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

, is said to have been the son of the preceding, but little is recorded of him, unless that he was a magistrate of Utrecht, and died in 1755. He wrote in Latin a “Life of Pope Adrian VI.” Utrecht 1727, and in 1738 a quarto volume, to which we have been considerably indebted, entitled “Trajectum eruditum,” or, an account of the learned men of Utrecht.

, the third and youngest son of the bishop, had an education equally advantageous with that of his two elder brothers. When he had acquired a sufficient preparation of grammatical learning, he was sent to the university of Oxford, where he becam^a commoner of Merton-college. After this, he studied two years at Leyden, from whence he seems to have made a tour through Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. Having chosen the profession of the law, he was entered at the Temple, where he appears to have contracted wildness of disposition, and irregularity of conduct. To this part of his character there are frequent allusions in the satirical publications of the times; and particularly in Dr. Arbuthnol’s notes and memorandums of the six days preceding the death of a right reverend prelate. Mr. Thomas Burnet was even suspected of being one of the Mohocks mentioned in the Spectator, whose extravagant and cruel exploits made much noise, and excited no small degree of terror at that period. Swift, in one of his letters to Stella, has the following passage: “Young Davenant was telling us, how he was set upon by the Mohocks, and how they ran his chair through with a sword. It is not safe being in the streets at night. The bishop of Salisbury’s son is said to be of the gang. They are all whigs. A great lady sent to me, to speak to her father, and to lord treasurer, to have a care of them, and to be careful likewise of myself; for she heard they had malicious intentions against the ministry and their friends. I know not whether there be any thing in this, though others are of the sante opinion.” The report concerning Mr. Burnet might be groundless; but it is certain that his time was not wholly spent in dissipation; for, being warmly devoted to the cause of the whigs, he commenced political writer against the administration of the four last years of queen Anne. No less than seven pamphlets of this kind, though without his name, were written by him, in 1712 and 1713. His first was entitled “A Letter to the People, to be left for them at the Booksellers; with a word or two of the Bandbox Plot.” This small tract is drawn up in short paragraphs, after the manner of Mr. Asgill; but not in ridicule of that author, who is spoken of in terms of high commendation. Another piece of Mr. Burnet’s was: “Our Ancestors as wise as we, or ancient Precedents for modern Facts, in answer to a Letter from a noble Lord;” which was followed by “The History of Ingratitude, or a second Part of ancient Precedents for modern Facts,” wherein many instances are related, chiefly from the Greek and Roman histories, of the ungrateful treatment to which the most eminent public characters have been exposed; and the whole is applied to the case of the duke of Marlborough. A subsequent publication, that had likewise a reference to the conduct of the ministry towards the same great general, and which was dedicated to him, was entitled “The true Character of an honest Man, especially with relation to public Affairs.” Another of Mr. Burnet’s tracts, which was called “Truth, if you can find it; or a Character of the present Ministry and Parliament,” was entirely of an ironical nature, and sometimes the irony is well supported. But our author’s principal political pamphlet, during the period we are speaking of, was, “A certain Information of a certain Discourse, that happened at a certain Gentleman’s House, in a certain County: written by a certain Person then present; to a certain Friend now at London; from whence you may collect the great Certainty of the Account.” This is a dialogue in defence of the principles and conduct of the whigs; and it gave such offence to queen Anne’s Tory ministry, that on account of it, Mr. Burnet was taken into custody in January 1712—13. He wrote, also, “Some new Proofs by which it appears that the Pretender is truly James the Third;” in which, from the information, we suppose, of his father, he gives the same account, in substance, of the Pretender’s birth, that was afterwards published in the bishop’s History of his own Time. What Mr. Burnet endeavours to make out is, that three supposititious children Vol. VII. C c were introduced; and consequently, that the “Pretender was James the Third;” or, to put it more plainly, “the third pretended James.” Whilst our young author, notwithstanding his literary application and engagements, still continued his wild courses, it is related, that his father one day seeing him uncommonly grave, asked what he was meditating. “A greater work,” replied the son, “than your lordship’s History of the Reformation.” “What is that, Tom?” “My own reformation, my lord.” “I shall be heartily glad to see it,” said the bishop, “but almost despair of it.” This, however, was happily accomplished, though, perhaps, not during the life of the good prelate, and Mr. Burnejt became not only one of the best lawyers of his time, but a very respectable character. After the accession of king George the First, he wrote a letter to the earl of Halifax, on “the Necessity of impeaching the late Ministry,” in which he urges the point with great zeal and warmth, and shews the utmost dislike of treating with any degree of lenity, a set of men whose conduct, in his opinion, deserved the severest punishment. He insists upon it, that the makers of the treaty of Utrecht ought to answer for their treasons with their heads. The letter to the earl of Halifax, which appeared with Mr. Burnet’s name, was followed by an anonymous treatise, entitled “A second Tale of a Tub; or the History of Robert Powel the Puppet-Showman.” This work, which is a satire on the earl of Oxford and his ministry, and is far from being destitute of wit and humour, hath never had the good fortune (nor, indeed, did it deserve it,) of being read and admired like the original “Tale of a Tub.” The author himself, in the latter part of his life, wished it to be forgotten; for we are well informed that he sought much for it, and purchased such copies as he could meet with, at a considerable price. Soon after his father’s death, he published “A Character of the right reverend father in God, Gilbert lord bishop of Sarum; with a true copy of his last Will and Testament.” In ridicule of this publication, was printed in Hudibrastic verse, and with a very small portion of merit, “A certain dutiful Son’s Lamentation for the Death of a certain right reverend; with the certain Particulars of certain Sums and Goods that are bequeathed him, which he will most certainly part with in a ctrtain time.” In 1715, Mr. Burnet, in conjunction with Mr. Ducket, wrote a truvestie of the first book of the Iliad, under the title of “Homerides;” which exposed him to the lash of Mr. Pope, and occasioned that great poet to give him a place, though not with remarkable severity, in the Dunciad. He was likewise concerned in a weekly paper, called “The Grumbler.” He was, however, soon, taken from these literary occupations, by being appointed his majesty’s consul at Lisbon, where he continued several years. Whilst he was in this situation, he had a dispute with lord Tyrawley, the ambassador, in which the merchants sided with Mr. Burnet. During the continuance of the dispute, the consul took an odd method of affronting-' his antagonist. Employing the same taylor, and having learned what dress his lordship intended to wear on a birthday, Mr. Burnet provided the same dress as liveries for his servants, and appeared himself in a plain suit. It is said, that in consequence of this quarrel (though how truly, may, perhaps, be doubted), the ambassador and consul were both recalled. Upon Mr. Burnet’s return to his country, he resumed the profession of the law. In 1723, he published, with a few explanatory notes, the first volume of his father’s “History of his own Time;” and, in 1732, wrote some remarks in defence of that history, in answer to lord Lansdowne’s letter to the author of the “Reflections historical and political.” When Mr. Burnet gave to the public, in 1734, the second volume of the bishop’s history, he added to it the life of that eminent prelate. In Easter term 1736 he was called to the degree of serjeant at law; and, in May 1740, was appointed king’s serjeant, in the room of serjeant Kyre > deceased. When, in 1741, judge Fortescue was raised to the mastership of the rolls, Mr. Burnet, in the month of October in that year, succeeded him as one of the justices of the court of common-pleas. On the 23d of No-/ vember, 1745, when the lord chancellor, the judges, and the associated gentlemen of the law, waited on the king, with their address on occasion of the rebellion, his majesty conferred upon him the honour of knighthood. He was also a member of the royal society. Sir Thomas Burnet continued in the court of common -pleas, with great reputation, to his death, which happened on the 5th of January, 1753. He died of the goat in his stomach, and left behind nim the character of an ab<e and upright judge, a sincere friend, a sensible and agreeable companion, and a munificent benefactor to the poor. Dr. Ferdinando Warner, in his dedication of sir Thomas More’s Life to the then lord keeper Henley, haying mentioned that Mr. justice Burnet recommended to him the translation of the Utopia, adds: “of whom I take this opportunity to say with pleasure, and which your lordship, I am sure, will allow me to say with truth, that for his knowledge of the world, and his able judgment of things, he was equalled by few, and excelled by none of his contemporaries.” The following clause in our learned judge’s will was the subject of conversation after his decease, and was inserted in the monthly collections, as being somewhat extraordinary. “I think it proper in this solemn act to declare, that as I have lived, so I trust I shall die, in the true faith of Christ as taught in the Scriptures; but not as taught or practised in any one visible church that I know of; though I think the church of England is as little stuffed with the inventions of men as any of them; and the church of Rome is so full of them, as to have destroyed all that is lovely in the Christian religion.” This clause gave occasion to the publication of a serious and sensible pamphlet, entitled: “The true Church of Christ, which, and where to be found, according to the Opinion of the late judge Burnet; with an Introduction concerning divine worship, and a caution to gospel preachers; in which are contained, the Reasons for that Declaration in his last Will and Testament.” A judgment may be formed of his abilities in his profession, from his argument in the case of Ryal and Rowls. In 1777 were published in 4to, “Verses written on several occasions, between the years 1712 and 1721.” These were the poetical productions of Mr. Burnet in his youth, of whom it is said by the editor, that he was connected in friendship and intimacy with those wits, which will for ever signalise the beginning of the present century; and that himself shone with no inconsiderable lustre amidst the constellation of geniuses which then so illustriously adorned the British hemisphere.

Of the Sacred Theory of the Earth, which is the principal of all his productions, the substance is this: between the beginning and end of the world, he supposes several intermediate periods, in which he conceives that nature undergoes various changes. Those which resp'ect this terraqueous globe, he believes to have been recorded in the sacred Scriptures. From these compared with profane history, he attempts to prove, that the primaeval earth as it rose out of chaos, was of a different form and structure from the present, and was such, that from its dissolution would naturally arise an universal deluge. Such a change in the state of the globe, he infers from the general aspect of its surface in the present day; and he argues, that since it is the nature of fluids to form a smooth surface, the earth, which was at first a chaotic mass in a fluid state, as it gradually became solid by the exhalation of the lighter particles of air and water, would still retain its regular superficies, so that the new earth would resemble an egg. The earth, in this paradisaical state, he supposes to be capable of sending forth its vegetable productions without rain, and to enjoy a perpetual serene and cloudless atmosphere. In process of time, he conceived that the surface of the earth, by the continual action of the rays of the sun, would become so parched, as to occasion vast fissures, through which the waters of the great abyss, contained within the bowels of the earth, would be sent forth by means of elastic vapours, expanded by heat, and acting with irresistible force upon their surface; whence a universal deluge would ensue, and in the violent concussion, lofty mountains, craggy rocks, and other varieties in the external form of the earth, would appear. Our theorist also conjectures, that the earth, in its original state, owed its universal spring to th*e coincidence of the plane of the ecliptic with that of the equator; and supposes that, at the deluge, the pole of the ecliptic changed its position, and became oblique to the plane of the equator. From similar causes he conceives that the final conflagration will be produced. This theory is well imagined, supported with much erudition, and described with great elegance of diction; but it can only be considered as an ingenious fiction, which rests upon no other foundation than mere conjecture. Yet it would be endless to transcribe all the encomiums passed on it. Mr. Addison, in 1699, wrote a Latin ode in its praise, which has been prefixed to many editions of it. An able writer, Dr. Warton, in his “Essay on Pope,” has not scrupled, from this single work, to rank Dn Burnet with the very few, in whom the three great faculties of the understanding, viz. judgment, imagination, and memory, have been found united. According to him, there have existed but few transcendant geniuses, who have been singularly blessed with this rare assemblage of different talents; and Burnet, in his Theory, he thinks has displayed an imagination very nearly equal to that of Milton.

It was between the fifteenth and sixteenth year of his age, that Robert, as he himself informs us, first “committed the sin of rhyme.” Having formed a boyish affection for a female who was his companion in the toils of the field, he composed a song, which is inserted in his works; but which, however extraordinary from one at his age, and in his circumstances, is far inferior to any of his subsequent performances. He was at this time “an ungainly, awkward boy,” unacquainted with the world, but who occasionally had picked up some notions of history, literature, and criticism, from the few books within his reach. These, he informs us, were Salmon’s and Guthrie’s Geographical Grammars, the Spectator, Pope’s Works, some plays of Shakspeare, Tull and Dickson on Agriculture, the Pantheon, Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding, Stackhouse’s History of the Bible, Justice’s British Gardener’s Directory, Boyle’s Lectures, Allan Ramsay’s Works, Taylor’s Scripture Doctrine of Original Sin, a Select Collection of English Songs, and Hervey’s Meditations. Of this motley assemblage, it may readily be supposed, that some would be studied, and some read superficially. There is reason to think> however, that he perused the works of the poets with such attention, as, assisted by his naturally vigorous capacity, soon directed his taste, and enabled him to discriminate tenderness and sublimity from affectation and bombast.

In April 1625, he presented a letter to king Charles, remonstrating against Dr. Neile and Dr. Laud, his majesty’s continual attendants, as popishly affected; and for this was forbidden the court. Soon after he was presented to the rectory of -St, Matthew’s, in Friday-street, London. In Dec. 1636, he was summoned to appear before Dr. Duck, one of the commissioners for causes ecclesiastical, who tendered to him the oaths ex officio, to answer to certain articles brought against him, for what he had advanced in two sermons preached in his own church on the preceding 5th of November . Burton, instead of answering, appealed to the king: but a special high-commission court, which was called soon after at Doctors’ Commons, suspended him, in his absence, from both his office and benefice; on which he thought fit to abscond, but published his two sermons under the title of “For God and the King;” together with an apology justifying his appeal. February 1, a serjeant at arms, with other officers, by virtue of a warrant from the star-chamber, broke open his doors, seized his papers, and took him into custody. Next day, he was, by an order of the privy-council, committed to the Fleet prison; from which place he dated one epistle to his majesty, another to the judges, and a third to the “truehearted nobility.” March 1!, he was proceeded against in the star-chamber, for writing and publishing seditious, schismatical, and libellous books, against the hierarchy of the church, and to the scandal of the government. To this information he (and Bastwick and Prynne who were indicted with him) prepared answers . In the end of May 1637, a person came to the Fleet to examine Burton upon his answer; but hearing that the greatest part of it had been expunged, he refused to be examined, unless his answer might be admitted as it was put in, or he permitted to put in a new answer. June 2, it was ordered by the court, that if he would not answer to interrogatories framed upon his answer, he would be proceeded against pro confesso. Accordingly, June 14, Burton, and the two others, being brought to the bar, the information was read; and no legal answer having been put in in time, nor filed on record, the court began for this contempt to proceed to sentence. The defendants cried out for justice, that their answers might be read, and that they might not be condemned unheard, but because their answers were not filed on record, the court proceeded to pass sentence: which was, that Burton, Prynne, and Bastwick pay a fine of 50OO/. each, and that Burton in particular be deprived of his ecclesiastical benefice, degraded from his ministerial function and degrees in the university, be set on the pillory, have both his ears cut off there, confined to perpetual close imprisonment in Lancaster-castle, debarred the access of his wife or any other except his keeper, and denied the use of pen, ink, and paper: all which, except the fine and the solitary part of the confinement, was executed accordingly, and the cutting off his ears with circumstances of great cruelty, they being pared so close, that the temporal artery was cut. During his twelve weeks imprisonment in the common gaol at Lancaster, great crowds pitying his misfortunes resorted to him, and some of his papers being dispersed in London, he was removed, by an order of council, to Cornet-castle in the isle of Guernsey, October 1637, where he was shut up almost three years; till in November 1640, the house of, commons, upon his wife’s petition, complaining of the severity of his sentence, ordered that he should be brought to the parliament in safe custody. Burton, on his arrival at London, presented a petition to the house of commons, setting forth his sufferings, and there was now a house of commons willing enough to listen to more trifling complaints. In consequence of this, the house resolved that the sentence against him was illegal, and ought to be reversed; that he be freed from the fine of 5000l. and from imprisonment, and restored to his degrees in the university, orders in the ministry, and to his ecclesiastical benefice in Friday-street, London; also have recompense for his imprisonment, and for the loss of his ears, which they fixed at six thousand pounds; but owing to the ensuing confusions in the kingdom, he never received that sum. He was, however, restored to his living of St. Matthew’s, after which he declared himself an Independent, and complied with all the alterations that ensued; but, according to Wood, when he saw to what extravagant lengths the parliament went, he grew more moderate, and afterwards fell out with his fellow-sufferers Prynne and Bastwick, and with Mr. Edmund Calamy. He died Jan. 7, 1648. Besides the tracts mentioned above, he wrote several others, which are thus enumerated. 1. “A Censure of Simony,” Loud. 1624. 2. “A Plea to an Appeal, traversed Dialoguewise,” Lond. 1626. 3. “The baiting of the Pope’s Bull,” Lond. 1627. 4. “A Tryal of private Devotions, or a Dyal for the Hours of Prayer,” Lond. 1628. 5. “Israel’s Fast; or, Meditations on the 7th Chapter of Joshua,” Lond. 1628. 6. “Seven Vials, or an Exposition on the loth and 16th Chapters of the Revelations,” Lond. 1628. 7. “Babel no Bethel; i. e. The Church of Rome no true visible Church of Christ, being an Answer to Hugh Cholmeley’s Challenge, and Robert Butterfield’s Maschil.” 8. “Truth’s Triumph over Trent, or the great Gulph between Sion and Babylon,” Lond. 1629. 9. “The Law and the Gospel reconciled against the Antinomians,” Lond. 1631^ 4to. 10. “Christian’s Bulwark, or the Doctrine of Justification,” Lond. 1632, 4to. 11. “Exceptions against a passage in Dr. Jackson’s Treatise of the Divine Essence and Attributes.” 12. “The sounding of the two last Trumpets; or, Meditations on the 9th, 10th, and llth Chapters of the Revelations,” Lond. 1641, 4to. 13. “The Protestation protested, or a short Remonstrance, shewing what is principally required of all those that have or do take the last Parliamentary Protestation,” London, 1641, 4to. 14. “Relation of Mr. Chillingworth.” 15. “A Narration of his own Life,” Lond. 1643, 4to. J6. “A Vindication of Independent Churches, in answer to Mr. Prynne’s two books of Church-Government, and of Independency,” Lond. 1644, 4to. 17. “Parliament’s Power for Laws in Religion,” 1645, 4to. 18. “Vindiciae Veritatis: Truth vindicated against Calumny: In a brief Answer to Dr. Bastwick’s two late books, entitled, Independency not God’s Ordinance,” Lond. 1645, 4to. 19. “Truth shut out of Doors; or, A brief Narrative of the Occasion and Manner of Proceeding of Aldermanbury Parish, in shutting their Church-Door against him,” Lond. 1645, 4to. 20. “Conformity’s Deformity, in a Dialogue between Conformity and Conscience,” Lond. 1646, 4to.

, founder of the society of the priests, or fathers, of the Christian doctrine, was born of a noble family at Cavaillon, Feb. 3, 1544. He at first cultivated poetry, and gave himself up to a life of pleasure, but afterwards reformed, lived in a most exemplary manner, went into holy orders, and travelled from place to place, confessing and catechising. His zeal having procured him many disciples, he formed them into a society, whose principal duty was to teach what they called the Christian doctrine. He was appointed general of this society in 1598, the institution having been first approved by pope Clement VIII. in the preceding year. That which goes by the same name in Italy was founded by Mark Cusani, a Milanese knight, and was established by the approbation and authority of Pius V. and Gregory XIII. Caesar de Bus had also some concern in establishing the Ursulines of France. He lost his sight about fourteen years before his death, which happened at Avignon, April 15, 1607. He left only a book of instructions, drawn up for his society, called “Instructions familieres sur les quatre parties de la Doctrine Chretienne,” 1666, 8vo. His life was written by James Beauvais, 4to.

, of Nottelen in Westphalia, a Jesuit, who died 1668, wrote a small “Meduila Theologize Moralis,” 12mo, which La Croix, one of his brethren, has enlarged to two vols. folio; the last edition is 1757. The idea of the pope’s authority, even over the persons of kings, is carried, in this work, to the height of extravagancy: all secular tribunals, therefore, united in its condemnation. The parliament of Toulouse in 1757, and that of Paris in 1761, ordered it to be burnt.

, a native of Arlon in Luxemburgh, in the sixteenth century, owed his success in life to his brother Francis, who died archbishop of Besangon in 1500. By his interest he became master of requests, a member of the sovereign council of Mechlin, and held several ecclesiastical benefices. His genius and learning recommended him to the friendship and correspondence of many of the learned men of his time, particularly Erasmus and sir Thomas More. He was employed in embassies to pope Julius II. Francis I. of France, and Henry VIII. of England; and in 1517, he was sent into Spain by Charles V. but falling sick at Bourdeaux, he died August 26 of that year. He left a considerable property to found three professorships at Louvain for Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, which composed what was called the Collegium Trilingue. Erasmus says this institution gave much disgust to the illiterate members of the church there, who, he adds, were vexed that three tongues should be in request. Several verses, speeches, and epistles written by Buslidius, were found after his death, but the only piece published is a letter prefixed to sir Thomas More’s Utopia.

, author of the “Lives of the Saints,” the second son of Simon Butler, esq. of Appletree, in the county of Northampton, was born in 1710, and educated for a short time at a school in Lancashire, whence in his eighth year he was sent to the English college at Douay, where he applied himself with uncommon diligence to the studies prescribed in that Roman catholic seminary, and was admired for his early piety. After completing his course, he was admitted an alumnus, and appointed professor of philosophy, in lecturing on which he followed the Newtonian system, then gaining ground in the foreign universities, in preference to the systems of Wolfe and Leibnitz, in which he discovered some things irreconcileable with the opinions of the church. He was next appointed professor of divinity, and while at this college published his first work, “Letters on the History of the Popes, published by Mr. Archibald Bower,” which were written with ease and good humour, and shew various and extensive learning. In 1745 he accompanied the late earl of Shrewsbury, and the hon. James and Thomas Talbot, on their travels through France and Italy. On his 1 return from these travels, he was sent on the English mission, and wished to be settled in London; where he might have access to literary society and the public libraries, with a view to complete his “Lives of the Saints,” on which he had long been engaged; but the vicar apostolic of the middle district claimed him, as belonging to that district, and appointed him, much against his will, to a mission in Staffordshire. Here, however, he did not remain long, being appointed chaplain to Edward duke of Norfolk, and to superintend the education of Mr. Edward Howard, his nephew and presumptive heir, whom he accompanied abroad, but who died soon. During his being at Paris, on this occasion, he completed and sent to press his “Lives of the Saints, which is said to have cost him the labour of thirty years. At the finishing of it he gave, what hisbiographer very truly calls, a very edifying instance of humility. The manuscript of the first volume having been, submitted to Mr. Cnalloner, the vicar-apostolic of the London district, he recommended the omission of all the notes, that the work might be less expensive and more useful. It is easy to suppose what it must have cost our author to consign to oblivion the fruit of so much labour. He obeyed, however, and to this circumstance it is owing, that in the first edition the notes.are omitted. Some years after, he published the” Life of Mary of the Cross,“a nun in the English convent of the poor Clatvs at Rouen, not, strictly speaking, apiece of biography, but a vehicle for instructions on religious life on Roman catholic principles. Sometime after our author’s return to England from his travels with Mr. Edward Howard, he was chosen president of the English college at St. Omer’s, in which station he continued until his death. He had projected many works besides those already mentioned, and among them, his treatise on the” Moveable Feasts,“which was published, after his death, under the inspection of Mr. Challoner. He proposed writing the lives of bishop Fisher and Sir Thomas More, and had made copious collections for both, some of which are in the hands of his biographer. He had begun a treatise on” Natural and revealed religion,“being dissatisfied with what Bergier had published on those subjects. Three volumes of his” Discourses“have been published since his decease. As a preacher, however, we are told, that he almost wholly failed. His sermons were sometimes interesting and pathetic; but they were always desultory, and almost always immeasurably long. His” Short life of Sir Toby Matthews,“has lately been published by his biographer. His literary correspondence was very extensive, and among other correspondents of distinction, may be mentioned the learned Lambertini, afterwards pope Benedict XIV. and the late Dn Lowth, bishop of London; and the assistance he afforded to English men of literature has been liberally acknowledged by Dr. Kennicot, and others. After a life spent in devotion to his profession, and in various studies, he died May 15, 1773, in the sixtythird year of his age; and was interred in the chapel of the English college at St. Omers, where a monument of white marble was erected to his memory, with an elegant Latin inscription. His” Lives of the Saints," although run free from the peculiarities of his predecessors in that branch of biography, is a work of great value and research. It was first published in 1745, 5 vols. 4to; and in 1779, or 1780, an edition was published at Dublin, in 12 vols. 8vo; and in 1799 1800, at Edinburgh, in the same form, to which his nephew, Charles Butler, esq. barrister at law, prefixed a life, from which the preceding sketch is taken.

During his short residence in this country, he corresponded with the Irish for the purpose of inducing them to engage in the royal cause; and having engaged lord Inchiquin to receive him in Munster, he landed at Cork, after escaping the imminent danger of shipwreck, in 1648, and on his arrival, adopted measures which were not a little assisted by the abhorrence which the king’s death excited through the country; and in consequence of this favourable impression, the lord lieutenant caused Charles II. to be immediately proclaimed. But Owen O'Neile, instigated by the pope’s nuncio, and supported by the old Irish, raised obstacles in his way, which he determined to overcome by the bold enterprise of attacking the city of Dublin, then held for the Parliament by governor Jones. This enterprise, however, failed, with very considerable loss on the part of the marquis; and soon after Cromwell arrived in Ireland, and having stormed Drogheda, surrendered it to military execution, thus striking tenor into the Irish, so that they becoming dissatisfied with the lord lieutenant, and insisting on his leaving the kingdom, he embarked for France, in 1650, and joined the exiled family. In order to retrieve his affairs, the marchioness went over to Ireland, and having in some measure succeeded in exempting her own estate from forfeiture, she remained in the country, and never saw her husband till after the restoration. In the mean while the marquis was employed in various Commissions in behalf of the king; and he rendered essential service to his cause by rescuing the duke of Gloucester out of the hands of the queen-mother, and preventing her severe treatment from inducing him to embrace the Catholic religion. He was also instrumental in detaching the Irish Catholic regiments from the service of France, one of which he was appointed to command, and in obtaining the surrender of the town of St. Ghilan, near Brussels, to the Spaniards. In a secret embassy to England for the purpose of inquiring into the actual state of the royal party, he had some narrow escapes from the spies of Cromwell; and at length, when Charles II. was restored to the throne of his ancestors, the Marquis accompanied him, and not only recovered his large estates in the county of Tipperary, but was raised to the dignity of duke of Ormond, and officiated as lord high steward of England at the king’s coronation. In 1662, he was again appointed lord lieutenant, and had considerable success in reducing the country to a state of tranquillity; and he promoted various very important and lasting -improvements, particularly with respect to the growth of flax and manufacture of linen. His attachment to earl Clarendon, however, involved him in the odium which pursued that great man; and notwithstanding the purity of his conduct, he was deprived of his government by the machinations of the duke of Buckingham, in 1669; but in the same year he was elected to the office of chancellor of the university of Oxford. In 1670 a desperate design was formed ' against him by colonel Blood, whom he had imprisoned in Ireland on account of his having engaged in a plot for the surprisal of D.ublin castle. Blood, being at this time in London, determined to seize his person, in his return from an entertainment given in the city to the Prince of Orange; and in the prosecution of his purpose, his accomplices dragged the duke out of his coach, and placed him behind one of them who was on horseback, in order to convey him to Tyburn, and execute him on the pubiic gallows; or, as others say, to take him out of the kingdom, and compel him to sign certain papers relating to a forfeited estate of Blood. The duke by his struggles threw both the man and himself from the horse, and by seasonable assistance he was released from the custody of these assassins. This daring act of violence excited the king’s resentment; but Blood, for certain reasons, having been taken into favour, hi* Majesty requested the duke to forgive the insult. To which message he replied, “that if the king could forgive Blood for attempting to steal his crown, he might easily forgive him for an attempt on his life; and that he would obey his Majesty’s pleasure without inquiring into his reasons.” For seven years the duke was neither in favour with the court nor employed by it; but at length, in 1677, he was surprised by a message announcing the king’s intention to visit him. The object of this visit was to disclose his Majesty’s resolution of appointing him to the lord lieutenancy of Ireland; and this resolution had been adopted by the influence of the duke of York, who had reason to imagine, that the “cabal,” or court party, proposed to introduce the duke of Monmouth into this high station in the room of the earl of Essex, who had been removed. In order to counteract this plan, the duke of York recommended his grace of Ormond to the king, as the most likely person to engage general confidence, and to unite discordant parties in both countries. On this the duke consented, and upon his arrival adopted vigorous measures for disarming the papists and maintaining public tranquillity; and though he did not escape calumny, the king determined to support him against all attempts for removing him, and declared with an oath, *' that while the duke of Ormond lived, he should never be put out of that government." He opposed the duke only in the measure of calling a parliament in Ireland for settling affairs, to which the king would not give his consent. In 1682, when he came over to England to acquaint the king with the state of his government, he was advanced to the dignity of an English dukedom; but, notwithstanding this mark of royal favour, he had given such offence by his importunity with respect to an Irish parliament, that immediately on his return he was apprised of an intention to remove him. Upon the accession of James, the duke caused him to be proclaimed, and soon after resigned his office and came over to England.; Although the duke’s principles did not suit the projects of the new reign, he was treated with respect by the king, and received from him the honour of a visit whilst he was confined to his chamber with the gout. He died at Kingston ^hall, in Dorsetshire, July 21, 1688, in the seventy-eighth year of his age, and was buried in Westminster-abbey.

It is almost superfluous to add, that with such an attachment to rhime, he wrote with ease: it is more to his credit that he wrote in general with correctness, and that his mind was stored with varied imagery and original turns of thought, which he conveys in flowing measure, always delicate and often harmonious, In his “Dialogue on Contentment,” and his poem “On the Fall of Man, in answer to bishop Sherlock,” he strongly reminds us of Pope in the celebrated essay, although in the occasional adoption of quaint conceits he appears to have followed the example of the earlier poets. Of his long pieces, perhaps the best is “Enthusiasm,” which he published in 175i , and which is distinguished by superior animation, and a glow of vigorous fancy suited to the subject. He depicts the classical enthusiast, and the virtuoso, with a strength of colouring not inferior to some of Pope’s happiest portraits in his Epistles. His controversial and critical verses, it has already been hinted, are rather to be considered as literary curiosities than as poems, for what can be a poem which excludes the powers of invention, and interdicts the excursions of fancy? Yet, if there be a merit in versifying terms of art, some may also be allowed to the introduction of questions of grammar, criticism, and theology, with so much ease and perspicuity.

Byrom’s lines “On the Patron of England” are worthy of notice, as having excited a controversy which is, perhaps, not yet decided. In this poem he endeavoured to prove the non-existence of St. George, the patron saint of England, by this argument chiefly, that the English were converted by Gregory the First, or the Great, who sent over St. Austin for that purpose; and he conceives that in the ancient Fasti, Georgius was erroneously set down for Gregorius, and that George nowhere occurs as patron until the reign of Edward III. He concludes with requesting that the matter may be considered by Willis, Stukeley, Ames, or Pegge, all celebrated antiquaries, or by the society of antiquaries at large, stating the plain question to be, “Whether England’s patron was a knight or a pope?” This challenge must have been given some time before the year 1759, when all these antiquaries were living, but in what publication, if printed at all, we have not been able to discover. Mr. Pegge, however, was living when Byrom’s collected poems appeared, and judged the question of sufficient importance to be discussed in the society. His “Observations on the History of St. George” were printed in the fifth volume of the Archseologia, in answer, not only to Byrom, but to Dr. Pettingal, who in 1760 expressed his unbelief in St. George by a “Dissertation on the Equestrian Figure worn by the knights of the Garter:” Mr. Pegge is supposed to have refuted both. The controversy was, however, revived at a much later period (1795) by Mr. Milner, of Winchester, who, in answer to the assertions of Gibbon, the historian, has supported the reality of the person of St. George with much ingenuity.

, a learned Polander, and a very voluminous writer, was descended from a good family, and born in 1567. His parents dying when he was a child, he was educated by his grandmother on the mother’s side, in the city of Prosovitz; and made so good use of the instructions of one of his uncles, that at ten years of age he could write Latin, compose music, and make verses. After this, he went to continue his studies at Cracow, and there took the habit of a Pominican. Being sent into Italy, he read lectures of philosophy at Milan, and of divinity at Bologna. After he returned into his own country, he preached in Posnania, and in Cracow, with the applause of all his hearers; and taught philosophy and divinity. He was principal of a college of his own order; and did several considerable services to that and to his country. Afterwards he went to Rome; where he was received with open arms by the pope, and lodged in the Vatican. From his holiness he certainly deserved that reception, for he imitated Baronius closely in his ambition to favour the power, and raise the glory, of the papal see. His inconsiderate and violent zeal, however, led him to representations in his history of which he had reason to repent. He had very much reviled the emperor Lewis of Bavaria, and razed him ignominiously out of the catalogue of emperors. The duke of Bavaria was so incensed at this audaciousness, that, not satisfied with causing an apology to be wrote for that emperor, he brought an action in form against the annalist, and got him condemned to make a public retractation, and he was also severely treated in the “Apology of Lewis of Bavaria,” published by George Herwart; who affirms, that Bzovius had not acted in his annals like a man of honesty, or wit, or judgment, or memory, or any other good quality of a writer. Bzovius would probably have continued in the Vatican till his deat^h, if the murder of one of his servants, and the loss of a great sum of money, which was carried off by the murderer, had not struck him with such a terror, as obliged him to retire into the convent of Minerva, where he died in 1637, aged seventy. The letter which the king of Poland writ to the pope in 1633, does our Dominican much honour; for in it the king supplicates Urban VIII. most humbly to suffer the good old man to return into Poland, that he might employ him in composing a history of the late transactions there. He declares, that he shall esteem himself much indebted to his holiness, if he will be pleased to grant him that favour, which he so earnestly requests of him.

, archbishop of Thessalonica in the fourteenth century, under the empire of the Andronicus’s, wrgainst the Latins; the first to prove that the division between the Greek and Latin churches is owing in a great measure to the conduct of the Pope, who wishes to act independently of an œcumenical council, contrary to the usage of the church the second is a 'more direct attack on the infallibility of the Pope, and reduces his primacy to merely a primacy of honour; and he urges many arguments against the assumed power of the pope which are perfectly consistent with the opinions on which the reformers afterwards proceeded. These treatises, Du Pin says, are written with method, perspicuity, and learning. They were at first printed at London in Greek, without date, according to Du Pin, but we have not been able to discover this edition. They were, however, published in English at London, in 1560; or at least the latter of them, under the title “A Treatise containing a declaration of the Pope’s usurped primacie; written in Greek above seven hundred yeares since by Nilus archbishop of Thessalonica. Translated by Thomas Gressop, student in Oxford,” 8vo. There are also editions in Greek and Latin at Basil, 1544, Francfort, 1555, and with Salmasius’s notes, 1608. Our author also wrote a large work on the procession of the Holy Ghost, in opposition to the Latins.

was a native of Cavaillon, in Provence, where he became a canon of the cathedral, archdeacon and bishop in 1334. He was also honoured with the rank of chancellor to Sancha, queen of Sicily, by her husband Robert, in 1341, and jointly with that princess was regent during the minority of Joan her grand-daughter. In 1366, he was appointed patriarch of Jerusalem, and had the charge of the bishopric of Marseilles and at last pope Urban V. raised him to the rank of cardinal, and vicar-general spiritual and temporal in the diocese of Avignon, and while the popes resided at Avignon, Gregory XI. made him superinterulant of the papal territory in Italy. He died at Perugia in 1372. He wrote a treatise “De Nugis Curie-ilium,” some sermons, and two books on the life and miracles of St. Mary Magdalen. Petrarch was his particular friend, and dedicated to him his treatise on a solitary life; and many of his letters are addressed to him. He is likewise mentioned with high praise by other learned contemporaries.

, an eminent botanist and physician, was born at Arezzo, in the district of Florence, in 1519. He was educated under Luke Ghinus, superintendant of the public garden at Pisa, where he appears to have acquired his taste for botanical pursuits. There also he was appointed first professor of physic and botany in the university, and afterwards first physician to pope Clement VIII. a promotion which required his residence at Home, where he died in 1603. He described, says Dr. Pulteney, with exquisite skill, the plants of his own country, and left an herbarium of 768 species. He extended Gesner’s idea, and commenced the period of systematic arrangement. In his “Libri XVI de Plantis,” published in 1583, at Florence, he has arranged upwards of 800 plants into classes, founded, after the general division of the trees from herbs, on characters drawn from the fruit particularly, from the number of the capsules and cells; the number, shape, and disposition of the seeds; and from the situation of the corculum, radicle, or eye of t]ie seed, which he raised to great estimation. The orders, or subdivisions, are formed on still more various relations. On the other hand, the biographer of Linnceus remarks, that, though his genius was inventive, his knowledge of botany was neither original nor universal. He missed both leisure and opportunity. Clusius had discovered more fresh plants than he ever was acquainted with. His herbal did not contain nine hundred species, a fact fully proved by the Florentine botanist Micheli, who had it in his possession. A provision of this kind was too small to give a comprehensive view of botany, and the knowledge which Ca?salpinus acquired of the internal structure of plants was too defective to point out the most perfect order. He was only directed by the fruit, and mostly by that part on which tlui shoots or germins repose. This system had its defects, but it brought CiEsalpinus much nearer to the truth, and he discovered more real similarities, more natural classes, than all the botanists who preceded, and many who followed him. His speculations in anatomy are still more ingenious. He describes very clearly the circulation of the blood through the heart, and was acquainted with the uses of the valves. Douglas thinks him entitled to equal praise with Harvey, who only completed what he had nearly achieved. He clearly, Douglas says, describes the contraction and dilatation of the heart, which is shewn from the following passage from his fourth book “Question um Peripateticarum.” “The lungs,” he says, “drawing the warm blood through a vein (the pulmonary artery) like the arteries, out of the right ventricle of the heart, and returning it by an anastomosis to the venal artery (the pulmonary vein) which goes to the left ventricle of the heart, the cool air being in the mean time let in through the canals of the aspera arteria, which are extended along the venal artery, but do not communicate with it by inosculations, as Galen imagined, cools it only by touching. To this circulation of the blood out of the right ventricle of the heart through the lungs into its left ventricle, what appears upon dissection answers very well: for there are two vessels which end in the right ventricle, and two in the left: but one only carries the blood in, the other sends it out, the membranes being contrived for that purpose.” His works on the practice of medicine have also their portion of merit. “Questionum Medicarum Libri ii.;” “De Facultatibus Medicamentorum Libri duo,” Venet. 1593, 4to; “Speculum Artis Medicae Hippocraticae, exhibens dignoscendos curandosque morbos, in quo multa visuntur, quae a prjcclarissimis medicis intacta relicta erant,” Lyons, 1601-2-3, 3 vols. 8vo.

, a cardinal, was born in 1469, at Cajeta, a town in the kingdom of Naples. His proper name was Thomas de Vio, but he took that of Cajetan from the place of his nativity. He was entered of the order of Dominic, of which he became an illustrious ornament; and having taken a doctor’s degree when he was about twenty-two years of age, he taught philosophy and divinity first at Paris, and afterwards at Rome. He went regularly through all the honours of his order, till he was made general of it; which office he exercised for ten years. He defended the authority of the pope, which suffered greatly at the council of Nice, in a work entitled “Of the Power of the Pope;” and for his zeal upon this occasion, was made bishop of Cajeta. Then he was raised to the archiepiscopal see of Palermo; and in 1517 was made a cardinal by pope Leo X. The year after he was sent a legate into Germany, to quell the commotions which Luther had raised by his opposition to Leo’s indulgences: buJt Luther, being under the particular protection of Frederic elector of Saxony, set him at defiance; and though, in obedience to the cardinal’s summons, he repaired to Augsburg, yet he rendered his endeavours of no effect. Cajetan indeed was the most improper person that could have been selected to oppose Luther, having nothing to advance hut the arrogant dictates of mere authority. He was, however, more advantageously employed in several other negotiations and transactions, being not only a man of letters, but having a peculiar turn for business; and at length died, in 1534, when he was sixty-five years old.

, a famous engraver, son of John. Callot, herald of arms in Lorrain, was descended from an ancient and noble family, and born at Nancy in 1593. He cherished almost from hig infancy a taste and spirit for the belles lettres, as well as for the fine arts. When he was only twelve years old he set off for Rome, without the knowledge of his parents, in order to see the many curiositjes there he had heard so much talk of; but his money failing, he joined himself to a party of Bohemians, who were going into Italy, and went with them to Florence. There he was taken under the protection of an officer of the great duke, who placed him to learn designing under Remigio Canta Gailina, a skilful painter and engraver. Afterwards he got to Rome, where he was known by a merchant of Nancy, and sent immediately home to his parents. When he was about 14 years of age he left home again, and directed his course towards Rome but being discovered by his elder*- brother, who was at Turin about business, he was brought buck a second time to Nancy. His passion, however, for seeing Rome being still ardent and irresistible, his father at length gave him leave to go in the train of a gentleman whom the duke of Lorrain sent to the pope.

, a learned Benedictine of the college of St. Vanncs, was born at Mesnil-la-Horgue, near Commercy, Feb. 26, 1672, and was first educated in the priory of Breuii. In 1687 he went to study at the university of Pont-a-Mousson, where he was taught a course of rhetoric. On leaving this class, he entered among the Benedictines in the abbey of St. Mansuy, in the fauxbourg of Toul, Oct. 17, 1688, and mad,e profession in the same place Oct. 23, 1689. He began his philosophical course in the abbey of fcfe. Evre, and completed that and his theological studies in the abbey of St. Munster. At his leisure hours he studied the Hebrew language with great attention and success, and likewise improved his knowledge of the Greek. In 1696 he was sent with some of his companions to the abbey of Moyenmoutier, where they studied the Holy Scriptures under P. D. Hyacinthe Alliot. Two years aftef, in 1698, Calmet was appointed to teach philosophy and theology to the young religious of that monastery, an employment which he filled until 1704, when he was sent, with the rank of sub-prior, to the abbey of Munster. There he was at the head of an academy of eight or ten religious, with whom he pursued his biblical studies, and having, while at Moyenmoutier written commentaries and dissertations, on various parts of the Bible, he here retouched and improved these, although without any other design, at this time, than his own instruction. During a visit, however, at Paris, in 1706, he was advised by the abbe Duguet, to whom he had been recommended by Mabillon, to publish his commentaries in French, and the first volume accordingly appeared in 1707. In 1715 he became prior of Lay, and in 1718 the chapter-general appointed bim abb 6 of St. Leopold, of Nancy, and the year following he was made visitor of the congregation. In 1728 he was chosen abbe* of Senones, on which occasion he resigned his priory of Lay. When pope Benedict XIII. confirmed his election, the cardinals proposed to his holiness that Calmet should also have the title of bishop in partibus infiddium, with power to exercise the episcopal functions in those parts of the province which are exempt from the jurisdiction of the ordinary; but this Calmet refused, and wrote on the subject to Rome. The pope in Sept. 1729, addressed a brief to him, accepting of his excuses, and some time after sent him a present of his works, in 3 vols. fol. Calmet took possession of the abbey of Senones, January 3, 1729, and continued his studies, and increased the library and museum belonging to the abbey with several valuable purchases, particularly of the medals of the deceased M. de Corberon, secretary of slate, and of the natural curiosities of M, Voile. Here be died Oct. 25, 1757, respected by all ranks, Roman catholics and Protestants, for his learning and candour, and by his more particular friends and those of his own order, for his amiable temper and personal virtues. His learning, indeed, was most extensive, as the greater part of his long life was devoted to study, but amidst such vast accumulation of materials, we are not surprized that he was sometimes deficient in selection, and appears rather as a collector of facts, than as an original thinker. His principal works are, 1. “Commentaire litteral sur tous les livres de l'Aneten et da Nouyeau Testament,” 1707 1716, 23 vols. 4to; reprinted in 26 vols. 4to, and fol. and abridged in 14 vols. 4to. Rondet published a new edition of this abridgment in 17 vols. 4to, Avignon, 1767 1773. M. Fourmont, Arabic professor in the royal college, had begun an attack on this commentary, because Calmet had not, as he thought, paid sufficient respect to the rabbins, but the king (Louis XIV.) and the cardinal de Noailles obliged him to desist. The celebrated father Simon wrote some letters against Calmet, which were communicated to him by Pinsonnat, the Hebrew professor, who did not approve of them, nor did Anquetille, the librarian of Tellier, archbishop of Rheims, nor were they published until eighteen or twenty years afterwards, and even then the censors expunged many illiberal passages respecting Calmet. 2. The “Dissertations and Prefaces” belonging to his commentary, published separately with nineteen new Dissertations, Paris, 1720, 2 vols. 4to. 3. “Histoire de PAncien et du Nouveau Testament,” intended as an introduction to Fleury’s “Ecclesiastical History,” 2 and 4 vols. 4to; and 5 and 7 vols. 12mo. 4. “Dictionnaire historique, critique, et chronologique de la Bible.” Paris, 1730, 4 vols. fol. This work, which is a valuable treasure of sacred history and criticism, was soon made known to the English public by a translation, in 3 vols. fol. London, 1732, by Sam.D'Oyly, M. A. vicar of St. Nicholas, Rochester, and John Colson, F. R. S. vicar of Chalk, in Kent, a work elegantly printed and embellished with a profusion of fine engravings. A new edition appeared in 17^5, 4to, with valuable additions from subsequent critics, travellers, and philosophers. 5. “Histoire ecclesiasiique et civile de la Lorraine,” 3 vols. fol. reprinted 1745, in 5 vols. fol. 6. “Bibliotheque des Ecrivains de Lorraine,” fol, 1751. 7. “Histoire universelle sacrée et profane,” 15 vols. 4to. This Calmet did not live to finish, and in other respects it is not his best work. 7. “Dissertations sur les apparitions des Anges, des Demons, et des Esprits, et sur les Revenans et Vampires de Hongrie,” Paris, 1746, 12mo, and Einfidlen, 1749, 12mo, a work, say the French critics, in which there are many symptoms of old age, and its credulous weaknesses. It was however translated and published in English in 1759, 8vo. The author admits the reality of apparitions, on the authority of the scriptures, but discredits many of the miraculous stories concerning them to which his own church has given currency. 9. f Commentaire litteral, historique, et moral, sur la Regie de St. Benoit,“1754, 2 vols. 4to. 10.” De la Poesie et Musique des anciens Hebreux," Amst. 1723, 8vo. His conjectures on this subject, Dr. Burney thinks, are perhaps as probable as those of any one of the numerous authors who have exercised their skill in expounding and defining what some have long since thought involved in Cimmerian darkness. Calmet also left a vast number of manuscripts, or rather manuscript collections, as it had long been his practice to copy, or employ others to copy, whatever he found curious in books. In 1733, he deposited in the royal library, a correct transcript of the Vedam, a work which the natives of Hiudostan attribute to their legislator Brama, who received it, according to their tradition, from God himself. This copy came into Calmet' s possession by means of a bramin who had been converted by the Jesuit missionaries. Calmet’s life was written by Dom Fange, his nephew and successor in the abbey of Senones, and published in 8vo. It was afterwards translated into Italian by Benedetto Passionei, and published at Rome in 1770.

, a learned German chronologist, the son of a Lutheran peasant, was born at Gorschleben, a village of Thuringia, in 1556. Being very poor in his youth, he got his livelihood by his skill in music, which he learned very early, and was so liberally encouraged at Magdeburgh, that he was enabled to study for some time at the university of Helmstadt, where he made great progress in the learned languages, and in chronology and astronomy. He died at Leipsic, where he held the office of chantor, in 1615. His “Opus Chronologicum” appeared first in 1605, on the principles of Joseph Scaliger, for which he was not a little commended by Scaliger. Isaac Casaubon, also, a better judge in this case than Scaliger, as being under less temptation to be partial, has bestowed high praises on Calvisius. In 1611, Calvisius published a work against the Gregorian calendar, under the title of “Elenchus calendarii a papa Gregorio XIII. comprobati;” or, a “Confutation of the calendar, approved and established by pope Gregory XI 11.” Vossius tells us, that he not only attempts in this work to shew the errors of the Gregorian calendar, but offers also a new and more concise, as well as truer method of reforming the calendar. He was the author also of “Enodatio duarum questionum, viz. circa annum Nativitatis et Tempus Ministerii Christi,” Ertbrd, 1610, 4to. His “Chronology” was often reprinted. Of his musical talents, he has left ample proofs to posterity in his short treatise called “Μελοποια, sive Melodiæ condendæ ratio, quam vulgò musicam poeticam vocant, ex veris fundamentis extracta et explicata,” 1592. This ingenious tract contains, though but a small duodecimo volume, all that was known at the time concerning harmonics and practical music; as he has compressed into his little book the science of most of the best writers on the subject; to which he has added short compositions of his own, to illustrate their doctrines and precepts. With respect to composition, he not only gives examples of concords and discords, and their use in combination, but little canons and fugues of almost every kind then known. He composed, in 1615, the 150th psalm in twelve parts, for three choirs, as an Epithalamium on the nuptials of his friend Casper Ankelman, a merchant of Hamburgh, and published it in folio at Leipsic the same year. Several of his hymns and motets appear in a collection of Lutheran church music, published at Leipsic, 1618, in eight volumes 4to, under the following title: “Florilegium portens CXV. selectissimas Cantiones, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, voc. prsBstantissimorum Auctorum.” Some of these which Dr. Burney had the curiosity to score, have the laws of harmony and fugue preserved inviolate.

Mr. Cambridge was not so fortunate in a hero. He was content to take up Scriblerus where Pope and Swift, or rather Arbuthnot, left him, a motley, ideal being, without an exemplar, combining in one individual, all that is found ridiculous in forgotten volumes, or among the pretenders to science and the believers of absurdities. Mr. Cambridge’s hero, therefore, without any qualities to se< cure our esteem, is an antiquary, a pedant, an alchymist, and what seldom is found among such characters, a poet. In conducting him through a series of adventures, upon the plan sketched by the triumvirate above mentioned, it is with great difficulty that he is able to avoid the error they fell into, either of inventing nonsense for the sake of laughing at it, or of glancing their ridicule at the enthusiasm of useful research, and the ardour of real science and justifiable curiosity. The composition of the Scribleriad is in general so regular, spirited, and poetical, that we cannot but wish the author had chosen a subject of more permanent interest. The versification is elegant, and the epithets chosen with singular propriety. The events, although without much connection, all add something to the character of the hero, and the conversations, most gravely ironical, while they remind us of the serious epics, are never unnecessarily protracted.

, a celebrated Italian philosopher, was born at Stilo, a small village in Calabria, Sept. 5, 1568. At thirteen he understood the ancient orators and poets, and wrote discourses and verses on various subjects; and the year after, his father purposed to send him to Naples to study law: but young Campanella, having other views, entered himself into the order of the Dominicans. Whilst he was studying philosophy at San Giorgio, his professor was invited to dispute upon some theses which were to be maintained by the Franciscans; but finding himself indisposed, he sent Campanella in his room, who argued with so much subtilty and force, as to charm his auditory. When his course of philosophy was finished, he was sent to Cosenza to study divinity: but his inclination led him to philosophy. Having conceived a notion that the truth was not to be found in the peripatetic philosophy, he anxiously examined all the Greek, Latin, and Arabian commentators upon Aristotle, and began to hesitate more and more with regard to the doctrines of that sect. His doubts still remaining, he determined to peruse the writings of Plato, Pliny, Galen, the Stoics, the followers of Democritus, and especially those of Telesius; and he found the doctrine of his masters to be false in so many points, that he began to doubt even of uncontroverted matters of fact. At the age of twenty- two he began to commit his new system to writing, and in 1500 he went to Naples to get it printed. Some time after he was present at a disputation in divinity, and took occasion to commend what was spoken by an ancient professor of his order, as very judicious;but the old man, jealous, perhaps, of the glory which Campanella had gained, bade him, in a very contemptuous manner, be silent, since it did not belong to a young man, as he was, to interpose in questions of divinity. Campanella 'fired at this, and said, that, young as he was, he was able to teach him; and immediately confuted what the professor had advanced, tothe satisfaction of the audience. The professor conceived a mortal hatred to him on this account, and accused him to the inquisition, as if he had gained by magic that vast extent of learning which he had acquired without a master. His writings now made a great noise in the world, and the novelty of his opinions stirring up many enemies agaiast him at Naples, he removed to Rome; but not meeting with a better reception in that city, he proceeded to Florence, and presented some of his works to the grand duke, Ferdinand I. the patron of learned men. After a short stay there, as he was passing through Bologna, in his way to Padua, his writings were seized, and carried to the inquisition at Rome, which, however, gave him little disturbance, and he continued his journey. At Padua, he was employed in instructing some young Venetians in his doctrines, and composing some pieces. Returning afterwards to Rome, he met with a hetter reception than before, and was honoured with the friendship of several cardinals. In 1598 he went to Naples, where he staid but a short time, then visited his own country. Some expressions which he dropped, with regard to the government of the Spaniards, and the project of an insurrection, being reported to the Spaniards, he was seized and carried to Naples in 1599, as a criminal against the state, and put seven times to the rack, and afterwards condemned to perpetual imprisonment. At first he was not permitted to see any person, and denied the use of pen, ink, and paper; but, being afterwards indulged with these implements, he wrote several of his pieces in prison; some of which Tobias Adamus of Saxony procured from him, and published in Germany. Pope Urban VIII. who knew him from his writings, having obtained his liberty from Philip IV. of Spain in May 1626, Campanella went immediately to Rome, where he continued some years in the prisons of the inquisition, but was a prisoner only in name. In 1629 he was discharged, but the resentment of the Spaniards was not abated. The friendship shewn him by the pope, who settled a considerable pension, and conferred many other favours on him, excited their jealousy; and his correspondence with some of the French nation, gave them new suspicions of him. Being informed of their designs against him, he went out of Rome, disguised like a minim, in the French ambassador’s coach, and, embarking for France, landed at Marseilles in 1634. Mr. Peiresc, being informed of his arrival, sent a letter to bring him to Aix, where he entertained him some months. The year following he went to Paris, and was graciously received by Lewis XIII. and cardinal Richelieu; the latter procured him a pension of 2000 livres, and often consulted him on the affairs of Italy. He passed the remainder of his days in a monastery of the Dominicans at Paris, and died March 21, 1639.

, an Italian poet and prelate, was born in 1427 at Cavelli, a village of Campania, of parents so obscure that he bore no name but that of his country, and was employed in his early years as a shepherd, in which situation an ecclesiastic discovering some promise of talents in him, sent him to Naples, where he studied under Laurentius Valla. He went afterwards to Perugia, where he rose to be professor of eloquence, and filled that chair with so much reputation, that when, in 1459, pope Pius II. happened to pass through Perugia in his way to the council of Mantua, he bestowed his patronage on him, and made him bishop of Crotona, and secondly of Teramo. Enjoying the same favour under pope Paul II. this pontiff sent him to the congress of Ratisbon, which assembled for the purpose of consulting on a league of the Christian princes against the Turks. Sixtus IV. who had been one of his scholars at Perugia, made him successively governor of Todi, of Foligno, and of Citta di Castello; but the pope having thought proper to besiege this last named city, because the inhabitants made some scruple about receiving his troops, Campano, touched with the hardships they were likely to suffer, wrote to the pope with so much freedom and spirit as to enrage his holiness, and provoke him to deprive him of his government, and banish him from the ecclesiastical states. Campano on this went to Naples, but not rinding the reception he expected, he retired to his bishopric at Teramo, where he died July 15, 1477, of chagrin and disappointment. His works, which were first printed at Rome in 1495, fol. consist of several treatises on moral philosophy, discourses, and funeral orations, and nine books of letters, in which there is some curious information with respect both to the political and literary history of his times. This volume contains likewise, the life of pope Pius II. and of Braccio of Perugia, a famous military character, and lastly, of eight book of elegies and epigrams, some of which are rather of too licentious a nature to accord with the gravity of his profession. These, or part of them, were reprinted at Leipsic in 1707, and in 1734. Campano was at one time a corrector of the press to Udalric, called Gallus, the first printer of Rome, and wrote prefaces to Livy, Justin, Plutarch, and some other of the works which issued from that press.

His biographer, Dr. Campbell, says of him, that he was a nobleman of great political abilities, an eloquent and distinguished senator, of high spirit, undaunted courage, and eminent military talents. But he has been accused of being much actuated by motives of avarice and ambition; and, indeed, the uniformity with which he supported alt the measures of government at one period, and opposed them at another, cannot be reconciled to principles of real patriotism. He had, however, the honour to be celebrated in very high terms both by Pope and Thomson. In private life his conduct is said to have been very respectable. He was an affectionate husband, and an indulgent master. He seldom parted with his servants till age had rendered them incapable of their employments; and then he made provision for their subsistence. He was liberal to the poor, and particularly to persons of merit in distress: but though he was ready to patronize deserving persons, he was extremely cautious not to deceive any by lavish promises, or leading them to form vain expectations. He was a strict œconomist, and paid his tradesmen punctually every month; and though he maintained the dignity of his rank, he took care that no part of his income should be wasted in empty pomp, or unnecessary t-xpences." Mr. Macpherson’s character of him, as a public character, is less favourable, but the reader may consult, with more confidence, the judicious and impartial sketches in Coxe’s Life of Walpole.

, an eminent cardinal of the Romish church, and an English bishop, was a native of Bologna, the son of John Campegio, a learned lawyer, and was himself professor of law at Padua. After the death of his wife, he went into the church, and in 1510 became auditor of the Rota, and in 1512 bishop of Feltria. Being afterwards, in 1517, created cardinal, he was sent as pope’s legate into England in the following year. His chief business at the English court was to persuade Henry VIII. to join the confederation of Christian princes against the Turks. He was very favourably received on this occasion, and had several spiritualities bestowed upon him, among which was the bishoprick of Salisbury, but not having been able to accomplish the business of his mission, he returned to Rome. When the controversy respecting Henry’s divorce began, in 1527, -cardinal Campegio was sent a second time into England, to call a legantine court, where he and his colleague cardinal Wolsey were to sit as judges. Having arrived in London Oct. 1528, the first session began at Blackfriars, May 31, 1529, and the trial lasted until July 23, when the queen Catherine appealing to the pope, the court was adjourned until Sept. 28, and was then dissolved. Afterwards Campegio was recalled to Rome, the king making him considerable presents upon his departure; but a rumour being spread, that he carried along with him a treasure belonging to cardinal Wolsey, whose downfall was at this time contrived, and who, it was suspected, intended to follow him to Rome, he was pursued by the king’s orders, and overtaken at Calais. His baggage was searched, but nothing being found of the kind suspected, he complained louilly of this violation of his sacred character. In this, however, he obtained no redress, and when king Henry understood that the see of Rome was not disposed to favour him with a divorce from his queen, he deprived Campegio of his see of Salisbury. He died at Rome in August 1539, leaving the character of a man of learning, and a patron of learned men, and much esteemed by Erasmus, Sadolet, and other eminent men of that time. His letters only remain, which contain many historical particulars, and were published in “Epistolarum miscellanearum, libri decem,” Basil, 1550, fol. Hume represents his conduct, in the matter of the divorce, as prudent and temperate, although somewhat ambiguous.

, an ingenious Roman catholic writer, was born in London in 1540, and educated at Christ’s hospital. Being a boy of great parts, he was selected while at school, to make an oration before queen Mary at her accession to the crown; and from thence elected scholar of St. John’s college in Oxford by Thomas White, the founder of it, in 1553. He took his degrees of B. and M. A. regularly, and afterwards went into orders. In 1566, when queen Elizabeth was entertained at Oxford, he made an oration before her, and also kept an act in St. Mary’s church, with very great applause from that learned queen. In 1568, he went into Ireland, where he wrote a history of that country in two books; but being then discovered to have embraced the popish religion, and to labour for proselytes, he was seized and detained for some time. He escaped soon after into England; but in 1571 transported himself into the Low Countries, and settled in the English college of Jesuits at Doway, where he openly renounced the protestant religion, and had the degree of B. D. conferred upon him. From thence he went to Rome, where he was admitted into the society of Jesuits in 1573; and afterwards sent by the general of his order into Germany. He lived for some time in Brune, and then at Vienna where he composed a tragedy, called “Nectar and Ambrosia,” which was acted before the emperor with great applause. Soon after he settled at Prague in Bohemia, and taught rhetoric and philosophy for about six years in a college of Jesuits, which had been newly erected there. At length being called to Rome, he was sent by the command of pope Gregory XIII. into England, where he arrived in June 1580. Here he performed all the offices of a zealous provincial, and was diligent in propagating his religion by all the arts of conversation and Writing. He seems to have challenged the English clergy to a disputation, by a piece entitled “Rationes decem oblati certaminis in causa fidei, redditse academicis Angliae,” which was printed at a private press in 1581; and many copies of which, as Wood tells us, were dispersed that year in St. Mary’s church at Oxford, during the time of an act. It was afterwards printed in English, and ably refuted by the English divines. In short, Campian, though nobody knew where he was, was yet so active as to fall under the cognizance of Walsingham, secretary of state; and Walsingham employed a person to find him out. He was at last discovered in disguise at the house of a private gentleman in Berks, from whence he was conveyed iiv great procession to the Tower of London, with a paper fastened to his hat, on which was written “Edmund Campian, a most pernicious Jesuit.” Afterwards, having been found guilty of high treason in adhering to the bishop of Rome, the queen’s enemy, and in coming to England todisturb the peace and quiet of the realm, he was hanged and quartered, with other Romish priests, at Tyburn, December 1, 1581.

, an exemplary French prelate, was born at Paris in 1582, and on account of his excellent character and talents, was nominated to the bishopric of Bellay by Henry IV. in 1609, before he was of age, but having obtained the pope’s dispensation, he was consecrated on Dec. 30th of the same year. From this time he appears to have devoted his time and talents to the edification of his flock, and of the people at large, by frequent preaching, and more frequent publication of numerous works calculated to divert their attention to the concerns of an immortal life. In his time romances began to be the favourite books with all who would be thought readers of taste; and Camus, considering that it would not be easy to persuade them to leave off such books without supplying them with some kind of substitute, published several works of practical piety with a mixture of romantic narrative, by which he hoped to attract and amuse the attention of romancereaders, and draw them on insensibly to matters of religious importance. He contrived, therefore, that the lovers, in these novels, while they encountered the usual perplexities, should be led to see the vanity and perishable nature of all human enjoyments, and to form resolutions of renouncing worldly delights, and embracing a religious life. Among these works we find enumerated, 1. “Dorothee, ou recit de la pitoyable issue d'une volorite violentee,” Paris, 1621. 2. “Alexis,” 1^22, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. L'Hyacinte, histoire Catalane,“ibid. 1627, 8yo. 4.” Alcime, relation funeste, &c.“ibid. 12mo, 1625, &c. But the principal object of his reforming spirit was the conduct of the rnonks, or mendicant friars, against whom he wrote various severe remonstrances, and preached against them with a mixture of religious fervour and satirical humour. Among the works he published against them are, 1.” Le Directeur desinteresse,“Paris, 1632, 12mo. 2.” Desappropriation claustrale,“Besangon, 1634. 3.” Le Rabat-joy e du triomphe monagal.“4.” L'anti-Moine bien prepare,“1632, &c. &c. These monks teazed the cardinal Richelieu to silence him, and the cardinal told him,” I really find no other fault with you but this horrible bitterness against the monks; were it not for that, I would canonize you.“”I wish that may come to pass,“said the bishop,” “for then we should both have our wish; you would be pope, and I a saint.” Many of his bons-mots were long in circulation, and show that he had the courage to reprove vices and absurdities among the highest classes. In 1620 he established in the city of Bellay a convent of capuchins, and in 1622 one for the nuns of the visitation, instituted by St. Francis de Sales. In 1629 he resigned his bishopric that he might pass the remainder of his days in retirement, in the abbey of Cluny in Normandy, but the archbishop of Rouen, unwilling that so active a member of the church should not be employed in public services, associated him in his episcopal cares, by appointing him his grand vicar. At length he finally retired to the hospital of incurables in Paris, where he died April 26, 1652. Moreri has enumerated a large catalogue of his works, the principal of which, besides what we have enumerated, are, “L' Esprit de S. Frangois de Sales,” 6 vols. 8vo, reduced to one by a doctor of the Sorbonne; and “L'Avoisinement des Protestans avec TEglise Romaine,” republished in 1703 by Richard Simon, under the title of “Moyens de reunir les Protestans avec l'Eglise Romaine.” Simon asserted, that Bossuet’s exposition of the catholic faith was no more than this work in a new dress.

, one of the restorers and improvers of anatomy, was born at Ferrara, in Italy, in 1515, where he acquired so much reputation for his skill in medicine, that he was invited to Rome by pope Julius III. who made him archiator, and his principal physician. On the death of the pope he returned to Ferrara, and pursued his anatomical researches. He first discovered the valves of the veins, which were afterwards more completely described by Vesalius. The work by which he is known, of which only four complete copies are said to be in existence, is “Musculorum humani corporis picturata dissectio,” 4to, printed, Haller thinks, in 1543, no date or place named. The figures, twenty-seven in number, are neatly engraved on copper, and represent the muscles of the upper extremities. In the preface, he promises a continuation of the work, which he probably did not finish. He died in 1579.

, seigneur du Fresne, counsellor of state, was born 1551 at Paris, and carefully educated by his father James de la Canaye, an eminent advocate. At the age of fifteen, having declared himself a Calvinist, he went into Italy, Germany, and to Constanstinople; and published an account of his travels to that city, under the title of “Ephemerides.” He shone afterwards at the bar, and was counsellor of state under Henry III. Henry IV. sent him ambassador into England, Germany, and to Venice. He assisted at the famous conference of Fontainebleau, 1600, between cardinal du Perron and DuplessisMornay, and afterwards turned catholic. The year following he was sent ambassador to Venice, where he contributed greatly to the termination of the disputes between that republic and pope Paul V. He died at his return to Paris, February 27, 1610. Three vols. fol. of his embassies were published in 1635, with his life prefixed to the first.

, was an artist, whose real name was De Witte (or White), although Sandrart calls him Candido, as also does De Piles, on account of that name being inscribed on some of the prints engraved after the designs of this artist. Some authors affirm that he was born at Munich; but Descamps asserts, that he was born at Bruges, in Flanders, in 1548, although he probably might have resided for several years at Munich, and perhaps have died there. He painted with equal success in fresco and in oil, and had an excellent genius for modelling. He worked in conjunction with Vasari at the pope’s palace in Rome, and was also employed at Florence by the grand duke; ia both places affording competent proofs of his skill, and gaining reputation; till at last he was taken into the service of the elector Maximilian of Bavaria, and spent the remainder of his life in the court of that prince. Several prints are published by Sadeler, after his designs and paintings particularly the Hermits, and the Four Doctors of the Church.

Of his personal history, we are told that in his youth he was volatile, and that when his wife died he became enamoured of her sister, but could not obtain a dispensation from the pope to marry her, although he endeavoured to cain his favour by painting two fine pictures for his holiness. When employed by Philip II. of Spain, he wished to obtain his leave to marry the lady, but was again unsuccessful, and it is supposed the disappointment contributed to his death, which happened at the Escurial in 1585. In the royal collection at Paris there are a “Sleeping Cupid,” as large as life, and likewise “Judith with her Attendant,” which do honour to this master. In the Pembroke collection at Wilton, there is a picture, representing Christ bearing his cross, which is ascribed to Cangiagi.

, a German poet and statesman, and privy counsellor of state, was of an ancient and illustrious family in Brandenburg, and born at Berlin in 1654, five months after his father’s death. After his early studies, he travelled to France, Italy, Holland, and England; and upon his return to his country, was charged with important negociations by Frederic II. and Frederic III. Canitz united the statesman with the poet; and was conversant in many languages, dead as well as living. His German poems were published for the tenth time, 1750, in 8vo. He is said to haVe taken Horace for his model, "and to have written purely and delicately; and the French biographers complimented him with the title of the Pope of Germany. He not only cultivated the fine arts himself, but gave all the encouragement he could to them in others. He died at Berlin in 1699, highly praised for the excellence of his private character.

, a Franciscan friar, was born in the village of Capistran in Italy, 1385, and acquired prodigious reputation by his zeal, his eloquence, and the regularity of his manners. He was sent into Bohemia, in order to effect the conversion of the Hussites; and he preached a crusade against the Turks, in Germany, in Hungary, and in Poland. His eloquence seconded so happily the valour of Hunniades, that he contributed greatly to the victories which the Christians gained over Mahomet, and particularly to the famous battle of Belgrade in 1456. These two men divided so evidently the glory of the victories which were gained, that it was thought there was a jealousy between them; for in the account which Capistran gave of the victory of Belgrade, no notice was taken of John Hunniades; and the relations of the latter did not make the least mention of Capistran. Capistran died a little after the victory last mentioned, Oct. 23, 1456, and was buried at Wiilak in Hungary. We are told, that many miracles were wrought at his tomb, and that his prayers put a stop to the miracles of a lay-brother. He was canonized in October 1690 by pope Alexander VIII. but had before been beatified by Gregory XV. Some very surprising effects are related of his eloquence, as that he prevailed on his hearers to make a pile of, and burn, all their implements of gaming, and then take up arms against the Turks. He did not, however, depend upon his eloquence, but employed the secular arm in the work of conversion, and put to death those whom he found refractory. His body, after being buried above a century, was removed to another monastery when the Turks took Sirmisch, and afterwards, when the protestants got possession of that monastery, it was thrown into a well. His principal work was, “Speculum Clericorum,” a treatise on the power of the pope and councils, &c. which he maintained in the genuine spirit of persecution.

He affronted a knight of some consequence, and was therefore thrown into prison. He found means to escape by night, and went to Sicily; where not thinking himself safe, he proceeded to Naples. Here he chose to remain till the grand master, to whom he had sent as a present an Herodias with the head of St. John, should procure his pardon. But one day, as he was going out of his inn, he was attacked at the door by armed people, and wounded in the face. Though severely smarting with the wound, he got immediately on board a felucca, and went to Rome, knowing that cardinal Gonzaga had obtained his pardon from the pope. On his landing from the vessel, he was seized upon by the Spanish guard, who took him for another cavalier, and carried him to prison, from whence he was not discharged till they had convinced themselves of their mistake. He now returned to the felucca, in order to fetch his baggage, but found it no longer there. Quite dejected under the pressure of so many misfortunes, he wandered about upon the shore, and at length, in the extreme heat of the sun, reached on foot the gate Porto Ercole, where his courage entirely forsook him a violent fever ensued, of which he died, 1601, in the fortieth year of his age.

In 1547, an offer was made to him of the honourable post of physician to the king of Denmark, with an annual salary of eight hundred crowns, and a free table, which he refused on account of the climate and the religion of the country. This offer, which was made by the advice of Vesalius, is a proof that his medical reputation was considerably high; and we find that it was likewise very extensive, for in 1552, he was invited into Scotland by Hamilton, archbishop of St. Andrew’s, who had consulted the most eminent physicians in Europe without effect. Of his disease, which was of the asthmatic kind, he began to recover from the time that Cardan prescribed for him; and in less than two months Cardan left him with fair prospects of recovery, and gave him some prescriptions, which in two years effected a complete cure. For this he was amply rewarded by his patient, and great offers were made to persuade him to reside in Scotland. These, however, he rejected, and took an opportunity to visit France and Germany, from which he passed into England, and' at London he exercised his astrological knowledge in calculating the nativity of Edward VI. The most remarkable part of it was, that the young monarch should die a violent death; for which reason, he says, he left the kingdom for fear of further danger which might follow on it. He drew a very favourable character of Edward, which was probably just and sincere, because it was afterwards published in one of his works, in Italy, where Edward was detested as a heretic, and where Cardan could have no motive for flattering his memory. While at the English court Edward was solicitous to retain him in England, and appears to have honoured him with frequent conferences; but Cardan refused sril his offers, and returned to Milan, after an absence, in all, of only ten months, and resided there until 1559, practising physic and teaching the mathematics. He then went to Pavia, where he filled the chair of professor of medicine until 1562, when he removed to Bologna, and there likewise became professor of medicine until 1570. About this time he was, for some reason with which we are unacquainted, thrown into prison, which was exchanged soon after for a milder confinement in his own house. On his release, he was invited to Rome, and admitted into the college of physicians there, with a pension from the pope. Here he died Sept. 21, 1576, “more,” says Brucker, “like a maniac than a philosopher.” Thuanus and Scaliger both are of opinion that he starved himself, in order to verify his own prediction of his death.

It does not appear that any of his poems were published during his life-time, except such as were set to music. The first collection was printed in 1640, 12mo, the second in 1642, the third (not in 1654 as Cibber asserts, but) in 1651, and a fourth in 1670. In 1772 Mr. Thomas Davies published an edition, with a few notes, and a short character, in which the writer has taken for granted some particulars for which no authority can be found. Carew’s Ccelum Britannicum, at one time erroneously attributed to Davenant, was printed with the first editions of his poems, and afterwards separately in 1651. Langbaine, and Cibber after him, say that our author placed the Lathi motto on the front, when printed, but no edition printed in his life-time is now known. The distich, however, might have been prefixed to the music of the masque. Oldys, in his ms notes on Langbaine, informs us, that “Garew’s sonnets were more in request than any poet’s of his time that is, between 1630 and 1640. They were many of them set to music by the two famous composers, Henry and William Lawes, and' other eminent masters, and sunoat. court in their masques.” It may be added, that Carew was one of the old poets whom Pope studied, and from, whom he borrowed. Dr. Percy honours him with the compliment of being an “elegant, and almost forgotten writer, whose poems deserve to be revived.” But no modern critic appears to have estimated his merit with more liberality than Mr. Head ley: his opinion, however, is here copied, not without suspicion that. his enthusiasm may be thought to have carried him too far.

He perhaps wrote upon a greater variety of subjects than any other clergyman of his time. Among his works are enumerated: 1. “Heroici characteres, ad illustriss. equitem Henricum Nevillum,” Oxon. 1603, 4to. Several of his Latin verses are also in the university-book of verses made on the death of sir Philip Sidney, in “Bodleiomnema,” and in other books. 2. “Tithes examined, and proved to be due to the Clergy by a Divine Right,”- Lond. 1606, and '1611, 4to. 3. “Jurisdiction Regal, Episcopal, Papal: Wherein is declared how the Pope hath intruded upon the jurisdiction of Temporal Princes,and of the Church, &c.” Lond. 1610, 4to. 4. “Consensus Ecclesiae Catholicse contra Tridentinos, de Scripturis, Ecclesia, fide, & gratia,” &c. Lond. 1613, 8vo. 5. “A thankful! Remembrance of God’s Mercy. In an Historicall Collection of the great and mercifull Deliverances of the Church and State of England, since the Gospel began ne here to flourish, from the beginning of queene Elizabeth,” Loud. 1614; the third edition came out in 1627, and the fourth in 16 Jo. The historical part is chiefly extracted from Camden’s Annals of queen Elizabeth; and the latter editions are adorned at the beginning of each chapter, with figures engraved in copper, representing the most material things contained in the ensuing description. 6. “Short Directions to know the true Church,” Loud. 1615, &c. 12mo. 7. “Oration made at the Hague before the prince of Orange, and the Assembly of the high and mighty lords, the States General,” Lond. 1619, in one sheet and a half, 4to. 8. “Astrologimania or, the Madness of Astrologers or, an Examination of sir Christopher Heydon’s book entitled ' A Defence of judicial Astrology 1” written about the year 1604, and published at London, 1624, 4to, by Thomas Vicars, B. D. who had married the author’s daughter. It was reprinted at London, 1651. 9. “Examination of those things wherein the Author of the late Appeal (Montague afterwards bishop of Chichester) holdeth the Doctrine of Pelagians and Arminians, to be the Doctrines of the Church of England,” Lond. 1626, and 16S6, 4to. 10. “A joynt Attestation, avowing that the Discipline of the Church of England was not impeached by the Synod of Dort,” Lond. 1628, 4to. 11. “Vita Bernardi Gilpini, viri sanctiss. farnaque apud Anglos aquilonares celeberrimi,” Lond. 1626, 4to, inserted in Dr. W. Bates’s Collection of Lives, Lond. lf.81, 4to. It was also published in English, under this title, “The Life of Bernard Gilpin, a man most holy and renowned amongthe Northerne English,” Lond. 1629, 4to, and 1636, 8vo. 12. “Testimony concerning the Presbyterian discipline in the Low-countries, and Episcopal government in England,” printed several times in 4to and- 8vo, and at London in particular, in 1642, in one sheet. 13. Latin Letter to Mr. Camden, containing some Notes and Observations on his Britannia. Printed by Dr. Smith amongst “Camdeni Epistolae,” N 80. 14-. Several Sermons. 15. He had also a hand in the Dutch Annotations, and in the new translation of the Bible, undertaken by order of the Synod of Dort, but not completed and published till 1637. Two of hU letters to sir Dudley Carleton, are in lord Hardwicke’s publication of sir Dudley’s correspondence. By his first wife, Anne, daughter of sir Henry Killegrew, knt. and widow of sir Henry Neville, of Billingbere, in Berkshire, he had a son, Henry, who was chosen representative for Arundel, in Sussex, in the short parliament which met at Westminster on the 13th -of April 1640. Mr. Henry Carleton embraced the cause of the house of commons in the civil war with king Charles the First, accepted a captain’s commission in the parliamentary army, and in other respects did no honour to his father.

, an eminent civilian of the sixteenth century, was of a Glamorganshire family, and educated at Oxford. Here he chiefly studied the civil law, of which he took the degree of doctor in June 1524, being about that time principal of Greek-hall in St. Edward’s parish. He was admitted at Doctors’ Commons Nov. 13, 1625, and his talents being known at court, he was sent abroad on public affairs, and received the honour of knighthood from the emperor Charles V. In 1530 he was joined in a commission with archbishop Cranmer and others, the purpose of which was to argue the matter of king Henry VIII.'s memorable divorce at the courts of France, Italy, and Germany. Sir Edward Carne afterwards remained at Rome as “a sort of standing agent for Henry, and appears likewise to have continued there during the reign of Edward VI. and had no concern in the reformation. During queen Mary’s reign, he was her agent in the same situation; but on the accession of Elizabeth, the pope ordered him to relinquish that employment. When he was recalled by the queen, with offers of preferment, he thought proper to remain at Rome, and was employed by the pope as director of the English hospital in that city. He was so far a patriot as to inform Elizabeth of the machinations of the catholic powers against her, but he continued inflexible in his attachment to popery, and died in that communion Jan. 18, 1561. Several of his letters relating to the divorce are in Burnet’s” History of the Reformation." Wood remarks that sir Edward Carne was accounted the last ambassador of the kings of England to the pope, until Roger earl of Castlemain was sent to him by king James II.

, an Italian poet, was born in 1507, at Civita Nova, in the march of Ancona, of poor parents. After his first studies he obtained the patronage of the illustrious house of Gaddi in Florence, a branch of which, John Gaddi, legate of Romania, appointed him secretary of legation, and retained him in his service, with some interval, until his death. On this event Caro determined on a life of independence; but unable to resist the liberal offers of Peter Louis Farnese, accepted the place of confidential secretary in 1543. While with him, Caro had an opportunity of forming a very fine collection of medals, and wrote a treatise on the subject. Such was his reputation at this time that Onufrius Pauvinius dedicated his work “De Antiquis Romanorum nominibus” to him, as the ablest antiquary in Italy. With the study of medals, Caro united that of the sciences, the belles lettres, languages, and the Italian particularly, which owes great obligations to him. He composed in that language several works of the light kind, such as the “Ficheide del P. Siceo (i. e Francis Maria Molza) col Commento dr Ser Agresto (Annibal Caro) sopra la prima Ficata,” 1539, 4to; “La diceria de nasi;” and a prose comedy, “Gli Straccioni,” Venice, 1582, 12mo. These works procured him the friendship of persons of rank at tfome, and the esteem of the learned throughout Italy. All the academies were opened to him, and the most celebrated poets acknowledged him as their master. Sonnets being then the fashionable poetry of Italy, Caro acquired great reputation by his performances in this style, and was compared to Petrarch rnd Bembo. Nor were his talents less conspicuous as a negvciaior. In 1544 he executed a very important commission of this kind, with wh?ch he was intrusted by the house of Farnese at the court of Charles V. After the death of his patron Peter Lewis Farnese, the cardinals Alexander and Kanutius, and the duke Octavius Farnese, vied with each other in presenting him with ecclesiastical preferments, and even with the order of Malta, of which he was made commander. It was on this occasion, in order to pay his court to cardinal Alexander Farnese, that he composed an ode in honour of the royal family of France, which was almost universally applauded. Castelvetro the critic, however, attacked it with much asperity, and Caro answered him with spirit; but the controversy unfortunately became personal, and Caro, in 1548, published a gross and scandalous attack on, Castelvetro, and even denounced him to the inquisition, from which he narrowly escaped, as will be noticed in his life. After this dispute which did so little honour to either party, Caro resumed his studies, and at the request of cardinal St. Croix, afterwards pope Marcellus II. translated some parts of the works of Gregory Nazianzen and St. Cyprian. He likewise translated Aristotle’s Rhetoric, but infirmities coming upon him, and being tired of a court life, he requested permission of his patrons to retire, and the cardinal Ranutius gave him a small house at Frescati, to which he removed his library. In this retreat he meditated the composition of an epic poem, but was diverted from the design by his friends, and made a translation of Virgil into bkink verse, which has been very much admired. He had scarcely finished this when he died, Nov. 21, 1566. After his death his works were published by his nephews; his poetry and the translations from Gregory of Nazianzen and St. Cyprian in 1568; Aristotle’s Rhetoric in 1570; and his letters, vol. I. and II. in 1572 and 1575, much admired for ease and elegance. The translation of Virgil was not published until 1581. One of the best editions is that of Paris, 1765, 2 vols. 8vo; and in 1725, his “Letters” were reprinted at Padua, with a life of the author, by Alexander Zalioli, and notes by the editor, 2 vols. 8vo; but the most complete edition is in 6 vols. Padua, 1765. Caro also translated the Pastorals of Longus, of which Bodoni printed a fine edition at Parma in 1786, 4to. Among his unpublished works are a translation of Aristotle’s “History of Animals,” and his treatise above mentioned on medals.

, a divine and poet of the seventeenth century, was educated at Eton college, and thence elected scholar of King’s college in Cambridge, in 1622. About three years after, he left England, and studied in Flanders, Artois, France, Spain, and Italy; and at length received holy orders at Rome from the hands of the pope’s substitute. Soon after, having taken upon him the order of St. Benedict, he was sent into England to make proselytes; in which employment he continued somewhat above a year, then returned to the protestant religion, and, through the archbishop of Canterbury’s interest, obtained the small vicarage of Poling by the seaside, near Arundel castle, in Sussex. Here he was exposed to the insults of the Romish party, particularly one Francis a S. Clara, living in that neighbourhood under the name of Hunt, who used to expose him to scorn before his parishioners. In the time, however, of the civil war, he quitted his living, retired to Paris, and reconciling himself to the Romish church, he made it his business to rail against the protestants. Afterwards, returning to England, he settled at Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire, where he had some relations; and, being once more a protestant, he would often preach there in a very fantastical manner, to the great mirth of his auditors. He was living there in 1670; but before his death he returned a third time to popery, causing his pretended wife to embrace that persuasion; and in that faith he died. He was generally esteemed a man of an absurd character, one that changed his opinions as often as his cloaths, and, for his juggles and tricks in religion, a theological mountebank.

In 1739, she translated “The Critique of Crousaz on Pope’s Essay on Man;” and in the same year gave a translation of “Algarotti’s Explanation of Newton’s Philosophy for the use of the Ladies.” These publications extended her acquaintance among the literati of her own country and her fame reached the continent, where Baratier bestowed high praises on her talents and genius. In 1741 she formed an intimacy with Miss Catherine Talbot, niece to the lord chancellor Talbot, and a young lady of considerable genius and most amiable disposition. This was an important event of Miss Carter’s life on many accounts. The intimacy of their friendship, the importance of their correspondence, and the exalted piety of both, made it the main ingredient of their mutual happiness: and in addition to this, it procured a friendship with Dr. Seeker, then bishop of Oxford, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, with whom Miss Talbot resided, which extended her knowledge of the world, cherished her profound learning, and exercised the piety of her thoughts. To this event is to be traced her undertaking and completing the work by which her fame has been most known abroad, and will longest be remembered by scholars at home, her “Translation of Epictetus.” It was not, however, till the beginning of 1749, that this translation was commenced. It was then sent up in sheets, as finished, to Miss Talbot, who earnestly pressed its continuance, which was further urged by bishop Seeker, to whom her friend shewed it. Her biographer has given a minute account of its progress till its conclusion in December 1752. She then by the bishop’s desire, added notes and an introduction, both admirably executed; and the work was sent to press in June 1757, and finished in April 1758, in an elegant quarto volume. At the entreaty of her friends, she permitted it to published by subscription (at the price of \l. 1s.) and by their liberality, it produced her a clear 1000l.

In lord Egmont’s manuscripts are some curious traits of earl Granville' s character. He was one of those politicians who make religion subservient to the state. The considering the kingdom of Christ as a separate kingdom from those of this world he counted absurd. On the contrary, be maintained that Christianity is incorporated with civil government as sand with lime, each of which by itself makes no mortar. Where he imagined that the public interest might receive prejudice by Christianity, he was against its being taught. He hoped, therefore, never to see our negroes in America become Christians, because he believed that this would render them less laborious slaves. On the same principle, he was against any attempts to convert the American savages. In learning Christianity, they would fall into the use of letters, and a skill in the arts being the consequence, they would become more formidable to the plantations. Pursuing a similar train of reasoning, lord Granville wished to God that the pope might never turn protestant, or the Italians cease to be papists, for then we should sell them no fish. He was glad % N that the clergy sent abroad to our plantations were immoral and ignorant wretches, because they could have no influence over the inhabitants, as better and wiser men would have, and who would use that influence for the purpose of inspiring the planters with a spirit of iadependence on their mother country. He was hostile to the scheme of sending bishops to America. These, he thought, would labour to bring the several sects to one religion; whereas the security of that people’s dependence on England he conceived to arise from their mutual divisions. He was an enemy likewise to the improvement of our colonies in learning. This he said would take off their youth from wholly attending to trade, fill them with speculative notions of government and liberty, and prevent the education of the sons of rich planters in England, where they contract a love to this kingdom, and when grown old, come back and settle, to the great increase of our wealth. Even" at home he was against charity-schools, and was not for having the vulgar taught to read, that they might think of nothing but the plow, and their other low avocations. However unsound some of these opinions may appear, most readers may recollect that they did not die with his lordship.

, whose proper name was Forteguerra, an eminent Italian scholar, was born of a good family at Pistoia in Tuscany, Feb. 4, 1467. He was at first educated at a college in Pistoia called “la Sapienza de' Forteguerri,” from a cardinal of that name who founded it for the benefit of twelve students, three of whom should he of the family of Forteguerra. He studied afterwards at Rome and Florence, where Politian was his Greek preceptor. In 1500, the senate of Venice appointed him to teach Greek in that city, and his reputation for knowledge of that language was most extensive. He was afterwards invited to Rome by pope Julius II. who appointed him preceptor to his nephew, the cardinal Galeotto and Leo X. is said to have chosen him in the same capacity for his cousin Julius de Medici; but whatever benefits might have accrued from this or other instances of Leo’s favour, were prevented by Carteromachus’s death, Oct. 1G, 1513. He is indebted for his literary reputation rather to the numerous commendations of his contemporaries and friends than to his own writings, many of which are said to have been dispersed at his death, and usurped by others into whose hands they had fallen. Among those which remain is his “Oratio de laudibus literarum Graecarum,” Venice, 1504, 4to, Basil, 1517, and prefixed to Stephens’ s “Thesaurus Linguae Grasctf.” Several epigrams of his also are extant in Greek and Latin in the publications of the times. During his residence at Venice, he frequently acted as corrector of the Ahline press, and had a considerable hand in the edition of Ptolomy’s Geography printed at Rome in 1507, folio.

, probably a native of Sussex, was of the Roman catholic persuasion, being secretary to queen Mary, the wife of James II. and one who followed the fortunes of his abdicating master; who rewarded him first with knighthood, and then with the honorary titles of earl Caryl and baron Dartford. How long he continued in that service is not known: but he was in England in the reign of queen Anne, and was the intimate friend of Pope, to whom he recommended the subject of the “Rape of the Lock,” and who at its publication addressed it to him. From some of his letters in the last edition of Pope’s Works, he appears to have been living in 1717; but he was not the intimate friend of Pope’s unfortunate lady, as asserted in the last edition of this Dictionary. It is plain from one of his letters, dated July 1717, that he had no knowledge of her, and asks Pope “who was the unfortunate lady you address a copy of verses to?” to which Pope does not appear to have returned any answer.

, an eminent Italian writer, was born at Florence in 1503, and educated at Bologna, and at Florence under Ubaldino Bandinelli. In 153S he became clerk of the apostolic chamber, and was in his youth distinguished for the elegance of his writings, and the licentiousness of his morals. In 1544 he was promoted to the archbishopric of Benevento, and sent as pope’s nuncio to Venice, and it is thought would have been made a cardinal, but for some indecent writings which he had published in his youth: but there must have been some other reason than this for his not obtaining that honour, as these writings had been no obstruction to his advancement to the archbishopric. He was engaged, however, in several political negociations, until he became involved in the disgrace of the cardinal Alexander Farnese, and retired to Venice. Upon the accession of pope Paul IV. who had an esteem for him, he returned to Rome, where he amused himself with literary pursuits, and where he died in 1556 or 1557. He was considered as one of the most elegant writers of his time, both in Latin and Italian; of the former we have sufficient proof in his “Latina Monimenta,” Florence, 1564, 4to, which include his elegant lives of Bembo and Contarini, and his translations from Thucydides. His most celebrated work in Italian prose is the “Galateo,” or art of living in the world, which is a system of politeness, and has been translated into most European languages. In 1774, it was published in an English translation, 12mo. There are complete editions of Casa’s works, Venice, 1752, 3 vols. and 5 vols. and Naples, 6 vols. 4to. Some of his Italian poems are sufficiently licentious, but the authenticity of other works of that description attributed to him has been questioned, particularly by Marchand, and by other authorities specified by Saxius.

, a learned cardinal, was born at Naples, June 13, 1620, and at first, in compliance with his father’s wishes, studied the law; but afterwards his father was induced, at the request of cardinal Pamphili, to allow him to go into the church. This cardinal, as sooa as he became pope, by the name of Innocent X. made Casanata one of his chamberlains of honour, and bestowed on him several governments. In 1658 he was sent to Malta as inquisitor by pope Alexander VII. and after residing there four years and a half, was recalled to Rome, and employed in several congregations. He was promoted to be cardinal by Clement X. in 1673, and was again employed in public affairs of importance, during all which he retained a love of letters, accumulated an immense library, and corresponded with many of the literati of Europe, whom he encouraged in the publication of their works. In 1693, pope Innocent XII. chose him librarian to the Vatican. As it was his ambition to promote literature, he employed the deputy librarian, the abbé Zacagni, to publish some curious works that were in manuscript. Of these one volume in quarto was. printed, and more would have followed if Casanata had not been prevented by death in March 1700. He left his library 10 the church and Dominican convent of St. Maria sopra Minerva, with a legacy of 80,000 ducats, destined partly for purchasing books, and partly for salaries to ten learned monks, of whom two were to act as librarians, two to expound the doctrine of St. Thomas, and the six others to defend the doctrines of the church. This establishment appears to have continued until within these few years, as in 1776, the two librarians published “Bibliothecae Casanatensis Catalogus librorum typis impressorum,” Rome, 3 vols. folio. This catalogue, which was probably continued (although we have heard of only these three volumes), reaches to letter G. Most of the books in this extensive library were published in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but there are neither English nor German works among them. The Italian books, however, are very numerous; and the catalogue, on account of the great number of anecdotes and notices interspersed, may be considered as an important acquisition to bibliography.

, a Latin poet of the sixteenth century, was a native of Rome, and gained a reputation in the epigrammatic species of poetry, for which he had a natural bent. He imitated Martial, particularly in his lively style, and was master of the art of pointing his terminations, which he exercised with the greatest ease. In the verses he composed for the illustrious characters of antient Rome he proposed Catullus for his model; but he is far from attaining to that purity and delicacy which charm us in the Latin poet; and though he sometimes comes up to him in elegance, yet his diction is more strong than mellow. His poems are to be found in the “Delicise Poetaruin Italorum.” Having exercised his wit at the expence of pope Clement VII. to please the Colonna family, he was imprisoned and condemned to death, but received a pardon. When Rome was taken by the Imperialists in 1527, he was stripped of all, reduced to beggary, and died in that year, either of famine or the plague.

His writings are 1 “In Diogenem Laertium Notae Isaaci Hortiboni,” Morgiis, 1583, 8vo. He was but twenty-five years old when he made these notes, and intended to have enlarged them afterwards, but was hindered. He dedicated them to his father, who commended him, but told him at the same time, “He should like better one note of his upon the holy Scriptures, than all the pains he could bestow upon profane authors.” These potes of Casaubon were inserted in the editions of Diogenes Laertius, printed by H. Stephens in 15l>4 and 1598, in 8vo, and in all the editions published since. The name of Hortibonus, which Casaubon took, is of the same import as Casaubon, i. e. a good garden; Casait, in the language of Dauphiné, signifying a garden, and bon, good. 2. “Lectiones Theocriticæ,” in Crispinus’s edition of Theocritus, Genev. 1S84, 12mo, reprinted several times since. 3. “Strabonis Geographiae Libri XVII. Grsece & Latine, ex Guil. Xylandri Interpretatione,” Genevae, 1587, fol. Casaubon’s notes were reprinted, with additions, in the Paris edition of Strabo in 1620, and have been inserted in all other editions since. 4. “Novurn Testamentum. Grace urn,” Geneva;, 1587, 16 to, with notes which were reprinted afterwards, at the end of Whitaker’s edition of the New Testament, Lond. and inserted in the “Critici Sacri.” V. “Animadversiones in Dionysium Halicarnassensem,” in the edition of Dionysius Halicarnassensis, published by our author with Æmilius Portus’s Latin version, Genev. 1588, fol. These were written in haste, and are of no great value. 6. “Polyseni Stratagematum,” Libri VIII.“Lugduni, 1589, 16to. Casaubon was the first who published the Greek text of this author. The Latin version, joined to it, was done by Justus Vulteius, and first published in 1550. 7.” Dicsearchi Geographica quaedam, sive de Statu Grascise; ejusdem descriptio Grrcciae versibus Greeds jambicis, ad Theophrastum; cum Isaaci Casauboni & Henrici Stephani nods,“Genevac, 1589, 8vo. 8.” Aristotelis Opera Grasce, cum variorum Interpretatione Latina, & variis Lectionibus & Castigationibus Isaaci Casauboni,“Lugduni, 1590, fol.; Genevae, 1605, fol. These notes are only marginal, and were composed at leisure hours. 9.” C. Plinii Caec. Sec. Epist. Lib. IX. Ejusdem & Trajani imp. Epist. amcebaea?. Ejus­* clem Pi. & Pacati, Mamertini, Nazarii Panegyrici. Item Claudiani Panegyrici. Adjunctae sunt Isaaci Casauboni Notae in Epist.“Geneva, 1591, 12mo; ibid. 1599, 1605, 1610, and 1611, 12mo. These notes are but very short. 10.” Theophrasti Characteres Ethici Grasce & Latine,“Lugduni, 1592, 12mo, and 1612, 12mo. This latter edition is the most exact of the two, being revised by the author. Casaubon’s edition of Theophrastus is still highly esteemed, and was one of those works which procured him most reputation. Joseph Scaliger highly extols it. 11.” L. Apuleii Apologia,“Typis Commeiini 1593, 4to. In this edition he shewed himself as able a critic in the Latin, as he had done before in the Greek tongue. It is dedicated to Joseph Scaliger. 12.” C. Suetonii Tranquilli Opera,“Genevas, 1595, 4to, and Paris, 1610, an enlarged edition. 13.” Publii Syri Mimi, sive sententiae selectae, Latine, Graece versas, & Notis illustrate per Jos. Scaligerum; cum prefatione Isaaci Casaubon i,“Lugd. Batav. 1598, 8vo. 14.” Athenaei Deipnosophistarmn, LibriXV. Graece Latine, Interprete JacoboDalechampio, cum Isaaci Casauboni Animadversion um Libris XV.“Geneva, 1597, 2 vols. fol.; ibid. 1612, 2 vols. fol Casaubon’s notes take up the second volume, and are copious and learned, and constitute the most valuable part of this edition. 15.” Historiae Augustae Scriptures, “Paris, 1603, 4to, reprinted at Paris in 1620, with Saiivmsius’s Commentaries on the same autnors, fol. and at Leyden, in 1670, 2 vols. 8vo. 16.” Diatnba ad Dionis Chrysostomi Orationes,“published in the edition of that author by Frederick Morel, at Paris, 1604, fol. 17.” Persii Satyrae ex recensione &- cum Commentar.“Pans, 1605, 8vo; Lond. 1647, 8vo. These notes upon Persius ar Lectures he had formerly read at Geneva. They were enlarged in the edition of 1647. Scaliger used to say of them,” That the sauce was better than the fish.“18.” De Satyrica Graecorum Poesi, & llomanorum Satyra Libri duo,“Paris, 1605, 8vo. In this work Casaubon affirms, that the satire of the Latins was very different from that of the Greeks, which Daniel Heinsius contradicts in his two books,” De Satyra Horatiana,“Lugd. Batava. 1629, 12mo. But the learned Ezekiel Spanheim, after having examined the arguments of these two learned men, declares for Casaubon. Crenius has inserted this tract of Casaubon, in his” Musceum Philologicum & Historicom,“Ludg. Batav. 1699, 8vo; and also the following” piece, which was published by our author at the end of his two books, “De Satyrica Poesi,” &c. 19. “Cyclops Euripidis Latinitate donata a Q. Septimio Florente.” 20. “Gregorii Nysseni Epistola ad Eustathiam, Ambrosiam, & Basilissam, Gr. & Lat.” Paris, 1601, 8vo Hanoviac, 1607, 8vo. This letter was first published by Casaubon. 21. “De Libertate Ecclesiastica Liber,” 1607, 8vo; composed by the author during the disputes between pope Paul V. and the republic of Venice; and contained a vindication of the rights of sovereigns against the incroachmentsof the court of Rome. As those differences were adjusted while the book was printing, king Henry IV. caused it to be suppressed; but Casaubon having se4it the sheets, as they came out of the press, to some of his friends, some copies were preserved. Melchior Goldast inserted that fragment in his “Collectanea de Monarchia S. Imperil,” torn. I. p. 674, and Almeioveen reprinted it in his edition of our author’s letters. It was also published by Dr. Hickes in 1711. 22. “Inscriptio vetus dedicationem fundi continens, ab Herode rege facta, cum notis.” This small piece, published in 1607, has been inserted by T. Crenius in his “Musoeum. Phiiologicum.” Casaubon’s notes are short, but learned; however, he appears to have been mistaken in ascribing the inscription on which they were made to Herod king of Judaea, instead of Herodes the Athenian. 23. “Polybii Opera Gr. & Lat. Accedit Æneas Tracticus detoleranda obsidione, Gr. & Lat.” Paris, 1609, fol. & HanoviiE, 1609, fol. The Latin version of these two authors was done by Casaubon, who intended to write a commentary upon them, but went no farther than the first book of Polybius, being hindered by death. Thuanus, and Fronto Ducaeus the Jesuit, were so pleased with that Latin version, that they believed it was not easy to determine whether Casaubon had translated Polybius, or Polybius Casaubon. At the head of this edition there is a dedication to king Henry IV. a species of writing in which, as well as in prefaces, he is allowed to excel. In the former, he praises without low servility, and in a manner remote from flattery; in the latter, he lays open the design and excellences of the books he publishes, without ostentation, and with an air of modesty. 24. “Josephi Scaligeri Opusculavaria,” Paris, 1610, 4to; and Francofurti, 1612, 8vo, with a preface of his own. 25. “Ad Frontonem Ducseum Epistola, de Apologia, Jesuitarum nomine, Parisiis edita,” Londini, 1611, 4to. Casaubon, after his coming to England, being obliged to write against the papists, in order to please his patron king James I. began with this letter, dated July 2, 1611, which is the 730th in Almeloveen’s collection, and for which king James made him a considerable present. It is a confutation of “la Reponse Apologetique a I'Anti-coton, par Francois Bonald.” Au Pont, 1611, 8vo. 26. “Epistola ad Georgium Michaelem Lingelshemium de quodam libello Sciopii,” 1612, 4to. This letter is dated Aug. 9, 1612, and is the 828th of Almeloveen’s collection. 27. “Epistola ad Cardinalem Perronium,” Londini, 1612, 4to. This letter, which is the 838th in Almeloveen’s collection, and is written with moderation, is not so much Casaubon’s own composition, as an exact account of the sentiments of king James I. whose and the church of England’s secretary he was, as he tells us, with regard to some points of religion. Accordingly, it was inserted in the edition of that king’s works, published in 1619, by Dr. Montague, bishop of Winchester. Cardinal du Perron undertook to give an answer to it, which was left unfinished at his death. It has been likewise animadverted upon by Valentine Smalcius, the Socinian, in his “Ad Isaacum Casaubonum Paraenesis,” Racoviae, 1614, 4to, published under the name of Anton. Ileuchlin. 28. “De Rebus sacris & Ecclesiasticis Exercitationes xvi. Ad Cardinalis Baronii Prolegomena in Annales, & primam eorum partem, de Domini nostri Jesu Christi Nativitate, Vita, Passione, Assumtione,” Londini, 1614, fol. Francofurti, 1615, 4to; Genevx, 1655, & 1663, 4to. Soon after Casaubon' s arrival in England, Peter du Moulin wrote to Dr. James Montagu, then bishop of Bath and Wells, to inform him that Casaubon had a great inclination to popery; that there were only a few articles, which kept him among the protestants; and that if he returned to France, he would change his religion, as he had promised. Therefore, he desired him to endeavour to keep him in England, and to engage him in writing against the Annals of Baronius, since he knew “that he had materials ready for that purpose.” Accordingly, king James employed him in that work, which was finished in eighteen months’ time. Niceron thinks that Casaubon was not equal to this work, because he had not sufficiently studied divinity, chronology, and history, and was not conversant enough in the fathers, and is charged with having committed more errors than Baronius in a less compass. Besides, as he comes no lower than the year 34 after Christ, he is said to have pulled down only the pinnacles of Baronius’ s great building. It appears from letter 1059th of our author, that Dr. Richard Montague, afterwards bishop of Norwich, had undertaken to write against Baronius at the same time with himself; and he threatens to complain of him to the king, who had engaged him in that work. 29. “Ad Polybii Historiarum Libruni primum Commentarius,” Paris, 1617, 8vo, See above, No. 23. 30. “Isaaci Casauboni Epistohp,” Hagie Comin. 1638, 4to, published by John Frederick Gronovius. A second edition, enlarged and arranged in chronological order, was published afterwards by John George Gramus at Magdeburgb, and Helmstadt, 1656, 4to; but the best, which includes his life, is entitled “Is. Casauboni Epistolae,” &c. Curante Theodore Janson ab Almeloveen,“Roterodami, 1709, foL The letters in this volume are 1059 in number, placed according to the order of the time in which they were written; and 5 1 without dates. Niceron finds in them neither elegant style, nor fine thoughts; and censures, as very disagreeable, the mixture of Greek words and expressions that are dispersed throughout; affirming besides, that they contain no particulars tending to the advancement of learning, or that are of any great importance. In the” Sorberiana“it is said that there is in them the history of a man of probity and learning; but nothing otherwise very remarkable, excepting the purity of the language, and the marks of a frank and sincere mind. Argonne, however, in his” Melanges d'Histoire,“assures us that they are all perfectly beautiful; and makes no scruple to compare them to those of Grotius and Scaligerwith regard to learning; and to assert that they exceed them for the easiness and purity of the style, which is entirely epistolary, and not at all affected. 31.” Casauboniana," Hamburg!, 1710, 8vo. There is nothing very material in this collection.

, an eminent astronomer, was born of noble parents, at a town in Piedmont in Italy, June 8, 1635. After he had laid a proper foundation in his studies at home, he was sent to continue them in a college of Jesuits at Genoa. He had an uncommon turn for Latin poetry, which he exercised so very early, that poems of his were published when he was but eleven years old. At length he fell in with books of astronomy, which he read with great eagerness; and feeling a strong propensity to proceed farther in that science, in a short time he made so amazing a progress, that, in 1650, the senate of Bologna invited him to be their public methematical professor. He was not more than fifteen years of age when he went to Bologna, where he taught mathematics, and made observations upon the heavens with great care and assiduity. In 1652 a comet appeared, which he observed with great accuracy; and discovered, that comets were not bodies accidentally generated in the atmosphere, as had usually been supposed, but of the same nature, and probably governed by the same laws, as the planets. The same year he solved an astronomical problem, which Kepler and Bullialdus had given up as insolvable; viz. to determine geometrically the apogee and eccentricity of a planet from its true and mean place. In 1653, when a church of Bologna was repaired and enlarged, he obtained leave of the senate to correct and settle a meridian line, which had been drawn by an astronomer in 1575. These were circumstances very remarkable in one who had not yet attained his twentieth year. In 1657 he attended, as an assistant, a nobleman, who was sent to Rome to compose some differences which had arisen between Bologna and Ferrara, from the inundations of the Po; and shewed so much skill and judgment in the management of that affair, that in 1663, Marius Chigi, brother of pope Alexander VII. appointed him inspector-general of the fortifications of the castle of Urbino; and he had afterwards committed to him the care of all the rivers in the ecclesiastical state.

Meanwhile he did not neglect his astronomical studies, but cultivated them with great care. He made many discoveries relative to the planets Mars and Venus, especially the revolution of Mars upon his own axis; but his principal object was to settle an accurate theory of Jupiter’s satellites, which after much labour and watching he happily effected, and published it at Rome, among other astronomical pieces, in 1666. Picard, the French astronomer, getting Cassini’s tables of Jupiter’s satellites, found them so very exact, that he conceived the highest opinion of his skill; and from that time his fame increased so fast in France, that Lewis XIV. desired to have him a member of the academy. Cassini, however, could not leave his station, without leave of his superiors; and therefore Lewis requested of pope Clement IX. and of the senate of Bologna, that Cassini might be permitted to come into France. Leave was granted for six years; and he came to Paris in the beginning of 1669, where he was immediately made the king’s astronomer. When this term was near expiring, the pope and the senate of Bologna insisted upon his return, on pain of forfeiting his revenues and emoluments, which had hitherto been remitted to him; but the minister Colbert prevailed on him to stay, and he was naturalized in the latter end of 1673, in which same year also he married.

, an Italian mathematician, the particular friend of Galileo, was born of an ancient and noble family at Brescia, in the year 1577. In 1595, he entered into a monastery of the order of St. Benedict in his native city, but afterwards studied at Padua and at Florence, where he became a disciple of Galileo, and assisted him in his astronomical observations, and afterwards maintained a regular correspondence with him. Galileo, not only had the highest esteem for his talents, but reposed the utmost confidence in his friendship. Under his name the apology of Galileo against the censures of Ludovico delle Colombe and Vincent di Grazia appeared, though it was principally written by Galileo himself. From 1615 to 1625, he occupied the mathematical chair at Pisa. In 1625, Castelli was invited to Rome by pope Urban VIII. and made mathematical professor in the college della Sapienza. The subject of his particular attention, and in the investigation of which he chiefly excelled, was the motion of water, on which subject as connected with the health of the cities of Venice, &c. he was frequently consulted, and suggested many important improvements. In 1628, he published on the mensuration of running waters, “Delia misura dell' acque correnti,” Rome, 4to, and “Dimostrazioni geometriche clella misura dell acque correnti,” ibid. 4to. These have been inserted in the collection of the author’s works on similar topics, printed at Florence, with other treatises, on the laguna of Venice, on the improvement of the Pontine, Bolognese, Ferrarese, and Romagnese marshes, &c. in 1766. Guglielrnini, though in other things he impugns Castelli, allows him the honour of having first applied geometry to the motion of water; and Montucla calls him “The Creator of a new part of Hydraulics.” His defence of Galileo, “Riposta alle opposizioni del Sig. Ludovico delle Colombe, &c.” was published at Florence, 1615, 4 to. He deeply lamented the death of this great man, and it is supposed to have hastened his own in 1644. Duke Leopold ordered his bust to be placed beside that of Galileo.

, an Italian critic, celebrated for his parts, but more for the seventy of his criticisms, was born at Modena in 1505. Being despised for his poverty by the ignorant part of mankind, and hated for his knowledge by the learned, says Moreri, he left his own country, and went into Germany, where he resided at the court of the emperor Maximilian II. After six years’ absence he returned to Modena, and distinguished himself chiefly by his Commentary upon Aristotle’s Poetics; in which, Rapin assures us, he always made it a rule to find something to except against in the text of Aristotle. He attacked his contemporary and rival in polite literature, Hannibal Caro, as we have observed under his article; and the quarrel did not end without many satirical pieces written on both sides in verse and prose. Castelvetro, however, was assisted here by his friends; for though he knew how to lay down rules for writing poetry, yet he was not a poet himself. His rival 'Hannibal Caro at length brought him under the cognisance of the inquisition at Rome, by which he was accused of paying too much deference 1 to the new opinions, and not enough to the old. It is probable that during his travels into Germany, win -re Lutheranism was established, he had imbibed the principles of the reformation, which appeared in his conversation and writings. He wished to be tried at a distance, as he then was, before a council; but the pope acquainted the cardinal of Mantua, his legate, that since Castelvetro had been accused before the inquisition at Rome, it was necessary for him to appear there, under the character of a person accused. Upon the pope’s assuring him of* high honours if he was found innocent, and of clemency if guilty, he appeared before the inquisition, and was examined in October 1560: but, finding himself embarrassed by the questions put to him, and especially in regard to a bouk of Melancthon, which he had translated into Italian, he fled to Basil in Switzerland, where he pursued the study of the belles lettres to the time of his death, which happened Feb. 20, 1571.

When Castiglione was eighteen years of age, he went into military service, under Lewis Sforza, duke of Milan; but his father dying soon after, and some disastrous circumstances overtaking that state, he was obliged to quit the camp, and return to Mantua. He engaged a second time in the service of the duke, and distinguished himself much by his bravery and conduct; but returning soon after, and being desirous to see other courts, particularly that of Rome, he went thither at the very time that Julius II. obtained the popedom. His fame was not unknown to this pontiff; and the high opinion he had of his abilities and merit, made him write to Guido Ubaldo, duke of Urbino, his cousin, that if he would send him to the court of Rome, in his own name, with the character of a public minister, he should take it as a singular obligation. Castiglione was twenty-six years of age; and Guido Ubaldo sent him ambassador to pope Julius, to transact affairs of the highest importance. He was sent upon a second embassy to Lewis XII. of France, and upon a third to Henry VII. of England; whither he went to be invested with the order of the garter, as proxy for the duke his master. On his arrival in England he was received with every mark of honour and esteem, being met at the port where he landed by the earl of Huntingdon, who was then lord of the bedchamber, accompanied by many other lords, and a king at arms. After he had dispatched his business here, and was returned home, to gratify the importunities of Alfonso Ariosto, his particular friend, he began his celebrated work, “The Courtier,” which in a small space of time he completed at Rome, in March 1516. From this work we may perceive how intimate he was with the Greek and Latin authors, having here gleaned together the first flowers of their wit, and treasured up, as it were, in a single cabinet, the richest jewels of antiquity. The book has been universally well received, both in Italy, and abroad; often reprinted, and translated into several languages. It is lull of moral and political instructions; and, it' we wish to study the Italian tongue, it is said that it can no where be found in more purity.

Castiglione was highly esteemed and favoured by the duke Francisco Maria, who constituted him his first minister of state, as well in civil as military affairs; and for his services, particularly at the siege of Mirandola, at which pope Julius was present, made him a free gift of the castle of Nuvolara, in the county of Pesaro, with the most ample privileges to himself, and to his heirs and successors for ever. This was in 1513. Not long after, Leo X. confirmed it to him by two briefs; the one written to him by Peter Bembo, and dated March 14, 1514; the other by Jacomus Sadolet, in May following. Having now reached his thirty-sixth year, he married a noble lady, who was the daughter of the famous Bentivoglio, and very remarkable for her wit and beauty. She brought him a son and two daughters, and then died; having lived no more than four years with him.

A little before this misfortune, the marquis of Mantua sent him to Leo X. as his ambassador; and after the death of Leo he continued at Rome in that capacity, under Hadrian VI. and Clement VII. Clement sent him to the emperor Charles the Fifth’s court in quality of legate; where affairs were to be transacted of the highest importance, not only to the pontifical see, but to all Italy. He went into Spain, Oct. 1524; and in his negotiations and transactions not only answered the pope’s expectations, but also acquired the good-will of the emperor, by whom he was soon received as a favourite counsellor and friend, as well as an ambassador. Among other marks of affection which the emperor shewed Castiglione, one was rather singular, that being then at war with Francis I. of FVance, he always desired him to be present at the military councils of that war and, when it was supposed that the war would be ended by a single combat between Charles V. and Francis I. with only three knights attending them, the emperor chose Castiglione to be one of the number. He also made him 'a free denizen of Spain; and soon alter nominated him to the bishopric of Avila. And because this happeped at the juncture of the sacking of Rome, some took occasion to reflect upon Castiglicwie, as if he had neglected the affairs of the court of Rome, for the sake of gratifying the inclinations of the emperor; at least such was indeed the current opinion at Rome; but Castiglione defended himself from the imputation in his letter to Clement VII. It is probable that there were no real grounds for it, since Clement himself does not appear to have given the least credit to it. Paul Jovius says, that if Castiglione had lived, the pope intended to have made him a cardinal; and after his death, in two of his holiness" briefs, both of condolence to his mother, there are the strongest expressions of his unblemished fidelity and devotion to the see of Rome. The imputation, however, affected Castiglione so sensibly, that it was supposed in some measure to have contributed to his death. His constitution was already impaired with the continual fatigues, civil as well as military, in which he had always been engaged; and falling at length sick at Toledo, he died Feb. 2, 1529. The emperor, who was then at Toledo, was extremely grieved, and commanded all the prelates and lords of his court to attend his corpse to the principal church there; and the funeral offices were celebrated by the archbishop with such solemnity and pomp as was never permitted to any one before, the princes of the blood excepted. Sixteen months after, his body was removed by his mother from Toledo to Mantua, and interred in a church of her own building; where a sumptuous monument was raised, and a Latin epitaph inscribed, which was written by cardinal Bern bo.

, a celebrated Italian general, was born at Lucca, in Tuscany, in 1284; where, it is said, he was taken up one morning accidentally in a vineyard, where he had been laid and covered with leaves; but others deduce him from an ancient and great family. The former account, however, goes on to inform us that he was found by Dianora, a wi.iow lady, and sister of Antonio, a canon ot rft Michael in Lucca, who was descended from the illustrious family of the Castracani. Antonio be ing priest, and Dianora having no children, they determined to bring him up, christened him Castruccio, by the name of their father, and educated him as carefully as if he had been their own. Antonio designed him for a priest, and accordingly trained him to letters; but Castruccio was scarcely fourteen years old when he began to neglect his books, and to devote himself to military exercises, to wrestling, running, and other athletic sports, which very well suited his great strength of body. At that time the two great factions, the Guelfs and Ghibilins, shared all Italy between them, divided the popes and the emperors, and engaged in their different interests, not only the members of the same town, but even the members of the same family. Francisco, a considerable man on the side of the Ghibilins, observing one day in the market-place, the uncommon spirit and qualities of Castruccio, prevailed with Antonio to let him turn soldier. As nothing could be more agreeable to the inclination of Castruccio, he presently became accomplished in every thing which could adorn his profession. He was eighteen years old when the faction of the Guelfs drove the Ghibilins out of Pavia, and was then made a lieutenant of a company of foot, by Francisco Guinigi, of whom the prince of Milan had solicited succours. The first campaign this new lieutenant made, he gave such proofs of his courage and conduct, as spread his fame all over Lombardy; and Guinigi conceived such an opinion of him, and had so much confidence in him, that, dying soon after, he committed the care of his son and the management of his estate to him. So great a trust and administration made Castruccio more considerable than before but at the same time created him many enemies, and lost him some friends for, knowing him to be of an high and enterprising spirit, many began to fancy his views were to empire, and to oppress the liberty of his country. He went on still, however, to distinguish himself by military exploits, and at last raised so much jealousy in his chief commander, that he was imprisoned by stratagem, with a view of being put to death; but the people of Lucca soon released him, and in a short time after, solemnly chose him their sovereign prince, and there were not then, either in Lombardy or Tuscany, any of the Ghibilins who did not look upon Castruccio as the true head of their faction. Those who were banished their country upon that account fled to him for protection, and promised unanimously, that if he could restore them to their estates, they would serve him so effectually, that the sovereignty of their country should be his reward. Flattered by these promises, and encouraged by the strength of his forces, he entertained a design of making himself master of Tuscany; and to give more reputation to his affairs, he entered into a league with the prince of Milan. He kept his army constantly on foot, and employed it as suited best with his own designs. For the services he did the pope he was made senator of Rome with more than ordinary ceremony. The day of his promotion, he came forth in a habit suitable to his dignity, but enriched with a delicate embroidery, and with two devices artificially wrought in, one before, the other behind. The former was in these words, “He is as it pleases God” the latter, “And shall be what God will have him.” While Castruccio was at Rome, news was brought him which obliged him to return in all haste to Lucca. The Florentines were making war upon him, and had already done him some damage; and conspiracies were forming against him as an usurper, at Pisa and in several places; but Castruccio surmounted all these difficulties, and the supreme authority of Tuscany was just falling into his hands, when a period was put to his progress and his life. An army of 30,000 foot and 10,000 horse appeared against him in May 1328. Of these he destroyed 22,000, with the loss of not quite 1600 of his own men, and was returning from the field of battle; but, happening to halt a little for the sake of thanking and caressing his soldiers as they passed fi,red with an action as fatiguing as glorious, and covered with sweat, a north wind blew upon him, and affected him so, that he fell immediately into a fit of ague. At first he neglected it, believing himself sufficiently hardened against such attacks; but the fit increasing, and with it the fever, his physicians gave him over, and he died in a few days. He was in his forty-fourth year; and from the time he came to appear first in the world, he always, as well in his good as bad fortune, expressed the same steadiness and equality of spirit. As he left several monuments of his good fortune behind him, so he was not ashamed to leave some memorials of his adversity. Thus, when he was delivered from the imprisonment above-mentioned, he caused the irons with which he was loaded, to be hung in the most public room of his palace, where they were to be seen many years after.

, a Spanish divine, was a native of Zamora, and of the order of St. Francis. He flourished in the sixteenth century, under the reigns of the emperor Charles V. and Philip II. and accompanied the latter into England when his majesty married queen Mary. De Castro after this appears to have resided in the Netherlands, and was there promoted to the archbishopric of Compostella; but before he could receive the necessary documents from the pope, he died at Brussels, Feb. 13, 1558, in the sixty-third year of his age. His works were printed at Paris in 1578, folio. The principal and most valued was his “Treatise against Heresies,” a work partly historical, and partly controversial.

, Queen Of England, and first consort of Henry VIII. was the fourth daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, king and queen of Castile and Arragon. She was born in 1485. In the sixteenth year of her age, Nov. 14, 1501, she was married to Arthur, prince of Wales, son of Henry VII. who died a few months after. The king, either from political reasons, or, as some think, because he was unwilling to restore Catherine’s dowry, which was 200,000 ducats, obliged his second son Henry, whom he created prince of Wales, and who was then in his twelfth year, to be contracted to the infanta. The prince resisted this injunction to the utmost of his power; but the king was invincible, and the espousals were at length, by means of the pope’s dispensation, contracted between the parties. Immediately after the accession of Henry VIII. to the crown, in 1509, the king began to deliberate on his former engagements, to which he had many objections, but his privy council, though contrary to the opinion of the primate, gave him their advice for celebrating the marriage. Even the prejudices of the people were averse to an union betwixt such near relations as Henry and his brother’s widow; and the late king is thought to have had an intention to avail himself of a proper opportunity of annulling the contract. In 1527 several circumstances occurred which combined to excite scruples in the king’s mind concerning the lawfulness of his marriage, but probably the chief were what arose from his own passions. The queen was six years older than the king; and the decay of her beauty, together with particular infn-mities and diseases, had contributed, notwithstanding her blameless character and deportment, to render her person unacceptable to him. Though she had borne him several children, they all died in early infancy, except one daughter, Mary; and it was apprehended, that if doubts of Mary’s legitimacy concurred with the weakness of her sex, the king of Scots, the next heir, would advance his pretensions, and might throw the kingdom into confusion. But most of all, Anne Boleyn had acquired an entire ascendant over his affections, and he was now determined on a divorce, and upon consulting them, all the prelates of England, except Fisher, bishop of Rochester, unanimously declared that they deemed his marriage unlawful. In this they were supported by cardinal Wolsey, who had political purposes to answer in breaking off the match with Catherine, although he was no friend to Anne Boleyn. Accordingly Henry determined to apply to the pope, Clement VII. for a divorce, who, though at first disposed to favour Henry’s application, and had actually concerted measures for its successful issue, was overawed by the interference of the emperor, Charles V. Catherine’s nephew; and when the negociation was protracted to such a length as to tire Henry’s patience, the pope, importuned by the English ministers, put into their hands a commission to Wolsey, as legate, in conjunction with the archbishop of Canterbury, or any other English prelate, to examine the validity of the king’s marriage, and of the late pope’s dispensation. He also granted them a provisional dispensation for the king’s marriage with any other person; and promised to issue a decretal bull, annulling the marriage with Catherine; but he enjoined secrecy, and conjured them not to publish these papers, or to make any farther use of them, till his afflxirs with regard to the emperor were in such a train as to secure his liberty and independence. After considerable hesitation and delay, the legates, Campeggio and Wolsey, to whom the pope had granted a new commission for the trial of the king’s marriage, opened their court in London, May 31, 1529, and cited the king and queen to appear before it. They both presented themselves, and the king answered to his name, when called; but the queen, instead of answering to her’s, threw herself at the king’s feet, and appealed to his justice, declaring that she would not submit her cause to be tried by the members of a court who depended on her enemies; and making the king a low reverence, she departed, and never would again appear in that court.

Upon her departure, the king, after acknowledging that she had ever been a dutiful and affectionate wife, and that the whole tenor of her behaviour had been conformable to the strictest rules of probity and honour, insisted on his own scruples with regard to the lawfulness of their marriage; and craved a sentence of the court agreeable to the justice of his cause. The legates, after citing the queen anew, declared her contumacious, notwithstanding her appeal to Rome, and then proceeded to the examination of the cause; but while the king was all impatience for a sentence, Campeggio suddenly prorogued the court to a future day. This threw the king into the utmost perplexity, from which he was relieved by Dr. Cranaaer, who suggested, that the readiest way, either to quiet Henry’s conscience, or to extort the pope’s consent, would be to consult all the universities of Europe. If they agreed to approve of the king’s marriage with Catherine, his remorse would naturally cease; if they condemned it, the pope would find it difficult to resist his majesty’s solicitations. In consequence of this application several of the foreign universities gave an opinion in the king’s favour; as did Oxford and Cambridge, although subsequently, and with more reluctance; and the convocations both of Canterbury and York, pronounced the king’s marriage invalid, and contrary to the law of God. But pope Clement, still subject to the influence of the emperor, continued to summon the king to appear, either by himself or proxy, before his tribunal at Rome; and the king, apprized that no fair trial could be expected there, refused to submit to such a condition, and would not admit of any citation, which he regarded as a high insult, and a violation of his royal prerogative. In the progress of this business, the queen’s appeal was received at Rome. The king was cited to appear; and several consistories were held to examine the validity of their marriage. The king retained his purpose of not sending any proxy to plead his cause before this court, and alleged, that the prerogatives of his crown must be sacrificed if he allowed appeals from his own kingdom. For the purpose of adding greater security to his intended defection from Rome, he procured an interview with Francis at Boulogne and Calais, and renewed his alliance with that monarch; and it is said that he even persuaded Francis to follow his example, in withdrawing his obedience from the bishop of Rome, and administering ecclesiastical affairs without having further recourse to that see. In the mean time he privately celebrated his marriage with Anne Boleyn, Nov. 14, 1532; and in April of the following year he publicly owned it, and prepared measures for declaring, by a formal sentence, the invalidity of his marriage with Catherine. Catherine, however, did not quit the kingdom; but fixed her abode for some time at Ampthill, in Bedfordshire, where, after several preliminary steps, Cranmer pronounced a sentence which annulled the king’s marriage with her. Catherine still continued obstinate in maintaining the validity of her marriage; and she would admit no person to her presence who did not approach her with the customary formalities. Although Henry employed menaces against such of her servants as complied with her commands in this particular, he was never able to make her relinquish her title and pretensions.

, of Sienna, was born in that city in 1347, and having vowed virginity at eight years old, she took the Dominican habit some time after, and became eminent for her genius, charity, zeal, and writings. Going to Avignon, in order to reconcile the Florentines with Gregory XI. who had excommunicated them, she pressed that pope so much, by her discourses and solicitations, that she engaged him to quit France and go to Rome in 1377, where he again fixed the pontifical seat, seventy years after Clement V. had removed it to France. She died 1380, aged 33, and was canonized by Pius II. 1461. Various “Letters” in Italian are ascribed to her, which were printed at Venice, 1500, fol. “Italian poems,” Sienna, 1505, 8vo, and some small devotional treatises. Her whole works were collected at Sienna, 1707, 4 vols. 4to. Her Legend, in Italian, is very scarce, Florence, 1477: and the editions of 1524, 4to, and 1526, 8vo, are also scarce. Johndu Pins wrote the life of St. Catherine in Latin, Bologna, 1505, 4to; there is another in French by P. de Rechac, Paris, 1647, 12mo.

Her “Letters” are written in a style so pure and elegant, that Sienna has pretended to rival Florence in the production of classical language. Girolamo Gigli, a learned man of Sienna, who published a fine edition of St. Catherine’s Letters in 1707, had a design of subjoining a vocabulary of words and expressions peculiar to her, but in this attempt took so many liberties with the language and academy of Florence, that his “Vocabolario Cateriniano” was stopt by an order from pope Innocent XII. the author banished, his work burnt by the hands of the hangman, and his name struck out of the list of the Florentine academicians, as guilty, says a late Italian historian, not only of leze-grammar, but of leze-majesty. The vocabulary, however, was afterwards published, without a date, 4to, and with the fictitious name of Manille.

, an Italian writer of considerable fame, was born at Florence in 1503. After being educated in polite literature, he left his country when very young, and went to Rome, where he got into employment under pope Paul III. and his grandson Octavius Farnese. He also served under Henry II. in the war of the Siennese, as long as that republic was able to maintain the conflict with assistance from France. He appears also to have been entrusted with the management of several political affairs, and when peace was concluded between the French and Spaniards, he retired to Padua, and passed the rest of his days in literary pursuits. He died there Dec. 9, 1562. His principal works were his Rhetoric, “liettorica,” Venice, 1559, and often reprinted, and his essay on the best forms of republics, “Trattati sopra gli ottirni reggimenti dellaRepubliche antiche e moderne,” Venice, 1555, 4to, and 1571, 4to. He also translated into Italian the “Castrametation” of Polybius, which was published with some other military treatises, at Florence, 1552, 8vo.

As a poet, he displays considerable variety of power, but perhaps he is rather to be placed among the ethical versifiers, than ranked with those who have attempted with success the higher flights of genius. As an imitator of Pope, he is superior to most of those who have formed themselves in that school, and sometimes his imitations are so close as to appear the effect rather of memory than of judgment. His “Abelard to Eloisa” was a bold attempt, yet we miss the impassioned bursts and glowing scenes, true to nature and feeling, which have placed the Eloisa of Pope beyond all reach of competition. His “Epistle from Lady Jane Grey to Lord Dudley” is another attempt in the heroic manner, in which he has been more successful; the subject was his own, and there is less of ambitious effort in treating it. His principal excellence, however, lies in solid reflection on men and manners, and in satirical pictures and allusions: here he has all the gaiety of the most favoured disciples of the Horatian school, and far more ease than in his other compositions.

, the reputed patroness of music, was a Roman virgin of distinguished birth, who lived in the second century. She was eminent for her piety, and had vowed virginity, but contrary to her inclinations-, was espoused by her parents to a heathen nobleman of the name of Valerian, whom she is said to have kept from her bed, by informing him that she had an angel appointed to protect her, and she engaged that Valerian should see this angel, in case he would prepare himself for such a favour by becoming a Christian. Valerian consented, saw the angel, abstained from Cecilia as a wife, and was converted along with his brother Tiburtius. Valerian and Tiburtius suffered martyrdom, and Cecilia was honoured with the same death some days after. These martyrdoms are variously placed under M. Aurelius, between 176 and 180, and under Alexander Severus, about 231. The body of St. Cecilia was found by pope Pascal I. in the cemetery of a church called by her name, which occurs as early as the sixth century; and her body and her husband’s, found in the same place, were translated in 821 to a monastery founded by pope Pascal in honour of the martyrs Tiburtius and Maximus, near the church of St. Cecilia in Rome, usually called in Trastevere, to distinguish it from two others dedicated to the sama saint.

, Pope, and the only one of his name who seems to deserve much notice, was born in Apulia about the year 1221, and lived as a hermit in a little cell. He was admitted into holy orders; but after that, he lived five years in a cave on mount Morroni near Sulmona, where he founded a monastery in 1274. The see of Rome having been vacant two years and three months, Celestine was unanimoifsly chosen pope on account of the fame of his sanctity. The archbishop of Lyons, presenting him with the instrument of his election, conjured him to submit to the vocation. Peter, in astonishment, prostrated himself on the ground: and after he had continued in prayer for a considerable time, consented to his election, and' took the name of Celestine V. Since the days of the fir* Gregory, no pope had ever assumed the pontifical dignity with more purity of intention. But he had not Gregory’s talents for business and government; apd the Roman see was far more corrupt in the thirteenth than it was in the sixth century. Celestine soon became sensible of his incapacity. He attempted to reform abuses, to retrench the luxury of the clergy, to do, in short, what he found totally impracticable. He committed mistakes, and exposed himself to ridicule. His conscience, in the mean time, was kept on the rack through a variety of scruples, from which he could not extricate himself; and from his ignorance of the world and of canon law, he began to think he had done wrong in accepting the office. He spent much of his time in retirement; nor was he easy there, because his conscience told him, that he ought to be discharging the pastoral office. In this dilemma he consulted cardinal Cajetan, who told him he might abdicate, which he accordingly did in 1294, after having endeavoured to support the rank of pope for only four or five months, and before his abdication made a constitution that the pontiff might be allowed to abdicate, if he pleased; but there has been no example since of any pope taking the benefit of this constitution. Cajetan succeeded him under the title of Boniface VIII. and immediately imprisoned him in the castle of Fumone, lest he should revoke his resignation, although nothing was more improbable, and treated him with such harshness as brought him to his grave, after ten months imprisonment, in 1296. Clement V. canonized him in 1313. Several of his “Opuscula” are in the Bibl. Patrum. The order of the Celestins, which takes its name from him, still subsists.

, a celebrated sculptor and engraver of Florence, was born in 1500, and intended to be trained to music but, at fifteen years of age, bound himself, contrary to his father’s inclinations, apprentice to a jeweller and goldsmith, under whom he made such a progress, as presently to rival the most skilful in the business. He had also a turn for other arts: and in particular an early taste for drawing and designing, which he afterwards cultivated. Nor did he neglect music, but must have excelled in some degree in it; for, assisting at a concert before Clement VII. that pope took him into his service, in the double capacity of goldsmith and musician. He applied himself also to seal-engraving; learned to make curious damaskeenings of steel and silver on Turkish daggers, &c. and was very ingenious in medals and rings. But Cellini excelled in arms, as well as in arts; and Clement VII. valued him as much for his bravery as for his skill in his profession. When the duke of Bourbon laid siege to Rome, and the city was taken and plundered, the pope committed the castle of St. Angelo to Cellini; who defended it like a man bred to arms, and did not suffer it to surrender but by c?.pitulation. Meanwhile, Cellini was one of those great wits, wh'o may truly be said to have bordered upon madness; he was of a desultory, capricious, unequal humour, which involved him perpetually in adventures that often threatened to prove fatal to him. He travelled among the cities of Italy, but chiefly resided at Rome where he was sometimes in favour with the great, and sometimes out. He consorted with all the first artists in their several ways, with Michael Angelo, Julio Romano, &c. Finding himself at length upon ill terms in Italy, he formed a resolution of going to France; and, passing from Rome through Florence, Bologna, and Venice, he arrived at Padua, where he was most kindly received by, and made some stay with, the famous Pietro Bembo. From Padua he travelled through Swisserland, visited Geneva in his way to Lyons, and, after resting a few days in this last city, arrived safe at Paris. He met with a gracious reception from Francis I. who would have taken him into his service; but, conceiving a dislike to France from a sudden illness he fell into there, he returned to Italy. He was scarcely arrived, when, being accused of having robbed the castle of St. Angelo of a great treasure at the time that Rome was sacked by the Spaniards, he was arrested and sent prisoner thither. When set at liberty, after many hardships and difficulties, he entered into the service of the French king, and set out with the cardinal of Ferrara for Paris: where when they arrived, being highly disgusted at the cardinal’s proposing what he thought an inconsiderable salary, he abruptly undertook a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. He was, however, pursued and brought back to the king, who settled a handsome salary upon him, assigned him a house to work in at Paris, and granted him shortly after a naturalization. But here, getting as usual into scrapes and quarrels, and particularly having offended madame d'Estampes, the king’s mistress, he was exposed to endless troubles and persecutions; with which at length being wearied out, he obtained the king’s permission to return to Italy, and went to Florence; where he was kindly received by Cosmo de Medici, the grand duke, and engaged himself in his service. Here again, disgusted with some of the duke’s servants (for he could not accommodate himself to, or agree with, any body), he took a trip to Venice, where he was greatly caressed by Titian, Sansovino, and other ingenious artists; but, after a short stay, returned to Florence, and resumed his business. He died in 1570. His life was translated into English by Dr. Nugent, and published in 1771, 2 vols. 8vo, with this title: “The Life of Benevenuto Cellini, a Florentine artist; containing a variety of curious and interesting particulars relative to painting, sculpture, and architecture, and the history of his own time.” The original, written in the Tuscan language, lay in manuscript above a century and a half. Though it was read with the greatest pleasure by the learned of Italy, no man was hardy enough, during this long period, to introduce to the world a book, in which the successors of St. Peter were handled so roughly; a narrative, where artists and sovereign princes, cardinals and courtezans, ministers of state and mechanics, are treated with equal impartiality. At length, in 1730, an enterprising Neapolitan, encouraged by Dr. Antonio Cocchi, one of the politest scholars in Europe, published it in one vol. 4to, but it soon was prohibited, and became scarce. According to his own account, Cellini was at once a man of pleasure and a slave to superstition; a despiser of vulgar notions, and a believer in magical incantations; a fighter of duels, and a composer of divine sonnets; an ardent lover of truth, and a retailer of visionary fancies; an admirer of papal power, and a hater of popes; art offender against the laws, with a strong reliance on divine providence. Such heterogeneous mixtures, however, generally form an amusing book, and Cellini’s life is amusing and interesting in a very high degree. It must not, however, be omitted, that Cellini published two treatises on the subject of his art, “Duo trattati, uno intorno alle oito principal! arti dell* oreficiera, Paltro in materia dell* arte della scoltura,” &c. 1568, 4to.

Mrs. Centlivre enjoyed, for many years, the intimacy and esteem of some of the most eminent wits of the time, particularly -ir Richard Steele, Mr. Rowe, Dr. Sewell, and Mr. Farquhar. P^ustace Budgell was also of the number of her acquaintance. But she had the misfortune to incur the displeasure of Mr. Pope, who introduced her into the Dunciad, for having written a ballad against his Homer. She died in Spring-garden, Charing-cross, on the first of December, 1723, and was buried at St. Martin’s in the Fields. She possessed a considerable share of beauty, was of a friendly and benevolent disposition, and in conversation was sprightly and entertaining. Her literary acquisitions appear to have been merely the result of her own application; but she is supposed to have understood the French, Dutch, and Spanish languages, and to have had some knowledge of the Latin. An extensive acquaintance with men and manners is exhibited in her dramatic wri tings; but they are sometimes justly censurable for their licentiousness. In 1761, her dramatic works were collected to Tether, and printed in three volumes 12 mo. She was also the author of “several copies of verses on divers subjects and occasions, and many ingenious letters, entitled, Letters of Wit, Politics, and Morality,” which were collected and published by Mr. Boyer.

, a Spanish Jesuit, and native of Toledo, who entered among the Jesuits in 1574, was a man of great learning, and, as his brethren have represented him, of as great simplicity and candour. He distinguished himself by several productions; and the fame of his parts and learning was so great, that Urban VIII. is said to have had his picture in his cabinet; and, when that pope sent his nephew cardinal Barberini ambassador into Spain, it was part of his business to pay Cerda a visit, and to assure him of the pope’s esteem. Cerda’s “Commentaries upon Virgil,” Paris, 1624 1641, 3 vols. fol. contain many useful and learned remarks, buried, however, in a multitude of what are superfluous and trifling. Baillet says, there are some good things in them, and some very moderate. His Commentaries upon the works of “Tertullian,” begun in 2 vols. but not finished, have not been so much esteemed; Dupin says, they are long and tedious, full of digressions and explications of passages which are too clear to need any explaining. There is also of Cerda’s a volume of “Adversaria Sacra,” printed in folio at Lyons, in 1626. He died in 1643, aged above 80.

, the author of Don Quixote, was born at Alcala de Henares in 1547. He was the son of Rodrigo de Cervantes and Donna Leonora de Cortinas, and baptised Sunday, Oct. 9 of that year, as appears from the parish register of Santa Maria la Mayor in Alcala. Several concurring testimonies furnished the clue for this discovery, although six other places, Seville, Madrid, Esquivias, Toledo, Lucena, and Alcazar de San Juan, called him their son, and each had their advocates to support their claims, in which respect his fame resembles that of Homer’s. His parents designed him for the profession of letters, and although he had at home the opportunity of instruction in the university, he studied Latin in Madrid. He afterwards resided there in 1568, but two years afterwards we find him at Rome in the service of cardinal Aquaviva in the capacity of chamberlain. Some time after this, pope Pius V. Philip IL of Spain, and the republic of Venice, united in a league, which was concluded May 29, 1571, against Selim the grand Turk. Cervantes, not satisfied with an idle court life, desirous of military renown, determined to commence soldier. Marco Antonio Colonna being appointed general of the pope’s galleys, Cervantes went with him, and was present in the famous battle of Lepanto, where he was so wounded in his left hand by a gun-shot as totally to lose the use of it; but he thought this such an honour, that he afterwards declared he would rather have been present in this glorious enterprise, than to be whole in his limbs, and not to have there at all. Colonna returned to Rome in the end of 1572, and it is probable that Cervantes was with him,; as he tells us that for some years he followed his conquering banners. He was ordered to join his regiment at Naples, notwithstanding his being maimed. In his “Viage del Parnaso,” he tells us that he walked its streets more than a year: and in the copy of his ransom, it appears that he was there a long time. Don J. A. Pellicer supposes that in this city he employed his leisure hours in cultivating his knowledge of the Italian tongue, and in reading of its good writers, with whom he appears conversant in his works. As he was going from Naples to Spain on board the galley of the Sun, Sept. 26, 1575, he had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the Moors, who carried him captive to Algiers. The several hardships he underwent in his five years’ captivity are noticed by a contemporary writer: and though the events mentioned in the story of “The Captive,” in the first part of Don Quixote, cannot strictly be applied to himself, yet they could hardly have been so feelingly described but by one who had been a spectator of such treatment as he relates. Several extraordinary and dangerous attempts were made by him and his companions to obtain their liberty, which was effected at last by the regular way of ransom, which took place Sept. 19, 1580. The price was 500 escudos; towards which his mother, a widow, contributed 250 ducats, and his sister 50.

, a very accomplished Italian scholar, was born at Rome in Oct. 1595, the son of Julian Cesarini, duke of Citta Nuova, and of Livia Ursini. Such was his application to study, that at an age when most scholars are but beginning, he was acquainted with languages, philosophy, theology, law, medicine, mathematics, and sacred and profane history. Cardinal Bellarmin compared him in knowledge, personal character, and accomplishments, to Picus de Mirandula, and such was the general esteem in which he was held, that a medal was struck with the heads of Cesarini and Picus crowned with laurel, and on the reverse two phenixes. His modesty and probity were not less conspicuous than his learning. Pope Urban VIII. intended to have made him a cardinal, but he died in the flower of his age, in 1624, then a member of the academy of the Lyncei. His Latin and Italian poems were printed in the collection entitled “Septem illustrium virorum poemata,” Antwerp, 1662, 8vo, and since reprinted. He wrote also a treatise against astrology, and on other subjects, which have not been published. Augustin Favoriti, secretary of the college of cardinals, wrote his life in Latin, which is in the “Memoria philosophorum, &c. curante Henningo Witten, decas prima,” Francfort, 1677, 8vo. Bianchi also, in his account of the academicians of the Lyncei, Milan, 1744, notices Cesarmi.

, a native of Athens, of the fifteenth century, and the scholar of Theodore Gaza, was one of those Greeks who about the time of the taking of Constantinople went into the west. At the invitation of Lorenzo de Medici, he became professor of the Greek language at Florence in 1479; where he had for his rival Angelus Politianus, to whom Laurence had committed the tuition of one of his sons. After the death of Laurence, Chalcondyles was invited to Milan by Lewis Sfortia; which invitation he accepted, either because he was tired of contending with Politian, or because he was hurt with Politian’s acknowledged superiority in Latin learning. Such is the usually-received account, which rests only on the authority of Paul Jovius, who was always hostile to the character of Politian; but Mr. Roscoe in his life of Lorenzo has proved that the story is without foundation. At Milan, however, Chalcondyles taught Greek a long time with great reputation; and did not die before 1510, when there is reason to think he was above 80 years of age. Among the learned Greeks whom pope Nicolas V. sent to Rome to translate the Greek authors into Latin, Chalcondyles was one; from which we may collect, that he probably travelled into the west before the taking of Constantinople in 1453, since Nicolas died in 1455. He published a grammar, of which we shall presently take notice; and under his inspection and care was first published at Florence, in 1499, the Greek Lexicon of Suidas. Pierius Valerianus, in his book “De infelicitate literatorum,” says, that Chalcondyles, though a deserving man in his moral as well as literary character, led nevertheless a very unhappy life; and reckons perpetual banishment from his country among the chief of his misfortunes. Others have mentioned domestic evils that have attended him. The particulars of his life are very imperfectly given. Dr. Hody has probably collected all that now can be found, but he has merely given the notices from various authors, without attempting a regular narrative. Some have thought that he was at one time a printer, and that he printed the folio Homer of Florence, which goes by his name, and which was executed in 1488; but this report no doubt arose from the care he took in correcting the press, as the printers’ names are given in that rare edition. The “domestic evils” above alluded to have a better foundation, as he was unhappy in his wife, whose chastity was suspected, and in his sons: Theophilus, the eldest, who taught Greek at Paris, was assassinated in the streets in a riotous squabble; and two others, Saleucus and Basil, both of promising talents, died young.

, an ingenious English lady, sister to the subject of the following article, was born at Malmsbury, in Wiltshire, in 1687, and was carefully trained up in the principles of religion and virtue. As her father’s circumstances rendered it necessary that she should apply herself to some business, she was brought up to that of a milliner. But, as she had a propensity to literature, she employed her leisure hours in perusing the best modern writers, and as many as she could of the antient ones, especially the poets, as far as the best translations could assist her. Amongst these, Horace was her particular favourite, and she greatly regretted that she could not read him in the original. She was somewhat deformed in her person, in consequence of an accident in her childhood. This unfavourable circumstance she occasionally made a subject of her own pleasantry, and used to say, “That as her person would not recommend her, she must endeavour to cultivate her mind, to make herself agreeable.” This she did with the greatest care, being an admirable œconornist of her time; and it is said, that she had so many excellent qualities in her, that though her first appearance could create no prejudice in her favour, yet it was impossible to know her without valuing and esteeming her. She thought the disadvantages of her shape were such, as gave her no reasonable prospect of being happy in the married state, and therefore chose to remain single. She had, however, an honourable offer from a worthy country gentleman, of considerable fortune, who, attracted merely by the goodness of her character, took a. journey of an hundred miles to visit her at Bath, where she kept a milliner’s shop, and where he paid her his addresses. But she declined his offers, and is said to have convinced him that such a match could neither be for his happiness, nor her own. She published several poems in an 8vo volume, but that which she wrote upon “Bath” was the best received. It passed through several editions. She intended to have written a large poem upon the being and attributes of God, and did execute some parts of it, but did not live to finish it. It was irksome to her to be so much confined to her business, and the bustle of Bath was sometimes disagreeable to her. She often languished for more leisure and solitude: but the dictates of prudence, and a desire to be useful to her relations, whom she regarded with the warmest affection, brought her to submit to the fatigues of her business for thirty-five years. She did, however, sometimes enjoy occasional retirements to the country seats of some of her acquaintance; and was then extremely delighted with the pleasures of solitude, on which she wrote some beautiful verses, and the contemplation of the works of nature. She was honoured with the esteem and regard of the countess of Hertford, afterwards duchess of Somerset, who several times visited her. Mr. Pope also visited her at Bath, and complimented her for her poem on that place, and the celebrated Mrs. Howe was one of her particular friends. She had the misfortune of a very valetudinary constitution, which was supposed to be, in some measure, owing to the irregularity of her form. By the advice of Dr. Cheyne, she entered on a vegetable diet, and adhered to it even to an extreme. She died en the llth of September, 1745, in the fifty-eighth year of her age, after about two days illness.

He died in 1634, at the age of seventy-seven, and was buried on the south side of St. Giles’s church in the Fields. His friend Inigo Jones planned and erected a monument to his memory, which was unfortunately destroyed with the old church. He appears to have been much respected in his own time; and, indeed, the man who communicated Homer to his countrymen, even in such language as that of Chapman, might justly be considered as their benefactor; and in estimating the merit of his version, candid allowance ought to be made for the age in which he lived, and the then unimproved state of our language. Of this translation Mr. Warton says, Chapman “is sometimes paraphrastic and redundant, but more frequently retrenches or impoverishes what he could not feel and express. In the mean time he labours with the inconvenience of an aukward, inharmonious, and unheroic measure, imposed by custom, but disgustful to modern ears. Yet he is not always without strength or spirit. He has enriched our language with many compound epithets, much in the manner of Homer, such as the silver-footed Thetis, the silver-thorned Juno, the triple-feathered helme, the highwalled Thebes, the fair-haired boy, the silver-flowing floods, the hugely-peopled towns, the Grecians navy-bound, the strong-winged lance, and many more which might be collected. Dryden reports, that Waller never could read Chapman’s Homer without a degree of transport. Pope is of opinion that Chapman covers his defects by a daring fiery spirit, that animates his translation, which is something like what one might imagine Homer himself to have written before he arrived to years of discretion.' But his fire is too frequently darkened by that sort of fustian which now disfigured the face of our tragedy.” Mr. Warton’s copy once belonged to Pope in which he has noted many of Chapman’s absolute interpolations, extending sometimes to the length of a paragraph of twelve lines. A diligent observer will easily discern that Pope was no careless reader of his rude predecessor. Pope complains that Chapman took advantage of an unmeasureable length of line but in reality, Pope’s lines are longer than Chapman’s. If Chapman affected the reputation of rendering line for line, the specious expedient of chusing a protracted measure which concatenated two lines together, undoubtedly favoured his usual propensity to periphrasis. — As a dramatic writer, he had considerable reputation among his contemporaries, and was justly esteemed for the excellence of his moral character. Wood says that he was a person of most reverend aspect, religious and temperate, qualities rarely meeting in a poet."

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

In such an age, it is the highest praise of Chaucer, that he stood alone, the first poet who improved the art by melody, fancy, and sentiment, and the first writer, whether we consider the quantity, quality, or variety of his productions. It is supposed that many of his writings are lost. What remain, however, and have been authenticated with tolerable certainty, must have formed the occupation of a considerable part of his life, and been the result of copious reading and reflection. Even his translations are mixed with so great a portion of original matter as, it may be presumed, required time and study, and those happy hours of inspiration, which are not always within command. The principal obstruction to the pleasure we should otherwise derive from Chaucer’s works, is that profusion of allegory which pervades them, particularly the “Romaunt of the Rose,” the “Court of Love,” “Flower and Leaf,” and the “House of Fame.” Pope, in the first edition of*his Temple of Fame, prefixed a note in defence of allegorical poetry, the propriety of which cannot be questioned, but which is qualified with an exception which applies directly to Chaucer. “The incidents by which allegory is conveyed, should never be spun too long, or too much clogged with trivial circumstances, or little particularities.” But this is exactly the case with Chaucer, whose allegories are spun beyond all bounds, and clogged with many trivial and unappropriate circumstances.

, author of a very useful Biographical Dictionary, was descended from the ancient and noble family of the Calfopedi of Florence, which removed into France under Francis I. At the revocation of the edict of Nantz, Samuel de Chaufepié, the representative of the family, and pfotestant minister at Couhé in Poitou, was obliged to take refuge in Friesland, where he died pastor of the church of Leuwarden in 1704. He had ten children by his wife Maria Marbœuf de la Rimbaudiere, of whom the subject of the present article was the youngest, and born at Leuwarden, Nov. 9, 1702. He was educated partly at Franeker, under professor Andala, as appears by his maintaining an academical thesis before that professor, in 1718, on “Innate Ideas,” and probably about the same time, a second on “The punishment of the Cross,” which was afterwards published in a collection by Gerdes, in 1734. After being admitted into the ministry, he preached for some time at Flushing, then at Delft, and lastly at Amsterdam, where he was pastor of the Walloon church, and where he died, highly respected for piety and learning, and much lamented, July 3, 1786. He was not more diligent in the discharge of his professional functions, than attached to studious researches, which he pursued throughout the whole of his long life. In 1736 he published, “Lettres sur divers sujets importans de la Religion,” 12mo, and in 1746 prefixed a life or historical eulogium to the sermons of John Brutel de la Riviere. In 1756 he published three sermons, intended to prove the truth of the Christian religion from the present state of the Jews; and wrote an account of the life and writings of our celebrated poet Pope, which was prefixed to a French translation of his works, printed at Amsterdam in 1758. He also translated from the Dutch an abridgement, in question and answer, of the history of his country; and from the English, part of Shuckford’s works, with additions, and several volumes of the “Universal History,” which he improved very considerably, particularly in the history of Venice. This labour, however, he discontinued in 1771, and does not appear after that to have published any thing of consequence, confining himself to his pastoral duties, if we except his “Life of Servetus,” which in 1771 was translated into English, by James Yair, minister of the Scots church at Campvere, and published at London, 8vo. The chief object of it seems to be to vindicate Calvin from the reproaches usually thrown upon him for the share he had in the prosecution of Servetus; but some will probably think that he has at least been equally successful in throwing new and not very favourable light on the conduct and principles of Servetus.

In the beginning of the year 1556, his wife being come to Brussels, he resolved, chiefly upon a treacherous invitation he received from the lord Paget and sir John Mason, to go thither. But first he consulted astrology, in which he was very credulous, to know whether he might safely undertake that journey; and being deceived by that delusive art, he fell into a fatal snare between Brussels and Antwerp. For, by order of king Philip II. being way- laid there by the provost-marshal, he was suddenly seized on the 15th of May, unhorsed, blindfolded, bound, and thrown into a waggon; conveyed to the nearest harbour, put on board a ship under hatches, and brought to the Tower of London, where he was committed close prisoner. He soon -found that this was on account of his religion; for two of the queen’s chaplains were sent to the Tower to endeavour to reconcile him to the church of Rome, though without success. But the desire of gaining so great a man, induced the queen to send to him Dr. Feckenham, dean of St. Paul’s, a man of a moderate temper, and with whom he had been acquainted in the late reign. This man’s arguments being inforced by the dreadful alternative, “either comply, or burn,” sir John’s frailty was not able to withstand them. He was, therefore, at his own desire, carried before cardinal Pole, who gravely advised him to return to the unity of the church: and in this dilemma of fear and perplexity, he endeavoured to escape by drawing up a paper, consisting of quotations out of the fathers that seemed to countenance transubstantiation, representing them as his own opinion, and hoping that would suffice to procure him his liberty, without any other public declarations of his change. This paper he sent to cardinal Pole, with a letter dated July 15, in which he desired him to spare him from making an open recantation but that being refused, he wrote a letter to the queen the same day, in which he declared his readiness to obey her laws, and other orders of religion. After this, he made his solemn submission before the cardinal, suing to be absolved, and received into the bosom of the Roman catholic church; which was granted him as a great favour. But still he was forced to make a public recantation before the queen, on the 4th of October, and another long one before the whole court; and submitted to whatever penances should be enjoined him by the pope’s legate, i. e. the cardinal. After all these mortifications, his lands were restored to him, but upon condition of an exchange with the queen for others*. The papists, by way of triumph over him and the protestants, obliged him to keep company generally with catholics, and even to be present at the examinations and convictions of those they called heretics. But his remorse, and extreme vexation for what he had done, sat so heavy upon his mind, that pining away with shame and regret, he died September 13, 1557, aged forty-three, at his friend Mr. Peter Osborne’s house, in Wood-street, London, and was buried in St. Alban’s church there, in the north chapel of the choir, the 16th of September. A stone was set afterwards over his grave, with an inscriptionf. He left three sons; John and Edward, the two youngest, died without issue; Henry, the eldest, was secretary to the council in the north, and knighted by queen Elizabeth: he died about the year 1586. Thomas, his eldest son and heir, was knighted by

In 1723 he published in 8vo, his “Treatise on the high operation for the Stone.” This work was soon attacked in an anonymous pamphlet, called “Lithotomus castratus, or an Examination of the Treatise of Mr. Cheselden,” and in which he was charged with plagiarism. How unjust this accusation was, appears from his preface, in which he had acknowledged his obligations to Dr. James Douglas and Mr. John Douglas, from one of whom the attack is supposed to have come. Mr. Cheselden’s solicitude to do justice to other eminent practitioners is farther manifest, from his having annexed to his book a translation of what had been written on the subject by Franco, who published “Traite des Hernies,” &c. at Lyons, in 1561, and by Rosset, in his “Cæsarei Partus Assertio Historiologica,” Paris, 1590. The whole affair was more candidly explained in 1724, by a writer who had no other object than the public goodj in a little work entitled “Methode de la Tailie au haut appareile recuillie des ouvrages du fameux Triumvirat.” This triumvirate consisted of Rosset, to whom the honour of the invention was due; Douglas, who had revived it after long disuse; and Cheselden, who had practised the operation with the most eminent skill and success. Indeed Mr. Cheselden was so celebrated on this account, that, as a lithotomist, he monopolized the principal business of the kingdom. The author of his eloge, in the “Memoires de L' Academic Royale de Chirurgerie.,” who was present at many of his operations, testifies, that one of them was performed in so small a time as fifty-four seconds. In 1728, Mr. Cheselden added greatly to his reputation in another view, by couching a lad of nearly fourteen years of age, who was either born blind, or had lost his sight so early, that he had no remembrance of his having ever seen. The observations made by the young gentleman, after obtaining the blessing of sight, are singularly curious, and have been much attended to, and reasoned upon by several writers on vision. They may be found in the later editions of the “Anatomy.” In 1729, our author was elected a corresponding member of the royal academy of sciences at Paris; and in 1732, soon after the institution of the royal academy of surgery in that city, he had the honour of being the first foreigner associated with their learned body. Mr. Cheselden’s “Osteography, or Anatomy of the Bones,” inscribed to queen Caroline, and published by subscription, came out in 1733, a splendid folio, in the figures of which all the bones are represented in their natural size. Our author lost a great sum of money by this publication, which in 1735 was attacked with much severity by Dr. Douglas, whose criticism appeared under the title of “Remarks on that pompous book, the Osteography of Mr. Cheselden.” The work received a more judicious censure from the celebrated Haller, who, whilst he candidly pointed out its errors, paid the writer that tribute of applause which he so justly de­“served. Heister, likewise, in his” Compendium of Anatomy,“did justice to his merit. Mr. Cheselden having long laboured for the benefit of the public, and accomplished his desires with respect to fame and fortune, began at length to wish for a life of greater tranquillity and retirement; and in 1737 he obtained an honourable situation of this kind, by being appointed head surgeon to Chelsea hospital; which place he held, with the highest reputation, till his death. He did not, however, wholly remit his endeavours to advance the knowledge of his profession; for, upon the publication of Mr. Gataker’s translation of Mons. le Dran’s” Operations of Surgery," he contributed twenty-one useful plates towards it, and a variety of valuable remarks, some of which he had made so early as while he was a pupil to Mr. Feme. This was the last literary work in which he engaged. In 1751, Mr. Cheselden, as a governor of the Foundling hospital, sent a benefaction of fifty pounds to that charity, enclosed in a paper with the following lines, from Pope:

The connections of our eminent surgeon and anatomist were not confined to persons whose studies and pursuits were congenial to those of his own profession. He was fond of the polite arts, and cultivated an acquaintance with men of genius and taste. He was honoured, in particular, with the friendship of Pope, who frequently speaks of dining with him, but once had an interview rather of an unpleasing kind. In 1742, Mr. Cheselden, in a conversation with Mr. Pope at Mr. Dodsley’s, expressed his surprize at the folly of those who could imagine that the fourth book of the Dunciad had the least resemblance in stylo, wit, humour, or fancy, to the three preceding books. Though he was not, perhaps, altogether singular in this opinion, which is indeed a very just one, it was no small mortification to him to be informed by Pope, tbat he himself was the author of it, and was sorry that Mr. Cheselden did not like the poem. Mr. Cheseklen is understood to have too highly valued himself upon his taste in poetry and architecture, considering the different nature of his real accomplishments and pursuits. His skill in the latter art is said not to have been displayed to the best advantage in Surgeons’ -hall, in the Old Bailey, which was principally built under his direction. These, however, are trifling shades in eminent characters.

, an Italian poet, was born at Savone, in 1552. He went to study at Rome, where Aldus Manutius and Muretus gave him their friendship and advice, and pope Urban VIII. and the princes of Italy honoured him with many public marks of their esteem. In 1624 Urban, himself a poet, as well as a protector of poets, invited him to Rome for the holy year; but Chiabrera excused himself on account of old age and infirmities. He died at Savone in 1638, aged eighty-six. His Lyric Poems, Rome, 1718, 3 vols. 8vo, and “Amadeida,” Napoli, 1635, 12mo, are particularly admired. All his works were collected at Venice, 1731, 4 vols. 8vo.

, in Latin Claramontius, an eminent Italian astronomer and philosopher, was born at Cesena in the province of Romagna in June 1565. His father was a physician at Cesena. He studied at Perugia and Ferrara, and became distinguished for his progress in philosophy and mathematics;, the former of which he taught for some time at Pisa. He passed, however, the greater part of his long life at Cesena, and in his history of that place, which he published in 1641, he informs us, that for fifty -nine years he had served his country in a public capacity. He was, in particular, frequently deputed to Rome, either to offer obedience to the pope in the name of his countrymen, or on other affairs. He had married a Jady whom he calls Virginia de Abbatibus, but becoming a widower at the age of eighty, he went into the church, received priest’s orders, and retired with the priests of the congregation of the oratory, for whom he built a church at Cesena, and there he died Oct. 3, 1652, in his eightyseventh year. He established at Cesena the academy of the Oifuscati, over which he presided until his death. His works, written partly in Italian and partly in Latin, are very numerous, and filled a considerable space in the literary history of his time: 1. “Discorso della Cometa pogonare dell' anno 1618, &c.” Venice, 1619, 4to, in which he suggests that comets are sublunary, and not celestial bodies. 2. “Anti-Tycho, in quo contra Tychonem Brahe, et nonnullos alios, &.c. demonstrator Cometas esse sublunares,” Venice, 1621, 4to. Kepler on this occasion stept forward in defence of Tycho Brahe, who had been dead some years. 3. “De conjectandis cuj usque moribus et latitantibus animi affectibus semeiotice moralis, seu de signis libri decem,” ibid. 1625, 4to, reprinted by Herman Conringius, who calls it an incomparable work, at Helmstadt, in 1665, 4to. MorhofT also praises it highly. M. Trichet Dufresne brought a copy of it for the first time into France, and M. de la Chambre availed himself of it in his work on the passions. 4. “Notse in moralem suam semeioticam, seu de signis,” Cesena, 1625, 4to. It is, perhaps, unnecessary to inform our readers that physiognomy was a favourite study from the beginning of the fifteenth to the end of the sixteenth century, and Chiaramonti appears to have made as much progress in it as any of his contemporaries. 5. An answer to Kepler, under the title “Apologia pro Anti-Tychone suo adversus Hypcraspiten Joannis Kepleri,” Venice, 1626, 4to. 6. “De tribus novis stellis, quse annis 1572, 1600, et 1604, comparuere,” Cesena, 1628, 4to. Galileo now took the part of Tycho Brahe, and published in Italian a work against Chiaramonti, who answered it in, 7. “Difesa di Scipioni Chiaramonti, &c.” Florence, 1633, 4to. 8. “Delia ‘ragione di stato libri tre, nel quale trattato da primi priticipii dedotto si suo prona la natura, le massime, e le specie cle’ governi buoni, cattivi e mascherati,” Florence, 1635, 4to, and translated into Latin, Hamburgh, 1679, 4to. 9. “Examen ad censuram Joannis Camilli Gloriosi in hbrum de tribus novis stellis,” ibid. 1636, 4to. 10. “De sede sublunari Cometarum, opuscula tria,” Amst. 1636, 4to. If. “Castigatio J. Camilli Gloriosi adversus Claramontium castigata ab ipso Claramontio,” Cesena, 1638, 4to. 12. “De methodo ad doctrinam spectante, libri quatuor, &c.” ibid. 1639, 4to. 13. “Csesense Historia libris sexdecim, ab initio civitatis ad haec tempera,” with a sketch of the general history of Italy during the same period, Cesena, 1641, 4to. 14. “De atrabile, quoad mores attinet,” Paris, 1641, 8vo, dedicated to Naude, but in the licence it is erroneously said that the author was physician to the pope. 15. “Anti-Philolaus, in quo Philolaus redivivus de terrse motu et solis ac fixarum quiete impugnalur,” &c. Cesena, 1643, 4to. This was written against Bullialdus’s attempt to revive the system of Philolaus, but in this we doubt whether our author was equal to his antagonist. 16. “Defensio ab oppugnationibus Fortunii Liceti de sede Cometarum,” Cesena, 1644, 4to. 17. “De Universo, libri sexdecim,” Cologne, 1644, 4to. 18. One of his best works, “De altitudine Caucasi liber unus, cura Gab. Naudasi editus,” Paris, 1649, 4to, and 1680, 4to. 19. “Philosophia naturalis methodo resolutiva tradita, &c.” Cesena, 1652, 4to. 20. “Opuscula varia mathematica,” Bologna, 1653, 4to. 21. “Commentaria in Aristotelem de iri.de, &c.” ibid. 1654, 4to. 22. “In quatuor meteorum Aristotelis librum commentaria,” Venice, 1668, 4to. 23. “Delle, scene, e theatri opera posthuma,” Cesena, 1675, 4to.

, archbishop of Canterbury, and founder of All Souls college, Oxford, was born, probably in 1362, at Higham-Ferrars in Northamptonshire, of parents who, if not distinguished by their opulence, were at least enabled to place their children in situations which qualified them for promotion in civil and political life. Their sons, Robert and Thomas, rose to the highest dignities in the magistracy of London; and Henry, the subject of this memoir, was, at a suitable age, placed at Winchester school, and thence removed to New college, where he studied the civil and canon law. Of his proficiency here, we have little information, but the progress of his advancement indicates that he soon acquired distinction, and conciliated the affection of the first patrons of the age. From 1392 to 1407, he can be traced through . various ecclesiastical preferments and dignities, for some at least of which he was indebted to Richard Metford, bishop of Salisbury. This valuable friend he had the misfortune to lose in the last mentioned year; but his reputation was so firmly established, that king Henry IV. about this time employed him on an embassy to pope Innocent VII. on another to the court of France, and on a third to pope Gregory XII. who was so much pleased with his conduct as to present him to the bishopric of St. David’s, which happened to become vacant during his residence at the apostolic court in 1408. In the following year he was deputed, along with Hallum, bishop of Salisbury, and Chillingdon, prior of Canterbury, to represent England in the council of Pisa, which was convoked to settle the disputed pretensions of the popes Gregory and Benedict, both of whom were deposed, and Alexander V. chosen in their room, who had once studied at Oxford.

In the spring of 1414, Chichele succeeded Arundel as archbishop of Canterbury, which he at first refused in- deference to the pope but on the pontiff’s acceding to the election made by the prior and monks, he was put in complete possession, and soon had occasion to exert the whole of his talents and influence to preserve the revenues of the church, which the parliament had more than once advised the king to take into his own hands. The time was critical; the king bad made demands on the court of France, wlrch promised to end in hostilities, and large supplies were wanted. The clergy, alarmed for the whole, agreed to give up a part of their possessions, and Chichele undertook to lay their offer before parliament, and as far as eloquence could go, to render it satisfactory to that assembly. It is here that historians have taken occasion to censure his conduct, and to represent him as precipitating the king into a war with France, in order to divert his attention from the church. But while it is certain that he strongly recommended the recovery of Henry’s hereditary dominions in France, and the vindication of his title to that crown, it is equally certain that this was a disposition which he rather found than created; and in what manner he could have thwarted it, if such is to be supposed the wiser and better course, cannot be determined without a more intimate knowledge of the state of parties than is now practicable. The war, however, was eminently successful, and the battle of Azincourt gratified the utmost hopes of the nation, and has ever since been a proud memento of its valour. During this period, besides taking the lead in political and ecclesiastical measures at home, Chichele twice accompanied the king’s camp in France.

After the death of Henry V. in 1422, and the appointment of Humphrey duke of Gloucester to be regent during the minority of Henry VI., Chichele retired to his province, and began to visit the several dioceses included in it, carefully inquiring into the state of morals and religion. The principles of Wickliffe had made considerable progress, and it was to them chiefly that the indifference of the public towards the established clergy, and the efforts which had been made to alienate their revenues, were attributed. Officially, therefore, we are not to wonder that Chichele, educated in all the prejudices of the times, endeavoured to check the growing heresy, as it was called; but from the silence of Fox on the subject, there is reason to hope that his personal interference was far more gentle than that of his predecessor Arundel. On the other hand, history has done ample justice to the spirit with which he resisted the assumed power of the pope in the disposition of ecclesiastical preferments, and asserted the privileges of the English church. In all this he was supported by the nation at large, by a majority of the bishops, and by the university of Oxford, nor at this time was more zeal shown against the Lollards, or first protestants, than against the capricious and degrading encroachments of the court of Home. Among the vindications of Chichele’s character from the imputations thrown upon it by the agents of the pope, that of the university of Oxford must not be omitted. They told the pope, that “Chichele stood in the sanctuary of God as a firm wall that heresy could not shake, nor simony undermine, and that he was the darling of the people, and the foster parent of the clergy.” These remonstrances, however, were unsatisfactory to the proud and restless spirit of Martin V. but after he had for some time kept the terrors of an interdict hanging over the nation, the dispute was dropped without concessions on either side, and the death of this pope, soon after, relieved the archbishop from farther vexation.

In 1442, he applied to pope Eugenius for an indulgence to resign his office into more able hands, being now nearly eighty years old, and, as he pathetically urges, “heavy laden, aged, infirm, and weak beyond measure.” He intreats that he may be released from a burthen which he was no longer able to support either with ease to himself, or advantage to others. He died, however, before the issue of this application could be known, on the 12th of April 1443, and was interred with great solemnity in the cathedral of Canterbury, under a monument of exquisite workmanship built by himself. As a farther mark of respect, the prior and monks decreed that no person should be buried in that part of the church where his remains were deposited.

At what time he first conceived this plan is not recorded. It appears, however, to have been in his old age, when he obtained a release from interference in public measures. The purchases he made for his college consisted chiefly of Berford hall, or Cherleton’s Inn, St. Thomas’s hall, Tingewick hall, and Godknave hall,- comprising a space of one hundred and seventy-two feet in length in the High street, ana one hundred and sixty-two in breadth in Cat, or Catherine street, which runs between the High street and Hertford college: to these additions were afterwards made, which enlarged the front in the High street. The foundation stone was laid with great solemnity, Feb. 10, 1437. John Druell, archdeacon of Exeter, and Roger Keyes, both afterwards fellows of the college, were the principal architects, and the charter was obtained of the king in 1438, and confirmed by the pope in the following year. In the charter, the king, Henry VI. assumed the title of founder, at the archbishop’s solicitation, who appears to have paid him this compliment to secure his patronage for the institution, while the full exercise of legislative authority was reserved to Chichele as co-founder.

"This made him from first wavering in religion, and indulging to scruples, to reconcile himself too soon, and too easily to the church of Rome; and carrying still his own inquisitiveness about him, without any resignation to their authority (which is the only temper can make that church sure of its proselytes) having made a journey to St. Omers (Doway), purely to perfect his conversion, by the conversation of those who had the greatest name, he found as little satisfaction there, and returned with as much haste from them; with a belief that an entire exemption from error was neither inherent in, nor necessary to any church: which occasioned that war, which was carried on by the Jesuits with so great asperity and reproaches against him, and in which he defended himself by such an admirable eloquence of language, and clear and incomparable power of reason, that he not only made them appear unequal adversaries, but carried the war into their own quarters $ and made the pope’s infallibility to be as much shaken, and declined by their own doctors (and as great an acrimony amongst themselves upon that subject) and to be at least as much doubted, as in the schools of the reformed or protestant; and forced them since, to defend and maintain those unhappy controversies in religion, with arms and weapons of another nature, than were used, or known in the church of Rome, when Bellarmine died; and which probably will in time undermine the very foundation that supports it.

, the brother of Erasmus de Surlet, lord of Chokier (one of the ablest lawyers of his time, who died in 1625), was born at Liege Jan. 14, 1571, of an ancient and noble family. He studied law at the university of Lovaine, and especially the Roman history and antiquities under Lipsius. After taking the degree of doctor in canon and civil law at Orleans, he went to Rome, and was introduced to pope Paul V. On his return to Liege, he received some promotion in the church; and Ferdinand of Bavaria, bishop and prince of Liege, made him vicar-general of his diocese, and one of his counsellors. Chokier was not more esteemed for his learning than for his benevolence, which led him to found two hospitals, one for poor incurables, and the other for female penitents. He died at Liege, either in 1650 or 1651; but his biographers have not specified the particular time, although they notice that he was buried in the cathedral of Liege, under a magnificent tomb. Among his works, are, 1. “Notae in Senecse libellum de tranquillitate animi,” Leige, 1607, 8vo. 2. “Thesaurus aphorismorum politicorum, seu commentarius in Justi-Lipsii politica, cum exemplis, notis et monitis,” Rome, 1610, Mentz, 1613, 4to, and with corrections and the addition of some other treatises, at Liege, 1642, folio. Andrew Hetdemann translated this work into German, but with so little fidelity, as to oblige, the author to publish against it in a volume entitled “Specimen candoris Heidemanni,” Liege, 1625, 8vo. 3. “Notae et dissertationes in Onosandri strategicum,” Gr. and Lat. 1610, 4to, and inserted in the latter editions of his “Aphorismi.” 4. “Tractatus de permutationibus beneficiorunV 1616, 8vo, and afterwards Rome, 1700, folio, with other treatises on the same subject. 5.” De re numjnaria prisci sevi, collata ad aestimationem monetae presentis,“Cologne, 1620, 8vo, Liege, 1649. Another title of this work we have seen is” Monetae antiquae diversarum gentium maxime Romanae consideratio et ad nostram hodiernam reductio.“He published some other works on law subjects and antiquities of the courts of chancery, the office of ambassador, &c. and some of controversy against the protestants, and one against the learned Samuel Marets, entitled ff Apologeticus adversus Samuel Maresii librum, cui titulus, Candela sub modio posita per clerum Romanum,” 1635, 4to; but he had not complete success in proving that the Roman catholic clergy at that time did not hide their candle under a bushel."

In 1652 she first proposed to resign in favour of her successor, but the remonstrances of the States delayed this measure until 1654, when she solemnly abdicated the crown, that she might be at perfect liberty to execute a plan of life which vanity and folly seem to have presented to her imagination, as a life of true happiness, the royal cum dignitatc. Some time before this step, Anthony Macedo, a Jesuit, was chosen by John IV. king of Portugal, to accompany the ambassador he sent into Sweden to queen Christina; and this Jesuit pleased this princess so highly, that she secretly opened to him the design she had of changing her religion. She sent him to Rome with letters to the general of the Jesuits; in which she desired that two of their society might be dispatched to her, Italians by nation, and learned men, who should take another habit that she might confer with them at more ease upon matters of religion. The request was granted; and two Jesuits were immediately sent to her, viz. Francis Malines, divinity professor at Turin, and Paul Casati, professor of mathematics at Rome, who easily effected what Macedo, the first confidant of her design, had begun. Having made her abjuration of the Lutheran religion, at which the Roman catholics triumphed, and the protestants were discontented, both without much reason, she began her capricious travels: from Brussels, or as some say, Inspruck, at which she played the farce of abjuration, she went to Rome, where she intended to fix her abode, and where she actually remained two years, and met with such a reception as suited her vanity. But some disgust came at last, and she determined to visit France, where Louis XIV. received her with respect, but the ladies of the court were shocked at her masculine appearance, and more at her licentious conversation. Here she courted the learned, and appointed Menage her master of ceremonies, but at last excited general horror by an action, for which, in perhaps any other country, she would have been punished by death. This was the murder of an Italian, Moualdeschi, her master of the horse, who had betrayed some secret entrusted to him. He was summoned into a gallery in the palace, letters were then shewn to him, at the sight of which he turned pale, and intreated for mercy, but he was instantly stabbed by two of her own domestics in an apartment adjoining that in which she herself was. The French court was justly offended at this atrocious deed, yet it met with vindicators, among whom was Leibnitz, whose name was disgraced by the cause which he attempted to justify. Christina was sensible that she was now regarded with horror in France, and would gladly have visited England, but she received no encouragement for that purpose from Cromwell: she therefore, in 1658, returned to Rome, and resumed her amusements in the arts and sciences. But Rome had no permanent charms, and in 1660, on the death of Gustavus, she took a journey to Sweden for the purpose of recovering her crown and dignity. She found, however, her ancient subjects much indisposed against her and her new religion. They refused to confirm her revenues, caused her chapel to be pulled down, banished all her Italian chaplains, and, in short, rejected her claims. She submitted to a second renunciation of the throne, after which she returned to Rome, and pretended to interest herself warmly, first in behalf of the island of Candia, then besieged by the Turks, and afterwards to procure supplies of men and money for the Venetians. Some differences with the pope made her resolve, in 1662, once more to return to Sweden; but the conditions annexed by the senate to her residence there, were now so mortifying, that she proceeded no farther than Hamburgh, and from Hamburgh again to Rome, where she died in 1689, leaving a character in which there is little that is amiable. Vanity, caprice, and irresolution deformed her best actions, and Sweden had reason to rejoice at the abdication of a woman who could play the tyrant with so little feeling when she had given up the power. She left some maxims, and thoughts and reflections on the life of Alexander the Great, which were translated and published in England in 1753; but several letters attributed to her are said to be spurious.

, the principal of those learned men who brought the Greek language and literature into the West, was born at Constantinople, as it is supposed, about 1355. He was of considerable rank, and descended from so ancient a family that his ancestors are said to have removed with Constantine from Rome to Byzantium. He was sent ambassador to the sovereigns of Europe by the emperor John Palseologus in 1387, to solicit assistance against the Turks, and was here in England in the reign of Richard II. In an epistle which he wrote at Rome to the emperor, containing a comparison of ancient and modern Rome, he says that he was two years before at London with his retinue. When he had finished this embassy in somewhat more than three years, he returned to Constantinople; but afterwards, whether through fear of the Turks, or for the sake of propagating the Greek learning, left it again, and came back into Italy about 1396, by invitation from the city of Florence, with the promise of a salary, to open a school there for the Greek language. With this he complied, and taught there for three years, and had Leonard Aretin for his scholar. From Florence he went to Milan, at the command of his emperor, who was come into Italy, and resided in that city; and while he was here, Galeazzo, duke of Milan, prevailed with him to accept the Greek professorship in the university of Pavia, which had lately been founded by his father. This he held till the death of Galeazzo, and then removed to Venice on account of the wars which immediately followed. Between 1406 and 1409 he went to Rome upon an invitation from Leonard Aretin, who had formerly been his scholar, but was then secretary to pope Gregory XII. In this city his talents and virtues procured him the honour of being sent, in 1413, into Germany by pope Martin V. as ambassador to the emperor Sigismund, along with cardinal Zarabella, in order to fix upon a place for holding a general council; and Chrysoloras and the cardinal fixed upon Constance. Afterwards he returned to his own emperor at Constantinople, by whom he was sent ambassador with others as representatives of the Greek church, to the council of Constance; but a few days after the opening of the council he died, April 15, 1415. He was buried at Constance and a handsome monument was erected over him, with an inscription upon it by Peter Paul Vergerio. His scholar Poggio also honoured his memory with an elegant epitaph, and a volume of eulogies upon him lately existed in the monastery at Camaldoli, justly due to one who contributed so essentially to revive Grecian literature, which had lain dormant in the West for seven hundred years. Emanuel had a nephew, John Chrysoloras, who likewise taught Greek in Italy, and died in 1425. Emanuel’s. Greek Grammar was published soon after the invention of printing, and there are a great many editions from 1480 to 1550, 4to and 8vo, almost all of which are very scarce.

But divinity was, unfortunately for himself, his favourite fitudy and it is said that a little society was formed at Salisbury, under the management and direction of Chubb, for the sake of debating upon religious subjects. Here the scriptures were at first read, under the guidance of some commentator; but in time every man delivered his sentiments freely, and without reserve, and commentators were no longer in favour, the ablest disputant being the man who receded most from established opinions. About this time the controversy upon the Trinity was carried on very warmly between Clarke and Waterland; and falling under the cognizance of this theological assembly, Chubb, at the request of the members, drew up his sentiments about it, in a kind of dissertation which, after it had undergone some correction, and been submitted to Whiston, who saw not much in it averse to his own opinions, published it under the title of “The Supremacy of the Father asserted, &c.” A literary production from one of a mean and illiberal education will always create wonder, and a tallow-chandler arbitrating between such men as Clarke and Waterland, could not fail to excite attention. Those who would have thought nothing of the work had it come from the school of Clarke, discovered in this piece of Chubb’s, great talents in reasoning, as well as great perspicuity and correctness in writing; so that he began to be considered as one much above the ordinary size of men. Hence Pppe, in a letter to his friend Gay, was led to ask him if he had seen or conversed with Mr. Chubb, who is a wonderful phenomenon of Wiltshire?“and says, in relation to a quarto volume of tracts, which were printed afterwards, that he had” read through his whole volume with admiration of the writer, though not always with approbation of Jus doctrine." How far Pope, was a judge of controversial divinity is not now a question, but the friends of Chubb appear to have brought forward his evidence with triumph.

While the friends of Churchill were thus negligent of his fame, it was not to be expected that his enemies would be very eager to perpetuate the memory of a man by whom they had suffered so severely. Perhaps no writer ever made so many enemies, or carried his hostilities into so many quarters, without provocation. If we except the ease of Hogarth, it is doubtful whether he ever attacked the character of one individual who did him an injury, or stood in his way. Such wantonness of detraction must have naturally led to the general wish that his name and works might be speedily consigned to oblivion. His writings, however, may now be read with more calmness, and his rank as a poet assigned with the regards due to genius, however misapplied. Jf those passages in which his genius shines most conspicuously were to be selected from the mass of defamation by which they are surrounded, he might be allowed to approach to Pope in every thing but correctness; and even of his failure in this respect, it may be justiy said that he evinces carelessness rather than want of taste. But he despised regularity in every thing, and whatever was within rules, bore an air of restraint to which his proud spirit could not submit; hence he persisted in despising that correctness which he might have attained with very little care. The opinion of Cowper upon this subject is too valuable to be omitted. Churchill “is a careless writer for the most part, but where shall we find in. any of those authors, who finish their works with the exactness of a Flemish pencil, those bold and daring strokes of fancy, those numbers so hazardously ventured upon, and so happily finished, the matter so compressed, and yet so clear, and the colouring so sparingly laid on, and yet with such a beautiful effect? In short it is not his least praise, that he is never guilty of those faults as a writer which he lays to the charge of others. A proof, that he did not judge by a borrowed standard, or from rules laid down by critics, but that he was qualified to do it by his own native powers, and his great superiority of genius*.” The superiority of his genius, indeed, is so obvious from even a slight perusal of his works, that it must ever be regretted that his subjects were temporary, and his manner irritating, and that he should have given to party and to passion what might have so boldly chastised vice, promoted the dignity of virtue, and advanced the honours of poetry. His fertility was astonishing, for the whole of his poems were designed and finished within the short space of three years and a half. Whatever he undertook, he accomplished with rapidity, although such was the redundancy of his imagination, and such the facility with which he committed his thoughts to paper, that he has not always executed what he began, and perhaps delights too much in excursions

It is well known that Pope’s character of Atossa was designed for her; and when these lines were shewn to her grace, as if they were intended for the portrait of the duchess of Buckingham, she soon stopped the person that was reading them to her, and called out aloud—“I cannot be so imposed upon—I see plainly enough for whom they are designed;” and abused Pope for the attack, though she was afterwards reconciled to, and courted him. The violence of the duchess of Marlborough‘ s temper, which is so strongly painted in the character of Atossa, frequently broke out into wonderful and ridiculous indecencies. In the last illness of the great duke her husband, when Dr. Mead left his chamber, the duchess, disliking his advice, followed him down stairs, swore at him bitterly, and was going to tear oft’ his perriwig. Dr. Hoadly, the late bishop of Winchester, was present at this scene. Disappointed ambition, great wealth, and increasing years, rendered her more and more peevish. She hated courts, says lord Hailes, over which she had no influence, and she became at length the most ferocious animal that is suffered to go loose a violent party-woman. In the latter part of her life she became bed-ridden. Paper, pens, and ink were placed by her side, and she used occasionally to write down either what she remembered, or what came into her head. A selection from these loose papers was made in the way of diary, by sir David Dalryraple, lord Hailes, under the title of “The Opinions of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, published from the original Mss.” 1788, 12mo, which Mr. Park, who has given a specimen, very properly characterises as the effusions of caprice and arrogance. This lady died Oct. 18, 1744.

, brother to the preceding, and a very learned critic of Spain, was born at Toledo in 1525, and died at Rome in 1581. He was employed with others by pope Gregory XIII. in correcting the calendar, and also in revising an edition of the Bible, and of some other works printed at the Vatican. He wrote learned notes upon Arnobius, Tertullian, Cassian, Caesar, Pliny, Terence, &c. He was the author, likewise, of some separate little treatises, one particularly, “De Triclinio Romano;” which, with those of Fuivius Ursinus and Mercurialis upon the same subject, was published at Amsterdam, 1689, in 12mo, with figures to illustrate the descriptions.

The “Careless Husband,” which is reckoned his best play, was acted in 1704 with great success, a great portion of which he very handsomely places to the account of Mrs. Oldfield, a celebrated actress, who gave great spirit to the character of Lady Betty Modish; yet not more than the author himself in the part of Lord Foppington, wherein he was inimitable. But of all his plays, none was of more importance to the public and to himself, than his comedy called the “Nonjuror,” which was acted in 1717, and dedicated to the king: the hint of it he took from the TartufFe of Moliere. It was considered, however, as a party piece, and it is said that, as he foresaw, he had never after fair-play given to any thing he wrote, and was the constant butt of Mist in his “Weekly Journal,” and of all the Jacobite faction. But this is not an exact state of the case. It is true that he incurred the ridicule of the Jacobites, but the Jacobites only laughed at him in common with all the wits of the day. This general contempt was afterwards heightened by Pope’s making him the hero of the “Duneiad” instead of Theobald, a transfer undoubtedly mean and absurd on Pope’s part, since what was written for Theobald, a dull plodder, could never suit Cibber, a gay lively writer, and certainly a man of wit However, if the Nonjuror brought upon its author some imaginary evils, it procured him also some advantage, for when he presented it to George I. the king ordered him 200l. and the merit of it, as he himself confesses, made him poet-laureat in 1730. Here again he incurred the ridicule of his brother wits, by his annual odes, which had no merit but their loyalty, lyric poetry being a species of writing for which he had not the least talent, and which he probably would not have attempted, had not his office rendered it necessary. These repeated efforts of his enemies sometimes hindered the success of his dramatic pieces; and the attacks against him, in verse and in prose, were now numerous and incessant, as appears by the early volumes of the Gentleman’s Magazine. But he appears to have been so little affected by them, that he joined heartily in the laugh agaiost himself:, and even contributed to increase the merriment of the public at his own expence.

The same year (1730) he quitted the stage, though he occasionally appeared on it afterwards; in particular, when “Papal Tyranny in the reign of king John,” a tragedy of his own, was acted in 1744, he performed the part of Pandulph, the pope’s legate, with great spirit and vigour, though he was at that time above seventy years of age. He died Dec. 12, 1757. His plays, such of them as he thought worth preserving, he collected and published in 2 vols. 4to. Though Pope has made him the prince of dunces, yet he was a man of parts, but vain, and never so happy as when among the great, making sport for people who had more money, but less wit than himself. Dr. Johnson says he was by no means a blockhead, but by arrogating to himself too much, he was in danger of losing that degree of estimation to which he was entitled. Of this we have a proof in a work he published in 1747, entitled “The Character and Conduct of Cicero considered, from the History of his Life by the Rev. Dr. Middleton; with occasional Essays and Observations upon the most memorable Facts and Persons during that Period,” 4to. Cibber was much better qualified to estimate the merits of his brother comedians, than to investigate the conduct of Cicero. As to his moral character, we know not that any thing mean or dishonourable has ever been imputed to him, and his “Letter to Pope,” expostulating with him for placing him in the Dunciad, does some credit to his spirit, and is a more able defence of his conduct than Pope could answer. Although addicted to the promiscuous gallantries of the stage, and affecting the “gay seducer” to the last, he pleased the moral Richardson so well by his flattery, that the latter conceived a high idea of him, and wondered on one occasion, that Dr. Johnson, then a young man, could treat Cibber with familiarity! The best edition of Cibber’s Works is that of 1760, in 5 vols. 12mo. His “Life,” from which much of this article is taken, has been often reprinted.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born at St. Edmundsbury, in Suffolk, September 14, 1646, and educated in the free-school there, under the care of Dr. Thomas Stephens, author of the notes on Statius’s Sylvse, who took very early notice of the promising parts of his scholar. Before he was full thirteen years of age, he was admitted a pensioner in Emanuel-college, in Cambridge, September 5, 1659, under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Jackson, where he took his degree of A. B. 1663, A.M. 1667, and commenced D. D. in 1683. He was then chosen one of the preachers of St. Edmundsbury, which office he discharged for seven years with universal reputation. From thence, at the instance of some considerable men of the long robe, whose business at the assizes there gave them opportunities of being acquainted with his great worth and abilities, he was thought worthy by the society of Gray’s-inn, to succeed the eminent Dr. Cradock, as their preacher, which he continued to be all the remaining part of his life, much to the satisfaction of the society. He was also presented by the lord keeper North (who was his wife’s kinsman) to the rectory of Farnham-royal, in Buckinghamshire, into which he was instituted May 14, 1683; but what he most valued next to his preacher’s place at Gray’s-inn, was the lectureship of St. Michael Bassishaw, to which he was elected by that parish about two years before his death. He was also chaplain in ordinary to his majesty. He was cut off, however, in the prime of life. He was seized with the small-pox on a Sunday evening, March the 16th, after having preached at St. Martin in the Fields, in his Lent course there; and died March 28, 1638. He was buried in a vault under part of the church of St. Michael Bassishaw, in the grave with his wife, Mrs. Thornasin North, a most virtuous and accomplished woman, who died eighteen days after him, of the same disease. We are assured by the testimony of Dr. Sharp, that no man of a private condition, in the last age, died more lamented, and his private virtuesand public services are spoken of by all his contemporaries in the highest terms. Bishop Burnet ranks him among those worthy and eminent men whose lives and labours in a great measure rescued the church from those reproaches that the follies of others drew upon it; nor ought it to be forgotten, that he was one of those excellent divines who made that noble stand against popery in the reign of king James II. which will redound to their immortal honour. The several things published by Dr. Clagett, are as follows: 1. “A Discourse concerning the Operations of the Holy Spirit; with a confutation of some part of Dr. Owen’s book upon that subject,” Part I. Lond. 1677, 8vo; Part II. Lond. 1680, 8vo. In this second part there is an answer to Mr. John Humphreys’s Animadversions on the first Part. The author intended a third part, proving that the Fathers were not on Dr. Ovven’s side, which was burnt by an accidental fire, and the author never found leisure to re-write it. We are not of opinion, however, that what is published ranks among his most successful performances. In 1719 Dr. Stebbing published an abridgment of the two parts mentioned above. 2. “A Reply to a pamphlet called The Mischief of Impositions, by Mr. Alsop, which pretends to answer the dean of St. Paul’s (Dr. Stillingfleet’s) Sermon concerning the Mischief of Separation,” Lond. 1681, 4to. 3. “An Answer to the Dissenters’ Objections against the Common Prayers, and some other parts of the divine service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England,” Lond. 1683, 4to. 4. “The Difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants fromthe Church of Rome, and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England,” Lond. 1683, 4to. 5. “The State of the Church of Rome when the Reformation began, as it appears by the advices given to pope Paul III. and Julius III. by creatures of their own.” 6. “A Discourse concerning the Invocation of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints,” Lond. 1686, 4to. 7. “A Paraphrase, with notes, upon the sixth Chapter of St. John, shewing that there is neither good reason, nor sufficient authority to suppose that the Eucharist is discoursed of in that chapter, much less to infer the doctrine of Transubstantiation from it.” Lond. 1686, 4to. Reprinted in 1689, 8vo, at the end of his second volume of sermons. 8. “Of the Humanity and Chanty of Christians. A Sermon preached at the Suffolk Feast, at St. Michael, Cornhill, London, November 30, 1686.” 9. “A Discourse concerning the pretended Sacrament of Extreme Unction, &.c.” in three parts. “With a letter to the Vindicator of the bishop of Condom,” Lond. 1687, 4to. 10. “A second letter to the Vindicator of the bishop of Condom,” Lond. 1637, 4to. 11. “Authority of Councils, and the Rule of Faith, with an answer to the Eight Theses laid down for the Trial of the English Reformation.” The first part, about Councils, by Hutchinson, esq. the rest by Dr. Clagett, 4to. 12. “Notion of Idolatry considered and confuted,” Lond. 1688. 13. “Cardinal Bellarmine’s seventh note, of the Union of the Members among themselves, and with the Head.” 14. “His twelfth note, Of the Light of Prophecy, examined and confuted.” 15. “A View of the whole Controversy between the Representer and the Answerer; in which are laid open some of the methods by which Protestants are misrepresented by Papists,” Lond. 1687, 4to. 16. “An Answer to the Representer’s Reflections upon the State and View of the Controversy. With a Reply to the Vindicator’s full Answer; shewing that the Vindicator has utterly ruined the new design of expounding and representing Popery,” London, 1688, 4to. 17. “Several captious Queries concerning the English Reformation, first in Latin, and afterwards by T. W. in English, briefly and fully answered,” Lond. 1688, 4to. 18. “A Preface concerning the Testimony of Miracles, prefixed to The School of the Eucharist established upon the miraculous respects and acknowledgements, which Beasts, Birds, and Insects, upon several occasions, have rendered to the Sacrament of the Altar.” Translated by another hand, from the original French of F. Toussain Bridoul, a Jesuit," Lond. 1687, 4to. Besides these, after his decease, his brother, Mr. Nicolas Clagett, published four volumes of his sermons: the first in 1689, contained seventeen sermons; one of which was greatly admired by queen Mary, who desired to have it read more than once during her last illness: Text, Job ii. 10. The second volume, printed in 1693, contained eleven sermons; a Paraphrase and Notes upon the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh, and eighth Chapters of the Gospel of St. John. The Paraphrase, and Notes on the sixth Chapter, which had been published before: A Discourse of Church- Unity, with Directions now, in this divided State of Christendom, to keep within the Unity of the Church A Discourse of Humanity and Charity And a Letter concerning Protestants Charity to Papists published by Dr. Clagett. The third and fourth volumes did not come out till 1720, at so great a distance of tune from the two former volumes, that the booksellers would not call them the third and fourth volumes, but the first and second volumes, as well as the former; only notice was given, that they were never before published.

, the founder of the Clares, an order of nuns so called from her, was born at Assisi, in 1193, and was a model of piety and devotion from her infancy, according to her biographers, whose account is certainly a model of credulity and superstition. Her parents were persons of rank, from whom in 1212 she ran away, and went to St. Francis, who cloathed her in his habit, a piece of sackcloth tied about her with a cord, and sent her to a Benedictine nunnery, and from this epoch the poor Clares date their foundation. She was next placed by St. Francis in a new house of nuns, of which she was appointed the superior, and which was soon crowded with devotees of rank. This female community practised austerities, “of which,” we are told, “people in the world have hardly any conception.” They not only went without shoes and stockings, lay on the ground, and kept perpetual abstinence, but were enjoined profound silence, unless in cases of the greatest necessity. Pope Innocent IV. in 1251, confirmed to this order the privilege of poverty, without any property in common. St. Clare’s abstinence and mortifications brought her into a miserable state of disease, from which she was released Aug. 11, 1253, and was buried the day following, on which her festival is kept. Alexander IV. canonized her in 1255. The nuns of St. Clans are divided into Damianists and Urbanists. The former follow the rule given by St. Francis to St. Clare; the latter are mitigated, and follow the rules given by Urban IV. From their name, Minoresses, sometimes given them, our Minories near Aldgate, is derived, where they had a nunnery from the year 1293.

When sir John Germaine lay upon his death-bed, and was in great confusion and trouble of mind, he sent for Dr. Clarke, and requested to know of him whether he should receive the Sacrament, and what he should do in his sad condition. The doctor, who was well acquainted with sir John’s pursuits and course of life, sedately replied, that he could not advise him to receive the Sacrament, and that he did not think it likely to be of any avail to him with respect to his final welfare. Having said this, he departed, without administering the communion, having first recommended the dying man to the mercy of God. Mr. Pope has a kind of reflection upon Dr. Clarke’s frequenting the court; to which the poet was stimulated by resentment against the doctor, because he refused to use his interest for obtaining the recall of lord Bolingbroke from France, with a general pardon.

, a German Jesuit, was born at Bamberg, in Germany, in 1537. He became a very studious mathematician, and elaborate writer, his works making five large folio volumes; and containing a complete body or course of the mathematics. They are mostly elementary, and commentaries on Euclid and others; having very little of invention of his own. His talents and writings have been variously spoken of, and it must be acknowledged that he exhibits more of industry than genius. He was sent for to Rome, to assist, with other learned men, in the reformation of the calendar, by pope Gregory; which he afterwards undertook a defence of, against Scaliger, Vieta, and others, who attacked it. He died at Rome, the 6th of February, 1612, after more than fifty years close application to the mathematical sciences.

, one of the popes so called, whose proper name was Bertrand de Gouth, or de Goth, was appointed bishop of Comminges, then archbishop of Bourdeaux by Boniface VIII. and afterwards elected pope at Perugia, June 5, 1305. The ceremony of his coronation was performed at Lyons, Sunday, November 10, but interrupted by a wall giving way, from being overloaded with spectators: by which accident John II. duke of Bretany was ^killed, the king wounded, and the tiara thrown from the pope’s head. This accident was considered as a presage of the misfortunes which afflicted Italy and all Christendom during the pontificate of Clement V. He was the first pope who resided at Avignon. In 1311, he held the general council of Vienne, appropriated to himself the first year’s revenue of all the English benefices, which was the origin of first fruits, abolished the order of templars, and made the collection of what are called the “Clementine Constitutions” of which there are some scarce editions; Mentz, 1460, 1467, and 1471, fol. They formed afterwards part of the body of canon law. Clement V. died at Roquemaure on the Rhone, April 20, 1314, as he was going to Bourdeaux for change of air. It is generally allowed that he was a reproach to the church, and the high office he held in it.

, an eminent designer and engraver, was born at Metz, in 1637, of a family in such an humble condition, that he entered while very young into the abbey of St. Arnould, in that city, in quality of helper in the kitchen. He had such a natural talent for drawing, that all the moments of leisure he could get from his employment he Hlled up in making little portraits with a pen on such scraps of paper as he found about the kitchen. The prior of the house caught him one day occupied in this manner; and, on examining his performance, perceived in it such marks of genius as allowed him not to doubt that young Le Clerc would attain to excellence if assisted by art. He immediately took the resolution to cultivate his natural talents, put the crayon into his hand, and gave him to the care of one of the monks, with orders to get him instructed. At ten years old he could handle the graver. At the same time he applied himself to the study of geometry, perspective, fortification, and architecture, in which he made as rapid a progress as in drawing and engraving. Marshal de la Ferte made choice of him for his geographical engineer; Louis XIV. for his engraver in ordinary, at the solicitation of Colbert; and pope Clement XI. honoured him with the title of a Roman knight. In addition to this superior merit, and this strong capacity for the arts, Le Clerc had kind affections and an insinuating address. He died at Paris the 25th of October, 1714, at the age of seventy-seven. This master treated every subject with equal excellence; as landscapes, architecture, ornaments, discovering a lively and glowing imagination kept under due restraint, a correctness of design, a wonderful fertility, and elegant expression and execution. The productions of his graver, amounting to upwards of 3000, would have been sufficient of themselves to have gained him great reputation, independently of those of his pen. The principal of the latter kind are: 1. “A Treatise of Theoretic and Practical Geometry,” reprinted in 174-5, 8vo, with the life of the author. Colbert, informed of the success of this work, ordered Le Clerc a pension of 600 crowns, and apartments in the Gobelins. But he presently after gave up this pension, which confined him to the king’s service, in order to work more freely, and on subjects of his own choice. 2. “A Treatise on Architecture,” 12 vols. 4to. 3. “A Discourse on Perspective,” in which the author shews a profound knowledge of his subject. After Callot, he is the engraver who has most distinctly shewn five or six leagues extent of country in a small space.

, justly celebrated for his astonishing miniatures and illuminations in missals and other religious books, was born in Sclavonia in the year 1498. He was originally educated for the church, and took orders, but was afterwards suffered to relinquish the sacerdotal habit by a dispensation from the pope. Soon after the age of eighteen, his love of painting prompted him to travel to Rome, where he was taken into the service of the cardinal Grimani, by whom he was, for the space of three years, employed in making careful pen-drawings from the finest medals. He afterwards became the scholar of Julio Romano, and made considerable advancement in oil-painting; but his master, perceiving the extraordinary talent which he evinced for miniature, succeeded in persuading him to apply himself entirely to that branch of the art; and' it may with justice be said, that we owe to the sagacity of Julio Romano, and the unexampled assiduity of Clovio, the most exquisite and delicately finished performances of that kind in the known world; since he not only far surpassed all who went before him, but to this day stands unrivalled, by all those who have since attempted to walk in his footsteps. In addition to the instruction which our artist received from the favourite scholar of Raffaele, he derived great benefit from the works of Buonarotti, many of which he copied in a most beautiful and finished manner; and he afterwards reaped great advantage from the friendship and experience of Girolamo da 1 Libri, a miniature painter of great note at Verona: the result of all these studies was a style of drawing, partaking of the purity of the Roman, and the grandeur of the Florentine school; united, not unfrequently, to the rich colouring of Titian or the ambient hue of Correggio.

, an ingenious poet, and a man of taste, wit, and learning, was master of the grammar-school of Christ’s hospital, where he was himself educated. He took the degree of B. A. in 1698, and of M. A. in 1702, in Trinity- college, Cambridge. He died at London, in 1713, in the prime of life, and was buried in the cloisters of Christ’s hospital. Jacob says that his “Observations on Virgil” shew that he was well acquainted with that poet. He published in 1707, “A Collection of Poems on several occasions, &c. to which is prefixed a Discourse on Criticism, and the Liberty of Writing, by way of letter to a friend.” He translated the third, and part of the fourth book of Howe’s edition of the “Callipapdia,” and assisted Ozell in the translation of Boileau’s “Lutrin.” His other known productions are, 1. “The Miller’s Tale,” from Chaucer. 2. A translation of the “Muscipula.” 3. “The Oak and the Briar,” a tale. His excellent ode, “The Female Reign,” was printed in Dodsley’s Collection, and afterwards in the Gent. Mag. 1753, with alterations by Dr. Watts, who thought it “the truest and best Pindaric he had ever read,” an opinion in which we find Dr. Warton coinciding, in one of his notes on Pope’s works.

, a native of Nuremberg, canon of Breslau, was born in 1479, and became a bigotted adherent to the Roman catholic religion, and disputed warmly against Luther, Osiander, Bucer, Melancthon, Calvin, and the other patriarchs of the reformation; but he is too full of invective, even by the confession of the catholics themselves. In 1539 he received from England a refutation by Richard Morrison, D. D. of the tract he had published against the marriage of Henry Vjii. He replied in a publication bearing this title “The broom of Johannes Cochlæus for sweeping down the cobwebs of Morrison.” Morrison had reproached him with having been made canon of Mersberg on condition that he should write no more against Luther, and for having forfeited his word, on being bought over by promises from the pope. Cochlæus declares that he is not canon of Mersberg that prince George of Saxony sent for him to Mentz, where he was canon of St. Victor, to give him a canonry in the cathedral of Misnia, in order to assist Jerom Emser in the defence of the catholic faith; adding, that it is so far from being true that he had promised to write no more against Luther, that in the preceding year he had published no less than six writings against him. He defends what he had written against the divorce of Henry VIII. and boasts that Erasmus had approved his work. The principal productions of this author are: 1. “Historia Hussitarum,” folio; a scarce and curious/work, and one of his best performances. 2. “De actis et scriptis Lutheri,” 1549, folio. 3. “Speculum circa Missam,” 8vo. 4. “De vita Theoxlorici regis Ostrogothorum,” Stockholm, 1699, 4to. 5. “Consilium cardinalium anno 1538,” 8vo. 6. “De emendanda ecclesia,” 1539, 8vo, very scarce. He died at Breslau, January 10, 1552, at the age of 72.

, a French poet, was born at Janville in the Orleanois in 1735, and was a votary of the muses from his very infancy. He made his first appearance in the literary world in 1758, by a poetical translation of Pope’s Eloisa to Ahelard; in which he was said to have retained the warmth of the original, with the richness of its images. His tragedies of Astarbe and Calisto, the one performed in 1758, and the other in 1760, were not so successful. The complexion of them is indeed sorrowful, and even gloomy, but never tragical. The “Temple of Guides,” and two of the “Nights” of Young, in French verse, the epistle to M. Duhamel, and the poem of Prometheus, which appeared afterwards, are in general versified in a soft and harmonious manner. The epistle to M. Duhamel, which is replete with rural descriptions and sentiments of beneficence, has been ranked by many of its enthusiastic admirers with the best epistles of Boileau. These several performances excited the attention of the French academy towards the author, who elected him a meaaber at the beginning of 1776; but before he had pronounced his inaugural discourse, he was snatched away by death, in the flower of his age, the 7th of April in the same year, after he had risen from his bed in a state of extreme Weakness, and burnt what he had written of a translation of Tasso. This poet, who has so well described the charms of nature in his poems, and who even understood the art of drawing, yet in all the variety of colours saw only white and black, and only the different combinations of light and shade. This singular organization, however, did not weaken the charms of his imagination. His works were collected in two vols. 8vo, Paris, 1779, and have been since reprinted in 12mo. Among these is a comedy entitled “Les perfidies a la mode,” in which are some agreeable verses, two or three characters well enough drawn, but not a single spark of the vis comica.

Colbert applied himself wholly to the advancement of his master’s interests, and gave him so many marks of his diligence and skill that afterwards he made him his intendant. He accommodated himself so dexterously to the inclinations of that minister, by retrenching his superfluous expences, that he was entrusted with the sale of benefices and governments, and it was by Colbert’s counsel that the cardinal obliged the governors of frontier places to maintain their garrisons with the contributions they exacted. He was sent to Rome, to negociate the reconciliation of cardinal de Retz, for which the pope had shewed some concern; and to persuade his holiness to fulfill the treaty concluded with his predecessor Urban VIII. From all these services Mazarine conceived so high an opinion of Colbert’s abilities, that at his death in 1661, he earnestly recommended him to Louis XIV. as the most proper person to regulate the finances, which at that time were in great confusion. Louis accepted the recommendation, and Colbert being appointed intendant of the finances, applied himself to their regulation, and succeeded: though it procured him many enemies. France is also obliged to this minister for establishing at that time her trade with the East and West Indies, from which she once reaped innumerable advantages.

His health began to decline several years before his death: and he was extremely afflicted with the stone, which at last put an end to his life, Dec. 13, 1729; he was interred in Oxford chapel. It is remarkable that notwithstanding the accusation of being an enemy to religion, he declared, just before his last minutes, “That as he had always endeavoured, to the best of his abilities, to serve God, his king, and his country, so he was persuaded he was going to that place which God had designed for them that love him.” Presently after, he said, that “the catholic religion is to love God, and to love man;” and he advised such as were about him to have a constant regard to those principles. His library, which was very large and curious, was sold by T. Ballard in 1730-1. The catalogue was drawn up by Dr. Sykes. We are told, that “the corruption among Christians, and the persecuting spirit of the clergy, had given him a prejudice against the Christian religion; and at last induced him to think, that, upon the foot on which it is at present, it is pernicious to mankind.” He has indeed given us himself an unequivocal intimation, that he had actually renounced Christianity, Thus, in answer to Rogers, who had supposed that it was men’s lusts and passions, and not their reason, which made them depart from the gospel, he acknowledges, that <c it may be, and is undoubtedly, the case of many, who reject the gospel, to be influenced therein by their vices and immoralities. It would be very strange,“says he,” if Christianity, which teaches so much good morality, and so justly condemns divers vices, to which men are prone, was not rejected by some libertines on that account; as the several pretended revelations, which are established throughout the world, are by libertines on that very account also. But this cannot be the case of all who reject the gospel. Some of them who reject the gospel lead as good lives as those who receive it. And I suppose there is no difference to the advantage of Christians, in point of morality, between them and the Jews, Mahometans, heathens, or others, who reject Christianity.“But we ought not to conclude this article without remarking, that whatever Mr. Collins’s character in private life, he was, at the same time, a most unfair writer. He seemed, with all his morality, to have very little conscience in his quotations, adapting them, without scruple, to his own purposes, however contrary they might be to the genuine meaning of the authors cited, or to the connection in which the passages referred to stood. So many facts of this kind were undeniably proved against him by his adversaries, that he must ever be recorded as a flagrant instance of literary disingenuity. Let these facts, which are clearly proved by Leland, be compared with his dying declarations. In addition to the answerers of Collins, we may mention dean Swift, in an excellent piece of irony, entitled” Mr. Collins’s Discourse of Freethinking, put into plain English, by way of abstract, for the use of the poor,“1713, reprinted in Mr. Nichols’s edition of his Works, vol. X. The twelfth chapter also of the” Memoirs of Martinus Scriblerus," in Pope’s Works, is an inimitable ridicule on Collins’s arguments against Clarke, to prove the soul to be only a quality.

, an ancient Italian poet and philosopher, was born at Stignano in Pescia, in 1330, His father, who was in the army, being involved in the troubles of his country, was obliged to retire to Bologna, where Coluccio was educated, or rather where he taught himself for some time without % master. It appears indeed from a letter which he wrote to Bernardo cli Moglo, that he did not apply himself to the cultivation of polite literature till he was arrived at man’s estate, and that it was then he went to Bologna? and attended the public lectures of the father of the above Bernardo. By his own father’s request, he afterwards studied law, but on his death quitted that profession for eloquence and poetry. It is not stated when he left Bologna, nor when he was permitted to return to Florence; but in 1363, in his thirty-eighth year, we find him the colleague of Francis Bruin, as apostolical secretary to pope Urban V, and it is probable that he quitted this employment when Urban went to France. He quitted at the same time the ecclesiastical habit, and married a lady by whom he had ten children. His reputation for knowledge and eloquence procured him the greatest offers from popes, emperors, and kings; but his love for his native country made him prefer, to the most brilliant prospects, the office of chancellor of the republic of Florence, which was conferred on him in 1375, and which he filled very honourably for thirty years. The letters he wrote appeared so striking to John Galeas Visconti, then at war with the republic, that he declared one letter of Coluccio’s to be more mischievous to his cause than the efforts of a thousand Florentine knights.

, another eminent missionary for the propagation of the Christian religion in the sixth century, was a native of Ireland according to Jonas, who wrote his life, sir James Ware, and others; but Mackenzie maintains that he was a North Briton. From either Scotland or. Ireland, however, he went into England, where he continued some time, and in 589 proceeded to France, and founded the monastery of Luxevil, near Besanon, which he governed during twenty years. In 598 we find him engaged in a controversy with pope Gregory concerning the proper time of keeping Easter, which was then a frequent object of dispute; but Columbanus at last submitted to the court of Rome. After so long residence in France, he was banished for censuring the immoralities of Theodoric and his queen. He then went to Switzerland, where he was kindly received by Theodebert, king of that country, and was successful in converting the pagans; but the Swiss army being defeated by the French, he was obliged to remove to Italy, where, under the protection of the king of the Lombards, he founded, in 613, the abbey of Bobio, near Naples. Over this monastery he presided but a short time, dying Nov. 21, 61S. Authors are not agreed as to the order of monks to which Columbanus belonged, but it is certain that his disciples conformed to the rules of the Benedictines. His works are printed in the Bibl. Patrum, and consist of monastic rules, sermons, poems, letters, &c.

But Comenius was not only intent upon the reformation of schools; he had become a deep re’searcher into prophecies, revolutions, the ruining of antichrist, the millennium, &c. and had collected with prodigious care the chimeras of Kotterus, those of Christiana Poniatovia, and of Drabicius, and published them at Amsterdam. These writers promised miracles to those who stiould endeavour to extirpate the house of Austria and the pope. Gustavus Adolphus, and Charles Gustavus, kings of Sweden, Cromwell and Ragotski, had been promised as those who should accomplish those splendid prophecies; to which, however, the event did not correspond. We are told that Comenius, not knowing how to extricate himself, at last took it into his head to address Lewis XIV, of France; that he sent him a copy of Drabicius’s prophecies, and insinuated that it was to this monarch God promised the empire of the world, by the downfall of those who persecuted Christ. He wrote some books at Amsterdam; one particularly against des Marets concerning the millennium, and Des Marets answered with contempt and asperity, representing him as an impostor.

, a very popular artist, was born at Gaeta in 1676. He studied under Solimene, and by persevering practice soon became an able machinist. At little less than forty, the desire of seeing Rome prompted him to visit that city, where he became once more a student, and spent five years in drawing after the antique and the masters of design: but his hand, debauched by manner, refused to obey his mind, till wearied by hopeless fatigue, he followed the advice of the sculptor le Gros, and returned to his former practice, though not without considerable improvements, and nearer to Pietro da Cortona than his master. He had fertile brains, a rapid pencil, and a colour which at first sight fascinated every eye by its splendor, contrast, and the delicacy of its flesh tints. His dispatch was equal to his employment, and there is scarcely a collection of any consequence without its Conca. He was courted by sovereigns and princes, and pope Clement XI. made him a cavaliere at a full assembly of the academicians of St. Luke. He died, far advanced in age, in 1764. Sir Robert Strange, in whose possession was a Virgin and Child," by Conca, observes that, with all his defects, he was a great painter, and must be regarded as one of the last efforts which this expiring art made in Italy.

, a miscellaneous writer of some note in his day, was born in Ireland, and bred to the law, in which we do not find that he ever made any great figure. From thence he came over to London, in company with a Mr. Stirling, a dramatic poet of little note, to seek his fortune; and finding nothing so profitable, and so likely to recommend him to public notice, as political writing, he soon commenced an advocate for the government. There goes a story of him, however, but we will hope it is not a true one, that he and his fellow-traveller, who was embarked in the same adventure, for the sake of making their trade more profitable, resolved to divide their interests; the one to oppose, the other to defend the ministry. Upon which they determined the side each was to espouse by lots, or, according to Mr. Reed’s account, by tossing up a halfpenny, when it fell to Concanen’s part to defend the ministry. Stirling afterwards went into orders, and became a clergyman in Maryland. Concanen was for some time concerned in the “British” and “London Journals,” and in a paper called “The Specnlatist,” which last was published in 1730, 8vo. In these he took occasion to abuse not only lord Bolingbroke, who was naturally the object of it, but also Pope; by which he procured a place in the Dvwiciad. In a pamphlet called “A Supplement to the Profound,” he dealt very unfairly by Pope, as Pope’s commentator informs us, in not only frequently imputing to him Broome’s verses (for which, says he, he might seem in some degree accountable, having corrected what that gentleman did), but those of the duke of Buckingham and others. His wit and literary abilities, however, recommended him to the favour of the duke of Newcastle, through whose interest he obtained the post of attorney-general of the island of Jamaica in 1732, which office he filled with the utmost integrity and honour, and to the perfect satisfaction of the inhabitants, for near seventeen years; when, having acquired an ample fortune, he was desirous of passing the close of his life in his native country; with which intention he quitted Jamaica and came to London, proposing to pass some little time there before he went to settle entirely in Ireland. But the difference of climate between that metropolis and the place he had so long been accustomed to, had such an effect on his constitution, that he fell into a consumption, of which he died Jan. 22, 1749, a few weeks after his arrival in London. His original poems, though short, have considerable merit; but much cannot be said of his play, entitled “Wexford Wells.” He was also concerned with Mr. Roome and other gentlemen in altering Richard Broome’s “Jovial Crew” into a ballad opera, in which shape it is now frequently performed. Concanen has several songs in “The Musical Miscellany, 1729,” 6 vols. But a memofable letter addressed to him by Dr. Warburton will perhaps be remembered longer than any writing of his own pen. This letter^ which Mr. Malone first published (in his Supplement to Shakspeare, vol. I. p. 222), shews that, in 1726, Warbtirton, then an attorney at Newark, was intimate with Concanen, and an associate in the attacks made on Pope’s fame and talents. In 1724, Concanen published 3, volume of “Miscellaneous Poems, original and translated,” by himself and others.

, a very celebrated Dominican divine, of the congregation of St. James Salomoni, was born about 1686 in Friuli, on one of the estates of the signiors Savoriani, noble Venetians. He entered the Dominican order 1708, preached, with great applause, in the prin^ pipal towns of Italy, gained the esteem of pope Clernent XII. and Benedict XIV. and wrote incessantly against the opinions of the relaxed casuists. He died February 21, 1756, at Venice, aged 69. His works are numerous, both in Latin and Italian the latter are “The Lent of the litigious ecclesiastical Courts,” Venice, 1739, 4to “The Church discipline respecting the fast of Lent,” &c. Venice, 1742, 4to; “Dissertations theological, moral, and critical, on the history of probability and rigourism,” &c. Venice, 1743, 2 vols. 4to, and two pieces in defence of this work, 4to; an “Explanation of the four paradoxes which are in vogue in our age,” Lucca, 1746, 4to. This work has been translated into French, 12mo. “The dogma of the Roman Church respecting Usury,” Naples, 1746, 4to; an ^ Historical Memoir on the use of chocolate upon fast 'days,“Venice,” 1748; a “Treatise on revealed Religion, against atheists, deists, materialists, and indifte rents,” Venice, 1754, 4tq; ^'Instructions for confessors and penitents,“Venice, 1753, 4to. The following are written in Latin three volumes upon Usury, 4to three others on” Monastic discipline and poverty“” Nine letters on relaxed morality.“But the most valuable of all his works is his” Theologia Christiana dogmatico-moralis," Rome, 1746, 12 vols. 4to.

, chevalier de St. Lazare, member of a great number of academies, and a celebrated traveller, was born at Paris in 1701. He began his journey to the east very young; and after having coasted along the shores of Africa and Asia in the Mediterranean, he was chosen, in 1736, to accompany M. Godin to Peru, for the purpose of determining the figure of the earth at the equator. The difficulties and dangers he surmounted in this expedition are almost incredible; and at one time he had nearly perished by the imprudence of one of his companions, M. Seniergues, whose arrogance had so much irritated the inhabitants of New Cuenca, that they rose tumultuously against the travellers; but, fortunately for the rest, the offender was the only victim. On his return home, la Condamine visited Rome, where pope Benedict XIV. made him a present of his portrait, and granted him a dispensation to marry one of his nieces, which he accordingly did, at the age of fifty-five. By his great equanimity of temper, and his lively and amiable disposition, he was the delight of all that knew him. Such was his gaiety or thoughtlessness, that two days before his death he made a couplet on the surgical operation that carried him to the grave; and, after having recited this couplet to a friend that came to see him, “You must now leave me,” added he, “1 have two letters to write to Spain; probably, by next post it will be too late.” La Condamine had the art of pleasing the learned by the concern he shewed in advancing their interests, and the ignorant by the talent of persuading them that they understood what he said. Even the men of fashion sought his company, as he was full of anecdotes and singular observations, adapted to amuse their frivolous curiosity. He was, however, himself apt to lay too much stress on trifles; and his inquisitiveness, as is often the case with travellers, betrayed him into imprudencies. Eager after fame, he loved to multiply his correspondences and intercourse; and there were few men of any note with whom he had not intimacies or disputes, and scarcely any journal in which he did not write. Replying to every critic, and flattered with every species of praise, he despised no opinion of him, though given by the most contemptible scribbler. Such, at least, is the picture of him, drawn by the marquis de Condorcet in his eloge. Among his most ingenious and valuable pieces are the following 1 “Distance of the tropics,” London, 1744. 2. “Extract of observations made on a voyage to the river of the Amazons,” 1745. 3. “Brief relation of a voyage to the interior of South America,” 8vo. 1745. 4. “Journal of the voyage jnade by order of the king to the equator; with the supplement,” 2 vols. 4to. 1751, 1752. 5. On the Inoculation of the Small-pox,“12mo, 1754. 6.” A letter on Education,“8vo. 7.” A second paper on the Inoculation of the Small pox,“1759. 8.” Travels through Italy,“1762, 12mo. These last three were translated and published here. 9.” Measure of the three first degrees of the meridian in the southern hemisphere,“1751, 4to. The style of the different works of la Condamine is simple and negligent; but it is strewed with agreeable and lively strokes that secure to him readers. Poetry was also one of the talents of our ingenious academician; his productions of this sort were, <e Vers de societe,” of the humorous kind, and pieces of a loftier style, as the Dispute for the armour of Achilles and others, translated from the Latin poets; the Epistle from an old man, &c. He died the 4th of February 1774, in consequence of an operation for the cure of a hernia, with which he had been afflicted.

It has been observed of Congreve, that no man ever passed through life with more ease and less envy than he. No change of ministries affected him in the least, nor was he ever removed from any post that was given him, except to a better. His place in the Custom House, and his office of secretary in Jamaica, are said to have brought him in upwards of 1200l. per annum; and though he lived suitably to such a fortune, yet by his economy he raised from thence a competent estate. He was always upon ^ood terms with the wits of his time, and never involved ii/ any of their quarrels, nor did he receive from any of them the least mark of distaste or dissatisfaction. On the contrary, they were solicitous for his approbation, and received it as the highest sanction of merit. Addison testified his personal regard for him, and his high esteem of his writings, in many instances. Steele considered him as his patron upon one occasion, in dedicating his Miscellanies to him, and was desirous of submitting to him as an umpire on another, in the address prefixed to Addison s “Drummer.” Even Pope, though jealous, it is said, of his poetical character, has honoured him with the highest testimony of deference and esteem in the postscript to his translation of Homer’s Iliad, and he preserved a high respect for him. About two years after his death, in a conversation with Tonson the bookseller, who happened to mention Congreve, Pope said with a sigh, “Ay, Mr. Tonson, Congreve was ultimus Romanorum * /”

"The ‘ Birth of the Muse’ is a miserable fiction. One good line it has, which was borrowed from Dryden of his irregular poems, that to Mrs. Arabella Hunt seems to be the best: his * Ode for Cecilia’s Day,‘ however, has some lines which Pope had in his mind when he wrote his own. His Imitations of Horace are feebly paraphrastical, and the additions which he makes are of little value. He sometimes retains what were more properly omitted, as when he talks of vervain and gums to propitiate Venus. Of his translations, the ’ Satire of Juvenal 1 was written very early, and may therefore be forgiven, though it have not the massiness and vigour of the original. In all his versions strength and sprightliness are wanting: his Hymn to Venus, from Homer, is perhaps the best. His lines are weakened with expletives, and his rhymes are frequently imperfect.

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Braintree in Essex, in 1702 or 1703, where his father was an inn-keeper, and as Pope used to say, a Muggletonian. He was educated at Felsted school, where he made considerable proficiency, but how long he remained here, or what was his destination in life is not known. For some time he appears to have been domesticated in the family of lord Pembroke, who died in 1733, and who probably suggested to him a translation of Hesiod, to which his lordship contributed some notes. Before this nobleman’s death, he came to London in 1722, and became a writer by profession, and a strenuous supporter of revolution-principles, which formed a bond of union between him and Tickell, Philips, Welsted, Steele, Dennis, and others, whose political opinions agreed with his own. He wrote in some of the weekly journals of the time, and was considered as a man of learning and abilities. He is supposed to have attacked Pope from political principles, but it is fully as probable, that, as he was a good Greek scholar, he wished to derive some reputation from proving that Pope, in his translation of Homer, was deficient in that language. In 1725 he published a poem entitled “The Battle of the Poets,” in which Pope, Swift, and some others were treated with much freedom and translated and published in the Daily Journal, 1727, the episode of Thersites, from the second book of the Iliad, to show how much Pope had mistaken his author. For this attack Pope gave him a place in the “Dunciad,” and notices him with equal contempt in his Epistle to Dr. Arbutlmot. In a note likewise he informs us that Cooke “wrote letters at the same time to him, protesting his innocence;” but Cooke’s late biographer, sir Joseph Mawbey, is inclined to doubt this, and rather to believe that he was regardless of Pope’s enmity. In a subsequent edition of “The Battle of the Poets” Cooke notices the Dunciad with becoming spirit, and speaks with little respect of Pope’s “philosophy or dignity of mind, who could be provoked by what a boy writ concerning his translation of Homer, and in verses which gave no long promise of duration.” In 1725 or 172G, Cooke published “The Knights of the Bath,” and “Philander and Cydippe,” both poetical tales; and several other pieces of poetry the former evidently meant to attract the public attention, on the revival, about that time, of the order of the Bath. He wrote soon after “The Triumphs of Love and Honour,” a play; “The Eunuch,” a farce; and “The Mournful Nuptials,” a tragedy; all performed at Drury-lane theatre, but with little success. In 1726 he published an account of the “Life and Writings of Andrew Marvell, esq.” prefixed to an edition of the poetical works of that celebrated politician, 2 vols. 12mo, and in 1728 his translation of “Hesiod.” In 1734 he published an edition of Terence, with an English translation, 3 vols. 12mo, and in 1737 “A Translation of Cicero on the Nature of the Gods,” with philosophical, critical, and explanatory notes, to which is added an examination into the astronomy of the ancients, 8vo. In 1741 he encreased his classical reputation by an edition of Virgil, with an interpretation in Latin, and notes in English. In 1742 he published a volume of his original “Poems,” with imitations and translations, and in 1746 undertook a new edition and translation of Plautus, by subscription. Of this he produced in 1754 the first volume, containing a dissertation on the life of Plautus, and a. translation of the comedy of Amphitryon, but although his list of subscribers was very copious, and he went on receiving more, he never completed the work.

In 1749 he published with his name, “The Life of Socrates, collected from all the ancient authorities.” In this work he received many learned notes from the sturdy antagonist of Warburton, the rev. John Jackson of Leicester, a controversial divine of considerable fame in his day. These notes were principally levelled at Warburton, and in language not very respectful. Warburton, who knew Jackson, but probably little of Cooper, retorted by a note, in his edition of Pope’s Works, on the Essay of Criticism, in which he accused the author of the Life of Socrates of impudent abuse and slander, the offspring of ignorance joined with vanity. Cooper’s vanity, it must be confessed, is amply displayed in this work, and it is impossible to justify his affected contempt for writers of established reputation. Warburton’s rebuke, however, was very coarse, and appears to have alarmed him, for he was not naturally of an abusive turn, but, on the contrary, rather prided himself on a mind superior to personal animosities. In his defence, therefore, he published Remarks on Warburton’s edition of Pope, in which he professes that he had attacked him as an author, and not as a man, and did not, as a fair antagonist, deserve to be called an impudent slanderer. He next examines a few of Warburton’s notes on Pope, and endeavours to prove his incapacity as a commentator. He betrays, however, that the real cause of his introducing Warburton’s name into the Life of Socrates, was his want of veneration for Mr. Cooper’s favourite philosophers, Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, &c. The whole is written with much acrimony, but with a very considerable display of learning. In the former, at least, there is reason to think, he was assisted by Jackson; but the Life of Socrates brought very little reputation to its author, and after some years, Warburton’s angry note was omitted from the editions of Pope.

, an eminent English painter, was born in London in 1609, and bred under the care and discipline of Mr. Hoskins, his uncle: but derived the most considerable advantages from his observations on the works of Van Dyck, insomuch that he was commonly styled the Van Dyck in miniature. His pencil was generally confined to ahead only; and indeed below that part he was not always so successful as could be wished. But for a face, and all the dependencies of it, namely the graceful and becoming air, the strength, relievo, and noble spirit, the softness and tender liveliness of flesh and blood, and the looseness and gentle management of the hair, his talent was so extraordinary, that, for the honour of our nation, it may without vanity be affirmed, he was at least equal to the most famous Italians; and that hardly any one of his predecessors has ever been able to shew so much perfection in so narrow a compass. The high prices of his works, and the great esteem in which they were held at Rome, Venice, and in France, were abundant proofs of their great worth, and extended the fame of this master throughout Europe. He so far exceeded his master and uncle Hoskins, that the latter became jealous of him; and finding that the court was better pleased with his nephew’s performances than with his, he took him into partnership with him, but his jealousy increasing, he dissolved it; leaving our artist to set up for himself, and to carry, as he did, most of the business of that time before him. He drew Charles II. and his queen, the duchess of Cleveland, the duke of York, and most of the court: but the two most famous pieces of his were those of Oliver Cromwell, and of one Swingfield. The French king offered Iso/, for the former, but was refused; and Cooper carrying the latter with him to France, it was much admired there, and introduced him into the favour of that court. *He likewise did several large limnings in an unusual size for the court of England; for which his widow received a pension during her life from the crown. This widow was sister to the mother of the celebrated Pope. Answerable to Cooper’s abilities in painting, was his skill in music; and he was reckoned one of the best lutenists, as well as the most excellent limner, of his time. He spent several years of his life abroad, was personally acquainted with the greatest men of France, Holland, and his own country, and by his works was universally known in all parts of Europe. He died at London May 5, 1612, aged 63, and was buried in Pancras church in the fields; where there is a fine marble monument set over him, with a Latin inscription.

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

, Was born at Limoges in 1570, and at an early age discovered a considerable turn for literary pursuits, but the death of his father restricted him to trade until he was about thirty years of age, when a change of circumstances enabled him to indulge his original propensity. He entered into the society of Jesuits at Avignon; but a series of ill health obliged him to quit their seminary, and to pursue his studies privately. He afterwards became a canon, of his native place, and a collector of rare and valuable books. He was himself an author and editor of considerable reputation and after his death, which happened in 1642, his library was purchased by cardinal Mazarine. He was editor of the works of Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims; and of the works of George Cassander. He translated father Paul’s “History of the Differences between Pope Paul V. and the republic of Venice;” and likewise Camillo Portio’s “History of the Troubles in the kingdom of Naples, under Ferdinand I.”

, a famous musician of Italy, was born at Fusignano, a town of Bologna, in 1653. His first instructor in music was Simonelli, a singer in the pope’s chapel; but his genius leading him to prefer secular to ecclesiastical music, he afterwards became a disciple of Bassani, who excelled in that species of composition, in which Corelli always delighted, and made it the business of his life, to cultivate. It is presumed that he was taught the organ: but his chief propensity was for the violin, on which he made so great proficiency, that some did not scruple to pronounce him the first performer on that instrument in the world. About 1672 his curiosity led him to visit Parisand it is said that the jealous temper of Lully not brooking so formidable a rival, he soon returned to Rome; but this Dr. Burney thinks is without foundation. In 1680 he visited Germany, was received by the princes there suitably to his merit; and, after about five years stay abroad, returned and settled at Rome.

, a late celebrated improvisatrice, was born at Pistoia in 1740, and gave, in her infancy, the most unequivocal marks of uncommon genius; and her acquirements in natural and moral philosophy, and ancient and modern history, were at the age of seventeen very remarkable. At the age of twenty she began to display that talent for extempore composition which is so common in Italy, and so uncommon elsewhere as to be questioned. Of this lady’s abilities, however, we are not permitted to doubt, if we give any credit to the popularity she gained among all classes, and especially among persons of the highest rank. The empress Maria Theresa offered her the place of female poet laureat at court, which she accepted, And went to Vienna in 1765. Previously to this she had married signer Morelli, a gentleman of Leghorn; but her conduct after marriage became grossly licentious, a circumstance which does not appear to have diminished the respect paid to her by all ranks. At Vienna, she wrote an epic poem and a volume of lyric poetry, both which she dedicated to the empress. She attracted the enthusiastic admiration of Metastasio himself, and rendered the taste for Italian poetry more predominant than it had ever been in Vienna. Soon after 1771, she settled in Rome, was admitted a member of the academy of the Arcadi, under the name of Gorilla Olympica, and for some years continued to charm the inhabitants of Rome by her talents in improvisation. At length when Pius VI. became pope, he determined that she should be solemnly crowned, an honour which had been granted to Petrarch only. An account of this singular transaction, beautifully printed at Parma, by Bodoni, in 1779, contains her diploma and all the discourses, poems, sonnets, &c. written on the occasion, with the examination which she underwent, concerning her knowledge of the most important subjects upon which she was required to Improvisare, or treat extemporaneously, in verse publicly at the Campidoglio in Rome. The Italian title of this narrative is, “Atti della solenne coronazione fatta in Campidoglio della insigne poetesia D-na. Maria Maddalena Morelli Fernandez Pistoiese, Tragli Arcadi Gorilla Olimpica.” Twelve members of the Arcadian academy were selected out of thirty, publicly to examine this new edition of a Tenth Muse which has been so often dedicated to ladies of poetical and literary talents. Three several days were allotted for this public exhibition of poetical powers on the following subjects: sacred history, revealed religion, moral philosophy, natural history, metaphysics, epic poetry, legislation, eloquence, mythology, fine arts, and pastoral poetry.

In the list of examiners there appear a prince, an archbishop, three monsigneurs, the pope’s physician, abati, avocati, all of high rank in literature and criticism. These, severally, gave her subjects, which, besides a readiness at versification in all the measures of Italian poetry, required science, reading, and knowledge of every kind. In all these severe trials, she acquitted herself to the satisfaction and astonishment of all the principal personages, clergy, literati, and foreigners then resident at Rome; among the latter was our sovereign’s brother, the duke of Gloucester. Near fifty sonnets by different poets, with odes, canzoni, terse rime, ottave, canzonette, &c. produced on the subject of this event, are inserted at the end of this narrative and description of the order and ceremonials of this splendid, honourable, and enthusiastic homage, paid to poetry, classical taste, talents, literature, and the fine arts.

, a learned Venetian lady, born in 1646, was the daughter of Gio Baptista Cornaro, and educated in a very different manner from the generality of her sex, being taught languages and sciences, and all the philosophy of the schools. After having studied many years, she took her degrees at Padua, and was perhaps the first lady that ever was made a doctor. She was also admitted of the university of Rome, wherei she had the title of Humble given her, as she had at Padua that of Unalterable, titles which she is said to have deserved, because her learning had not inspired her with vanity, nor was any thing capable of disturbing her train of thought. With all this, however, she was not free from the weaknesses of her religion, and the age in which she lived. She early made a vow of perpetual virginity; and though all means were used to persuade her to marry, and even a dispensation with her vow obtained from the pope, yet she remained immoveable. It is affirmed, that not believing the perpetual study to which she devoted herself, and which shortened her days, sufficient to mortify the flesh, she addicted herself to other superstitious restraints, fasted often, and spent her whole time either in study or devotion, except those few hours when she was obliged to receive visits. All people of quality and fashion, who passed through Venice, were more solicitous to see her, than any of the curiosities of that superb city. The cardinals de Bouillon and D'Etrees, in passing through Italy, were commanded by the king of France, to examine whether what some said of her was true and their report was that her parts and learning were equal to her high reputation. At length her incessant study of books, particularly such as were in Greek and Hebrew, impaired her constU tution so much, that she fell into an illness, of which she died in 1685. We are told that she had notice of her death a year before it happened, and that, talking one day to her father of an old cypress-tree in his garden, she advised him to cut it down, since it would do well to make her a coffin.

, a learned antiquary, born in 1660, was first a lawyer, and in that profession so distinguished, as to attract the notice of pope Clement XI. who appointed him to honourable and confidential offices. Disgusted, however, by the intrigues of the court, he gave himself up to retirement, for the purpose of applying to literary pursuits. Here he remained till he was created cardinal by pope Innocent XIII. which dignity he enjoyed more than twenty years, and died at Rome in 1743. He wrote a learned and curious work, entitled “VetusLatium,profanum et sacrum,” Rome, 1704 and 1707, 2 vols. fol. reprinted in 1727, 4 vols. 4to likewise a history of his native place, entitled “De civitate et ecclesia Settina;” Rome, 1702, 4to. He is said to have written a dissertation concerning certain contested rights between the emperor and the pope, “De jure precum primariarum,” 1707, under the assumed name of Conradus Oligenius.

, an elegant modern Latin poet, was born in a village near Verona in 1483, and gained considerable reputation by his talents. -He followed to the army Bartholomew d'Alviano, a Venetian general who had a regard for him; but he was taken by the French at the battle of Ghiara d'Adda, in the year 1509, lost some of his manuscripts, and did not regain his liberty for some time. His patron sent him to pope Julius II. at Viterbo, where he died in 1511, of a pestilential fever. Several of his epigrams and orations are printed in the collection entitled “Carmina quinque poetarum,” Venice, 1548, 8vo.

, was the son of sir Clement Cotterel of Wylsford in Lincolnshire, groom porter to James I. He was in the interregnum steward to the queen of Bohemia; and in 1670, when he was created LL. D. in the university of Oxford, it appears that he was master of the requests to Charles II. He possessed in an extraordinary degree the various accomplishments of a gentleman, and particularly excelled in the knowledge of modern languages. During the exile of his royal master, he translated from the French “Cassandra the famed romance,” which has been several times printed; and had a principal hand in translating “Davila’s History of the civil wars of France” from the Italian, and several pieces of less note from the Spanish. In 1686 he resigned his place of master of the ceremonies, and was succeeded by his son Charles Lodowick Cotterel, esq. He is celebrated by Mrs. Catherine Phillips under the name of Poliarchus, and to one of his descendants, colonel Cotterel of Rousham near Oxford, Pope addressed his second epistle in imitation of Horace. It is unnecessary to add that the office of master of the ceremonies has long been in this family.

, a Jesuit, born in 1564, at Neronde near the Loire, of which place his father was governor, distinguished himself early in life by his zeal for the conversion of protestants, and by his success in the pulpit. He was called to the court of Henry IV. at the instance of the famous Lesdiguieres, whom he had converted, and the king pleased with his wit, manners, and conversation, appointed him his confessor. M. Mercier censures the king, for “having too peculiar a deference for this Jesuit, a man of very moderate talents, solely attached to the narrow views of his order;” and it was commonly said, “Our prince is good, but he has cotton in his ears.” Henry was desirous of making him archbishop of Aries, and procuring him a cardinal’s hat; but Cotton persisted in refusing his offers. His brotherhood, after their recall, unable easily to settle themselves in certain towns, that of Poitiers especially, started great difficulties, and Cotton wished to persuade the king that this opposition was the work of Sulli, governor of Poitou; but Henry having refused to listen to this calumny, and blaming Cotton for having adopted it with too much credulity: “God forbid,” said Cotton, “that I should say any harm of those whom your majesty honours with his confidence! But, however, I am able to justify what I advance. I will prove it by the letters of Sulli. I have seen them, and I will shew them to your majesty.” Next day, however, he was under the necessity of telling the king that the letters had been burnt by carelessness. This circumstance is related in the “Cours d'histoire de Condillac,” tom. XIII. p. 505. After the much lamented death of Henry, Cotton was confessor to his son Louis XIII, but the court being a solitude to him, he asked permission to quit it, and obtained it in 1617, so much the more easily as the duke de Luynes was not very partial to him. Mezerai and other historians relate, that when Ravaillac had committed his parricide, Cotton went to him and said: “Take care that you do not accuse honest men!” There is room to suppose that his zeal for the honour of his society prompted him to utter these indiscreet words, and his notions on the subject appear to be rather singular. We are told that Henry IV. having one day asked him, “Would you reveal the confession of a man resolved to assassinate me?” he answered “No; but I would put my body between you and him.” The Jesuit Santarelli having published a work, in which he set up the power of the popes over that of kings, Cotton, then provincial of Paris, was called to the parliament the 13th of March 1626, to give an account of the opinions of his brethren. He was asked whether he thought that the pope can excommunicate and dispossess a king of France “Ah” returned he, “the king is eldest son of the church and he will never do any thing to oblige tae pope to proceed to that extremity” “But,” said the first president. “are you not of the same opinion with your general, who attributes that power to the pope?” —“Our general follows the opinions of Rome where he is and we, those of France where we are.” The many disagreeable things experienced by Cotton on this occasion, gave him so much uneasiness, that he fell sick, and died a few days afterwards, March 19, 1626. He was then preaching the Lent-discourses at Paris in the church of St. Paul. This Jesuit wrote, “Traite du Sacrifice de la Messe;” “Geneve Plagiaire,” Lyons, 1600, 4to; “L'Institution Catholique,” 1610, 2 torn, fol; “Sermons,” 1617, 8vo; “La Rechute de Geneve Plagiaire;” and other things, among which is a letter declaratory of the doctrine of the Jesuits, conformable to the doctrine of the council of Trent, which gave occasion to the “Anti Cotton,” 1610, 8vo, and is found at the end of the history of D. Inigo, 2 vols. 12mo. This satire, which betrays more malignity than wit, was attributed to Dumoulin and to Peter du Coignet, but is now given to Caesar de Plaix, an advocate of Paris. Fathers Orleans and Rouvier wrote Cotton’s Life, 12mo, and as well as Gramont, give him a high character, which from the society of the Jesuits, at least, he highly deserved.

, archbishop of Canterbury in the reign of king Richard II. was the fourth son of Hugh Courtney, earl of Devonshire, by Margaret, daughter of Humphrey Bohun, earl of Hereford and Essex, by his wife Elizabeth, daughter of king Edward I. and was born in the year 1341. He had his education at Oxford, where he applied himself to the study of the civil and canon law. Afterwards, entering into holy orders, he obtained three prebends in three cathedral churches, viz. those of Bath, Exeter, and York. The nobility of his birth, and his eminent learning, recommending him to public notice, in the reign of Edward III. he was promoted in 1369 to the see of Hereford, and thence translated to the see of London, September 12, 1375, being then in the 34th year of his age. In a synod, held at London in 1376, bishop Courtney distinguished himself by his opposition to the king’s demand of a subsidy; and presently after he fell under the displeasure of the high court of chancery, for publishing a bull of pope Gregory II. without the king’s consent, which he was compelled to recall. The next year, in obedience to the pope’s mandate, he cited Wickliff to appear befofe his tribunal in St. Paul’s church: but that reformer being accompanied by John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, and other nobles, who favoured his opinions, and appeared openly in the bishop’s court for him, and treated the bishop with very little ceremony, the populace took his part, went to the duke of Lancaster’s house in the Savoy, plundered it, and would have burnt it to the ground, had not the bishop hastened to the place, and drawn them off by his persuasions. The consequences of this difference with so powerful a nobleman as John of Gaunt, were probably dreaded even by Courtney; for, with respect to Wickliff, he at this time proceeded no farther than to enjoin him and his followers silence. In 1378, it is said by Godwin, but without proper authority, that Courtney was made a cardinal. In 1381, he was appointed lord high chancellor of England. The same year, he was translated to the see of Canterbury, in the room of Simon Sudbury; and on the 6th of May, 1382, he received the pall from the hands of the bishop of London in the archiepiscopal palace at Croydon. This year also he performed the ceremony of crowning queen Anne, consort of king Richard II. at Westminster. Soon after his inauguration, he restrained, by ecclesiastical censures, the bailiffs, and other officers, of the see of Canterbury, from taking cognizance of adultery and the like crimes, which then belonged to the ecclesiastical court. About the same time, he held a synod at London, in which several of Wickliff’s tenets were condemned as heretical and erroneous. In 1383, he held a synod at Oxford, in which a subsidy was granted to the king, some of WicklifT's followers obliged to recant, and the students of the university to swear renunciation of his tenets. The same year, in pursuance of the pope’s bull directed to him for that purpose, he issued his mandate to the bishop of London for celebrating the festival of St. Anne, mother of the blessed virgin. In 1386, the king, by the advice of his parliament, put the administration of the government into the hands of eleven commissioners, of whom archbishop Courtney was the first; but this lasted only one year. In 1387, he held a synod at London, in which a tenth was granted to the king. The same year, it being moved in a parliament held at London on occasion of the dissension between the king and his nobles, to inflict capital punishment on some of the ringleaders, and it being prohibited by the canons for bishops to be present and vote in cases of blood, the archbishop and his suffragans withdrew from the house of lords, having first entered a protest in relation to their peerage and privilege to sit upon all other matters. In 1399, he held a synod in St. Mary’s church in Cambridge, in which a tenth was granted to the king, on condition that he should pass over into France with an army before the 1st of October following. This year, archbishop Courtney set out upon his metropolitical visitation, in which he was at first strongly opposed by the bishops of Exeter and Salisbury; but those prelates being at last reduced to terms of submission, he proceeded in his visitation without farther opposition: only, at the intercession of the abbot of St. Alban’s, he refrained from visiting certain monasteries at Oxford. The same year, the king directed his royal mandate to the archbishop, not to countenance or contribute any thing towards a subsidy for the pope. In a parliament held at Winchester in 1392, archbishop Courtney, being probably suspected of abetting the papal encroachments upon the church and state, delivered in an answer to certain articles exhibited by the commons in relation to those encroachments, which is thought to have led the way to the statute of pr&munire. The same year, he visited the diocese of Lincoln, in which he endeavoured to check the growth of Wickliff’s doctrines. In 1395, he obtained from the pope a grant of four-pence in the pound on all ecclesiastical benefices; in which he was opposed by the bishop of Lincoln, who would not suffer it to be collected in his diocese, and appealed to the pope. But before the matter could be decided, archbishop Courtney died, July 31, 1396, at Maidstone in Kent, where he was buried, but has a monument in the cathedral church of Canterbury, on the south side, near the tomb of Thomas Becket, and at the feet of the Black Prince. His remains at Maidstone, only a few bones, were seen some years ago. This prelate founded a college of secular priests at Maidstone. He left a thousand marks for the repair of the cathedral church of Canterbury also to the same church a silver- gilt image of the Trinity, with six apostles standing round it weighing 160 pounds some books, and some ecclesiastical vestments. He obtained from king Richard a grant of four fairs to be kept at Canterbury yearly within the site of the priory. The character of archbishop Courtney, weighed in the balance of modern opinions, is that of a persecuting adherent to the church of Rome, to which, however, he was not so much attached as to forget what was due to his king and country. He appears to have exhibited in critical emergencies, a bold and resolute spirit, and occasionally a happy presence of mind. One circumstance, which displays the strength and firmness of Courtney’s mind in the exercise of his religious bigotry, deserves to be noticed. When the archbishop, on a certain day, with a number of bishops and divines, had assembled to condemn the tenets of Wickliff, just as they were going to enter upon business, a violent earthquake shook the monastery. Upon this, the terrified bishops threw down their papers, and crying out, that the business was displeasing to God, came to a hasty resolution to proceed no farther. “The archbishop alone,” says Mr. Gil pin in his Life of Wickliff, “remained unmoved. With equal spirit and address he chid their superstitious fears, and told them, that if the earthquake portended any thing, it portended the downfall of heresy; that as noxious vapours are lodged in the bowels of the earth, and are expelled by these violent concussions, so by their strenuous endeavours, the kingdom should be purified from the pestilential taint of heresy, which had infected it in every part. This speech, together with the news that the earthquake was general through the city, &s it was afterwards indeed found to have been through the island, dispelled their fears Wickliff would often merrily speak of this accident; and would call this assembly the council of the herydene; herydene being the old English word for earthquake.”

, in Latin, Cognatus, a learned writer of the sixteenth century, was born at Nozeret, in Franche-Comte, Jan. 21, 1506. Having a turn for the law, he went to study at Dole in 1526, but not relishing it after six months application, he entered upon a course of divinity, and being introduced to Erasmus, was employed by him as an amanuensis or copyist. Erasmus also instructed him in the learned languages and in polite literature. In 1535 the prince of Orange conferred on him a canonry of St. Antony at Nozeret, in consequence of which preferment, he was obliged to leave Erasmus, who expressed a very high regard for him in several of his letters. When established at Nozeret, he appears to have taught school. In 1553, he accompanied the archbishop of Besancon on a tour into Italy; but being soon after suspected of heresy, he was arrested by order of pope Pius V. and thrown into prison, in which he died in 1567. It is generally agreed that he inclined in some measure to the sentiments of the reformers. His works, of which a collection was published in 1562, 3 ' vols. folio, at Basle, consist of translations from various authors, a treatise on grammar, erroneously ascribed to St. Basil Latin dissertations letters historical and critical treatises, &c. Niceron has an elaborate article on this author; and in 1775 was published at Altorf, “Commentatio de vita Gilberti Cognati, et Commentatio de scriptis,” by Schwartz, 4to. Cousin’s notes upon Lucian are in Bourdelot’s edition of that classic, 1615, folio, but had been published before by himself, in an edition printed at Basil, 1563, and reprinted in 1602, and 1619, 4 vols. 8vo.

Dr. Johnson’s character of Cowley is so complete and so superior to any criticism with which we are acquainted, that it may be referred to with the utmost confidence. His life of Cowley yields only, if indeed it does yield, to those of Milton, Dryden, and Pope, and his account of the class of poets to whom Cowley belongs, the metaphysical poets, is highly ingenious and original. Two short passages, only, from Cowley’s life, may not inaptly conclude the present article, the one relating to his prose, the other to his poetry.

, originated from a gentleman’s family at Strickland in Westmoreland, where he was born in 1567, and in 1583 was admitted in Queen’s college in Oxford, of which he obtained a fellowship in 1598. He was esteemed a celebrated preacher and a deep controversial divine, and was particularly admired by the puritans. When king James 1. sent the lord Evers ambassador to the emperor, Mr. Crakanthorpe went along with him in 1603 as chaplain; and upon his return he was chaplain to Dr. Ravis, bishop of London, and presented to the rectory of Black Notley, near Braintry in Essex. He had the reputation of a general scholar, was a considerable canonist, and perfectly acquainted with ecclesiastical antiquity and scholastic divinity. He died in 1624, at his rectory of Black-Notley. His works are, 1. “Justinian the emperor defended against cardinal Baronius,” 1616, 4to. 2. “Introductio in Metaphysicam, lib. 4.” Oxon. 1619, 8vo Lond. 1641, 4to. 3. “A Defence of Constanthie, with a treatise of the pope’s Temporal Monarchy,” Lond. 1621, 4to. 4. “Pefensio ecclesiae Anglicanse contra M. Anton, cle Dominis archiepisc. Spalatensis injurias,” Lond. 1625, 4to; this book has the character of a most exact piece of controversy. 5. “Vigilius dormitans; or, a treatise of the 5th general council held at Constantinople, ann. 553,” Lond. 1631, fol. 6. “Logicae libri quinque,” Lond. 1622; Ox. 1677, 4to. 7. “Tractatus de providentia,” Camb. 1622, 4to; with several sermons, and some controversial Mss. left behind him, a part of which are in Queen’s college library.

, the first Protestant archbishop of Canterbury, was the son of Thomas Cranmer, esq. and of Agnes, daughter of Laurence Hatfield, of Willoughby, in Nottinghamshire. He was born at Aslacton, in that county, July 2, 1489, and educated in grammar learning, under a rude and severe parish-clerk, of whom he learned little, and endured much. In 1503, at the age of fourteen, he was admitted into Jesus college, in Cambridge; of which he became fellow, and where he studied such learning as the times afforded, till the age of twenty-two, For the next four or five years he applied himself to polite literature; and for three years more, to the study of the Scriptures. After he was M. A. he married a gentleman’s daughter named Joan, living at the Dolphin, opposite Jesus-lane, and having by this match lost his fellowship, he took up his residence at the Dolphin, and became reader of the common lecture in Buckingham, now Magdalen college; but his wife dying in child-bed within a year, he was again admitted fellow of Jesus college. Upon cardinal Wolsey’s foundation of his new college at Oxford, Cranmer was nominated to be one of the fellows; but he refused the offer, or, as some say, was on the road to Oxford, when he was persuaded to return to Cambridge. In 1523, he was made D. D. reader of the theological lecture in his own college; and one of the examiners of those that took the degrees in divinity. The most immediate cause of his advancement to the greatest favour with king Henry VIII. and, in consequence of that, to the highest dignity in the church of England, was the opinion he gave in the matter of that king’s divorce. Having, on account of the plague at Cambridge, retired to Waltham-abbey, in Essex, to the house of one Mr. Cressy, to whose wife he was related, and whose sons were his pupils at the university; Edward Fox, the king’s almoner, and Stephen Gardiner, the secretary, happened accidentally to come to that house, and the conversation turning upon what then was a popular topic, the king’s divorce, Cranmer, whose opinion was asked, said, that “it would be much better to have this question, e whether a man may marry his brother’s wife, or no?' decided and discussed by the divines, and by the authority of the word of God, than thus from year to year prolong the time by having recourse to the pope; and that this might be done as well in England in the universities here, as at Rome, or elsewhere.” This opinion being communicate-d by Dr. Fox to the king, his majesty approved of it much; saying, in his coarse language, that Cranmer “had the sow by the right ear.” On this, Cranmer was sent for to court, made the king’s chaplain, ordered to write upon the subject of the divorce, furnished with books for that purpose, and placed in the family of Thomas Boleyn, earl of Wiltshire and Ormond. When he had finished his book, he went to Cambridge to dispute upon that point, and brought several over to his opinion, which was, that, according to the Scriptures, general councils, and ancient writers, the pope had no authority to dispense with the word of God. About this time he was presented to a living, and made archdeacon of Tauntpn. In 1530 he was sent, with some others, into France, Italy, and Germany, to discuss the affair of the king’s marriage. At Rome he got his book presented to the pope, and offered to dispute openly against the validity of king Henry’s marriage; but no one chose to engage him. While he was at Rome, the pope constituted him his pcenitentiary throughout England, Ireland, and Wales. In Germany he was sole embassador on the same affair; and in 1532 concluded a treaty of commerce between England and the Low Countries. He was also employed on an embassy to the duke of Saxony, and other Protestant princes. During his residence in Germany, he married at Nuremberg a second wife, named Anne, niece of Osiander’s wife. Upon the death of archbishop Warham, in August 1532, Cranmer was nominated for his successor; but, holding still to his opinion on the supremacy, he refused to accept of that dignity, unless he was to receive it immediately from the king, without the pope’s intervention Before his consecration, the king so far engaged him in the business of his divorce, that he made him a party and an actor almost in every step he took in that affair. He not only pronounced the sentence of divorce between king Henry and queen Catherine, at Dunstable, May the 23d, 1533, but, according to Parker, married him to Anne Boleyn; although lord Herbert says they were privately married by Rowland Lee, afterwards bishop of Litchfield and Coventry, in the presence of lady Anne’s father, mother, and brother, Dr. Cranmer, and the duke of Norfolk. However this may be, on March 30th, 1533, he was consecrated archbishop of Canterbury, by the bishops of Lincoln, Exeter, and St. Asaph, when he made an unusual protestation. His design was by this expedient to save his liberty, to renounce every clause in his oath which barred him doing his duty to God, the king, and his country. Collier, who often argues as if he were fee'd by the church of Rome, thinks there was something of human infirmity in this management, because it was not made at Koine to the pope, nor by Cranmer’s proxies there, before the obtaining of the bulls, not perceiving that Cranmer’s opposition to the power of the pope was as uniform as it had been early, and the effect of conviction. The temporalities of the archbishopric were restored to Cranmer the 29th of April following. Soon after, he forbad all preaching throughout his diocese, and visited it this year in December. The pope threatening him with excommunication, on account of his sentence against queen Catherine, he appealed from his holiness to a general council, and in the ensuing parliaments, strenuously disputed against the pope’s supremacy. All along he showed himself a zealous promoter of the reformation; and, as the first step towards it, procured the convocation to petition the king that the Bible might be translated into English. When that was obtained, he diligently encouraged the printing and publication of it, and caused it to be recommended by royal authority, and to be dispersed as much as he possibly could. Next, he forwarded the dissolution of the monasteries, which were one of the greatest obstacles to a reformation *. He endeavoured also to restore the church of England to its original purity. In 1535 he performed a provincial visitation, in order to recommend the king’s supremacy, and preached upon that subject in several parts of his diocese, urging that the bishop of Rome was not God’s vicar upon earth, as supposed, and that that see so much boasted of, and by which name popes affected to be styled, was but a holiness in name, and that there was no such holiness at Rome, as he easily proved from the vices of the court of Rome. In

After queen Mary’s accession to the throne, so obnoxious an enemy to popery could not long escape, and accordingly he was first ordered to appear before the council, and bring an inventory of his goods; which he did August the 27th, when he was commanded to keep his house, and be forth-coming. September the 13th, he was again summoned before the council, and enjoined to be at the Starchamber the next day, when he was committed to the Tower; partly, for setting his hand to the instrument of the lady Jane’s succession; and, partly, for the public offer he had made a little before, of justifying openly“the religious proceedings of the late king. Some of his friends, foreseeing the storm that was likely to fall upon him, advised him to fly, but he absolutely refused, as unworthy of his character and the station he held. In the ensuing parliament, on November the 3d, he was attainted, and at Guildhall found guilty of high treason; on which the fruits of his archbishopric were sequestered; yet, upon his humble and repeated application, he was pardoned the treason, but it was resolved he should be proceeded against for heresy. In April 1554, he, and Ridley and Latimer, were removed to Oxford, for a public disputation with the papists on the subject of the sacrament; which was accordingly held there towards the middle of the month, with great noise, triumph, and confidence on the papists’ side, and with as much gravity, learning, modesty, and argument on the side of the protestant bishops. The 20th of April, two days after the end of these disputations, Cranmer and the two others were brought before the commissioners, and asked, whether they would subscribe (to Popery)? which they unanimously refusing, were condemned as heretics. From this sentence the archbishop appealed to the just judgment of the Almighty; and wrote to the council, giving them an account of the disputation, and desiring the queen’s pardon for his treason, which it seems was not yet remitted. By the convocation, which met this year, his” Defence of the true and Catholic doctrine of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ," was ordered to be burnt. Some of his friends petitioned the queen in his behalf; putting her in mind, how he had once preserved her, by his earnest intercessions for her, when her father had determined to send her to the Tower, and make her suffer for disobedience to the laws; so that she had reason to believe he loved her, and would speak the truth to her, more than all the rest of the clergy. But all these endeavours were ineffectual. The sentence pronounced against him by Weston at Oxford being void in law, because the Pope’s authority was not yet re-established in England, a new commission was sent from Rome for his trial and conviction. Accordingly, on September the 12th, 1555, he appeared before the commissioners; viz. Brooks bishop of Gloucester, for the pope; and Drs. Martin and Story for the queen: the commission was opened at St. Mary’s church, Oxford, and Cranmer was accused of blasphemy and heresy, for his writings against popery; of perjury, for breaking his oath to the pope; and of incontinency, or adultery, on account of his being married: against all which he vindicated himself. At last, he was cited to appear *at Rome within eighty days, to answer in person; which he said he would do, if the king and queen would send him, but this was not done, and therefore the pope dispatched, on December the 14th, his letters executory to the king and queen, and to Bonner and Thirlby bishops of London and Ely, to degrade and deprive him. In these letters, Cranmer was declared contumacious, for not appearing at Rome within eighty days, according to his citation; as if he could have appeared at Rome, when he was all the while kept a prisoner. Upon the arrival of the letters, Bonner and Thirlby, with Dr. Martin and Dr. Story the king’s and queen’s proctors, went to Oxford to degrade him. They dressed him in all the garments and ornaments of an archbishop, only in mockery every thing was of canvass and old clouts: and then he was, piece by piece, stripped of all again. When they came to take the crosier gut of his hand, he refused to part with it, and appealed to the next general council. After he was degraded, they put him on a poor yeoman -beadle’s gown, thread- bare, and a towns-man’s cap, and remanded him to prison. From thence he wrote letters to the queen, to give her an impartial account of vyhat had passed at his degradation, to prevent mis-reports, and to justify himself in what he had said and done; and hitherto he manifested a great deal of courage and wisdom in his sufferings; but at last human frailty made him commit what he felt as the greatest blemish of his life. For, through flatteries, promises, importunities, threats, and the fear of death, he was prevailed upon to sign a recantation *, wherein he renounced the Protestant

* Strype informs us that archbishop have received the pope’s authority Cranmcr was subtilly drawn in by the within this realm, I am content to subpapists to subscribe six different pa- mit myself to their laws herein, and to pers the fust being expressed in am- take the pope for chief head of this biguous words, capable of a favoura- chuich of England, so far as God’s ble construction, tiVe five following were laws, and the laws and customs of thi| added as explanations of it. That first realm, will permit.“In the nrxt, he recantation was in these words,” For submitted himself to the Catholic as much as the king’s and queen’s ma- church of Clirist, and unto the pope, jesties, by consent of their parliament, supreme head of the same church. In religion, and embraced again all the errors of popery; which, recantation was immediately printed and dispersed about by his enemies. Notwithstanding that, the merciless queen, not satisfied with this conquest, resolved to glut her revenge, by committing Cranmer to the flames. Accordingly, she sent for Dr. Cole, provost of Eton, and gave him instructions to prepare a sermon for that mournful occasion; and on the 24th of February a writ was signed for the execution. The 2 1st day of March, the fatal day, he was brought to St. Mary’s church, and placed on a kind of stage over against the pulpit, where Dr. Cole was to preach. While Cole was haranguing, the unfortunate Cranmer expressed great inward confusion; often lifting up his hands and eyes to heaven; and frequently pouring out floods of tears. At the end of the sermon, when Cole desired him to make an open profession of his faith, as he had promised him he would; he, first, prayed in the most fervent manner; then made an exhortation to the people present, not to set their minds upon the world; to obey

the third, he submitted to the king and qii'vn, and to all their laws, as well concerning the pope’s supremacy, as others: and promised, that he would stir and move all others to live in quietness and obedience to their majesties. As for his book, he was content to submit to the judgment of the Catholic church, and the next general council. Tiiis was followed by a fourth, wherein be- professed firmly, stedfastly, and assnndly to believe in all articles and points of the Christian religion and Catholic faith, as the Catholic church doih believe. Moreover, as concerning the sacraments, he declared he believed uiiiVig-iiediy in all poinis as the said Catholic church did. In the fifth paper, which is that in Fox, and has been thought to be his only recantation, they required of him, to renounce and anathematize all Lutheran and Zumglian heresies and errors; to acknowledge the one only Catholic church, to be that whereof the pope is the head; and to declare him Christ’s vicar. Then followed an express acknowledgment of transubstantiation, the seven sacraments, and of all the doctrines of the church of Rome in general. A sixth was still required of him, which was drawn up in so strong terms, that nothing was capable of being added to it. For it contained a large acknowledgment of all the popish errors and corruptions, and a most grievous accusation of himself as a blasphemer, enemy of Christ, and murderer of souls, on account of his being the author of king Henry’s divorce, and of all the calamities, schisms, and heresies of which that was the fountain. This was subscribed on the 18lh of March. These six papers were, soon after his death, sent to the press by Bonner, and published with the addition of another, which they had prepared for him to speak at St. Mary’s, before his execution: and though he then spoke to a quite contrary effect, and revoked his former recantations, Bonner had the confidence to publish this to the world, as if it had been approved and made use of by the archbishop. In 1736, William Whiston, M. A. published a little book, entitled “An Enquiry into the Evidence of Archbishop Cranmer’s Recantation: or reasons for a suspicion that the pretended copy of it is not genuine.” In this he supposes, that what Cranmer signed, was only the first part of the Recantation printed in Fox’s “Acts and Monuments,” as far as the words -“without which there is no Salvation,” that the rest was added by the papists, but that Cranmer never set his hand to it. the king and queen; to love each other; and to be charitable. After this he made a confession of his faith, beg nning with the Creed, and concluding with these words, “And I believe every word and sentence taught by our Saviour Jesus Christ, his apostles and prophets, in the Old and New Testament. And now,” added he, “I come to the great thing, that so much troubleth my conscience more than any thing I ever did or said in my whole life-; and that is the setting abroad a writing contrary to the truth, which 1 here now renounce as things written with my hand contrary to the truth which 1 thought in my heart, and written for fear of death, and to save my life if it might be; that is, all such bills and papers which I have written or signed with my hand since my degradation, wherein I have written many things untrue. And forasmuch as my hand offended, writing contrary to my heart, my hand shall first be punished; for, may I come to the fire, it shall be first burned. As for the pope, I refuse him, as Christ’s enemy and antichrist, with all his false doctrine. And as for the Sacrament, I believe as I have taught in my book against the bishop of Winchester.” Thunderstruck as it were with this unexpected declaration, the enraged popish crowd admonished him not to dissemble: “Ah,” replied he with tears, “since I lived hitherto, I have been a hater of falsehood, and a lover of simplicity, and never before this time have I dissembled.” On this, they pulled him off the stage with the utmost fury, and hurried him to the place of his martyrdom, over against Baliol-college; where he put off his clothes in haste, and standing in his shirt, and without shoes, was fastened with a chain to the stake. Some pressing him to agree to his former recantation, he answered, showing his hand, “This is the hand that wrote it, and therefore it shall first suffer punishment.” Fire being applied to him, he stretched out his right hand into the flame, and held it there unmoved (except that once with it he wiped his face) till it was consumed, crying with a loud voice, “This hand hath offended;” and often repeating, “This unworthy right hand.” At last, the fire getting up, he soon expired, never stirring or crying out all the while, only keeping his eyes fixed to heaven, and repeating more than once, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Such was the end of the renowned Thomas Cranmer, in the 67th year of his age, a man who deservedly ranks high among the most illustrious characters in ecclesiastical history, although his conduct was not in all respects free from blame. Of the two instances in which Cranmer has been accused of retaining the spirit of persecution, after he had got rid of every other attribute of popery, Mr. Gilpin gives the following account: “Joan Bocher and George Paris were accused, though at different times, one for denying the humanity of Christ the other for denying his divinity. They were both tried, and condemned to the stake: and the archbishop not only consented to these acts of blood; but even persuaded the aversion of the young king into a compliance.” Your majesty must distinguish (said he, informing his royal pupil’s conscience) between common opinions, and such as are the essential articles of faith. These latter we must on no account suffer to be opposed.“Mr. Gilpin justly observes, that” nothing even plausible can be suggested in defence of the archbishop on this occasion; except only that the spirit of popery was not yet wholly repressed." That he was not, however, a man of blood, and that in every case of personal injury he was the most placable of human beings, is amply confirmed by all authorities. The last act of Henry’s reign, says the same biographer, was an act of blood; and gave the archbishop a noble opportunity of shewing, how well he had learned that great Christian lesson of forgiving an enemy. Almost without the shadow of justice, Henry had given directions to have the duke of Norfolk attainted by an act of parliament. The king’s mandate stood in lieu of guilt; and the bill passed the house with great ease. No man, except the bishop of Winchester, had been so great an enemy to the archbishop as the duke of Norfolk. He had always thwarted the primate’s measures; and oftener than once had practised against his life. How many would have seen with secret pleasure the workings of Providence against so rancorous an enemy; satisfied in having themselves no hand in his unjust fate! But the archbishop saw the affair in another light; he saw it with horror: and although the king had in a particular manner interested himself in this business, the primate opposed the bill with all his might; and when his opposition was vain, he left the house with indignation, and retired to Croydon.

In 1785, the late Mr. Peregrine Phillips published a selection from Crashaw’s poems, with an address in which he attacks Pope, for having availed himself of the beauties of Crashaw, while he endeavoured to injure his fame. Against this accusation, Mr. Hayley has amply vindicated Pope. That he has horrowed from him is undeniable, and not unacknowledged by himself, but that it should be his intention to injure the fame of a writer whose writings were unknown, unless to poetical antiquaries, and that in a confidential letter to a friend whom he advised to read the poems as well as his opinion of them, is an absurdity scarcely worthy of refutation. Pope enumerates among Crashaw’s best pieces, the paraphrase on Psalm xxiii. the verses on Lessius, Epitaph on Mr. Ashton, Wishes to his supposed Mistress, and the Dies Irae. Dr. Warton recommends the translation from Moschus, and another from Catullus, and amply acknowledges the obligations of Pope and Roscommon to Crashaw. Mr. Hayley, after specifying some of Pope’s imitations of our author, conjectures that the elegies on St. Alexis suggested to him the idea of his Eloisa; but, adds he, “if Pope borrowed any thing from Crashaw in this article, it was only as the sun borrows from the earth, when drawing from thence a mere vapour, he makes it the delight of every eye, by giving it all the tender and gorgeous colouring of heaven.” Some of Crashaw’s translations are esteemed superior to his original poetry, and that of the “Sospetto d' Herod e,” from Marino, is executed with Milton ic grace and spirit. It has been regretted that he translated only the first book of a poem by which Milton condescended to profit in his immortal Epic. The whole was, however, afterwards translated and published in 1675, by a writer whose initials only are known, T. R. Of modern critics, Mr. Headley and Mr. Ellis have selected recommendatory specimens from Crashaw. In Mr. Headley’s opinion, “he has originality in many parts, and as a translator is entitled to the highest applause.” Mr. Ellis, with his accustomed judgment and moderation, pronounces that “his translations have considerable merit, but that his original poetry is full of conceit. His Latin poems were first printed in 1634, and have been much admired, though liable to the same objections as his English.”

* The creditors of Crebillon would ceived him uncommonly well, being have stopped the profits of this tragedy; struck with his venerable and interestbut the spirited old bard appealed to ing figure; but she was in bed, and the king in council, and procured an ai the instant the old poet was kissing honourable decree in his favour, netting hc-r hand, the king entered the room, forth, that works of genius should not “Alas! ruadame!” exclaimed Crebi4be deemed effects that weie capable of Ion, “the king has surprised us: 1 am being seized. Warton’s Essay on undone.” This exclamation, fro:n the Pope. inouth of an old man of eighty, dif In order to remove Voltaire from verted Louis XV. exceedingly. The

The following is a list of his translations; for we do not find him to have been the author of any original works. 1. A translation of “Lucretius,” printed in 8vo, at Oxford, 1682. Dryden, in the preface to the “Miscellany Poems,” which were published by him, speaks of this translation in the highest terms of approbation, calling Creech “the ingenious and learned translator of Lucretius” and every body else entertained the same opinion of it.' In the edition of 1714, in 2 vols. 8vo, all the verses of the text, which Creech had left untranslated, particularly those in the fourth book about the nature of love, are supplied; and many new notes added and intermixed by another hand, by way of forming a complete system of the Epicurean philosophy. Creech had published in 1695 an edition of Lucretius in Latin, with notes, which were afterwards printed at the end of the English translation. Another edition of this, much enlarged, but very incorrect, was published in 1717 in 8vo. The best is that of Glasow, 1759, 12 mo. He will perhaps be far longer rememred as the editor than the translator of Lucretius. 2. In 1684 he published a translation of “Horace” in which, however, he has omitted some few odes. As to the satires, he was advised, as he tells us in the preface, “to turn them to our own time; since Rome was now rivalled in her vices; and parallels for hypocrisy, profaneness, avarice, and the like, were easy to be found.” But those crimes,“he declares,” were out of his acquaintance; and since the character is the same whoever the person is, he was not so fond of being hated, as to make any disobliging application. Such pains,“says he,” would look like an impertinent labour to find a dunghill.“3. The” Idylliums“of Theocritus, with Rapin’s discourse of pastorals, 1684,- 8vo. 4. The second elegy of Ovid’s first book of elegies the sixth, seventh, eighth, and twelfth of the second book; the story of Lucretia, out of the Fasti; and the second and third of Virgil’s eclogues; printed in a collection of miscellany poems, 1684. 5. The thirteenth satire of Juvenal, with notes. Printed in the English translation of the satires, 1693, in folio. 6. A translation into English of the verses prefixed to Quintinie’s Complete Gardener. 7. The Lives of Solon, Pelopidas, and Cleomenes, from Plutarch. 8. The Life of Pelopidas, from Cornelius Nepos. 9. Laconic apophthegms, or remarkable sayings of the Spartans, from Plutarch. 10. A discourse concerning Socrates’s da3mon, and the two first books of the Symposiacs, from Plutarch. These translations from Plutarch were published in the English translations of his” Lives“and” Morals.“11. A translation of Manilius’s Astronomicon, dated from All-Souls, Oct. 10, 1696. On his father’s monument he is called” the learned, much admired, and much envied Mr. Creech.“By whom he could have been envied, we know not, yet there is a ridiculous story that Dryden became so jealous of him, as to incite him to translate Horace that he might lose as much reputation by that poet, as he had gained by Lucretius. His poetry will scarcely at present be deemed an object which calls for much criticism, as he is rather a good scholar than a good poet; and in the instance of Lucretius, a most judicious editor. Dr. Warton, however, who will be allowed Jto be an admirable judge, has spoken of him in terms of applause.” Creech,“says the doctor,” in truth, is a much better translator than he is usually supposed and allowed to be. He is a nervous and vigorous writer: and many parts, not only of his Lucretius, but of his Theocritus and Horace (though now decried) have not been excelled by other translators. One of his pieces may be pronounced excellent; his translation of the thirteenth satire of Juvenal; equal to any that Dryden has given us of that author.“Pope certainly paid him no small compliment by beginning his epistle to Mr. Murray (afterwards lord Mansfield) with two lines from Creech’s Horace. Pope used to say that” he hurt his translation of Lucretius very much by imitating Cowley, and bringing in turns even into some of the most grand parts. He has done more justice to Manilius."

Crescimbeni was the first custode, or president of this academy, and retained that office for thirty-eight years, during which the academy is said to have produced very beneficial effects on public taste, and on the style of Italian poetry. Crescimbeni, however, was so intent on this establishment, as to neglect his profession as a lawyer, and now embraced, as it is termed, the ecclesiastical state. In 1705, pope Clement XI. bestoweu on him a canonry of St. Mary in Cosmedino, and in 1719 appointed him archpriest of the same city, at which time he took the regular orders of the priesthood. In 1728, during a fit of sickness, he took the vows of the Jesuits, but died March 8, of that year. He appears to have enjoyed great literary reputation in his time, and was a member of most of the Italian, academies, and of the Naturae Curiosorutn in Germany.

, bishop of Durham, the fifth sen of John lord Crewe, of Stean, co. Northampton, by Jemima, daughter and coheir of Edward Walgrave, of Lawford, in Essex, esq. was born at Stean, the 3 1st of January, 1633; and in 1652 admitted commoner of Lincoln college, in Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. Feb. 1, 1655-6; soon after which he was chosen fellow of that college. On June 29th, 1658, he took the degree of M. A. At the restoration he declared heartily in favour of the crown and hierarchy; and in 1663 was one of the proctors of the university. The year following, on the 2d of July, he took the degree of LL. D.; and soon after went into holy orders. August the 12th, 1668, he was elected rector of Lincoln -college, upon the decease of Dr. Paul Hood. On the 29th of April, 1669, he was installed dean of Chichester, and held with that dignity, the praecentorship, in which he had been installed the day before. He was also appointed clerk of the closet to king Charles II. In 1671, upon the translation of Dr. Blandford to the see of Worcester, he was elected hishop of Oxford in his room, on the 16th of June, confirmed June the ISth, consecrated July the 2d, and enthroned the 5th of the same month; being allowed to hold with it, in commendam, the living of Whitney, and the rectorship of Lincoln college, which last he resigned in October 1672. In 1673 he performed the ceremony of the marriage of James duke of York with Maria of Este; and through that prince’s interest, to whom he appears to have been subservient, he was translated, the 22d of October, 1674, to the bishopric of Durham. In the beginning of J6.75, he baptized Katharina- Laura, the new-born daughter of James duke of York. The 26th of April, 1676, he was sworn of the privy council to king Charles II. and upon the accession of king James II. to the crown, he was in great favour with that prince; he was made dean of his majesty’s royal chapel in 1685, in the room of Compton, bishop of London, who had been removed; and within a few days after, was admitted into the privy council. In 1686 he was appointed one of the commissioners in the new ecclesiastical commission erected by king James, an honoqr which he is said to have valued beyond its worth. By virtue of that commission, he appeared on the 9th of August, at the proceedings against Henry bishop of London, and was for suspending him during the king’s pleasure; though the earl and bishop of Rochester, and chief justice Herbert, were against it. Immediately after that bishop’s suspension, commissioners were appointed to exercise all manner of ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the diocese of London, of which bishop Crewe was one. The 20th of November following, he was present at, and consenting to, the degradation of Mr. Samuel Johnson, previously to the most severe punishment that was inflicted on that eminent divine; and countenanced with his presence a prosecution carried on, in May 1687, against Dr. Peachy, vice-chancellor of Cambridge, for refusing to admit one Alban Francis, a Benedictine monk, to the degree of master of arts in that university, without taking the oaths. In July the same year, he offered to attend the pope’s nuncio at his public entry into London; but we are told his coachman refused to "drive lijm that way. His name was put again in a new ecclesiastical commission issued out this year, in October; in which he acted, during the severe proceedings against Magdalen college in Oxford, for refusing to elect one Anthony Farmer their president, pursuant to the king’s mandate. The bishop continued acting as an ecclesiastical commissioner till October 1688; when that commission was abolished. Towards the end of the year 1687, he was employed, with the bishops of Rochester and Peterborough, to draw up a form of thanksgiving for the queen’s being with child. But finding that the prince of Orange’s party was likely to' prevail, he absented himself from the council-board, and told the archbishop of Canterbury, that he was sorry for having so long concurred with the courtand desired now to be reconciled to his grace, and the other bishops. Even in the convention that met January 22, 1688-9, to consider of filling the throne, he was one of those who voted, on the 6th of February, that king James II. had abdicated the kingdom. Yet his past conduct was too recent to be forgotten, and therefore he was excepted by name out of the pardon granted by king William and queen Mary, May 23, 1690, which so terrified him, that he went over to Holland, and returned just in time to take the oaths to the new government, and preserved his bishopric. But, in order to secure to himself the possession of that dignity, he was forced to permit the crown to dispose of, or at least to nominate to, his prebends of Durham, as they should become vacant. By the death of his two elder brothers, he became in 1691, baron Crewe of Stean; and, about the 21st of December the same year, he married, but left no issue. During the rest of king William’s reign, he remained quiet and unmolested; and in the year 1710, he was one of the lords that opposed the prosecution then carried on against Dr. Sacheverell, and declared him not guilty; and likewise protested against several steps taken in that affair. He applied himself chiefly, in the latter part of his life, to works of munificence and charity. Particularly, he was a very great benefactor to Lincoln college, of which he had been fellow and rector; and laid out large sums in beautifying the bishop’s palace at Durham; besides many other instances of generosity and munificence of a more private nature. At length, his lordship departed this life on Monday September 18, 1721, aged eighty-eight; and was buried in his chapel at Stean, the 30th of the same month, with an inscription on his monument. He held the see of Durham forty-seven years. Dying without issue, the title of Baron Crewe of Stean became extinct with him.

The next account we have of Crichton is, that he went to Rome, where he fixed a placard in all the eminent places of the city, in the following terms: “Nos Jacobus Crichtonus, Scotus, cuicunque rei propositae ex improviso respondebimus.” In a city which abounded in wit, this bold challenge, to answer to any question that could be proposed to him, without his being previously advertised of it, could not escape the ridicule of a pasquinade. It is said, however, that being nowise discouraged, he appeared at the time and place appointed, and that, in presence of the pope, many cardinals, bishops, and doctors of divinity, and professors in all the sciences, he displayed such wonderful proofs of his universal knowledge, that he excited no less surprise than he had done at Paris. Boccalini, who was then at Rome, gives something of a different relation of the matter. According to this author, the pasquinade against Crichton, which was to the following effect, “And he that will see it, let him go to the sign of the Falcon, and it shall be shewn,” made such an impression upon him, that he left a place where he had been so grossly affronted as to be put upon a level with jugglers and mountebanks. From Rome he went to Venice, at his approach to which city he appears to have been in considerable distress, of mind at least, if not with regard to external circumstances. This is evident from the following lines of his poem, “In suum ad urbem Venetam appulsum:”

, of an illustrious family of Italy, established in the comtat Venaissin, knight of Malta, and one of the greatest generals of his age, was born in 1541, and entered into the service in 1557. At the age of fifteen he was at the siege of Calais, and contributed greatly to the taking of that place, by a brilliant action that brought him to the notice of Henry II. He afterwards signalized himself against the Huguenots, or protestants, at the battles of Dreux, of Jarnac, and of Moncontour, in 1562, 1568, and 1569. The youthful hero so greatly distinguished himself in his caravans, especially at the battle of Lepanto in 1571, that he was made choice of, though wounded, to carry the news of the victory to the pope and to the king of France. We find him two years afterwards, in 1573, at the siege of la Rochelle, and in almost all the other considerable rencontres of that period. He every where shewed himself worthy of the name usually given him hy Henry IV. of the Brave Crillon. Henrv Hi. who was well acquainted with his valour, made him knight of his orders in 1585. The specious pretences of the league, the mask of religion which it put on, could never shake the fidelity of the brave Crillon, however great his antipathy to the Huguenots. He rendered important services to his prince in the affair of the Barricades, at Tours, and elsewhere. Henry III. ventured to propose to Crillon to assassinate the duke de Guise, a rebellious subject whom he was afraid to put to death by the sword of the law. Crillon offered to fiorht him; but disdained to hear of assassination. When Henry IV. had made the conquest of his kingdom, Crillon was as faithful to him as he had been to his predecessor. He repulsed the leaguers before Boulogne. The army of Villars having invested Villebceuf in 1592, he vigorously defended that place, replying to the besiegers, on their summoning the besieged to surrender, “Crillon is within, and the enemy without.” Henry, however, did but little for him; “because,” said he, “I was sure of the brave Crillon and I had to gain over my persecutors.” The peace of Vervins having put an end to the wars that had troubled Europe, Crillon retired to Avignon, and there died, in the exercises of piety and penance, the 2d of December 1615, at the age of seventy-four. Francis Bening, a Jesuit, pronounced the discourse at his funeral: a piece of burlesque eloquence, printed in 1616, under the title of “Boucher d'Honnenr,” the “Buckler of Honour,” and reprinted not many years since, as a specimen of ridiculous jargon. Mademoiselle de Lusson published in 2 vols. 12mo, 1757, the life of this hero, called by his contemporaries I'homme sans peur (the man without fear), le brave des braves (the bravest of the brave). This was translated into English by Miss Lomax, of Hertfordshire, and after being revised by Richardson, the author of Clarissa, was published at London, 1760, 2 vols. 12mo. Crillon appears to have been a second chevalier Bayard, not on account of his fantastic and sullen humour, but from the excellence of his heart and his attachment to religion. It is well known that being present one day at a sermon on the sufferings of Christ, when the preacher was come to the description of the flagellation, Crillon, seized with a sudden fit of enthusiasm, put his band to his sword, crying out, “Where wert thou, Crillon?” These sallies of courage, the effect of an exuberant vivacity of temper, engaged him too frequently in duels, in which he always came off with honour. Two instances are recorded of an intrepidity highly characteristic of Crillon. At the battle of Moncontour in 1569, a Huguenot soldier thought to serve his party by dispatching the bravest and most formidable of the catholic generals. In this view he repaired to a place where Crillon, in his return from pursuing the fugitives, must necessarily pass. The soldier no sooner perceived him than he drew the trigger of his piece. Crillon, though severely wounded in the arm, ran up to the assassin, laid hold on him, and was instantly going to thrust him through with his sword, when the soldier threw himself at his feet and begged his life. “I grant it thee,” said Crillou; “and if any faith could be put in a man that is at once a rebel to his king, and an apostate to his religion, I would put thee on thy parole never to bear arms but in the service of thy sovereign.” The soldier, confounded at this act of magnanimity, swore that he would for ever shake off all correspondence with the rebels, and return to the catholic religion. — The young duke of Guise, to whom Henry IV. had sent him at Marseilles, was desirous of trying how far the fortitude of Crillon would go. In this design he caused the alarm to be sounded before the quarters of his brave commander, and two horses to be led to his door. Then, running up to his apartments, pretended that the enemy was master of the port and town, and proposed to him to make his escape, that he might not swell the triumph of the conquerors. Though Crillon was hardly well awake when he heard these tidings, he snatched up his arms without the least trepidation, maintaining that it was better to die sword in hand, than survive the loss of the place. Guise, finding it impossible, by all the arguments he could use, to alter his resolution, accompanied him out of the chamber; but, when they were about the middle of the stairs, he burst out into a violent laughter, which plainly discovered the trick to Crillon. He then put on a graver countenance than when he thought he was going to fight; and griping the duke of Guise by the hand, he said, with an oath, according to his custom, “Young man, never again amuse thyself with putting to the test the heart of an honest man. Par la mort! if thou hadst found me weak, I would have poignarded thee!” After these words he retired without saying any thing more. We will conclude with the laconic billet written to him from the field of battle by Henry IV. after the victory of Arques, where Crillon was unable to be present: “Hang thyself, Crillon! We have been fighting at Arques, and thou wert not there. Adieu, brave Crillon! I love thee whether right or wrong.”

, an Italian divine and poet, of the sixteenth century, was born at Gallipoli, in the kingdom of Naples. Having entered into the church, his merit procured him the friendship of many of the most learned men of his time, and particularly of the cardinal Jerome Seripando, to whom he was for some time secretary; and he was also in great request as a teacher of jurisprudence, philosophy, and theology. He died about 1595, at the time when pope Clement VIII. intended to have promoted him to a bishopric. His principal work is a piece of criticism, much admired in his time, “De ethnicis philosophis caute legendis,” Rome, 1594, folio. Crispus’s other works are two orations concerning the war against the Turks, printed at Rome in 1594, 4to. “De JMedici Laudibus, Oratio ad cives suos Gallipolitanos,” Home, 1591, 4to. The “Life of Sannazarius,” Rome, 1583, reprinted at Naples in 1633, 8vo. A draught or map of the city of Gallipoli, dedicated to Flaminio Caraccioli January the 1st, 1591. Some of his Italian poems are in a collection published by Scipio de Monti, under the title “Le Rime,” &c. 1585, 4to.

, earl of Essex, an eminent statesman in the sixteenth century, was the son of Walter Cromwell, a blacksmith, at Putney, near London, and in his latter days a brewer; after whose decease, his mother was married to a sheerman in London. What education he had, was In a private school: and all the learning he attained to, was (according to the standard of those times), only reading and writing, and a little Latin. When he grew up, having a very great inclination for travelling, he went into foreign countries, though at whose expence is not known; and by that means he had an opportunity of seeing the world, of gaining experience, and of learning several languages, which proved of great service to him afterwards. Coming to Antwerp, where was then a very considerable English factory, he was by them retained to be their clerk, or secretary. But that office being too great a confinement, he embraced an opportunity that offered in 1510, of taking a journey to Rome. Whilst he remained in Italy he served for some time as a soldier under the duke of Bourbon, and was at the sacking of Rome: and at Bologna he assisted John Russel, esq. afterwards earl of Bedford, in making his escape, when he had like to be betrayed into the hands of the French, being secretly in those parts about our king’s affairs. It is also much to his credit, as an early convert to the reformation, that, in his journey to and from Rome, he learned by heart Erasmus’s translation of the New Testament. After his return from his travels he was taken into the family and service of cardinal Wolsey, who is said to have first discovered him in France, and who made him his solicitor, and often employed him in business of great importance. Among other things, he had the chief hand in the foundation of the two colleges begun at Oxford and Ipswich by that magnificent prelate; and upon the cardinal’s disgrace in 1529, he used his utmost endeavours and interest to have him restored to the king’s favour: even when articles of high-treason against him were sent down to the house of commons, of which Cromwell was then a member, he defended his master with so much wit and eloquence, that no treason cauld be laid to his charge: which honest beginning procured Cromwell great reputation, and made his parts and abilities to be much taken notice of. After the cardinal’s household was dissolved, Cromwell was taken into the king’s service (upon the recommendation of sir Christopher Hales, afterwards master of the rolls, and sir John Russel, knt. above-mentioned) as the fittest person to manage the disputes the king then had with the pope; though some endeavoured to hinder his promotion, and to prejudice his majesty against him, on account of his defacing the small monasteries that were dissolved for endowing Wolsey’s colleges. But he discovering to the king some particulars that were very acceptable to him respecting the submission of the clergy to the pope, in derogation of his majesty’s authority, he took him into the highest degree of favour, and soon after he was sent to the convocation, then sitting, to acquaint the clergy, that they were all fallen into a praemunire on the above account, and the provinces of Canterbury and York were glad to compromise by a present to the king of above 100,000l. In 1531 he was knighted; made master of the king’s jewel-house, with a salary of 50l. per annum; and constituted a privy-counsellor. The next year he was made clerk of the Hanaper, an office of profit and repute in chancery; and, before the end of the same year, chancellor of the exchequer, and in 1534, principal secretary of state, and master of the rolls. About the same time he was chosen chancellor of the university of Cambridge; soon after which followed a general visitation of that university, when the several colleges delivered up their charters, and other instruments, to sir Thomas Cromwell. The year before, he assessed the fines laid upon those who having 40l. per annum estate, refused to take the order of knighthood. In 1535 he was appointed visitor-general of the monasteries throughout England, in order for their suppression; and in that office is accused of having acted with much violence, although in other cases promises and pensions were employed to obtain the compliance of the monks and nuns. But the mode, whatever it might be, gave satisfaction to the king and his courtiers, and Cromwell was, on July 2, 1536, constituted lord keeper of the privy seal, when he resigned his mastership of the rolls . On the 9th of the same month he was advanced to the dignity of a baron of this realm, by the title of lord Cromwell of Okeham in Rutlandshire; and, six days after, took his place in the house of lords. The pope’s supremacy being now abolished in England, lord Cromwell was made, on the 18th of July, vicar-general, and vicegerent, over all the spirituality, under the king, who was declared supreme head of the church. In that quality his lordship satin the convocation holden this year, above the archbishops, as the king’s representative. Being-invested with such extensive power, he employed it in discouraging popery, and promoting the reformation. For that purpose he caused certain articles to be enjoined by the king’s authority, differing in many essential points from the established system of the Roman-catholic religion; and in September, this same year, he published some injunctions to the clergy, in which they were ordered to preach up the king’s supremacy; not to lay out their rhetoric in extolling images, relics, miracle*, or pilgrimages, but rather to exhort their people to serve God, and make provision for their families: to put parents and other directors of youth in mind to teach their children the Lord’s-prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments in their mother-tongue, and to provide a Bible in Latin and English, to be laid in the churches for every one to read at their pleasure. He likewise encouraged the translation of the Bible into English; and, when finished, enjoined that one of the largest volume should be provided for every parish church, at the joint charge of the parson and parishioners. These alterations, with the dissolution of the monasteries, and (notwithstanding the immense riches gotten from thence) his demanding at the same time for the king subsidies both from the clergy and laity, occasioned very great murmurs against him, and indeed with some reason. All this, however, rather served to establish him in the king’s esteem, who was as prodigal of money as he was rapacious and in 1537 his majesty constituted him chief justice itinerant of all the forests beyond Trent and on the 26th of August, the same year, he was elected knight of the garter, and dean of the cathedral church of Weils. The year following he obtained a grant of the castle and lordship of Okeham in the county of Rutland; and was also made constable of Carisbrook-castle in the Isle of Wight. In September he published new injunctions, directed to all bishops and curates, in which he ordered that a Bible, in English, should be set up in some convenient place in every church, where the parishioners might most commodiously resort to read the same: that the clergy should, every Sunday and holiday, openly and plainly recite to their parishioners, twice or thrice together, one article of the Lord’s Prayer, or Creed, in English, that they might learn the same by heart: that they should make, or cause to be made, in their churches, one sermon every quarter of a year at least, in which they should purely and sincerely declare the very gospel of Christ, and exhort their hearers to the works of charity, mercy, and faith not to pilgrimages, images, &c. that they should forthwith take clown all images to which pilgrimages or offerings were wont to be made: that in all such benefices upon which they were not themselves resident, they should appoint able curates: that they, and every parson, vicar, or curate, should for every church keep one book of register, wherein they should write the day and year of every wedding, christening, and burying, within their parish; and therein set every person’s name that shall be so wedded, christened, or buried, &c. Having been thus highly instrumental in promoting the reformation, and in dissolving the monasteries, he was amply rewarded by the king in 1539, with many noble manors and large estates that had belonged to those dissolved houses. On the 17th of April, the same year, he was advanced to the dignity of earl of Essex; and soon after constituted lord high chamberlain of England. The same day he was created earl of Essex he procured Gregory his son to be made baron Cromwell of Okeham. On the 12th of March 1540, he was put in commission, with others, to sell the abbey-lands, at twenty years’ purchase: which was a thing he had advised the king to do, in order to stop the clamours of the people, to attach them to his interest, and to reconcile them to the dissolution of the monasteries. But as, like his old master Wolsey, he had risen rapidly, he was now doomed, like him, to exhibit as striking an example of the instability of human grandeur; and au unhappy precaution to secure (as he imagined) his greatness, proved his ruin. Observing that some of his most inveterate enemies, particularly Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, began to be more in favour at court than himself, he used his utmost endeavours to procure a marriage between king Henry and Anne of Cleves, expecting great support from a queen of his own making; and as her friends were Lutherans, he imagined it would bring down the popish party at court, and again recover the ground he and Cranmer had now lost. But this led immodiaieiy to his destruction; for the king, not liking the queen, began to hate Cromwell, the great promoter of the marriage, and soon found an opportunity to sacrifice him; nor was this difficult. Cromwell was odious to all the nobility by reason of his low binh: hated particularly by Gardiner, and the Roman catholics, for having been so busy in the dissolution of the abbies: the reformers themselves found he could not protect them from persecution; and the nation in general was highly incensed against him for his having lately obtained a subsidy of four shillings in the pound from the clergy, and one tenth and one fifteenth from the laity; notwithstanding the immense sums that had flowed into the treasury out of the monasteries. Henry, with his usual caprice, and without ever considering that Cromwell’s faults were his own, and committed, if we may use the expression, for his own gratification, caused him to be arrested at the council table, by the duke of Norfolk, on the 10th of June, when he least suspected it. Being committed to the Tower, he wrote a letter to the king, to vindicate himself from the guilt of treason; and another concerning his majesty’s marriage with Anne of Cleves; but we do not find that any notice was taken of these: yet, as his enemies knew if he were brought to the bar he would justify himself by producing the king’s orders and warrants for what he had done, they resolved to prosecute him by attainder; and the bill being brought into the house of lords the 17th of June, and read the first time, on the 19th was read the second and third times, and sent down to the commons. Here, however, it stuck ten days, and at last a new bill of attainder was sent up to the lords, framed in the house of commons: and they sent back at the same time the bill the lords had sent to them. The grounds of his condemnation were chieHy treason and heresy; the former very confusedly expressed. Like other falling favourites, he was deserted by most of his friends, except archbishop Cranmer, who wrote to the king in his behalf with great boldness and spirit. But the duke of Norfolk, and the rest of the popish party, prevailed; and, accordingly, in pursuance of his attainder, the lord Cromwell was brought to a scaffold erected on Tower-hill, where, after having made a speech, and prayed, he was beheaded, July 28, 1540. His death is solely to be attributed to the ingratitude and caprice of Henry, whom he had served with great faithfulness, courage, and resolution, in the most hazardous, difficult, and important undertakings. As for the lord Cromwell’s character, he is represented by popish historians as a crafty, cruel, ambitious, and covetous man, and a heretic; but their opponents, on better grounds, assert that he was a person of great wit, and excellent parts, joined to extraordinary diligence and industry; that his apprehension was quick and clear; his judgment methodical and solid; his memory strong and rational; his tongue fluent and pertinent; his presence stately and obliging; his heart large and noble; his temper patient and cautious; his correspondence well laid and constant; his conversation insinuating and close: none more dextrous in finding out the designs of men and courts; and none more reserved in keeping a secret. Though he was raised from the meanest condition to a high pitch of honour, he carried his greatness with wonderful temper; being noted in the exercise of his places of judicature, to have used much moderation, and in his greatest pomp to have taken notice of, and been thankful to mean persons of his old acquaintance. In his whole behaviour he was courteous and affable to all; a favourer in particular of the poor in their suits; and ready to relieve such as were in danger of being oppressed by powerful adversaries; and so very hospitable and bountiful, that about two hundred persons were served at the gate of his house in Throgmorton-strcet, London, twice every day, with bread, meat, and drink sufficient. He must be regarded as one of the chief instruments in the reformation; and though he could not prevent the promulgation, he stopped the execution, as far as he could, of the bloody act of the six articles. But when the king’s command pressed him close, he was not firm enough to refuse his concurrence to the condemnation and burning of John Lambert. In his domestic concerns he was very regular; calling upon his servants yearly, to give him an account of what they had got under him, and what they desired of him; warning them to improve their opportunities, because, he said, he was too great to stand long; providing for them as carefully, as for his own son, by his purse and credit, that they might live as handsomely when he was dead, as they did when he was alive. In a word, we are assured, that for piety towards God, fidelity to his king, prudence in the management of affairs, gratitude to his benefactors, dutifulness, charity, and benevolence, there was not any one then superior to him in England.

Two of M. de Crousaz’s publications yet remain, and require particular notice: his “Examen de l‘Essai sur l’homme, poeme de M. Pope,” Lausanne, 1737; and “Commentaire sur la traduction en vers de M. l‘abbé du Resnel, de l’essai de M. Pope,” Geneva, 1738, 12mo. In these M. Crousaz accuses Mr. Pope of Spinosism and naturalism, and the first of them was immediately translated into English by the celebrated Miss Carter, with some assistance from Dr. Johnson, and published under the title of “An Examination of Mr. Pope’s Essay on Man containing a succinct view of the system of the fatalists, and a confutation of their opinions with an illustration of the doctrine of free-will, and an inquiry what view Mr. Pope might have in touching upon the Leibnitzian philosophy and fatalism,” 1738, 8vo. The other was translated under the title of “A Commentary on Mr. Pope’s Principles of Morality, or Essay on Man. By M. Crousaz; with the abbe” dn Resnel’s translation of the Essay into French verse, and the English interlined: also observations on the French, Italian, and English Poetry,“1741, 8vo. Pope, who had got the principles of the Essay from Bolingbroke, and did not understand them, would have made but a sorry figure in this controversy had he not found in Warburton a vigorous defender, although it is said that he had once written a censure of the doctrines of the Essay on Man. He now stept forth, however, with a defence, which was first published in a monthly literary journal (The Republic of Letters), but was afterwards collected into a volume (1742, 12mo), written with more asperity than argument.” Crousaz,“says Dr. Johnson,” was no mean antagonist; his mind was one of those in which philosophy and piety are happily united. He was accustomed to argument and disquisition, and, perhaps, was grown too desirous of detecting faults; but his intentions were always right, his opinions were solid, and his religion pure. His incessant vigilance for the promotion of piety disposed him to look with distrust upon all metaphysical systems of theology, and all schemes of virtue and happiness purely rational; and therefore it was not long before he was persuaded that the positions of Pope, as they terminated for the most part in natural religion, were intended to draw mankind away from revelation, and to represent the wholecourse of things as a necessary concatenation of indissoluble fatality; and it is undeniable, that in many passages a religious eye may easily discover expressions not very favourable to morals or to liberty.“The consequence to Pope was, that his eyes were opened, and he was not a little pleased that by” any mode of interpretation he could be made to mean well." To Warburton the consequences were more important; Pope courted him, and ultimately got him a. ricli wife and a bishopric.

, a celebrated wit and scholar, but memorable chiefly for the peculiarity of his fate, was descended from a good family, though some have insinuated the contrary, and born at Hinton St. George in Somerset-' shire about 1560. He gave early marks of genius and application, and in 1576 was admitted of Trinity college in Oxford; where he soon distinguished himself by his knowledge of the Greek tongue, and an admirable faculty in disputing. He was elected scholar in May 1578, and was admitted fellow in May 1583, but had the misfortune to lose his fellowship for a witticism, which, either in jest or malice, he levelled at sir Thomas Pope, the founder of his college. Sir Thomas, we are told, had a singular whim, upon visiting some persons, of seizing whatever he could lay his hands on, and carrying it off under his gown or in his pocket; which, however, was not imputed to dishonesty, but to humour. This induced Cuff in one of his merry moments to say, “A pox! this is a poor beggarly college indeed: the plate that our founder stole, would build such another.” The president, hearing of this, ejected Cuff from his fellowship; not suffering prophane wit to be thus exercised within his walls, for fear perhaps that it should become contagious. Such is the story, as told by Wood, who says he had it from Dr. Bathurst; but Mr. Warton has proved that he has misrepresented it, nor was Cuff removed by the president, but by a mandate from lady Powlett, the foundress, who first placed him there. Cuff’s merit, however, was so great, and his reputation for foaming so extraordinary, that he was, in 1586, elected probationer of Merton college by sir Henry Savile, then warden; and two years after made fellow. He was considered as a man capable of making a shining figure in life; and that he was much esteemed by sir Henry Savile, appears not only from the instance of kindness just mentioned, but also from a letter of his to the learned Camden, in which he gives him the highest character, and styles him his own and Camden’s intimate friend. He wrote a Greek epigram in commendation of Camden’s Britannia, which is prefixed to all the Latin editions, and to some of the English translations of it; and which has been much admired. He was afterwards promoted to the Greek professorship, and chosen proctor of the university in 1594. While Greek professor, he assisted Columbanius in the first edition of Longus’s elegant pastoral romance, printed at Florence in 1598.

, a celebrated lawyer, was born at Thoulouse about 1520. His parents were mean; but nature compensated for the favours of fortune, by the great talents she bestowed upon him. In his education he was independent of the assistance of teachers. He taught himself Greek and Latin, and every thing else which related to polite literature: and he arrived to so profound a knowledge of law in general, and of civil law in particular, that he is supposed of all the moderns to hare penetrated the farthest into the origin and mysteries of it. The means by which he succeeded in these refcearches, were the same which the ancient lawyers pursued; the etymology of words, and the lights of history. Indeed he was some little time under Arnoldus: but it was so little, that it can be esteemed of no account to him. With such talents and acquirements he had some reason to complain of his country, for refusing him the professor’s chair when it was vacant, and presenting one to it who was not capable of filling it xvith half the honour. Foreigners, however, did justice to his merit, came from all parts, and studied under his direction, and the ablest magistrates, which France then had, were formed by the instructions of this lawyer. From Thoulouse he was invited to the university of Cohors, and thence to Bourges. The king of France shewed him every honour, and permitted him to sit amongst his counsellors of parliament. Emanuel Philibert, duke of Savoy, invited him to Turin; and pope Gregory XIII. endeavoured to draw him to Bologna, his own native country, a very advantageous offer, which his age and infirmities did not permit him to accept. He continued to teach at Bourges, where he took the greatest pleasure in communicating familiarly to his friends and scholars whatever he had discovered in the law, and shewed them the shortest and easiest way to come to a perfect knowledge of that science. He was remarkable for his friendly manner of treating his scholars. He used to eat and drink with them; and, to encourage them in their studies, lent them money and books, which procured him the name of “Father of his scholars.” He died at Bourges 1590; and his works were first published at Paris, 1584, folio, and afterwards by C. Hannibal Fabrot, at Paris, in 10 vols. 1659, folio, which is reckoned the best edition. With respect to his religious principles, in the critical times in which he lived, we are told that when his opinion was asked about some questions in divinity, then agitated with great warmth, he answered, “Nil hoc ad edictum prsetoris:” which Gallio-like answer subjected him to the suspicion of indifference in religious matters.

, of Piemont, was born at San Chirico, in 1503, of a noble family, and cultivated philosophy, and made several journies in Germany and Italy. Having abjured the religion of Rome to embrace the doctrines of Luther, he was thrown into prison, and confined for several months, but without this making any impression on his sentiments; and he was no sooner released than he played a very bold trick. Having access to the relics of the monastery of St. Benigno, he executed the plan of carrying away the holy shrine, and leaving in its place what to him was more holy and estimable, the Bible, inscribed with these words, “Haec est area foederis, ex qua vera sciscitari oracula liceat, et in qua veroe sunt sanctorum reliquiae.” As, however, he was aware the fury of the populace would not permit him to escape with his life, if he were suspected, he thought it prudent to retire, and we find him afterwards at Milan, where he married in 1530, and began to preach. Having-fixed his abode near Casal, he one day heard a Dominican declaiming loudly against Luther, and charging him with criminal acts and heretical notions, of which he was not guilty; he asked permission to give an answer to the outrageous preacher. This being granted: “My father,” said he to the monk, “you have attributed to Luther a number of terrible declarations; but where does he say them? Can you point me out the book where he has delivered such a doctrine?” — The monk replied that he could not immediately shew him the passage; but that, if he would go with him to Turin, he would point it out to him. “And I,” said Curio, “will shew you this moment that what you advance cannot be true.” Then pulling out of his pocket Luther’s Commentary on the epistle to the Galatians, he refuted the Dominican with so much strength of argument, that the crowd fell upon him, and it was with great difficulty that he escaped out of their hands. The inquisition and the bishop of Turin being informed of this quarrel, Curio was arrested; but the bishop, perceiving that he was supported by a considerable party, went to Rome, to receive advice from the pope in what manner he should proceed. In the mean time, Curio was carried in irons to a private prison, and kept under a constant guard; but, notwithstanding these precautions, found means to escape during the night. He fled to Salo, in the duchy of Milan, and from thence to Pavia; whence, three years afterwards, he was obliged to take refuge at Venice, because the pope had threatened to excommunicate the senate of Pavia, if they did not put him under an arrest. From Venice Curio went successively to Ferrara, to Lucca, to Lausanne, in Switzerland, where he was made principal of the college, and lastly to Bale, in 1547. Here he became professor of eloquence and the belles-lettres, which situation he held until his death, which happened in 1569, at the age of sixty-seven. There is a singular work by him, entitled “De amplitudine bead regni Dei,” Bale, 1550, 8vo, in which he extends that kingdom to the comprehension of a far greater number of elect than the generality of divines allow. He also wrote: 1. “Opuscula,” Bale, 1544, 8vo, scarce, and containing a dissertation on Providence, another on the Immortality of the Soul, &c. 2. “Letters,” Bale, 1553, 8vo. 3. “Calvinus Judaisans,” 1595, 8vo. 4. To him are attributed: u Pasquillorum tomi duo,“1544, 2 parts in 1 vol. 8vo. What has led the critics to think him the editor of this collection, is, that he is indeed the author of the two editions of” Pasquillus extaticus,“8vo, the one without date, the other of Geneva, 1544. The second was reprinted with” Pasquillus theologaster,“Geneva, 1667, 12mo. These are satires, which petulance on one side, and the desire of suppressing them on the other, have occasioned to be sought after. The book-collectors add to these, two volumes, the works of a certain German, named” Pasquillus merus.“This makes a third volume, which has scarcely any relation to the former, nor is either of much value. 5. A Latin translation of Guicciardini’s history, 1566, 2 vols. fol. 6.” De Bello Melitense, anno 1565,“8vo, inserted in Muratori. 7.” Vita et doctrina Davidis Georgii haeresiarchse,“Bale, 1599, 4to. 8.” Forum Romanum,“a Latin dictionary, Bale, 1576, 3 vols. fol. 9.” Historia Francisci Spirae,“8vo, &c. Of a very scarce work of his,” Paraphrasis in principium Evangelii S. Johannis,“but which, if we mistake not, was originally published among his” Opuscula,“an extract may be seen in the” New Memoirs of Literature," vol. XIII.

, a cardinal, so called from Cusa, the place of his birth, was born in 1401. His parents were mean and poor; and it was his own personal merit which raised him to the height of dignity he afterwards attained. He was a man of extraordinary parts and learning, particularly famous for his vast knowledge in law and divinity, and a great natural philosopher and geometrician. Nicholas V. made him a cardinal by the title of St. Peter ad viucula, in 1448; and two years after, bishop of Brixia. In 1451 he was sent legate into Germany, to preach the crusade, but not succeeding in this attempt, he performed the more meritorious service of reforming some monasteries which he visited, and of establishing some new rules relating to ecclesiastical discipline. He returned to Rome under Calixtus III. and afterwards was made governor of it by Pius II. during his absence at Mantua, where he was chief concerter and manager of the war against the Turks. He died at Todi, a city of Umbria, in 1464, aged sixtythree years. His body was interred at Rome; but his heart, it is said, was carried to a church belonging to the hospital of St. Nicholas, which he had founded near Cusa, and where he collected a most noble and ample library of Greek and Latin authors. He left many excellent works behind him, which were printed in three volumes at Basil, in 1565. The first volume contains all his metaphysical tracts, in which he is very abstruse and profound; the second, his controversial pieces, and others which relate to the discipline of the church; the third, his mathematical, geographical, and astronomical works. It is said of Cusa, that before he was made a cardinal, he had taken the freedom to reprehend some errors and misdemeanours in the pope; and there are some instances in his works, where he has made no scruple to detect and expose the lying sophistries and false traditions of his church. In his piece entitled “Catholic Concord,” he has acknowledged the vanity and groundlessness of that famous donation of Constantine the Great to Sylvester, bishop of Rome. He gained considerable reputation by his “Cribratio Alcorani.” The Turks had taken Constantinople in 14-53, which seems to have given occasion to his writing this book, by way of antidote, as he proposed it, to the doctrines of the Koran, which were now in so fair a way of being spread through the western parts of the world. It appears by the dedication, that it was not written till after the loss of that city being inscribed to Pius II. who did not enter on the papacy till the Turks had been about three years in. possession of it. It is a very learned and judicious performance.

But what affords the most memorable instance of Cyril’s fiery zeal, is his quarrel with Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople. Nestorius had urged in some of his homilies, that the virgin Mary ought not to be called the mother of God; and these homilies coming to Egypt, raised no small disturbances among the monks there. Cyril wrote a pastoral letter to the monks, in which he maintained, that she was indeed the mother of God, and therefore ought to be called so. As soon as Nestorius heard of this letter, he openly declared Cyril his enemy, and refused to have any iurther commerce with him. Cyril upon this, wrote Nestorius a very civil letter, without approving his doctrine; which Nestorius answered as civilly, without retracting it. The affair was laid at length before pope Celestine; after which Cyril, supported by the pontiff’s authority, began, to issue forth anathemas against Nestorius and his doctrine, and the quarrel rose to such a pitch, that it was necessary to convene a general council at Ephesus, in order to put an end to it: where some bishops of the East, who were assembled on the part of Nestorius, gave Cyril so warm an opposition, that they got him deprived of his bishopric, and thrown into prison. But he was soon set at liberty and restored, and gained a complete victory over Nestorius, who was deposed from his see of Constantinople in the year 431 Cyril returned to Alexandria, where he died in the year 444. His works are voluminous, and have been often printed. They consist of the commentaries upon the Pentateuch, called “Glaphyra, &c.” Isaiah, the 12 lesser prophets, and St. John’s gospel; 17 books on the adoration and worship of God in spirit and truth, composed in form of a dialogue; dialogues on the holy and consubstantial trinity, and on the incarnation; a discourse of the orthodox faith; homilies, letters, and apologies. John Aubert, canon of Laon, published the best edition in Greek and Latin, 1638, 6 vols. fol. which are bound in seven, because vol. 5th consists of two parts. St. Cyril’s style is diffuse and singular; his writings contain much subtilty, metaphysical reasoning, and all the niceties of logic. St. Isidore, of Pelusium, accuses him of acting with too much zeal and heat during the disputes in which he was engaged; but the catholic writers think that he atoned for that fault by his piety and innocent life.

, a celebrated pope, was born at Guimaraens in Spain, and succeeded Liberius in the year 366. Ursinus, or Ursicinus, opposed his election, and caused himself to be ordained bishop of Rome, which raised a sedition, in which many of the people were murdered. Ursinus was sent into exile by order of the emperor, but, returning to Italy in the year 381, excited fresh troubles there. The Italian bishops, however, condemned him the same year, in the council of Aquileia, and he was banished for ever by the emperor Gratian, at their request: thus Daniasus remained in peaceful possession of his seat at Rome. He held several councils, condemned Ursaces, Valens, and Auxentius; took the part of Paul in us against Meletius, excommunicated ApolUnanus, Vitalus, and Timotheus; and declared himself against the Luciferians. Datnasus had an illustrious secretary in St. Jerome. He governed the church of Rome with what the catholic writers term great glory, for eighteen years, and died in the year 384. Some of his letters remain,. Rome, 175-i, fol. with his life, in the library of the fathers, and in the Epist. Rom. Pont, of Coustant, fol. He also left some Latin verses, which may be found in Maittaire’s Corpus Poetarum. Fabricius gives a very particular account of his works. This pope is said to have introduced the custom of singing hallelujah in the church. He is more noted, however, for having extended the power and authority of the bishops of Rome, and laid the foundation of the custom of conferring upon certain bishops the title of vicars to the pope, by which they were enabled to perform several authoritative acts, which they could not by the mere virtue of episcopal power: hence the rights of bishops and synods became gradually and entirely dependent on the authority of the pope.

, an eminent cardinal, was born at Ravenna in the beginning of the eleventh century, became a Benedictine, and, it is thought, would always have preferred solitude to the dignities of the church, if he had not been in some measure forced to accept them. In 1057 he was created cardinal by pope Stephen IX. and under pope Nicolas II. was sent as papal legate to Milan, to reform certain clerical abuses, which he successfully accomplished, and even turned his arguments against his superiors, whom he found licentious, without any respect for their rank or power. Among other proofs of his zeal, he publicly condemned the liberty which the popes took of opposing the emperors in cases of war; affirming, that the offices of emperor and pope are distinct, and that the emperors ought not to meddle with what belongs to the popes, nor the popes with what belongs to the emperors. “As the son of God,” says he, “surmounted all the obstacles of worldly power, not by the severity of vengeance, but by the lively majesty of an invincible patience, so has he taught us rather to bear the fury of the world with constancy, than to take up arms against those who offend us; especially since between the royalty and the priesthood there is such a distinction of offices, that it belongs to the king to use secular arms, and to the priest to gird on the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God,” &c. Damian described also in a very lively manner the enormous vices of his age, in several of his works;, in his Gomorrhaetis particularly, which, though pope Alexander II. thought fit to suppress it, has nevertheless been preserved. Disappointed, however, in his hopes of producing any favourable change, he resigned all his preferments in the church in 1061, although he appears afterwards to have been employed on missions as legate. He died in 1073, and his writings, while in ms. must have been frequently read and admired, as we find that between five and six centuries after his deaih they were ordered to be printed by Clement VIII. who employed Constantino Cajetan as editor. This first edition was published at Home in 3 vols. fol. 160b, 1608, 1615, and reprinted at Leyden, 1623, fol. In 1640 Cajeta 1 added a fourth volume. The whole were afterwards reprinted at Paris in 1642 and 1663, in a thick folio. These works consist of

, an illustrious Italian poet, descended from one of the first families of Florence, of the name of Caccia Guida. Alighieri was the surname of the maternal line, natives of Ferrara, so called from a golden wing which the family bore on their arms. He was born in 1265, a little after the return of the Guelfs or pope’s faction, who had been exiled from their native country in consequence of the defeat at Monte Aperte. The superiority of his genius appeared early, and if we may credit his biographer Boccaccio, his amorous disposition appeared almost as soon. His passion for the lady whom he has celebrated in his poem by the name of Beatrice, is said to have commenced at nine years of age. She was the daughter of Eoleo Portinari, a noble citizen of Florence. His passion seems to have been of the platonic kind, according to the account he gives of it in his “Vita Nuova,” one of his earliest productions. The lady died at the age of twenty-six and Dante, affected by the afflicting event, fell into a profound melancholy, to cure which his friends recommended matrimony. Dante took their advice, but was unfortunate in choosing a lady of a termagant temper, from whom he found it necessary to separate, but not until they had lived miserably for a considerable time, during which she bore him several children. Either at this period, or after the death of his first mistress, he seems by his own account to have fallen into a profligate course of life, from which he was rescued by the prayers of his mistress, now a saint, who prevailed on the spirit of Virgil to attend him through the infernal regions. It is not easy to reduce this account to matter of fact, nor is it very clear indeed whether his reigning vice was profligacy, or ambition of worldly honours. It is certain, however, that he possessed this ambition, and had reason to repent of it.

He had already conceived notions of military glory, and had distinguished himself by his bravery in an action where the Florentines obtained a signal victory at Arezzo. This, joined with his acknowledged learning, prepared the way for his advancement to the first honours of the state. Italy, at that time, was distracted between the factions of the Guelfs, or partizans of the pope, and the Ghibellines, who adhered to the emperor. After many revolutions, the Gnelfs had got the superiority in Florence; and in 130O Dante, with several colleagues, was elected prior, the first executive office in the republic of Florence, and from this he is said to have dated all his misfortunes. Although the faction of the Ghibellines seemed totally extinct, an uninterrupted flow of ten years prosperity was attended with consequences more fatal to the Guelfs than all their past misfortunes. The two noble families of the Cherchi and Donati had been engaged in a quarrel of old standing, and now had recourse to arms, in consequence of a dispute between two branches of the family of Cancelieri, of Pistoia. The rival factions had distinguished themselves by the names of the blacks and the whites, i. e. the Neri and the Bianchi. Donati, from an old attachment to the part of the Cancelieri, called the blacks, joined their faction, which immediately determined the Cherchi to join the whites; and in order to put an end to the quarrel, Dante and his colleagues, ordered the heads of the opposite factions t remove from Pistoia to Florence, the consequence of which was, that all the noble families of Florence ranged themselves with the one or the other, and even the lower order of the citizens became partizans. At last, at a secret meeting of the blacks, Carso Donati proposed to apply to pope Boniface VIII. to terminate these intestine broils, by sending Charles of Valois of the blood royal of France. The whites, having learned this, assembled in arms, and clamoured loudly against the project, and Dante was so dissatisfied with it, that from that moment it is probable he took a decided part against the black faction.

To preserve, however, the appearance of impartiality, he and his colleagues, gaining the multitude on their side, ordered the leaders of both parties, Donati and Cherchi, into confinement; but Dante’s real sentiments soon appeared: the whites were set at liberty, and the blacks remained in bonds or in exile, and although Dante’s priorate had expired before the whites were released, the measure was attributed to his influence. This appearance of partiality gave the wished for pretext to Boniface to send Charles of Valois to Florence, who, after producing a letter pretended to be written by some of the leaders of the whites, offering to corrupt his integrity in their favour, recalled the exiles of the black faction, and banished their opponents. Dante was at this time at Rome soliciting the pope to conciliate the two parties, and finding his solicitations in vain, returned, and found the sentence of exile passed upon him, his possessions confiscated, and his house razed to the foundation. This news met him at Siena, where he was soon joined by a numerous body of exiles, who formed themselves into an army, and after makingsome unsuccessful efforts to enter their native city byforce, which they repeated for four years, were obliged tu disperse.

Eloquence was one of the many talents which Dante possessed in an eminent degree; on this account he is said to have been employed in fourteen different embassies during the course of his life, and to have succeeded in most of them. His patron Guido had occasion to try his abilities in a service of this nature, and dispatched him as his ambassador, to negociate a peace with the Venetians, who were preparing for hostilities against Ravenna. Manetti asserts that he was unable to procure a public audience at Venice, and returned to Ravenna by land, from his apprehension of the Venetian fleet. But the fatigue of his journey, and the mortification of having failed in his attempt to preserve his generous patron from the impending danger, threw him into a fever, which terminated in death. He died Sept. 14, 1321, in the palace of Guido, who paid the most tender regard to his memory. This magnificent patron, says Boccaccio, commanded the body to be adorned with poetical ornaments; and alter being carried on a bier through the principal streets of Ravenna, by the most illustrious citizens, to be deposited in a marble coffin. He pronounced himself the funeral oration, and expressed his design of erecting a most splendid monument, in honour of the deceased; a design, which his subsequent misfortunes rendered him unable to accomplish. At his request, however, many epitaphs were written on the poet. The best of them, says Boccaccio, was by Giovanni di Virgilio, of Bologna, a famous author of the time, and the intimate friend of Dante. Bernardo Bembc, the father of the celebrated cardinal, raised a handsome monument over the neglected ashes of the poet, with a Latin inscription; but before this, the Florentines had vainly endeavoured to gain the bones of their great poet from the city of Ravenna. In the age of Leo X. they made a second attempt, by a solemn application to the pope for that purpose; and Michael AngeJo, an enthusiastic admirer of Dante, very liberally offered to execute a magnificent monument to the poet, but the hopes of the Florentines were again unsuccessful.

, according to some, a descendant of the famous poet, was born at Perugia in 1537, and took the habit of a Dominican. He became skilful in philosophy and divinity, but more so in the mathematics. He was invited to Florence by the great duke Cosmo I. and explained to him the sphere and the books of Ptolemy, and left here a marble quadrant, and an equinoctial and meridian line on the front of the church of St. Maria Novella. He read public lectures on the same subject, and had many auditors in the university of Bologna, where he was appointed mathematical professor. Before he returned to Perugia, he made a fine map of that city, and of its whole territory, and in 1576 traced the grand meridian in the church of St. Petrona, which Cassini completed. The reputation of his learning caused him to be invited to Rome by Gregory XIII. who employed him in making geographical maps and plans. He acquitted himself so well in this, that the pope thought himself obliged to prefer him; and accordingly gave him the bishopric of Alatri, near Rome. He went and resided in his diocese; but Sixtus V. who succeeded Gregory XIII. would have him near his person, and ordered him to return to Rome. Dante was preparing for the journey, but was prevented by death, in 1586. His principal works are, “A Treatise of the Construction and Use of the Astrolabe,” “Mathematical Tables,” and a “Commentary on the Laws of Perspective.”

, a learned Italian writer, the son of a lawyer at Sienna, was born at that place in 1420, and after acquiring some knowledge of the Latin language, was put under the care of Francis Philelphus, an eminent teacher at Sienna, who at the end of two years declared he was his best scholar. Dati, however, at this time suffered not a little from the ridicule of his schoolfellows, owing to a hesitation in his speech, which he is said to have cured by the means which Demosthenes adopted, that of speaking with small pebbles in his mouth. After finishing his classical studies, he learned Hebrew of some Jews, and then entered on a course of philosophy, jurisprudence, and theology. During his application to these branches, Odo Anthony, duke of Urbino, from the very favourable account he had of him, invited him to Urbino to teach the belles lettres. Dati accordingly set out for that city in April 1442, where he was received with every mark of honour and friendship by the duke, but this prosperity was not of long duration. He had not enjoyed it above a year and a half, when the duke, whose excesses and tyranny had rendered him odious, was assassinated in a public tumult, with two of his favourites; and Dati, who was hated by the populace merely because he was respected by the duke, was obliged to take refuge for his life in a church, while the mob pillaged his house. The successor of Odo, prince Frederick, endeavoured to console Dati for this misfortune, and offered him a pension, besides recompense for all he had lost; but Dati could not be reconciled to a residence so liable to interruption, and in 1444 returned to Sienna. Here, after refusing the place of secretary of the briefs, offered to him by pope Nicholas V. he opened a school for rhetoric and the classics, and acquired so much reputation, that the cardinal of Sienna, Francis Piccolomini, formally granted him permission to lecture on the Holy Scriptures, although he was a married man; and at the same time gave him a similar licence to teach and lecture on any subject, not only in his college, but in all public places, and even in the church, where, his son informs us, he once preached during Lent. He was also much employed in pronouncing harangues on public occasions in Latin, many of which are among his works. Nor were his talents confined to literature, but were the means of advancing him to the first offices of the magistracy, and the republic of Sienna entrusted him with the negociation of various affairs of importance at Rome and elsewhere. In 1 J-57 he was appointed secretary to the republic, which he held for two years. Towards the close of his life he laid aside the study of profane authors for that of the Scriptures and ecclesiastical historians. He died of the plague at Sienna, April 6, 1478. His son Nicolas collected his works for publication, “Augustini Dathi, Senensis, opera,” of which there are two editions, that printed at Sienna, 1503, fol. and an inferior in correctness, printed at Venice, 1516. They consist of treatises on the immortality of the soul letters; three books on the history of Sienna; a history of Piombinoj on grammar, &c. &c.

, a name of great celebrity in the literary history of the fifteenth century, was born at Pavia in 1399. In his youth he was appointed secretary to Philip-Maria Visconti, and after the death of his master, while struggling for the liberties of the Milanese, Decembrio defended the same cause with ardour, while there was any prospect of success; and when all failed, he quitted Milan for Rome, where pope Nicholas V. made him apostolical secretary. He returned to Milan about twenty years afterwards, and died there in 1477. According to the inscription on his monument, he composed one hundred and twenty-seven works, but few of these appear to be known. The two principal are the lives of Philip-Maria Visconti, and Francis Sforza, both dukes of Milan. Muratori has inserted them in his Script. Rer. Ital. vol. XX. In the first he has imitated the style and manner of Suetonius with considerable success. The second is in hexameter verse, but his facts are more interesting than his poetry. His other printed works are treatises on different subjects; Latin and Italian poems, several translations, particularly of Appian and Quintus Curtius into Italian, &c. It is much to be regretted that his Letters, which are in several of the Italian libraries, have not been published, as they might throw great light on the literary and political history of his age.

We come now to that period of his life, by which he has been most known, though for reasons which have justly rendered him least regarded. He was certainly a man of uncommon parts, learning, and application; and might have distinguished himself in the scientific world if he had been possessed of solid judgment; but he was very credulous, superstitious, extremely vain, and, we suspect, a little roguish; but we are told that it was his ambition to surpass all men in knowledge, which carried him at length to a desire of knowing beyond the bounds of human faculties. In short, he suffered himself to be deluded into an opinion, that by certain invocations an intercourse or communication with spirits might be obtained; from whence he promised himself an insight into the occult sciences. He found a young man, one Edward Kelly, a native of Worcestershire, who was already either rogue or fool enough for his purpose, and readily undertook to assist him, for which he was to pay him 50l. per annum. Dec. 2, 1581, they began their incantations; in consequence of which, Kelly was, by the inspection of a certain table, consecrated for that purpose with many superstitious ceremonies, enabled to acquaint Dee with what the spirits thought fit to shew and discover. These conferences were continued for about two years, and the subjects of them were committed to writing, but never published, though still preserved in Ashmole’s museum. In the mean time, there came over hither a Polish lord, one Albert Laski, palatine of Siradia, a man of great parts and learning; and, as a late writer observes, of large fortune too, or he would not have answered their purpose. This nobleman was introduced by the earl of Leicester to Dee, and became his constant visitant. Having: himself a bias to those superstitious arts, he was, after much intreaty, received by Dee into their company, and into a participation of their secrets. Within a short time, the palatine of Siradia, returning to his own country, prevailed with Dee and Kelly to accompany him, upon the assurance of an ample provision there; and accordingly they went all privately from Mortlake, in order to embark for Holland; from whence they travelled by land through Germany into Poland, where, Feb. 3, 1584, they arrived at the principal castle belonging to Albert Laski. When Laski had been sufficiently amused with their fanatical pretences to a conversation with spirits, and was probably satisfied that they were impostors, he contrived to send them to the emperor Rodolph II. who, being quickly disgusted with their impertinence, declined all farther interviews. Upon this Dee applied himself to Laski, to introduce him to Stephen king of Poland; which accordingly he did at Cracow, April 1585. But that prince soon detecting his delusions, and treating him with contempt, he returned to the emperor’s court at Prague; from whose dominions he was soon banished at the instigation of the pope’s nuncio, who gave the emperor to understand, how scandalous it appeared to the Christian world, that he should entertain two such magicians as Dee and Kelly. At this time, and while these confederates were reduced to the greatest distress, a young nobleman of great power and fortune in Bohemia, and one of their pupils, gave them shelter in the castle of Trebona; where they not only remained in safety, but lived in splendour, Kelly having in his possession, as is reported, that philosophical powder of projection, by which they were furnished with money very profusely. Some jealousies and heart-burnings afterwards happened between Dee and Kelly, that brought on at length an absolute rupture. Kelly, however, who was a younger man than Dee, seems to have acted a much wiser part; since it appears, from an entry in Dee’s diary, that he was so far intimidated as to deliver up to Kelly, Jan. 1589, the powder, about which it is said he had learned from the German chemists many secrets which he had not communicated to Dee.

The noise their adventures made in Europe induced queen Elizabeth to invite Dee home, who, in May 1689, set out from Trebona towards England. He travelled with great pomp and solemnity, was attended by a guard of horse; and, besides waggons for his goods, had uo less than three coaches for the use of his family; for he had married a second wife, and had several children. He landed at Gravesend Nov. 23; and, Dec. 9, presented himself at Richmond to the queen, who received him very graciously. He then retired to his house at Mortlake; and collecting the remains of his library, which had been torn to pieces and scattered in his absence, he sat down to study. He had great friends; received many presents; yet nothing, it seems, could keep him from want. The queen had quickly notice of this, as well as of the vexations he suffered from the common people, who persecuted him as a conjuror, which at that time was not a title equivalent to an impostor. The queen, who certainly listened oftener to him than might have been expected from her good sense, sent him money from time to time: but all would not do. At length he resolved to apply in such a manner as to procure some settled subsistence; and accordingly, Nov. 9, 1592, he sent a memorial to her majesty by the countess of -Warwick, in which he very earnestly pressed her, that commissioners might be appointed to hear his pretensions, and to examine into the justness of his wants and claims. This had a good effect; for, on the 22d, two commissioners, sir Thomas Gorge, knt. and Mr. Secretary Wolley, were actually sent to Mortlake, where Dee exhibited a book, containing a distinct account of all the memorable transactions of his life, those which occurred in his last journey abroad only excepted; and, as he read this historical narration, he produced all the letters, grants, and other evidences requisite to confirm them, and where these were wanting, named living witnesses. The title of this work, the original of which still remains in the Cotton library, and a transcript of it among Dr. Smith’s written collections, runs thus: “The compendious rehearsal of John Dee, his dutiful declaration and proof of the course and race of his studious life for the space of half an hundred years now by God’s favour and help fully spent, and of the very great injuries, damages, and indignities which for these last nine years he hath in England sustained, contrary to her majesty’s very gracious will and express commandment, made unto the two honourable commissioners by her most excellent majesty thereto assigned, according to the intent of the most humble supplication of the said John, exhibited to her most gracious majesty at Hampton-court, ann. 1592, Nov. 9.” Upon the report made by the commissioners to the queen, he received a present, and promises of preferment; but these promises ending like the former in nothing, he engaged his patroness, the countess of Warwick, to present another short Latin petition to the queen, but with what success does not appear. In Dec. 1594, however, he obtained a grant to the chancellorship of St. Paul’s. But this did not answer his end: upon which he applied himself next to Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, by a letter, in which he inserted a large account of all the books he had either published or written: and in consequence of this letter, together with other applications, he obtained a grant of the vvardenshipof Manchester-college. Feb. 15D6, he arrived with his wife and family in that town, and was installed in his new charge. He continued there about seven years; which he is said to have spent in a troublesome and unquiet manner. June 1604, he presented a petition to king James, earnestly desiring him that he might be brought to a trial; that, by a formal and judicial sentence, he might be delivered from those suspicions and surmises which had created him so much uneasiness for upwards of fifty years. But the king, although he at first patronized him, being better informed of the nature of his studies, refused him any mark of royal countenance and favour; which must have greatly affected a man of that vain and ambitious spirit, which all his misfortunes could never alter or amend. November the same year he quitted Manchester with his family, in order to return to his house at Mortlake; where he remained but a short time, being now very old, infirm, and destitute of friends and patrons, who had generally forsaken him. We find him at Mortlake in 1607; where he had recourse to his former invocations, and so came to deal again, as he fancied, with spirits. One Hickman served him now, as Kelly had done formerly. Their transactions were continued to Sept. 7, 1607, which is the last date in that journal published by Casaubon, whose title at large runs thus: “A true and faithful relation of what passed for many years between Dr. John Dee, a mathematician of great fame in queen Elizabeth and king James their reigns, and some spirits, tending, had it succeeded, to a general alteration of most states and kingdoms in the world. His private conferences with Rudolph emperor of Germany, Stephen. king of Poland, and divers other princes, about it. The particulars of his cause, as it was agitated in the emperor’s court by the pope’s intervention. His banishment and restoration in part; as also the letters of sundry great men and princes, some whereof were present at some of these conferences, and apparitions of spirits to the said Dr. Dee, out of the original copy written with Dr. Dee’s own hand, kept in the library of sir Thomas Cotton, knt. baronet. With a preface confirming the reality, as to the point of spirits, of this relation, and shewing the several good uses that a sober Christian may make of all. By Meric Casaubon, D. D. Lond. 1659,” fol.

In 1720 he published “The complete Art of Painting,” which he “did into English” from the French of Du Fresnoy. Dryden had before given a translation of this poem, which has been esteemed for its knowledge of the sister arts, and Mason’s since has supplanted both. What could tempt De Foe to this undertaking, it is not easy to discover. Dryden has been praised for relinquishing vicious habits of composition, and adopting better models for his muse. De Foe, after he had seen the correctness of Pope, remained regardless of sweeter numbers. His politics and his poetry would not have preserved his name beyond the fleeting day. It does not appear that De Foe lived at this period in pecuniary distress; for his genius and industry were very productive; and in 1722 he obtained from the corporation of Colchester, a ninety-nine years lease of Kingswood Heath, at a yearly rent of 120l. with a fine of 50O/. This transaction seems to evince some degree of wealth; though the assignment of his lease, not long after, to Walter Bernard, equally proves, that he could not easily hold what he had obtained. Kingswood Heath is now worth 300l. a year.

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

, the second wife of the preceding, and a lady of distinguished ingenuity and merit, was born at a small country house of her father’s at Coulton in Wiltshire, May, 14, 1700. She was the daughter of Bernard Granville, esq. afterward lord Lansdowne, a nobleraan whose abilities and virtues, whose character as a poet, whose friendship with Pope, Swift, and other eminent writers of the time, and whose general patronage of men eyf genius and literature, have often been recorded in biographical productions. As the child of such a family, sh^ could not fail of receiving the best education. It was at Long-Leat, the seat of the Weymouth family, which was occupied by lord Lansdowne during the minority of the heir of that family, that Miss Granville first saw Alexander Pendarves, esq. a gentleman of large property at Roscrow in Cornwall, and who immediately paid his addresses to her; which were so strenuously supported by her uncle, whom she had not the courage to deny, that she gave a reluctant consent to the match; and accordingly it took place in the compass of two or three weeks, she being then in the seventeenth year of her age. From a great disparity of years, and other causes, she was very unhappy during the time which this connexion lasted, but endeavoured to make the best of her situation. The retirement to which she was confined was wisely employed in the farther cultivation of a naturally vigorous understanding: and the good use she made of her leisure hours, was eminently evinced in the charms of her conversation, and in her letters to her friends. That quick feeling of the elegant and beautiful which constitutes taste, she possessed in an eminent degree, and was therefore peculiarly fitted for succeeding in the fine arts. At the period we are speaking of, she made a great proficiency in music, but painting, which afterwards she most loved, and in which she principally excelled, had not yet engaged her practical attention. in 1724 Mrs. Pendarves became a widow; upon which occasion she quitted Cornwall, and fixed her principal residence in London. For several years, between 1730 and 1736, she maintained a correspondence with Dr. Swift. In 1743, as we have seen in the former article, Mrs. Pendarves was married to Dr. Delany, with whom it appears that she had long been acquainted; and for whom he had many years entertained a very high esteem. She had been a widow nineteen years when this connexion, which was a very happy one, took place, and her husband is said to fcave regarded her almost to adoration. Upon his decease in ftiay 1768, she intended to fix herself at Bath, and was in quest of a house for that purpose. But the duchess dowager of Portland, hearing of her design, went down to the place; and, having in her earl v years formed an intimacy with Mrs. Delany, wished to have near her a lady from whom she had necessarily, for several years, been much separated, and whose heart and talents she knew would in the highest degree add to thejiappiness of her own life. Her <*race succeeded in her solicitalions, and Mrs. Delany now passed her time between London and Bulstrode. On the death of the duchess-dowager of Portland, his present majesty, who had frequently seen and honoured Mrs Delany with his notice at Bulstrode, assigned her for her summer residence the use of a house completely furnished, in St. Alhan’s-street, Windsor, adjoining to the entrance of the castle: and, that the having two houses on her hands might not produce any inconvenience with regard to the expence of her living, his majesty, as a farther mark of his royal favour, conferred on her a pension of three hundred pounds a year. On the 15th of April, 1788, after a short indisposition, she departed this life, at her house in St. James’s-place, having nearly completed the 88th year of her age. The circumstance that has principally entitled Mrs. Delany to a place in this work is her skill in painting, and in other ingenious arts, one of which was entirely her own. With respect to painting, she was late in her application to it. She did not learn to draw till she was more than thirty years of age, when she put herself under the instruction of Goupy, a fashionable master of that time, and much employed by Frederic prince of Wales. To oil-painting she did not take till she was past forty. So strong was her passion for this art, that she has frequently been known to employ herself in it, day after day, from six o'clock in the morning till dinner time, allowing only a short interval for breakfast. She was principally a copyist; but a very fine one. The only considerable original work of hers in oil was the Kaising of Lazarus, in the possession of her friend lady JBute. The number of pictures painted by her, considering how late it was in life before she applied to the art, was very great. Her own house was full of them; and others are among the chief ornaments of Calswich, Welsborn, and Ham, the respective residences of her nephews, Mr. Granville and Mr. Dewes, and of her niece Mrs. Port. Mrs. Delany, among her other accomplishments, excelled in embroidery and shell-work; and, in the course of her life, produced many elegant specimens of her skill in these respects. But, what is more remarkable, at the age of 74 she invented a new and beautiful mode of exercising her ingenuity. This was by the construction of a Flora, of a most singular kind, formed by applying coloured papers together, and which might, not improperly, be called a species of mosaic work. Being perfectly mistress of her scissars, the plant or flower which she purposed to imitate she cut out; that is, she cut out its various leaves and parts in such coloured Chinese paper as suited her subject; and, when she could not meet with a colour to correspond with the one she wanted, she dyed her own paper to answer her wishes. She used a black ground, as best calculated to throw out her flower; and not the least astonishing part of her art was, that though she never employed her pencil to trace out the form or shape of her plant, yet when she had applied all the p eces which composed it, it hung so loosely and gracefully, that every one was persuaded that it must previously have been drawn out, and repeatedly corrected by a most judicious hand, before it could have attained the ease and air of truth which, without any impeachment of the honour of this accomplished lady, might justly be called a forgery of nature’s works. The effect was superior to what painting could have produced; and so imposing was her art, that she would sometimes put a real leaf of a plant by the side of one of her own creation, which the eye could not detect, even when she herself pointed it out. Mrs. Delany continued in the prosecution of her design till the 83d year of her age, when the dimness of her sight obliged her to lay it aside. However, by her unwearied perseverance, she became authoress of far the completest Flora that ever was executed by the same hand. The number of plants finished bv her amounted to nine hundred and eighty. This invaluable Flora was bequeathed by her to her nephew Court Dewes, esq. and is now in the possession of Barnard Dewes, esq. of Welsborn in Warwickshire. The liberality of Mrs. Delany’s mind rendered her at all times ready to communicate her art. She frequently pursued her work in company; was desirous of shewing to her friends how easy it was to execute; and was often heard to lament that so few would attempt it. It required, however, great patience and great knowledge in botanical drawing. She began to write poetry at 80 years of age, and her verses shew at least a pious disposition. Her private character is thus given by her friend, Mr. Keate. “She had every virtue that could adorn the human heart, with a mind so pure, and so uncontaminated by the world, that it was matter of astonishment how she could have lived in its more splendid scenes without being tainted with one single atom of its folly or indiscretion. The strength of her understanding received, in the fullest degree, its polish, but its weakness never reached her. Her life was conducted by the sentiments of true piety; her way of thinking, on every occasion, was upright and just; her conversation was lively, pleasant, and instructive. She was warm, delicate, and sincere in her friendships; full of philanthropy and benevolence, and loved and respected by every person who had the happiness to know her. That sun-shine and serenity of mind which the good can only enjoy, and which had thrown so much attraction on her life, remained without a shadow to the last; not less bright in its setting, than in its meridian lustre. That form which in youth had claimed admiration, in age challenged respect. It presented a noble ruin, become venerable by the decay of time. Her faculties remained unimpaired to the last; and she quitted this mortal state to receive in a better world the crown of a well-spent life.”

In 1641 he published his tragedy of the “Sophy;” which was so much admired by Waller that he took occasion from this piece to say of the author, that “he broke out like the Irish rebellion, threescore thousand strong, when nobody was aware, or in the least suspected it.” Soon after he was pricked high sheriff of Surry, and made governor of Farnham-castle for the king; but, not being skilled in military affairs, he quitted that post soon after, and retired to his majesty at Oxford. Here, in 1643, he published his “Cooper’s Hill;” a poem, which, Drydeu says, for majesty of style, is, and ever will be, the standard of good writing. Pope has celebrated this poem very highly in his “Windsor Forest;” and indeed it is thought so much superior to his other poems, that some have suspected him, though without any just foundation, not to have been author of it. Thus, in the “Session of the Poets,” printed in Dryden’s Miscellanies, we have the following insinuation:

“Denham,” says Dr. Johnson, “is deservedly considered as one of the fathers of English poetry. Denham and Waller, according to Prior, improved our versification, and D:yden perfected it. He appears to have had, in common with almost all mankind, the ambition of being upon proper occasions a merry fellow; and, in common with most of them, to have been by nature, or by early habits, debarred from it. Nothing is less exhilarating than the ludicrousness of Denham. He does not fail for want of efforts: he is familiar, he is gross; but he is never merry, unless the * Speech against Peace in the close Committee‘ be excepted. For grave burlesque, however, his imitation of Davenant shews him to have been well qualified. His poem on the death of Cowley was his last, and, among his shorter works, his best performance: the numbers are musical, and the thoughts are just. ’ Cooper’s Hill' is the work that confers upon him the rank and dignity of an original author. He seems to have been, at least among us, the author of a species of composition that may be denominated local poetry, of which the fundamental subject is some particular landscape, to be poetically described, with the addition of such embellishments as maybe supplied by histosical retrospectioi incidental meditation. To trace a new scheme of poetry has in itself a very high claim to praise, and its praise is yet more when it is apparently copied by Garth and Pope; after whose names little will be gained by an enumeration of smaller poets, that have left scarce a corner of the island undignified by rhyme, or blank verse. He appears to have been one of the first that understood the necessity of emancipating translation from the drudgery of counting lines and interpreting single words. How much this servile practice obscured the clearest and deformed the most beautiful parts of the ancient authors, may be discovered by a perusal of our earlier versions; some of them the works of men well qualified not only by critical knowledge, but by poetical genius; who yet, by a mistaken ambition of exactness, degraded at once their originals and themselves. Denham saw the better way, but has not pursued it wiih great success. His versions of Virgil are not pleasing: but they taught Dryden to please better. His poetical imitation of Tully on Old Age has neither the clearness of prose, nor the spriteliness of poetry.” Most of the lesser faults pointed out in Dr. Johnson’s critique “are in Denham’s first productions, when he was less skilful, or at least less dextrous in the use of words; and though they had been more frequent, they could only have lessened the grace, not the strength, of his composition. He is one of the writers that improved our taste, and advanced our language, and whom we ought therefore to read with gratitude, though, having done much, he left much to do.”

It has not been generally remarked that Denham continued to improve and polish his poems as long as he lived. Pope wrote on his copy of “Cooper’s Hill” the following note: “This poem was first printed without the author’s name in 1643. In that edition are a great many verses to be found, since omitted, and very many others since corrected and improved. Some few the author afterwards added, and in particular, the celebrated lines on the Thames,” O could I flow like thee," &c. all with admirable judgment; and the whole read together is a very strong proof of what Mr. Waller says,

Thus far Mr. Dennis pursued his critical inquiries without giving any peculiar offence. He might, indeed, occasionally deliver with freedom his sentiments concerning the writings of his contemporaries, and in some few instances might express himself with severity. But still he did not run into such excesses as to bring on any material personal controversy, until in 1711, soon after the commencement of the Spectator, he entered into a contest with Addison, Steele, and Pope. He imagined himself to be attacked so early as in the second or third number of that paper; and was particularly displeased with the thirty-ninth and fortieth numbers, in which a doctrine was advanced, with regard to poetical justice, very different from what he had always maintained. Accordingly, he addressed a letter to the Spectator on the subject, at the conclusion of which he says, “Thus I have discussed the business of poetical justice, and shewn it to be the foundation of all tragedy; and therefore, whatever persons, whether ancient or mo dern, have written dialogues which they call tragedies, where this justice is not observed, those persons have entertained and amused the world with romantic lamentable tales, instead of just tragedies, and or' lawful fables.” That our critic was extremely anxious in support of this point, is apparent from several other parts of his works. He has particularly insisted upon it in a letter to sir Richard Blackmore on the moral and conclusion of an epic poem; and has certainly conducted his argument with great ingenuity. Another opportunity which the Spectator afforded Mr. Dennis for the exercise of his critical skill, was by the illustrations in the seventieth and seventy-fourth numbers of the ballad of Chevy Chase, though the subject was scarcely important enough to deserve an elaborate discussion of nearly thirty pages. A farther attack upon the Spectator was particularly levelled at sir Richard Steele. That gentleman, it is said, had promised our critic to take some opportunity of mentioning his works in public with advantage, and thereby of promoting his reputation. It however unfortunately happened, that Mr, Addison, who perhaps knew nothing of sir Richard’s engagement, quoted, in his paper upon Laughter, the two following lines, which he calls humourous and well-expressed, from Mr. Dennis’s translation of a satire of Boileau’s:

Mr. Dennis’s contest with the Spectator was speedily followed by his more unfortunate attack upon Mr. Pope; occasioned by the publication of the “Essay on Criticism.” In. that essay were some lines, which our author considered as having a reference to himself, and wrote a pamphlet, of which Dr. Johnson says, that it is such as rage might be expected to dictate. In a few instances his strictures were just; but in general his desire to do mischief was greater than his power. The only extenuation of the personal abuse he threw out against Mr. Pope was his conviction of that gentleman’s having given the first offence. “Thus,” observes Dr Johnson, “began the hostility between Popa and Dennis, ivhich, though suspended for a short time, never was appeased. Pope seems, at first, to have attacked him wantonly; but, though he always professed to despise him, he discovers, by mentioning him very often, that he felt his force or his venom.” Dennis afterwards criticized several of Mr. Pope’s other poems; but without success; and that he should upon that account have a place assigned to him in the “Dunciacl,” is no more than what might have been expected. He took his revenge, such as it was, by writing against the “Rape of the Lock,” remarking that the machinery is superfluous; and that, by all the bustle of preternatural operation, the main event is neither has-, tened nor retarded; but the “Rape of the Lock” was not to be thus assailed, and Dennis never discharged his critical artillery with less effect. What, indeed, could be more ridiculous, than his pretending to find a latent meaning in the incidents of this inimitable poem, and therefore accusing Pope of being an enemy to his king and country? This, liuwever, produced a piece of exquisite humour, “The Key to the Lock.”

In 1713, Mr. Addison’s Cato was produced upon the stage with a degree of applause, which, we believe, was never before given to any dramatic composition. But though the play was acted in the cause of whiggism, and Dennis himself was so zealous a whig, he could not bear the success with which it was attended. That in this hewas actuated by personal animosity, cannot be denied; since it is acknowledged by himself, in a letter to the duke of Buckingham, that the motive which induced him to write his remarks upon Cato was, his having been attacked in several numbers of the Spectator. His principle of action we condemn; but the abilities with which he has executed his purpose are unquestionable, “He found,” says Dr. Johnson, “and shewed many faults: he shewed them, indeed, with anger; but he found them with acutejncss, such as ought to rescue his criticism from oblivion;” and Dr. Johnson has thought a large extract from this pamphlet worthy of transcription into his Life of Add son, who himself maintained a profound silence. Pope, however, took upon him to avenge his cause, in a pamphlet entitled “The Narrative of Dr. Robert Norris, concerning the strange and deplorable frenzy of Mr. John Dennis, an officer in the custom house,” a piece of humour which does little credit to Pope’s heart, and must excite the disapprobation of every benevolent mind. Pope, however, left Dennis’s objections to Cato in their full force, “and therefore discovered more desire of vexing the critic, than of defending the poet. Addison, who was no stranger to the world,” says Dr. Johnson, “probably saw the selfishness of Pope’s friendship; and resolving that he should have the consequences of his officiousness to himself, informed Dennis by Steele, that he was sorry for the insult; and that whenever he should think fit to answer his remarks, he would do it in a manner to which nothing could be objected.” Mr. Dennis, having been successful in displaying the faults of Cato, with regard to the probability of the action, and the reasonableness of the plan, proceeded, in the pride of conquest, to attack the sentiments of the play in seven letters. But here his strictures are, in general, trifling and insignificant; containing such petty cavils, and minute objections, as the malignity of criticism, united with some degree of sagacity, might be capable of exercising against the most perfect productions of the human mind.

The relief which Mr. Dennis obtained by these publications, though considerable, was not permanent. Being much distressed very near the close of his life, it was proposed to act a play for his benefit, and Thomson, Mallet, Mr. Benjamin Martin, and Pope, took the lead upon the occasion. The play, which was “The Provoked Husband,” was represented at the Little Theatre in the Haymarket, December 18, 1733; and Pope wrote a prologue, which was spoken by Theophilus Cibber. Dennis had at this time become blind; Mr. Pope’s benevolence was not so pure as could be wished; for his prologue was throughout a sneer upon the poor old critic, who happily, either from vanity, or the decay of his intellects, did not perceive its tendency. Warburton styled it “benevolent irony.” Mr. Dennis survived this assistance only twenty days, dying on the 6th of January, 1733-4, in the seventyseventh year of his age.

, a young man who acquired a short-lived reputation as a poet, was born in the south of Ireland, January 1775. His father, who was a schoolmaster at Ennis for some years, is said to have employed his son, when only in his ninth year, in the situation of Greek and Latin assistant at his own school, and to increase the wonder, we are told time he had written as much genuine poetry at ten, as either Cowley, Milton, or Pope had produced at nearly double that age. At ten, too, he. ran away to Dublin, where he acquired the patronage of a Dr. Houlton, in whose house he resided about ten weeks, giving astonishing proofs of his acquaintance with the Greek and Roman classics, and producing poetical translations ad aperturam libri. This gentleman, when obliged himself to leave Dublin, gave him some money, which he soon spent, and wandered through the streets without a settled home, until he found an asylum with a scene-­painter belonging to the theatre. The scene-painter introduced him to the players, and some attempts were laudably made by them to place him in a situation where he might prosecute his studies; but the depravity of his disposition appears to have been as early wonderful as his poetical talents. The latter, however, procured him one patron after another, all of whom he disgusted by his ingratitude and licentious conduct. At length, abandoned by every person of character, he entered as a private in the 108th regiment, commanded by the earl of Granard, and behaving with some decency under the check of military discipline, he was progressively advanced to the ranks of corporal and serjeant; and in September 1794, in the nineteenth year of his age, embarked with the regiment for England. He accompanied it afterwards abroad in the expedition under the earl of Moira, and appears to have behaved so well, that his lordship promoted him to a second-lieutenancy in the waggon corps, but on the reduction of this army, Dermody was put on the half-pay list.

Such are the outlines of a life which his biographer has extended to two volumes, of considerable size, without affording a period or an incident on which the mind can dwell with any pleasure. The whole, indeed, forms a most disgusting picture of early and uniform depravity, a character wholly formed of shade, and comparable to nothing we remember. As a poet, Dermody cannot be allowed to rank very high. With a happy ear for versification, he gives us only common ideas and common images variously applied; whether he might have produced any work of a superior kind, had he been regular and studious, cannot now be ascertained. The early age at which he produced many of his pieces affords no ground of probability. If, according to his biographer, he wrote as well at the age of ten, as Cowley, Milton, or Pope, it is certain that he sunk as much below them afterwards.

, a learned Greek scholar of the sixteenth century, was born in the island of Corfou, of a catholic family. At the age of eight he was taken to Rome by John Lascaris, and placed with other eastern youths in the Greek college, which had been just established. Having made great progress in this language, cardinal Rodolphi gave him the care of his library, which office he held for fifteen years, and in that time he compiled an index to Eustathius’s commentary on Homer, for which pope Paul III. gave him a pension; and Paul IV. who continued this pension, made him corrector of the Greek Mss. in the Vatican. On the death of cardinal Rodolphi, Marc -Antony Colonna, who was afterwards cardinal, became scholar to Devarius for three years in the Greek language. He was afterwards patronized by the cardinal Farnese; and died in his service, about the end of the sixteenth century, in the seventieth year of his age. By order of pope Pius V. he translated the catechism of the council of Trent into Greek; but the work for which he is best known is entitled “De Particulis Graecae linguae liber particularis,” of which there have been many editions, the first published by his nephew, Peter Devarius, at Rome, in 1558, 4to, and reprinted at London, 1657, 12mo Amsterdam, 1700 and 1718, &c. &c.

After the king’s affairs were totally ruined, sir Kenelm found himself under a necessity of returning into England in order to compound for his estate. The parliament, however, did not judge it proper that he should remain here; and therefore not only ordered him to withdraw, but voted, that if he should afterwards at any time return, without leave of the house first obtained, he should lose both life and estate. Upon this he went again to France, where he was very kindly received by Henrietta Maria, dowager queen of England, to whom he had been for some time chancellor. He was sent by her not long after into Italy, and at first well received by Innocent X. but Wood says, behaved to the pope so haughtily, that he quickly lost his good opinion; and adds farther, that there was a suspicion of his being no faithful steward of the contributions raised in that part of the world for the assistance of the distressed catholics in England. After Cromwell had assumed the supreme power, sir Kenelm, who had then nothing to fear from the parliament, ventured to return home, and continued here a great part of 1655; when it has generally been supposed that he was embarked in the great design of reconciling the papists to the protector.

His poems, which are not numerous, are in the body of English poetry collected by Dr. Johnson. His “Essay on Translated Verse,” and his translation of “Horace’s Art of Poetry,” have great merit. Waller addressed a poem to his lordship upon the latter, when he was 75 years of age. *' In the writings of this nobleman we view,“says Fenton,” the image of a mind naturally serious and solid; richly furnished and adorned with all the ornaments of art and science; and those ornaments unaffectedly disposed in the most regular and elegant order. His imagination might probably have been more fruitful and sprightly, if his judgment had been less severe but that severity (delivered in a masculine, clear, succinct style) contributed to make him so eminent in the didactical manner, that no man, with justice, can affirm he was ever equalled by any of our nation, without confessing at the same time that he is inferior to none. In some other kinds of writing his genius seems to have wanted fire to attain the point of perfection; but who can attain it? He was a man of an amiable composition, as well as a good poet; as Pope, in his ‘Essay on Criticism,’ had testified in the following lines:

We must allow of Roscommon, what Fenton has not mentioned so distinctly as he ought, and, what is yet very much to his honour, that he is perhaps the only correct writer in verse before Addison; and that, if there are not so many or so great beauties in his compositions as in those of some contemporaries, there are at least fewer faults. Nor is this his highest praise; for Pope has celebrated him as the only moral writer of king Charles’s reign

, a diligent schoolmaster, was many years settled in Wapping, and is known by an useful “Spelling Book,” where, in imitation of his predecessors, he has favoured the public with a print of himself. He wrote besides, “The young Book-keeper’s Assistant,” 8vo. “The Schoolmaster’s Assistant,” 12mo; and 3. “Miscellaneous Arithmetic,” 12mo, all of them manytimes printed. He died Jan. 17, 1780. To this brief notice, from the last edition of this Dictionary, perhaps of little importance, we may add, that there was, about fifty or sixty years ago, a W. H. Dilworth, M. A. the author of many abridged Lives and Histories, price one shilling each, “adorned with cuts,” such as “The Life of Alexander Pope, esq. with the Secret History of Himself and the Noble Lords his patrons;” “The Life of Dean Swift, with a thousand agreeable incidents,” &c. &c. He appears to have been the legitimate successor of Robert Burton, and probably, like him, may one day be elevated from the hawker’s stall to the collector’s library.

, an heretic of the thirteenth century, was a disciple of Amauri or Almaric, who imbibed many errors from the study of Aristotle, and fell under the ecclesiastical censure of the second council of Paris. (See Amauri). The writings both of Amauri and Dinanto were condemned to be burned, which sentence was followed by a general prohibition of the use of the physical and metaphysical writings of Aristotle in the schools, by the synod of Paris, and afterwards, under pope Innocent III. by the council of the Laternu. Dinanto expressed the fundamental principle of his master in the following proposition, “God is the primary matter and substance of all things.” He composed a work entitled “Quaternarii,” with several other productions, which were chiefly designed to atfect and gain the multitude, in which he partly succeeded until he was obliged to save himself by flight.

, or Ding, a native of Mugello in Tuscany, was a very learned lawyer and professor of law at Bologna, in the thirteenth century, and indeed accounted the first man of his time for knowledge, eloquence, and style both of speaking and writing. Pope Boniface VIII. employed him in compiling the fourth book of the Decretals, called the Sextus. He died at Bologna in 1303, as it is said, of chagrin. He had entered into the church, and been disappointed of rising according to what he thought his deserts. Of his works, his “Commentarium in regulas juris Pontificii,” 8vo, was so valuable that Alciat reckoned it one of those books which a student ought to get by heart, a character which it ceased to support when Charles du Moulin pointed out a great many errors in it. His other publication is entitled “De glossis contrariis,” 2 vols. fol.

, a Polish historian, was born in Ml 5, at Brzeznich, a town in Poland, of which his father was governor. In his sixth year, his father being appointed governor of Korczyn, he was removed thither with the family, and began his education, which was continued in the different places of which his father was successively appointed governor, until he was sent to Cracow. Here and at other places he pursued his studies, with very little encouragement from his father, but found a friend in Zbigneus, bishop of Cracow, who was a patron of learned men. This prelate first placed him at the head of his chancery, after that of his house, and at last made him general manager of his affairs; and he acquitted himself so much to the satisfaction of the bishop, that on his death-bed he appointed him one of his executors. He had also ordained him priest at the age of twenty-five, and gave him some church preferment, particularly the living of St. Martin of Klobuczk, and a canonry of Cracow. He was afterwards promoted to be chanter, and treasurer of the church of Vissicza, canon of Sendomir, and got some other preferments less considerable. The only use he made of the wealth arising from these benefices, was to share it with poorer clergymen of talents and character;. or to bestow it on the poor, on the repairs of churches, and other pious purposes. Eugene IV. having appointed Zbigneus to the dignity of cardinal, and several impediments being thrown in the way of this preferment, Dlugoss went to Rome in 1449, and had these difficulties removed. Pope Nicholas V. employed him to carry the cardinal’s cap to the bishop, which he had the honour to put on his head in the cathedral of Cracovr, in the same year. In 1450 he took a journey to the land of Palestine, where he contemplated with veneration the places dignified by being the site of Scripture history. On his return to Poland, king Casimir IV. appointed him tutor to his sons, which office he filled for many years with great reputation. On the death of his early patron, cardinal Zbigneus, in April 1455, Dlugoss was accused by the brother of the deceased for having abused his confidence, a charge which he had little difficulty in repelling, but was less successful with the king, whose displeasure he incurred by espousing the cause of an ecclesiastic whom the pope had nominated bishop of Cracow, while the king had nominated another; and for this slight reason Dlugoss was exiled for the space of three years; at the end of which, however, he was recalled, and his majesty restored him to his favour, and not only consulted him on many public affairs of importance, but employed him to negociate in various parts of Europe, on matters respecting the interests of Poland. At length he was appointed archbishop of Leopold, but died before his consecration, May 29, 1480. His principal historical work is entitled “Historia Polonica,” the first volume of which was printed in 1615, fol. This edition, which is of rare occurrence, is one of the few scarce books which proceed from the private press of Herburt of Dobromil, It contains, however, only the first six books, bringing the history down to 1240; the rest remained in manuscript until 1711, when they were printed at Francfort, along with the preceding, under the title “J. Dlugossi historiie Polonicoe Hbri duodecim, &c.” This hrings the history down to 1444, but a continuation was published by J. G. Krause, which he called the thirteenth book, at Leipsic, 1712, folio, and which extends to 1480, the year of the author’s death. He is esteemed a very correct historian, although not free from the barbarism of his age. His other works are, 1. “Vita St. Stanislai episcopi et martyns,” Cracow, 1611 and 1666. 2. “Plocensium episcoporuin vita 1” which is inserted in “Stanislai Lubienski opera posthum^,” Antwerp, 1643, fol. 3.“Vitae episcoporum Postnajiiensium,” 1G'24, 4to and some other lives of bishops.

Lord Melcombe is allowed to have been generous, magnificent, and convivial, but more respected as a private gentleman than as a politician. In the one character he was free, easy, and engaging; in the other intriguing, close, and reserved. His reigning passion was to be well at court, and to this object he sacrificed every circumstance of his life. Lord Orford says of him that he was “ostentatious in his person, houses, and furniture, and wanted in his expences the taste he never wanted in his conversation. Pope and Churchill treated him more severely than he deserved, a fate that may attend a man of the greatest wit, when his parts are more suited to society than to composition. The verse remains, the bon-mots and sallies are forgotten.” He was handsome, and of a striking figure, but in his latter days was probably singular in his dress. Churchill ridicules his wig, and Hogarth has introduced it in one of his “orders of periwigs.” His patronage of learned men descended from Young, Thomson, and Glover, to the meaner political hirelings who frequented the prince’s court. And among his intimate friends, besides Young, Thomson, and Glover, were Fielding, Bentley, Voltaire, Lyttelton, lord Chesterfield, lord Peterborough, Dr. Gregory Sharpe, &c. and among his lower associates, Ralph, Paul Whitehead, and a Dr. Thomson, a physician without practice or manners, served to add to the hilarity of his table. Most of his biographers have reported that he was a single man, but he certainly was married, as in his letters he frequently speaks of Mrs. Dodington, whose heart was placed in an urn at the top of an obelisk which he erected at Hammersmith. When she died we know not, but as she left no family, he is reported to have used some singular expedients for procuring an heir, which were as unsuccessful as immoral and foolish. He bequeathed his whole property, a few legacies excepted, to the late Thomas Wyndham, esq. of Hammersmith. The mansion which he built at Eastbury came, as already observed in the note, to the marquis of Buckingham, and was taken down a few years ago. Part of the offices were left standing, and have been converted into a very convenient house by J. Wedgewood, esq. who purchased the estate of the marquis of Buckingham. His villa at Hammersmith became a few years ago the property of the margrave of Anspach.

index. Faulkner’s Hist, of Fulham. Park’s Royal and Noble Authors. Cumberland’s Life. Some account of his uncle, Knight’s Life ofColet. Hawkins’s Life of Johnson. Dodsley’s, Pcareh’s, and NiclioU's Poems. Bowles’s edition of Pope’s Works, Louoj^r’s Common-place li^ok, vol. 1. Cose’s Life of purity of his own character in the following terms: “It is no more fit for a judge to decline to give an account of his doings than for a Christian of his faith. God knoweth I have endeavoured always to keep a good conscience; for a troubled one who can bear? I have now sat in this court fifteen years, and I should know something. Surely, if I had gone in a mill so long, dust would cleave to my clothes. I am old, and have one foot in the grave; therefore I will look to the better part as near as 1 can. But omnia haberc in memoria, et in nullo errarc, divinum potius est quain human um.” He died Sept. 13, 1628, in the seventy-third year of his age, and was buried in the ambulatory before the door of the library, formerly called Lady Mary’s Chapel, in the cathedral church of Exeter. Within that library is a very sumptuous monument erected to his memory, containing his figure and that of his wife, cut in alabaster, under a stately arch supported by marble pillars. This learned judge, by his happy education, accompanied with excellent natural parts and unremitted industry, became so general a scholar, that it was said of him, that it was difficult to determine whether he were the better artist, divine, civil or common lawyer. Among his other studies, he was a great lover of antiquities, and attained to such an eminence of knowledge and skill in that department of literature, that he was regarded as one of the ablest members of the famous society of antiquaries, which may be said to have begun in 1571, but which more particularly flourished from 1590 to 1614. Rewrote, I. “The Lawyer’s Light; or, due direction for the study of the Law,” London, 1629, 4to. 2. “A complete Parson, or a description of advowsons and church livings, delivered in several readings, in an inn of chancery called the New Inn,” printed 1602, 1603, 1630, 4to. 3. “The History of the ancient and modern estate of the principality of Wales, duchy of Cornwall, and earldom of Chester,” 1630, 4to. 4. “The English Lawyer, a treatise describing a method for the managing of the Laws of this Land, and expressing the best qualities requisite in the student, practiser, judges, &c.” London, 1631, 4to. 5. “Opinion touching the antiquity, power, order, state, manner, persons, and proceedings, of the High Courts of Parliament in England,” London, 1658, 8vo. 6. “A Treatise of particular Estates,” London, 1677, duodecimo, printed at the end of the fourth edition of William Noy’s Works, entitled, “The Ground and Maxims of the Law.” 7. “A true representation of forepassed Parliaments to the view of the present times and posterity.” This still remains in manuscript. Sir John Doddridge also enlarged a book called “The Magazine of Honour,” London, 1642. 7'he same book was afterwards published under his name by the title of “The Law of Nobility and Peerage,” Lond. 16S7, 1658, 8vo. In the Collection of curious Discourses, written by eminent antiquaries, are two dissertations by our judge; one of which is on the dimensions of the land of England, and the other on the office and duty of heralds in this country. Mr. Bridgman, in his “Legal Bibliography,” informs us that many valuable works have been attributed to sir John Doddridge, which in their title-pages have borne the names of others. He mentions particularly Sheppard’s “Law of Common Assurances touching Deeds in general,” and “Wentworth’s office and dutie of Executors;” both which are said to have been written by Doddridge.

, an English poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Mansfield, in Nottinghamshire, in 1703. His father is said to have kept the tree-school at Mansfield, a situation in which it is natural to suppose he could have bestowed some education on his children, yet it is not easy to reconcile this with the servile track of life into which they were obliged to enter. He is described as a little deformed man, who, after having a large family by his first wife, married at the age of seventy-five a young girl of only seventeen years, by whom he had a child. Of his sons, A Ivory lived many years, and died in the service of the late sir George Saville; Isaac was for some time gardener to Mr. Allen, of Prior-park, and afterwards to lord Weymouth, at Long-leat. In these two families he spent fifty-two years of his life; and has the credit of being the projector of some of the beautiful plantations at both those seats. He retired from Long-leat at the age of seventy-eight, and died about three years after. There was a third, John, whose name with that of Alvory, and of the father, is among the subscribers to our poet’s first publication. James, who was twenty-two years younger than Robert, will come to be mentioned hereafter; when he was taken into partnership. How he passed the preceding part of his time is not known. Of Robert, nothing is now remembered in his native town, but a traditional story, that he was put apprentice to a stocking-weaver of that place, and that, being almost starved, he ran away, and was hired by a lady as her footman: this lady, it is added, observing that he employed his leisure hours in reading, gave him every encouragement; and soon after he wrote an entertainment, which was shewn to Pope and others. Part of this story is probable, but too much of his history is crowded into it. His first service was not that of a lady, nor was the entertainment (The Toy-shop) his first production.

Although he was probably not in many stations of the menial kind, it is certain that he was once footman to Charles Dartiquenave, (or, as spelt by Swift, Dartineuf,) esq. paymaster of the works, and the Darty who is noticed by Pope,

His next attempt was more successful than the publication or' his poems, and, considering the disadvantages of a life of servitude, more extraordinary; he wrote a dramatic piece, entitled “The Toy-shop,” the style of which discovers an improvement which to those who had just read “The Muse in Livery,” must have appeared wonderful. This the author determined to submit to Pope in manuscript. He tells us he had a great regard for that poet, before he had the honour of being known to him, and “it was a great mortification to him that he used to think himself too inconsiderable ever to merit his notice or esteem,. However, some time after I had wrote the Toy-shop, hoping there was something in it which might recommend me to him in a moral capacity, at least, though not in a poetical one, I sent it to him, and desired his opinion of it; expressing some doubt, that though I designed it for the stage, yet, unless its novelty would recommend it, I was afraid it would not bear a public representation, and therefore had not offered it to the actors.”

Pope’s answer to this application may appear in this place without impropriety, as it has escaped the collectors of his letter-;, and exhibits his kindness to unprotected genius in a very favourable light.

Pope accordingly recommended it to Mr. Rich, and ever after bestowed his “favour and acquaintance” on the author. The hint of this excellent satire, for it scarcely deserves the name of drama, was taken from Randolph’s “M use’s Looking-glass.” It was acted at Covent-garden theatre in 1735, and met with great success; but was yet more popular, when printed, being indeed much better calculated for the closet than the stage. There is an ease and elegance in the style which raise our opinion of Dodsfey’s natural talents; and so many circumstances of public and private absurdities are brought together, as to afford decisive proof that he had a mind far above his situation, and that with habits of attentive observation of life and manners, he cherished the justest moral feelings. Such was his situation, however, that for some time he was supposed to be only the nominal author of the “Toy-shop;” but when he asserted his claim, he became more noticed, and the theatre more easily accessible to his future dramatic attempts. The profits of his volume of poems, and the Toy-shop, enabled him to set up in business, and with much judgment he chose that of a bookseller, which liis friends might promote, and which might afford him leisure and opportunity to cultivate his talents. At what time he quitted service is not known, but he commenced the bookselling trade at a shop in Pall Mall, in 1735, and by Pope’s friendly interest, and his own humble and prudent behaviour, soon drew into his little premises such a society of men of genius, taste, and rank, as have seldom met. Many of these he afterwards had the honour to unite together in more than one scheme of literary partnership.

Almost from the commencement of trade, Dodsley became a speculator in various literary undertakings, either original or compiled. So rapid was his success, that before he had been three years in business, he became a purchaser of copyrights; and it is among the most striking of those occurrences which diversify the lives of men of literary eminence, that, in 1738, the truly illustrious Dr. Samuel Johnson was glad to sell his first original publication to humble Robert Dodsley, for the small sum of ten guineas. We find by Mr. Boswell’s very interesting account of this transaction, that Dodsley was the first to discover the merits of Johnson’s “London,” and was desirous to purchase an article of which as a tradesman he had not miscalculated the value. But before this time Dodsley’s shop must have been in considerable reputation, as in April 1737 he published Pope’s “Second Epistle of the Second Book of Horace,” and in the following month Pope assigned over to him the sole property of his “Letters,” and afterwards that of vols. V. and VI. of his Works, and some of his detached pieces. Not long after, Young and Akenside published their works at his shop, and as early as March 1738-9, he became a partner with some of his brethren in the copyright of established authors. The first of his literary schemes was a periodical journal, which appears to have escaped the researches of his biographers, entitled “The Public Register, or Weekly Magazine,” begun Jan. 3, 1741, each number of which consisted of sixteen 4to pages, handsomely printed, and was sold for three-pence. Although Dodsley appears to have lived on friendly terms with Cave, the printer, who referred Johnson to him as a lit publisher of the “London,” yet this Register was undoubtedly one of the many attempts made at that time to rival me uncommon and much envied success of the Gentleman’s Magazine, and like them was soon obliged to yield to the superior popularity of that valuable miscellany. Dodsley and Cave abused one another a little, as rival projectors, but were probably reconciled when the cause was removed. The contents of Dodsley’s “Public Register” were original letters and essays in prose and verse records of literature; the substance of the parliamentary debates, with news foreign and domestic, and advertisements relating to books. The original essays were contributed by his mends, and many of them probably by himself. It proceeded as far as the twenty-fourth number, when the editor thought proper to stop. He urges in his farewell address, “the additional expense he was at in stamping it, and the ungenerous usage he met with from one of the proprietors of u certain monthly pamphlet, who prevailed with most of the common newspapers not to advertise it.” In 1745, he wrote a little poetical piece called “Rex et Pontifcx,” which he meant as an attempt to introduce a new species of ^pantomime upon the stage. It was not, however, received by any of the theatres, and probably was considered only as a political effusion for a temporary purpose. In 1746, he projected another periodical work, entitled “The Museum, or the Literary and Historical Register,” published every fortnight, in an 8vo size. Of this concern he had only a fourth share, the rest being the property of Mess. Longman, Shewell, Hitch, and Rivington. It extended to three volumes, and contains a greater variety of original essays of real merit than any similar undertaking within our memory, nor will this be doubted, when it is added that among the contributors were Spence, Horace Walpole, the two Wartons, Akenside, Lowth, Smart, Gilbert Cooper, William Whitehead, Merrick, and Campbell. This last wrote those political papers which he afterwards collected, enlarged, and published under the title of “The Present State of Europe.”

In 1748 our author published a work of yet greater popularity and acknowledged value in the instruction of youth, feis “Preceptor,” to which some of the parties just mentioned contributed. Dr. Johnson furnished the Preface, and “The Vision of Theodore the Hermit.” In the be ginning of the following year, Dodsley purchased Johnson’s “Vanity of Human Wishes,” for the small sum of fifteen guineas, but Johnson reserved the right of printing one edition. It is a better proof of Dodsley’s enterprising Spirit that he was the first who suggested the scheme of the English Dictionary, upon which Dr. Johnson was at this time employed; and is supposed to have procured some hints from Pope, among whose friends a scheme of this kind had been long entertained. Pope, however, did not live to see the excellent Prospectus which Johnson published in 1747. In 1748, Dodsley collected together in one volume his dramatic pieces, under the modest title of “Trifles.” On the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, he wrote the “Triumph of Peace,” a masque, which was set to music by Dr. Arne, and performed at Drury-lane in 1748-9. In 1750 he published a small volume, unlike any of his former attempts, entitled “The Œconomy of Human Life, translated from an Indian manuscript, written by an ancient Bramin; to which is prefixed, an account of the manner in which the said manuscript was discovered. In a letter from an English Gentleman, now residing in China, to the earl of *****.” Whether from modesty, fear, or merely a trick of trade, Dodsley affected to be only the publisher of this work, and persisted in his disguise for some time. Conjecture gave it to the earl of Chesterfield, and not quite so absurdly as Mrs. Teresa Constantia Phillips complimented that nobleman on being author of the “Whole Duty of Man.” Chesterfield had a friendship for Dodsley, and would not contradict a report which rendered the sale of the “Œconomy” both rapid. and extensive. The critics, however, in the Monthly Keview, and Gentleman’s Magazine, were not to be deceived.

In the same year, Dodsley produced his tragedy of “Cleone,” at Covent-garden theatre. This is said to have been rejected by Garrick with some degree of contempt, principally because there was not a character in it adapted to the display of his talents; and when it was performed for the first time at the rival theatre, he endeavoured to diminish its attraction by appearing the same night in a new character at Drury-lane. The efforts of jealousy are sometimes so ridiculous, as to make it difficult to be believed that they are seriously intended. But notwithstanding this malicious opposition, Cleone was played with great success for numv nights, although the company at Covent- garden, with the exception of Mrs. Bellamy, were in no reputation as tragedians. How powerfully the author has contrived to excite the passions of terror and pity, was lately seen, when this tragedy was revived by Mrs. Siddons. Its effect was so painful, and indignation at the villainy of Glanville and Ragozin approached so near to abhorrence, that the play could not be endured. There are, indeed, in this piece, many highly-wrought scenes, and the madness of Cleone deserves to rank ^mong the most pathetic attempts to convey an idea of the ruins of an amiable and innocent mind. For Garrick’s opinion we can have little respect, and perhaps he was not sincere in Diving it. The prologue to Cleone was written by MehnoUi, and the epilogue by Shenstone. Dodsley omitted about thirty lines of the latter, and substituted twelve or fourteen of his own, but restored the epilogue as originally written, in the fourth edition, at which it arrived in less than a year. Such was the avidity of the public, occasioned probably in a great measure by the opposition given to the performance of the play, that two thousand copies were sold on the first day of publication. Pope, when very young, had attempted a tragedy on the same subject, which he afterwards burnt, as he informed Dodsley, when the latter sent him his Cleone, in its first state, requesting his advice. Pope encouraged him to bring it out, but wished he would extend the plan to the accustomed number of five acts. Dodsley acted with su r iicient caution in keeping his piece rather more than “ni:ie years,” and then submitted it to lord Chesterfield and other friends, who encouraged him to offer it to the sta^e, and supported it when produced. Dr. Johnson was likewise among those who praised its pathetic effect, and declared that “if Otway had written it, no other of his pieces would have been remembered.” Dodsley, to whom this was told, said very justly, that “it was too much.”

After the incidental notices taken of his different writings in this sketch of his life, little remains to be added as to their general character. As a poet, if poets are classed by rigorous examination, he will not be able to maintain a very elevated rank. His “Agriculture” was probably intended as the concentration of his powers, but the subject had not been for many years of town-life very familiar to him, and had he been more conversant in rural œconomy, he could not give dignity to terms and precepts which are neither intelligible nor just when translated from the homely language of the farm and the cottage. Commerce and the Arts, had he pursued his plan, were more capable of poetical illustration, but it may be doubted whether they were not as much above his powers, as the other is beneath the flights of the heroic muse. The “Art of Preaching” shows that he had not studied Pope’s versification in vain. It is not, however, so strictly an imitation of Horace’s Art of Poetry, which probably he could not read, as of Pope’s manner of modernizing satire. It teaches no art, but that which is despicable, the art of casting unmerited obloquy on the clergy.

, a very able mineralogist, was born in Dauphiny, June 24, 1750. Of his early history our authorities give but a confused account. He was inspector of the mines, and commander of the order of Malta. He first went to sea at the age of eighteen, when being insulted by one of his companions, who was on board the same ship, he fought and killed him; for which, on his return to Malta, he was sentenced to death by the chapter of the order. The grand-master, however, granted him his pardon, but as it was necessary that it should be confirmed by the pope, and as his holiness was at that time out of humour with the knights, he remained inflexible, and Dolomieu was confined for nine months in a dungeon in the island. He afterwards resumed his studies, and accompanied the regiment of carabineers in which he was an officer. At Metz he took his first lessons in chemistry and natural history, and his progress became so rapid, that the academy of sciences granted him the title of corresponding member, which favour attached him entirely to natural philosophy. He then quitted the service, and almost immediately began his travels through Sicily, which produced “Voyage aux Isles de Lipari,” 1783, 8vo; a very interesting account of these volcanic isles, and forming very useful materials for a history of volcanoes. In the same year he published “Memoire sur le tremblemens de terre de la Calabre in 1783,” 8vo, which the following year was translated into Italian; and in 1788, “Memoire sur les isles Ponces, et Catalogue raisonne de PEtna,” 8vo.

Domenichino was made the chief architect of the apostolical palace by pope Gregory XV. for his great skill in that art. He was likewise very well versed in the theory of music, but not successful in the practice. He loved solitude; and it was observed, that, as he went along the streets, he took notice of the actions of private persons he met, and often designed something in his pocket-book. He was of a mild temper and obliging carriage, yet had the misfortune to find enemies in all places wherever he came. At Naples, particularly, he was so ill treated by those of his own profession, that, having agreed among themselves to disparage all his works, they would hardly allow him to be a tolerable master: and they were not content with having frighted him for some time from that city, but afterwards, upon his return thither, never left persecuting him, till by their tricks and vexations they had wearied him out of his life. He died in 1641, not without the suspicion of poison.

After establishing this important order, St Dominic, who had deservedly become a favourite at the court of Home, was detained for several months to preach in that city and by his advice the pope created the new office, already mentioned, that of master of the sacred palace, who is by virtue of this office the pope’s domestic theologian or chaplain; and St. Dominic was appointed to it. It has ever since been held by one of his order. The rest of his history at Rome consists of his miracles, and may well be spared. In 1218 he took a journey from Rome through Languedoc into Spain, and founded two convents; thence he went in 1219 to Toulouse and Paris, at which last place he founded his convent in St. James’s-street, whence his order were called Jacobins, and inhabited a house since memorable in the history of the French revolution. After this, and the foundation of other convents, he arrived at Bologna, where he principally resided during the remainder of his life, which ended August 6, 1221. He was canonized by pope Gregory IX. in 1234.

When Bedell returned to England, Dominis came over with him, and was at first received by the English clergy with all possible marks of respect. Here he preached and wrote against the Romish religion, and the king gave him the deanery of Windsor, the mastership of the Savoy, and the rich living of West Ildesley in Berkshire. De Dominis’s view seems to have been to reunite the Romish and English churches, which he thought might easily be effected, by reforming some abuses and superstitions in the former; “and then,” Grotius says, “he imagined, the religion of protestants and catholics would be the same.” After he had staid in England some years, he was made to believe, upon the promotion of pope Gregory XIV. who had been his school-fellow and an old acquaintance, that the pope intended to give him a cardinal’s hat, and to make use of him in all affairs; so that he fancied he should be the instrument of a great reformation in the church. This snare wa* laid for him chiefly by the artifice of Gondemar, the Spanish ambassador; and his own ambition and vanity (of both which he had a share) made him easily fall into it. Accordingly he returned to Rome in 1622, where he abjured his errors in a very solemn manner. He was at first, it is said, well received by the pope himself; but happening to say of cardinal Bellarmine, who had written against him, that he had not answered his arguments, he was complained of to the pope, as if he had been still of the same mind as when he published his books. He excused himself, and said, that though Bellarmine had not answered his arguments, yet he did not say they were unanswerable; and he offered to answer them himself, if they would allow him time for it. This imprudent way of talking, together with the discovery of a correspondence which he held with some protestants, furnished a sufficient plea for seizing him; and he was thrown into prison, where he died in 1625. It was discovered after his death, that his opinions were not agreeable to the doctrine of the church of Rome; upon which his corpse was dug up, and burnt with his writings in Flora’s Field, by a decree of the inquisition.

, or Donato, one of the principal revivers of sculpture in Italy, of an obscure family at Florence, was born in 1383. He learned design under Lorenzo de Bicci, and abandoning the old dry manner, he was the first who gave his works the grace and freedom of the productions of ancient Greece and Rome; and Cosmo de Medicis employed him on a tomb for pope John XXIII. and in other works, both public and private. Cosmo also availed himself of his taste and judgment in forming those grand collections, which gave celebrity to Florence as the parent of modern art. Amongst his performances in that city are his Judith and Holofernes in bronze, his Annunciation, his St. George and St. Mark, and his Zuccone, in one of the niches of the Campanile at Florence; all of which are as perfect as the narrow principles upon which the art was then conducted would allow. To these we may add another excellent performance, his equestrian statue of bronze at Padua, to the honour of their general Gallamalata. Conscious of the value of his performances, he exclaimed to a Genoese merchant, who had bespoke a head, and estimated it by the number of days which it had employed the artist, “this man better knows how to bargain for beans than for statues he shall not have my head” and then dashed it to pieces yet no man less regarded money than Donatello. Cosmo at his death having recommended him to his son, the latter gave him an estate; but in a little while Donatello, who began to be plagued with his farmers and agents, begged his benefactor to take it again, as he did not like the trouble of it. The gift was resumed, and a weekly pension of the same value assigned to the artist. He had no notion of hoarding; but it is said that he deposited what he received in a basket, suspended from a ceiling, from which his friends and workpeople might supply themselves at their pleasure. He died in 1466, at the age of 83, and was buried in the church of St. Lorenzo, near his friend Cosmo, that, as he expressed himself, “his soul having been with him when living, their bodies might be near each other when dead.” He left a son, named “Simon,” who adopted his manner, and acquired reputation.