answered Lessmg, with great vivacity, “would to heaven I had I should then at least have found something” The extent of his genius must be gathered from his numerous writings. Mendelsohn said of him in a letter to his brother, shortly after his death, that he was advanced at least a century before the age in which he lived.

This appearance at the court of Cromwell was much censured, after the restoration, by some of the royal party, who also objected to him, that he had once been heard playing in a concert where the usurper was present, and, therefore, they nick-named him “Oliver’s Fidler.” He was charged also with having bribed some of the protector’s people, but he positively disavows it; averring, he never spoke to Thurloe but once in his life about his discharge; and that, though during the dependency of that affair he might well be seen at Whitehall, yet he never spoke to Cromwell on any other business, or had the least commerce of any kind with him. From this to the time of the restoration, he seems to have lived free from any disturbance from the then governing powers; and perhaps the obscurity into which he had fallen made him be overlooked by Charles II. and his ministry, on that prince’s recovering his throne. He did not, however, so undervalue his own sufferings and merits, as to put up quietly with this usage, and therefore addressed a warm expostulation to the earl of Clarendon, in the dedication to that minister of his “Memento,” published in 1662; where he joins himself with other neglected cavaliers, who had suffered for their attachment to the royal family during the civil wars and the succeeding usurpation, at the same tima acknowledging the personal obligations he had received from Clarendon. For some time his remonstrances appear to have produced little effect, but at length he was made licenser of the press, a profitable post, which he enjoyed till the eve of the revolution. This, however, was all the recompence he ever received, except being in the commission of the peace, after more than twenty years, as he says, spent in serving the royal cause, near six of them in gaols, and almost four under a sentence of death in Newgate. It is true, he hints at greater things promised him; and, in these hopes, exerted his talents, on behalf of the crown, in publishing several pieces. In 1663, for a farther support, he set up a paper, called “The Public Intelligencer, and the News;' f the first of which came out the 1st of August, and continued to be published twice a week, till January 19, 1665; when he laid it down, on the design then concerted of publishing the” London Gazette,“the first of which papers made its appearance on. Saturday Feb. 4. After the dissolution of Charles’s second parliament, in 1679, he set up a paper, called” The Observator;“the design of which was to vindicate the measures of the court, and the character of the king, from the charge of being popislily affected. With the same spirit he exerted himself in 1681, in ridiculing the popish plot; which he did with such vehemence, that it raised him many enemies, who endeavoured, notwithstanding his known loyalty, to render him obnoxious to the government. But he appeared with no less vehemence against the fanatic plot in 1682; and, in 1683, was particularly employed by the court to publish Dr. Tillotson’s papers exhorting lord Russel to avow the doctrine of non-resistance, a little before his execution. In this manner he weathered all the storms raised against him during that reign, and, in the next, unrewarded with the honour of knighthood, accompanied with this declaration,” that it was in consideration of his eminent services and unshaken loyalty to the crown, in all extremities; and as a mark of the singular satisfaction of his majesty, in his present as well as his past services.“In 1687, he was obliged to lay down his” Observator,“now swelled to three volumes; as he could not agree with the toleration proposed by his majesty, though, in all other respects, he had gone the utmost lengths. He had even written strenuously in defence of the dispensing power, claimed by that infatuated prince; and this was probably one reason, why some accused him of having become a proselyte to the church of Home, an accusation which gave him much uneasiness, and which was heightened by his daughter’s defection to that church. To clear himself from this aspersion, he drew up a formal declaration, directed to his kinsman, sir Nicolas L'Estrange, on the truth of which he received the sacrament at the time of publishing the same, which is supposed to be in 1690 . By this declaration we find he was married his lady’s name was Anne Doleman but what issue he had by her, besides the just- mentioned daughter, has not come to our knowledge. After the revolution, he seems to have been left out of the commission of the peace; and, it is said, queen Mary shewed her contempt of him by the following anagram she made upon his name,” Lying- Strange Roger:" and it is certain he met with some trouble, for the remainder of his life, on account of his being a disaffected person.

, an eminent oriental and classical scholar, was born at Utrecht, April 26, 1624, of reputable parents, who died when he was very young. He studied at the schools and university of Utrecht, and took his degree of master of arts in 1647. To his philosophical course, he then added the study of theology, and particularly the oriental languages, in which he made great proficiency. In 1649, he was admitted among the number of candidates for the ministry, and then went to Amsterdam to acquire a more perfect knowledge of the Hebrew, and of the Jewish customs, availing himself of the instructions of two learned Jews, one of whom, being an Arabian, gave him a favourable opportunity of adding that language to his stock. On his return to Utrecht in January 1650, he was licensed to teach the oriental languages, an honour which induced him to return once more to Amsterdam, to study the Talmud and the Rabbins. In July of the same year, the curators of the university of Utrecht appointed him professor extraordinary of Hebrew. He was required to give only two lectures per week, which, however, he increased to three, and included the oriental languages and theology; and when he received a call to a congregation in Flanders, the curators of the university, unwilling to part with a man of such ability, promoted him to the chair of professor in ordinary, which he filled with great reputation. In 1658 he travelled through the Palatinate and the neighbourhood, and afterwards visited France and England. On his return he married, and had a numerous family. Three of his sons attained considerable eminence, Rodolph as a physician, John William as a counsellor and burgomaster, and James as a divine. After long enjoying a good state of health, the result of temperance and exercise, he was attacked by the nephritic colic, which, afte'r tormenting him for some weeks, occasioned his death, Sept. 30, 1699, in his seventy-fifth year. He was a man of a frank, liberal temper, and benevolent he was very kind to foreign students, particularly those from Hungary, and used to be called the Father of the Hungarians. His manner of teaching was clear and methodical; and by that, and a strict discipline, he produced many eminent scholars.

, a celebrated divine of the sixteenth century, was born at Little Lever, in Lancashire, and educated at Cambridge, where after taking his degrees, he was chosen fellow, and then master of St. John’s college. He was ordained both deacon and priest in 1550, by bishop Ridley, and became a most eloquent and popular preacher in the reign of king Edward. He is, indeed, on his monument called by way of distinction, “preacher to king Edward.” Under his mastership St. John’s college greatly flourished, and in it the reformation gained so much ground, that on the commencement of the Marian persecution, he and twenty-four of the fellows resigned their preferments. Mr. Lever went abroad, and resided with the other exiles for religion at Francfort, where he in vain endeavoured to compose the differences which arose among them respecting church discipline and the habits. He resided also for some time in Switzerland, at a place called Arrow, where he was pastor to a congregation of English exiles. Here he became so much a favourer of Calvin’s opinions, as to be considered, on his return to England, as one of the chiefs of the party who opposed the English church-establishment. The indiscreet conduct of some of them soon made the whole obnoxious to government; and uniformity being strictly pressed, Mr. Lever suffered among others, being convened before the archbishop of Ydrk, and deprived of his ecclesiastical preferments. Many of the cooler churchmen thought him hardly dealt with, as he was a moderate man, and not forward in opposing the received opinions, Bernard Gilpin, his intimate friend, was among those who pitied, and expressed his usual regard for him. His preferments were a prebend of Durham, and the mastership of Sherburn hospital; Strype mentions the archdeaconry of Coventry, but is not clear in his account of the matter. He appears to have been allowed to retain the mastership of the hospital, where he died in July 1577, and was buried in its chapel. Baker in his ms collections gives a very high character of him as a preacher. “In the days of king Edward, when others were striving for preferment, no man was more vehement, or more galling in his sermons, against the waste of church revenues, and other prevailing corruptions of the court; which occasioned bishop Ridley to rank him with Latimer and Knox. He was a man of as much natural probity and blunt native honesty as his college ever bred; a man without guile and artifice; who never made suit to any patron, or for any preferment; one that had the spirit of Hugh Latimer. No one can read his sermons without imagining he has something before him of Latimer or Luther. Though his sermons are bold and daring, and full of rebuke, it was his preaching that got him his preferment. His rebuking the courtiers made them afraid of him, and procured him reverence from the king. He was one of the best masters of feis college, as well as one of the best men the college ever bred.” He was succeeded in the mastership of his hospital by his brother Ralph, whom some rank as a puritan, although his title seems doubtful. He was however, of less reputation than his brother. Mr. Thomas Lever’s printed works are a few “Sermons,” which, like Latimer’s, contain many particulars of the manners of the times and three treatises “The right way from the danger of sin and vengeance in this wicked world,” 1575 a “Commentary on the Lord’s Prayer” and “The Path-way to Christ.”

His writings are, 1. “An Almanack and Kalendar; containing the day, hour, and minute, of the change of the moon for ever,” &c. 8vo. 2. “Commentarioli Britannicae Descriptionis Fragmentuni. Colon. Agrip.” 1572: of which a new edition was published by Mr. Moses Williams, under the title of “Humfredi Lhwyd, Armigeri, Britannicie Descriptionis Comrnentariolum: necnon de Monfi Insula, & Britannica Arce sive Armamentario Romano Disceptatio Epistolaris. Accedunt^raa Cambro-Britannicae. Accurante Mose Gulielmo, A.M. R. S. Soc.” Lond. 1731, 4to. Thi? was translated into English by Tho. Twyne, who entitled it, “The Breviary of Britain,” Lond. 1753, 8vo. 3. “De JVionfi Druidum Insula, Antiquitati sine restitutfi;” in a letter to Abraham Ortelius, April 5, 1568. 4. “De mentario Romano.” These two last are printed at the end of “Historic Britannicae Defensio; written by sir John Price,” Lond. 1573, 4to. 5. “Chronicon Wallisr, a Rege Cadtvalladero, usque ad Ann. Dom. 1294,” ms. in the Cottontail library. 6. “The History of Cambria, now called Wales, from Caradoc of Lancarvan, the Registers of Con­^ray and Stratflnr; with a Continuation, chiefly extracted from Mat. Paris, Nic. Trivet, &c.” He died before this was quite finished; but sir Henry Sidney, lord -president of Wales, having procured a copy of it, employed Dr. David Powel to prepare it for the press, who published it under this title: “The Historic of Cambria, now called Wales; a part of the most famous yland of Britaine; written in the Brytish language above two hundred years past; translated into English by H. Lloyd, gent, corrected, augmented, and continued out of Records and best approved Authors,” Lond. 1584, 4to. Our author translated also, 7. “The Treasure of Health; containing many profitable Medicines, written by Peter Hispanus.” To which were added, “The Causes and Signs of every Disease, with the Aphorisms of Hippocrates,” Lond. 1585. And 8. “The Judgment of Urines,” Lond. 1551, 8vo.

, a physician and chemist, born at Hall, in Saxony, was professor of history and poetry at Jena, in 1588, but removed to Rothenburg, on the Tauber, in 1591, and to Coburg, in Franconia, in 1605, where he was appointed principal of the college of Casimir, at that place. He died at Coburg in 1616. Libavius obtained a considerable reputation in his time by his chemical works, having pursued that science upon better principles than most of his contemporaries, although he did not altogether escape the delusions of alchemy. Although he employed many chemical preparations in medicine, he avoided the violence of Paracelsus and his disciples, against whom he frequently defends the doctrines of the Galenical school. He left his name long attached, in the laboratories, to a particular preparation of tin with muriatic acid, which was called “the fuming liquor of Libavius.” It is unnecessary to enumerate the titles of his many works, which have now become obsolete, and are almost forgotten. His last work, published at Francfort in 1615, under the title of “Exarnen Philosophise Novae, quae veteri abrogandac opponitur,” folio, is remarkable for the first mention of the transfusion of blood from the vessels of one living animal to those of another, of which he speaks with great confidence, and which once excited great expectations, which have confessedly been disappointed.

two champions appeared in the court, “Collections,” vol. I. armed cap-a-pie, with sand l>ag, &c. patched this important affair, returned to England in a few months with the pamphlet, Bastwick’s “Merry Liturgy,” as it was called, and a cargo of other pieces of a similar kind. These he dispersed with much privacy, until, being betrayed by his associate, he was apprehended; and, after examination before the council-board and high commission court, to whose rales he refused to conform, he was found guilty of printing and publishing several seditious books, particularly “News from Ipswich,” a production of Prynne’s. Lilburne was condemned Feb. 1637, to be whipped at the cart’s tail from the Fleet-prison to Old Palace Yard, Westminster; then set upon the pillory there for two hours; afterwards to be carried back to the Fleet, there to remain till he conformed to the rules of the court; also to pay a fine of 500l. to the king; and, lastly, to give security for his good behaviour. He underwent this sentence with an undismayed obstinacy, uttering many bold speeches against the bishops, and dispersing many pamphlets from the pillory, where, after the star-chamber then sitting had ordered him to be gagged, he stamped with his feet. The spirit he shewed upon this occasion procured him the nickname of “Free-born John” among the friends to the government, and among his own party the title of Saint. In prison he was loaded with double irons on his arms and legs, and put into one of the closest wards; but, being suspected to have occasioned a fire which broke out near that ward, he was removed into a better, at the earnest solicitation both of the neighbours and prisoners. The first nse he made of his present more convenient situation, was to publish a piece of his own writing, entitled “The Christian Man’s Trial,” in 4to, “Nine arguments against episcopacy,” and several “Epistles to the Wardens of the Fleet.”

When the parliament had voted an army to oppose the king, Lilburne entered as a volunteer, was a captain of foot at the battle of Edge-hill, and fought well in the engagement at Brentford, Nov. 12, 1612, but being taken prisoner, was carried to Oxford, and would have been tried and executed for high treason, had not his parliamentary friends threatened retaliation. After this, as he himself informs us, he was exchanged very honourably above his rank, and rewarded with a purse of 300l. by the earl of Essex. Yet, when that general began to press the Scots’ covenant upon his followers, Lilburne quarrelled with him, and by Cromwell’s interest was made a major of foot, Oct. 1643, in the new-raised army under the earl of Manchester. In this station he behaved very well, and narrowly escaped with his life at raising the siege of Newark by prince Rupert; but at the same time he quarrelled with his colonel (King), and accused him of several misdemeanours, to the earl, who immediately promoted him to be lieutenant-colonel of his own regiment of dragoons. This post Lilburne sustained with signal bravery at the battle of Marston-moor, in July; yet he had before that quarrelled with the earl for not bringing colonel King to a trial by a court* martial; and upon Cromwell’s accusing his lordship to the House of Commons, Nov. 1644, Lilburne appeared before the committee in support of that charge. Nor did he rest until he had procured an impeachment to be exhibited in the House of Commons in August this year, against colonel King for high crimes and misdemeanours. Little attention being paid to this, he first offered a petition to the House, to bring the colonel to his trial, and still receiving no satisfaction, he published a coarse attack upon the earl of Manchester, in 1646. Being called before the House of Lords, where that nobleman was speaker, on account of this publication, he not only refused to answer the interrogatories, but protested against their jurisdiction over him in the present case; on which he was first committed to Newgate, and then to the Tower. He then appealed to the House of Commons; and upon their deferring to take his case into consideration, he charged that House, in print, not only with having done nothing of late years for the general good, but also with having made many ordinances notoriously unjust and oppressive. This pamphlet, which was called “The Oppressed man’s oppression,” being seized, he printed another, entitled “The Resolved man’s resolution,” in which he maintained “that the present parliament ought to be pulled down, and a new one called, to bring them to a strict account, as the only means of saving the laws and liberties of England from utter destruction,” This not availing, he applied to the agitators in the army; and at length, having obtained liberty every day to go, without his keeper, to attend the committee appointed about his business, and to return every night to the Tower, he made use of that indulgence to engage in some seditious practices. For this he was recommitted to the Tower, and ordered to be tried; but, upon the parliament’s apprehensions from the Cavaliers, on prince Charles’s appearing with a fleet in the Downs, he procured a petition, signed by seven or eight thousand persons, to be presented to the House, which made an order, in August 1648, to discharge him from imprisonment*, and to make him satisfaction for his sufferings. This was not compassed, however, without a series of conflicts and quarrels with Cromwell; who, returning from Ireland in

singular address to the jury, that in October 26, 1649." them alone was inherent the judicial May 1650, and finding Lilburne in a peaceable disposition witli regard to the parliament, procured him the remainder of his grant for reparations above-mentioned. This was gratefully acknowledged by his antagonist, who, however, did not continue long in that humour; for, having undertaken a dispute in law, in which his uncle George Lilburne happened to be engaged, he petitioned the parliament on that occasion with his usual boldness in 1651; and this assembly fined him in the sum of 7000l. to the state, and banished him the kingdom. Before this, however, could be carried into execution, he went in Jan. 1651-2, to Amsterdam; where, having printed an apology for himself, he sent a copy of it, with a letter, to Cromwell, charging him as the principal promoter of the act of his banishment. He had also several conferences with some of the royalists, to whom he engaged to restore Charles II. by his interest with the people, for the small sum of 10,000l. but no notice was taken of a design which, had it been plausible, could never have been confided to such a man. He then remained in exile, without hopes of re-visiting England, till the dissolution of the long parliament; on which event, not being able to obtain a pass, he returned without one, in June 1657; and being seized and tried at the Old Bailey, he was a second time acquitted by his jury. Cromwell, incensed by this contempt of his power, which was now become despotic, had him curried to Portsmouth, in order for transportation; but the tyrant’s wrath was averted, probably by Lilburne* s brother Robert, one of his major-generals, * upon whose bail for his behaviour he was suffered to return. After this, he settled at Khham, in Kent, where he passed the short remainder of his days in tranquillity, giving, however, another proof of his versatile principles, by joining the quakers, among whom he preached, in and about Eltham, till his death, Aug. 29, 1657, in his forty- ninth year. He was interred in the then new burial place in Moor-fields, near the place now called Old Bedlam; four thousand persons attending his burial.

All this while our astrologer continued true to his own interest, by serving that of the parliament party, from whom he received this year, 1648, fifty pounds in cash, and an order from the council of state for a pension of 100l. perann. which was granted to him for furnishing them with a perfect knowledge of the chief concernments of France. This he obtained by means of a secular priest, with whom he had been formerly acquainted, and who now was confessor to one of the French secretaries. Lilly received the pension two years, when he threw it up, with the employment, in disgust on some account or other. He read public lectures upon astrology, in 1648 and 1649, for the improvement of young students in that art and succeeded so well both as a practitioner and teacher, that we find him, in 1651 and 1652, laying out near 2000l. for lands and a house at Hersham. During the siege of Colchester, he and Booker were sent for thither, to encourage the soldiers, which they did by assuring them that the town would soon be taken, which proved true, and was perhaps not difficult to be foreseen. In 1650 he published that the parliament should not continue, but a new government arise, agreeably thereto; and in the almanack for 1653, he also asserted, that the parliament stood upon a ticklish foundation, and that the commonalty and soldiery would join together against them. On this he was called before the committee of plundered ministers; but, receiving notice before the arrival of the messenger, he applied to speaker Lenthal, always his friend, who pointed out the offensive passages, which he immediately altered; and attended the committee next morning with six copies printed, which six alone he acknowledged to be his. By this trick he escaped after having been only detained thirteen days in custody of the serjeant at arms. This year he was engaged in a dispute with Mr. Thomas Gataker, and, before the expiration of the year, he lost his second wife, to his great joy, and married a third in October following. In 1655 he was indicted at Hicks’s-hall, for giving judgment upon stolen goods, but acquitted: and, in 1659, he received, from the king of Sweden, a present of a gold chain and medal, worth above 50l. on account of his having mentioned that monarch with great respect in his almanacks of 1657 and 1658.

Lily’s works are, 1. “Brevissima institutio, seu ratio grammatices cognoscendi,” Lond. 1513; reprinted often, and used at this day, and commonly called “Lily’s Grammar.” The English rudiments were written by Dr. Colet, and the preface to the first edition, by cardinal Wolsey. The English syntax was written by Lily; also the rules for the genders of nouns, beginning with Propria quse maribus; and those for the preter-perfect tenses and supines, beginning with “As, in prsesenti.” The Latin syntax was chiefly the work of Erasmus. See Ward’s preface to his edition of Lily’s grammar, 1732. 2. “In senigmatica Bossi Antibossicon primum, secundum, tertium, ad G. Hormannum,” Lond. 1521, 4to. 3. “Poemata varia,” printed with the former. 4. “Apologia ad R. Whyttingtonum.” 5. “Apologia ad Joan. Skeltonum,” in answer to some invectives of that poet. 6. “De laudibus Deipari Virginis.” 7. “Super Philippi archiducis appulsu.” 8. “De Caroli quinti Caesaris adventu panegyricum.” Some other pieces are attributed to him on doubtful authority.

, a celebrated professor of divinity in Holland, of the Arminian persuasion, was of a good family, originally of Maestricht, and born at Amsterdam, June 19, 1633. He passed the first years of his life in his father’s house, going thence daily to school; and then, attending the public lectures, became the disciple of Gaspar Barlaeus in ethics, of Gerard John Vossius in history, and of Arnold Sanguerd in philosophy. This foundation being laid, he applied himself to divinity under Stephen Curcellseus, who succeeded Simon Episcopius in that chair, among the remonstrants. From Amsterdam he went to Utrecht, and frequented the lectures of Gilbert Voetius, and other divines of the reformed religion. In May 1654, he returned to Amsterdam, and made his first probationsermon there in Oct. following. He passed an examination in divinity in August 1655; and was admitted to preach publicly, as a probationer, which he did first at Haerlem. The same year he was invited to be stated minister of Alcmaer, but declined it, not thinking himself yet qualified for that important task. In 1657 he published a course of sermons in Dutch, by Episcopius, his greut uncle by the mother’s side, and the same year was invited to be minister of the remonstrants at Gouda, where there was a numerous congregation of that sect. He accepted this vocation, and exercised the ministerial function in that town till he was called to Amsterdam.

, one of the most eminent physicians and scholars of his age, descended from the Linacres of Li nacre-hall in the parish of Chesterfield, Derbyshire, was born at Canterbury about 1460. Having completed his school-education, under William de Sellingj a very eminent master, in his native city, he entered at Oxford, and was chosen fellow of All Souls’ college in 1484. Being desirous of farther advancement in learning, he accompanied De Selling into Italy, whither the latter was sent on an embassy to the court of Rome by Henry VII. De Selling left him at Bologna, with strong recommendations to Politian, one of the most elegant Latinists in Europe; and removing thence to Florence, Linacre acquired the favour of that munificent patron of literature, Lorenzo de Medicis, who granted him the privilege of attending the same preceptors with his own sons; an opportunity, by which he knew how to profit; and under Demetrius Chalcondylas, who had fled from Constantinople when it was taken by the Turks, he acquired a perfect knowledge of the Greek language. He then went to Rome, and studied medicine and natural philosophy under Hermolaus Barbaras. He applied particularly to the works of Aristotle and Galen, and is said to have been the first Englishman who made himself master of those writers by perusing them in the original Greek. He also translated and published several of Galen’s tracts into most elegant Latin, and along with Grocyn and William Latimer, undertook a translation of Aristotle, which, however, they left imperfect. On his return to England, he was incorporated M. D. at Oxford, which degree he had taken at Padua, gave temporary lectures on physic, and taught the Greek language in that university. His reputation soon became so high, that king Henry VII. called him to court, and entrusted him with the care both of the health and education of his son, prince Arthur. He is said also to have instructed princess Catherine in the Italian language. He was made successively physician to the kings Henry VII., Henry VIII., and Edward VI., and to the princess Mary.

, an ancient Scotch poet, descended from a noble family, was born in 1490, at Garmylton in Hadingtonshire, and received his early education probably at the neighbouring school of Coupar. In 1505 he was sent to the university of St. Andrew’s, which he is supposed to have left in 1509. He then entered into the service of the court, where, in 1512, he was an attendant, or page of honour to James V. then an infant. In this situation he continued until 1524, when, by the intrigues of the queen mother, the young king was deprived of his servants, Bellenden, Lindsay, and others, for whom he seems always to have entertained a just regard, and whom he dismissed with a pension, the payment of which his majesty was studious to enforce, while his means were few, and his power was little. From 1524 to 1528, Lindsay was a witness of the confusions and oppressions arising from the domination of the Douglasses over both the prince and his people. From that thraldom the king, at the age of sixteen, made his escape, by his own address and vigour, in July of 1528, after every other exertion had failed. Lindsay had now liberty and spirits to support him in the cultivation of his muse, and about the end of the year just mentioned, produced his “Dreme.” In the following year he presented his “Complaynt” to the king, and in 1530 he was inaugurated lion king of arms, and incidentally became a knight. In December of this year he published his satire on the clergy, called “The Complaynt of the Papingo.”

Sir David was soon employed in discharging the proper functions of lion herald. In April 1531, he was sent with Campbel and Panter, to Antwerp, to renew the ancient treaty of commerce with the Netherlands, and they were so well received by the emperor Charles V. as to insure the success of their mission. Lindsay returned to Scotland in the latter end of 1531, and not long after married. This marriage does not appear to have been either fruitful or happy. Sir David left no issue, and he every where speaks with a sort of Turkish contempt of women. He was now occupied upon a poem, which displays much of that sentiment, a drama of a very singular kind, which he called, what he intended it to be, “A Satyre of the three Estatis.” Some of his biographers have affected to consider him as the first dramatist of his country. But moralities existed in Scotland before he was born; and were very common in his time. In 1536, probably, he produced his “Answer to the King’s Flyting,” and his ' Complaynt of Basche," which shew the gloominess of his temperament.

In the mean time he was sent as lion king, with sir John Campbel of Laudon, in 1535, to the emperor, to demand in marriage one of the princesses of his house. The king, however, not being satisfied with the portraits of the princesses presented to him, or perhaps, as Mr. Chalmers thinks, being attracted by a more useful connection with France, sent Lindsay, in 1536, to that country to demand in marriage a daughter of the house of Vendome; but the king himself, arriving the year following, made choice of Magdalene of France, who died in about two months after her marriage; and this lamentable event occasioned Lindsay’s next poem, the “Deploratioun of the Deith of quene Magdalene.” The king, however, married again in 1538, and Lindsay’s talents were called forth in the rejoicings and ceremonies consequent to that event, and afterwards on the birth of a prince. During the remainder of the reign of James V. he appears to have retained his majesty’s favour, and to have been frequently employed in his character of herald; but few of these incidents seem of sufficient importance to be detached from his biographer’s narrative. During the regency, he appears to have espoused the cause of the reformers, and after the assassination of cardinal Beaton, wrote his “Tragedie of the late Cardinal,” to strengthen the prejudices of the public against that ecclesiastic.

, a Socinian writer, was born at Middlewich, in Cheshire, June 20th, 1723, old style. His father, Mr. Robert Lindsey, was an opulent proprietor of the salt-works in that neighbourhood; his mother’s name was Spencer, a younger branch of the Spencer family, in the county of Buckingham. Theophilus was the second of three children, and so named after his godfather, Theophilus earl of Huntingdon. He received the rudiments of grammar-learning at Middlewich, and from his early attachment to books, and the habitual seriousness of his mind, he was intended by his mother for the church. He lost some time by a change of schools, until he was put under the care of Mr. Barnard of the free-school of Leeds, under whom he made a rapid progress in classical learning. At the age of eighteen he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, where, by exemplary diligence and moral conduct, he obtained the entire approbation of his tutors. As soon as he had finished his studies at college, taken his first degree, and had been admitted to deacon’s orders, he was nominated by sir George Wheler to a chapel in Spital-square London. Soon after this, he was, by the recommendation of the earl of Huntingdon, appointed domestic chaplain to Algernon duke of Somerset. The duke, from a great regard for his merit, determined to procure him a high rank in the church, but an early death deprived Mr. Lindsey of his illustrious patron. In 1754, be accompanied the present duke of Northumberland to the continent, and on his return he supplied, for some time, the temporary vacancy of a good living in the north of England, called Kirkby-Wisk: here he became acquainted with Mr. archdeacon Blackburne, and in 1760 married his daughter-in-law. From Kirkby Mr. Lindsey went to Piddletown, in Dorsetshire, having been presented to the living of that place by the earl of Huntingdon: this, through the interest of the same patron, he exchanged, in 1764, for the vicarage of Catterick, in Yorkshire. Here he resided nearly ten years, an exemplary pattern of a primitive and conscientous pastor, highly respected and beloved by the people committed to his charge. Besides his various and important duties as a parish clergyman, Mr. Lindsey was ever alive, and heartily active, in every cause in which a deviation from the formularies and obligations of the church was considered as necessary. With this view, in 1771 he zealously co-operated with Mr. archdeacon Blackburne, Dr. John Jebb, Mr. Wyvil, and others, in endeavouring to obtain relief in matters of subscription to the thirty-nine articles. Mr. Lindsey had, probably, for some years, entertained doubts with respect to the doctrine of the Trinity, and other leading topics of the established faith; and these pressed so heavy upon him that he could no longer endure to remain in a church, partaking of its emoluments, which he could not deserve, and preaching its doctrines, which he could not believe. He therefore, in November 1773, wrote to the prelate of his diocese, informing him of his iateiuion to quit the church, and signifying, that in a few days he should transmit to him his deed of resignation. The bishop endeavoured to persuade him to remain at his post, but he had made up his mind that duty required the sacrifice, and he was resolved to bear the consequences. When the act was done, he said he felt himself delivered from a load which had long lain heavy upon him, and at times nearly overwhelmed him. Previously to his quitting Catterick, Mr. Lindsey delivered a farewell address to his parishioners, in which he stated his motives for quitting them in a simple and very affecting manner, pointing out the reasons why he could no longer conduct, nor join in their worship, without the guilt of continual insincerity before God, and endangering the loss of his favour for ever. He left Catterick about the middle of December, and after visiting some friends in different parts of the country, he arrived in London in January 1774, where he met with friends, who zealously patronized the idea which he entertained of opening a place of worship, devoted entirely to unitarian principles. A large room was at first fitted up for the purpose in Essex-street in the Strand, which was opened April 17, 1774. The service of the place was conducted according to the plan of a liturgy which had been altered from that used in the established church by the celebrated Dr. Samuel Clarke, whose conscience was not quite so delicate as that of Mr. Lindsey. Mr. Lindsey published the sermon which he preached on the opening of his chapel, to which was added an account of the liturgy made use of. About the same time he published his “Apology,” of which several editions were called for in the course of a few years. This was followed by a still larger volume, entitled “A Sequel to the Apology,” which was intended as a reply to his various opponents, and likewise to vindicate and establish the leading doctrines which he professed, and on account of which he had given up his preferment in the church. This work was published in 1776; and in 1778 he was enabled, by the assistance of his friends, to build the chapel of Essex-street, and to purchase the ground on which it stands. Till the summer of 1793, Mr. Lindsey, with the aid of his friend the Rev. Dr. Disney, conducted the services of the place, upon strict unitarian principles, to a numerous congregation. He then resigned the whole into the hands of his coadjutor, notwithstanding the, earnest wishes of his hearers that he should still continue a part of the services, Though he had quitted the duties of the pulpit, he continued to labour in the cause, by his publications, till he had attained his 80th, year. In 1802, he published his last work, entitled “Conversations on the Divine Government, shewing that every thing is from God, and for good to all.” The professed object of this piece is to vindicate the Creator from those gloomy notions which are too often attached to his providence, and to shew that the government of the world is the wisest that could have been adopted, and that afflictions and apparent evils are permitted for the general good. From this principle Mr. Lindsey derived consolation through life, and upon it he acted in every difficult and trying scene. On his death-bed he spoke of his sufferings with perfect patience and meekness, and when reminded, by a friend, that he doubtless was enabled to bear them with so much fortitude in the recollection of his favourite maxim, that “Whatever is, is right; w “No,” said he with an animation that lighted up his countenance, “Whatever is, is best.” This was the last sentence which he was able distinctly to articulate: he died Novembers, 1808. Besides the works already referred to, he published two dissertations: 1. On the preface to St. John’s Gospel; 2. On praying to Christ:” An Historical View of the State of the Unitarian Doctrine and Worship from the Reformation to our own Times;“and several other pieces. Among controversial writers Mr. Lindsey takes a place as his” Vindiciae Priestleianae,“and his” Examination of Mr. Robinson’s Plea for the Divinity of Christ," will shew. Two volumes of his Sermons have been published since his death.

About this period the queen of Sweden, Louisa Ulrica, having a taste for natural history, which her- royal consort, king Adolphus Frederick, also patronized, shewed much favour to Linnæus. He was employed in arranging her collection of insects and shells, in the country palace of Drotningholm, or Ulricksdahl, and was frequently honoured with the company and conversation of their majesties, during his attendance there. The queen interested herself in the education of his son, and promised to send him to travel through Europe at her own expence. She also listened very graciously to any recommendation or petition, of Linnæus, in the service of science. Linnæus devoted some of his leisure time in winter, to the arragement of his friend count Tessin’s collection of fossils, at Stockholm, of which an account in Latin and Swedish, making a small folio, with plates, came out in 1753. The result of his labours at Drotningholm was not given to the public [until] 1764, when his “Museum Reginse” appeared, in 8Vo, be-, ing a sort of Prodromus of an intended more splendid work, that was never executed. His most magnificent publication appeared in 1754, being a large folio, entitled “Museum Regis Adolphi Frederici,” comprehending descripr: tions of the rarer quadrupeds, birds, serpents, fishes, &c. of the king’s museum, in Latin and Swedish, with plates, and an excellent preface, which was translated by Dr. (now; sir James) Smith, and first printed in 1786; appearing, again, in a volume of “Tracts relating to Natural History,” in 1798. In the mean time, Linnæus was preparing a lasting monument of his own talents and application, the “Species Plantarum,” of which the first editiqn was primed in 1753, the second in 1762, each in two volumes S.vo. The work is too well known to need any description, and must ever be memorable for the adaptation of specific,­<5>ras they were at first called, trivial, names. This coa-, trivance, which Linnæus first used in his “Pan Sueciciw,” a dissertation printed in 1749, extended to minerals in his “Museum Tessinianum,” and subsequently to all the departments of zoology, has perhaps rendered his works more popular than any one of their merits besides. His specific differences were intended to be used as names; but their unavoidable length rendering this impracticable, and the application of numeral figures to each species, in Haller’s manner, being still more burthensome to the memory, all natural science would have been ruined for want of a common language, were it not for this simple and happy invention. By this means we speak of every natural production in two words, its generic and its specific name. No ambiguous comparisons or references are wanted, no presupposition of any thing already known. The philosophical tribe of naturalists, for so they are called by themselves and their admirers, do not therefore depreciate Linnæus, when they call him a nomenclator. Whatever may have been thought of the Linnæun trivial names at their first appearance, they are now in universal use, and their principle has been, with the greatest advantage, extended to chemistry, of which the celebrated Bergman, the friend of Linnæus, originally set the example.

, a painter, called from his dress “the Turk,” was born at Geneva, in 1702. He went to Paris to study in 1725, and thence accompanied the marquis de Puisieux to Rome, where the earls of Sandwich and Besborough engaged him to accompany them to Constantinople. There he became acquainted with sir Everard Fawkener, our ambassador, who persuaded him to come to England, where he remained two years. He painted admirably in miniature, and in enamel, though he seldom practised the last, but he is best known by his crayons. The earls of Harrington and Besborough have some of his most capital works. His portraits, however, were so exact as to displease those who sat to him, for he never could conceive the absence of any imperfection or mark in the face that presented itself. Such a man could not be long a favourite, and therefore, according to lord Orford, although he had great business the first year, he had very little the second, and went abroad. It is said that he owed much of his encouragement to his making himself conspicuous by adopting the manners and habits of the Levant He came to England again in 1772, and brought a collection of pictures of different masters, which he sold by auction; and some pieces of glass painted by himself with surprizing effect of light and shade, but more curious than useful, as it was necessary to darken the room before they could be seen to advantage. He staid two years likewise on this visit. He went to the continent afterwards, but we find no account of his death. He carried his love of truth with him on all occasions; and we are told that at Venice and Milan, and probably elsewhere, all but firstrate beauties were afraid to sit to him, and he would have starved if he had not so often found customers who were of opinion that they belonged to that class.

Lipsius died at Louvain, March 23, 1606, in his 59th year, and left, says Joseph Scaliger, the learned world and his friends to lament the loss of him. Lipsius is said to have been so mean in his countenance, his dress, and his conversation, that those who had accustomed themselves to judge of great men by their outward appearance, asked, after having seen Lipsius, whether that was really he. But the greatest blot in his character was his inconstancy with regard to religion. He was educated a Roman Catholic, but professed the Lutheran religion while he was professor at Jena. Afterwards returning to Brabant, he appeared again a Roman Catholic; but when he accepted a professor’s chair in the university of Leyden, he published what was called Calvinism. At last, he removed from Leyden, and went again into the Low Countries, where he adopted the extreme bigotry of the Roman communion. This is obvious from his credulous and absurd accounts of the holy virgins, in his “Diva Virgo H aliensis,” &c. and “Diva Schemiensis,” &c. in both which he admits the most trifling stories, and the most uncertain traditions. Some of his friends endeavoured to represent how greatly all this would diminish the reputation he had acquired; but he was deaf to their expostulations. He even went so far as to dedicate a silver pen to the Holy Virgin of Hall; and on this occasion wrote some verses which are very remarkable, both on account of the elogies he bestows on himself, and of the extravagant worship he pays to the Virgin. By his last will, he left his gown, lined with fur, to the image of the same lady. With these superstitions he joined an inconsistency of a more serious nature; for when, as we have already noticed, he lived at Leyden in an outward profession of the reformed religion, he gave his public approbation of the persecuting principles which were exerted, throughout all Europe, against the professors of it, maintaining that no state ought to suffer a plurality of religions, nor shew any mercy towards those who disturbed the established worship, but pursue them with fire and sword, it being better that one member should perish rather than the whole body “dementias non hie locus ure, seca, ut membrorum potius aliquod quam totum corpus corrumpatur.” When attacked for these principles and expressions, he endeavoured to explain them in a very evasive manner, pretending that the words ure and seca were only terms borrowed from chirurgery, not literally, to signify fire and sword, but only some effectual remedy. All these evasions are to be met with in his treatise * f De una Religione," the worst of his writings. His works in general turn upon subjects of antiquity and criticism. In his early pieces he imitated, with tolerable success, the style of Cicero; but afterwards chose rather to adopt the concise and pointed manner of Seneca and Tacitus. For this corruption of taste he was severely censured by Scioppius and Henry Stephens; but his example was followed by several contemporary writers. On this innovation Huet justly remarks, that although the abrupt and antithetical style may obtain the applauses of unskilful youth, or an illiterate multude, it cannot be pleasing to ears which have been long inured to genuine Ciceronian eloquence.

He died June 30, 1694, aged sixty-seven years, and was buried on the north side of the chancel of Chelsea church, where there is a handsome monument, with an epitaph to his memory. He was an excellent philologist and grammarian, particularly in the Latin, as appears from his Dictionary of that language; he appears also to have studied the Greek with equal minuteness, a Lexicon of which he had long been compiling, and left unfinished at his death. He was also well skilled in the Oriental languages and in rabbinical learning; in prosecution of which he exhausted great part of his fortune in purchasing ' books and manuscripts from all parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa. The consequence of this improvidence, we are sorry, however, to add, was his dying insolvent, and leaving his widow in very distressed circumstances. Some time before his death, he made a small essay towards facilitating the knowledge of the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Arabic tongues, which he intended to have brought into a narrower compass. He was versed also in the abstruse parts of the mathematics, and wrote a great many pieces concerning mystical numeration, which came into the hands of his brother-in-law Dr. Hockin. In private life he was extremely charitable, easy of access, communicative, affable, facetious in conversation, free from passion, of a strong constitution, and a venerable countenance. Besides his “Latin Dictionary,” which appeared first in 1678, 4to, and was often reprinted, but is now superseded by Ainsworth’s, he published, 1. “Tragicomcedia Oxoniensis,” a Latin poem on the Parliament-Visitors,“1648, a single sheet, 4to, which, however, was afterwards attributed to a Mr. John Carrick, a student of Christ-churdi. 2.” Pasor metricus, sive voces omnes Nov. Test, primogenias hexametris versibus compreherusae,“1658, 4to, Greek and Latin. 3.” Diatriba in octo Tractatus distributa,“&c. printed with the former. 4.” Elementa Religionis, sive quatuor Capita catechetica totidem Linguis descripta, in usum Scholarum,“1658, 8vo, to which h added, 5.” Complicatio Radicum in primaeva Hebrseorurh Lingua.“6.” Solomon’s Gate, or an entrance into the Church,“&c. 1662, 8vo. Perhaps this title was taken from the north gate of Westminster-abbey, so called 7.” Sixty-one Sermons,“1680, fol. 8.” A Sermon at a solemn meeting of the natives of the city and county of Worcester, in Bow-church, London, 24th of June, 1680,“4to. 9.” Preface to Cicero’s Works,“Lond. 1681, 2 vols.'fol. 10.” A Translation of ‘ Selden’s Jani Anglorum Facies Altera,’ with Notes,“which for some unkuown reason he published under the name of Redman Westcote, 1683, fol. With this were printed three other tracts of Selden, viz. his” Treatise of the Judicature of Parliaments,“&c.” Of the original of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of Testaments.“”Of the Disposition of Intestates Goods.“11.” The Life of Themistocles,“from the Greek, in the first vol. of Plutarch’s Lives, by several hands, 1687, 8vo. He also published” Dissertatio epistolaris de Juramento Medicorum qui Ορκοσ Ἱπποκρατουσ dicitur," &c. also A Latin Inscription, in prose and verse, intended for the monument of the fire of London, in Sept. 1666. This is printed at the end of his Dictionary; with an elegant epistle to Dr. Baldwin Hamey, M. D.

, a celebrated English judge, descended of an ancient family, was the eldest son of Thomas Westcote, of the county of Devon, esq. by Elizabeth, daughter and sole-heir of Thomas Littleton or Lyttleton, of Frankley in Worcestershire, in compliance with whom she consented that the issue, or at least the eldest son, of that marriage should take the name of Lyttleton, and bear the arms of that family. He was born about the beginning of the fifteenth century at Frankley. Having laid a proper foundation of learning at one of the universities, he removed to the Inner-Temple; and, applying himself to the law, became very eminent in that profession. The first notice we have of his distinguishing himself is from his learned lectures on the statute of Westminster, “de donis conditionalibus,” “of conditional gifts.” He was afterwards made, by Henry VI. steward or judge of the court of the palace, or marshalsea of the king’s household, and, in May 1455, king’s serjeant, in which capacity he went the Northern circuit as a judge of the assize. Upon the revolution of the crown, from the house of Lancaster to that of York) in the time of Edward IV. our judge, who was now made sheriff of Worcestershire, received a pardon from that prince; was continued in his post of king’s serjeant, and also in that of justice of assi/r for the same circuit. This pardon passed in 1462, the second year of Edward IV.; and, in 1466, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of Common Pleas. The same year, he obtained a writ to the commissioners of the customs of London, Bristol, and Kingston-upon-Hull, enjoining them to pay him a hundred and ten marks annually, for the better support of his dignity; a hundred and six shillings and eleven pence farthing, to furnish him whh a furred robe; and six shillings and six-pence more, for another robe called Li num. In 1473, we find him residing near St. Sepulchre’s church, London, in a capital mansion, the property of the abbot of Leicester, which he held on lease at the yearly rent of 1 <'>.-. In 1475 he was created, among others, knight of the Hath, to grace the solemnity of conferring that order upon the king’s eldest son, then prince of Wales, afterwards Edward V. He continued to enjoy the esteem of his sovereign and the nation, on account of his profound knowledge of the laws of England, till his death, Aug. 23, 1481, the day after the date of his will. He was then said to be of a good old age, but its precise length has not been ascertained. He was honourably interred in the cathedral church of Worcester, where a marble tomb, with his statue, was erected to his memory; his picture was also placed in the church of Frankley; and another in that of Hides-Owen, where his descendants purchased a good estate. He married, and had three sons, William, Richard, and Thomas. Kichard, bred to the law, became eminent in thut profession; and it was for his use that our judge drew up his celebrated treatise on tenures or titles, which will probably hand his name down to the latest posterity. The judge’s third son, Thomas, was knighted by Henry VII. for taking Lambert Simnel, the pretended earl of Warwick. His eldest son and successor, sir William Littleton, after living many years in great splendour, at Frankley, died in 1508; and from this branch the late celebrated lord Lyttelton of Frankley co. Worcester, who was created a baron of Great Britain, Nov. 1756, derived his pedigree; but who, owing to the alteration in the spelling of the name (which, however, appears unnecessary) will occur in a future part of this work.

The memory of judge Littleton is preserved by his “Tenures” and the various editions through which his book has passed are the best evidence of its worth. Dr. Middleton supposes the first edition to have been that printed in French by Lettou and Machlima, near the church of All-Saints, or All-Hallows, in London, without date: and he thinks that it was put to press by the author himself in 1481, the year he died; but lord Coke supposes the French edition in folio, printed without date, at Rouen, by W. Le Tailleur, for R. Pinson, to have been the first. The point however has not yet been settled; and perhaps cannot now be settled with precision. The various opinions on the subject may be found in our authorities. That it was often reprinted is a matter of less doubt: the editions from 1539 to 1639 only, amount to twenty-four. The original composition of this celebrated work is justly esteemed as the principal pillar on which the superstructure of the law of real property in this kingdom is supported; and the valuable “Commentary” of lord Coke has uniformly been considered, by the most eminent lawyers, as the result and repository of all his learning on the subjects there treated. Of this work a republication was made in folio, 1738, which, independent of the valuable annotations of lord Hale and lord chancellor Nottingham, has been greatly improved by the learning and indefatigable labours of Mr. Hargrave and Mr. Butler. There was a book written in the reign of Edward III. which is called “Oki Tenures,” to distinguish it from Littleton’s book. It gives an account of the various tenures by which land was holdeu, the nature of estates, and some other incidents relating to landed property. It is a very scanty tract, but has the merit of having led the way to Littleton’s famous work.

In this station he preserved the esteem of both parties for some time, and the two houses of parliament agreed to return their thanks by him to the king, for passing the triennial bill, and that of the subsidies; but, as he concurred in the votes for raising an army, and seizing the militia, in March 1641, measures very hostile to the royal cause, the king sent an order from York to lord Falkland, to demand the seal from him, and to consult about a successor with Hyde, afterwards earl of Clarendon; but this last step prevented the former order from being put into execution. Hyde, who always entertained a great regard for the keeper, had, upon his late behaviour, paid him a visit at Exeter-house, on which occasion the keeper freely disclosed his mind, lamenting that he had been removed from the common-pleas, of which court he was acquainted with the business aud the persons with whom he had to deal, to an higher office, which involved him with another sort of men, and in affairs to which he was a stranger; and this without his having one friend among them, to whom he could confide any difficulty that occurred to him. Adverting likewise to the unhappy state of the king’s affairs, he said that the party in hostility to the court “would never have done what they had already, unless they had been determined to do more: that he foresaw it would not be long before a war would break out, and of what importance it was, in that season, that the great seal should be with his majesty; that the prospect of this necessity had made him comply to a certain degree with that party; that there had lately been a consultation, whether, in case the king might send for him, or the great seal be taken from him, it were advisable to keep it in some secure place, where the keeper should receive it upon occasion, they having no mind to disoblige him: that the knowledge of this had induced him to vote as he did in the late debates; and by that compliance, which he knew would give the king a bad impression of him, he had gained so much credit with them, that he should be able to preserve the seal in his own hands till his majesty should demand it, and then he would be ready to wait on the king with it, declaring that no man should be more willing to perish with and for his majesty than himself.” Mr. Hyde acquainted lord Falkland with this conference; and, being confident that the lord-keeper would keep his promise, recommended to advise his majesty to write a kind invitation to the keeper to come to York, and bring the seal with him, rather than, think of giving it to any other person. The advice was embraced by the king, who, though he still had his doubts of Littleton’s sincerity, was influenced by the reasons assigned; and accordingly the seal was sent to York on the f2d, and followed by the keeper on the 23d of May, 1642. But, notwithstanding this piece of service and eminent proof of his loyalty, at the risk of his life, he could never totally regain the king’s confidence, or the esteem of the court-party. He continued, however, to enjoy his post, in which he attended his majesty to Oxford, was there created doctor of laws, and made one of the king’s privycouncil, and colonel of a regiment of foot in the same service, some time before his death, which happened Aug. 27, 1645, at Oxford. His body was interred in the cathedral of Christ church; uu which Qccasioa a funeral oration was pronounced by the celebrated Dr. Hammond, then orator to the university. In May 1683, a monument was erected there to his memory, by his only daughter and heiress, the lady Anne Lyttelton, widow of sir Thomas Lyttelton; and the same year came out his “Reports,” in folio, which, however, Mr. Stevens, in his introduction to lord Bacon’s Letters, edition 1702, p. 21, thinks were not composed by him, many of the cases being the same verbatim as in Hetley’s reports. Lord Clarendon says of sir Edward Littleton, that “he was a man of great reputation in the profession of the law, for learning, and all other advantages which attend the most eminent men. He was of a very good extraction in Shropshire, and inherited a fair fortune and inheritance from his father. He was a handsome and a proper man, of a very graceful presence, and notorious courage, which in his youth he had manifested with his sword. He had taken great pains in the hardest and most knotty part of the law, as well as that which was most customary; and was not only ready and expert in the books, but exceedingly versed in records, in studying and examining whereof he had kept Mr. Selden company, with whom he had great friendship, and who had much assisted him: so that he was looked upon as the best antiquary of his profession, who gave himself up to practice; and, upon the mere strength of his abilities, he had raised himself into the first of the practisers of the common law courts, and was chosen recorder of London before he was called to the bench, and grew presently into the highest practice in all the other courts, as well as those of the law.” Whitelocke also observes, that he was a man of courage, and of excellent parts and learning. But we fear he cannot be altogether acquitted of unsteadiness in some parts of his conduct, although it must at the same time be owned that when he found he could no longer retain the seal with credit, he delivered it, with his own hands, to his unhappy sovereign, and died firmly attached to his cause.

The encomiums bestowed upon Livy, by both ancients and moderns, are great and numerous. Quinctiliau speaks of him in the highest terms, and thinks that Herodotus need not take it ill to have Livy equalled with him. In general, probity, candour, and impartiality, are what have distinguished Livy above all historians. Neither complaisance to the times, nor his particular connexions with the emperor, could restrain him from speaking so well of Pompey, as to make Augustus call him a Pompeian. This we learn from Cremutius Cortlus, in Tacitus, who relates also, much to the emperor’s honour, that this gave no interruption to their friendship. Livy, however, has not escaped censure as a writer. In the age in which he lived, Asinius Pollio charged him with Patavinity, a word variously explained by writers, but generally supposed to relate to his style. The most common opinion is, that Pollio, accustomed to the delicacy of the language spoken in the court of Augustus, could not bear with certain provincial idioms, which Livy, as a Paduan, used in various places of his history. Pignorius is of a different opinion, and considers Patavinity as relating to the orthography of certain words, in which Livy used one letter for another, according to the custom of his country, writing “sibe” and “quase” for “sibi” and “quasi;” which he attempts to prove by several ancient inscriptions. Chevreau maintains, that it does not concern the style, but the principles of the historian: the Paduans, he says, preserved a long and constant inclination for a republic, and were therefore attached to Pompey; while Pollio, being of Caesar’s party, was naturally led to attribute to Livy the sentiments of his countrymen, on account of his speaking well of Pompey. It seems remarkable that there should exist such difference of opinion, when Quinctilian, who must be supposed to know the true import of this Patavinity, has referred it entirely to the language of our author. MorhofPs elaborate treatise, however, is highly creditable to his critical skill. The merit of Livy’s history is so well known, as to render it unnecessary to accumulate the encomiums which modern scholars have bestowed on him. With these the school -boy is soon made acquainted, and they meet the advanced scholar in all his researches. His history was first printed at Rome, about 1469, by Sweynheym and Pannartz, in folio. Of this rare edition, lord Spencer is in possession of a fine copy; but the exquisite copy on vellum, formerly in the imperial library at Vienna, now belongs to James Edwards, esq. of Harrow; and is perhaps the most magnificent volume of an ancient classic in the world. Of modern printing the best editions are, that of Gronovius, “cum Notis variorum & suis, Lugd. Bat. 1679,” 3 vols. 8vo; that of Le Clerc, at “Amsterdam, 1709,” 10 vols. 12mo that of Crevier, at “Paris, 1735,” 6 vols. <Ko of Prakenborch, Auist. 1738, 7 vols. 4to of Ruddiman, Edinburgh, 1751, 4 vols. 12mo; of Homer, Lond. 1794, 8 vols. 8vo and that of Oxford, 1800, 6 vols. 8vo. Livy has been translated into every language. The last English translation was that of George Baker, A. M. 6 vols. 8vo, published in 1797, which was preceded by that of Philemon Holland, in 1600; that of Bohun, in 1686; and a third, usually called Hay’s translation, though, no such name appears, printed in 1744, 6 vols. 8vo.

At what time he quitted the school, we are not told. In 1760 and 1761, he superintended the poetical department of a short-lived periodical publication, entitled the “Library,” of which the late Dr. Kippis was the editor. In 1760 he published the first of his productions which attracted much notice, “The Actor.” It was recommended by an easy and harmonious versification, and by the liberality of his censures, which were levelled at certain improprieties common to actors in general. By this poem, Churchill is said to have been stimulated to write his *' Rosciad,“in which he descended from general to personal criticism. The subjects, however, were so alike, that Lloyd was for some time supposed to be the author of the” llosciad,“which he took an early opportunity to deny, and not only acknowledged his inferiority, but attached himself more closely than ever to the fame and fortunes of Churchill. In the same year, he attempted a small piece of the musical kind, called” The Tears and Triumphs of Parnassus/' and the following season had another little opera performed at Drury-lane theatre, in honour of their present majesties’ nuptials, entitled “Arcadia; or, The Shepherd’s Wedding.” The profit arising from these pieces was not great, but probably enough to induce him to become an author by profession, although no man ever ventured on that mode of life with fewer qualifications. His poetical productions were of such a trifling cast as to bring him very small supplies, and he had neither taste nor industry for literary employment.

tholics,“says he,” will be the easiest sion, in a poem called “Faction disway for protestants to destroy them.” played," supposed to be written by

He seems first to have appeared as an author in 1657, during the interregnum, by the publication of his “little consort of three parts for viols or violins, consisting of pavans, ayres, corants, sarabands, in two several varieties, the first twenty of which are for two trebles and a base.” Some of his compositions appear in the second part of John Playford’s continuation of Hilton’s “Catch that catch can,” in 1667; and among them the most pleasing of Lock’s compositions, “Never trouble thyself about times or their turnings,” a glee for three voices. He was the first Who attempted dramatic music for the English stage, if we except the masques that were performed at court, and at the houses of the nobility, in the time of Charles I. and during the reign of Charles II. When musical dramas were first attempted, which Dryden calls heroic plays and dramatic operas, Lock was employed to set most of them, particularly the semi-operas, as they were called, the Tempest, Macbeth,] and Psyche, translated from the French of Moliere, by Shadwell. The Tempest and Psyche were printed in 1675, and dedicated to James duke of Monmouth. There is a preface of some length by Lock, which, like his music, is rough and nervous, exactly corresponding with the idea which is generated of his private character, by the perusal of his controversy with Salmon, and the sight of his picture in the music-school at Oxford. It is written with that natural petulance which probably gave birth to most of the quarrels in which he was involved. It includes, however, a short history of these early attempts at dramatic music on our stage, in which, as in the most successful representations of this kind in later times, the chief part of the dialogue was spoken, and recitative, or musical declamation, which seems to be the true criterion and characteristic of Italian operas, but seldom used, unless merely to introduce some particular airs and choruses. Upon examining this music, it appears to have been very much composed on Lulli’s model. The melody is neither recitative nor air, but partaking of both, with a change of measure as frequent as in any old French opera which we ever saw.

In the third introductory music to the Tempest, which is called a curtain tune, probably from the curtain being first drawn up during the performance of this species of overture, he has, for the first time that is come to one knowledge, introduced the use of crescendo (louder by degrees), with diminuendo and lentando, under the words soft and slow by degrees. No other instruments are mentioned in the score of his opera of Psyche, than violins for the ritornels; and yet, so slow was the progress of that instrument during the last century, that in a general catalogue of music in 1701, scarce any compositions appear to have been printed for its use. This musician was of so irascible a disposition, that he seems never to have been without a quarrel or two on his hands. For his furious attack on Salmon, for proposing to reduce all the clefs in music to one, he had a quarrel with the gentlemen of the chapel royal, early in Charles II.'s reign. Being composer in ordinary to the king, he produced for the chapel royal a morning-service, in which he set the prayer after each of the ten commandments to different music from that to which the singers had been long accustomed, which was deemed an unpardonable innovation, and on the first day of April, 1666, at the performance of it before the king, there was a disturbance and an obstruction for some time to the performance. To convince the public that it was not from the meanness or inaccuracy of the composition that this impediment to its performance happened, Lock thought it necessary to print the whole service; and it came abroad in score on a single sheet, with a long and laboured vindication, by way of preface, under the following title, “Modern church musick pre-accused, censured, and obstructed in its performance before his majesty.” Lock was long suspected of being a Roman catholic, and it is probable that this new service, by leaning a little more towards the mass than the service of the 1 protestant cathedral, may have given offence to some zealous members of the church of England.

Of all Mr. Locke’s works, his “Essay on Human Understanding,” is that which has contributed most to his fame, and the reputation which it had from the beginning, and which it has gradually acquired abroad, is a sufficient testimony of its merit. There is perhaps no book of the metaphysical kind that has been so generally read by those who understand the language, or that is more adapted to teach men to think with precision, and to inspire them with that candour and love of truth, which is the genuine spirit of philosophy. He gave, Dr. Reid thinks, the first example in the English language of writing on such abstract subjects, with a remarkable degree of simplicity and perspicuity; and in this he has been happily imitated by others that came after him. No author has. more successfully pointed out the danger of ambiguous words, and the importance of having distinct and determinate notions in judging and reasoning. His observations on the various powers of the human understanding, on the use and abuse of words, and on the extent and limits of human knowledge, are drawn from attentive reflection on the operations of his own mind, the true source of all real knowledge on those subjects; and show an uncommon degree of penetration and judgment Such is the opinion of the learned and candid Dr. Reid, who says, “I mention these things that when I have occasion to differ from him, I may not be thought insensible of the merit of an author whom I highly respect, and to whom I owe my first lights in those studies, as well as my attachment to them.” Dr. Reid has ably pointed out what he thought defective in Locke’s system, which indeed has been more or less the subject of discussion in every work on metaphysics during the last century. The late Mr. Home Tooke, in his “Diversions of Purley,” differs from all others in advancing one of those singular opinions which are peculiar to that gentleman. He calls Locke’s Essay, merely “a grammatical treatise, or a treatise on words, or on language;” and says, that “it was a lucky mistake which Mr. Locke made when he called his book an Essay on the Human Understanding. For some part of the inestimable benefit of that book has, merely on account of its title, reached to thousands more than, I fear, it would have done, had he called it a Grammatical Essay. The human mind, or the human understanding, appears to be a grand and noble theme, and all men, even the most insufficient, conceive ttut to be a proper object for their contemplation, while inquiries into the nature of language are supposed to be beneath the concern of their exalted understanding.”

son of Stephen Locker, esq. or Lockier (for that was the family name in the reign of Charles II. as appears by the signature pf one of their ancestors to a lease in that reign), was of a gentleman’s family in Middlesex, where they possessed a considerable property, which, it is said, they lost, as many others did, by their loyalty. He was bred at MerchantTaylors’ school, whence he went to Merton-college, Oxford; after which he travelled abroad with his friend Mr. Twisleton, who was probably of the same college. He was entered at Gray’s Inn, where he studied the law in the same chambers formerly occupied by his admired lord Bacon; and having been called to the bar, was afterwards clerk of the companies of leather-sellers and clock-makers, and a commissioner of bankrupts. He married (the families being before related) miss Elizabeth Stillingfleet, who was remarkable for her many excellent qualities as well as personal charms. She was grand-daughter to the eminent bishop of Worcester by his lordship’s first wife, and sister to Benjamin Stillingfleet, esq. much distinguished by his ingenious writings and worthy character. By this lady, who died August 12, 1759, he had nine children. Mr. Locker is noticed by Dr. Johnson , in his Life of Addison, as eminent for curiosity and literature; as he is by Dr. Ward, in his Lives of the Gresham Professors, as a gentleman much esteemed for his knowledge of polite literature. He was remarkable for his skill in the Greek language; and attained the modern, which he could write very well, in a very extraordinary manner. Coming home late one evening, he was addressed in that language by a poor Greek, from the Archipelago, who had lost his way in the streets of London. Mr. Locker took him home, where he was maintained, for some time, by the kindness of himself and Dr. Mead; and, by this accidental circumstance, Mr. Locker acquired his knowledge of modern Greek. He almost adored lord Bacon; and had collected from original manuscripts and other papers, many curious things of his lordship’s not mentioned by others, which it was his intention to publish, but his death prevented it; however, this fell into such good hands, that the public are now in possession of them, as is mentioned in the last edition of lord Bacon’s works, by Dr. Birch and Mr. Mallet, 1765. Mr. Locker also wrote the preface to Voltaire’s Life of Charles XII. of Sweden, and translated the two first books; and Dr. Jebb the rest. He died, very much regretted, in May 1760, not quite a year after the loss of his amiable lady, which it was thought accelerated his own death. They both were buried in St. Helen’s church, Bishopsgate-street, London. Their son William, bred to the naval service, but a man of some literary talents, died lieutenant-governor of Greenwich-hospital, on December 26, 1800, at the age of seventy. Some particulars of him are to be found in our authority.

, a polite scholar, and magistrate of some eminence in America, was born in Scotland about 1674. He was one of the people called Quakers, and accompanied William Penn in his last voyage to Pennsylvania. For many years of his life he was employed in public business, and rose to the offices of chief justice and governor of the province: but he felt always an ardour of study, and by husbanding his leisure hours, found time to write several treatises in Latin, of which one on the generation of plants, was translated into English by Dr. Fothergill. When advanced in years, he withdrew from the tumult of public business to the solitude of his country-seat, near Germantown, where he corresponded with the most distinguished literary characters of Europe. He also made a version of “Cicero de Senectute,” which was published with notes by the celebrated Dr. Franklin. Mr. Logan died in 1751, at the age of seventy-seven, leaving his library, which he had been fifty years in collecting, to the people of Pennsylvania. The following extract from his will affords a pleasing idea of his literary enthusiasm: " In my library, which I have left to the city of Philadelphia, for the advancement and facilitating of classical learning, are above an hundred volumes of authors in folio, all in Greek, with mostly their versions. All the Roman classics without exception. All the whole Greek mathematicians, viz. Archimedes, Euclid, Ptolemy, both his Geography, and Almagest, which I had in Greek (with Theon’s commentary in folio, above 700 pages) from my learned friend Fabricius, who published 14 volumes of his ‘ Bibliotheque Grecque,’ in 4to, in which, after he had finished his account of Ptolemy, on my inquiring of him

, sometimes called Abre Anam, or father of Anam, was a philosopher of great account among the Easterns, but his personal history is involved in much obscurity, and what we have is probably fabulous. Some say he was an Abyssinian of Ethiopia or Nubia, and was sold as a slave among the Israelites, in the reigns of David and Solomon. According to the Arabians, he was tlje son of Baura, son or grandson of a sister or aunt of Job. Some say he worked as a carpenter, others as a tailor, while a third sort will have him to be a shepherd; however that be, he was certainly an extraordinary person, endowed with great wisdom and eloquence, and we have an account of the particular manner in which he received these divine gifts; being one day asleep about noon, the angels saluted Lokman without making themselves visible, in these terms: “We are the messengers of God, thy creator and ours; and he has sent us to declare to thee that he will make thee a monarch, and his vice-gerent upon earth.” Lokman replied, “If it is by an absolute command of God that I am to become such a one as you say, his will be done in all things; and I hope if this should happen, that he will bestow on me all the grace necessary for enabling me to execute his commands faithfully; however, if he would grant me the liberty to chuse my condition of life, I had rather continue in my present state, and be kept from offending him; otherwise, all the grandeur and splendours of the world would be troublesome to me.” This answer, we are told, was so pleasing to God, that he immediately bestowed on him the gift of wisdom in an eminent degree; and he was able to instruct all men, by a multitude of maxims, sentences, and parables, amounting to ten thousand in number, every one of which his admirers reckon greater than the whole world in value.

, well known by the title of Master or“the Sentences, was born at Novara, in Lombardy, whence he took his surname. He was educated at Bologna, and Rheims, under St. Bernard, and afterwards removed to Paris, where, as one of the professors in that university, he distinguished himself so much, that the canonry of Chartres was conferred upon him. He was some time tutor to Philip, son of king Lewis le Gros, and brother of Lewis the young; and was so much esteemed by him, that upon the vacancy of the bishopric of Paris, that noble personage, being intended for the see, declined it for the sake of Lombard, who was accordingly promoted to it about 1160, and died in 1164. He was interred in the church of Marcellus, in the suburb of that name, where his epitaph is still to be seen. His work of the Sentences, divided into four books, contains an illustration of the doctrines of the church, in a collection of sentences or passages taken from the fathers. This was so favourably received, that in a short time it was the only work taught in the schools, and the author was, by way of eminence, called the” Master of the Sentences,“and was accounted the chief of the scholastic divines. His work was first printed at Venice, 1477, fol. and innumerable commentaries have been written on it. In our own universities the being admitted” to read the Sentences“was, as may be frequently seen in Wood’s Athenae, a mark of great progress in study, for a greater veneration was paid to Lombard’s work than to the Scriptures. Bacon, in a letter to Clement IV. mentions this preference as an absurdity.” The bachelor,“says he,” who reads the Scriptures, gives place to the reader of the * Sentences,' who everywhere is honoured and preferred. The reader of the Sentences has his choice of the most eligible time, and holds a call and society with the religious; but the biblical reader has neither; and must beg for such an hour as the reader of the Sentences is pleased to assign him. He who reads the Lombardine thesis, may anywhere dispute and be esteemed a master; but he who reads the text of Scripture is admitted to no such honour: the absurdity of this conduct is evident," &C.

Besides his astronomical work,- he published in 1731, under the name of Dicaiophilus Cantabrigiensis, “The Rights of Churches and Colleges defended; in answer to a pamphlet called * An Enquiry into the customary estates and tenant-rights of those who hold lands of church and other foundations, by the term of three lives, &c. by Everard Fleetwood, esq.;' with remarks upon some other pieces on the same subject,” 8vo. The author of this pamphlet, to which our author replied, was not Fleetwood, which was an assumed name, but Samuel Burroughs, esq. a master in chancery. Dr. Long published also a “Commencement-Sermon, 1728;” and an answer to Dr. Gally’s pamphlet “On Greek Accents.” We shall subjoin a few traits of him, as delineated in 1769, by Mr. Jones: " He is now in the eighty-eighth year of his age, and, for his years, vegete and active. He was lately (in October) put in nomination for the office of vice-chancellor. He executed that trust before; I think in the year 1737. A very ingenious person, and sometimes very facetious. At the public commencement in the year 1713, Dr. Greene (master of Bene't college, and afterwards bishop of Ely) being then vice-chancellor, Mr. Long was pitched upon for the tripos-performance; it was witty and humourous, and has passed through divers editions. Some that remembered the delivery of it told me, that, in addressing ttye vice chancellor (whom the university-wags usually styled Miss Greene), the tripos-orator, being a native of Norfolk, and assuming the Norfolk dialect, instead of saying, Domine vice-cancellarie, did very archly pronounce the words thus, Domina vice-cancellaria; which occasioned a general smile in that great auditory. His friend the late Mr. Bonfoy of Ripton told me this little incident: `That he and Dr. Long walking together in Cambridge, in a dusky evening, and coming to a short post fixed in the pavement, which Mr. B. in the midst of chat and inattention, took to be a boy standing in his way, he said in a hurry, `Get out of my way, boy.‘ `That boy, sir,’ said the doctor very calmly and slily, `is a post-boy, who turns out of his way for nobody.'

His principal work^ are, 1. “An Exercitation concerning the use of the Lord’s Prayer in the public worship of God,” Lond. 1658, 8vo, partly in answer to some sentiments advanced by the celebrated Dr. John Owen in his “Vindicise Evangelicae.” 2. “Calvinus redivivus, or Conformity to the Church of England, in doctrine, government, and worship, persuaded by Mr. Calvin,” ibid. 1673, 8vo. 3. “History of the Donatists,” ibid. 1677, 8vo. 4. “The Character of a Separatist or sensuality the ground of separation,” ibid. 1677, 8vo. 5.“Mr. Hales’s Treatise of Schism examined and censured,” ibid. 1678, 8vo, occasioned by the publication of that treatise among Hales’s “Posthumous Miscellanies.” 6. “The Nonconformist’s Plea for Peace impleaded, in answer to several late writings of Mr. Baxter, and others,” &c. ibid. 1680, 8vo. 7. “Unreasonableness of Separation,” &c. begun by Stillingfleet, with remarks on the life and actions of Baxter,“ibid. 1681, 4to and 8vo. 8.” No Protestant, but the Dissenters’ Plot, discovered and defeated;. being an answer to the late writings of several eminent dissenters,“ibid. 1682, 8vo. 9.” Vindication of the Primitive Christians in point of obedience to their prince, against the calumnies of a book entitled * The Life of Julian the Apostate,' “ibid. 1683, 8vo. 10.” History of all the popish and fanatical Plots, &c. against the established government in Church and State,“&c. ibid. 1684, 8vo. 11.” The Letter for Toleration decyphered,“&c. ibid, 1689, in answer to Locke. 12.” Vox Cleri; or the sense of the Clergy concerning the making of alterations in the Liturgy,“ibid. 1690. 13.” An Answer to a Socinian Treatise, called the Naked Gospel,“ibid. 1691. 14.” Dr. Walker’s true, modest, and faithful account of the author of Eikon Basilike,*' &c. proving this work to have come from the pen of Charles I. 15. Several single Sermons.

In the introduction to the vision, the poet (shadowed by the name and character of Peter or Pierse, a plowman) represents himself as weary of wandering, on a May-morning, and at last laid down to sleep by the side of a brook; where, in a vision, he sees a stately tower upon a hill, with a dungeon, and dark dismal ditches belonging to it, and a very deep dale under the hill. Before the tower a large field or plain is supposed, filled with men of every rank or occupation, all being respectively engaged in their several pursuits; when suddenly a beautiful lady appears to him, and unravels to him the mystery of what he had seen. Before every vision the manner and circumstances of his falling asleep are distinctly described; before one of them in particular, P. Plowman is supposed, with equal humour and satire, to fall asleep while he is bidding his beads. In the course of the poem, the satire is carried on by means of several allegorical personages, such as Avarice, Simony, Conscience, Sloth, &c. Selden mentions this author with honour; and by Hickes he is frequently styled, “Celeberrimus il-le Satyrographus, morum vindex acerrimus,” Sue. Chaucer, in the “Plowman’s Tale,” seems to have copied from our author. Spenser, in his Pastorals, seems to have attempted an imitation of his visions; and Milton is considered as under some obligations to him. The memory of this satire has been of late years revived by Percy, Warton, and Ellis, in whose works more ample information may be found than it is necessary to admit in a work professedly biographical. Perhaps indeed it does not belong to our department, since some of the most profound of our poetical critics have considered it as anonymous; Mr Tycwhitt remarks that in the best Mss. the author is called William, without any surname, and the name of Robert Longland, or Langlande, rests upon the authority only of Crowley, its earliest editor. Three of Crowley’s editions were published in 1550, doubtless owing to its justifying the Reformation then begun under king Edward, by exposing the abuses of the Romish church. There is also an edition printed in 1561, by Owen Rogers, to which is sometimes annexed a poem of nearly the same tendency, and written in the same metre, called “Pierce the Plowman’s Crede,” the first edition of which, however, was printed by Wolfe in 1553. Of both these works, new editions have recently been announced.

, or Longolius, a very elegant scholar, was born in 1490, at Mechlin, although some have called him a Parisian, and Erasmus makes him a native of Schoohhoven in Holland. He was the natural son of Antony de Longueil, bishop of Leon, who being on some occasion in the Netherlands, had an intrigue with a female of Mechlin, of which this son was the issue. He remained with his mother until eight or aine years old; when he was brought to Paris for education, in the course of which he fur exceeded his fellowscholars, and was able at a very early age to read and understand the most difficult authors. He had also an extraordinary memory, although he did not trust entirely to it, but made extracts from whatever he read, and showed great discrimination in the selection of these. His taste led him chiefly to the study of the belles lettres, but his friends wished to direct his attention to the bar, and accordingly he went to Valence in Dauphiny, where he studied civil law under professor Philip Decius, for six years, and returning then to Paris, made so distinguished a figure at the bar, that in less than two years, he was appointed counsellor of the parliament of Paris, according to his biographer, cardinal Pole, but this has been questioned on account of its never having been customary to appoint persons so young to that office; Pole has likewise made another mistake, about which there can be less doubt, in asserting that the king of Spain, Philip, appointed Longueil his secretary of state, for Philip died in 1506, when our author was only sixteen years of age.

was an ancient Greek author, probably of the fifth century, who seems to have written after Heliodorus, and, in some places, to have imitated him. He is called a sophist; but we have no remains of his except four books of “Pastorals upon the Loves of Daphnis and Cloe.” Huet speaks advantageously of this work, and had proposed, when he was young, to have made a translation of it; but he also takes notice of several defects in it, and, doubtless, its obscenities made him lay aside his purpose of translating it. None of the ancient writers mention Longus. There is a good edition of the original by Petrus Moll, a professor of the Greek language at Franeker, 1660, in 4to, but Villoison’s, Gr. and Lat. Paris, 1778, '2 vols. 8va, is the best. It was translated into English by George Thorney, and printed at London in 1657. The last edition of the English version, of which there have been four, is inscribed to James Craggs, esq. secretary of state. The French, with whom this work has always been a favourite, have many translations of it. That by Amyot has passed through many editions; the most elegant of which is that of 1718, 12mo, with 29 plates, drawn by the regent, Philip duke of Orleans, and engraved by Benoft Audran; the 29th is not his engraving, and is seldom found in the edition of 1718, the reason of which, some say, was, that only 250 copies were taken, which the prince disposed of as presents; but Brunei thinks it is too common for so small an impression. Next to this edition, that of 1745, 8vo, is preferred, with the same plates retouched.

, commonly called Glareanus, from Claris, a town in Switzerland, where he was born in 1488, was educated at Cologne, Basil, and Paris, and in the course of his studies acquired the friendship of some eminent scholars, particularly Erasmus. He had a strong turn to music, and made it a great part ol his study. After having contributed to the advancement of letters, both by discourse and writing, he died in 1563, aged seventy- five. He composed the following works: 1. “Isagoge in Arithmeticam.” 2. “Descriptio de Situ Helvetia & vicinis Gentibus.” 3. “De quatuor Helvetiorum Fcedere Panegyricon.” 4. “Isagoge in Musicatn.” 5. “De Geographia Liber.” 6. “Judicium in Terentii Carmina.” 7. “In Horatium Annotationes.” 8. “Annotationes in Ovidii Metamorphoses.” 9. “Annotationes in Ciceronis Librum de Senectute.” 10. “Annotationes in Sallustii, quae adhuc extant, Historiarum Fragmenta.” 11. “Commentariusin Arithmeticam & Musicam Boethii.” 12. “Annotationes in Johannis Csesarii Dialecticam.” 13. “Annotationes in Ccesaris Cotnmentaria.” 14. “Annotationes in Titum Liviurn.” 15. “Annotationes & Cbronologia in totam Historiam Romanam.” 16. “Annotationes in Dionysiurn Halicarnasseum.” 17. “Elegiarum Libri duo.” 18. “De Arte Musica.” 19. “De Ponderibus ac Mensuris.” 20. “Annotationes in Valerium, Suetonium, & Lucanum.” 21. “Annotationes in Eutropium.” 22. “Epistola ad Johannem Hervagium.” 23. “Scholia in J\n Donati Methodum.” 24. “Brevis Isagoge de Katione Syllabarum & de Figuris quibus Poetae utuntur.” 25. “De Asse Libellus.”

, master of the works to the French kin;', was born at Lyons about the beginning of the sixteenth century. At fourteen, he went into Italy, to study the beauties of antiquity. There he became acquainted with Cervius, afterwards pope Marceilus II. who had a good taste for the polite arts, and, conceiving a great esteem for Lorme, communicated to him every thing that he knew. Enriched with the spoils of antiquity, he returned to Lyons in 1536, and banished thence the Gothic taste. At length, going to Paris, to work for the cardinal de Bellay, he was soon employed in the court of Henry II. He made the Horse-shoe, a fortification at Fontainbleau, built the stately chateau of Anet and Meudon; the palace of the Thuilleries, and repaired and ornamented several of the royal houses, as Villiers, Colerets, St. Germain then called the castle of the Muette, the Louvre, &c. These services were recompensed above his expectations. He was made almoner and counsellor to the king, and had the abbies of St. Eloy and St. Serge of Angers conferred upon him.

, an actor and dramatic writer, assumed this name (from his wife’s, De L'Amour) when he first attached himself to the stage. He was one of the sons of Mr. Dance the city surveyor, whose memory will be transmitted to posterity on account of the clumsy edifice which he erected for the residence of the city’s chief magistrate. Our author received, it is said, his education at Westminster school, whence he removed to Cambridge, which, it is believed, he lett without taking any degree. About that time a severe poetical satire against sir Robert Waipole, then minister, appeared under the title of “Are these things so?” which, though written by Mr. Miller, was ascribed to Pope. To this Mr Love immediately wrote a reply called “Yes, they are, what then?” which proved so satisfactory to Walpole that he made him a handsome present, and gave him expectations of preferment. Elated with this distinction, with the vanity of a young author, and the credulity of a young man, he considered his fortune as established, and, neglecting every other pursuit, became an attendant at the minister’s levees, where he contracted habits of indolence and expence, without obtaining any advantage. The stage now offered itself as an asylum from the difficulties he had involved himself in, and, therefore, changing his name to Love, he made!is first essays ID strolling companies. He afterwards performed both at Dublin and Edinburgh, and at the latter place resided some years as manager. At length he received, in 1762, an invitation to Drury-lane theatre, where he continued during the remainder of his life. In 1765, with the assistance of his brother, he erected a new theatre at Richmond, and obtained a licence for performing in it; but did not receive any benefit from it, as the success by no means answered his expectations. He died about the beginning of 1774. He neither as an actor or author attained any great degree of excellence. His performance of Falstaff was by much the best, but the little reputation which he acquired by it was entirely eclipsed by the superiority of gen;iis which his successor, Mr. Henderson, di-splayed in the representation of the same character As an author, he has given the world “Pamela, a Comedy,” 1742, and some other dramatic pieces, enumerated in the “Biographia Dramatica.”

, was a noted cavalier in the reign of king Charles I. He was born at a place called Tremare in Cornwall. During the heat of the civil wars he took refuge in Holland, where, being strongly attached to the Muses, he had an opportunity of enjoying their society, and pursuing his study in peace and privacy. He died in 1662. He was a very great admirer of the French poets, particularly Corneille and Quinault, on whose works he has built the plans of four out of the six plays which he wrote. The titles of his dramatic works are, 1. “Phoenix in her Flames.” 2. “Polyeuctes or, The Martyr.” 3. “Horatius.” 4. “Inchanted Lovers.” 5. “Noble Ingratitude.” 6. “Amorous Phantasm.” All those, except the first, were written during the usurpation. He translated from the French the first and third volumes of “The Innocent Lady, or Illustrious Innocents.” But the most considerable of his translations, was “A Relation in form of a Journal of the voyage and residence of Charles II. in Holland from May 25, to June 2, 1660,” fol. finely printed, with good engravings of the ceremonies, and several copies of bad verses by the translator.

His pen was first employed, in 1716, in a kind of periodical work, called the “Occasional Papers,” which now form three volumes, 8vo, and in which he wrote, No. I. (vol. H.) “On Orthodoxy” and No. VI. “On the danger of the Chqrcb.” His colleagues in this paper were Mr. Simon Brown, Dr. Grosvenor, Dr. Evans, and others. The subjects are in general on points in controversy with the church. In 1718, he wrote a treatise against Collins, the title of which, says his biographer, is forgotten, but it is mentioned by the accurate Leland, as “The Argument from prophecy, in proof that Jesus is the Messiah, vindicated, in some considerations on the prophecies cf the Old Testament, as the grounds and reasons of the Christian religion.” It was not printed, however, until 1733. In 1735, he was one of the preachers at Salttr’s-H ill, against popery: the subject of his sermon, “The Principles of Popery schismatical.” He had published before this, two occasional sermons. Another of his pamphlets, entitled “An Argument to prove the Unity and Perfections of God d prioi'i,” uas more admired for its novelty and ingenuity than usefulness: but the works of Mr. Lowman on which his reputation is most securely founded, are, 1. “A Dissertation on the Civil Government of the Hebrews,” in answer to Morgan’s “Moral Philosopher.” This, whicU appeared in 1740, was esteemed a very judicious performance, and was highly approved of by bishop Sherlock and' other clergymen of the established church. The second edition, in 1745, has an appendix. 2. “A rationale of the Ritual of the Hebrew Worship: in which the design and usefulness of that ritual are explained and vindicated from objections/ 1 1748. 3.” A Paraphrase and Notes upon the Revelation of St. John,“4to, twice, and 8vo, lately. 4.” Three (posthumous) Tracts," on the Schechina, the Logos, &c.

In 1765 Dr. Lowih was elected a fellow of the royal societies of London and Gottingen; and in the same year was involved in a controversy with bishop Warburton. On this subject we shall be brief, but we cannot altogether agree with former biographers of Lowth and Warburton, in considering them as equally blameable, and that the contest reflected equal disgrace on both. In all contests the provoking party has more to answer for than the provoked. We lament that it was possible for Warburton to discover in the amiable mind of Lowth that irritability which has in some measure tainted the controversy on the part of the latter and we lament that Lowth was not superior to the coarse attack of his antagonist; but all must allow that the attack was coarse, insolently contemptuous, and almost intolerable to any man who valued his own character. Lowth bad advanced in his Prelections an opinion respecting the Book of Job, which Warburton considered as aimed at his own peculiar opinions. This produced a private correspondence between them in 1756, and after some explanations the parties seem to have retired well satisfied with each other. This, however, was not the case with Warburton, who at the end of the last volume of a new edition of his “Divine Legation,” added “An appendix concerning the Book of Job,” in which he treated Dr. Lowth with every expression of sneer and contempt, and in language most grossly illiberal and insolent. This provocation must account for the memorable letter Dr. Lowth published entitled “A Letter to the right rev. author of the Divine Legation of Moses demonstrated, in answer to the Appendix to the fifth volume of that work; with an appendix, containing a former literary correspondence. By a laic professor in the university of Oxford,” 8vo. Few pamphlets of the controversial kind were ever written with more ability, or more deeply interested the public than this. What we regret is the strong tendency to personal satire; but the public at the time found an apology even for that in the overbearing character of Warburton, and the contemptuous manner in which he, and his under-writers, as Hard and others were called, chose to treat a man in all respects their equal at least. It was, therefore, we think, with great justice, that one of the monthly critics introduced an account of this memorable letter, by observing, that “when a person of gentle and amiable manners, of unblemished character, and eminent abilities, is calumniated and treated in the most injurious manner by a haughty and over-bearing colossus, it must give pleasure to every generous mind to see a person vindicating himself with manly freedom, resenting the insult with proper spirit, attacking the imperious aggressor in his turn, and taking ample vengeance for the injury done him. Such is the pleasure which every impartial reader, every true republican in literature, will receive from the publication of the letter now before us.” 1

Several occasional discourses, which the bishop was by his station at different times called upon to deliver, were of course published, and are all worthy of his pen. That “On the Kingdom of God,” preached at a visitation at Durham, was most admired for liberality of sentiment, and went through several editions. Some of his poetical effusions have been already mentioned, and others appear in podsley’s and Nichols’s Collections, the Gentleman’s Magazine, &c. With such various abilities, equally applicable either to elegant literature or professional studies, bishop Lowth possessed a mind that felt its own strength, and decided on whatever came before it with promptitude and firmness a mind fitted fur the high station in which he was placed. He had a temper, which, in private and domestic life, endeared him in the greatest degree to those who were most nearly connected with him, and towards others produced an habitual complacency and agreeableness of manners; but which, as we have seen, was susceptible of considerable warmth, when it was roused by unjust provocation or improper conduct.

Loyola had already presented the pope with the plan of his new society; and he now continued his application with more waruuh than ever, that it might be approved by the holy see. Accordingly Paul III. confirmed it in 1540, on condition that their number should never exceed threescore; and again in 1543, without any restrictions. Loyola was created general of this new order in 1541, and made Rome his head- quarters, while his companions- dispersed themselves over the whole earth. He employed himself in several occupations, as the conversion of the Jews, the reforming of lewd women, and the assisting of orphans. Rome was at that time full of Jews, who were, many of them, ready to embrace Christianity, if they had not feared poverty; upon which, Paul III. at Loyola’s request, enacted, that they should preserve all their possessions; and that if any of them, who might be well born, should turn Christians, contrary to their parents’ consent, the whole substance of the family should devolve to them. Julius Hi. and Paul IV. added a new ordinance, namely, that all the synagogues in Italy should be taxed every year at a certain. sum, to be applied to the maintenance of the proselytes. There was at that time a convent of Magdalenes, into which such dissolute women as were desirous of leaving their infamous course of life, were admitted, provided they would oblige themselves to lead a conventual life for the rest of their days, and take all the vows of their order. But Loyola, thinking this condition, and some others, too severe, founded a new community of this kind of penitents, into which maids and married women might be indifferently admitted. It was called “The community of the grace of the blessed Virgin.” He caused apartments to be built in St. Mary’s church; and he frequently conducted them thither himself. He was sometimes told, that he lost his time, for that such women were never heartily converted; to which he replied, “If I should hinder them but one night from offending God, I should think' my time and labour well employed.”

Calumny levelled all her artillery at him from every quarter; notwithstanding which, he employed his utmost endeavours to heighten the glory of his order, and settle it on a firm foundation. Some women would have submitted to his discipline; but the great trouble, which the spiritual direction of three of that sex had given him, obliged him to free his society for ever from that perplexing task. Having got his order confirmed by pope Julius III. in 1550, he would have resigned his employment of general; but, the Jesuits not permitting him, he continued in it till his death, which happened July 31, 1556, in his sixty-sixth year. He died thirty- five years after what has been called his conversion, a,nd sixteen after his society was founded, and had lived to see his followers spread over the face of the whole earth, and giving laws, under him, to almost all nations. He was of a middle stature, rather low than tall; of a brown complexion, bald-headed, his eyes deep set and full of fire, his forehead large, and his nose aquiline. He halted a little, in consequence of the wound he received at the siege of Pampeluna; but he managed himself so well in walking, that it was hardly perceived. It was not pretended at first, that Loyola wrought any miracles; but when his canonization began to be talked of, his miracles became innumerable, and were confirmed by all sorts of witnesses. Paul V. beatified him in 1609; Gregory XV. inserted him in the catalogue of saints in 1622; Innocent X. and Clement IX. increased the honours that were paid him.

The Socinians, who look upon him as a saint, if not a martyr, pretend that he was favoured with a very remarkable revelation during the siege of Stetin; and the following story is told in his life: “Two powerful reasons ei aged Lubienietski to pray that God would be pleased to cause this siege to be raised: his wife and children were in the town; and there was a Swedish count, who promised that be would turn Socinian, in case Lubienietski could by his prayers prevent the taking of it. This minister, animated by the private interest of his family, and by the hopes of gaining an illustrious proselyte to his religion, continued three weeks fasting and praying; after which he went to meet the count, and assured him that the town would not be taken. The count, and the persons about him, treated this as the effect of a delirium; and were the more confirmed in that opinion, as Lubienietski fell sick the moment he left them. But they were all extremely surprised, when, at the end of six days, there came news that the siege was raised; since it was impossible that any person should have acquainted Lubienietski with that good news, when he first told it. However, when the count was called upon to perform his promise, he answered, That he had applied to God in order to know whether he should do well to embrace that minister’s religion, and that God had confirmed him in the Augsburg confession.'”

Soon after the death of the earl of Essex, Sept. 1646, Ludlow had reason to suspect, from, a conversation with Cromwell, who expressed a dislike to the parliament and extolled the army, that his ambition would lead him to destroy the civil authority, and establish his own; and therefore he gave a flat negative to the vote for returning Cromwell thanks, on his shooting ' Arnell, the agitator, and thereby quelling that faction in the army. In the same spirit of what has been called pure rep ublicanism, he joined in the vote for not addressing the king, and in the declaration for bringing him to a trial: and soon alter, in a conference with Cromwell and the leaders of the army, he harangued upon the necessity and justice of the king’s execution, and, after that, the establishment of an equal commonwealth, in which he differed from another pure republican, Lilburne, who was for new-modelling the parliament first, and then, as a natural consequence, putting the king to death. Ludlow induced the Wiltshire people to agree to the raising of two regiments of foot, and one of horse, against the Scots, when they were preparing to release the king from Carisbrook- castle. After which, he went to Fairfax, at the siege of Colchester, and prevailed with him to oppose entering into any treaty with the king; and when the House of Commons, on his majesty’s answer from Newport, voted that his concessions were ground for a future settlement, Ludlow not only expressed his dissatisfaction, but had a principal share both in forming and executing the scheme of forcibly excluding all that party from the house by colonel Pride, in 1648. Agreeably to all these proceedings, he sat upon the bench at the trial and condemnation of the king, concurred in the vote that the House of Peers was useless and dangerous, and became a member of the council of state.

When Cromwell succeeded Fairfax, as captain-general of the army, and lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he, as an artful stroke of policy, nominated Ludlow lieutenant-general of horse in that kingdom, which being confirmed by the parliament, Ludlow went thither, and discharged the office with diligence and success, till the death of Ireton, lorddeputy, Nov. 1651, whom, in his “Memoirs,” he laments as a staunch republican. He now acted as general, by an appointment from the parliament commissioners, but without that title, which Cromwell, of whose ambitious views be constantly expressed a jealousy, as constantly found one pretext or other to keep from being conferred on him; and in the following year, 1652, Fleetwood went thither with the chief command. Soon after this, the rebellion being suppressed, a considerable part of the army was disbanded, the pay of the general and other officers reduced, and necessary steps taken for satisfying the arrears due to them, which Ludlow says fell heavier upon him than others, as in supporting the dignity of the station he had spent upwards of 4500l. in the four years of his service here, out of his own estate, over and above his pay. At home, in the mean time, Cromwell was become sovereign, under the title of protector. This being esteemed by Ludlow an usurpation, he endeavoured by every means in his power to hinder the proclamation from being read in Ireland; and being defeated in that attempt, he dispersed a paper against Cromwell, called “The Memento:” for which he was dismissed from his post in the army, and ordered not to go to London by Fleetwood, now deputy of Ireland. Soon after, being less narrowly watched by Henry Cromwell, who succeeded in that office, he found means to escape and cross the water to Beaumaris; but was there seized and detained till he subscribed an engagement, never to act against the government then established. But this subscription being made with some reserve, he was pressed, on his arrival in London, Dec. 1655, to make it absolute; which he refused to do, and endeavoured to draw major-general Harrison, and Hugh Peters, into the same opinion. Cromwell, therefore, after trying in vain, in a private conference, to prevail upon him to subscribe, sent him an order from the council of state, to give security in the sum of 5000l. not to act against the new government, within three days, on pain of being taken into custody. Not obeying the order, he was apprehended by the president’s warrant; but the security being given by his brother Thomas Ludlow, though, as he says, without his consent, he went into Essex, where he continued till Oliver died. He was then returned in the new parliament called upon Richard’s accession to the protectorate; and, either from connivance or cowardice on the part of the government, was suffered to sit in the house without taking the oath required of every member, not to act or contrive any thing against the protector. He was afterwards very active in procuring the restoration of the Rump parliament; in which, with the rest, he took possession of his seat again, and the same day was appointed one of the committee of safety. Soon after this, he obtained a regiment, by the interest of sir Arthur Haslerig; and in a little time was nominated one of the council of state, every member of which took an oath to be true and faithful to the commonwealth, in opposition to Charles Stuart, or any single person. He was likewise appointed by parliament one of the commissioners for naming and approving officers in the army.

But the Wallingford-house party, to remove him out of the way, recommended him to the parliament, for the post of commander in chief of the forces in Ireland, in the room of Henry Cromwell, and he accordingly arrived, with that command, at Dublin, in August 1659; but in September, receiving Lambert’s petition to parliament, for settling the government under a representative and select senate, he procured a counter petition to be signed by the officers of the army near Dublin, declaring their resolution of- adhering closely to the parliament and soon after, with the Consent of Fieetwood, set out for England. On his arrival at Beaumaris, hearing that the army had turned the parliament oat of the house, and resumed the supreme power, he hesitated for some time about proceeding on his journey, but at length resolved upon it; and on his arrival at Chester, finding an addition made to the army’s scheme of government, by which all the officers were to receive new commissions from Fleetwood, and that a committee of safety was appointed, consisting of twenty-one members, of which he was one, and that he was also continued one of the committee for nomination of officers, he set out for London the next day, and arrived there Oct. 29, 1659. The Wallingford-house p;irty prevailing to have a new parliament called, Ludlow opposed it with great fervour, in defence of the Hump, and proposed to qualify the power of the army by a council of twenty-one under the denomination of the Conservators of liberty; but being defeated in this, by the influence of the Wallingford-house party, he resolved to return to his post in Ireland, and had the satisfaction to know, before he left London, that it was at last carried to restore the old parliament, which was done two or three- days after. In Ireland, however, he was far from being well received. Dublin was barred against him, and landing at Duncannon, he was blockaded there by a party of horse, pursuant to an order of the council of officers, who likewise charged him with several crimes and misdemeanors against the army. He wrote an answer to this charge; but, before he sent it away, received an account, that the parliament had confirmed the proceedings of the council of officers at Dublin against him; and, about a week after, he received a letter from them, signed William Lenthall, recalling him home.

He understood twenty-five languages: Hebrew, and that of the Rabbins; the Samaritan, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, learned, literal, and vulgar; Greek, learned and vulgar; Ethiopic, learned and vulgar, Called Amharic; Coptic, Persian, Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Flemish, English, Polish, Sclavonic, and the ancient language of Sclavonia, and of the Finnes. He was equally esteemed for his manners as for his talents; and was very communicative; hardy and indefatigable in business, and so much inured to study, that he had always a book open before him at his ordinary repasts. He left a son, Christian Ludolph, who was the only child he had, and was counsellor and secretary to the duke of Saxe-Eysenach. ' His works are: 1. “Schola Latinitatis, &c.” Gothae, 1672, 8vo. 2. “Historia Kthiopica, &<.” Franc. 1681, folio. 3. “Epistola Ethiopice scripta,” 1685, in folio. This was the letter he wrote to persuade the Abyssinians to an alliance with the princes of Europe. 4. “De bello Turcico feliciter conficiendo, &c.” Franc. 1686. 4to. 5. “Remarque* sur les pensees enjouez & serieux, &c.”' Leipsic, 1689, 8vo. 6. “Epistolse Samaritans Sichetnitarum ad Jobum Ludolphum, &c.” Leipsic, 1688, 4to. 7, “Specimen commentarii in historian! Ethiopicam,” 1687. 8. “Comaientarins in historiam Ethiopicam, &c.” Franc. 1691, folio. 9. “Appendix ad hist. Ethiopicam illiusque commentarium, &c.” ibid. 1693, folio. 10. “Jugerrtent d‘un anonyme sur une lettre a un ami touchant une systeme d’etymologie Hebraique.” II. “Dissertatio de locustis, &c.” Franc. 1694, folio. 12. “Grammatica Amharicae liiifmse qua; est vernacula Habessinorum,” ibid. 1698, fojio. 13.“Lexicon Amharico-Latinnm, &c.” ibid. 1698, folio. J4. Lexicon Ethiopico-Latinum, ibid, editio secunda,“1699, folio. 15.” Gratnmatica linguae Ethiopian, secunda,“ibid. 1702, folio. 16.” Psalterium Davidis, Ethiopice & Latine, &c.“ibid. 1701, 4to. J7.” Theatre historique de ce que s’est passé en Europe, pendant le xvii siécle,“in German,” avec des figures de Remain de Hoog,“ibid. 2 vols. folio. 18.” Confessio fidei Claudii Regis Ethiopicse," &c. in 4to.

While he was cardinal, he was very charitable and bestowed tlu> Jesuits’ bark, which then sold for its weight in gold, very liberally to persons afflicted with agues. He was iiic first that brought this febrifuge specific into France in 1650, when it was called cardinal de Lugo’s powder. He was undeniably a learned man, and had all that subtlety of genius which is the characteristic quality of the Spanish divines; and is said to be the first that discovered the philosophical sin, and the justice of punishing it eternally. His solution of this difficulty is somewhat extraordinary; for, having asserted that the savages might be ignorant of God inculpably, he observes that the Deity gave them, before their death, so much knowledge of himself as was necessary to be capable of sinning theologically, and prolonged their life till they had committed such sin, and thereby justly incurred eternal damnation. Among his other scholastic absurdities he has also the reputation of inventing the doctrine of inflated points, in order to remove the difficulties in accounting for the infinite divisibility of quantity, and the existence of mathematical points. It was a received opinion, that a rarefied body takes up a greater space than before, without acquiring any new matter; our cardinal applied this to a corpuscle, or atom, without parts or extension, which he supposes may swell itself in such a manner as to fill several parts of space.

Being for some offence dismissed from the princess’s service, he got himself entered among the king’s violins; and in a little time became able to compose. Some of his airs being noticed by the king, he called for the author; and was so struck with his performance of them on the violin, of which Lulli was now become A master, that in 1660 he created a new band, called “Les Petits Violons,” and placed him at the head of it. He was afterwards appointed sur-intendant de la musique de la chambre du Roy; and upon this associated himself with Quinault, who was appointed to write the operas; and being now become composer and joint director of the opera, he not only detached himsek' from the former band, and instituted one of his own, but, what is more extraordinary, neglected the violin so much, that he had not even one in his house, and never played upon it afterwards^ except to very few, and in private. On the other hand, to the guitar, a trifling instrument, he retained throughout life such a propensity, that for his amusement he resorted to it voluntarily; and to perform on it even before strangers, needed no incentive. The reason of this seeming perverseness of temper has been thus assigned: “The guitar is an instrument of small estimation among persons skilled in music, the power of performing on it being attained without much difficulty; and, so far as regards the reputation of the performer, it is of small moment whether he plays very well on it or not: but the performance on the violin is a delicate and an arduous energy; which Lulli knowing, set too high a value on the reputation he had acquired when in constant practice, to risk the losing of it.”

While these things passed in Germany, Leo attempted to put an end to these disputes about indulgences, by a decision of his own; and for that purpose, November the 9th, published a brief, directed to cardinal Cajetan, in which he declared, that “the pope, the successor of St. Peter, and vicar of Jesus Christ upon earth, hath power to pardon, by virtue of the keys, the guilt and punishment of sin, the guilt by the sacrament of penance, and the temporal punishments due for actual sins by indulgences; that these indulgences are taken from the overplus of the merits of Jesus Christ and his saints, a treasure at the pope’s own disposal, as well by way of absolution as suffrage; and that the dead and the living, who properly and truly obtain these indulgences, are immediately freed from the punishment due to their actual sins, according to the divine justice, which allows these indulgences to be granted and obtained.” This brief ordains, that “all the world shall hold and preach this doctrine, under the pain of excommunication reserved to the pope; and enjoins cardinal Cajetan to send it to all the archbishops and bishops of Germany, and c:iuse it to be put into execution by them.” Luther knew very well that after this judgment made by the pope, he could not possibly escape being proceeded against, and condemned at Rome; and therefore, upon the 28th of the same month, published a new appeal from the pope to a general council, in which he asserts the superior authority of the latter over the former. The pope, foreseeing that he should not easily manage Luther so long as the elector of Saxony continued to support and protect him, sent the elector a golden rose, such an one as he used to bless every year, and send to several princes, as marks of his particular favour to them. Miltitius, or Miltitz, his chamberlain, who was a German, was intrusted with this commission; by whom the pope sent also letters in Jan. 1519, to the elector’s counsellor and secretary, in which he prayed those ministers to use all possible interest with their master, that he would stop the progress of Luther’s errors, and imitate therein the piety of his ancestors. It appears by Sectendorf 's account of Miltitz’s negotiation, that Frederick had long solicited for this bauble from the pope; and that three or four years before, when his electoral highness was a bigot to the court of Rome, it had probably been a most welcome present. Bat it was now too late: Luther’s contests with the see of Rome had opened the elector’s eyes, and enlarged his mind; and therefore, when Miltitz delivered his letters, and discharged his commission, he was received but coldly by the elector, who valued not the consecrated rose, nor would receive it publicly and in form, but only privately, and by his proctor; and to the remonstrances of Miltitz respecting Luther, answered that he would not act as a judge, nor oppress a man whom he had hitherto considered as innocent. It is thought that the death of the emperor Maximilian, who expired on the 12th of this month, greatly altered the face of affairs, and made the elector more able to determine Luther’s fate. Miltitz thought it best, therefore, to try what could be done by fair and gentle means, and to that end came to a conference with Luther. He poured forth many commendations upon him, and earnestly intreated him that he would himself appease that tempest which could not but be destructive to the church. He blamed at the same time the behaviour and conduct of Tetzel; whom he called before him, and reproved with so much sharpness, that he died of melancholy a short time after. Luther, amazed at all this civil treatment, which he had never before experienced, commended Miltitz highly, owned that, if they had behaved to him so at lirst, all the troubles occasioned by these disputes, had been avoided; and did not forgt-t to cast the blame upon Albert archbishop of Mentz, who had increased these troubles by his severity. Miltitz also made some concessions; as, that the people had been seduced by false opinions about indulgences, that Tetzel had given the occasion, that the archbishop had employed Tetzel to get money, that Tetzel had exceeded the bounds of his commission, &c. This mildness and seeming candour on the part of Miltitz gained so wonderfully upon Luther, that he wrote a most submissive letter to the pope, on March 13, 1519. Miltitz, however, taking for granted that they would not be contented at Rome with this letter of Luther’s, written, as it was, in general terms only, proposed to refer the matter to some othec judgment; and it was agreed between them that the elector of Triers should be the judge, and Coblentz the place of conference; but this came to nothing; for Luther afterwards gave some reasons for not going to Coblentz, and the pope would not refer the matter to the elector of Triers.

While Luther was labouring to excuse himself to the emperor and the bishops of Germany, Eckius had gone to Rome, to solicit his condemnation: which, it may easily be conceived, was not now very difficult to be obtained, as he and his whole party were had in abhorrence, and the elector Frederic wajs out of favour, on account of the protection which he afforded Luther. The elector excused himself to the pope, in a letter dated April 1; which the pope answered, and sent him at the same time a copy of a bull, in which he was required “either to oblige Luther to retract his errors, or to imprison him for the disposal of the pope.” This peremptory proceeding alarmed at first the court of the elector, and many German nobles who were of Luther’s party, but their final resolution was, to protect and defend him. In the mean time, though Luther’s condemnation was determined at Rome, Miltitz did not cease to treat in Germany, and to propose means of accommodation. To this end he applied to the chapter of the Augustine friars there, and prayed them to interpose their authority, and to beg of Luther that he would endeavour to conciliate the pope by a letter, full of submission and respect. Luther consented to write, and his letter bears date April the 6th; but matters had been carried too far on both sides, ever to admit of a reconciliation. The mischief Luther had done, and continued to do, to the papal authority, was irreparable; and the rough usage and persecutions he had received from the pope’s party had now inflamed his active spirit to that degree, that it was not possible to appease it, but by measures which the pope and the court of Rome could never be expected to adopt. At all events, the letter he wrote at this juncture could not be attended with any healing ednsequences; the style and sentiments were too irritating for a less degree of pride than that which presided at Rome. In this epistle Luther says, “that among the monsters of the age, with whom be had been engaged for three years past, he had often called to mind the blessed father Leo: that now he began to triumph over his enemies, and to despise them: that, though he had been obliged to appeal from his holiness to a general council, yet he had no aversion to him: that he had always wished and prayed for all sorts of blessings upon his person and see: that his design was only to defend the truth: that he had never spoken dishonourably of his holiness, but had called him a Daniel in the midst of Babylon, to denote the innocence and purity he had preserved among so many corrupt men: that the court of Rome was visibly more corrupt than either Babylon or Sodom; and that his holiness was as a lamb among wolves, a Daniel among lions, and an Ezekiel ampng scorpions: that there were not above three or four cardinals of any learning or piety: that it was against these disorders of the court of Rome he was obliged to appear: that cardinal Cajftan, who was ordered by his holiness to treat with him, bad shewn no inclinations to peace: that his nuncio JVliltitz had indeed come to two conferences with him, and that he had promised JVliltitz to be silent, and submit to the decision of the archbishop of Triers; but that the dispute at Leipsic had hindered the execution of this project, and put things into greater confusion: that Milt it/ hud applied a third time to the chapter of his order, at whose instigation he had written to his holiness: and that he now threw himself at his feet, praying him to impose silence upon his enemies: but that, as for a recantation on his part, be must not insist upon it, unless he would increase the troubles; nor prescribe him rules for the interpretation of the word of God, because it ought not to be limited. Then he admonishes the pope not to suffer himself to be seduced, by his flatterers, into a persuasion that he can command and require all things, that he is above a council and the universal church, that he alone has a right to interpret scripture; but to believe those rather who debase, than those who exalt him.”

Luther, now perceiving that all hopes of an accommodation were at an end, no longer observed the least reserve or moderation. Hitherto he had treated his adversaries with some degree of ceremony, paid them some regard; and, not being openly separated from the church, did not quite abandon the discipline of it. But now he kept no measures with them, broke off all his engagements to the church, and publicly declared, that he would no longer communicate in it. The first step he took, after the publication of the pope’s bull, was to write against it; which he did in very severe terms, calling it, “The execrable bull of antichrist.” He published likewise a book called “The Captivity of Babylon” in which he begins with a protestation, “That he became every day more knowing: that he was ashamed and repented of what he had written about indulgences two years before, when he was a slave to the superstitions of Rome: that he did not indeed then reject indulgences, but had since discovered, tliat they are nothing but impostures, fit to raise money, and to destroy the faith: that he was then content with denying the papacy to be jure divino, but had lately been convinced that it was the kingdom of Babylon: that he then wished a general council would settle the communion in both kinds, but npw plainly saw, that it was commanded by scripture: that he did absolutely deny the seven sacraments, owning no more than three, baptism, penance, and the Lord’s supper,” &c. About the same time also, he published another treatise in the German language, to make the court of Rome odious to the Germans; in which “he gives a history of the wars raised by the popes against the emperors, and represents the miseries Germany had suffered by them. He strives to engage the emperor and princes of Germany to espouse his party against the pope,' by maintaining, that they had the same power over the clergy as they had over the laity, and that there was no appeal from their jurisdiction. He advised the whole nation to shake off the pope’s power; and proposes a reformation, by which he subjects the pope and bishops to the power of the emperor, &c.” Lastly, that he might not be wanting in any thing which should testify his abhorrence of the proceedings in the court of Rome, Luther determined to treat the pope’s bull and decretals in the same manner as they had ordered his writings to be treated: and therefore, calling the students at Wittemberg together, he flung them into a fire prepared for that purpose; saying, “Because thou hast troubled the holy one of God, let eternal fire trouble thee.” This ceremony was performed, Dec. 10, 1520.

While the bull of Leo X. executed by Charles V. was thundering throughout the empire, Luther was safely shut up in his castle, which he afterwards called his Hermitage, and his Patmos. Here he held a constant correspondence with his friends at Wittemberg, and was employed in composing books in favour of his own cause, and against his adversaries. He did not however so closely confine himself, but that he frequently made excursions into the neighbourhood, though always under some disguise or other. One day he assumed the title and appearance of a nobleman: but it may be supposed that he did not act his part very gracefully; for a gentleman who attended him under that character, to an inn upon the road, was, it seems, so fearful of a discovery, that he thought it necessary to caution him against that absence of mind peculiar to literary men; bidding him “keep close to his sword, without taking the least notice of books, if by chance any should fall in his way.” He used sometimes even to go out a hunting with those few who were in his secret; which, however, we may imagine, he did more for health than for pleasure, as indeed may be collected from his own curious account of it. “I was,” says he, “lately two days a hunting, in which amusement I found both pleasure and pain. We killed a brace of hares, and took some unhappy partridges; a very pretty employment, truly, for an idle man! However, I could not forbear theologizing amidst dogs and nets; for, thought I to myself, do not we, in hunting innocent animals to death with dogs, very much resemble the devil, who, by crafty wiles and the instruments of wicked priests, is perpetually seeking whom he may devour? Again: We happened to take a leveret alive, which I put into my pocket, with an intent to preserve it; yet we were not gone far, before the dogs seized upon it, as it was in my pocket, and worried it. Just so the pope and the devil rage furiously to destroy the souls that I have saved, in spite of all my endeavours to prevent them. In short, I am tired of hunting these little innocent beasts; and had rather be employed, as I have been for some time, in spearing bears, wolves, tigers, and foxes; that is, in opposing and confounding wicked and impious divines, who resemble those savage animals in their qualities.”

In the beginning of 1524, Clement VII. sent a legate into Germany to the diet which was to be held at Nuremberg. This pope had succeeded Adrian, who died in Oct. 1523, and had, a little before his death, canonized Benno, who Was bishop of Meissen in the time of Gregory VII. and one of the most zealous defenders of the holy se. Luther, imagining that this was done directly to oppose him, drew up a piece with this title, “Against the new Idol and Devil set up at Meissen;” in which he treats the memory of Gregory with great freedom, and does not spare even Adrian. Clement VII.'s legate, therefore, represented to the diet at Nuremberg the necessity of enforcing the execution of the edict of Worms, which had been strangely neglected by the princes of the empire; but, notwithstanding the legate’s solicitations, which were very pressing, the decrees of that diet were thought so ineffectual, that they were condemned at Rome, and rejected by the emperor. It was in this year that the dispute between Luther and Erasmus began about free-will. Erasmus had been much courted by the papists to write against Luther; but had hitherto avoided the task, by saying, “that Luther was too great a man for him to write against, and that he had learned more from one short page of Luther, than from all the large books of Thomas Aquinas.” Besides, Erasmus was all along of opinion, that writing would not be found an effectual way to end the differences, and establish the peace of the church. Tired out, however, at length with the importunities of the pope and the catholic princes, and desirous at the same time to clear himself from the suspicion of favouring a cause which he would not seem to favour, he resolved to write against Luther, though, as he tells Melancthon, it was with some reluctance; and he chose free-will for the subject. His book was entitled “A diatriba, or Conference about Free-will,” and was wriuen with much moderation, and without personal reflections. He tells Luther in the preface, “that he ought not to take his differing from him in opinion ill, because he had allowed himself the liberty of differing from the judgment of popes, councils, universities and doctors of the church.” Luther was some time before he answered Erasmus’s book, but at last published a treatise “De servo arbitrio, or, Of the Servitude of Man’s Will;” and though Melancthon had promised Krasmus, that Luther should answer him with civility and moderation, yet Luther had so little regard to Melancthon’s promise, that he never wrote any thing more severe. He accused Erasmus of being carelrsn about religion, and little solicitous what became of it, provided the world continued in peace; and that his notions were rather philosophical than Christian. Erasmus immediately replied to Luther,- in a piece called “Hyperaspistes”. in the first part of which he answers his arguments, and in the second his personal reflections.

In October 1524, Luther threw off the monastic habit; which, though not premeditated and designed, was yet a very proper preparative to a step he took the year after; we mean, his marriage with Catherine de Bore. Catherine cie Bore was a gentleman’s daughter, who had been a nun, and was one of those whom we mentioned as escaping from tue nunnery in 1523. Luther had a design to marry her to Glacius, a minister of Ortamuncien; but she did not like Glacius, and Luther married her himself, June 13, 1525. This conduct of his was blamed not only by the catholics, but, as Melancthon says, by those of his own party. He was even for some time ashamed of it himself; aud owns, “that his marriage had made him so despicable, that he hoped his humiliation would rejoice the angels, and vex the devils.” Melancthon found him so afflicted with what he had done, that he wrote some letters of consolation to him: he adds, however, that “this accident may possibly not be without its use, as it tends to humble him a little: for it is dangerous,” says he, “not only for a priest, but for any man, to be too much elated and puffed up; great success giving occasion to the sin of a high mind, not only, as the orator says, in fools, but sometimes even in wise men.” It was not so much the marriage, as the circumstances of the time, and the precipitation with which it was done, that occasioned the censures passed upon Luther. He married very suddenly, and at a time when Germany was groaning under the miseries of war, which was said at least to be owing to Lutheranism. It was thought also an indecent thing in a man of forty-two years of age, who was then, as he declared, restoring the gospel and reforming mankind, to involve himself in marriage with a woman of six and twenty, upon any pretext. But Luther, as soon as he had recovered himself a little from this abashment, assumed his former air of intrepidity, and boldly supported what he had done with reasons. “I took a wife,” says he, “in obedience to my father’s commands, and hastened the consummation, in or 1 r to prevent impediments, and stop the tongues of slanderers.” It appears from his own confessions, that,this reformer was very fond of Mrs. de Bore, and used to call her his Catherine; which occasioned some slanderous reflections and therefore, says he, “I married of a sudden, not only that J might not be obliged to hear the clamours which I knew would be raised against me, but to stop the mouths of those who reproached me with Catherine de Bore.” Luther also gives us to understand, that he did it partly as concurring with his grand scheme of opposing the catholics. “See,” says he, “because they are thus mad, I have so prepared myself, that, before I die, I may be found by God in the state in which I was created, and, if possible, retain nothing of my former popish life. Therefore let them rave yet more, and this will be their last farewell; for my mind presages, that I shall soon be called by God unto his grace: therefore, at my father’s commands, I have taken a xtife.” In another letter he speaks thus: “1 hope I shall live a little longer, and I would not deny this last obedience to my father, who required it in hopes of issue, and also to confirm the doctrines I have taught.”

The troubles of Germany still continuing, the emperor was forced to call a diet at Spires in 1529, to require the assistance of the princes of the empire against the Turks, who had taken Buda, and to Bud out some means of allaying the contests about religion, which increased daily. In this diet were long and violent debates, utter winch the decree of the former diet oi Spues was again agreed to, in which it was ordered, that concerning me execution of the edict of Worms, the princes of the empire should act in such a manner, as that they might give a good account of their management to God and the emperor, but, because some had taken occasion from these general terms, to maintain all sorts of new doctrines, they made a new decree in this diet, to explain that of the former; by which it was appointed, “That in those places where the edict of Worms had hitherto been observed, they should still keep to the execution of it, nil a council should be called by the emperor; that those, who had taken up new opinions, and could not be brought to quit them without the hazard of some sedition, should be quiet for the future, and not admit of any alterations till the meeting of the council; that the new doctrine about the eucharist, which had been started of late, should not be entertained; that the mass should not be left off, nor the celebration of it be hindered, even in those places where the reformed doctrine prevailed; that the anabaptists should be proscribed; that the ministers of the word of God should preach it according to the interpretation of the church, and should abstain from speaking of any other doctrines, till the council should meet; that all the provinces of the empire should live in peace, and not commit acts of hostility upon one another, under a pretence of religion; and that one prince should not protect the subjects of another.”

The deputies having received this answer, drew up an act of appeal, and caused it to be presented to the emperor; which enraged him so extremely, that he confined them to their lodgings, and forbade them to write into Germany upon pain of death. One of the deputies, who happened to be absent when this order was given, wrote immediately to the senate of Nuremberg an account of what had passed; and this was transmitted to the elector of Saxony, the landgrave of Hesse, and other confederates, who met at Smalkald in November. Here it was first of all proposed, to agree upon a confession of faith; which accordingly was prepared, and afterwards offered at the diet of Augsburg, in June 1530. The emperor would not suffer it to be read in a full diet, but only in a special assembly of the princes and other members of the empire; after which the assembly was dismissed, that they might consult what resolutions should be formed. Some thought that the edict of Worms should be put in execution; others were for referring the matter to the decision of a certain number of honest, learned, and indifferent persons; a third party were for having it confuted by the catholic divines, and the confutation to be read in a full diet before the protestants; and these prevailed. The protestants afterwards presented an apology for their confession; but the emperor would not receive it; they were, however, both made public. This confession of faith, which was afterwards called “The confession of Augsburg,” was drawn up by Melancthon, the most moderate of all Luther’s followers, as was also the apology. He revised and corrected it several times, and, as Dupin tells us, could hardly please Luther at last. Maimbourg says, however, that Luther was exceedingly pleased with it, when Melancthon sent him a copy of it; and Seckendorf allows that Luther was very glad of the opportunity which was offered of letting the world know what he and his followers taught. It was signed by the elector of Saxony, the marquis of Brandenburg, Ernest and Francis dukes of Brunswick and Lurtenburg, the landgrave of Hesse, the princes of Anhalt, and the deputies of the cities of Nuremberg and Retlingen.

In 1534 the Bible translated by him into German was first printed, as the old privilege, dated “at Bibliopolis, under the elector’s own hand, shews, and was published the year after. He also published this year a book” against masses and the consecration of priests,“in which he relates a conference he had with the devil upon those points; for it is remarkable in Luther’s whole history, that he never had any conflicts of any kind within, which he did not attribute to the personal agency of the devil. In Feb. 1537, an assembly was held at Smalkald about matters of religion, to which Luther and Melancthoii were called. At this meeting Luther was seized with so dangerous an illness, that there was no hope of his recovery. He was afflicted with the stone, and had a stoppage of urine for eleven days. In this condition he insisted on travelling, notwithstanding all his friends could do to prevent him: his resolution, however, was attended with a good effect, for the night after his departure he began to be better. As he was carried along he made his will, in which he bequeathed his detestation of popery to his friends and brethren; agreeably to what he often used to say,” Pestis cram vivus, moriens ero mors tua, papa;“that is,” I was the plague of popery in my life, and shall be its destruction in my death."

In this manner he was employed till his death, which happened in 1546. That year, accompanied by Melancthon, he paid a visit to his own country, which he had not seen for many years, and returned again in safety. But soon after he was called thither again by the earls of Mansfelt, to compose some differences which had arisen about their boundaries. He had not been used to such matters; but because he was born at Isleben, a town in the territory of Mansfelt, he was willing to do his country what service he could, even in this way. Preaching his last sermon, therefore, at Wittemberg, Jan. 17, he set off the 23d; and at Hall in Saxony lodged with Justus Jonas, with whom he stayed three days, because the waters were out. The 28th he passed over the river with his three sons, and Jonas and being in some danger, he said to the doctor, “Do not you think it would rejoice the deril exceedingly, if I and you, and my three sons, should be drowned” When he entered the territories of the earl of Mansfelt, he was received by 100 horsemen or more, and conducted in a very honourable manner; but was at the same time so very ill that it was feared he would die. He said that these fits of sickness often came upon him when he had any great business to undertake: of this, however, he did not recover, but died Feb. 18, in his sixty-third year. A little before he expired he admonished those that were about him to pray to God for the propagation of the gospel “because,” said he, “the council of Trent, which had sat once or twice, and the pope, will devise strange things against it.” Soon after, his body was put into a leaden coffin, and carried with funeral pomp to the church at Isleben, when Jonas preached a sermon upon the occasion. The earls of Mansfelt desired that his body should be interred in their territories; but the elector of Saxony intsted upon his being brought back to Wittemberg, which was accordingly done; and there he was buried with the greatest pomp that perhaps ever happened to any private mail. Princes, earls, nobles, aad students without number, attended the procession; and Melancthon made his funeral oration.

After this long, but we trust, not uninteresting account of the great founder of the Reformation, we shall select only, on the part of the Roman catholics, the opinion of father Simon, respecting his talents as an interpreter of scripture, for this is a part of his character which must appear very important, as he was the first who boldly undertook to reform an overgrown system of idolatry and superstition by the pure word of God. “Luther,” says this critical author, “was the first protestant who ventured to translate the dible into the vulgar tongue from the Hebrewtext, although he understood Hebrew but very indifferently. As he was of a free and bold spirit, he accuses St. Jerom of ignorance in the Hebrew tongue; but he had more reason to accuse himself of this fault, and for having so precipitately undertaken a work of this nature, which required more time than he employed about it. Thus we find that he was obliged to review his translation, and make a second edition; but, notwithstanding this review, the most learned protestants of that time could not approve of either the one or the other, and several of them took the liberty to mark the faults, which were very numerous.” In another place he speaks of him not as a translator, but as a commentator, in the following manner: “Luther, the German protestant’s patriarch, was not satisfied with making a translation of the whole Bible, both from the Hebrew and Greek, into his mother tongue, but thought he ought to explain the word of God according to his own method, for the better fixing of their minds whom he had drawn to his party. But this patriarch could succeed no better in his commentaries upon the Bible than in his translation. He made both the one and the other with too little consideration; and he very often consults only his own prejudices. That he might be thought a learned man, he spends time to no purpose in confuting of other people’s opinions, which he fancies ridiculous. He mixes very improperly theological questions and several other things with his commentaries, so that they may rather be called lectures, and disputes in divinity, than real commentaries. This may be seen in his exposition on Genesis, where there are many idle digressions. He thought, that by reading of morality, and bawling against those who were not of nis opinion, he might very much illustrate the word of God; yet one may easily see by his own books, that he was a turbulent and passionate man, who had only a little flashy wit and quickness of invention. There is nothing great or learned in his commentaries upon the Bible; every thing low and mean: and as he had studied divinity, he has rather composed a rhapsody of theological questions, than a commentary upon the scripture text: to which we may add, that he wanted understanding, and usually followed his senses instead of his reason.”

, a Greek poet and grammarian, was a native of Chalcis, in Eubcea, and according to Ovid, was killed by a shot with an arrow. He flourished about 304 years before Christ, and wrote a poem entitled “Alexandra,” or Cassandra, containing a long course of predictions, which he supposes to be made by Cassandra, daughter of Priam, king of Troy. This poem has created a great deal of trouble to the learned, on account of its obscurity, which procured him the title of “the tenebrous poet.” Suidas has preserved the titles of twenty tragedies of his composing; and he is reckoned in the number of the poets who were called the Pleiades, and who flourished under Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of Egypt. The best edition of “Lycophron,” is that at Oxford, 1697, by Dr. (afterwards archbishop) Potter; re-printed therein 1701, folio. A few years ago, the rev. Henry Meen, B. D. published “Remarks” on the “Cassandra,” which are highly judicious, and his conjectures in illustration of the obscurities of Lycophron, plausible and happy.

His works are, 1. “Ancient characters of the visible Church, 1625.” 2. “Via tuta, the safe way, &c.” reprinted several times, and translated into Latin, Dutch, and French, printed at Paris, 1647, from the sixth edition published in 1636, 12mo, under the title of “Popery confuted by Papists,” &c. 3. “Via devia, the by-way,” &c. 1630 and 1632, 8vo. 4. “A Case for the Spectacles; or, a Defence of the Via tuta,” in answer to a book written by J. R. called “A pair of Spectacles,” &c. with a supplement in Vindication of sir Humphrey, by the publisher, Dr. Daniel Featly. A book entitled “A pair of Spectacles for sir Humphrey Lynde,” was printed at Roan, 1631, in 8vo, by Robert Jenison, or Frevil, a Jesuit. 5. “An account of Bertram, with observations concerning the censures upon his Tract De corpore et sanguine Christi,” prefixed to an edition of it at London, 1623, 8vo, and reprinted there in 1686, 8vo, by Dr. Matthew Brian.

When he returned from his continental tour, he was (May 4, 1729) made page of honour to the princess royal. He also obtained a seat in parliament, and soon distinguished himself among the most eager opponents of sir Robert Walpole, though his father, who was one of the lords of the admiralty, always voted with the court. For many years the name of George Lyttelton was seen in every account of every debate in the house of commons. Among the great leading questions, he opposed the standing army, and the excise, and supported the motion for petitioning the king to remove Walpole. The prince of Wales having, in consequence of a quarrel with the king, been obliged to leave St. James’s in 1737, kept a separate court, and opened his arms to the opponents of the ministry. Mr. Lyttelton was made his secretary, and was supposed to have great influence in the direction of his conduct. His name consequently occurs, although not very often, in Doddington’s Diary. He persuaded the prince, whose business it was now to be popular, tbat he would advance his character by patronage. Mallet was made under-secretary, with 2001. a year; and Thomson had a pension of 100l. The disposition of the two men must account for the difference in the sums. Mallet could do more political service than the honest-hearted Thomson. For Thomson, however, Mr. Lyttelton always retained his kindness, and was able at last to place him at ease. Moore courted his favour by an apologetical poem called “The Trial of Selim,” and was paid with kind words, which, as is common, says Dr. Johnson, raised great hopes, that at last were disappointed. This matter, however, is differently stated in our account of Moore.

His collected works, first printed in 4to, in 1774, and since in 8vo, consist of, 1. “Observations on the Life of Cicero.” 2. “Observations on the Roman History.” 3. “Observations on the present state of our affairs at home and abroad,” &c. 4. “Letters from a Persian in England to his friend at Ispahan.” 5. “Observations on the conversion and apostleship of St. Paul” 6. “Dialogues of the Dead.” 7. “Four Speeches in parliament.” 8. “Poems.” 9. “Letters to Sir Thomas Lyttelton.” 10. “Account of a Journey into Wales.” Some other lesser pieces, which appeared in the periodical journals, have been attributed to him, and some anonymous political pamphlets. Lord Orford mentions him as a writer in the paper called “Common Sense,” but has not discovered his share. In that, however, he certainly wrote the criticism on “Leonidas,” which occurs in p. 72, of the first volume. In vol. II. p. 31, is a paper from the pen of lord Chesterfield, dated March 4, 1738, in defence of lord (then Mr.) Lyttelton against the attacks of the writers in the Daily Gazetteer. From his connection with the party in opposition to sir Robert Walpole, it seems not unreasonable to conjecture that he wrote in the “Craftsman;” but for this we have no positive authority.

In 1682 he took a journey into Burgundy, in which M. Colbert employed him to examine some ancient titles relating to the royal family. That minister received all the satisfaction he could desire; and, being fully convinced of Mabillon’s experience and abilities in these points, sent him the year following into Germany, in order to search there, among the archives and libraries of the ancient abbeys for materials to illustrate the history of the church in general, and that of France in particular. He spent five months in this journey, and published an account of it. He took another journey into Italy in 1685, by order of the king of France; and returned the year following with a very noble collection of above three thousand volumes of rare books, both printed and manuscript, which he added to the king’s library; and, in 1687, composed two volumes of the pieces he had discovered in that country, under the title of “Museum Italicum.” After this he employed himself in publishing other works, which are strong evidences of his vast abilities and application. In 1698 he published a Latin letter concerning the worship of the unknown saints, which he called “Eusehii Romani ad Theophilum Gallum epistola.” The history of this piece does credit to his love of truth, and freedom from traditional prejudices. While at Rome he had endeavoured to inform himself particularly of those rules and precautions, wh:ch were necessary to be observed with regard to the bodies of saints taken out of the catacombs, in order to be exposed to the veneration of the public. He had himself visited those places, and consulted all persons who could give him light upon the subject; but five or six years elapsed after his return to France, without his having ever thought of making use of these observations. In 1692, however, he drew up the treatise above-mentioned; in which he gave it as his opinion, that the bodies found in the catacombs were too hastily, and without sufficient foundation, concluded to be the bodies of martyrs. Still, aware this was a subject of a very delicate nature, and thai such an opinion might possibly give offence, he kept it by him five years, without communicating it to above one person; and then sent it, under the seal of secresy, to cardinal Colloredo at Rome, whose opinion was, that it should not be published in the form it was then in. Nevertheless, in 1698 it was published; and, as might easily be foreseen, very ill received at Rome; and after many complaints, murmurs, and criticisms, it was in 1701 brought before the Congregation of the Index, and Mabillon fou.id it necessary to employ all his interest to prevent the censure of that body. Nor, perhaps, could he have averted this misfortune if he had not agreed to publish a new edition of it; in which, by softening some passages, and throwing upon inferior officers whatever abuses might be committed with regard to the bodies taken out of the catacombs, he easily satisfied his judges; who, to do them justice, had a great esteem for his learning and virtues, and were not very desirous of condemning him.

, a celebrated French political and miscellaneous writer, and brother to the abbé Condillac, was born at Grenoble in March 1709, and was educated in the Jesuits’ college at Lyons. In his youth he attached himself to his relation the cardinal de Tencin, but never took any higher order in the church than that of sub-deacon. On his coming into life, as it is called, he had the honour to be admitted, both as a relation and a man of letters, into the parties of madame de Tencin, so well known for her intrigues and her sprightly talents, who at that time gave dinners not only to wits, but to politicians. Here madame de Tencin was so much pleased with the figure Mably made in conversation with Montesquieu and other philosophical politicians at hertable, that she thought he might prove useful to her brother, then entering on his ministerial career. The first service he rendered to the cardinal was to draw out an abridgment of all the treaties from the peace of Westphalia to that time (about 1740): the second service he rendered his patron, was of a more singular kind. The cardinal soon becoming sensible that he had not the talent xof conveying his ideas in council, Mably suggested to him the lucky expedient of an application to the king, that he might be permitted to express his thoughts in writing, and there can be little doubt that m this also he profited by the assistance of his relative, who soon began himself to meddle in matters of state. In 1743 he was entrusted to negoeiate privately at Paris with the Prussian ambassador, and drew up a treaty, which Voltaire was appointed to carry to Berlin. Frederick, to whom* this was no secret, conceived from this time a very high opinion of the abbe, and, as Mably’s biographer remarks, it was somewhat singular that tvro men of letters, who had no political character, should be employed on a negociation which made such an important change in the state of affairs in Europe. The abbe" also drew up the papers which were to serve as the basis of the negociation carried on in the congress at Breda in the month of April 1746.

, a distinguished physician, was born at Ballymony, co. Antrim, on the 26th of April, 1726. He was descended from an ancient family of his name in the shire of Galloway, in Scotland; but his grandfather, who was bred to the church, was called to officiate at Belfast to a congregation of Presbyterians, and his father became the minister of Ballymony, where David was born. Having received the first elements of his education at the public school of this place, and served his apprenticeship to a surgeon, he went into the navy, first in the capacity of mate to an hospital-ship, and subsequently in the rank of surgeon, in which station he remained for some years preceding the peace of Aix-laChapelle. At this period he was led from the frequent opportunities of witnessing the attacks of scurvy which a sea-faring life afforded him, to investigate the best method of cure for that disease, upon which he afterwards published a treatise. After the peace of Aix, Mr. Macbride went to Edinburgh and London, where he studied anatomy under those celebrated teachers doctors Monro and Hunter, and midwifery under Smellie. About the end of 1749, he settled in Dublin as a surgeon and accoucheur; but his youth and remarkable bashfulness occasioned him to remain a number of years in obscurity, little employed; although he was endeared to a small circle of friends by his great abilities, amiable dispositions, and his general knowledge in all the branches of polite literature and the arts. In 1764, he published his “Experimental Essays,” which were received with great applause, and were soon translated into different languages; and the singular merit of this performance induced the university of Glasgow to confer the degree of doctor of physic on its author. The improvement introduced by Dr. Macbride in the art of tanning, by substituting lime-water for common water in preparing ooze, procured him the honour of a silver medal from the Dublin Society, in 1768, and of a gold medal of considerable value from the society of arts and commerce in London.

, who in his Latin works called himself Cavellus, was titular primate of Armagh, and a learned writer in defence of Duns Scotus, whose opinions were generally embraced by his countrymen. He was born in the county of Down, in Ireland, in 1571, and became a Franciscan friar. He studied at Salamanca, in Spain, and afterwards for many years governed the Irish Franciscan college at Louvain, dedicated to St. Anthony, in the founding of which he had been instrumental. In this college he was also professor of divinity, which office he filled afterwards in the convent of Ara Cceli at Rome, was definitor-general of his order, and at length advanced by the pope to the see of Armagh; but died at Rome, as he was preparing for his journey to Ireland, Sept. 22, 1626, in the fifty -fifth year of his age. He was buried in the church of St. Isidore, under a monumental stone, and inscription, placed there by the earl of Tyrone. He was reckoned a man of great learning, and one of the best schoolmen of his time. His works, which consist chiefly of commentaries on and a defence of Scotus, were in substance incorporated in Wading' s edition of Scotus’s works, printed at Lyons, 1639, in 12 vols. folio.

, was an ancient heretic of the church of Constantinople, whom the Arians made bishop of that see in the year 342, at the same time that the orthodox contended for Paul. This occasioned a contest, which rose at length to such a height, that arms were taken up, and many lives lost. The emperor Constantius, however, put an end to the dispute, by banishing Paul, and ratifying the nomination of Macedonius; who, after much opposition, which ended at the death of Paul, became peaceably and quietly settled in his see, and might have remained so had he been of a temper to be long peaceable and quiet in any situation: he soon fell into disgrace with Constantius, for acting the part of a tyrant, rather than a bishop. What made him still more disliked by the emperor, was his causing the body of Constantine to be translated from the temple of the Apostles to that of Acacius the martyr. This also raised great tumults and confusion among the people, some highly approving, others loudly condemning, the procedure of Macedonius and the parties again taking up arms, a great number on both sides were slain. Macedonius, however, notwithstanding the emperor’s displeasure, which he had incurred by his seditious and turbulent practices, contrived to support himself by his party, which he had lately increased by taking in the Semi-Arians; till at length, imprudently offending two of his bishops, they procured his deposition by the council of Constantinople, in the year 359. He was so enraged at this, as to resolve to revenge the insult by broaching a new heresy. He began to teach, therefore, that the Holy Spirit had no resemblance to either the Father or the Son, but was only a mere creature, one of God’s ministers, and somewhat more excellent than the angels. The disaffected bishops subscribed at once to this opinion; and to the Arians it could not be unacceptable. According to St. Jerome, even the Donatists of Africa joined with them: for he says, that Douatus of Carthage wrote a treatise upon the Holy Ghost, agreeable to the doctrine of the Arians; and the outward shew of piety, which the Macedonians observed, drew over to their party many others. One Maratorus, who had been formerly a treasurer, having amassed vast riches, forsook his secular life, devoted himself entirely to the service of the poor and sick, became a monk; and at last adopted the Macedonian heresy, which he disseminated very extensively. In this he succeeded in most cases by his riches; which, being freely and properly distributed, were found of more force in effecting conversions than all his arguments: and from this man, as Socrates relates, the Macedonians were called Maratorians. They were also called Pneumatomachi, or persons who were enemies of the Holy Ghost. The report of the Macedonian heresy being spread over Egypt, the bishop Serapion advertised Athanasius of it, who then was leading a monastic life, and lay hid in the desert and this celebrated saint was the hrst who confuted it.

, an ingenious and learned writer, and eminent lawyer of Scotland, was descended from an ancient and noble family, his father Simon Mackenzie being brother to the earl of Seaforth. He was born at Dundee, in the county of Angus, in 1636, and gave early proofs of an extraorJinary genius, having gone through the usual classic authors, at ten years of age. He was then sent to the universities of Aberdeen and St. Andrew’s, where he finished his studies in logic and philosophy before he had attained his sixteenth year. After this, he turned his thoughts to the civil law, and to increase his knowledge of it, travelled into France, and became a close student in the university of Bourges, for about three years. On his return home, he was called to the bar, became an advocate in 1656, and gained the character of an eminent pleader in a few years.

He lived a bachelor to the year 1733; but being formed for society, as well as contemplation, he then married Anne, the daughter of Mr. Walter Stewart, solicitor-general to his late majesty for Scotland. By this lady he had seven children, of which, two sons and three daughters, together with his wife, survived him. In 1734, Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne, published a piece called “The Analyst;” in which he took occasion, from some disputes that had arisen concerning the grounds of the fluxionary method, to explode the method itself, and also to charge mathematicians in general with infidelity in religion. Maclaurin thought himself included in this charge, and began an answer to Berkeley’s book: but, as he proceeded, so many discoveries, so many new theories and problems occurred to him, that, instead of a vindicatory pamphlet, it increased to “A complete system of Fluxions, with their application to the most considerable problems in geometry and natural philosophy.” This work, which was published at Edinburgh in 1742, 2 vols. 4to, cost him infinite pains, and will do him immortal honour, being indeed the most complete treatise on that science that has yet appeared . In the mean time, he was continually gratifying the public with some performance or observation of his own, many of which were published in the fifth and sixth volumes of the “Medical Essays,” at Edinburgh. Some of them appeared likewise in “The Philosophical Transactions” as the following: 1. “Of the construction and measure of Curves.” 2. “A new method of describing all kinds of Curves.” 3. “A letter to Martin Folkes, esq. on Equations with impossible Roots, May 1726.” 4. “Coiir tinuation of the same, March 1729.” 5. “December the 21st, 1732, On the description of Curves; with an account of farther improvements, and a paper dated at Nancy, Nov. 27, 1722.” 6. “An account of the treatise of Fluxions, Jan. 27, 1742.” 7. “The same continued, March 10, 1742” 8. “A Rule for finding the meridional parts of a Spheroid with the same exactness as of a Sphere, Aug. 1741.” 9. “Of the Basis of the Cells wherein the Bees deposit their honey, Nov. 3, 1734.”

, an author whose fame rests chiefly on his being the editor of Ossian’s poems, was descended from one of the most ancient families in the North of Scotland, being cousin-german to the chief of the clan of the Macphersons, who deduce their origin from the ancient Catti of Germany. His father, however, was a farmer of no great affluence. He was born in the parish of Kingcusie, Inverness-shire, in the latter end of 1738, and received the first rudiments of his education at one of the parish schools in the district, called Badenoch, from which, in 1752, he entered King’s college, Aberdeen, where he displayed more genius than learning, entertaining the society of which he was a member, and diverting the younger part of it from their studies by his humorous and doggrel rhimes. About two months after his admission into the university, the King’s college added two months to the length of its annual session or term, which induced Macpherson, with many other young men, to remove to Marischal college, where the session continued short: and this circumstance has led the biographer, from whom we borrow it, to suppose that his father was not opulent. Soon after he left college, or perhaps before, he was schoolmaster of Ruthven or Riven, of Badenocb, and afterwards is said to have delighted as little as his antagonist Johnson, in the recollection of that period, when he was compelled, by the narrowness of his fortune, to teach boys in an obscure school.

It was here, however, about 1758, that he published the “Highlander,” an heroic poem in six cantos, 12mo. Of this poem, which has not fallen in our way, we have seen two opinions, the one, that it indicated considerable genius in so young an author; the other that it is a tissue of fustian and absurdity, feeble, and in some parts ridiculous, and shews little or no talent in the art of versification. This last we take to be the opinion of the late Isaac Reed, who had a copy of the poem, which was purchased at his sale by George Chalmers, esq. Mr. Reed adds, that in a short time the author became sensible of its faults, and endeavoured to suppress it. About the same time he wrote an “Ode on the arrival of the Earl Marischal in Scotland,” which he called an attempt in the manner of Pindar, how justly, the reader may determine, as it was published in the European Magazine for 1796.

In 1762 he published “Fingal, an ancient epic poem, in six books,” together with several other poems, composed by Ossian, the son of Fingal, translated from the Gaiic language, 4to. The subject of this epic poem is an invasion of Ireland by Swaran, king of Lochliu. Cuchullin, general of the Irish tribes during the minority of Cormac king of Ireland, upon intelligence of the invasion, assembled his forces near Tura, a castle on the coast of Ulster. The poem opens with the landing of Swaran; councils are held, battles fought, and Cuchullin is at last totally defeated. In the mean time Fingal, king of the Highlands of Scotland, whose aid had been solicited before the enemy landed, arrived, and expelled them from the country. This war, which continued but six days and as many nights, is, including the episodes, the story of the poem: the scene, the heath of Lena, near a mountain called Cromleach in Ulster. This poem also was received with equal applause as the preceding fragments.

The next year he produced “Temora,” an ancient epic poem, in eight books: together with several other poems composed by Ossian, son. of Fingal, 4to, which, though well received, found the public somewhat less disposed to bestow the same measure of applause. Though these poems had been examined by Dr. Blair and others, and their authenticity asserted, there were not wanting some of equal reputation for critical abilities, who either doubted or declared their disbelief of the genuineness of them. After their publication, by which he is said to have gained twelve hundred pounds, Mr, Macpherson was called to an employment which withdrew him for some time from the muses and his country. In 1764, governor Johnstone was appointed chief of Pensacola, and Mr. Macpherson accompanied him as his secretary; but some difference having arisen between them, they parted before their return to England. Having contributed his aid to the settlement of the civil government of that colony, he visited several of the West-India islands, and some of the provinces of North America, and returned to England in 1766. He now resumed his studies, and in 1771 produced “An Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland,” 4to, a work which, he says, “without any of th ordinary incitements to literary labour, he was induced to proceed in by the sole motive of private amusement.” This work is not inelegantly written, but his hypotheses on Celtic origin brought upon him the resentment of some critics, who preserved very little decency on a subject that might certainly have been discussed in an amicable manner. His next performance was more justly entitled to contempt, as it showed him to be utterly destitute of taste, and consequently produced him neither reputation nor profit. This was “The Iliad of Homer” translated, in two volumes 4to, 1773, a work fraught with vanity and selfconsequence, and which met with the most mortifying reception from the public. It was condemned by the critics, ridiculed by the wits, and neglected by the world. Some of his friends, and particularly sir John Elliott, endeavoured to rescue it from contempt, and force it into notice, but their success was not equal to their efforts. After a very acute, learned, and witty critique, inserted in the Critical Review, the new translation was confessed to possess no merit, and ever since has been consigned to oblivion.

Soon after this period, the tide of fortune flowed very rapidly in Mr. Macpherson’s favour, and his talents and industry were amply sufficient to avail himself of every favourable circumstance whieh arose. The resistance of the Colonies called for the aid of a ready writer to combat the arguments of the Americans, and to give force to the reasons which influenced the conduct of government, and he was selected for the purpose. Among other things he wrote a pamphlet, which was circulated with much industry, entitled “The Rights of Great Britain asserted against the Claims of the Colonies; being an answer to the declaration of the general congress,” 1776, 8vo, and of which many editions were published. He also was the author of “A short History of the Opposition during the last session of parliament,” 1779, 8vo, a pamphlet, which, on account of its merit, was by many ascribed to Mr. Gibbon.

, was a name assumed by a modern poet, whose true name was John Salmon; or, as some say, given to him on account of his excessive thinness, from the Latin adjective macer. It became, however, the current appellation of himself and Charles, his brother, who was also a writer of some celebrity, preceptor to Catherine of Navarre, sister of Henry IV, and who perished in the massacre of St. Bartholomew. Some have called Macrinus the French Horace, on account of his talents for poetry, particularly the lyric kind. He was born at Loudon, where he died in 1557, at an advanced age. He wrote hymns, naeniae, and other works, which appeared from 1522 to 1550: and was one of those who principally contributed to restore the taste for Latin poetry. Varillas relates a story of his drowning himself in a well, in despair, on being suspected of Lutheranism. But this, like most anecdotes of the same writer, is a matter of invention rather than fact.

, a celebrated preacher and writer, was the son of Martin Madan, esq. of Hertingfordbury near Hertford, member of parliament for Wootton Basset, and groom of the bedchamber to Frederick prince of Wales. His mother was daughter of Spencer Cowper, esq. and niece of the lord chancellor Cowper, an accomplished lady, and author of several poems of considerable merit. He was born in 1726, and was bred originally to the law, and had been called to the bar; but being fond of the study of theology, well versed in Hebrew, and becoming intimate with Mr. Jones and Mr. Romaine, two clergymen of great popularity at that time, by their advice he left the law for the pulpit, and was admitted into orders. His first sermon is said to have been preached in the church of Allhallows, Lombard -street, and to have attracted immediate attention and applause. Being appointed chaplain to the Lock-hospital, his zeal led him to attend diligently, and to preach to the unfortunate patients assembled in the parlour: his fame also brought many others thither, till the rooms and avenues were crowded. This led to a proposal for a chapel, which was finished in 176.1, and opened with a sermon from the chaplain. He subjected himself to much obloquy, about the year 1767, by the advice he gave to his friend Mr. Havveis, to retain the rectory of Aldwincle, and several pamphlets were written on the subject; but lord Apsley (afterwards Bathurst) did not seem to consider the affair in an unfavourable light, as he afterwards appointed him his chaplain. Mr. Madan became an author in 1761, when he published, 1. “A sermon on Justification by Works.” 2. “A small treatise on the Christian Faith,” 1761, 12mo. 3. “Sermon at the opening of the Lock Hospital, 1762.” 4. “Answer to the capital errors of W. Law,” 1763, 8vo. 5. “Answer to the narrative of facts respecting the rectory of Aldwinckle,” 1767, 8vo. 6. “A comment on the Thirty-nine Articles,” 1772, 8vo. 7.“Thelyphthora,” 1780, 2 vols. -&vo. In this book the author justifies polygamy, upon the notion that the first cohabitation with a woman is a virtual marriage; and supports his doctrine by many acute arguments. The intention of the work was to lessen or remove the causes of seduction; but it met with much opposition, many very severe animadversions, and cost the author his reputation among the religious world. He, however, was not discouraged; and in 1781, published a third volume, after which the work sunk into oblivion, a fate to which the masterly criticism on it in the Monthly Review, by the rev. Mr. Badcock, very greatly contributed. It is somewhat remarkable that Mrs. Manley in the “Atalantis” speaks of lord chancellor Cowper, as maintaining the same tenets on polygamy. Mr. Madan next produced, 8. “Letters to Dr. Priestley,” 1787, 12mo. 9. A literal version of “Juvenal and Persius,” with notes, 1789, 2 vols. 8vo: and some controversial tracts on the subject of his Thelyphthora. Mr. Madan died at Epsom in May, 1790, at the age of 64, after a short illness, and was buried at Kensington. The late Dr. Spencer Madan, bishop of Peterborough, was brother to our author.

, D. D. (“a name,” says Dr. Johnson, “which Ireland ought to honour,”) was born in 1687, and received his education at Dublin. He appears, however, to have been in England in 1729; and having written a tragedy called “Themistocles, or the Lover of his country,” was, as he himself says, tempted to let it appear, by the offer of a noble study of books from the profits of it. In 1731, he projected a scheme for promoting learning in the college of Dublin by premiums, at the quarterly examinations, which has proved highly beneficial. In 1732, he published his “Memoirs of the Twentieth Century; being original Letters of State under George the Sixth, relating to the most important events in Great-Britain, and Europe, as to church and state, arts and sciences, trade, taxes, and treaties, peace and war, and characters of the greatest persons of those times, from the middle of the eighteenth to the end of the twentieth century, and the world. Received and revealed in the year 1728; and now published, for the instruction of all eminent statesmen, churchmen, patriots, politicians, projectors, papists, and protestants.” In 6 vols. Lond. 1733, 8vo. In 1740, we find him in his native country, and in that year setting apart the annual sum of one hundred pounds to be distributed, by way of premium, to the inhabitants of Ireland only; namely, 50l. to the author of the best invention for improving any useful art or manufacture; 25l. to the per-> son who should execute the best statue or piece of sculpture; and 25l. to the person who should finish the best piece of painting, either in history or landscape the premiums to be decided by the Dublin society, of which Dr. Madden was the institutor. The good effects of these well applied benefactions have not only been felt to advantage in the kingdom where they were given, but have even extended their influence to its sister country, having giren rise to the society for the encouragement of arts and sciences in London. In 1743 or 4, he published a long poem, called “Boulter’s Monument;” which was corrected for the press by Dr. Johnson; and an epistle of about 200 lines by him is prefixed to the second edition of Leland’s “Life of Philip of Macedon.” In an oration spoken at Dublin, Dec. 6, 1757, by Mr. Sheridan, that gentleman took occasion to mention Dr. Madden’s bounty, and intended to have proceeded in the following manner, but was prevented by observing the doctor to be then present. Speaking of the admirable institutions of premiums, he went on, “Whose author, had he never contributed any thing farther to the good of his country, would have deserved immortal honour, and must have been held in reverence by the latest posterity. But the unwearied and disinterested endeavours, during a long course of years, of this truly good man, in a variety of branches, to promote industry, and consequently the welfare of this kingdom, and the mighty benefits which have thence resulted to the community, have made many of the good people of Ireland sorry, that a long-talked of scheme has not hitherto been put in execution: that we might not appear inferior in point of gratitude to the citizens of London, with respect to a fellow-citizen [sir John Barnard], (surely not with more reason,) and that like them we might be able to address our patriot, Praesenti tibi matures largimur honores.”

, the great friend and counsellor of Augustus Caesar, was himself a polite scholar, but is chiefly memorable for having been the patron and protector of men of letters. He was descended from a most ancient and illustrious origin, even from the kings of Hetruria, as Horace often tells us; but his immediate forefathers were only of the equestrian order. He is supposed to have been born at Rome, because his family lived there; but in what year antiquity does not tell us. His education is supposed to have been of the most liberal kind, and agreeable to the dignity and splendour of his birth, as he excelled in every thing that related to arms, politics, and letters. How he spent his younger years is also unknown, there being no mention made of him, by any writer, before the death of Julius Caesar, which happened in the year of Rome 709. Then Octavius Caesar, who was afterwards called Augustus, went to Rome to take possession of his uncle’s inheritance; and, at the same time, Mæcenas became first publicly known; though he appears to have been Augustus’s friend, and, as it should seem, guardian, from his childhood. From that time he accompanied him through all his fortunes, and was his counsellor and adviser upon all occasions; so that Pedo Albinovanus, or rather the unknown author whose elegy has been ascribed to him, justly calls him “Caesaris dextram,” Caesar’s right hand.

, better known by the name of Magellan, an eminent navigator, was by birth a Portuguese. He served with much reputation during five years under Albuquerque, in the East Indies, particularly at the conquest of Malacca in 1510, but as his services were not well repaid, he accepted from Charles V. king of Spain, the command of a fleet, with which, in 1519, he discovered the straits called after himself at the extremity of South America. Soon after this he took possession of the Ladrone and Philippine islands in the name of Charles V.; and had he acted with prudence, might have had the honour of being accounted the first circumnavigator of the globe. His severities, however, towards the natives of Matan, compelled them to resist; and in the contest Magalhaens received a wound from an arrow in the leg, and being ill supported by his men, he was killed by a lance, in 1521.

In 1708 Magnol was admitted a member of the 'academic des sciences of Paris, in the place of his distinguished friend Tournefort, and contributed some papers to their memoirs. He died in 1715, at the age of seventy-seven. He left a son, named Anthony, who wa professor of physic at Montpellier, but not of Botany. To this son we are indebted for the publication of the “Novus Character Plantarum,” on which the fame of Magnol as a systematic botanist chiefly rests. This posthumous work appeared in 1720, making a quarto volume of 341 pages. The system therein taught is much celebrated by Linnæus, who in his Classes Plautarutn, 375 403, gives a general view of it, expressing his wonder that so new and singular a system had not made more proselytes. That noble genus of trees or shrubs, called the Magnolia, received that name from Plumier, in honour of our author.

, a French poet of the seventeenth century, was bred up as an advocate, and for some time followed that profession at Lyons. He then became a dramatic writer, and produced several pieces, of which the least bad is a tragedy called Artaxerxes; this has some plot, good sentiments, and characters tolerably supported. He then conceived the extraordinary project of writing an encyclopaedia in verse, which was to consist of ten volumes, each containing twenty thousand verses. Being asked, after some time, when this work would be finished “Very soon,” said he, “I have now only a hundred thousand verses to write.” His project, however, was cut off, notwithstanding this near approach to its conclusion, as he was murdered by thieves at Paris, in 1662. His verses were bad enough to account for his facility in producing them, yet he was a friend of Moliere. A part of his great work appeared in folio in 1663, with the magnificent title of “Science Universelle.” The preface was still more pompous: “Libraries,” says he, “will hereafter be for ornament only, not use.” Yet how few contain this wonderful work!

, or Mohammed, founder of the system of religious imposture called Mahometanism, was born in the year 569, at Mecca, a city of Arabia, of the tribe of the Korashites, which was reckoned the noblest in all that country; and was descended in a direct line from Pher Koraish, the founder of it. Yet in the beginning of his life he was in a very poor condition; for his father dying before he was two years old, and while his grandfather was still living, all the power and wealth of his family devolved to his uncles, especially Abu Taleb. Abu Taleb, after the death of his father, bore the chief sway in Mecca during the whole of a very long life; and it was under his protection chiefly, that Mahomet, when he first began topropagate his imposture, was sufficiently supported against all opposers, so as to be able, after his death, to establish it through all Arabia by his own power.

Among the various means to effect this, none seemed to him more eligible than that imposture which he afterwards published with so much success, and so much mischief to the world. The extensive trade which he carried on in Egypt, Palestine, and Syria, having made him well acquainted with both Christians and Jews, and given him an opportunity of observing with what eagerness they and the several sects into which the Christians of the Eastwerd then miserably divided, engaged against each other, he concluded that nothing would be more likely to gain a party firm to him for the attaining the ends at which he aimed, than the invention of a new religion. In this, however, he proceeded leisurely; for it was not till his thirty-eighth year that he began to prepare his design. He then withdrew himself from his former way of living, which is said to have been very licentious and wicked; and, affecting an hermit’s life, used every morning to retire into a solitary cave near Mecca, called the Cave of Hira; and there continued all day, exercising himself, as he pretended, in prayers, fastings, and holy meditations. Thus he went on for two years, during which time he gained over his wife Cadiga, who was his first proselyte, by pretending visions which he had seen, and voices which he had heard, in his retirement. It is to be observed, says Dr. Prideaux, that Mahomet began this imposture about the same time that the bishop of Rome, by virtue of a grant from the tyrant Phocas, first assumed the title of universal pastor. Phocas made this grant in the year 606, and Mahomet in the same year retired to his cave to contrive that deception which he began in the year 608 to propagate at Mecca.

In his fortieth year, Mahomet began to take upon him the style of the Apostle of God, and under that character to carry on the plan which he had now contrived; but for four years he confined his doctrines to such as he either had most confidence in, or thought himself most likely to gain. When he had gained a few disciples, some of whom, however, were the principal men of the city, he began to publish it to the people at Mecca, in his forty-fourth year, and openly to declare himself a prophet sent by God, to convert them from the error of paganism, and to teach them the true religion. On his first appearance, he was treated with derision and contempt, and called by the people a sorcerer, magician, liar, impostor, and teller of fables, of which he frequently complains in the Koran; so that for the first year he made little or no progress. But persevering in his design, which he managed with great address, he afterwards gained so many proselytes, that in the fifth year of his pretended mission, he had increased his party to the number of thirty-nine, himself making the fortieth. People now began to be alarmed at the progress he made. Those who were addicted to the idolatry of their forefathers, stood up to oppose him as an enemy of their gods, and a dangerous innovator in their religion. Others, who saw further into his designs, thought it time to put a stop to them, for the sake of preserving the government, at which they thought he aimed: and therefore they combined together against him, and intended to have cut him off with the sword. But Abu Taleb, his uncle, defeated their design; and by his power, as being chief of the tribe, preserved him from many other attempts of the same nature; for though Abu Taleb himself persisted in the paganism of his ancestors, yet he had so much affection for the impostor, as being his kinsman, and one that was bred up in his house, and under his care, that he extended his full protection to Mahomet as long as he lived. The principal arguments, which Mahomet employed to delude men into a belief of this imposture, were promises and threats, both well calculated to influence the affections of the vulgar. His promises were chiefly of Paradise, which with great art he framed agreeably to the taste of the Arabians: for they, lying within the torrid zone, were, through the nature of their climate, as well as the corruption of their manners, exceedingly given to the love of women; and the scorching heat and dryness of the country, making rivers of water, cooling drinks, shaded gardens, and pleasant fruits, most refreshing and delightful unto them, they were from hence apt to place their highest enjoyment in things of this nature. For this reason, he made the joys of his Paradise to consist totally in these particulars; which he promises them abundantly in many places of the Koran. On the contrary, he described the punishments of hell, which he threatened to all who would not believe in him, to consist of such torments as would appear to them the most afflicting and grievous to be borne; as, “that they should drink nothing but boiling and stinking water, nor breathe any thing but exceeding hot winds, things most terrible in Arabia; that they should dwell for ever in continual fire, excessively burning, and be surrounded with a black hot salt smoke, as with a coverlid, &c.” and, that he might omit nothing which could work on their fears, he terrified them with the threats of grievous punishments in this life. To which purpose he expatiated, upon all occasions, on the terrible calamities which had befallen such as would not be instructed by the prophets who, were sent before him; how the old world was destroyed by water, for not being reformed at the preaching of Noah; how Sodom was consumed by fire from heaven, for not hearkening to Lot when sent unto them; and how the Egyptians were plagued for despising Moses: for he allowed the divinity of both the Old and New Testament, and that Moses and Jesus Christ were prophets sent from God; but alledged that the Jews and Christians had corrupted those sacred books, and that he was sent to purge them from those corruptions, and to restore the law of Cod to that original purity in which it was first delivered. And this is the reason, that most of the passages which he takes out of the Old and New Testaments, appear different in the Koran from what we find them in those sacred books.

On his relating this extravagant fiction to the people the next morning after he pretended the thing to have happened, it was received by them, as it deserved, with a general outcry; and the imposture was never in greater danger of being totally blasted, than by this ridiculous fable. But, how ridiculous soever the story may appear, Mahomet had a further design in it than barely telling such a miraculous adventure of himself to the people. Hitherto he had only given them the Koran, which was his written law; and had pretended to be nothing more than barely the messenger of God in publishing it, as it was delivered to him by the angel Gabriel. But now, learning from his friend Abdalla, that the Jews, besides the written law dictated by God himself, had also another law, called the oral law, given with it, as they pretend, to Moses himself while in the mount; and understanding that this law, which had its whole foundation in the sayings and dictates of Moses, was in as great veneration with them as the other; he had a mind for the future to advance his authority to the same pitch, and to make all his sayings and dictates pass for oracles among the mussulmen, as those which were pretended to proceed from Moses did among the Jews; and for this end chiefly it was, that he invented this story of his journey to heaven.

The story, however, whatever advantages he might gain by it when the imposture became more firmly established, was deemed at present so grossly ridiculous, that it occasioned the revolt of many of his disciples, and made his stay at Mecca no longer practicable. But what he lost at Mecca he gained at Medina, then called Yathreb, a city lying 270 miles north-west from Mecca; which was inhabited, the one part by Jews, and the other by heretical Christians. These two parties not agreeing, feuds and factions rose at length so high among them, that one party, exasperated against the other, went over to Mahomet. Thus we are told, that in the thirteenth year of his pretended mission, there came to him from thence seventy-three men and two women. Twelve of these he retained awhile with him at, Mecca, to instruct them in his new religion; then sent, them buck to Yathreb, as his twelve apostles, to propagate it in that town. In this they laboured abundantly, and with such success, that in a short time they drew over the greatest part of the inhabitants; of which Mahomet receiving an account, resolved to go thither immediately, finding it unsafe to continue any longer at Mecca.

On the 12th day of the month, which the Arabs call the Former Rabia, that is, on the 24th of our September, he came to Yathreb, and was received with great acclamations by the party which called him thither. This party is supposed to have been the Christians, and this supposition is confirmed by what he says of each of them in the fifth chapter of the Koran, which is one of the first he published after his coming to Yathreb. His words are these: “Thou shalt find the Jews to be very great enemies to the true believers, and the Christians to have great inclination and amity towards them.” By which we may see into what a deplorable decay the many divisions and distractions which then reigned in the eastern church had brought the Christian religion, when its professors could so easily desert it for that gross imposture which an illiterate barbarian proposed to them. On his first coming to Yathreb, he lodged in the house of Chalid Abu Job, one of the chief men of the party that called him thither, till he had built a house for himself. This he immediately undertook, and erected a mosque at the same time, for the exercise of his new-invented religion; and having thus settled himself in, this town, he continued there to the time of his death. From this flight of Mahomet, the Hegira, which is the sera of the Mahometans, begins its computation: Hegira, in. the Arabic language, signifying flight. It was first appointed by Omar, the third emperor of the Saracens, and takes its beginning from the 16th of July, in the year 622. Indeed the day that Mahomet left Mecca was on the first of the Former Rabia; and he came to Medina on the 12th of the same month, that is on the 24th of our September; but the Hegira begins two months before, from the first of Moharram: for, that being the first month of the Arabian year, Omar would make no alteration as to that, but anticipated the computation fifty-niue days, that he might commence his sera from the beginning of that year, in which the flight of the impostor happened, from which it topk its name.

The first thing that Mahomet did after he had settled himself at Medina, was to marry his daughter Fatima* to his cousin Ali. She was the only child then living of six which were born to him of Cadiga his first wife; and indeed the only one which he had, notwithstanding the mcltifnde of his wives who survived him. Having now obtained the end at which he had long been aiming, that is, that of having a town at his command, he entered upon a scheme entirely new. Hitherto he had been only preaching his religion for thirteen years together; for the remaining ten years of his life he took the sword, and fought for it. He had long been teazed and perplexed at Mecca with questions, and objectiows, and disputes about what he had preached, by which he/v as often put to silence-; but iKjnceforth he forbad all manner of disputing, telling his disciples that his religion was to be propagated not by disputing, but by fighting. He commanded them therefore to arm themselves, and slay with the sword all that. would not embrace it, unless they submitted to pay a yearly tribute for the redemption of their lives: and according to this injunction, even to this day, all who live under any Mahometan government, and are not of their religion, pay an annual tax for a mulct of their infidelity; and are punished with death if they contradict or oppose any doctrine taught by Mahomet. After he had sufficiently infused this doctrine into his disciples, he next proceeded to put it in practice; and having erected his standard, called them all to come armed to it. His first expeditious were against the trading caravans, in their journeys between Mecca and Syria, which he attacked with various success; and-if we except the establishing and adjusting a few particulars relating to his grand scheme, as occasion required, his time, for the two first years after his flight, was wholly spent in predatory excursions upon his neighbours, in robbing, plundering, and destroying all those that lived near Medina, who would not embrace his religion.

Having thus made a truce with the men of Mecca, and thereby obtained free access for any of his party to go into that city, he ordained them to make pilgrimages thither, which have ever since been observed, with much superstition, by all his followers, once every year: and now being thus established in the sovereignty, at which he had long been aiming, he assumed all the insignia belonging to it; still retaining the sacred character of chief pontiff of his religion, as well as the royal, with which he was invested. He transmitted both to his successors, who, by the title of Caliphs, reigned after him: so that, like the Jewish princes of the race of Maccabees, they were kings and chief-priests of their people at the same time. Their pontifical authority consisted chiefly in giving the interpretation of the Mahometan law, in ordering all matters of religion, and in praying and preaching in their public mosques: and this at length was all the authority the caliphs had left; as they were totally stripped of the rest, first by the governors. of the provinces, who, about the 325th year of the Hegira, assumed the regal authority to themselves, and afterwards by others, who gradually usurped upon them; till at length, after a succession of ages, the Tartars came in, and, in that deluge of destruction with which they over-ran all the East, put a total end not only to their authority, but to their very name and being. Ever since that time, most Mahometan princes have a particular officer appointed in their respective dominions, who sustains this sacred authority, formerly invested in their caliphs; who in Turkey is called the Mufti, and in Persia the Sadre. But they, being under the power of the princes that appoint them, are in reality the mere creatures of state, who make the law of Mahomet speak just such language as is necessary to support the measures of the government, however unjust or tyrannical.

He spent the remainder of the year in sending lieutenants into all his provinces, to govern in his name, to destroy the heathen temples, and all the other remains of the Arabian idolatry, and establish his religion in its stead. Towards the end of it, he took a journey in pilgrimage to Mecca, where a great concourse of people resorted to him from all parts of Arabia, whom he instructed in his law, and then returned to Medina. This pilgrimage is called, by his followers, the pilgrimage of valediction, because it was the last he made: for, after his return to Medina, Jhe began daily ta decline, through the force of that poison which he had taken three years before at Caibar. It had never been removed from his constitution, and at length brought him so low, that he was forced, on the 28th day of Saphar, the second month of their year, to take to his bed; and, on, the 12th day of the following month, he died, after a sickness of thirteen days. During his sickness he much complained of the mea.t which he had taken at Caibar; telling those who came to visit hirp, that he had felt the torments of it in his body ever since: so that, notwithstanding the intimacy he pretended with the angel Gabriel, and the continual revelations he received from him, he could not be preserved from perishing by the snares of a girl.

But of all his wives, Ayesha, the daughter of that Abubeker who succeeded him, was by far his best beloved. He married her very young, and took care to have her bred up in all the learning of Arabia, especially in the elegance of their language, and the knowledge of their antiquities; so that she became at length one of the most accomplished ladies of her time. She was a bitter enemy to Ali, he being the person who discovered her incontinence to Mahomet, and therefore employed all her interest, upon every vacancy, to hinder him from being chosen Caliph, althougn, as son-in-law to the impostor, he had the fairest pretence to it; and when at last, after having been thrice put by, he attained that dignity, she appeared in arms against him; and although she did not prevail, caused such a defection from him, as ended in his ruin. She lived forty. eight years after the death of Mahomet, and was in great reputation with her sect, being called by them the Prophetess, and the mother of the faithful. One of the principal arguments which the followers of Mahomet used, to excuse his having so many wives, is, that he might beget young prophets: he left, however, neither prophet nor prophetess long behind him of all his wives. The six children which he had by Cadiga, his first wife, all died before him, except Fatima, the wife of Ali, who only survived him sixty days; and be had no child by any of the rest.

As the impostor allowed the divinity of the Old and New Testament, it is natural to suppose that he would attempt to prove his own mission from both; and the texts used for this purpose by those who defend his cause, are these following. In Deuteronomy it is said, “The Lord came down from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them: he shined forth from mount Pharan^ and he came with ten thousand of saints: from his right-hand went a fiery law for them.” By these words, according to the Mahometans, are meant the delivery of the law to Mosea, on mount Sinai; of the gospel to Jesus, at Jerusalem; and of the Koran to Mahomet, at Mecca: for, say they, Seir are the mountains of Jerusalem, where Jesus appeared; and Pha-. ran the mountains of Mecca, where Mahomet appeared. But they are here mistaken in their geography; for Pharan is a city of Arabia Petraea, near the Red Sea, towards the bottom of the gulph, not far from the confines of Egypt and Palestine, and above 500 miles distant from Mecca. It was formerly an episcopal see, under the patriarchs of Jerusalem, and famous for Theodorus, once bishop of it, who was the first that published to the world the opinion of the Monothelites. It is at this day called Fara: and hence the deserts, lying from this city to the borders of Palestine, are called the deserts or wilderness of Pharan, and the mountains lying in it, the mountains of Pharan, in holy scripture; near which Moses first began to repeat, and more clearly to explain the law to the children of Israel, before his death: and it is to that, to which the text above mentioned refers.

Maimbourg had a great reputation as a preacher, and published two volumes of sermons. But what have made him most known were the several histories he published. He wrote the History of Arianism, of the Iconoclasts, of the Croisades, of the Schism of the West, of the f-chism of the Greeks, of the Decay of the Empire, of the League, of Lutheranism, of Calvinism, the Pontificate of St. Leo; and he was composing the “History of the Schism of England” when he died. These histories form 14 vols. 4to, or 26 in 12mo. Protestant authors have charged him with insincerity, have convicted him of great errors and misrepresentations, in their refutations of his “History of Lutheranism and Calvinism.” The Jansenists criticued his “History of Arianism,” and that of the “Iconoclasts,” leaving all the rest untouched. The “History of Calvinism,” which he published in 1681, stirred up a violent war against him; the operations whereof he left entirely to his enemies, without ever troubling himself in the least about it, or acting either offensively or defensively. The abbé L'Avocat says that his historical works were admired at first, on account of a kind pf romantic style which prevails in them; but this false taste did not continue long, and the greatest part of them were exploded while their author was yet living. It is asserted that P. Maimbourg never took up his pen till he had heated his imagination by wine, nor ever attempted to describe a battle till he had drank two bottles; making use of this precaution, as he said jestingly, lest the horrors of the combat should enfeeble his style. The same biographer adds, that Theodore Maimbourg, his cousin, turned Calvinist, then went back to the catholic church, then changed afresh to “what is called the reformed religion,” and died a Socinian at London, about 1693. This last left an answer to “M. Bossuet’s Exposition of the Catholic Faith” and other works.

, or Moses the son of Maimon, a celebrated rabbi, called by the Jews “The eagle of the doctors,” was born of an illustrious family at Cordova in Spain, 1131. He is commonly named Moses Egyptius, because he retired early, as it is supposed, into Egypt, where he spent his whole life in quality of physician to the Soldan. As soon as he arrived there he opened a school, which was presently filled with pupils from all parts, especially from Alexandria and Damascus; who did such credit to their master by the progress they made under him, that they spread his name throughout the world. Maimonides was, indeed, according to all accounts of him, a most uncommon and extraordinary man, skilled in all languages, and versed in all arts and sciences. As to languages, the Hebrew and Arabic were the first he acquired, and what he understood in the most perfect manner; but perceiving that the knowledge of these would distinguish him only among his own people, the Jews, he applied himself also to the Chaldee, Turkish, &c. &c. of all which he became a master in a very few years. It is probable also, that he was not ignorant of the Greek, since in his writings he often quotes Aristotle, Plato, Galen, Themistius, and others; unless we can suppose him to have quoted those authors from Hebrew and Arabic versions, for which, however, as far as we can find, there is no sufficient reason.

He was famous for arts as well as language. In all branches of philosophy, particularly mathematics, he was extremely well skilled; and his experience in the art of healing was so very great, that as we have already intimated, he was called to be physician in ordinary to the king. There is a letter of his extant, to rabbi Samuel Aben Tybbon, in which he has described the nature of this office, and related also what vast incumbrances and labours the practice of physic brought upon him. Of this we shall give a short extract, because nothing can convey a clearer or a juster idea of the man, and of the esteem and veneration in which he was held in Egypt. Tybbon had consulted him by a letter upon some difficult points, and had told him in the conclusion of it, that as soon as he could find leisure he would wait upon him in person, that they might canvas them more fully in the freedom of conversation. Maimonides replied, that he should be extremely glad to see him, and that nothing could give him higher pleasure than the thoughts of conversing with him; but yet that he must frankly confess to him that he durst not encourage him to undertake so long a voyage, or to think of visiting him with any such views. “1 am,” says he, “so perpetually engaged, that it will be impossible for you to reap any advantage from me, or even to obtain a single hour’s private conversation with me in any part of the four-and-twenty. I live in Egypt, the king in Alkaira; which places lie two sabbath-days journey asunder. My common attendance upon the king is once every morning; but when his majesty, his concubines, or any of the royal family, are the least indisposed, I am not suffered to stir a loot from them; so that my whole time, you see, is almost spent at court. In short, 1 go to Alkaira every morning early, and, if all be well there, return home about noon; where, however, I no sooner arrive, than I find my house surrounded with many different sorts of people, Jews and Gentiles, rich men and poor, magistrates and mechanics, friends as well as enemies, who have all been waiting impatiently for me. As I am generally half famished upon my return from Alkaira, I prevail with this multitude, as well as I can, to suffer me to regale myself with a bit of dinner; and as soon as I have done, attend this crowd of patients, with whom, what with examining into their particular maladies, and what with prescribing for them, I am often detained till it is night, and am always so fatigued at last, that I can scarcely speak, or even keep myself awake. And this is my constant way of life,” &c.

The works of Maimonides are very numerous. Some of them were written in Arabic originally, but are now extant in Hebrew translations only. The most considerable are his Jad, which is likewise called “Mischne Terah,” his “More Nevochim,” and his “Peruschim, or Commentaries upon the Misna.” His “Commentaries upon the Misna” he began at the age of three-and-twenty, and finished in Egypt, when he was about thirty. They were translated from the Arabic by rabbi Samuel Aben Tybbon. His “Jad” was published about twelve years after, written in Hebrew, in a very plain and easy style. This has always been esteemed a great and useful work, being a complete code, or pandect of Jewish law, digested into a clear and regular form, and illustrated throughout with an intelligible commentary of his own. “Those,” says Collier, “that desire to learn the doctrine and the canon law contained in the Talmud, may read Maimonides’s compendium, of it in good Hebrew, in his book entitled Jad; wherein they will find a great part of the fables and impertinences in the Talmud entirely discarded.” But of all his productions, the “More Nevochim” has been thought the most important, and valued the most, not only by others, but also by himself. This was written by him in Arabic, when he was about fifty years old; and afterwards translated into Hebrew, under his own inspection, by rabbi Samuel Aben Tybbon. The design of it was to explain the meaning of several difficult and obscure words, phrases, metaphors, parables, allegories, &c. in scripture which, when interpreted literally, seemed to have no meaning at all, or at least a very absurd and irrational one. Hence the work, as Buxtorf says, took its title of “More Nevochim,” that is, “Doctor perplexorum;” as being written for the use and benefit of those who were in doubt whether they should interpret such passages according to the letter, or rather figuratively and metaphorically. Jt was asserted by many at that time, but very rashly, that the Mosaic rites and statutes had no foundation in reason, but were the effects of mere will, and ordained by God upon a principle purely arbitrary. Against these Maimonides argues, shews the dispensation in general to be instituted with a wisdom worthy of its divine author, and explains the causes and reasons of each particular branch of it. This procedure, however, gave offence to many of the Jews; those especially who had long been attached to the fables of the Talmud. They could not conceive that the revelations of God were to be explained upon the principles of reason; but thought that every institution must cease to be divine the moment it was discovered to have any thing in it rational. Hence, when the “More Nevochim” was translated into Hebrew, and dispersed among the Jews of every country, great outcries were raised, and great disturbances occasioned about it. They reputed the author to be a heretic of the worst kind, one who had contaminated the religion of the Bible, or rather the religion of the Talmud, with the vile allay of human reason; and would gladly have burnt both him and his book. In the mean time, the wiser part of both Jews and Christians have always considered the work in a very different light, as formed upon a most excellent and noble plan, and calculated in the best manner to procure the reverence due to the Bible, by shewing the dispensation it sets forth to be perfectly conformable to all our notions of the greatest wisdom, justice, and goodness: for, as the learned Spencer, who has pursued the same plan, and executed it happily, observes very truly, “nothing contributes more to make men atheists, and unbelievers of the Bible, than their considering the rites and ceremonies of the law as the effects only of caprice and arbitrary humour in the Deity: yet thus they will always be apt to consider them while they remain ignorant of the causes and reasons of their institution.”

This wonderful rabbi died in Egypt, in 1204, when he was seventy years of age, and was buried with his nation in the land of Upper Galilee. The Jews and Egyptians bewailed his death for three whole days, and called the year in which he died “Lamentum 1 amen tab ile,” as the highest honour they could confer upon his name. See the preface of John Buxtorf the son, to his Latin translation of the “More Nevochim,” whence this account of the author is chiefly taken.

In 1679, the king bought her the lands of Maintenon, worth 250,000 livres, which was the only estate she ever had, though afterwards in a height of favour that afforded her the means of purchasing immense property. Here she had a magnificent castle, in a most beautiful country, not more than fourteen leagues from Paris, and ten from Versailles. The king, seeing her extremely pleased with the acquisition of her estate, called her publicly madam de Maintenon; which change of name was of greater use to her than she herself could have foreseen. She could not well be raised to the rank in which she was afterwards seen, with the name of Scarron, which must always have been accompanied with a mean and burlesque idea. A woman, whose very name was a jest, must have detracted from the respect and veneration which was paid to the great and pompous Louis; nor could all the reserve and dignity of the widow efface the impression made by the remembrance of her buffoonish husband. It was necessery, therefore, that madam de Maintenon should obliterate madam Scarron.

, a scholastic divine and historian, was born, not at Haddington, as is usually said, but at Gleghorn, a village near North Berwick, in 1469. From some passages in his writings, it appears that he resided for a time both at Oxford and at Cambridge. At the former particularly, we learn from the dedication of one of his works to cardinal Wolsey, he resided, not three months, as Wood says, but a year. The cardinal, whom he styles “your majesty,” received him “after the old manner of Christian hospitality, and invited him with a splendid salary to Oxford, where he had lately founded his college, which Major did not accept, on account of the love he bore to his mother university of Paris.” It appears that he went in 1493 to Paris, and studied in the college of St. Barbe, under the famous John Boulac. Thence he removed to the college of Montacute, where he began the study of divinity, under the celebrated Standouk. In 1498 he was entered of the college of Navarre in 1505 he was created D. D. returned to Scotland in 1519, and taught theology for several years in the university of St. Andrew’s. At length, disgusted with the quarrels of his countrymen, he returned to Paris, and resumed his lectures in the college of Montacute, where he had several pupils, afterwards men of eminence. About 1530, he removed once more to Scotland, was chosen professor of divinity at St. Andrew’s, and afterwards became provost. It is usually supposed that he died in 1547, but it is certain that he was alive in 1549; for in that year he subscribed (by proxy, on account of his great age) the national constitutions of the church of Scotland. He died soon after, probably in 1550, which must have been in his eighty-second year. Du Pin says, that of all the divines who had written on the works of the Master of Sentences (Peter Lombard), Major was the most learned and comprehensive. His History of Scotland is written with much commendable freedom; but in a barbarous style, and not always correct as to facts. Hs was the instructor, but not, as some have said, the patron of the famous George Buchanan. He also had the celebrated John Knox as one of his pupils. Baker in a ms note on the “Athenae,” adds to the mention of this fact, that “a man would hardly believe he ha.d been taught by him.” Baker, however, was not sufficiently acquainted with Major’s character to be able to solve this doubt. Major, according to the very acute biographer of Knox (Dr. M‘Crie) had acquired a habit of thinking and expressing himself on certain subjects, more liberal than was adopted in his native country and other parts of Europe. He had imbibed the sentiments concerning ecclesiastical polity, maintained by John Gerson, Peter D’Ailly, and others, who defended the decrees of the council of Constance, and liberties of the Gallican church, against those who asserted the incontroulable authority of the sovereign pontiff. He thought that a general council was superior to the pope, might judge, rebuke, restrain, and even depose him from his dignity; denied the temporal supremacy of the bishop of Rome, and his right to inaugurate or dethrone princes; maintained that ecclesiastical censures and even papal excommunications had no force, it* pronounced on invalid or irrelevant grounds; he held that tithes were merely of human appointment, not divine right; censured the avarice, ambition, and secular pomp of the court of Rome and the episcopal order; was no warm friend of the regular clergy, and advised the reduction of monasteries and holidays. His opinions respecting civil government were analogous to those which he held as to ecclesiastical policy. He taught that the authority of kings and princes was originally derived from the people that the former are not superior to the latter, collectively considered that if rulers become tyrannical, or employ their power for the destruction of their subjects, they may lawfully be controuled by them; and proving incorrigible, may be deposed by the community as the superior power; and that tyrants may be judicially proceeded against, even to capital punishment. The affinity between these and the political principles afterwards avowed by Knox, and defended by the classic pen of Buchanan, is too striking to require illustration. But although Major had ventured to think for himself on these topics, in all other respects be was completely subservient to the opinions of his age; and with a mind deeply tinctured with superstition, defended some of the absurdest tenets of popery by the most ridiculous and puerile arguments. We cannot, therefore, greatly blame Buchanan, who called him in ridicule, what he affected to call himself in humility, “Joannes, solo cognomine, Major.” His works are, 1. “Libri duo fallaciarum,” Lugd. 1516, comprising his “Opera Logicalia.” 2. “In quatuor sententiarum commentarius,” Paris, 1516. 3. “Commentarius in physica Aristotelis,” Paris, 1526. 4. “In primum et secundum sententiarum commentarii,” Paris, 1510. 5. “Commentarius in tertium sententiarum,” Paris, 1517. 6. “Literalis in Matthaeum expositio,” Paris, 1518. From these two last may be collected his sentiments on ecclesiastical polity, mentioned above. 7. “De historia gentis Scotorum, sen historia majoris Britanniae,” Paris, 1521, 4to. Of this a new edition was printed at Edinburgh, 17+0, 4to. 8. “Luculenta in 4 Evangelia expositiones,” &c. Paris, 1529, folio. 9. “Placita theologica.” 10. “Catalogus episcoporum Lucionensium.” He also translated Caxton’s Chronicle into Latin.

, more known under the name of Sacy (Isaac inverted), was brother of the former, and was born at Paris, in 1613, where he was also educated. After pursuing his studies with the greatest success under Du Verger, the abbé of St. Cyran, and other eminent teachers, he was admitted to the priesthood in 1648. His reputation gained him the office of confessor to the society of Port Royal; but that house being accused of Jansenism, he was involved in the persecution; was obliged to conceal himself in 1661; and in 1666 was confined in the Bastille. In that prison he composed some important works, particularly a translation of the whole Bible, which was finished on the eve of All-saints, 1668; and on the same day he obtained his liberty, after being confined two years and a half. When this work was presented to the king and his minister, le Maistre desired no other reward than that of being allowed frequently to visit the Bastille, to inspect the state of the prisoners. Some writers assert that during his confinement, he composed a history of the Old and New Testament, in one volume, under the name of Royaumont, a work known in this, country by a translation in 4to, published about the beginning of the last century, with nearly 300 plates but others ascribe it to Nicholas Fontaine. Le Maistre remained at Paris till 1675, when he retired to Port-Royal but was obliged in 1679 to quit it, and retired to Pompona, where he died, at the age of seventy-one, in 1684. His works are, 1. His translation of the Bible, with explanations of the literal and spiritual sense taken from the fathers; in which part he was assisted by du Fosse, Hure“, and le Tourneaux. This work was published at Paris, in 1682, and several subsequent years, in 32 vols. 8vo. Several other editions have been printed, but this is on the whole esteemed the best. 2. A translation of the Psalms, from the Hebrew and the Vulgate together. 3. A translation of the Homilies of St. Chrysostom on St. Matthew, in 3 vols. 8vo. 4. A translation of Kempis on the Imitation of Christ, under the name of de Beuil, prior of S. Val, Paris, 1663, 8vo. 5. A translation of Phaedrus, under the name of St. Aubin, 12mo. 6. Three comedies of Terence, 12mo. 7. The Letters of Bongars, published under the rj^me of Brianville. 8. The poem of St. Prosper, on ingratitude, rendered in verse and prose. 9.” Les enluminures de l'Almanach des Jesuites,“1654, 12mo; an attack upon the Jesuits, which was so far relished as to be reprinted in 1733. 10.” Heures de Port-Royal,“called by the Jesuits Hours of Jansenism, 12mo. 11.” Letters of Piety," in 2 vols. 8vo, published at Paris in 1690. The merits of this author are fully displayed in the memoirs of PortRoyal, written by Nicholas Fontaine, and published at Cologne, in 1738, in 2 vols. 12mo.

He wrote several works. The first and principal, as in-deed it gave rise to almost all that followed, was his “Be la Recherche de la Verite,” or his “Search after Truth,” printed at Paris in 1674, and afterwards augmented in several successive editions. His design in this book is to point out the errors into which we are daily led by our senses, imaginvvtion, and passions;. and to prescribe a method for discovering the truth, which he does, by starting the notion of seeing all things in God. Hence he is led to think and speak meanly of human knowledge, either as it lies in written books, or in the book of nature, compared with that light which displays itself from the ideal world; and by attending to which, with pure and defecated minds, he supposes knowledge to be most easily had. These sentiments, recommended by various beauties of style, made many admire his genius who could not understand, or agree to his principles. Locke, in his “Examination of Malebranche’s opinion of seeing all things in God,” styles him an “acute and ingenious author;” and tells us, that there are “a great many very fine thoughts, judicious reasonings, and uncommon reflections in his Recherche:” but in that piece, endeavours to refute the chief principles of his system. Brucker is of opinion that the doctrine of his “Search after Truth,” though in many respects original, is raised upon Cartesian principles, and is, in some particulars, Platonic. The author represents, in string colours, the causes of error, arising from the disorders of the imagination and passions, the abuse of liberty, and an implicit confidence in the senses. He explains the action of the animal spirits, the nature of memory; the connection of the brain with other parts of the body, and their influence upon the understanding and will. On the subject of intellect, he maintains, that thought alone is essential to mind, and deduces the imperfect state of science from the imperfection of the human understanding, as well as from the inconstancy of the will in inquiring after truth. Rejecting the ancient doctrine of species sent forth from material objects, and denying the power of the mind to produce ideas, he ascribes their production immediately to God; and asserts, that the human mind immediately perceives God, and sees all things in him. As he derives the imperfection of the human mind from its dependence upon the body, so he places its perfection in union with God, by means of the knowledge of truth and the love of virtue. Singular and paradoxical, Brucker adds, as the notion of “seeing all things in God,” and some other dogmas of this writer, must have appeared, the work was written with such elegance and splendour of diction, and its tenets were supported by such ingenious reasonings, that it obtained general applause, and procured the author a distinguished name among philosophers, and a numerous train of followers. Its popularity might, perhaps, he in part owing to the appeal which the author makes to the authority of St. Augustine, from whom he professes to have borrowed his hypothesis concerning the origin of ideas. The immediate intercourse which this doctrine supposes, between the human and the divine mind, has led some to remark a strong resemblance between the notions of Malebranche, and those of the sect called Quakers.

In 1771, when the government had dissolved the whole legal constitution, and banished the parliaments, Malesherbes was banished to his country-seat by a “lettre de cachet,” and the duke de Richelieu, at the head of an armed force, abolished the court of aids. During his retirement, Malesherbes’s time was occupied with his family and his books, and the cultivation of his grounds. His expenditure in public objects was large: he drained marshes, cut canals, constructed roads, built bridges, planted walks, and carried his attention to the comfort of the lower classes so far as to raise sheds on the sides of the river for the shelter of the women at their domestic labours. He was thus benevolently and usefully employed when the accession of Lewis XVI. recalled him to a public station, and in 1774 Malesherbes received an order to resume the presidentship of the court of aids, on which occasion he pronounced a very affecting and patriotic harangue, and afterwards addressed the king in an eloquent speech of thanks. His majesty was so well pleased with him, and with the freedom of his sentiments, that he appointed him minister of state in June 1775, an office which gave Malesherbes an opportunity of extending his sphere of usefulness. One of his first concerns was to visit the prisons, and restore to liberty the innocent victims of former tyranny, and his praises were carried throughout France by persons of all descriptions returning to the bosoms of their families from the gloom of dungeons. Although he failed in his attempt to abolish the arbitrary power of issuing lettres de cachet, he procured the appointment of a commission, composed of upright and enlightened magistrates, to which every application for such letters should be submitted, and whose unanimous decision should be requisite for their validity. Malesherbes was also a great encourager of commerce and agriculture, in which he bad the cordial co-operation of the illustrious Turgot, at that period the comptroller of the revenue; but, owing to the rejection of some important measures which his zeal for the public good led him to propose, Malesberbes resigned in the month of May 1776. To obtain an accurate view of the manners and policy of other countries and foreign states, he set out on his travels, and visited Switzerland and Holland, and in the course of his journey he noted down every occurrence worthy of observation, and that might, hereafter, possibly be useful to himself, and promote the melioration of his country. On his return, at the end of a few years, he found his native country so much advanced in what he thought philosophical principles, that he was encouraged to present to the king two elaborate memoirs, one on the condition of the protestants, the other in favour of the principles of civil liberty, an4 toleration in general. Difficulties, however, were now accumulating in the management of the government, and the king, in 1786, called Malesherbes to his councils, but without appointing him to any particular post in the administration. He soon found it impossible to act with the men already possessed of the powers of government, and expressed his opinion in two energetic memoirs “On the Calamities of France, and the means of repairing them;” but it does not appear that these ever reached his majesty, nor could Malesherbes obtain a private interview; he therefore took his final leave of the court, and retreated to his country residence, determined to consult the best means of serving his country by agricultural pursuits, in 1790 he published “An Essay on the means of accelerating the progress of Rural Economy in France,” in which he proposed an establishment to facilitate the national improvement in this important point. In this tranquil state he was passing the evening of his days when the horrors of the revolution brought him again to Paris. During the whole of its progress, he had his eyes constantly fixed on his unhappy sovereign; and, subduing his natural fondness for retirement, went regularly to court every Sunday, to give him proofs of his respect and attachment. He imposed it as a duty on himself to give the ministers regular information of the designs of the regicide faction; and when it was determined to bring the king to trial, he voluntarily offered to be the defender of his master, in his memorable letter of Dec. 11, 1792, that eternal monument of his loyalty and affection. Three counsel had already been appointed, but one having from prudential motives, declined the office, the king, who wept at this proof of attachment from his old servant, immediately nominated Malesherbes in his stead. Their interview was extremely affecting, and his majesty, during the short interval before his death, shewed every mark of affection for, and confidence in, his generous advocate. Malesherbes was the person who announced to him his cruel doom, and was one of the last who took leave of him previously to his execution. After that catastrophe he again withdrew to his retreat, and with a deeply-wounded heart, refused to hear any thing of what was acting among the blood-thirsty Parisians. As he was one morning working in his garden, he observed four savage-looking wretches directing their course to his house, and hastening home, he found them to be officers from the revolutionary tribunal come to arrest his daughter and her husband, who had formerly been president of the parliament of Paris. The separation of these persons from his family was deeply afflicting to his heart, and it is probable that his own arrest shortly after was a relief to his feelings. He had long been esteemed as father of the village in which he lived, and the rustic inhabitants crowded round to take leave of their ancient benefactor with tears and benedictions. Four of the municipality accompanied him to Paris, that he might not be escorted by soldiers like a criminal. He was shut tip in prison with his unfortunate family and in a lew days the guillotine separated his son-in-law Lepelletier from his wife and the accusation of Malesherbes with his daughter and grand-daughter, “for a conspiracy against the liberties of the people,” was followed, as a matter of course, by a sentence of death. The real crime, as it was basely denominated, of this excellent man and worthy patriot, and which the convention never pardoned, was his defence of the king, an act in which he gloried to the latest hour of his existence. He probably thought it an honour to die by the same ruffian hands that had spilt the blood of his master. The condemnation of the females almost overcame the manly fortitude which he displayed in every personal suffering; his courage, however, returned at the prison, and they prepared for the death which was the last and only important event that they had to encounter. His daughter had exhibited the noble spirit with which she was inspired, for upon taking leave of mademoiselle Sombreuil, who had saved her father’s life on the second of September, she said to her, “You have had the happiness to preserve your father, I shall have the consolation of dying with mine” On the fatal day Malesherbes left the prison with a serene countenance, and happening to stumble against a stone, he said with much pleasantry, “a Roman would have thought this an unlucky omen, and walked back again.” Thus perished the venerable Malesherbes in April 1794, when he had attained to the age of seventy-two years four months and fifteen days. His character may be in part deduced from the preceding narrative, but is more fully displayed in his life translated by Mr. Mangin. The subsequent government has since made some reparation for the injustice done him, by ordering his bust to be placed among those of the great men who have reflected honour upon their country.

Malherbe was born at Caen, about 1555, of an ancient and illustrious family, who had formerly borne arms in, England, under Robert duke of Normandy. He lived to be old; and, about 1601, he became known to Henry the Great, from a very advantageous mention of him to that prince by cardinal du Perron. The king asked the cardinal one day, “if he had made any more verses?” To which the cardinal replied, that “he had totally laid aside all such amusements since his majesty had done him the honour to take him into his service; and added, that every body must now throw away their pens for ever, since a gentleman of Normandy, named Malherbe, had carried the French poetry to such a height, as none could hope to reach.” About four years after, he was called to court, and enrolled among the pensioners of that monarch. After the death of Henry, queen Mary of Medicis became his patroness, and settled upon him a very handsome pension. This he enjoyed to the time of his death, which happened at Paris in 1628. It was the misfortune of this poet, that he had no great share in the affection of cardinal Richelieu. It was discovered, that, instead of taking more than ordinary pains, as he should have done, to celebrate the glory of that great minister, he had only patched together old scraps, which he had found among his papers. This was not the way to please a person of so haughty a spirit; and therefore he received this homage from Malherbe very coldly, and not without disgust. “I learned from M. Racan,” says Menage, “that Malherbe wrote those two stanzas above thirty years before Richelieu, to whom he addressed them, was made a cardinal; and that he changed only the four first verses of the first stanza, to accommodate them to his subject. I learned also from the same Racan, that cardinal Richelieu knew that these verses had not been made for him.” His apparent indolence upon such an occasion was probably owing to that extreme difficulty with which he always wrote. All writers speak of the time and labour it cost Malherbe to produce his poems.

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, is said to have descended from the Macgregors, a clan which became in the early part of the last century, under the conduct of one Robin Roy, so formidable for violence and robbery, that the name was annulled by a legal prohibition; and when they we,re all to denominate themselves anew, the father, as is supposed, of our author called himself Malloch. This father, James Malloch, kept a publichouse at Crieff, co. Perth, in Scotland, where David was born, probably about 170O. Of his early years we have but scanty and discordant memorials, some accounts placing him at first in a menial situation in the university of Edinburgh; others informing us that he was educated at the university of Aberdeen. The latter seems most probable, as he wrote and even printed some lines on the repairs of that university, in which he could not have been interested, had he not studied there for some time. That he afterwards went to Edinburgh is not improbable, and it is aU most certain that he had in some way distinguished himself at that university, for when the duke of Montrose applied to the professors for a tutor to educate his sons, they recommended Malloch; a mark of their high opinion of him; and the office was of importance enongh to have excited the wishes of many candidates, there being no surer step to future advancement.

After making the usual tour of Europe with the duke’s sows, he returned with them to London, and by the influence of the family, in which he resided, easily gained admission to many persons of the highest rank, to wits, nobles, and statesmen. “By degrees,” says Dr. Johnson, “having cleared his tongue from his native pronunciation, so as to be no longer distinguished as a Scot, he seems inclined to disencumber himself from all adherences of his original, and took upon him to change his name from Scotch Malloch to English Mallet, without any imaginable reason of preference which the eye or ear can discover. What other proofs he gave of disrespect to his native country, I know not; bur it was remarked of him that he was the only Scot whom Scotchmen did not commend.” It seems unreasonable, however, to impute this change of name to disrespect for his country; with his countrymen many of his most intimate connections were formed, and his friendship for Thomson is one of the most agreeable parts of his history; and almost the last character he sustained was that of an intrepid advocate for lord Bute, and what were then called the Scotch junto who ruled the king and kingdom. As to Scotchmen not commending him, he had at least one adherent in Smollet, who engaged him to write in the Critical Review, where all Mallet’s works are highly praised, particularly his “Elvira.” The late commentator, George Steevens, esq. hit upon the truth more exactly, when he wrote in a copy of Gascoigne’s Works, purchased in 1766, at Mallet’s sale, “that he was the only Scotchman who died, in his memory, unlamented by an individual of fyis own nation.” Steevens probably mad this remark to Johnson, who forgot the precise terms. The first time we meet with the name of David Mallet is in 1726, in a list of the subscribers to Savage’s Miscellanies.

In 1731 his first tragedy, called “Eurydice,” was performed at Drury-lane, and very unfavourably received; nor when revived thirty years after, and supported by Garrick and Mrs. Gibber, could the town endure it with patience. On this last occasion Dayies informs us that the author would not take the blame upon himself; “he sat in the orchestra, and bestowed his execrations plentifully upon the players, to whom he attributed the cold reception of his tragedy.” About this time we find him an inmate in Mr. Knight’s family at Gosfield, probably as tutor to Mr. Newsham, Mrs. Knight’s son by her first husband. Her third was the late earl Nugent. We shall soon have occasion to quote a very remarkable passage from a letter of Pope’s to this lady, respecting Mallet.

In 1747 Mallet published his “Hermit, or Amyntor and Theodora,” a poem in which Dr. Johnson allows that there is copiousness and elegance of language (which indeed appear in most of Mallet’s works), vigour of sentiment, and imagery well adapted to take possession of the fancy. It abounds also with many excellent moral precepts, which receive weight and energy from the sanction of religion, a foundation on which Mallet did not always build. Dr. Warton was much censured for saying in his “Essay on the Life and Writings of Pope,” that “the nauseous affectation of expressing every thing pompously and poetically, is nowhere more visible than in a poem lately published, called Amyntor and Theodora;” but Warton was not a rash critic, and retained the sentence in the subsequent editions of his “Essay.”

Towards the end of his life, Mallet went with his wife to France, but after a while finding his health declining, returned alone to England, and died April 21, 1765. He was twice married. Of his first wife we find no mention, but by her he had several children. One daughter, who married an Italian of rank, named Cilesia, wrote a tragedy called “Almida,” which was acted at Drury-lane. This lady died at Genoa in 1790. His second wife, whom he married in October 1742, was miss Lucy Elstob, daughter to lord Carlisle’s steward. She had a fortune of 10,000l. all of which she took care to settle upon herself; but she was equally careful that Mallet should appear like a gentleman of distinction, and from her great kindness, always chose herself to purchase every thing that he wore, and to let her friends know that she did so. This lady’s sentiments were congenial to those of her husband, who was a professed free-thinker. They kept a good table (at which Gibbon appears to have been frequently a guest), and the lady, proud of her opinions, would often, we are told, in the warmth of argument, say, “Sir, we deists.”

, an ancient English historian, who flourished in the twelfth century, was born in Somersetshire, and, on that account, as Bale and Pits inform us, was called Somersetanus. When a child, he himself says, he discovered a fondness for learning, which was encouraged by his parents, and increased with his years. Some have supposed Oxford to have been the place of his education. He became, however, a monk of Malmsbury, and it reflects no small honour on his fraternity, that they elected him their librarian. He had studied several sciences, as they could then be acquired, logic, physic, and ethics, but history appears to have been his favourite pursuit. After studying that of countries abroad, he began to inquire into the memorable transactions of his own nation but not finding any satisfactory history already written, he resolved, as he says, to write one, not to display his learning, “which is no great matter, but to bring to light things that are covered with the rubbish of antiquity.” This resolution produced his valuable work “De regibus Anglorum,” a general history of England in five books, from the arrival of the Saxons, in the year 449 to the 26 Henry I. in 1126; and a modern history, in two books, from that year to the escape of the empress Maud out of Oxford in 1143 with a church history of England in four books, published in sir H. Savile’s collection, 1596. His merits as a historian have been justly displayed and recommended by lord Lyttelton in his “History of Henry II.” In all his works (the Latin style of which is more pure than that of any of his contemporaries), he discovers great diligence, much good sense, and a sacred regard to truth, accompanied with uncommon modesty. He says that he can scarcely expect the applause of his contemporaries, but he hopes that when both favour and malevolence are dead, he shall obtain from posterity the character of an industrious, though not of an eloquent historian. Besides what we have mentioned, Gale has printed his “Antiquities of Glastonbury,” and Wharton his “Life of St. Adhelm.” But his abilities were not confined to prose. He wrote many pieces of Latin poetry; and it is remarkable, says Warton, that almost all the professed prose writers of this age made experiments in verse. William of Malmsbury died in that abbey in 1143.

, a gentleman of great literary research, and one of the ablest commentators on Shakspeare, was descended from an Irish family of the highest antiquity, an account of which may be found in the seventh volume of Archdall’s Peerage of Ireland, which, it is believed, was drawn up by Mr. Malone himself. All his immediate predecessors were distinguished men. His grandfather, while only a student at the Temple, was entrusted with a negotiation in Holland and so successfully acquitted himself, that he was honoured and rewarded by king William for his services. Having been called to the Irish bar about 1700, he became one of the most eminent barristers that have ever appeared in that country. His professional fame has only been eclipsed by that of his eldest son, the still more celebrated Anthony Malone, who as a lawyer, an orator, and an able and upright statesman, was confessedly one of the most illustrious men that his country has produced. Edmond, the second son of Richard, and the father of the late Mr. Malone, was born on the 16th of April, 1704. He was called to the English bar in 1730, where he continued for ten years to practise; and, in 1740, removed to the Irish bar. After having sat in several parliaments, and gone through the usual gradations of professional rank, he was raised, in 1766, to the dignity of one of the judges of the court of common pleas in Ireland, an office which he filled till his death in 1774. He married, in 1736, Catherine, only daughter and heir of Benjamin Collier, esq. of liuckholts, in the county of Essex, by whom he had four sons, Richard, now lord Sunderlin; Edmond, the subject of our present memoir Anthony and Benjamin, who died in their infancy and two daughters, Henrietta and Catherine.

Edmond Malone was born at his father’s house in Dublin, on the 4th of October, 1741. He was educated at the school of Dr. Ford, in Molesworth-street and went from thence, in 1756, to the university of Dublin,where he took the degree of batchelor of arts. Here his talents very early displayed themselves; and he was distinguished by a successful competition for academical honours with several young men, who atterwarda became the ornaments of the Irish senate and bar. It appears that at his outset he had laid down to himself those rules of study to which he ever afterwards steadily adhered. When sitting down to the perusal of any work, either ancient or modern, his attention was drawn to its chronology, the history and character of its author, the feelings and prejudices of the times in which he lived; and any other collateral information which might tend to illustrate his writings, or acquaint us with his probable views, and cast of thinking. In later years he was more particularly engrossed by the literature of his own country; but the knowledge he had acquired in his youth had been too assiduously collected, and too firmly fixed in his mind, not to retain possession of his memory, and preserve that purity and elegance of taste which is rarely to be met with but in those who have early derived it from the models of classical antiquity. He appears frequently at this period, in common with some of his accomplished contemporaries, to have amused himself with slight poetical compositions; and on the marriage of their present majesties contributed an ode to the collection of congratulatory verses which issued on that event from the university of Dublin. In 1763 he became a student in the Inner Temple; and in 1767 was called to the Irish bar, and, at his first appearance in the courts, he gave every promise of future eminence. But an independent fortune having soon after devolved upon him, he felt himself at liberty to retire from the bar, and devote his whole attention in future to literary pursuits, for which purpose he soon after settled in London, and resided there with very little intermission for the remainder of his life. Among the many eminent men with whom he became early acquainted, he was naturally drawn by the enthusiastic admiration which he felt for Shakspeare, and the attention which he had already paid to the elucidation of his works, into a particularly intimate intercourse with Mr. Steevens. The just views which he himself had formed led him to recognize in the system of criticism and illustration which that gentleman then adopted, the only means by which a correct exhibition of our great poet could be obtained. Mr. Steevens was gratified to find that one so well acquainted with the subject entertained that high estimation of his labours which Mr. Malone expressed; and very soon discovered the advantage he might derive from the communications of a mind so richly stored. Mr. Malone was ready and liberal in imparting his knowledge, which, on the other part, was most gratefully received.

In 1795 he was again called forth to display his zeal in defence of Shakspeare, against the contemptible fabrications with which the Irelands endeavoured to delude the public. Although this imposture, unlike the Rowleian poems, which were performances of extraordinary genius, exhibited about the same proportion of talent as it did of honesty, yet some persons of no small name were hastily led into a belief of its authenticity. Mr. Malone save through the falsehood of the whole from its commencement; and laid bare the fraud, in a pamphlet, which was written in the form of a letter to his friend lord Charlemont, a nobleman with whom he lived on the most intimate footing, and maintained a constant correspondence. It has been thought by some that the labour which he bestowed upon this performance was more than commensurate with the importance of the subject; and it is true that a slighter effort would have been sufficient to have overthrown this wretched fabrication; but we have reason to rejoice that Mr. Malone was led into a fuller discussion than was his intention at the outset; we owe to it a work which, for acuteness of reasoning, and the curious and interesting view which it presents of English literature, will retain its value long after the trash which it was designed to expose shall have been consigned to oblivion. Mr. Malone, in 1792, had the misfortune to lose his admirable friend sir Joshua Reynolds, and his executors, of whom Mr. Malone had the honour to be one, having determined in 1797 to give the world a complete collection of his works, he superintended the publication, and prefixed to it a very pleasing biographical sketch of their author. Although his attention was still principally directed to Shakspeare, and he was gradually accumulating a most valuable mass of materials for a new edition of that poet, he found time to do justice to another. He drew together, from various sources, the prose works of Dryden, which, as they had lain scattered about, and some of them appended to works which were little known, had never impressed the general reader with that opinion of their excellence which they deserved; and published them in 1800. The narrative which he prefixed is a most important accession to biography. By active inquiry, and industrious and acute research, he ascertained many particulars of his life and character that had been supposed to be irrecoverably lost, and detected the falsehood of many a traditionary tale that had been carelessly repeated by former writers. In 1808 he prepared for the press a few productions of his friend, the celebrated William Gerard Hamilton, with which he had been entrusted by his executors; and prefixed to this also a brief but elegant sketch of his life. In 1811 his country was deprived of Mr. Windham: Mr. Malone, who equally admired and loved him, drew up a short memorial of his amiable and illustrious friend, which originally appeared in the Gentleman’s Magazine; and was afterwards, in an enlarged and corrected state, printed in a small pamphlet, and privately distributed. But the kind biographer was too soon to want “the generous tear he paid.” A gradual decay appears to have undermined his constitution; and when he was just on the point of going to the press with his new edition of Shakspeare, he was interrupted by an illness, which proved fatal; and, to the irreparable loss of all who knew him, he died on the 25th of May, 1812, in the 70th year of his age. In hid last illness he was soothed by the tender and unremitting attentions of his brother, lord Sunderlin, and his youngest sister; the eldest, from her own weak state of health, was debarred from this melancholy consolation. He left no directions about his funeral; but his brother, who was anxious, with affectionate solicitude, to execute every wish he had formed, having inferred from something that dropt from him, that it was his desire to be buried among his ancestors in Ireland, his remains were conveyed to that country, and interred at the family seat of Baronston, in the county of Westmeath.

, a distinguished mathematician, philosopher, and military engineer, was born at Paris July 23, 1775. His first education was principally directe'd to classical and polite literature, and at seventeen years of age he composed a tragedy in five acts, called “The Death of Cato.” These pursuits, however, did not prevent him from a study apparently not very compatible, that of the mathematics; for at the above age he passed an examination which gained him admittance into the school of engineers. After having distinguished himself there by his genius for analysis, he was about to leave it in quality of officer of military engineers, but was rejected on political grounds, and as this repulse deprived him of all hope of promotion there, he repaired to the army in the north, where he was incorporated in the 15th battalion of Paris, and was employed as a common soldier in the fortifications of Dunkirk. The officer of engineers, who superintended those works, perceiving that Malus was deserving of a better station, represented his merits to the government, and he was recalled and sent to the Polytechnic school, where he was soon appointed to the analytic course in the absence of M. Monge. Being now re-established in his former rank at the date of his first nomination, he succeeded almost immediately to that of captain, and was employed at the school at Metz as professor of mathematics.

Although exhausted by so many fatigues, and by the dreadful diseases which had undermined his constitution, he did not neglect his promise to his mistress, but married her soon after his arrival, and their union, though short, was happy. About the time of his marriage, Malus gained new celebrity by a work in which be treated all the optical questions which depend on geometry, and in which he expounded and calculated all the phenomena of reflection and refraction, and followed the ray of light through all its various courses. This production called the attention of the learned to the phenomenon of double refraction, which had occupied Huygens and Newton; and hopes were entertained of obtaining an explanation of a fact which had defied the penetration of the greatest geniuses. The Institute of France made it the subject of a prize, which ]VIalus gained, and shewed that to the analytical knowledge of which he had given proofs in his first work, he could unite the patience, the skill, and the sagacity, which constitute a great philosopher. By very nice experiments he discovered a remarkable and totally unknown property of light, that is, the resemblance between the loadstone and a particle of light, the latter of which he found to acquire polarity and a determined direction. This success opened the doors of the Institute to him, where he supplied the place of a philosopher whose name had been immortalized by a brilliant discovery (Montgolfier).

, commonly called the marquis Malvezzi, an Italian writer of eminence, was born of a noble family at Bologna, in 1599. After having finished his classical and philosophical studies, he applied to the law, and became a doctor in that faculty in 1616, although not quite seventeen years of age. After this he cultivated other sciences, and spent some time and pains upon physic, mathematics, and divinity. He even did not neglect astrology; in favour of which he always entertained high prejudices, although he affected outwardly to despise it. Music and painting were also among the arts in which he exercised himself for his amusement. He afterwards became a soldier, and served under the duke Feria, governor of the Milanese. Philip the Fourth of Spain employed him in several affairs, and admitted him into his council of war. Letters, however, occupied a good part of his time, and he was member of the academy of the Gelati at Bologna. He was the author of several works in Spanish and Italian: among the latter were, “Discourses upon the first book of Tacitus’s Annals,” which he composed at the age of twenty-three, and dedicated to Ferdinand II. great duke of Tuscany. There is a great shew of learning in it; too much, indeed, for there are many quotations from the fathers and scripture, which have but little to do with Tacitus and modern politics. There are also in it certain logical distinctions, and subtile reasonings, which savour of pedantry, and had better become a professor of philosophy, than a writer upon government and stateaffairs. He died at Bologna, Aug. 11, 1654. His discourses upon Tacitus were translated and published in English, by sir R. Baker, Lond. 1642, folio. His “Davide perseguitato” was translated by Robert Ashley, 1647, in 12mo; his “Romulus and Tarquin,” by lord H. Gary, 1638, 12mo; and his “Successi della monarchia di Spagna” by Robert Gentilis, 1647, 12mo.

, an ingenious and learned French Jesuit, who has written Latin poetry, was born in the diocese of Clermont, in 1581. He was one of the most ambitious imitators of Virgil; and wrote in the same measure, the same number of books, and in the three different kinds to which that illustrious poet applied himself. Thus we have of Mambrun, “Eclogues,” “Georgics, or four books upon the culture of the soul and the understanding;” and an heroic poem in twelve books, entitled “Constantine, or idolatry overthrown. We cannot, however, say that he has imitated the genius and judgment of Virgil as well as he has his exterior form and ceconomy. He is, indeed, allowed to have had great talents for poetry, and was a good critic, as he has sufficiently shewn in a Latin Peripatetic dissertation upon an epic poem; so that it is not without some foundation that Menage has called him” a great poet, as well as a great critic.“His” Peripatetic dissertation“was published at Paris, 1652, 4to; his” ConstantiYie,“at Amsterdam, 1659, in 12mo; his” Eclogues and Georgics," at Fleche, 1661, in 12mo; in which year also he died, aged eighty.

In 1749, and the thirty-fifth year of his age, Manara was called to town by his sovereign, and the place to which he was appointed, the first he had filled at court, was admirably adapted to his temper. No sooner had the highspirited Infant Don Philip become the pacific possessor of that principality, than he thought of reviving the languid progress of scientific and literary pursuits; and instituted that famous academy of arts, which, except those of Rome and Bologna, was soon accounted the best in Italy. He himself was appointed academician and counsellor, invested with a vote; and he greatly distinguished himself, as might be expected, in the sessions of the society, and in the annual speeches on the solemn distribution of its premiums. The first minister of state, marquis of Felin, a man of great discernment and sagacity, was not long in perceiving that Manara, by his uncommon abilities, was entitled to higher honours and employments at court. Accordingly, in 1760 he appointed him a chamberlain of the royal house, and soon after, superintendant of the newly-projected high road, through that lofty branch of the Apennines which connects the Ligurian with the Parmesan dominions; and from that time he was gradually promoted to more conspicuous and important places. He succeeded the abbe" de Condillac in the education of the young Infant (his late royal highness) Ferdinand, and acquitted himself of this task to the complete satisfaction of his friends and countrymen. The amiable prince himself was so duly sensible of his services in this respect that he rewarded him with an extraordinary pension for life^ and with the eminent dignity of first chamberlain of his royal family.

From 1767 to 1781 his farther advancements were so rapid, that we can only slightly glance at them. The celebrated Theatin Paciaudi being directed to new model the university of Parma, he established it on the same plan as that of Turin 1 he invested a committee of secular clergymen with the power of directing all moral and religious concerns in it, and another committee of lay noblemen, under the name of magistracy of reform, with that of superintending all its temporal and economical transactions. Manara was appointed one of these magistrates, with the additional prerogative of being the exclusive director of that branch of the establishment which was called the royal college of noblemen, and in this double capacity he answered the most sanguine expectations. In 1771 he was appointed counsellor of state to his royal highness, and in 1773 was sent ambassador to the court of Turin, for the purpose of felicitating his late Sardinian majesty on his accession to the crown.

, an author of temporary celebrity in the last century for his writings, was born about 1670, in Holland, where he studied physic, and took the degree of doctor in that faculty. He afterwards came over into England, and wrote several books, not without ingenuity, but some of them were justly considered as likely to produce a bad effect upon society. In 1709 he published his “Virgin Unmasked, or A dialogue between an old maiden aunt and her niece, upon love, marriage,” &c. a piece not very likely to increase virtue and innocence among his female readers. In 1711 came out his “Treatise of the hypocondriac and hysteric passions, vulgarly called the hyppo in men, and the vapours in women.” This work, which is divided into three dialogues, may be read with amusement at least, and contains some shrewd remarks on the art of physic and the modern practice of physicians and apothecaries, among whom he probably did not enjoy much reputation. In 1714 he published a poem entitled “The grumbling hive, or knaves turned honest;” on which he afterwards wrote remarks, and enlarged the whole into his celebrated publication, which was printed at London in 1723, under the title of “The Fable of the Bees, or private vices made public benefits with an Essay on charity and charity-schools, and a search into the nature of society.” In the preface to this book he observes, that since the first publication of his poem he had met with several, who, either wilfully or ignorantly mistaking the design, affirmed that the scope of it was a satire upon virtue and morality, and the whole written for the encouragement of vice. This made him resolve, whenever it should be reprinted, some way or other to inform the reader of the real intent with which that little poem was written. In this, however, he was so unfortunate, that the book was presented by the grand jury of Middlesex in July the same year, and severely animadverted upon in “A Letter to the Right Honourable Lord C.” printed in the London Journal of July the 27tb, 1723. The author wrote a vindication of his book from the imputations cast upon it in that Letter, and in the presentment of the grand jury, which he published in the “London Journal” of August the 10th, 1723. It was attacked, however, by various writers, to whom Mandeville made no reply until 1728, when he published, in another 8vo volume, a second part of “The Fable of the Bees,” in order to illustrate the scheme and design of the first. In 1720, he published “Free thoughts on Religion,” builfc upon the system called rational; an arrogant epithet, which generally excludes from the province of reason a belief in the truths of revelation. In 1732 he published “An inquiry into the origin of honour, and usefulness of Christianity in war;” a work which abounds in paradoxical opinions.

The “Fable of the Bees,” as we have observed, was attacked by several writers; particularly by Dr. Fiddes, in the preface to his “General treatise of morality formed upon the principles of natural religion only,” printed in 1724; by Mr. John Dennis, in a piece entitled “Vice and luxury public mischiefs,” in 1724; by Mr. William Law, in a book entitled “Remarks upon the Fable of the Bees,” in 1724; by Mr. Bluet, in his “Enquiry, whether the general practice of virtue tends to the wealth or poverty, benefit or disadvantage, of a people? In which the pleas offered by the author of The Fable of the Bees, for the usefulness of vice and roguery, are considered; with some thoughts concerning a toleration of public stews,” in 1725; by Mr. Hutcheson, author of the “Inquiry into the original of our ideas of beauty and virtue, in several papers published at Dublin, and reprinted in the first volume of Hibernicus’s Letters;” and lastly, by Mr. Archibald Campbell, in his “Astoria,” first published by Alexander Innis, D. D. in his own name, but claimed afterwards by the true author. Mandeville’s notions were likewise animadverted upon by Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne in Ireland, in his “Alciphron, or the Minute Philosopher,” printed in 1732; in answer to which Mandeville published, the same year, “A Letter to Dion, occasioned by his book called Alciphron.” In this year also a pamphlet appeared, entitled “Some remarks on the Minute Philosopher, in a letter from a country clergyman to his friend in London;” the anonymous author of which, supposed to have been John lord Harvey, interferes in the controversy between Mandeville and Berkeley with an apparent impartiality. It would be very unnecessary now, however, to enter minutely into the merits of a work no longer read. The prevailing error in the “Fable of the Bees” appears to us to be, that the author did not sufficiently distinguish between what existed, and what ought to be; that while he could uicontestibly prove “private vices” to be in some degree “public benefits,” that is, useful to the grandeur and financial prosperity of a state, he did not distinguish between vices properly so called, and superfluities, or articles of luxury, which are the accompaniments, and the usetul accompaniments too, of certain ranks of life. As to his tracing good actions to bad motives, and the general disposition he has to dwell on the unfavourable side of appearances in human nature and conduct, no apology can be offered, and none can be wanted for the contempt into which his writings have fallen.

, Man!, or Manicileus, the founder of a remarkable sect of heretics, flourished towards the conclusion of the third century, and began about the year 267 to propagate his doctrines, which he had taken from the books of one Scythianus. Scythianus was an Arabian, educated upon the borders of Palestine, and extremely well skilled in all the learning of the Greeks. Afterwards he went to Alexandria, where he studied philosophy, and acquainted himself also with the learning of the Egyptians. Here he espoused the opinion of Empedocles, concerning two co-eternal principles, one good and the other bad; the former of which he called God and light, the latter matter and darkness; to which he joined many dogmas of the Pythagorean school. These he formed into a system, comprised in four books; one of which was called “Evangelium,” another “Capita,” a third “Mysteria,” and a fourth “Thesauri.” After this he went to Jerusalem, ivhere he disputed with the Jews, and taught openly his opinions. Upon the death of Scythianus, his books and effects devolved by will to Terebinthus his disciple, who, however, soon quitted Palestine, and fled into Persia, where, to avoid the persecutions to which his doctrines exposed him, he took up his abode with a certain rich widow. Here he died, by a sudden and violent death, as it is commonly related. When, according to his usual way, he had ascended to the top of the house, in order to invoke the demons of the air, which custom the Manichees afterwards practised in their ceremonies, he was in a moment struck with a blow from heaven, which threw him headlong down and fractured his skull. St. Epiphanius says, that Scythianus had also met with the same fate before him. Here, however, it was that Manes became acquainted with the writings of Scythianus; for, having a handsome person and a ready wit, this widow, who had bought him, adopted him for her son, and took care to have him instructed by the magi in the discipline and philosophy of the Persians, in which he made so considerable a progress that he acquired the reputation of a very subtile and learned philosopher. When this lady died, the writings of Terebinthus, to whom she had been heir, or rather of Scythianus, from whom Terebinthus had received them, fell of course into the hands of Manes.

Manes now began to think of founding his system. He made what use he could of the writings of Scythianus; he selected from the heathen philosophy whatever was for his purpose, and he wrought it all up together with some institutes of Christianity; which made Socrates call his heresy a motley mixture of Christianity and Paganism. Although Manes wrote a great many pieces himself, we have nothing remaining, except a few fragments preserved in the writings of Epiphanius. Manes became famous all over Persia, engaged the attention of the court, and as he pretended to the gift of working miracles, he was called by king Sapor to cure his son, who was dangerously ill. This he undertook at the hazard of his life, and the undertaking in the end proved fatal to him. This bold impostor was no sooner called than he dismissed all the physicians who were about the young prince; and promised the king that he would recover him presently by the help of a few medicines, accompanied with his prayers: but the child dying in his arms, the king, enraged to the last degree, caused him to be thrown into prison; whence by the force of bribes he made his escape, and fled into Mesopotamia. There he was taken again by persons sent in quest of him, and carried to Sapor, who caused him to be flead alive, and after that his body to be given to the dogs, and his skin to be stuffed with chaff, and hung before the city gates, where, Epiphanius tells us, it was remaining to his time. His death is supposed to have happened about the year 278.

, an ancient Egyptian historian, who pretends to take all his accounts from the sacred inscriptions on the pillars of Hermes Trismegistus, to whom the Egyptians ascribed the first invention of their learning, and all excellent arts, and from whom they derived their history. Manethos, as Eusebius tells us, translated the whole Egyptian history into Greek, beginning from their gods, and continuing his history down to near the time of Darius Codomannus, whom Alexander conquered; for in Eusebius’s <k Chronica,“mention is made of Manethos’s history, ending in the sixteenth year of Artaxerxes Ochus, which, says Vossius, was in the second year of the third olympiad. Manethos, called from his country Sebennyta, was highpriest of Heliopolis in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, at whose request he wrote his history, and digested it into three tomes; the first containing the eleven dynasties of the gods and heroes, the second eight dynasties, the third twelve, and altogether, according to his fabulous computation, the sum oft 53, 53 5 years. These dynasties are yet preserved, being first epitomized by Julius Africanus, from him transcribed by Eusebius, and inserted in his” Chronica;“from Eusebius by Georgius Syncellus, out of whom they are produced by Joseph Scaliger, and may be seen both in his Eusebius and his” Canones Isagogici.“Manethos, as appears by Eusebius, vouches this as the principal testimony of the credibility of his history, that he took his relations” from some pillars in the land of Seriad, on which they were inscribed in the sacred dialect by the first Mercury Thoth, and after the flood were translated out of the sacred dialect into the Greek tongue in hieroglyphic characters, and are laid up in books among the reveries of the Egyptian temples by Agathodsemon, the second Mercury, the father of Tat.“” Certainly,“says bishop Stillingfleet, in his” Origines Sacroe,“” this fabulous author could not in fewer words have more manifested his own impostures, or blasted his own credit, than he hath done in these."

, called, like other Benedictines, Dom Thomas, did considerable honour to his order by the extent of his learning, which obtained him the places of antiquary, librarian, and counsellor to Charles duke of Lorraine. He died in 1763, when he was preparing a work, which was published in the course of the same year, by the abbe Jacquin. The title is, “Introduction a la science des Medailles pour servir a la connoissance des Dieux, et de la Religion, des Sciences, des Arts, et de tout ce qui appartient a l'Histoire ancienne, avec les preuves tires des Medailles,” folio. Mangeart is here said to have comprised, in a single volume, the elementary knowledge of medals which had before been treated but too slightly; and the most valuable information which is scattered through many prolix dissertations on particular parts of the subject, Mr. Pinkerton, however, pronounces it to be a dry compilation concerning antiquities found on medals, in which the author shews no knowledge of the medals themselves. It is a kind of supplement to Montfaucon’s antiquities. Mangeart published also, 2. Eight sermons, with a treatise on Purgatory, at Nancy, 1739, in 2 vols. 12mo.

, an English lady, authoress of a noted piece of scandal called “The Atalantis,” was born in Guernsey, or one of those small islands, of which her father, sir Roger Mauley, was governor. He wa* the second son of an ancient family, and had been a great sufferer for his loyalty in the reign of Charles I. without receiving either preferment or recompense in that of Charles II. He was a man of considerable literary talents, wnich appeared in several publications, particularly his Latin commentaries on the rebellion, under the title of “Commentaria de Rebelhone Anglicana, ab anno 1640 ad annum 1685,” Lond. 1686, 8vo, and of which an English translation was published in 1691; and his “History of the late wars of Denmark,” 1670. He is also said to have been the author of the first volume of the “Turkish Spy,” which was found among his papers, and continued to its present number of volumes by Dr. Midgley, a physician, who had the care of his papers; but this has been justly doubted (See Marana). His daughter, the subject of this article, received an education suitable to her birth, and gave indications of genius above her years, and, as her biographer says, “much superior to what is usually to be found amongst her sex.” The loss of her parents before she was settled in life, seems to have been peculiarly unfortunate, for her father confided the care of her to his nephew, a married man, who first pretended that his wife was dead, then by a series of seductive manoeuvres cheated her into a marriage. When he could no longer conceal his infamy, he deserted her, and the world tamed its back upon her. While in this situation, she accidentally acquired the patronage of the duchess of Cleveland, one of Charles II.'s mistresses, having been introduced to her by an acquaintance to whom she was paying a visit; but the duchess, a woman of a very fickle temper, grew tired of Mrs. Manley in six months, and discharged her upon a pretence that she intrigued with her son. When this lady was thus dismissed, she was solicited by general Tidcomb to pass some time with him at his country-seat; but she excused herself by saying, “that her love of solitude was improved by her disgust of the world; and since it was impossible for her to be in public with reputation, she was resolved to remain concealed.” In this solitude she wrote her first tragedy, called “The Royal Mischief,” which was acted at the theatre in Lincoln’s-inn-fields, in 1696. This play succeeded, and she received such unbounded incense from admirers, that her apartment was crowded with men of wit and gaiety, which proved in the end very fatal to her virtue, and she afterwards engaged in various intrigues. In her retired hours she wrote her four volumes of the “Memoirs of the New Atalantis,” in which she was very free with her own sex, in her wanton description of loveadventures, and with the characters of many high and distinguished personages. Her father had always been attached to the cause of Charles I. and she herself having a confirmed aversion to the Whig ministry, took this method of satirising those who had brought about the revolution. Upon this a warrant was granted from the secretary of state’s office, to seize the printer and publisher of those volumes. Mrs. Mauley had too much generosity to let innocent persons suffer on her account; and therefore voluntarily presented herself before the court of King’s -bench, as the author of the “Atalantis.' 1 When she was examined before lord Sunderland, then the secretary, he was curious to know from whom she got information of some particulars which they imagined to be above her own intelligence. She pleaded that her only design in writing was her own amusement and diversion in the country, without intending particular reflections and characters; and assured them that nobody was concerned with her. When this was not believed, and the contrary urged against her by several circumstances, she said,” then it must be by inspiration, because, knowing her own innocence, she could account for it no other way.“The secretary replied, that” inspiration used to be upon a good account; but that her writings were stark naught.“She acknowledged, that” his lordship’s observation might be true; but, as there were evil angels as well as good, that what she had wrote might still be by inspiration.“The consequence of this examination was, that Mrs. Manley was close shut up in a messenger’s house, without being allowed pen, ink, and paper. Her counsel, however, sued out her habeas corpus at the King’s-bench bar, and she was admitted to bail. Whether those in power were ashamed to bring a woman to a trial for this book, or whether the laws could not reach her, because she had disguised her satire under romantic names, and a feigned scene of action, she was discharged, after several times exposing herself in person, to oppose the court before the bench of judges, with her three attendants, the printer, and two publishers. Not long after, a total change of the ministry ensued, when she lived in high reputation and gaiety, and aroused herself in writing poems and letters, and conversing with wits. To her dramatic pieces she now added” Lucius,“the first Christian king of Britain, a tragedy, acted in Drury-lane, in 1717. She dedicated it to sir Richard Steele, whom she had abused in her” New Atalantis,“but was now upon such friendly terms with him, that he wrote the prologue to this play, as Mr. Prior did the epilogue. This was followed by her comedy called the” Lost Lover, or the Jealous Husband,“acted in 1696. She was also employed in writing for queen Anne’s ministry, certainly with the consent and privity, if not under the direction, of Dr Swift, and was the author of” The Vindication of the Duke of Maryborough,“and other pamphlets, some of which would not disgrace the best pen then engaged in the” defence of government. After dean Swift relinquished “The Examiner,” she continued it with great spirit for a considerable time, and frequently finished pieces begun by that excellent writer, who also often used to furnish her with hints for those of her own composition. At this season she formed a connection with Mr. John Barber, alderman of London, with whom she lived in a state of concubinage, as is supposed, and at whose house she died July 11, 1724.

, an excellent antiquary and topographer, the son of Mr. Owen Manning, of Orlingbury, co. Northampton, was born there Aug. 11, 1721. He was admitted of Queen’s-college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. in 1740; and about this time met with two extraordinary instances of preservation from untimely death. Having been seized with the small pox, he was attended by Dr. Heberden, who thinking he could not survive, desired that his father might be sent for. On his arrival he found the young man to all appearance dying, and next day he was supposed to have expired, and was laid out, as a corpse, in the usual manner. An undertaker was sent for, and every preparation made for his funeral. His father, however, who had not left the house, could not help frequently viewing the seemingly lifeless body; and in one of his visits, without seeing any cause for hope, said, “I will give my poor boy another chance,” and at the same time raised him up, which almost immediately produced signs of life. Dr. Heberden was then sent for, and by the use of proper means, the young man recovered. As it was customary for the scholars of every college to make verses on the death of any one of their own college, which are pinned to the pall at the funeral, like so many escutcheons, this tribute of respect was prepared for Mr. Manning, who was much beloved by his fellow students; and it is said that the verses were presented to him afterwards, and that he kept them for many years as memoranda of his youthful friendships. Scarcely had he met with this narrow escape, when, his disorder having made him for some time subject to epileptic fits, he was seized with one of these while walking by the river, into which he feJl, and remained so long that he was thought to be drowned, and laid out on the grass, until he could be conveyed to the college, where Dr. Heberden being again called in, the proper means of recovery were used with success.

, called Giovanni da san Giovanni, from a village near Florence, where he was born, was a celebrated painter of the Florentine school, where he shone by a natural superiority of genius. He perfectly understood the poetical part of his art, and excelled, therefore, in the ingenuity of those designs by which he at once ornamented the palace, and illustrated the beneficence and taste of Lorenzo de Medicis. He was particularly successful in painting in fresco, and his colours remain uninjured to the present day: in the imitation of bas-relief he was so skilful, that the touch only could distinguish his paintings of that kind from sculpture. He had profound skill also in perspective and optics. With all these excellencies in his art, he was capricious, envious, and malevolent, and consequently raised himself enemies who were not a little inveterate. He died at the age of forty-six, in 1636.

His ministerial functions were exercised in various places, first at Sowton near Exeter, and then at Colyton in Devonshire, where he was much respected. Removing to London, he became more admired for his talents in the pulpit, and about 1643 was presented to the living of Stoke Newington, by colonel Popham, and here preached those lectures on the epistles of St. James and St. Jude, which he afterwards published in 1651 and 1652, 4to. During his residence at Newington, he often preached in London, and is said to have preached the second sermon before the sons of the clergy, an institution then set on foot, chiefly through the influence of Dr. Hall, son to the bishop, who preached the first. He was also one of those who were called occasionally to preach before the parliament, but being a decided enemy to the murder of the king, he gave great offence by a sermon in which he touched on that subject. In 1651 he shewed equal contempt for the tyranny of the usurpers, by preaching a funeral sermon for Mr. Love (see Christopher Love), and in neither case allowed the fears of his friends to prevent what he thought his duty. In 1650 he removed from Stoke-Newington, on being presented to the living of Covent garden by the earl, afterwards duke of Bedford, who had a high respect for him. At this church he had a numerous auditory. Archbishop Usher, who was one of his hearers, used to say that he was one of the best preachers in England, and had the art of reducing the substance of whole volumes into a narrow compass, and representing it to great advantage. Although he had already, by the two sermons above noticed, shewn that he was far from courting the favours, of government, Cromwell, who well knew how to avail himself of religious influence and popular talents, sent for him in 1653, when he assumed the protectorate, and desired him to pray at Whitehall on the morning of his installation; and about the same time made him one of his chaplains. He was nominated also by parliament one of a committee of divines to draw up a scheme of fundamental doctrines. In the same year he was appointed one of the committee for the trial and approbation of ministers, and appears to have acted in this troublesome office with considerable moderation. What influence he had with Cromwell, he employed for the benefit of others, and particularly solicited him to spare the life of Dr. Hewit, a loyalist, whom Cromwell executed for being concerned in a plot to restore Charles II. In 1660, when the days of usurpation were over, Mr. Manton co-operated openly in the restoration of Charles, was one of the ministers appointed to wait upon his majesty at Breda, and was afterwards sworn one of his majesty’s chaplains. In the same year he was, by mandamus, created doctor of divinity at Oxford.

In imitation, it is said, of the hand-writing of the celebrated Petrarch, Aldus procured the first examples of that which is called, in printing, the Italic character, to be cut and cast for him by Francesco of Bologna, about 1500. An edition of the works of Virgil, in octavo, was the first book he printed in this type, which was long known among printers by the name of Aldine. The inventor obtained a patent from the Senate of Venice, for its exclusive use for ten years, from the 13th of November, 1502; and another similar patent from pope Alexander the Sixth, from the 17th of November, 1502. The last of these was renewed for fifteen years more, by Julius the Second, on the 27th of January, 1513; and again by Leo the Tenth, on the 28th of the following November.

Dr. Mapletoft lived very hospitably at Ely, and wherever he resided, and was esteemed for the many pious and charitable acts in his life-time; and, at his death, after many gifts, legacies, and charitable donations, he bequeathed to the university 100l. towards purchasing Golius’s library of Oriental books for the university library; and in case that design was not executed, then to some permanent university use, at the discretion of the vicechancellor and the two professors of divinity; lOOl. to poor widows, chiefly clergymen’s. His benefactions to the church of Ely were, to the dean and chapter for ever, all his close called hundred acres in the Wash in the town of Coveney, for the increase of the Dinging men’s stipends, and on condition that they should frequent early prayers in the cathedral. He also bequeathed to the same church his library of books, and 100l. toward fitting up a place to receive them, and furnishing it with more books; to each of the prebendaries a ring of 20,?. to each minor canon and schoolmaster 20s. to each singing-man and verger 10s. and to the choristers 5s. each.

In a codicil to his last will, signed 17th day of August, 1677, he gives to the use of the town of North Thoresby, in the county of Lincoln, his two cottages and one messuage, with all his lands in the same town and fields of the same for ever, to be settled upon trustees, for and towards the maintenance of one fit person to teach the scholars there to read, to learn them their catechism, and instruct them in it, to write, to cast accounts, and to teach tuem their accidence, and to make them fit for the grammar school, according to the rules and orders which he or his executors should prescribe; and also gives all those his lands, meadow, and pasture in Saltfleetby to the use of the town of Louth for ever, for and towards the maintenance of one fit person to teach the children there in like manner as in his gift to North Thoresby, per omnia. He gives likewise to the master, fellows, and scholars of Pembroke Hall, lands in Coveney for ever, on condition, that they pay yearly for ever to two poor scholars to be called his exhibitioners, 4l. each, and that they lay out yearly 4bs, in good books for the library of the said college.

, one of the most admired painters of the Italian school, was born in 1625, at Camerino in the march of Ancona. When quite a child he is said to have pressed out the juices of flowers, which he used for colours in drawing on the walls of his father’s house. This propensity most probably induced his parents to send him to Rome at eleven years old; where, by his manner of copying the designs of Raphael in the Vatican, he obtained the favour of Andrea Sacchi, and became his pupil. From the grace and beauty of his ideas he was generally employed in painting Madonnas and female saints; on which account he was, by Salvator Rosa, satirically called Carluccio delta Madonna. He was far from being ashamed of this name, and in the inscription placed by himself on his monument (nine years before his death), he calls it gloriosum cognomen, and professes his particular devotion to the Virgin Mary. The pope, Clement XI. gave him a pension, and the title of Cavaliero di Cristo and he was appointed painter in ordinary to Louis XIV. He died at Home, loaded with honours, in 1713, at the advanced age of eighty-eight. Extreme modesty and gentleness were the characteristics of his disposition; and Jiis admiration of the great models he had studied was such, that not content with having contributed to preserve the works of Raphael and the Caraccis in the Farnese gallery, he erected monuments to them in the Pantheon, at his own expence. Several plates are extant, etched hy him in aquafortis, in which he has displayed abundant taste and genius.

, a nobleman celebrated for musical knowledge, was born July 24, 1680, at Venice, and was the descendant of one of the most illustrious families of that republic. He had cultivated music so seriously and successfully under the guidance of the celebrated Gasparini, that no contemporary professor was more reverenced for musical science, or half so much praised for his abilities as a composer, as Marcello; and besides his musical productions, consisting of psalms, operas, madrigals, songs, and cantatas, he was frequently his own poet, and sometimes assumed the character of lyric bard for other musicians. It is probable that Marcello had received some disgust in his early attempts at dramatic music; for, in 1720, he published a furious satire upon composers, singing-masters, and singers in general, under the title of “Teatro alia Moda,” or “An easy and certain Method of composing and performing Italian Operas in the modern manner.” But his great musical work, to which the late Mr. Avison’s encomiums aud Mr. Garth’s publication to English words, have given celebrity in our own country, was first printed at Venice, in 8 vols. folio, under the following title: “Estro poetico-arznonico, Parafrasi sopra i primi 50 Salmi, Poesia di Girciarno Ascanio Giustiniani, Musica di Benedetto Marcello, Patrizj Veneti, 1724 and 1725.” Dr. Burney, after a careful examination of this elaborate work, is of opinion, that though it has considerable merit, the author has been over-praised; as the subjects of many of his fugues and airs are not only common and old-fashioned at present, but were far from new at the time these psalms were composed. But, adds Dr. Burney, Marcello was a Venetian nobleman, as Venosa was a Neapolitan prince; both did honour to music by cultivating it; and both expected and received a greater return in fame than the legal interest of the art would allow. Marcello died at Brescia, June 25, 173<>, or, according to our principal authority, in 1741. He was author of a drama called “Arato in Sparta,” which was set by Ruggieri, and performed at Venice in 1704; and in 1710 he produced both the words and the music of an oratorio called “Giuditta.” He set the “Psyche” of Cassini about the same time; and in 1718 he published “Sonnets” of his own writing, without music.

Besides the “Anti-Cotton, ou Refutation de la lettre declaratoire du P. Cotton, avec un dissertation,” printed at the Hague in 1738, at the end of the history of Don Inigo de Guipuscoa, and the “Chef-d‘oeuvre d’un inconnu,” often reprinted, he published in 1740 “Histoire de PImprimerie,” Hague, 4to, a work of great research, and often consulted by typographical antiquaries, but deficient in perspicuity of arrangement. A valuable supplement to it was published by Mercier, the abbé of St. Leger, 1775, 2 vols. 4to, which French bibliographers say is better executed than Marchand’s work, and certainly is more correct. But the vvork which best preserves the name of Marchand, was one to which we have taken many opportunities to own our obligations, his “Dictionnaire Historique, ou Memoires Critiques et Litteraires, concernant la vie et les outrages de divers personnages distingués, particulierement dans la republique des-lettres,” 1758 9, 2 vols. folio. This has been by his editor and others called a Supplement to Bayle; but, although Marchand has touched upon a few of the authors in Bayle’s series, and has made useful corrections and valuable additions to them, yet in general the materials are entirely his own, and the information of his own discovering. The articles are partly biographical, and partly historical; but his main object being the history of books, he sometime*enlarges to a degree of minuteness, which bibliographers only can pardon, and it must be owned sometimes brings forward inquiries into the history of authors and works which his utmost care can scarcely rescue from the oblivion in which he found them. With this objection, which by no means affects the totality of the work, we know few volumes that afford more satisfaction or information on the subjects introduced. His accuracy is in general precise, but there are many errors of the press, and the work laboured under the disadvantage of not being handed to the press by the author. He often intended this, and as often deferred it, because his materials increased so that he never could say when his design was accomplished; and at length, when he had nearly overcome all his scruples, and was about to print, a stroke of palsy deprived him of the use of his right hand, and unfitted him for every business but that of preparing to die, and the settlement of his affairs. This last took up little time. He was a man of frugal habits, content with the decent necessaries of life, and laid out what remained of his money in books. The items of his will, therefore, were few, but liberal. He left his personal property to a society established at the Hague for the education of the poor; and his library and Mss. to the university of Leyden. He died, at an advanced age, June 14, 1756. His “Dictiormaire” he consigned to the care of a friend, who has given us only the initials of his name (J. N. S. A.) to whom he likewise intrusted a new edition of his “History of Printing,” which has never appeared. This friend undertook to publish the Dictionary with the. greater alacrity, as Mart-hand assured him that the manuscript was ready. Ready it certainly was, hut in such a state as frightened the editor, being all written upon little pieces of paper of different sizes, some not bigger than one’s thumb-nail, and written in a character so exceeding small, that it was not legible to the naked eye. The editor, therefore, said perhaps truly, that this was the first book ever printed by the help of a microscope. These circumstances, however, may afford a sufficient apology for the errors of the press, already noticed; and the editor certainly deserves praise for having so well accomplished his undertaking amidst so many difficulties.

When a near relation, very dear to sir Patrick, was again imprisoned, he thought it adviseable to keep himself concealed. The following account of his concealment is taken, from the ms. preserved in the family by his grand-daughter. “After persecution began afresh, and my grandfather Baillie again in prison, sir Patrick thought it necessary to keep concealed; and soon found he had too good reason for so doing, parties being continually sent out in search of him, and often to his own house, to the terror of all in it, though not from any fear for his safety, whom they imagined at a great distance from home, for no soul knew where he was but my grandmother, and my mother, except one man, a carpenter, called Jamie Winter, who used to work in the house, and lived a mile off, on whose fidelity they thought they could depend; and were not deceived. The frequent examinations and oaths put to servants in order to make discoveries were so strict, they durst not run the risk of trusting any of them. By the assistance of this man they got a bed and bed-clothes carried in the night to the burying-place, a vault under ground at Polwarth church, a mile from the house, where he was concealed a month; and had only for light an open slit at the one end, through which nobody could see what was below; she (his daughter) went every night by herself at midnight, to carry him victuals and drink, and staid with him as long as she could to get home before day. In all this time my grandfather shewed the same constant composure and cheerfulness of mind that he continued to possess to his death, which was at the age of eighty -four; all which good qualities she inherited from, him in a high degree; often did they laugh heartily in that doleful habitation, at different accidents that happened. She at that time had a terror for a church-yard, especially in the dark, as it is not uncommon at her age, by idle nursery stories; but when engaged by concern for her father, she stumbled over the graves every night alone, without fear of any kind entering her thoughts, but for soldiers and parties in search of him, which the least noise or motion of a leaf put her in terror for. The minister’s house was near the church; the first night she went, his dogs kept such a barking as put her in the utmost fear of a discovery; my grandmother sent for the minister next day, and upon pretence of a mad dog, got him to hang all his dogs. There was also difficulty of getting victuals to carry him without the servants suspecting; the only way it was done, was by stealing it off her plate at dinner into her lap many a diverting story she has told about and other things of a like nature. Her father liked sheep’s head, and while the children were eating their broth, she had conveyed most of one into her lap; when her brother Sandy (the second lord Marchmont) had done, he looked up with astonishment, and said,” Mother, will ye look at Grizzel; while we have been eating our broth, she has eat up the whole sheep’s head.“This occasioned so much mirth among them, that her father at night was greatly entertained by it; and desired Sandy might have a share in the next. I need not multiply stories of this kind, of which I know many. His great comfort and constant entertainment (for he had no light to read by) was repeating Buchanan’s Psalms, which he had by heart from beginning to end; and retained them to his dying-day two years before he died, which was in 1724, I was witness to his desiring my mother to take up that work, which, amongst others, always lay upon his table, and bid her try if he had forgot his psalms, by naming any one she would have him repeat; and by casting her eye over it she would know if he was right, though she did not understand it; and he missed not a word in any place she named to him, and said they had been the great comfort of his life, by night and day, on all occasions. As the gloomy habitation my father was in, was not to be long endured but from necessity, they were contriving other places of safety for him; amongst others, particularly one under a bed which drew out, on a ground Moor, in a room of which my mother kept the key; she and the same man worked in the night, making a hole in the earth after lifting the boards, which they did by scratching it up with their hands not to make any noise, till she left not a nail upon her fingers, she helping the man to carry the earth as they dug it, in a sheet, on his back, out at the window into the garden; he then made a box at his own house, large enough for her father to lie in, with bed and bed-clothes, and bored holes in the boards for air; when all this was finished, for it was long about, she thought herself the most secure happy creature alive. When it had stood the trial for a month of no water coming into it, which was feared from being so low, and every day examined by my mother, and the holes for air made clear, and kept clean-picked, her father ventured home, having that to trust to. After being at home a week or two, the bed daily examined as usual, one day in lifting the boards, the bed bounced to the top, the box being full of water: in her life she was never so struck, and had near dropped down, it being at that time their only refuge; her father, with great composure, said to his wife and her, he saw they must tempt Providence no longer, and that it was now fit and necessary for him to go off, and leave them; in which he was confirmed hy the carrier telling for news he had brought from Edinburgh, that the day before, Mr. Baillie of Jerviswoode had his life taken from him at the Cross, and that every body was sorry, though they durst not shew it; as all intercourse by letters was dangerous, it was the first notice they bad of it; and the more shocking, that it was not expected. They immediately set about preparing for my grandfather’s going away. My mother worked night and day in making some alterations in his clothes for disguise; they were then obliged to trust John Allen, their grieve, who fainted away when he was told his master was in the house, and that he was to set out with him on horseback before day, and pretend to the rest of the servants that he had orders to sell some horses at Morpeth fair. Accordingly, my grandfather getting out at a window in the stables, they set out in the dark; though with good reason it was a sorrowful parting, yet after he was fairly gone they rejoiced, and thought themselves happy that he was in a way of being safe, though they were deprived of him, and little knew what was to be either his fate or their own.”

It may be truly said, that there have been few men in any age, who read more deeply than this distinguished nobleman. The notes he left behind him on almost every eminent author of antiquity, and on the most useful publications in modern times, afford an unequivocal proof of this. He was never himself an author; but it is to him the public are indebted for the publication of the records of parliament, from very nearly the earliest period of that assembly meeting, which have thrown most useful light on our constitutional history. The famous survey of all the counties in England made under the authority of William the Conqueror, called Domesday Book , was printed at the same time. The earl died at his house in Hertfordshire, January 10, 1794.

, a learned German critic, was born at Arnheim, a town of Gueldres, in 1548. His father, who was a man of rank and learning, observing in him a more than ordinary inclination for books, took particular care of his education. He had him taught at home the elements of the Latin tongue, and then sent him to school at Deventer, where he learned the Greek under Noviomagus. Marcilius, having made a great progress in both languages, was removed thence to the university of Louvain, where he applied himself to philosophy and civil law; and, having finished his studies, went to Paris, and thence to Toulouse, where he taught polite literature many years. Returning to Paris, he taught rhetoric in 1578, in the college of Grassins, and afterwards read lectures in several other colleges successively. In 1602, he was made royal professor of the Latin tongue, and the belles lettres: and died March 15, 1617. Though he was not a critic of the first rank, yet he did not deserve the contemptuous treatment which Scaliger has given him. He published an edition in Greek and Latin of “Pythagoras’s Golden Verses,” at Paris, 1585, with commentaries, which John Albeit Fabricius has called learned; and notes upon many of the ancient authors, Persius, Horace, Martial, Catullus, Suetonius, Aulus Gellius, &c. which are to be found in several editions of their works. He was also the author of some Latin works, as, “Historia Strenarum,” 1596, 8vo “Lusu’s de Nemine,” &c. and some poems and orations.

, queen of Navarre, and sister to Francis I. of France, celebrated as an author yet more than for her rank, was born at Angouleme, April 11, 1492; being the daughter of Charles of Orleans, duke of Angouleme, and Louisa of Savoy. In 1509 she married Charles the last duke of Alen^on, who died at Lyons, after the battle of Pavia, in 1525. The widow, inconsolable at once for the loss of her husband, and the captivity of her beloved brother, removed to Madrid, to attend the latter during his illness. She was there of the greatest service to her brother, by her firmness obliging Charles and his ministers to treat him as his rank demanded. His love and gratitude were equal to her merits, and he warmly promoted her marriage with Henry d‘Albret, king of Navarre. The offspring of this marriage was Joan d’Albret, mother of Henry IV. Margaret filled the character of a queen with exemplary goodness; encouraging arts, agriculture, and learning, and advancing by every means the prosperity of the kingdom. She died at the castle of Odos, in Bigorre, Dec. 2, 1549. She had conversed with protestant ministers, and had the sagacity to perceive the justness of their reasonings; and their opinions were countenanced by her in a little work entitled “Le Miroir de l'Ame pecheresse,” published in 1533, and condemned by the Sorbonne as heretical; but on her complaining to the king, these pliant doctors withdrew their censure. The Roman catholic writers say, that she was completely re-converted before she died. The positive absolution of the Romish priests is certainly a great temptation to pious minds in the hour of weakness and decline. Margaret is described as an assemblage of virtues and perfections, among which, that of chastity was by no means the least complete, notwithstanding the freedom, and, to our ideas, licence of some of her tales. Such is the difference of manners. She wrote well both in verse and prose, and was celebrated in both. She was called the tenth muse and the Margaret, or pearl, surpassing all the pearls of the east. Of her works, we have now extant, 1. her “Heptameron,” or, Novels of the queen of Navarre, 1559, and 1560, in 4to, and several times re-published. They are tales in the style of Boccace, and are told with a spirit, genius, and simplicity, which have been often serviceable to Fontaine in his tales. Several editions have been printed with cuts, of which the most valued are that of Amsterdam, in 1698j in 2 vols. 8vo, with cuts by Roinain de Hooge; the reprints of this edition in 1700 and 1708, are not quite so much valued, yet are expensive, as are the editions with Chodoviechi’s cuts, Berne, 1780 1, 3 vols. 8vo; Paris, 1784, and 1790. 2. “Les Marguerites de la Marguerite des Princesses;” a collection of her productions, formed by John de la Haye, her valet de chambre, and published at Lyons, in 1547, 8vo; a very rare edition, as is that of 1554. In this collection there are four mysteries, or sacred comedies, and two farces, according to the taste of the times. A long poem entitled “The Triumph of the Lamb,” and “The Complaints of a Prisoner,” apparently intended for Francis I.

, or Marcus, the founder of the sect of the Marcosians, is said to have appeared about the year 160, or, according to some, about the year 127. Many learned moderns are of opinion that Mark belonged to the Valentinian school, but Rhenford and Beausobre say that the Marcosians were Jews, or judaizing Christians; and Grabe likewise owns that they were of Jewish extract. Irenseus leads us to imagine that Mark, who was an Asiatic, had come into Gaul and made many converts there. Nevertheless, learned moderns think that they were only disciples of Mark, who came into that country, where Irenaeus resided, of whom, in one place, he makes particular mention. Irenaeus represents him as exceedingly skilful in all magical arts, by means of which he had great success. Tertullian and Theodoret concur in calling Mark a magician. Irenseus, after giving an account of the magical arts of Mark, adds, that he had, probably, an assisting daemon, by which he himself appears to prophesy, and which enabled others, especially women, to prophesy likewise: this practice favoured his seduction of many females, both in body and mind, which gained him much wealth. He is also said to have made use of philters and love-potions, in order to gain the affections of women; and his disciples are charged with doing the same. Dr. Lardner suggests some doubts as to the justice of these accusations; and indeed there is considerable obscurity in every particular of his personal history. His followers, called Marcosians, are said to have placed a great deal of mystery in the letters of the alphabet, and thought that they were very useful in finding out the truth. They are charged unjustly with holding two principles, and as if they were Docetse, and denied the resurrection of the dead; for which there is no sufficient evidence. They persisted in the practice of baptism and the eucharist. As to their opinion concerning Jesus Christ, they seem to have had a notion of the great dignity and excellence of his person, or his ineffable generation: and, according to them, he was born of Mary, a virgin, and the word was in him, When ha came to the water, the supreme power descended upon him; and he had in him all fulness; for in him was the word, the father, truth, the church, and life. They said that the Christ, or the Spirit, came down upon the man Jesus. He made known the Father, and destroyed death, and called himself the Son of Man; for it was the good pleasure of the Father of all that he should banish ignorance and destroy death: and the acknowledgment of him is the overthrow of ignorance. From the account of Irenceus, we may infer that the Marcosians believed the facts recorded in the gospels and that they received most, or all the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. Irenaeus also says that they had an innumerable multitude of apocryphal and spurious writings, which they had forged: and that they made use of that fiction concerning the child Jesus, that when his master bade him say, alpha, the Lord did so; but when the master called him to say beta, he answered, “Do you first tell me what is alpha, and then I will tell you what beta is.” As this story concerning alpha and beta is found in the gospel of the infancy of Jesus Christ, still in being, some are of opinion that this gospel was composed by the Marcosians.

A little farther account, however, of this controversy, and its rise, may yet be interesting. In 1741, Mr. Tunstall, public orator of Cambridge, published his doubts on the authenticity of the letters between Cicero and Brutus (which Middleton, in his Life of Cicero, had considered as genuine), in a Latin dissertation. This Middleton called “a frivolous, captious, disingenuous piece of criticism,” answered it in English, and published the disputed epistles with a translation. On this, Tunstall, in 1744, published his “Observations on the Epistles, representing several evident marks of forgery in them, in answer to the late pretences of the Rev. Dr. Conyers Middleton.” Markland, the following year, published his arguments on the same side of the question, which called forth a pamphlet, written by Mr. Ross, afterwards bishop of Exeter, entitled “A Dissertation in which the defence of P. Sylla, ascribed to M. Tullius Cicero, is clearly proved to be spurious, after the manner of Mr. Markland; with some introductory Remarks on other writings of the Ancients, never before suspected.” It is written in a sarcastic style, but with a display of learning very inferior to that of the excellent scholar against whom it was directed, and in a disposition very dissimilar to the candour and fairness which accompanied the writings of Markland. It has lately been discovered that Gray, the celebrated poet, assisted Ross in his pamphlet, but at the same time does not seem to have entertained a very high opinion of Ross’s wit. In a manuscript note in the first leaf of his copy of Markland, he writes: “This book is answered in an ingenious way, but the irony is not quite transparent.” Gray’s copy of Markland is now in the possession of his late excellent biographer, the rev. John Mitford, to whom we are indebted for these particulars. Mr. Mitford adds, that the notes which Gray has written in this copy “display a familiar knowledge of the structure of the Latin language, and answer some of the objections of Markland,” who had not then learnt the caution, in verbal criticism and conjectural emendation, which he well knew how to value when an editor of Euripides.“The only other pamphlet which this controversy produced was entitled” A Dissertation in which the observations of a late pamphlet on the writings of the Ancients, after the manner of Mr. Markland, are clearly answered; those passages in Tully corrected, on which some of the objections are founded: with amendments of a few pieces of criticism in Mr. Markland’s Epistola Critica," Lond. 1746, 8vo. At length Gesner defended the genuineness of the orations in question, and they were reprinted by Ernest, and are still believed to be part of Cicero’s works.

Which rightly should possess a poet’s brain." In 1557 he translated Coluthus’s “Rape of Helen” into English rhyme. He also translated the elegies of Ovid, which book was ordered to be burnt at Stationers’-hall, 1599, by command of the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London. Before 1598 appeared his translation of the “Loves of Hero and Leander,” the elegant prolusion of an unknown sophist of Alexandria, but commonly ascribed to the ancient Musseus. It was. left unfinished by Marlow’s death; but what was called a second part, which is nothing more than a continuation from the Italian, appeared by one Henry Petowe, in 1598. Another edition was published, with the first book of Lucan, translated also by Marlow, and in blank verse, in 160O. At length Chapman, the translator of Homer, completed, but with a striking inequality, Marlow’s unfinished version, and printed it at London in 1606, 4to. His plays were, 1. “Tamerlane the great Scythian emperor, two parts,” ascribed by Phillips erroneously to Newton. 2. “The rich Jew of Maltha.” 3. “The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Dr. John Faustus.” 4. “Lnst’s Dominion,” Lond. 1661, 8vo, from which was stolen the greater part of Aphra Behn’s “Abdelazer, or the More’s Revenge,” Lond. 1677. 5. “The Tragedy of King Edward II.” 6. “The Tragedy of Dido, queen of Carthage,” in the composition of which he was assisted by Thomas Nash, who published it in 1594.

His tragedies, says Warton, manifest traces of a just dramatic conception, but they abound with tedious and uninteresting scenes, or with such extravagancies as proceeded from a want of judgment, and those barbarous ideas of the times, over which it was the peculiar gift of Shakspeare’s genius alone to triumph and predominate. As a poet, there is one composition preserved in the collection called “England’s Helicon,” and often reprinted, which entitles him to the highest praise. It is that entitled “The Passionate Shepherd to his Love,” beginning “Come live with me, and be my love.” We can remember the revival of this beautiful pastoral about forty years ago, with some pleasing music, which made it the fashion of every theatre, concert, and private party. Sir Walter Raleigh wrote a reply to this piece.

As the revolution advanced, be withdrew himself from all share in those proceedings which ended in scenes of blood and violence, and retired to a distant part, where he employed his time in the education of his children, and in the composition of some works which have added considerably to his reputation. In 1797 he was once more called into public life, by being elected a representative in the national assembly; but, after this assembly was dissolved, he again retired to his cottage, where he died of an apoplexy, Dec. 1799, in the seventy-seventh year of his age.

Marot, according to an expression of the sieur de Vauprivas, was the poet of the princes, and the prince of poets, during his time in France. It is agreed on all hands, not only that the French poetry had never before appeared with the charms and beauties with which he adorned it, but that, even during the sixteenth century, there appeared nothing that could be compared with the happy turn, the native graces, and the wit, that was every-where scattered through his works, and which compose what is called the Marotic style. This has had many imitators, particularly La Fontaine and Rousseau. We find, by the judgments which have been collected upon Marot, that the French poets are obliged to him for the rondeau; and that to him they likewise owe, in same measure, the modern form of the sonnet and madrigal, and of some other of the smaller forms of poetry. His works, however, are highly censureable on the score of indecency. The wonder is, that, with such libertine propensities, he should employ his genius on a translation of the Psalms. Of these he first translated thirty, which he obtained a privilege to publish, about 1540, and dedicated them to Francis I. His translation was censured by the faculty of divinity at Paris, who carried matters so far as to make remonstrances and complaints to that monarch. The king, who had a great value for Marot on account of his genius, put them off with delays, testifying how acceptable this specimen was to him, and desiring to see the whole finished. However, after several remonstrances had been made to the king, the publication of them was prohibited; which, as usually happens in such cases, made them sell faster than the printers could work them off. After he had retired to Geneva, he translated twenty more Psalms, which in 1543 were printed there with the other thirty; together with a preface written by Calvin. Marot’s works have been collected and printed several times, and in various beautiful forms. Two of the best editions are those of the Hague, 1700, 2 vols. 12mo; and 1731, 4 vols. 4to.

, a French grammarian of high reputation, was born at Marseilles, July 17, 1676, and entered into the congregation of die oratory, but disgusted at the too great confinement of that institution, soon quitted it, and went to Paris. There he married in 1704, and practised for a time with some success as an advocate. Ere long, however, we find him quitting that profession, as not continuing to be advantageous, and separated from his wife, on finding her temper intolerable. He then undertook the care of educating pupils in several great families; among others, that of the president des Maisons, of the Scottish adventurer Law, and the marquis de Beaufremont. Some of these pupils did great honour to his care of their principles and learning. Still he was not fortunate enough to obtain any permanent provision; and undertook a kind of academy, which did not succeed; and he was for a considerable time reduced to go about giving lessons at private houses, and subsisting in a very straitened and precarious manner. At length, the persons who conducted the Encyclopedia, engaged him to bear a part in that great work, to which the articles on the subject of grammar, furnished by him, proved a most important aecession. They are distinguished by a sound and luminous philosophy, an extent of learning by no means common, great precision in the rules, and no less accuracy in the application of them. He had now struggled for the chief part of his life with adverse circumstances; when the count de Lauragais, struck with his merit, and affected by his situation, settled upon him an annuity of a thousand livres. He died June 11, 1756, at the age of eighty. Du Marsais had been considered during his life as sceptical, but is said to have returned to a sense of religion before his death. Several anecdotes were circulated respecting his indifference to religion, which materially injured his fortune. It was even said, that being called upon to educate three brothers in a great family, he asked the parents in what religion they would have them brought up? A story of little probability, but which passed sufficiently current to injure him in the minds of many respectable persons. His disposition was mild and equal, his understanding clear and precise; and his manners had a kind of simplicity which occasioned him to be called the Fontaine of philosophers. Fontenelle said of him, “C‘est le nigaud le plus spirituel, & l’homme d'esprit le plus nigaud que je connoisse,” that is, “He is for a simpleton the most ingenious, and for a man of genius the most of a simpleton of any one I know.” As his own character was so natural, so also was he an ardent admirer of nature, and an enemy to all affectation; and his precepts are said to have had great effect in teaching the celebrated actress le Couvreur, that simple and natural style of declamation which made her performance so pathetic, and raised her reputation to so great a height.

Released now from public concerns, he returned to his studies; and it was his peculiar good fortune, that amidst the hurry, and noise, and fatigue of war, he had made all the advantages which the most philosophic man ecu i have made, who had travelled pureiy in quest of knowledge; hact determined the situation of places by, astronomical methods, measured the course and swiftness of rivers, studied the fossils, the vegetables, the animals of each country, made anatomical and chemical experiments, and done, in short, every thing which a man of science could do, and with such a fund of knowledge, knew how to fill up his time in the most agreeable as well as honourable manner. While at Marseilles, he was called by pope Clement XL in 1709, and invested with a military commission. Returning soon after to Bologna, he began to execute a design which he had long been meditating. He had a rich collection of every thing that might contribute to the advancement of natural knowledge: instruments proper for astronomical and chemical experiments, plans for fortifications, models of machines, &c. &c. All these he presented to the senate of Bologna, by an authentic act, dated Jan. 11, 1712; forming, at the same time, a body out of them, which he called “The institute of the arts and sciences at Bologna.” He afterwards founded a printing-house, and furnished it with the best types for Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic. He presented this to the Dominicans at Bologna, in 1728, ‘on condition that ’all the writings of the “Institute, &c.” should be printed there at prime cost. It was called “The printing-house of St. Thomas of Aquinas.”

Marston contributed eight plays to the stage, which were all acted at the Black-Friars with applause and one of them, called “The Dutch Courtezan,” was once revived since, the restoration, under the title of “The Revenge, or a Match in Newgate.” In 1633, six of this author’s plays were collected, and published in one volume, dedicated to the lady viscountess Falkland. Besides his dramatic poetry, he wrote three books of satires, entitled, “The Scourge of Villainy,'” which were printed at London in 1599, and reprinted in 1764, by the rev. John Bowie. We have no account when Marston died; but he was certainly living in 1633. As a specimen of his poetry, Mr. Dodsley has republished the “Malecontent^” in his Collection of Old English Plays, vol. IV. Marston was a chaste and pure writer, avoiding all that obscenity, ribaldry, and scurrility which too many of the playwrights of that time, and much more so in periods since, have made the basis of their wit, to the great disgrace of the age. He abhorred such writers, and their works, and pursued so opposite a practice in his performances, that “whatsoever even in the spring of his years, he presented upon the public and private theatre, in his autumn and declining age he needed not be ashamed of.”

, an eminent Italian poet, was born at Bologna in 1665, and was educated at the Jesuits’ school, and at the university of his native city, after which he devqted himself to the study of classical literature, and having obtained the post of one of the secretaries to the senate of B*ologna, was enabled to follow his studies without much interruption. After publishing a serious poem, entitled “Gli Ocche di Gesu,” The Eyes of Jesus, he produced a tragedy called “La Morte di Nerone,” which with several of liis other pieces was acted with great^ applause. In 1707 he was appointed professor of the belles lettres in the university of Bologna, and soon after was made private secretary to Aldrovandi, who had been nominated delegate to pope Clement XI. At Rome, where he contracted an intimacy with many men of high literary reputation, he published a whimsical dialogue, “Del Volo,” On Flying, in which he endeavoured to prove that men and heavy bodies might be supported in the air, and also wrote several discourses in verse concerning the art of poetry. When he accompanied Aldrovandi, who was appointed the pope’s legate at the courts of France and Spain, he wrote at Paris his opinions “On” ancient and modern Tragedy,“in the form of dialogues; and on his return to Rome, he published his tragedies in three volumes, and was reckoned to have conferred a great benefit on Italian literature, although his style is often too turgid and florid for a model. He also began a poem” On the Arrival of Charlemagne in Italy, and his Accession to the Western Empire,“which he never finished. He died in 1727, at the age of sixty-two, leaving the character of a man of amiable manners and social qualities. His principal works,” Versi et Prose," were printed at Bologna in 1729, 7 vols. 8vo.

, an ancient Latin poet, and the model of epigrammatists, was born at Bilbilis, now called Bubiera, a town of the ancient Celtiberia in Spain, which is the kingdom of Arragon. He was born, as is supposed, in the reign of Claudius, and went to Rome when he was about twenty-one. He was sent thither with a view of prosecuting the law; but soon forsook that study, and applied himself to poetry. He excelled so much in the epigrammatic style, that he soon acquired reputation, and was courted by many of the first rank at Rome. Silius Italicus, Stella, and Pliny the younger, were his friends and patrons. Stertinius, a noble Roman, had so great an esteem for his compositions, that he placed > his statue in his library, while he was yet living; and the emperor Verus, who reigned with Antoninus the philosopher, used to call him his Virgil, which was as high an honour as could well be paid to him. We learn also from Pliny and Tacitus, as well as from several passages in his own writings, that he had honours and dignities bestowed upon him by some of the emperors. Domitian, whom it must be confessed he has flattered not a little, made him a Roman knight, and gave him likewise the “Jus trium liberorum,” the privileges of a citizen who had three children. He was also advanced to the tribunate. But though he was so particularly honoured, and had so many great and noble patrons, who admired him for his wit and poetry, it does not appear that he made his fortune among them. There is reason to think that, after the death of Domitian, his credit and interest declined at Rome; and if he had still remaining among the nobles some patrpns, such as Pliny, Cornelius Priscus, &c. yet the emperor Nerva took but little notice of him, and the emperor Trajan none at all. Tired of Rome, therefore, after he had lived in that city about four and thirty years, and grown, as himself tells us, grey-headed, he returned to his own country Bilbilis, where he took a wife, and had the happiness to live with her several years. He admired her much, as one who alone was sufficient to supply the want of every thing he enjoyed at Rome. She appears to have brought him a very large fortune; for, in one of his epigrams he extols the magnificence of the house and gardens he had received from her, and says, “that she had made him a little kind of monarch.” About three years after he had retired into Spain, he inscribed his twelfth book of Epigrams to Priscus, who had been his friend and benefactor; and is supposed to have died about the year 100. As an epigrammatist, Martial is eminently distinguished, and has been followed as a model by all succeeding wits. All his efforts, however, are not equally successful, and many of his epigrams are perhaps unjustly so called, being merely thoughts or sentiments without applicable point. He offends often by gross indelicacy, which was the vice of the times; but his style is in general excellent, and his frequent allusion to persons and customs render his works very interesting to classical antiquaries.

, a Benedictine monk, who distinguished himself by an edition of St. Jerome, was born at St. Sever, a village in Gascony, in 1647. He entered into the congregation of St. Maur at twenty years of age; and applied himself to the study of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages. He read lectures upon the holy scriptures in several monasteries, at x\rles, at Avignon, at Bourdeaux: in the last of which places he accidentally met with father Pezron’s book called “The antiquity of time re-established;” “L'Antiquite du temps retablie.” The authority of the Hebrew text, and the chronology of the Vulgate, being attacked in this work, Martianay resolved to defend them in two or three pieces, published against Pezron and Isaac Vossius, who maintained the Septuagint version. This monk died of an apoplexy in 1717, after having spent fifty years in a scrupulous observance of all the duties belonging to his order, and in writing more than twenty works, of which the most distinguished is his edition of the works of St. Jerome, in 5 vols. folio; the first of which was published at Paris in 1693, the second in 1699. In his notes on these two volumes he criticized several learned men, as well papists as protestants, with much severity, and even contumely; which provoked Le Clerc, who was one of them, to examine the merits of this edition and of the editor. This he did in a volume published in 12mo, at Amsterdam, in 1700, with this title, “Quaestiones Hie,ronymianae, in qnibus expenditur Hieronymi nupera editio Parisina, &c.” in which he endeavours to shew that Martianay, notwithstanding the indecent petulances he had exercised towards other critics, had none of the requisites to qualify him for an editor of St. Jerome; that he had not a competent skill either in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, or in the ancient interpreters of scripture, or in profane authors, or in the science of manuscripts, for this work. Martianay published the third volume in 1704, the fourth in 1705, and the fifth in 1706; and Le Clerc published, in the seventeenth tome of his “Bibliotheque choisee,” some copious remarks upon these three last volumes, in order to confirm the judgment he had passed on the two first. Nevertheless, Martianay’s edition of Jerome was by many thought the best, even after the appearance of Vallarsius’s edition.

, a protestant divine, was born at Revel, in Languedoc, in 1639, but settled in Holland after the revocation of the edict of Nantes. He was at once a good theologian, and a good philosopher, in both of which capacities he gave lectures at Utrecht, when he was settled as a pastor in that city. Though he was much absent from France, he retained a critical and accurate knowledge of its language, and when the French academy announced the second edition of their dictionary, he transmitted to them some remarks which were received with applause. He died at Utrecht, of a violent fever, in 1721. He was universally regretted in that place, from his probity, modesty, and ex9ellence of character; his heart was affectionate and compassionate, and-he delighted in doing good offices without being solicited, and without expecting even gratitude in return. He published, 1. “A History of the Old and New Testament,” in 2 vols. folio, printed at Amsterdam in 1707, with 424 fine plates. It is often, called Mortier’s Bible, from the name of the printer; and the early impressions are distinguished by the absence of a little defect in the last plate, which arose from a fracture of the plate after a few had been taken. 2. “Eight Sermons,” 1708, 8vo. 3. “A treatise on Natural Religion,” 1713, 8vo. 4. “An Explanation of the 110th Psalm,” against John Masson, 1715, 8vo. 5. “Two Dissertations,” one in defence of the authenticity of the controverted text, 1 John v. 7. the other in favour of the passage of Josephus, in which Christ is mentioned, 1722, 8vo. 6. “A Bible with short notes,” Amsterdam, 1707, 2 vols. fol. 7. “A treatise on Revealed Religion,” in which he ably supports the divine inspiration of the sacred books; reprinted at Amsterdam in 1723, in 2 vols. 8vo. This useful and judicious work has been translated into English. Martin wrote with ease, but not with a facility of style; but his talents were considerable, his memory good, and hisjudgment sound.

, a learned popish writer, whose name is so much connected with some protestant writers of eminence as to deserve a brief notice here, was born at Maxfield, near Winchelsea, in Sussex, and was admitted one of the original scholars of St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1557, by sir Thomas White, the founder. In 1564 he proceeded M. A. and was afterwards taken into the family of Thomas, duke of Norfolk, as tutor to his children, and particularly to Philip, earl of Surrey. Such had been Martin’s reputation at college, that when the duke paid a visit to St. John’s, one of the society, in a Latin address to his grace, introduced his name with this panegyric: “Habes, illustrissime dux, Hebraeum nostrum, Grsecum nostrum, poetam nostrum, decus et gloriam nostrum,” implying that Martin was their best Hebrew and Greek scholar and poet, and an ornament to their college. Having embraced the Roman catholic religion, which he chose no longer to conceal, he went to the English college at Douay in 1570, where he was ordained priest in 1573, and licentiate in divinity in 1575. After a visit in the following year to Rome, he returned to Doway and taught Hebrew, and gave lectures on the Scriptures. When the college was removed to Rheims, he undertook to translate the Bible into English from the Vulgate, and Dodd is of opinion that what is called “The Rheims translation,” may be entirely ascribed to him. It was. not, however, published at one time. The New Testament appeared first atRheims and Antwerp, with Bristow’s notes, and the Old Testament several years afterwards, with the editor, Dr. Worthington’s notes. The New Testament, as we have noticed, under their respective articles, was answered by Fulk and Cartwright. Martin died Oct. 28, 1582, atRheims. He published some other works, a list of which may be seen, in Wood and Dodd, but is scarcely worth transcribing. Camden says that in 1584 a book of his appeared in which queen Elizabeth’s gentlewomen were exhorted to serve her as Judith had served Holofernes. The catholic "writers, however, deny this, and apparently with justice.

, a learned German divine of the Protestant persuasion, was born in 1572, and studied at Paderborn, under the celebrated Piscator. In his twenty-third year he was called to officiate as minister in the courts of the counts of Nassau Dillembourg; the following year was appointed professor in the college of Paderborn, and in 1592 was appointed regent of the schools. He was afterwards called to be rector of the school at Bremen, and, in 1618, was deputed by the magistrates of Bremen to the synod of Dort, where he maintained the opinions of Cameron, Amyraut, Dai lie, and others; but signed all the acts of the synod. He died in 1630, leaving behind him many theological treatises, now forgotten, and a “Lexicon philologicum, in quo Latinae et a Latinis auctoribus usurpatae turn purae, turn barbaroe voces ex originibus declarantur, &c.: accedit Cadmus Graeco-Phoanix etGlossarium Isidori,” Utrecht, 1697, 2 vols. folio; reprinted at Amsterdam, 1701. This work, at one time, enjoyed considerable reputation, and it is said that some philologists have availed themselves of it, without acknowledgment.

We have mentioned that Peter Martyr’s wife died at Oxford, in 1551, and was buried in the cathedral of Christ church. Here her remains quietly reposed until 1556, when cardinal Pole appointed a set of commissioners to reform the university of Oxford, from all remains of the new religion, or heresy, as it was called. In the discharge of their functions, they were ordered to take into their consideration the manners and life “of one Catherine Cathie, or Dampmartin, the late wife of Dr. Peter Martyr, who died about four years ago, and was buried in the cathedral of Christ church, near to the reliques of St. Frideswyde.” They accordingly summoned several persons of her acquaintance, “to the end that if they could find any thing of her, favouring of heresy, they might take up her body and commit it to the fire” but, as these witnesses pretended they did not understand her language, and therefore could not tell what religion she professed, they informed the cardinal of their progress, who immediately wrote to Dr. Marshall, the dean, a letter, which by no means exhibits Pole as a man possessed of that greatness of mind which his late biographers have attributed to him. He tells the dean that “forasmuch as Catherine Cathie, of detestable memory, who had professed herself the legitimate wife of Peter Martyr, a heretic, though he and she had before marriage entered into solemn vows of religion, and that she had lived with him in Oxford in cursed fornication, when he denied the truth of the Sacrament, and that also after her death she was buried near the sepulchre of that religious virgin St. Frideswyde; he should according to his discretion deal so with her carcass that it should be far enough cast from ecclesiastical sepulture.” Melchior Adam imputes this conduct on the part of the cardinal, to a motive of resentment, which he had conceived against Peter Martyr. The cardinal had formerly been his most intimate friend, and even continued to appear so, after Martyr had expressed his disgust at the errors and superstitions of Rome; but when Martyr left Italy, he became his most inveterate enemy, and exercised that indignity, and even cruelty upon the wife, which it was not in his power to shew to the husband.

The first attack he made with his pen was in 1672, upon Dr. Parker, a man of parts and learning, but a furious partizan, and virulent writer on the side of arbitrary government, who at this time published “Bishop Bramhall’s Vindication of himself, and the rest of the episcopal clergy, from the presbyterian charge of popery, &c.” to which he added a preface of his own. This preface Marvell attacked, in a piece called “The Rehearsal transprosed; or, animadversions on a late book, intituled, A preface, shewing what grounds there are of fears and jealousies of Popery, the second impression, with additions and amendments. London, printed by J. D. for the assigns of John Calvin and Theodore Beza, at the sign of the king’s indulgence, on the south side of the Lake Leman; and sold by N. Ponder in Chancery-lane,” 1672,“in 8vo. The title of this piece is taken in part from the duke of Buckingham’s comedy, called” The Rehearsal;“and, as Dryden is ridiculed in that play under the name of Bayes, Marvell borrowed the same name for Parker, whom he exposed with much strength of argument, and force of humour. Parker answered Marvell in a letter entitled” A Reproof to the Rehearsal transprosed;“to which Marvell replied in,” The Rehearsal transprosed, the second part. Occasioned by two letters: the first printed by a nameless author, entitled A Reproof, &c. the second left for me at a friend’s house, dated Nov. 3, 1673, subscribed J. G. and concluding with these words: If thou darest to print any lie or libel against Dr. Parker, by the eternal God I will cut thy throat. Answered by Andrew Marvell,“Lond. 1673, 8vo. Marveil did not confine himself in these pieces to Parker’s principles, as they appear in the” Preface and the Reproof;“but he exposed and confuted likewise various opinions which the doctor had advanced in his” Ecclesiastical Polity,“published in 1670, and in his” Defence“of it in 167 1. Parker made no reply to Marvell’s last piece:” He judged it more prudent,“says Wood,” to lay down the cudgels, than to enter the lists again with an untowardly combatant, so hugely well versed and experienced in the then but newly refined art, though much in mode and fashion almost ever since, of sporting and buffoonery. It was generally thought, however, by many of those who were otherwise favourers of Parker’s cause, that the victory lay on Marvell’s side; and it wrought this good effect on Parker, that for ever after it took down his high spirit.“Burnet, speaking of Parker, says that,” after he had for some years entertained the nation with several virulent books, he was attacked by the liveliest droll of the age, who wrote in a burlesque strain; but with so peculiar and entertaining a conduct, that from the king down to the tradesman, his books were read with great pleasure. That not only humbled Parker, but the whole party; for the author of the Rehearsal transprosed had all the men of wit on his side.“Swift likewise, speaking of the usual fate of common answerers to books, and how short-lived their labours are, adds, that” there is indeed an exception, when any great genius thinks it worth his while to expose a foolish piece: so we still read MarvelPs answer to Parker with pleasure, though the book it answers be sunk long ago." Several other writers fell with great fury and violence upon Marvell; but Parker being considered as the principal, Marvell took but slight notice of the others.

A few years after, another divine fell under the cognizance of MarvfclPs pen. In 1675, Dr. Herbert Croft, bishop of Hereford, published without his name, a discourse in 4to, entitled, “The Naked Truth; or the true state of the Primitive Church. By an humble Moderator.” This was immediately answered by several persons, and among the rest by Dr. Turner, master of St. John’s-colJege, Cambridge, in a book called “Animadversions upon a late pamphlet, entitled, The Naked Truth,” &c. This animadverter being against moderation, which the author of “Naked Truth” had written his book on purpose to recommend, provoked Marvell to take him to task, in a piece entitled “Mr. Smirke, or the divine in mode; being certain annotations upon the animadversions on The Naked Truth, together with a short historical essay concerning general councils, creeds, and impositions in matters of religion, fiy Andreas Rivetus, junior. Anagrammatised, Res nuda veritas” 1676, 4to. The “Historical Essay” was afterwards printed by itself in folio. The last work of our author, which was published during his life, was “An account of the growth of Popery and arbitrary government in England; more particularly, from the long prorogation of Nov. 1675, ending the 15th of Feb. 1676, till the last meeting of parliament the 16th of July, 1677; _1678,” folio: and reprinted in State tracts in 1689. In this the author, having imputed the Dutch war to the corruption of the court, asserts, that the papists, and particularly the French, were the true springs of all the councils at this time: and these, and other aspersions upon the king and ministry, occasioned the following advertisement to be published in the Gazette: “Whereas there have been lately printed and published several seditious and scandalous libels against the proceedings of both houses of parliament, and other his majesty’s courts of justice, to the dishonour of his majesty’s government, and the hazard of public peace; these are to give notice, that what person soever shall discover unto one of the secretaries of state the printer, publisher, author, or hander to the press, of any of the said libels, so that full evidence may be made thereof to a jury, without mentioning the informer; especially one libel, intituled, An account of the growth of Popery, &c. and another called, A seasonable argument to all the grand juries, &c. the discoverer shall be rewarded as follows: he shall have fifty pounds for such discovery, as aforesaid, of the printer or publisher of it from the press and for the hander of it to the press, \00l. &c.”

Another important and laborious duty that devolved on him in consequence of his office was, to examine the pretensions of the various candidates who claimed the parliamentary rewards for new or improved methods of finding the longitude. His appointment took place at a period peculiarly interesting in the history of astronomy. His success in introducing and promoting the lunar observations greatly excited the public attention to the subject of the longitude, which was rendered still more interesting by the great rewards held out by parliament for further improvements in the problem, whether by astronomical or mechanical methods. These offers, united with the powerful motives of honour and emulation, called forth, flaring several years, many extraordinary efforts of genius, and produced useful inventions both in arts and sciences, and particularly in the construction of time-keepers. The parliamentary offers likewise encouraged numerous candidates of very slight pretensions, and even visionaries, whose applications became very troublesome. The claims of all were referred by the board of longitude to the astronomer royal, by whom scientific plans were examined, and the rates of chronometers ascertained. Thus by his office he was constituted arbiter of the fame and fortune of a great number of anxious projectors; and it is easy to conceive how arduous as well as unpleasant such a duty must have been. It was not indeed to be expected that the sanguine hopes and self-love of such a variety of candidates could be gratified, with justice to the high trust and confidence thus 1 reposed in him; and hence complaints were frequently heard, and pamphlets published, expressive of discontent and disappointment. Appeals even were made to parliament; but whatever difference of opinion might have then existed, time and experience have since fully proved the truth and impartiality of Dr. Maskelyne’s decisions.

, a non-conformist divine, chiefly known for his excellent work entitled “Self-Knowledge,” was descended from ancestors who were for several generations beneficed clergymen of the established church. His grandfather was the rev. John Mason, rector of Water-Stratford in Buckinghamshire, whose “Select Remains” were published by his grandson, the subject of this article: “a little work,” we are told by his biographer, “highly esteemed and warmly recommended by Dr. Watts.” This little work we have not seen, but from two accounts of the author’s life, one published anonymously in 1694, 4to, and the other by the rev. H. Maurice, rector of Tyringham in Bucks, in 1695, 4to, we are justified in ranking him among those enthusiasts who have done much to bring religion into disgrace; and our readers will probably be of the same opinion, when we inform them, that after having discharged his pastoral duties for several years, as a pious and useful clergyman, he propagated the notion that Christ’s second appearance was to be at Water- Stratford, where all his faithful people were to be collected, and reign with him a thousand years. This brought a great many persons to reside at that place, in hopes of meeting the Saviour, who were for some time called Mr. Mason’s followers; nor was it until his death had disappointed their hopes, that this delusion gradually abated. One of the sons of this enthusiast, John, the father of our author, became a dissenter, and, while pastor of a congregation at Dunmow in Essex, his son was born there, in 1705-6. He was educated at a dissenting academy, and in 1730 accepted an invitation to the pastoral charge of a congregation at Dorking in Surrey, where he had a numerous auditory. His earliest production was a Sermon on “Subjection to the higher powers,” preached Nov. 5, 1740, and published at the request of the congregation.

are similar to what are called the bye- by William Platt, esq. an opulent cifellowships in some other colleges at tizen of London. See Gent. Mag. vol.

As the editions of Dell in 1761, and Davies in 1779, will probably be heard of no more, it is unnecessary to point out their many errors and imperfections. Massinger has at length found in Mr. Gifford an editor, who has completely revived his fame, in the closet at least, and whose well-known learning and taste, it has been justly said, are accompanied, on this occasion, with that genuine spirit of research, that acuteness and accuracy which happily detect and rectify many gross mistakes of former editors, and admirably explain the customs, manners, and language of the poet’s time. This, which is perhaps the most correct edition of any of our ancient poets, was published in 180.5, 4 vols. 8vo, and so completely answered the public expectation, that a second edition was called for in 1813.

, a French historical and miscellaneous writer, was the son of a rich merchant, and born at St. Germain-Laval, in the territory of Forez, May 16, 1544. He lost his father when a child; and, though his mother married again, she appears to have taken great care of his education. At a proper age he was put under the Jesuits at Billon, in Auvergne, with whom he continued four years; and was then called to Lyons by an uncle, who intended to send him to Toulouse, to study the law: but the civil wars rendering this unsafe, he returned to Billon, where he applied himself to the belles lettres and philosophy. Here contracting an intimacy with a fellow-student, Anthony Challon, he joined with him in a resolution of entering into the society of Jesuits: and accordingly they went soon after to Rome, where they took the habit. Masson made a funeral oration at Rome for some cardinal, in the presence of several others, and acquired by it great credit and reputation. Afterwards these two friends went to Naples, where Masson taught two years in the college of Jesuits. They returned together to France, when Challon quitted the society, as did Masson some time after, and defended this step with so much moderation and candour that the society were not displeased at it.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born in Lancashire in 1626, and going with his father to New England in 1635, was educated at Harvard-college, of which he became the first fellow who took a degree there. In 1650 he returned to England, spent some time at Oxford, where and at Cambridge he again took his degrees, was chaplain of Magdalen-college, and often a preacher at St. Mary’s. He then went with the English commissioners to Scotland, and preached at Leith for two years. He returned to England in 1655, and having visited Ireland with Henry Cromwell, and Drs. Harrison, Winter, and Charnock, he was made senior fellow of Trinity-college, and became a favourite preacher. Wood says that though he was reckoned a congregational man, and a high nonconformist, yet he was moderate in his behaviour to the episcopals, when it was in his power to hurt them. When the lord deputy gave him and others a commission for displacing the episcopal ministers in Munster, he declined it, as he did afterwards in Dublin, giving as a reason that “he was called into the country to preach the gospel, and not to hinder others from doing it.” Soon after the restoration, he was suspended for preaching against the revival of the liturgy, on which he returned to England; but when the Bartholomew act took place, removed again to Dublin, where for some time he preached to a small congregation in his own house, until the laws against nonconformity obliged him to desist. He died Oct. 26, 1671. He published various tracts relative to the controversies of the times; and after his death appeared a course of sermons that were very popular, entitled “The Figures and Types of the Old, Testament explained and improved,” Dublin, 1683, 4to. He also wrote a pamphlet against Greatrakes, the noted quack but, says Calamy, he was not allowed to publish it, such a favourite was Greatrakes at that time.

, an English historian, who flourished, according to some, in 1377; while Nicolson thinks he did not outlive 1307, was a Benedictine of the abbey at Westminster, and thence has taken his name. From the title of his history, “Flores historiarum,” he has often been called Florilegus. His history commences from the foundation of the world, but the chief object of which is the English part. It is entitled, “Flores Historiarum, per Matthoeum Wesmonasteriensem collecti, prsecipue de Rebus Britannicis, ab exordio mundi, usque ad annum 1307,” published at London in 1567, and at Franckfort in 1601, both in folio. It is divided into six ages, butis comprised in three books. The first extends from the creation to the Christian aera; the second, from the birth of Christ to the Norman conquest; the third, from that period to the beginning of Edward the Second’s reign. Seventy years more were afterwards added, which carried it down to the death of Edward III. in 1377. He formed his work very much upon the model and plan of Matthew Paris, whom he imitated with great care. He wrote with so scrupulous a veracity/ that he is never found to wander a tittle from the truth; and with such diligence, that he omitted nothing worthy of remark. He is commended also for his acuteness in tracing, and his judgment in selecting facts, his regularity in the method or his plan, and his skill in chronological computations. He is, on the whole, except by bishop Nicolson, very highly esteemed, as one of the most venerable fathers of English history.

, son of the former, was born ini 1745. He was educated at Westminster-school, whence, in 1763, he was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge. After a time, he obtained a travelling fellowship of that college, which enabled him to pass three years on the continent; and in 1774$ he was appointed chaplain to lord Stormont, then ambassador at the court of France. Soon after this, he married one of the daughters of Joseph Clark, esq. of Weatherfield in Essex; whose brother, captain Charles Clark, afterwards became famous, as being successor in command to the celebrated Cook, in that unfortunate voyage which proved fatal to both those officers. By this lady he had one son, who survived his father, but died while yet at school. Mr. Maty, much respected for his abilities, acquirements, and character, by persons able to contribute to his advancement, would have been very likely to gain preferment in the church, after his return to England, had not some scruples arisen in his mind on the subject of those articles of faith which formerly he had subscribed. From that time he determined, from the most conscientious motives, never to accept of any ecclesiastical appointment; and, after the death of his father in 1776, he withdrew himself entirely from the functions of the ministry in the established church. His reasons for this step, dated Oct. 22, 1777, were printed at his own request in the Gent. Mag for that year. They are chiefly the doctrines of the Trinity, of original sin, and of absolute predestination; which last he finds in the seventeenth article. His own inclination is to the Arian hypothesis, and to a liturgy somewhat like Dr. Clarke’s; and he says, although he has left the church, he has no objection to preach to a congregation holding the same opinions. His life was thenceforward more particularly devoted to literary pursuits, which were highly favoured by the appointment he obtained, at the same time, of an assistant librarian in the British Museum. He was afterwards advanced to be one of the underlibrarians of the same establishment, in the department of Natural History and Antiquities. In November 1778, on the resignation of Dr. Horsiey, he was appointed one of the secretaries to the Royal Society. In January 1782, he began a review of publications, principally foreign, which be continued with considerable success, though with little assistance, till September 1786, when he was compelled by ill health to discontinue it. The motto which he took for this work was modest, and well appropriated “Sequitur patrem non passibus sequis” alluding to his father’s “Journal Britannique” and the truth appears to be, that, though he was far from being deficient either in learning or critical abilities, he was inferior in both to his father; and being the avowed author of this review, is thought to have created at least as many enemies as admirers. In the disputes which arose in the Royal Society, in 1784, respecting the re-instatement of Dr. Hutton, as secretary for foreign correspondence, he took so warm a part, that becoming very angry, he resigned his office of secretary. In this, as in other instances in his life, his vivacity outran his judgment. As a secretary, an officer of the societv, he was not called upon to take any active part; and the advantages he derived from the situation were such as he could ill afford to relinquish. In preferring always his conscience to his interest, he certainly was highly commendable; but in this question his conscience had no occasion to involve itself. To make himself amends for this diminution of his income, Mr. Maty undertook, on moderate terms, to read the Greek, Latin, French, or Italian classics, with such persons as might be desirous of completing their knowledge of those languages: but it does not appear that this employment turned out very profitable. In 1787, an asthmatic complaint, under which he long had laboured, completed the subversion of his constitution, and he died on the 16th of January in that year, at the early age of forty-two. Besides his review, he published a translation of the travels of Riesbeck through Germany; and translated into French, the accounts of the gems, in that magnificent work, the “Gemmae Marlburienses,” which Mr. Bryant had first written in Latin. For this he received lOOl. from the duke of Marlborongh, and a copy of the book. After his death, a volume of his sermons was published by subscription, in which, by an oversight, that has sometimes happened in other cases, two or three which he had transcribed from other author^ were reprinted. Notwithstanding much irritability of temper, he was of a warm and friendly disposition, which often manifests itself in his Review.

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.

, There are two saints of this name, of whom some notice may be taken; the oldest Maximus, of Turin, so called because he was bishop of that city in the fifth century, was eminent for his learning and piety. Many of his “Homilies” remain, some of which bear the name of St. Ambrose, St. Augustin, and Eusebius of messa, in the Library of the fathers. The other St. Maximus was an abbot, and confessor in the seventh century, born of an ancient and noble family at Constantinople. He warmly opposed the heresy of the Monothelites, and died in prison, August 13, 662, in consequence of what he had suffered on that occasion. We have a commentary of his on the books attributed to St. Dionysius the Areopagite, and several other works, which father Combesis published, 1675, 2 vols. folio; and they are also in the Library of the fathers.

, 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 learned English lawyer, the eldest son of Alexander Maynard, esq. of Tavistock, in Devonshire, was born thereabout 1602. In 1618 he entered as a commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, where, as we have often seen in the case of gentlemen of the law, he took only one degree in arts, and then went to the Middle Temple. After the usual routine of study he was called to the bar, and in 1640 obtained a seat in parliament for Totness. The part he took in the political contests of the day, procured him to be appointed one of the managers of the evidence against the earl of Strafford, and that against archbishop Laud. Yet in 1644 he was appointed, with Bulstrodte Whitlocke, at the particular desire of the lord chancellor of Scotland, and other commissioners from that kingdom, to consult with them and general Fairfax concerning the best method of proceeding against Cromwell as an incendiary between the two kingdoms. He was also one of the laymen nominated in the ordinance of the Lords and Commons to sit with the assembly of Divines, whose object was to establish the presbyterian form of church government in England. Notwithstanding this, we find him in 1647 opposing the violence of the parliament-army, for which he and serjeant Glynn were sent to the Tower; and when the parliament voted that no more addresses should be sent to the king, he told them that by such a vote they dissolved themselves. He even went farther, and after being secluded from his seat in the House of Commons for two months, he broke in among them, and pleaded for the life of the king with such strength of reasoning, that Cromwell several times demanded that he should be brought to the bar of the House.

His abilities, or that charm with which an independent mind never fails to conciliate its enemies, seem to have preserved him while thus apparently “serving two masters;” for in 1653, he was by writ called to the rank of serjeant at law; and in May of the same year was made, by patent, Cromwell’s serjeant. Here, too, his love of justice predominated, and he zealously pleaded the cause of a merchant of London, who had the boldness to oppose paying a tax imposed by Oliver without the consent of parliament. For this Oliver sent serjeant Maynard, serjeant Twysden, and counsellor Wadham Wyndham, to the Tower; nor were they released without making submission in some form or other. Maynard was afterwards continued serjeant to Richard Cromwell during his short period of usurpation.

Notwithstanding these many compliances with the parliamentary and Oliverian interest, his conduct must, upon the whole, have appeared in a favourable light to Charles II. as, immediately after the restoration, he was called again to be serjeant at law, in June 1660, and made the king’s serjeant Nov. 9 following, to which his majesty added the honour of knighthood. He was also nominated to be one of the judges, but did not chuse to give up his practice, which is said to have been very lucrative, for an office which at that time depended on the king’s pleasure. Whitlocke tells us that as far back as 1647 he got in one circuit seven hundred pounds, which was thought to be a larger sum than any of the profession had ever got before. Whitlocke indeed gives this as a report, but there is no doubt that his practice was most extensive, and his knowledge in law universally acknowledged.

Serjeant Maynard was esteemed a very able advocate, and has been called the best old book lawyer of his time. All parties, says Mr. Lysons, seem to have been willing to employ him, and he seems to have been equally willing to be employed by all. Some of his reports and speeches have been printed. There is also a report of his of a very singular case of murder, in “The Works of the Learned,” for August 1739, communicated by Dr. Rawlinson. Bishop Warburton has not inaptly characterised serjeant Maynard by a comparison with Whitlocke. They were both lawyers of family, and in the long parliament; both of the presbyterian faction; both learned and eminent in their profession; moderate, sage, and steady. So far they agreed. In this they differed: Maynard had strong parts with a serious modesty; Whitlocke was weak and vain: and by these defects only, more self-interested. A sense of honour made Maynard stick to the presbyterian faction, and to fall with them; but, as he had much phlegm and caution, not, like Hollis and Stapleton, to fall for them. So that he was never marked out by the independents for their first sacrifices. On the contrary, Whitlocke forsook his party in distress but as he had the other’s moderation, it was by slow and gentle degrees and so, as it happened, decently. Maynard, by adhering steadily, but not violently, to the party he set out with, was reverenced by all and had he not been more intent on the affairs of his profession, than on public business, might have become considerable by station. “He went,” adds Warburton, “through the whole reign of Charles and James II. with the same steady pace, and the same adherence to his party; but by his party, 1 rather mean presbytery for the sake of civil liberty, than to civil liberty for the sake of presbytery.”

, a very learned and ingenious physician of the seventeenth century, appears to have been born in Cornwall, in 1645, was a scholar of Wadham college, Oxford, and a probationary fellow of All Souls’ college. He took his degrees in civil law, but studied and practised physic; and principally at Bath, in the summer. He died at the house of an apothecary in York-street, Covent-garden, in September 1679, and was buried in the church of that parish. He published, “Tractatus quinque medicophysici, 1. de sale nitro, et spiritu nitro-aerio; 2. de re spiratione; 3. de respiratione foetus in utero, et ovo; 4. de motu musculari et spiritibus animalibus; 5. de Rachitide.” These were published together at Oxford, in 1674, 8vo; but there is an edition of two of them, “de respiratione,” and “de Rachitide,” published together at Leyden, in 1671. The fame of this author has been lately renewed and extended by Dr. Beddoes, who published in 179O, “Chemical Experiments and Opinions, extracted from a work published in the last century,” 8vo, in which he gives to Mayow the highest credit as a chemist, and ascribes to him some of the greatest modern discoveries respecting air; giving many extracts from the three first of his treatises. His chief discovery was, that dephlogisticated air (or as he called it, with Scheele) fire-air, exists in the nitrous acid, and in the atmosphere; which he proved by such decisive experiments, as to render it impossible to explain how Boyle and Hales could avoid availing themselves, in their researches into air, of so capital a discovery. Mayow also relates his manner of passing aeriform fluids under water, from vessel to vessel, which is generally believed to be a new art. He did not collect dephlogisticated air in vessels, and transfer it from one jar to another, but he proved its existence by finding substances that would burn in vacuo, and in water when mixed with nitre; and after animals had breathed and died in vessels filled with atmospheric air, or after fire had been extinguished in them, there was a residuum, which was the part of the air unfit for respiration, and for supporting fire; and he further shewed, that nitrous acid cannot be formed, but by exposing the substances that generate it to the atmosphere. Mayow was undoubtedly no common man, especially since, if the above dates are right, he was only thirty-four at the time of his death. But he was not so unknown as Dr. Beddoes supposed, for, since the repetition of the same discovery by Priestley and Scheele, reference has frequently been made by chemists to Mayow, as the original inventor; though no other person appears so closely to have examined his work as that writer. At the same time it appears, that with the partiality of a commentator, he has exalted his author unwarrantably at the expence of other chemists, and to a height, which, without the aid of strained interpretations, cannot be justified by the text.

The cardinal de Richelieu was induced from these services to conceive an esteem for him, while Barberini was equally attached to him, and prevailed upon Urban VIII. to make him keeper of the seals. He went in 1634 to Avignon, in quality of vice- legate, and to France in that of nuncio extraordinary, where he acquired a profound knowledge of state affairs, and with much art cultivated at the same time, the friendship of Richelieu, and the good-will of Louis XIII. In compliment to the nomination of this monarch, the pope added him to the number of cardinals in 1641. When Richelieu died, the same king made Mazarin his minister of state, and one of the executors to his will. In these departments, he took upon him the administration of affairs, during the minority of Louis XIV. and the regency of the queen Anne of Austria. The dawnings of his power were attended with the happiest success; and the good fortune of the king’s armies was to our cardinal a source of much national applause. But these advantages were very soon succeeded by the murmurs of an oppressed people, and the envious combination of the great nobles, who were jealous of his high advancement. Hence arose the civil wars in 1649, and the three following years; and the dissatisfaction becoming more general, it was insisted upon, that he should be dismissed from the royal presence. Mazarin, who knew how necessary it was for him to retire, demanded that he might take his leave; and immediately departed from the kingdom. He was stili so conscious of fortune’s always attending him, that he mentioned even this event as one of the chief incidents contributing to his greatness; and although decrees were issued out against him, his fine library was sold, and a price was fixed upon his head, he contrived to quell this fury with most astonishing dexterity. He even was enabled to return to court, and with a double share of power; and so mutable is popular opinion, that many who once had been his bitterest enemies, were now become his warmest friends. After this, he continued to render the state many important services, the chief of which was the obtaining of peace between France and Spain: for this purpose, he went in person to hold a conference with the Spanish minister, don Louis de Haro, in 1659. The successful termination of this affair, was followed by the king’s marriage, with the Infanta. The continual application of Mazarin to business brought on a very dangerous iUness: he was at that time at the Louvre, but gave orders to be carried to Vincennes, where he died March 9, 1661, aged 59. When sensible of his danger, he began to feel scruples concerning the wealth which he had heaped together, and his confessor plainly told him that restitution was necessary for his salvation. He gave the whole to the king, in the hope that, as was the case, his majesty would restore it to him. His wealth is said to have amounted to eight millions sterling, all collected in a time of war, or national commotion. The king paid the highest honours to his memory. His body was magnificently entombed in the college usually called after his name, but sometimes by that of “the four nations,” having been designed as a place of education for the youth of the four conquered nations.

Dr. Mead’s reputation now greatly increased his business, and recommended him to the patronage of the most eminent of the faculty. In 1707 he had the degree of M. D. conferred on him by the university of Oxford, by diploma. On the last illness of queen Anne, he was called in consultation, two days before her death. Cautious and reserved as physicians usually are on such occasions, Dr. Mead, either more discerning or more bold, no sooner saw the queen than he declared her in immediate danger; and when he found his brethren demur on this opinion, he said it would be sufficient to send to Hanover an account of the present symptoms, by which the physicians of that court would immediately perceive that, before the account came to them, the queen would be no more. Having opened his mind freely on this subject to his friend and protector Dr. Radcliffe, the latter made use of that friendship to excuse his own attendance. Radcliflfe surviving the queen but three months, Mead removed to his house, and resigned his office in St. Thomas’s hospital.

Meibomius, after this learned and elegant publication, was invited to the court of the queen of Sweden, to whom be had dedicated it; but this visit was not followed by the most pleasing consequences. Having by his enthusiastic account of the music of the ancients, impressed this princess with similar ideas, the younger Bourdelot, a physician, and his rival (as a classical scholar) in the queen’s favour, instigated her majesty to desire him to sing an ancient Grecian air, while Naudet, an old Frenchman, danced a la Grec to the sound or his voice. But the performance, instead of exciting admiration, produced loud bursts of laughter from all present; which so enraged Meibomius, that seeing the buffoon Bourdelot in the gallery among the scoffers, and having no doubt but that it was he who, with a malicious design, had persuaded her majesty to desire this performance, immediately flew thither, and exercised the pugilist’s art on his face so violently, without being restrained by the presence of the qneen, that he thought it necessary to quit the Swedish dominions before he could be called to an account for his rashness; and immediately went to Copenhagen, where being well received, he fixed his residence there, and became a professor at Sora, a Danish college for the instruction of the young nobility. Here too he was honoured with the title of aulic counsellor, and soon after was called to Elsineur, and advanced to the dignity of Architesorie, or president of the board of maritime taxes or customs; but, neglecting the duty of his office, he was dismissed, and upon that disgrace quitted Denmark'. Soon after, he settled at Amsterdam, and became professor of history in the college of that city; but refusing to give instructions to the son of a burgomaster, alleging that he was not accustomed to instruct boys in the elements of knowledge, but to finish students arrived at maturity in their studies, he was dismissed from that station. After quitting Amsterdam, he visited France and England; then returning to Holland, he led a studious and private life at Amsterdam till 1710 or 1711, when he died at near 100 years of age.

, a German writer on philosophical subjects, was born in 1718, at Ammendorff, near Halie in Saxony. He appeared first as an author in 1745, when he published, in German, 1. His “Representation of a Critic,” being his delineation of the character of a perfect critic. In the same year he produced, 2. “Instructions how any one may become a Modern Philosopher,” 8vo. We have a translation in this country, called “The Merry Philosopher, or Thoughts on Jesting,” published in 1764, from the German of Meier, but whether a translation of the last- mentioned work, we know not. It is a very dull performance. Whatever merit might belong to his works on philosophical and critical subjects, they were peculiarly his own, for he was not master of the learned languages. Yet his work on the elements of all the polite arts, was received by his countrymen with no inconsiderable approbation. It is entitled, 3. “Introduction to the elegant arts and sciences;” and was printed at Halle, in 8vo, 1748—1750; and republished, in three parts, in 1754—1759. J. Matthew Gesner, however, in his “Isagoge,” is frequently severe against this, author, and particularly derides his form of Æsthetics, which had been much applauded. Meier died in 1777.

Melancthon made use of the extensive influence, which his high reputation, and the favour of the reigning elector of Saxony, gave him in the German schools, in which he was considered as a kind of common preceptor, to unite the study of the Aristotelian philosophy with that of ancient learning in general. And he was much assisted in the execution of this design, by the labours of many learned protestants of the Germanic schools from Italy and Great Britain, who brought with them an attachment to the Peripatetic system, and, wherever they were appointed public preceptors, made that system the basis of their philosophical instructions. From Wittemberg, Tubingen, Leipsic, and other seminaries, conducted after the manner which was introduced by Melancthon, many learned men arose, who, becoming themselves preceptors, adopted the same plan of instruction, which from Melancthon was called the Philippic method; and thus disseminated the Peripatetic doctrine, till at length it was almost every where taught in the German protestants schools, under the sanction of civil and ecclesiastical authority. Considering the distractions of his life, and the infinity of disputes and tumults in which he was engaged, it is astonishing, how he could find leisure to write so many books. Their number is prodigious, insomuch that it was thought necessary to publish a chronological catalogue of them in 1582. They are theological, moral, and philosophical; some, however, relate to what is usually denominated the belles lettres, and others are illustrative of various classical authors. The most complete edition was published by the author’s son-in-law, Jasper Peucer, 1601, in 4 vols. fol.

, a learned and worthy bencher of LincolnVinn, was born in 1666. In conjunction with Mr. Peere Williams, Mr. Melmoth was the publisher of “Vernon’s Reports,” under an order of the court of chancery. He had once an intention of printing his own “Reports;” and a short time before his death, advertised them at the end of those of his coadjutor Peere Williams, as then actually preparing for the press. They have, however, not yet made their appearance. But the performance for which he justly deserves to be held in perpetual remembrance, is, “The Great Importance of a Religious Life.” It is a singular circumstance that the real author of this most admirable treatise should never have been publicly known until mentioned in the Anecdotes of Bowyer. It was ascribed by Walpole in his “Royal and Noble Authors,” to the first earl of Egmont. Of this work Mr. Melmoth’s son says, in the short preface which accompanies it, that “It may add weight, perhaps, to the reflections contained in the following pages, to inform the reader, that the author’s life was one uniform exemplar of those precepts, which, with so generous a zeal, and such an elegant and affecting simplicity of style, he endeavours to recommend to general practice. He left others to contend for modes of faith, and inflame themselves and the world with dndless controversy; it was the wiser purpose of his more ennobled aim, to act up to those clear rules of conduct which Revelation hath graciously prescribed. He possessed by temper every moral virtue; by religion every Christian grace. He had a humanity that melted at every distress; a charity which not only thought no evil, but suspected none. He exercised his profession with a skill and integrity, which nothing could equal, but the disinterested motive that animated his labours, or the amiable modesty which accompanied all his virtues. He employed his industry, not to gratify his own desires no man indulged himself less not to accumulate useless wealth no man more disdained so unworthy a pursuit it was for the decent advancement of his family, for the generous assistance of his friends, for the ready relief of the indigent. How often did he exert his distinguished abilities, yet refuse the reward of them, in defence of the widow, the fatherless, and him that had none to help him In a word, few have ever passed a more useful, not one a more blameless life y and his whole time was employed either in doing good, or in meditating it. He died on the 6th day of April, 1743, and lies buried under the cloister of Lincoln’sinn chapel.” This passage is repeated in a short tract entitled “Memoirs of a late eminent Advocate,” published in 1796, in which the character of his father is rather -more unfolded. We learn from this tract, that Mr. Melmoth “from early youth performed the paiuful but indispensable duty of communing with his own heart, with the severest and most impartial scrutiny.” This appears by a copy of a letter from some eminent casuit, whom he had consulted respecting certain religious scruples. He was afterwards perplexed respecting taking the oaths at the revolution, which happened when he had the prospect of being admitted to the bar. On this occasion he consulted the celebrated Mr. Norris of Bemerton, and a correspondence took place, part of which is* published in the “Memoirs.” It is probable that he was at last convinced of the lawfulness of the oaths, as he was called to the bar in 1693. There are other letters and circumstances given in these “Memoirs,” which tend to raise the character of Mr. Melmoth as a man of sincerity and humility, not, however, perhaps, unmixed with what may now be reckoned a degree of superstitious weakness.

, called Melozzo of Foiii, flourished about 1471, and was probably the scholar of Ansovino da Forli, a pupil of Squarcione. The memory of Melozzo is venerated by artists as the inventor of perspective representation and true foreshortening on arched roofs and ceilings, of what the Italians style “di Sotto in Sti;” the most difficult and most rigorous branch of execution. A tolerable progress had been made in perspective after Paolo Uccelio, by means of Piero della Francesca, an eminent geometrician, and some Lombards; but the praise of painting roofs with that charming illusion which we witness, belongs to Melozzo. Scannelli and Orlandi relate, that, to learn the art, he studied the best antiques; and, though“born to affluence, let himself as servant and colour-grinder to the masters of his time. Some make him a scholar of Piero della Francesco: it is at least not improbable that Melozzo knew him and Agostino di Bramantino, when they painted in Rome for Nicolas V. towards 1455. Whatever be the fact, Melozzo painted on the vault of the largest chapel in Ss. Apostoli, an Ascension, in which, says Vasari, the figure of Christ is so well foreshortened, that it seems to pierce the roof. That picture was painted for cardinal Riario, nephew of Sixtus IV. about 1472 and at the rebuilding of that chapel, was cut out and placed in the palace of the Quirinal, 1711, where it is still seen with this epigraphe” Opus Melotii Foroliviensis, qui summos fornices pingendi artem vel primus invenit vel illustravit.“Some heads of the apostles were likewise sawed out and placed in the Vatican. His taste on the whole resembles that of Mantegna and the Padouati schools more than any other. The heads are well formed, well coloured, well turned, and almost always foreshortened; the lights duly toned and opportunely relieved by shadows which give ambience and almost motion to his figures on that space; there is grandeur and dignity in the principal figure, and the lightsome drapery that surrounds him; with finish of pencil, diligence, and grace in every part. It is to be lamented, that so uncommon a genius has not met with an exact historian, of whom we might have learned his travels and labours previous to this great work painted for Riario. At Forli, they shew, as his work, the front of an apothecary’s shop, painted in arabesque, of exquisite style, with a half-length figure over the door pounding drugs, very well executed. We are informed by Vasari, that Francesco di Mirozzo da Forli painted before Dosso, in the villa of the dukes of Urbino, called L'lmperiale; we ought probably to read Melozzo, and to correct the word in the text, as one of that writer’s usual negligences, of which Vasari gives another instance in Marco Palmegiani, of Forli, whom he transforms to Parmegiano; a good and almost unknown artist, though many of his works survive, and he himself seems to have taken every precaution not to be forgotten by posterit3 T inscribing most of his altar-pieces and oil-pictures with Marcus pictor Foroliviensis, or, Marcus Palmasanus P. Foroliviensis pinsebat. Seldom he adds the year, as in two belonging to prince Ercolani, 1513 and 1537. In those, and in his works at Forli, we recognise two styles. The first differs little from the common one of Quattrocentist’s, in the extreme simplicity of attitude, in the gilding, in minute attention, and even in anatomy, which extended its researches at that time seldom beyond a S. Sebastian, or a S. Jerome. Of his second style the groups are more artificial, the outline larger, the proportions grander, but the heads perhaps less varied and more mannered. He used to admit into his principal subject others that do not belong to it thus in the crucifix at St. Agostino, in Forli, he placed two or three groups in different spots in one of which is S. Paul visited by S. Anthony in another, S. Augustine convinced, by an angel, of the absurdity of his attempt to fathom the mystery of the Trinity; and in those small figures he is finished and graceful beyond belief. Nor is his landscape or his architecture destitute of charms. His works abound in Romsagna, and are met with even in Venetian galleries: at Vicenza there is, in the palace Vicentini, a Christ of his between Nicodemus and Joseph; an exquisite performance, in which, to speak with Dante,” il morto par morto e vivi i vivi.

, 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.

Menedemus was of a strong constitution, acute and penetrating in understanding; in dispute he was vehement, Lut in his manners gentle. He was fond of convivial meetings; but it was those in which philosophy, not luxury, presided. His most intimate friend and fellowstudent was Asclepiades, whose steadiness of regard was highly honourable to b9th. After the death of Menedemus, his countrymen erected a statue to his memory. Some sarcastically called him the Eretrian Bull, from the gravity of his countenance. Being told one day, that it is a great felicity to have whatever we desire, “Yes,” said he, “but it is a much greater to desire nothing but what we have.”

, a Cynic, and a disciple of the second Menedemus before mentioned, was a native of Gadara in Palestine. His writings were chiefly of a ridiculous kind, and very satirical; so much so, that Lucian, himself no very lenient satirist, calls him in one passage “the most barking and snarling of all the Cynic dogs.” For this reason he is introduced into two or three of Lucian’s dialogues, as a vehicle for the sarcasms of that author. It appears, that the satires of Menippus were written in prose, with verses occasionally intermixed; for which reason the satires of Varro, who wrote in the same style, were called Menippean; and the same title, that of “Satyre Menippe'e,” was given, for the same reason, to a famous collection, written in France against the faction of the league; in which compositions Pierre le Roy, Nicolas Rapin, and Florent Chretien, bore a principal share. Varro himself lias been therefore called Mtnippeus, and sometimes Cynicus Romanus. Menippus was imitated also by his countryman Meleager, of whom an account has been given before. It is said by Laertius, that Menippus, having been robbed of a large sum of money, which he had'amassed by usury, hanged himself in despair. The same author mentions some of his works, of which, however, no part is now extant. He had been originally a slave, but purchased his freedom, and procured himself to be made a citizen of Thebes.

, surnamed Simon, or Simonson, was the founder of a sect called from him Mennonites. He was born at Witmarsum, in Friesland, in 1505. He was at first a Romish priest, and a notorious profligate, and resigned his rank and office in the Romish church, and publicly embraced the communion of the anabaptists. He died in 1561, in the duchy of Holstein, at the country-seat of a certain nobleman, not far from the city of Oldesloe, who, moved with compassion by a view of the perils to which Menno was exposed, and the snares that were daily laid for his ruin, took him, with certain of his associates, into his protection, and gave him an asylum. He began to propagate his opinions in 1636, and had many followers, whose history may be found in Mosheim. They split afterwards into parties, but the opinions that are held in common by the Mennonites, seem to be all derived from this fundamental principle, that the kingdom which Christ established upon earth is a visible church or community, into which the holy and just alone are to be admitted, and which is consequently exempt from all those institutions and rules of discipline, that have been invented by human wisdom, for the correction and reformation of the wicked. This principle, indeed, was avowed by the ancient Mennonites, but it is now almost wholly renounced; nevertheless, from this ancient doctrine, many of the religious opinions, that distinguish the Mennonites from all other Christian communities, seem to be derived: in consequence of this doctrine, they admit none to the sacrament of baptism, but persons that are come to the full use of their reason; they neither admit civil rulers into their communion, nor allow any other members to perform the functions of magistracy; they deny the lawfulness of repelling force by force, and consider war, in all its shapes, as unchristian and unjust: they entertain the utmost aversion to the execution of justice, and more especially to capital punishments; and they also refuse to confirm their testimony by an oath. Menno’s writings, in Dutch, were published in 1651, folio.

, an eminent geographer and mathematician, was born in 1512, at Ruremonde in the Low Countries. He applied himself with such industry to the sciences of geography and mathematics, that it has been said he often forgot to eat and sleep. The emperor Charles V. encouraged him much in his labours; and the tluke of Juliers made him his cosmographer. He composed and published a chronology; a larger and smaller atlas; and some geographical tables besides other books in philosophy and divinity. He was also so curious, as well as ingenious, that he engraved and coloured his maps himself. He made various maps, globes, and other mathematical instruments for the use of the emperor; and gave the most ample proofs of his uncommon skill in what he professed. His method of laying down charts is still used, which bear the name of “Mercator’s Charts;” also a part of navigation is from him called Mercator’s Sailing. He died at Duisbourg in 1594, at eighty-two years of age.

, a learned and eminent physician, was born at Forli, in Romagna, Sept 30, 1530. He was educated according to Niceron at Padua, and according to Eloy at Bologna. It seems, however, agreed that he received his doctor’s degree in 1555, and began to practice at Forli. In 1562 he was sent as ambassador to pope Pius IV. at Rome, where he was honoured with the citizenship, and upon a pressing invitation determined to reside in a place which presented so many opportunities for the pursuit of his favourite studies. During his abode at Rome, besides his professional concerns, he studied classical literature, and the monuments of antiquity, and produced a learned and elegant work, which acquired him much celebrity in the literary world, and which was first published at Venice in 1569, under the title of “De Arte Gymnastica Libri sex,” 4to. It was many times reprinted, and its merit occasioned his being appointed professor of medicine in the university of Padua. In 1573 he was called to Vienna by the emperor Maximilian II., to consult respecting a severe illness under which that personage laboured; and his treatment was so successful, that he returned loaded with valuable presents, and honoured with the dignities of a knight and count palatine. In 1587 he removed to a professorsip at Bologna, which has been partly attributed to a degree of dissatisfaction or self-accusation, in consequence of an error of judgment, which had been committed by him and Capivaccio, several years before, when they were called to Venice, in order to give their advice respecting a pestilential disorder which prevailed in that city. On this occasion both he and his colleague seem to have fallen into the mistake of several medical theorists, of denying the reality of contagion; and their counsels were said to have been productive of extensive mischief. Nevertheless his reputation appears to have suffered little from this error; for he was invited by Ferdinand, the grand duke of Tuscany, to settle at Pisa in 1599, where he was ordered a stipend of eighteen: hundred golden crowns, which was ultimately raised to two thousand. Here he died Nov. 9, 1606, and was interred, with great honours, in a chapel, which he had himself erected at Forli. He left a large property in money and effects, among which was a valuable collection of pictures; and he made a great number of charitable bequests.

, an English poet of considerable merit, was born in London, April 1755, and was descended in a right line from sir Henry Merry, who was knighted by James I. at Whitehall. Mr. Merry’s father was governor of the Hudson’s Bay company. His grandfather, who was a captain in the royal navy, and one of the elder brethren of the Trinity-house, established the commerce of the Hudson’s Bay company upon the plan which it now pursues. He made a voyage to Hudson’s Bay, and discovered the island in the North seas, which still bears the name of Merry’s island. He also made a voyage to the East Indies, and was, perhaps, the first Englishman who returned home over land; in which expedition he encountered inconceivable hardships. Mr. Merry’s mother was the eldest daughter of the late lord chief justice Willes, who presided for many years with great ability in the court of Common Pleas, and was for some time first lord commissioner of the great seal. Mr. Merry was educated at Harrow, under Dr. Sumner, and had the celebrated Dr. Parr as his private tutor. From Harrow he went to Cambridge, and was entered of Christ’s college. He left Cambridge without taking any degree, and was afterwards entered of Lincoln’s-inn, but was never called to the bar. Upon the death of his father he bought a commission in the horse-guards, and was for several years adjutant and lieutenant to the first troop, commanded by lord Lothian. Mr. Merry quitted the service, and went abroad, where he remained nearly eight years; during which time he visited most of the principal towns of France, Switzerland, Italy, Germany, and Holland. At Florence he stayed a considerable time, enamoured (as it is said) of a lady of distinguished rank and beauty. Here he studied the Italian language, encouraged his favourite pursuit, poetry, and was elected a member of the academy Delia Crusca. Here also he was a principal contributor to a collection of poetry, by a few English of both sexes, called “The Florence Miscellany.” The name of the academy he afterwards used as a signature to many poems which appeared in the periodical journals, and the newspapers, and excited so many imitators as to form a sort of temporary school of poets, whose affectations were justly ridiculed by the author of the “Baviad and Maeviad,” and soon despised by the public. Mr. Merry, however, had more of the qualities of a poet than his imitators, although not much more judgment. His taste, originally good, became vitiated by that love of striking novelties which exhausts invention. Of his poems published separately, scarcely one is now remembered or read.

Mersenne was a man of good invention; and had a peculiar talent in forming curious questions, though he did not always succeed in resolving them; however, he at least gave occasion to others to do it. It is said* he invented the Cycloid, otherwise called the Roulette. Presently the chief geometricians of the age engaged in the contemplation of this new curve, among whom Mersenne himself held a distinguished rank.

, an ingenious burlesque poet of Scotland, was born in the parish of Midmar in Aberdeenshire, about 1688. He received a liberal education at the Marischal college in Aberdeen, and, after finishing his studies, became one of the teachers in the high-school of New Aberdeen. Thence he removed into the family of Marshal, to be preceptor to the young earl of that name, and his brother, afterwards marshal Keith; and, in 1714, by the interest of the countess, was appointed professor of philosophy in the Marischal college. He did not long retain this situation, for, when the rebellion broke out in 1715, he followed the fortunes of his noble patrons, who made him governor of Dunotter castle. After the defeat at Sheriffmuir, he lurked among the mountains, till the act of indemnity was passed, with a few fugitive companions, for whose amusement and his own, he composed several of the burlesque poems, which he called “Mother Grim’s tales.” He appears to have remained steady to his principles, and consequently was not restored to his professorship but, while the countess of Marshal lived, resided chiefly in her family where his great pleasantry and liveliness made him always an acceptable guest. After her death, he must have been for some time without much provision, till he commenced an academy at Elgin, in conjunction with his brother Mr. Samuel Meston. He was, however, little formed for prudence and regularity, but much more given to conviviality; for which cause probably, among others, this academy at Elgin after a time began to decline. He then successively settled at Turiff, in Aberdeenshire, and* at Montrose, where he lost his brother and coadjutor. He made the same attempt at Perth, but soon after entered as preceptor into the family of a Mr. Oliphant, Here he continued till his health declined, when he removed to Peterhead for the benefit of the mineral waters. There he was chiefly supported by the bounty of the countess of Errol, under whose patronage he had formerly undertaken the academy at TuriflF. At length he removed to Aberdeen, where he was taken care of by some relations, till he died of a languishing distemper in the spring of 1745.

Meston is said to have been one of the best classical scholars of his time, and by no means a contemptible philosopher and mathematician. His wit also was very lively, and shone particularly in jovial meetings, to which unhappily he was rather too strongly addicted. His poems were first published separately, as they were written, and doubtless by way of assisting him in his necessities. That called “the Knight/* appears to have been first printed in 1723; and, after it had received several corrections, a second edition was printed at London. The first decade of” Mother Grim’s Tales,“afterwards appeared; and next, the second part, by Jodocus, her grandson. Some years after, the piece called,” Mob contra Mob.“The whole were first collected in a small volume, 12 mo, at Edinburgh, in 1767, to which a short account of his life is prefixed, whence the present memoirs have been extracted. The Knight,” and several others of his poems, are in the style of Butler, whom he greatly adinired and imitated, perhaps too servilely, yet with some success. In the second decade, written under the name of Jodocus, there are several poems in Latin, and the title was in that language. It runs thus: “Decadem alteram, ex probatissimis auctoribus, in usum Juventutis Jinguse Latinse, prsesertim verse poeseos studiosse, selectam, et in scholis ad propagandam fidem legendam: admixtis subinde nonnullis, in gratiam Pulchrioris Sexus, vernaculis, subjunxit Jodocus Grimmus Aniculae nostrae pronepos.” His Latin poetry is of no great excellence.

At the age of twenty he lost his excellent preceptor and patron, Gravina, who died in 1718. Metastasio, whose writings evince him to have been all tenderness, bewailed his death in the celebrated elegy called “La strada della Gloria,” and found when the will was examined, that he was made heir to all his fortune. Being now become a patron, instead of a dependant, he kept a handsome table, at which, as may be supposed, he easily obtained guests he abandoned the law, and cultivated poetry and in about two years found himself nearly at the end of his 15,000 crowns, which had been the bequest of his patron. He now went to Naples, with a serious intention to return to the study of the law; but his instructor Paglietti was harsh, the admirers of his poetry were numerous, and, in 1721, we find him addressing an epithalamium to the marquis Pignatelli, at the desire of the countess of Althan. His drama of Endymion, the first that he produced expressly for music, was written about the same time. He went on, though partly by stealth, on account of the inexorable lawyer under whom he was studying; till the acquaintance of the Romanina, the greatest singer and actress of the time, finally determined him to quit both his preceptor and that profession which he had ever studied so unwillingly. The effect of his first opera, “The Garden of the Hesperides,” upon the audience, is described as singular in the extreme. By the beauties of the verse, the excellence of the sentiments, and every species of merit, the audience, usually noisy, was charmed into profound attention, and the whole was heard with a silence then perfectly uncommon in the Italian theatres.

From this time Metastasio united his family establishment with that of the Romanina and her husband, and lived the life of a poet, amidst harmony and poetry. Thus situated, he wrotewithin a short period, three more dramas; “Catone in Utica,” “Ezio,” and “Semiramide riconosciuta.” But it was now, in 1729, the thirty-second year of Metastasio’s life, that he was to change his country. A letter, dated Aug. 31, in that year, from prince Pio of Savoy, invited him to the court of the emperor, as coadjutor to signior Apostolo Zeno, in the office of imperial laureat. All matters of appointment being settled to his mind, he resolved, though with reluctance, to quit Italy, and his Italian connections, for this new country: and he actually arrived at Vienna in July 1730. From this time the life of Metastasio was uniform, even beyond what is usual to men of letters. He resided continually in one city, Vienna; and in one house, that of M. Martinetz: with the exception only of a visit in the autumn, which for a long time was annual, to the countess of Althan in Moravia, where he sought health from the bracing air of the mountains. To make the uniformity of his life more singular, he was naturally and habitually attached to an exact regularity, and passed one day precisely as he passed another, allotting particular hours for particular occupations. His usual routine was this, according to the report of Dr. Burney. “He studied from eight in the morning till noon; then he visited his friends, and those families and individuals from whom he had received civilities. He dined at two; and at five received his most familiar and intimate friends. At nine, in summer, he went out in his carnage, visited, and sometimes played at ombre; a game which he liked better than those of mere chance, as it afforded him exercise of mind in calculation. He returned home at ten o'clock, supped, and went to bed before eleven.” This monotonous mode of life has by some been ridiculed, and certainly would not be expected in a poet; but the varieties of human nature are endless, and in him the love of order had superseded the more common passion for change and variety. A very interesting part of the history of Metastasio, is his long and steady friendship with the celebrated Farinelli. From appearing first before the public about the same time, the one as a singer, the other as a poet, in 1723, they called each other Gemelli, or twins; and their attachment, which was of the most sincere and ardent kind, ended only with their lives, which were extended nearly to the same period. His other tuneful friend died early, namely, in the beginning of 1734, and, as a mark of her regard, left him heir to all her property, after the death of her husband, to the amount of 25,000 crowns; but Metastasio, with his usual sense of propriety, and with great generosity, relinquished the whole bequest, and restored it to the disposal of her husband.

, or Meetkercke, or Mekerchus (Adolphus), a learned writer, was born at Bruges in 1528, and passed the greater part of his life in the service of the revolted states of the Low Countries, as counsellor of state, and envoy to the foreign potentates. He was employed on an embassy to queen Elizabeth in the latter part of his life, an office which was probably very agreeable to him, as he was a protestant, and had resided here for the quiet enjoyment of his religion for some time before he was appointed on the embassy. He appears to have been an ornament and delight of the age in which he lived, second to none in literary accomplishments, and was a man also of great benevolence and amiable temper. Grief for the loss of his son is said to have hastened his death, which took place at London in 1591, in his sixty-fourth year. He was buried in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, under a monument which, when that church was rebuilt, was conveyed to Julians, near Buntingford, in Hertfordshire, the seat of his descendants who settled in this country, and where some of them are still living. The present owner of the estate is in possession, among others, of a folio ms. of Greek and Latin poetry by his ancestor, the subject of this article, with additions by his son Adolphus, who died without issue, and by his son Edward, D. D. of Christchurch, Oxford, professor of Hebrew in that university, and prebendary of Winchester. He became professor in 1621, and died in 1660. Foppen asserts that sir Adolphus, as the ambassador was called, declared in writing, on his death-bed, that there was no true religion out of the catholic church, and that his daughter was so struck with this as to return to Bruges, and to the Roman catholic religion. As far as respects the daughter, this may be true, but her father certainly died in the protestant faith, as appears by the inscription on his monument, which Foppen is obliged to confess, is written “stylo acatholico.” Sir AdoU phus published in 1565, not a translation of some pieces of Bion and Moschus, as it has been erroneously called, but the first edition of “Bion and Moschus,” printed at Bruges in 1565, 4to, Gr. and Lat. It has a double Latin version with the Variorum scholia, the elegies of Phanoclis, and some fragments of Propertius. It is a very rare and curious edition. Retranslated into Latin verse “Theocriti Epigrammata,” and published a treatise “De veteri et recta pronuntiatione linguae Graecas Commentarius,” Bruges, 1565, and Antwerp, 1576, 8vo. He contributed also to editions of the “Fasti Consulares,” “Vitae Caesarum,” “Magna Grsecia,” &c. and in his political character published “A Collection of the Proceedings at the Peace of Cologne, in 1579.”