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

Some years afterwards, on the death of Dr. White, the magistrates once more appointed Dr. Cullen to give lectures on the theory of physic in his stead. And it was on that occasion Dr. Cullen thought it expedient to resign the chemical chair in favour of Dr. Black, his former pupil, whose talents in that department of science were then well known, and who filled the chair till his death with great satisfaction to the public. Soon after, on the death of Dr. Rutherford, who for many years had given lectures with applause on the practice of physic, Dr. John Gregory having become a candidate for this place along with Dr. Cullen, a sort of compromise took place between them, by which they agreed each to give lectures, alternately, on the theory and on the practice of physic during their joint lives, the longest survivor being allowed to hold either of the classes he should incline. In consequence of this agreement, Dr. Cullen delivered the first course of lectures on the practice of physic, in winter 176G; and Dr. Gregorysucceeded him in that branch the following year. Never, perhaps, did a literary arrangement take place, tli*t could have proved more beneficial to the students than this. Both these men possessed great talents, though of a kind extremely dissimilar. Both of them had certain failings or defects, which the other was aware of, and counteracted. Each of them knew and respected the talents of the other. They co-operated, therefore, in the happiest manner, to enlarge the understanding, and to forward the pursuits of their pupils. Unfortunately this arrangement was soon destroyed, by the unexpected death of Dr. Gregory, who was cut off in the flower of life by a sudden and unforeseen event After this time, Culleu continued to give lectures on the practice of physic till a few months before his death, which happened on the 5th of February, 1790, in the seventy-seventh year of his age.

Although much of the character of this learned and amiable man may be collected from the preceding narrative, yet the following circumstances are too remarkable to be omitted. In his lectures Dr. Cullen never attempted to read. They were delivered viva voce, without having been previously put into writing, or thrown into any particular arrangement. The vigour of his mind was such, that nothing more was necessary than a few short notes before him, merely to prevent him from varying from the general order he had been accustomed to observe. This gave to his discourses an ease, a vivacity, a variety, and a force, that are rarely to be met with in academical discourses. His lectures, by consequence, upon the same subject, were never exactly the same. Their general tenor indeed was not much varied; but the particular illustrations were always new, well suited to the circumstances that attracted the general attention of the day, and were delivered in the particular way that accorded with the cast of mind the prelector found himself in at the time. To these circumstances must be ascribed that energetic artless elocution, which rendered his lectures so generally captivating to his hearers. Even those who could not follow him in those extensive views his penetrating mind glanced at, or who were not able to understand those apt allusions to collateral objects, he could only rapidly point at as he went along, could not help being warmed in some measure by the vivacity of his manner. But to those who could follow him in his rapid career, the ideas he suggested were so nurnerous; the views he laid open were so extensive; and the objects to be attained were so important, that every active faculty of the mind was roused; and such an ardour of enthusiasm was excited in the prosecution of study, as appeared to he inexplicable to those who were merely unconcerned spectators. In consequence of this unshackled freedom in the composition and delivery of his lectures, every circumstance was in the nicest unison with the tone of voice, and expression of countenance, which the particular cast of mind he was in at the time inspired. Was he joyous, all the figures introduced for illustration were fitted to excite hilarity and good humour: was he grave, the objects brought under view were of a nature more solemn and grand; and was he peevish, there was a peculiarity of manner, in thought, in word, and in action, which produced a most striking and interesting effect. The languor of a nerveless uniformity was never experienced, nor did an abortive attempt to excite emotions that the speaker himself could not at the time feel, ever produce those discordant ideas which prove disgusting and unpleasing.

It would seem as if Dr. Cullen had considered the proper business of a preceptor to be that of putting his pupils into a proper train of study, so as to enable them to prosecute those studies at a future period, and to carry them on much farther than the short time allowed for academical prelections would admit. He did not, therefore, so much strive to make those who attended his lectures deeply versed in the particular details of objects, as to give them a general view of the whole subject; to shew what had been already attained respecting it; to point out what remained yet to be discovered; and to put them into a train of study that should enable them at a future period to remove those difficulties that had hitherto obstructed our progress; and thus to advance of themselves to farther and farther degrees of perfection. If these were his views, nothing could be more happily adapted to them than the mode he invariably pursued. He first drew, with the striking touches of a master, a rapid and general outline of the subject, by which the whole figure was seen at once to start boldly from the canvas, distinct in all its parts, and unmixed with any other object. He then began anew to retrace the picture, to touch up the lesser parts, and to finish the whole in as perfect a manner as the state of wur knowledge at the time would permit. Where materials were wanting, the picture there continued to remain imperfect. The wants were thus rendered obvious; and the means of supplying these were pointed out with the most careful discrimination. The student, whenever he looked back to the subject, perceived the defects; and his hopes being awakened, he felt an irresistible impulse to explore that hitherto untrodden path which had been pointed out to him, and fill up the chasm which still remained. Thus were the active faculties of the mind most powerfully excited; and instead of labouring himself to supply deficiencies that far exceeded the power of any one man to accomplish, he set thousands at work to fulfil the task, and put them into a train of going on with it.

It was to these talents, and to this mode of applying them, that Dr. Cullen owed his celebrity as a professor; and it was in this manner that he has perhaps done more towards the advancement of science than any other man of his time, though many individuals might perhaps be found who were more deeply versed in the particular departments he taught than he himself was. Chemistry, which was before his time a most disgusting pursuit, was by him rendered a study so pleasing, so easy, and so attractive, that it is now prosecuted by numbers as an Agreeable recreation, who but for the lights that were thrown upon it by Cullen and his pupils, would never have thought of engaging in it at all.

According to a man who knew him well, there were three things which eminently distinguished Culien as a professor. “The energy of his mind, by which he viewed every subject with ardour, and combined it immediately with the whole of his knowledge. The scientific arrangement which he gave to his subject, by which there was a hicidus ordo to the dullest scholar. He was the first person in this country who made chemistry cease to be a chaos. A wonderful art ftf interesting the students in every thing which he taught, and of raising an emulative enthusiasm among them.”

For some years before Dr. Cullen’s death, his friends perceived a sensible decline of that ardour and energy of mind which so strongly characterised him at a former period. Strangers who had never seen him before, could not be sensible of this change; nor did any marked decline in him strike them; for his natural vivacity still was such as might pass in general as the unabated vigour of one in prime of life. Yet then, though his vigour of body and mind were greater than others of his own age, it should never be forgot that the vigour of old age is but feeble, and the utmost energy of senility bears no resemblance to that gigantic ardour which characterises the man of genius in the prime of life. Cullen to the last was great; but how different from what he had been, those alone could tell who had an opportunity of knowing him in both situations, and who had at the same time not an opportunity of perceiving the change imperceptibly advance upon him, during the lapse of a continued intercourse.

Dr. Cuilen’s external appearance, though striking, and not unpleasing, was not elegant. His countenance was expressive, and his eye in particular remarkably lively, and at times wonderfully penetrating. In his person he was tall and thin, stooping very much. When he walked, he had a contemplative look, and did not seem much to regard the objects around him.

Dr. Cuilen’s writings are noticeable rather from their importance than number. We have mentioned that he never wrote his lectures. Copies of them, however, were taken in short-hand, and lent out to such students as wished to make transcripts. Finding on one occasion that his lectures on the materia medica were printing, he obtained an injunction against their being issued until he had corrected them; and they were permitted to appear in 1772. In 1789 he gave an enlarged and improved edition of them, in 2 vols. 4to. Fearing a similar fate to his “Lectures on the Practice of Medicine,” he published them in 1784, in 4 vols. 8vo, under the title of “First Lines.” But his most esteemed work is his “Synopsis Nosologiae Practicte,” in 2 vols. 8vo, which has passed through several editions; the fourth, published in 1785, contains his last corrections. The first volume contains the nosologies of Sauvages, Linnceus, Vogel, Sagar, and Macbride; the second his own, manifestly an improvement on those of his precursors. A small publication concerning the recovery of persons drowned, and seemingly dead, completes the works of this eminent professor.

, an accomplished antiquary, descended from a family seated in Suffolk early in the fifteenth century, and at Hawsted in that county in 1656, of which latter place he has himself been the historian, was born in 1733; educated at Catherine-hall, Cambridge, of which society he was afterwards fellow; and obtained the first senior bachelor’s dissertation prize in 1758. In April 1762 he was presented to the rectory of Hawsted, in Suffolk, by his father, who died in 1774; as did his mother in 1784. In March 1774, he became F. S. A.; in December that year he was instituted to the vicarage of Great Thurlow, in the same county, on the presentation of his brother-in-law, the late Henry Vernon, esq.; and in March 1775 was elected F. R. S. His admirable History of the Parish of Hawsted (of which he was lord and patron), and Hardwick House, a perfect model for every work of the same nature, was originally published as the twenty-third number of the “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica,” and has in the present year (1813) been again offered to the public in a superior style of typography, with the addition of seven new plates.

What collections sir John Cullutn possessed of his own and Mr. Thomas Martin’s, for the county of Suffolk, may be seen in Mr. Cough’s “Anecdotes of British Topography,” vol. II. pp. 242, 247. Besides a variety of notes taken in his tours about England, he communicated to the Gentleman’s Magazine: Observations on Cedars, vol. XLIX. p. 138, and on Yew-trees in Church-yards, ib. 578; to the Phil. Trans, vol. LXXIV. an Account of an Extraordinary Frost; and to the Antiquarian Repertory, No. 32, an Account of St. Mary’s church at Bury. He also revised the second edition, 1771, of the description of that ancient town.

That sir John Cullum was a profound antiquary, a good natural historian, and an elegant scholar, the “History of Hawsted” sufficiently evinces. That he most punctually and conscientiously discharged the proper duties of his profession as a divine, has been testified by the grateful recollection of his parishioners. His discourses in the pulpit were plain, unaffected, and rarely in any degree controversial; adapted to the village congregation which he gladdened by residing very near them. His attention to their truest interest was unremitted, and his example their best guide. His friendships in private life were amiable; and in his general commerce with the world, the uniform placidity of his manners, and his extensive literary acquirements, secured to him universal esteem. He was among the most valued correspondents of Mr. Gough, who sincerely lamented his loss. A specimen of his familiar letters will be found in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1797, vol. LXVII. p. 995.

Sir John Cullum died Oct. 9, 1785, in the fifty-second year of his age; and was hurled (according to the express direction of his will, dated Dec. 1, 1784), in the churchyard at Hawsted, under the great stone that lies at the north door of the church. His relict, dame Peggy Cullum, the daughter of Daniel Bisson, esq. of West Ham, died Aug. 2, 1810, aged seventy-eight. Dying without issue, the title devolved on his brother, now sir ThomasGery Cullum, bart.

, student, as he calls himself, in physic and astrology, was born in London, Oct. 18, 1616. He was the son of a clergyman, by whom he was sent, after receiving a preparatory education, to the university of Cambridge, at the age of eighteen. There making but a short stay, he was put apprentice to an apothecary, under whom he appears to have acquired a competent knowledge of the materia medica, and of the method of preparing and compounding medicines. On completing the term of his apprenticeship, he came to London, and settled in Spital-fields about 1642. By the whole tenor of his writings we find he joined, or at least favoured the Puritans, and those who were engaged in those unhappy times in overturning the constitution of the country. But his warfare was with the college of physicians, whom he accused of craft and ignorance. Like the popish clergy, he says they endeavoured to keep the people in ignorance of what might be useful either in preserving or restoring health. To counteract their endeavours, he published, in 1649, a translation of the “Dispensary of the College of Physicians,” in small 4to, adding to the account of each drug and preparation a list of their supposed virtues, and of the complaints in which they were usually given. He also published an “Herbal,” which has passed through several editions, and is still in repute as a sort of family guide. He tells in this book under what planet the plants are to be gathered, which he thinks essential in preserving their virtues; but Dr. Pulteney says his descriptions of common plants are drawn up with a clearness and distinction that would not have disgraced a better pen. He intended to treat of the diseases incident to men at the different periods of their lives, and as a beginning, gave a directory to midwives, on the method of insuring a healthy progeny, and then of the management of new-born children. Though this book is of very small value, it passed through many editions. He died at his house in Spital-fields, Jan. 10, 1653-4.

, second son of sir Thomas Culpeper of Hollingbourne, in Kent, knight, was born in 1636, and entered a commoner of University college, Oxford, in the beginning of 1640, and was created B. A. in 1643. He afterwards travelled, and on his return was elected probationer fellow of All Souls’ college, but soon retired to his estate in Kent, and after the restoration received the honour of knighthood. When he died is not ascertained, but probably it was about the end of the seventeenth century. He wrote: 1. “Moral Discourses and Essays upon several subjects,” Lond. 1655, 8vo. 2. “Considerations touching Marriage,” 4to. 3. “A Discourse shewing the many advantages, which will accrue to this kingdom by the abatement of usury. Together with the absolute necessity of reducing interest of money to the lowest rate it bears in other countries,” ibid. 1668, 4to. This occasioned a short controversy, in consequence of which sir Thomas wrote, 4. “The necessity of abating Usury, re-asserted,” ibid. 1670, 4to. 5. “Brief Survey of the growth of Usury in England, with the mischiefs attending it,” ibid. 1671, 4to. 6. “Humble proposal for the relief of Debtors, and speedy payment of their Creditors,” ibid. 1671, 4to. 7. “Several Objections against the Reducement of Interest, propounded in a letter, with the answer thereto,” ibid. 1671, 4to. He also wrote a preface to “A Tract against the high rate of Usury, presented to the parliament in 1623,” and reprinted by him in 1668: it was originally written by his father, sir Thomas Culpeper, who died in 1661, and appears to have bequeathed to his son his sentiments on usury, and the necessity of adjusting the interest of money on a new rate.

, a very learned divine, and bishop of Peterborough, the son of an honest citizen of London, who by his industry acquired a competent, though not a great fortune, was born in the parish of St. Anne, near Aldersgate, July 15th, 1632. He was educated at St. Paul’s school, under the care of Mr. John Langley, and was moved from thence to Magdalen-college, in Cambridge, probably in 1649, where he was contemporary with some very worthy and learned persons; such as Dr. Hezekiah Burton, his intimate friend and acquaintance, a very learned and pious divine; Dr. Hollings, an eminent physician at Shrewsbury; sir Samuel Moreland, admired for his skill in the mathematics; the celebrated Mr. Pepys, secretary to the admiralty; and the lord keeper Bridgeman, to whom himself, and his friend Dr. Burton, were chaplains at the same time. He was very remarkable, while fellow of his college, for his diligent application to his studies, as well as for the unaffected piety and unblemished probity of his life. He took his degree of B. A. in 1653, and in 1656 he became M. A. at which time he had thoughts of applying himself to physic, which he actually studied for some time. He was incorporated M. A. in the university of Oxford, July 14th, 1657, and went out B. D. at a public commencement at his own university, A. D. 1663, with universal applause. His first preferment was the rectory of Brampton, in the deanery of Haddon, in the archdeaconry and county of Northampton, which was given him by sir John Norwich, a gentleman who descended of a most ancient and noble family, and was advanced to the dignity of a baronet by king Charles the First. Mr. Cumberland was admitted December 3d, 1658, upon the demise of the reverend Mr. John Ward; and after the restoration, having never had the least scruple to the authority of the church, he had a legal institution, and read the Thirty-nine Articles, as directed by law, November 24th, 1661, and was the same year appointed one of the twelve preachers in the university of Cambridge. This, however, was a temporary avocation only, owing to the high character he had raised by the masterly manner in which he had performed all academical exercises, and from which he quickly returned to the duties of his parochial charge. In this rural retirement he minded little else than the duties of his function, and his studies. His relaxations from these were very few, besides his journies to Cambridge, which he made frequently, to preserve a correspondence with his learned acquaintance in that place. Here he might probably have remained during the course of his whole life, if his intimate friend and kind benefactor, sir Orlando Bridgeman, upon his receiving the seals in 1667, had not sent for him up to London, made him his chaplain, and soon after bestowed upon him the living of Alhallows, in Stamford. He discharged the functions of his ministry in that great town with indefatigable diligence; for, besides the duties incumbent upon him by his parochial charge, he accepted of the weekly lecture, and then preached three times every week in the same church, and at the same time cultivated his philosophical, mathematical, and philological studies. He gave a noble proof of this, and one which equally demonstrated the soundness of his morals and the solidity of his parts, in publishing his work “De Legibus Naturae Disquisitio philosophica,” Lond. 1672, 4to, written while he was chaplain to sir Orlando Bridgeman, to whom it was dedicated, and there is prefixed to it a short preface to the reader, by the author’s friend and fellow chaplain to the lord-keeper, Dr. Hezekiah Burton. Dr. Cumberland being at a distance from the press when this book was published, it came into the world very incorrectly printed, and in subsequent editions these faults were multiplied in a very surprizing manner. We may hence form an idea of the excellency of a work that could, notwithstanding, support its author’s reputation both at home and abroad, and be constantly esteemed one of the best performances that ever appeared, and that too upon one of the nicest and most important subjects. Mr. Payne says very justly, that it was one of the first pieces written in a demonstrative way on a moral subject, and at the same time the most perfect. It is indeed on all hands admitted, that Hobbes was never so closely handled, or his notions so thoroughly sifted, as by Dr. Cumberland. He has, however, taken a new road, very different from Grotius, Puffendorff, and other writers, more difficult, and less entertaining indeed, but at the same time much more convincing. It was desired that a piece of such general utility should be made better known by being put into an easier method, and translated into the English language. This the author would not oppose, though he did not undertake it; being very sensible that the obscurity complained of by some, was really in the subject itself, and would be found so by those who meddled with it. The project, however, was pursued by James Tyrrel, esq. grandson to the famous archbishop Usher, who published his performance under the following title: “A brief Disquisition of the Law of Nature, according to the principles and method laid down in the reverend Dr. Cumberland’s (now lord bishop of Peterburgh’s) Latin treatise on that subject, &c.” London, 1692, 8vo. Mr. Payne had also an intention to have translated it, but was anticipated by the rev. John Maxwell, in a translation published at London, 1727, 4to; and in 1750 appeared a third translation by the rev. John Towers, D. D. prebendary of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, 4to, Dublin, with large explanatory notes, &c. In 1744, Barbeyrac published a French translation.

The high fame and repeated praises of this work did not divert the author from his studies or his duties; and in his station of a private clergyman, so great was his reputation, that he was importuned by the university, and by other acquaintance, to take upon him the weighty exercise of responding at the public commencement. Nothing but the earnest solicitation of his friends could have prevailed with a man void not only of ambition, but of even the desire of applause, to appear so publicly. This he did in 1680, in so masterly a manner, as to be remembered for many years after. The next specimen of his abilities was his “Essay on Jewish Measures and Weights,” 1686, 8vo, a work not only highly useful in its nature, but very much wanted, and was therefore received with the highest applause by the best judges, who were equally pleased with the method and matter, as well as the manner and conciseness, of the performance. It was afterwards reprinted, and will continue to support the reputation of its author, as long as this kind of literature is either en-, couraged or understood. His sincere attachment to the protestant religion made him very apprehensive of its danger; and the melancholy prospect of affairs in the reign of king James made so deep an impression on him as to affect his health. After the revolution he appears to have entertained no thoughts of soliciting for better preferment; and it was, therefore, a greater surprize to himself than to any body else, when walking after his usual manner, on a post-day, to the coffee-house, he read there in a newspaper, that one Dr. Cumberland, of Stamford, was named to the bishopric of Peterborough, This piece of intelligence, however, proved true, and he had the singular satisfaction of finding himself raised to a bishopric, not only without pains or anxiety, but without having so much as sought for it; but at that time it was necessary to the establishment of the new government, that men who were to be raised to these high stations in the church, should be such only as had been most eminent for their learning, most exemplary in their lives, and firmest to the protestant interest; and whilst these qualifications were only considered, the king, who in two years’ time had appointed no less than fifteen bishops of the above character, was told that Dr. Cumberland was the fittest man he could nominate to the bishopric of Peterborough. He was elected in the room of Dr. Thomas White, who refused the new oaths May 15th; was consecrated with other bishops, July 5th, and enthroned September 12th, 1691, in the cathedral of Peterborough. He now applied himself to the work of a bishop, making no omissions to consult his own ease, or to spare his pains; and the desires of his mind, that all under him should do their duty, were earnest and sincere. His composition had no alloy of vain-glory. He never did any thing to court applause, or gain the praise of men. He never acted a part, never put on a mask. His tongue and heart always went together. If he ran into any extreme, it was the excess of humility; he lived with the simplicity and plainness of a primitive bishop, conversed and looked like a private man, hardly maintaining what the world calls the dignity of his character. He used hospitality without grudging; no man’s house was more open to his friends, and the ease and freedom with which they always found themselves entertained, was peculiar to it. The poor had substantial relief at his door, and his neighbours and acquaintance a hearty welcome to his table, after the plentiful and plain manner in which he lived. Every thing in his house served for friendly entertainment, nothing for luxury or pomp. His desire was to make every body easy, and to do them good. He dispensed with a liberal hand, and in the most private and delicate manner, to the necessities of others. His speeches to the clergy at his visitations, and his exhortations to the catechumens before his confirmations, though they had not the embellishments of oratory, yet they were fervent expressions of the inward desires of his soul to do what good he was able, and to excite others to be influenced by it; the pious breathings of a plain and good mind. On all occasions he treated his clergy with singular ta and indulgence. An expression that often came from him, was, “I love always to make my clergy easy.” This was his rule in all applications made to him by them, and if he erred, it was always on this side. When the duties of his office required it, he never spared himself. To the last month of his life it was impossible to dissuade him from undertaking fatigues that every body about him feared were superior to his strength. He was inflexible to their intreaties, and his answer and resolution was, “I will do my duty as long as I can.” He had acted by a maxim like this in his vigour. When his friends represented to him, that by his studies and labours he would injure his health, his usual reply was, “A man had better wear out than rust out.” The last time he visited his diocese, he was in the eightieth year of his age; and at his next triennial, when he was in the eighty-third year of his age, it was with the utmost difficulty that he could be dissuaded from undertaking again the visitation of his diocese. To draw the clergy nearer than the usual decanal meetings, to make his visitations easier to himself, was a thing he would not hear of. Such were the public acts of this great prelate in the discharge of his duty as a father of the church. In respect to his temporal concerns, and his management of the revenue arising from his see, he was not less liberal and munificent. His natural parts were not quick, but strong and retentive. He was a perfect master of every subject he studied. Eyery thing he read staid with him. The impressions on his mind were some time in forming, but they were clear, distinct, and durable. The things he had chiefly studied, were researches into the most ancient times; mathematics in all its parts and the Scripture in its original languages but he was also thoroughly acquainted with all the branches of philosophy, medicine, and anatomy, and was a good classical scholar. He was so thoroughly conversant in Scripture, that no difficult passage ever occurred, either occasionally, or in reading, but he could readily give the meaning of it, and the several interpretations, without needing to consult his books. He sometimes had thoughts of writing an exposition of the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, with a view to set the doctrine of justification in a light very different from that in which it has been hitherto considered by most divines, but what that light was we are not told. One of his chief objects was the examination of Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, about which the greatest men had been most mistaken, and in relation to which none had entered into so strict an examination as our learned prelate thought it deserved. He spent many years in these speculations; for he began to write several years before the revolution, and he continued improving his design down to 1702. Jt may be justly wondered, that, after taking so mnch pains, and carrying a work of such difficulty to so high a degree of perfection, he should never judge it expedient to publish it; for though his bookseller refused to print the first part at a critical season, yet afterwards both might have seen the light; and for this the most probable reason that can be assigned is, that thorough dislike he had to controversy. His son-in-law, however, the rev. Mr. Payne, has done justice to his memory, and published it under the title of“Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, translated from the first book of Eusebius de Preparatione Evangelica,” &c. Lond. 1720, 8vo. Mr. Payne observes, that our author had a quicker sense than many other men, of the advances popery was making upon us, and was affected with the apprehension of it to the last degree. This made him turn his thoughts to the inquiry, by what steps and methods idolatry got ground in the world. The oldest account of this he believed he found in Sanchoniathe'a fragment. This he saw was a professed apology for idolatry, and owned openly what other heathens would have made a secret of, that the gods of the Gentile world had been all mortal men. He studied this fragment with no other view than as it led to the discovery of the original of idolatry. He spent some time upon it, before ever he had a thought of extracting from it footsteps of the history of the world preceding the flood. While other divines of the church of England were engaged in the controversy with the papists, in which they gained over them so complete a victory, our author was endeavouring to strike at the root of their idolatrous religion. These fragments have exercised the talents of some of the ablest scholars that foreign nations have produced, and several of these, being able to make nothing clear or consistent out of them, incline to think they were forgeries, and consequently not worthy of notice. Our prelate was not only of a different sentiment, but with great knowledge and great labour, has made it very evident that these fragments are genuine, and that he thoroughly understood them. He has proved that they contain the most ancient system of atheism and idolatry; that very system which took place in Egypt, and was set up against the true religion contained in the writings of Moses.

After bishop Cumberland had once engaged his thoughts upon this subject, fresh matter was continually rising, for the distribution of which into a proper method, so as to render a very perplexed subject intelligible, he found himself under the necessity of undertaking a yet more extensive work than the former, in which he made some progress in the space of above twenty years, during which it employed his thoughts. To this piece, when finished, he proposed to have given the title of “Origines Antiquissimae,” which were transcribed in his life-time, and, by his direction, by Mr. Payne. This treatise, which is properly a supplement to the first, was published in 1724, 8vo, under the title of “Origines Gentium Antiquissimae,” or Attempts for discovering the times of the first planting of nations, in several tracts. — In bishop Cumberland’s old age, he retained the easiness and sweetness of his temper, which continued to the last day of his life. His senses and bodily strength were more perfect than could well be expected, in a man whose course of life had been studious and sedentary. He remained a master of all the parts of learning he had studied when he was young. He ever loved the classics, and to the last week of his life would quote them readily and appositely. When Dr. Wilkins had published his Coptic Testament, he made a present of one of them to his lordship, who sat down to study this when he was past eighty-three. At this age he mastered the language, and went through great part of this version, and would often give excellent hints and remarks as he proceeded in reading it. At length, in the autumn of 1718, he was struck in an afternoon with a dead palsy, and breathed his last in his palace at Peterborough on October 9, in the same year, in the eighty-seventh year of his age. His corpse was interred in his own cathedral, where a plain tomb has been erected, with a modest inscription to his memory. His reputation at the time of his death was very great at home, and much greater abroad. He is mentioned in the highest terms of respect by many foreign writers, particularly Niceron, Morhoff, Thomasius, Stollius, and Fourmont. His fame now rests chiefly on the works he published in his life-time. The Sanchoniatho and the Origines, although they afford ample demonstration of learned research, have not so well preserved their credit.

His great grandson, the subject of the next article, informs us upon the authority of his father, Dr. Denison Cumberland, that at the end of every year, whatever overplus bishop Cumberland found upon a minute inspection of his accounts, was by him distributed to the poor, reserving only one small deposit of 25l. in cash, found at his death in his bureau, with directions to employ it for the discharge of his funeral expences; a sum, in his modest calculation, fully sufficient to commit his body to the earth. The late Mr. Cumberland deposited in the library of Trinity-college, Cambridge, a copy of the bishop’s work “De Legibus Naturae,” interleaved and corrected throughout by Dr. Bentley.

, a late dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was the great grandson of the preceding. His father, Denison, so named from his mother, was educated at Westminster school, and from that admitted fellow-commoner of Trinity college, Cambridge. He married, at the age of twenty-two, Joanna, the younger daughter of Dr. Richard Bentley (the Phoebe of Byron’s Pastoral); by whom he had a daughter, Joanna, and Richard, the subject of this article. Though in possession of an independent fortune, he was readily prevailed upon by his father-in-law to take the rectory of Stanwick, in. Northamptonshire, given to him by lord chancellor King, as soon as he was of age to hold it. From this period he fixed his constant residence in that retired spot, and sedulously devoted himself to the duties of his function, never holding any other preferment for thirty years, except a small prebend in the church of Lincoln, given him by his uncle bishop Reynolds, He was in the commission of the peace, and a very active magistrate in the reconcilement of parties rather than in the conviction of persons. When the rebels were on the march, and had advanced to Derby, he raised among the neighbouring parishes two companies of 100 men each for the regiment then enrolling under the command of the earl of Halifax, and marched them in person to Northampton. The earl, as a mark of his consideration, insisted upon bestowing one of the companies upon his son, who being too young to take the command, an officer was named to act in his place. Some time after, on the approach of the general election for the county of Northampton, a contest took place with the rival parties of Knightly and Hanbury, or, in other words, between the tories and the whigs. His politics accorded with the latter, and he gave a very active and effectual support to his party. His exertions, though unsuccessful, were not overlooked by the earl of Halifax, who was then high in office, and lord lieutenant of the county. Offers were pressed upon him; yet, though he was resolute in declining all personal favours, he was persuaded to lend an ear to flattering situations pointed out for his son, who was shortly afterwards employed by lord Halifax as his confidential secretary. In 1757 he exchanged the living of Stanwick for Fulham, in order to be nearer his son, whose attendance on the earl of Halifax required his residence in town. On the earl being appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he was made one of his chaplains; and in 1763, at the close of his lordship’s administration, was promoted to the bishopric of Clonfert. In this situation he much ingratiated himself with all classes of people by his benevolence and generosity. He introduced many improvements and comforts among the Irish peasantry. He encouraged the English mode of agriculture by judicious rewards; and, as one of the members of the linen trade, introduced a number of spinning-wheels, and much good linen was made in consequence. This improving manufacture formed an interesting occupation also to his lady, and flourished under her care. The city of Dublin presented him with his freedom in a gold box, an honour never before (except in the remarkable instance of dean Swift) conferred on any person below the rank of a chief governor; and the deed which accompanied it assigned as the motive, the great respectability of his character, and his disinterested protection of the Irish clergy. In 1772 he was translated to the see of Kilmore. Some alarming symptoms soon after indicated the breaking up of his constitution, which was increased by the anxiety he experienced, through the debility and loss of health of his, amiable lady. When his son took leave of him at the end of his summer visit, the bishop expressed an intention of attempting a journey to England; but died in the winter of the same year; and this sad event was speedily succeeded by the death of his lady, whose weak and exhausted frame sunk under the blow, May 27, 1775.

Richard, the subject of this article, was born Feb. 19, 1732, under the roof of his grandfather Bentley, in the master’s lodge in Trinity college. When turned of six years of age, he was sent to the school at Bury St. Edmund’s, then under the mastership of the reverend Arthur Kinsman. For some time he made but little progress in his learning; till Kinsman, having observed his low station in the school, publicly reproved him; and thus roused in him a spirit of emulation. While he continued in this school, his grandfather Bentley died; and the affectionate manner in which Kinsman imparted the melancholy event to him, with the kind regard he evinced for his improvement, wrought so much upon his mind, that his task became his delight. In his exercises, however, he describes himself, in his “Memoirs,” as aiming at something like fancy and invention, and as being too frequently betrayed into grammatical errors, which did him no credit with his master, who commented on his blunders in one instance with great severity, producing so great an effect on his sensibility, that he never perfectly recovered it. It was about this time that he made his first attempt in English verse; the subject of which was an excursion he had made with his family in the summer holidays to visit a relation in Hampshire, which engaged him in a description of the docks at Portsmouth, and of the races at Winchester, where he had been present. This little poem he exhibited to his father, who received it with unreserved commendation, and persisted in reciting it to his intimates, when its author had gained experience enough to wish it had been consigned to oblivion. In the intervals from, school his mother began to form both his taste and his ear for poetry, of which art she was a very able mistress, by employing him every evening to read to her. Their readings were, with few exceptions, confined to Shakspeare, whom she both admired and understood in the true spirit and sense of the author. Under her instruction he became passionately fond of these evening entertainments, and the effect was several attempts on his part towards the drama. He was then head-boy of Bury school, though only in his 12th year. He fitted and compiled a kind of cento, eiititled “Shakspeare in the Shades,” in one act, in which the characters of Hamlet and Ophelia, Romeo and Juliet, Lear and Cordelia, were introduced, and Ariel as an attendant spirit on Shakspeare, who is present through the piece: some extracts from this juvenile production are printed in his “Memoirs.” Mr. Kinsman intimating his purpose of retiring from Bury school, young Cumberland was transplanted to Westminster, and admitted under Dr. Nichols, where he remained about a year and a half; and particularly profited there in point of composition. When only in his fourteenth year, he was admitted of Trinity college, Cambridge, where he had two tutors, who took little care of him; but the inconvenience of this being soon felt, the master of the college, Dr. Smith, in the last year of his being under-graduate, recommended him to lose no time in preparing for his degree, and to apply closely to his academical studies for the remainder of the year. During the year of trial, he determined to use every effort for redeeming lost time; he began a course of study so apportioned as to allow himself but six hours’ sleep, to which he strictly adhered, living almost entirely upon milk, and using the cold bath very frequently. In the several branches of mechanics, hydrostatics, optics, and astronomy, he made himself master of the best treatises; he worked all his propositions, and formed all his minutes, even his thoughts, in Latin, and thereby acquired advantages superior to some of the best of his contemporaries in public disputations; for, so long as his knowledge of a question could supply matter for argument, he never felt any want of terms for explanation. In consequence of this diligence, he was enabled to go through his scholastic exercises four times in the course of the year, keeping two acts and two first opponencies, and acquitted himself with great credit. On being cited to the senate -house for examination for the bachelor’s degree, he was kept perpetually at the table under the process of question and answer. His constitution, considerablv impaired by the intense application he had given, just held him up to the expiration of the scrutiny; and on hastening to his father’s, he soon fell ill of a rheumatic fever, from which, after six months’ care and attention, he was recovered. While in this state of extreme indisposition, a high station was adjudged to him amongst the wranglers of his year.

Having thus, in 1750, at an age more than commonly early, obtained his bachelor’s degree, with the return of his health he resumed his studies, and, without neglecting those he had lately been engaged in, again took up those authors who had lain by untouched for a whole twelvemonth. Being in the habit of reading upon system, he began to form collectanea of his studies. With this view he got together all the tracts relative to the controversy between Boyle and Bentley, omitting none even of the authorities and passages they referred to; and having done this, compressed the reasonings on both sides into a kind of statement and report upon the question in dispute; and, having accomplished this, he meditated upon a plan little short of what might be projected for an universal history, or at least for that of the great empires in particular. But he was perhaps more agreeably employed in reading the Greek tragedians; and when Mason published his Eu'rida, was warm in his praise of that generally-admired production; and, in imitation, planned and composed an entire drama, of which Caractacus was the hero, with bards and druids attached to it as a chorus, for whom he wrote odes.

About this time his father was persuaded to listen to some flattering offers of situations for him; but, as his health was still in an unsettled state, he joined with his family in an excursion to York, where he passed half a year in the society and amusements of that city. The style of living there was a perfect contrast with what he had been accustomed to: he hunted in the mornings, danced in the evenings, and devoted but little time to study. He here got hold of Spenser’s Fairy Queen, in imitation of which he began to write stanzas to the same measure; at other times he also composed short elegies in the manner of Hammond; but for these pursuits he was seasonablyreproved by his mother, and relinquished them; and on his return to college, he was soon invited to the master’s lodge by Dr. Smith, who honoured him with approbation of his past exertions, and imparted to him a new arrangement that had been determined upon, for annulling so much of the existing statutes as restricted all bachelors of arts, except those of the third year’s standing, from offering themselves candidates for fellowships. Dr. Smith also kindly recommended him, as he should be in the second year of his degree at the next election, to present himself for examination.

Whilst he was preparing to resume his studies with increased attention, he received a summons from lord Halifax to assume the situation of his private confidential secretary. He accordingly came to town; but, among the new connexions in which he was consequently thrown, he met with nothing that in any degree interested him, and at the recess he accompanied lord Halifax to Horton, and from thence went to Cambridge. There were six vacancies, and six candidates of the year above him. They underwent a severe examination from the electing seniors; and Cumberland particularly from Dr. Smith, the master; and on the next day Cumberland and Mr. Orde (afterwards master in chancery), who was of the same year, were announced as elected, to the exclusion of two of the year above them. After his election, he went home to Stanwick, and from thence made a short visit to lord Halifax.

On his return to town he was as much sequestered from the world as if he had been resident in his college. About this time he made his first small offering to the press, following the steps of Gray with another churchyard “Elegy, written on St. Mark’s Eve,” when, according to rural tradition, the ghosts of those who are to die within the year ensuing are seen to walk at midnight across the churchyard. It had been written in one of his college vacations, some time before he belonged to lord Halifax: “The public,” he observes in his Memoirs, “were very little interested with it, and Dodsley as little profited.”

While he was with lord Halifax, Mr. Charles Townshend was passing a few days at Horton; and among a variety of subjects which his active imagination was for ever starting, something occurred to his recollection of an enigmatical sort, that he wished to have the solution of, and could not strike upon it: it was only to be done by a geometrical process, which Cumberland hit upon: he worked it as a problem, and gave a solution in writing, with which Mr. Townshend was much pleased. Mr. Townshend afterwards put into Cumberland’s hands a long and elaborate report of his own drawing up (for he was then one of the lords of trade); and requested him to revise it, and give his remarks without reserve; and the manner in which this service was performed strengthened Mr. Townshend’s good opinion of Cumberland.

About this time he employed himself in collecting materials from the History of India, for the plan of a poem in heroic verse, on which he bestowed considerable labour, and in which he had made some progress. This design, however, was laid aside; but a specimen of it, respecting the discoveries of the Portuguese, is preserved in his “Memoirs.”

After the death of lady Halifax, on coming to town for the winter season with his patron, he read and wrote incessantly, and lived in all the temperance, and nearly all the retirement, of a hermit. The residence in town, however, which his attendance upon lord Halifax entailed upon him, and the painful separation from his family, became almost insupportable to him. But, whilst he was meditating a retreat, his father exchanged his living of Stanwick for Fulham, in order to afford him an easier access to his friends. In consequence of his occasional visits there, he became a frequent guest at La Trappe, the house of the eccentric Mr. Dodington, and passed much time with him there, in London also, and occasionally in Dorsetshire. His attendance on lord Halifax did not prevent his continuing this intimacy: indeed it was correspondent with lord Halifax’s wishes that he should cultivate Mr. Dodington’s acquaintance; for his lordship not only lived with him upon intimate terms as a friend, but was now in train to form some opposition connexions, having at this time thrown up his office of first lord of trade and plantations, and detached himself from the duke of Newcastle’s administration. In the summer of this year he went to Eastbury, the seat of Mr. Dodington, where he remained some time, and had ample opportunity of observing the character of his host, of which he has given an interesting description in his “Memoirs,” as well as that of many distinguished visitors there. Lord Halifax and some friends were resident there during the whole of his visit; and during the same period, Cumberland addressed a poem of 400 lines to Dodington, partly in compliment to him, and in part consolatory to lord Halifax upon the event of his retiring from public office: they flattered the politics then in favour with Mr. Dodington, and coincided with his wishes for detaching lord Halifax from the administration of the duke of Newcastle.

On his return from Dorsetshire he was invited by his friends at Trinity college to offer himself as a candidate for a lay-fellowship then vacant, in which he succeeded, but did not hold it long, as it could only be held on the terms of celibacy. About this time he wrote his first legitimate drama, in five acts, “The Banishment of Cicero;” a performance which, though occasionally inaccurate in the diction, and the plot totally unsuited to scenic exhihition, as a dramatic poem will bear examination. It was, however, rejected by Garrick, as unfit for the stage, but published by the author in 1761, 4to.

Having obtained, through the patronage of lord Halifax, a small establishment as crown agent for Nova Scotia, Mr. Cumberland tendered his addresses to Elizabeth, the only daughter of George Ridge, esq. of Kilmiston, Hants, to whom he was married, Feb. 19, 1759. On the king’s accession to the throne, Mr. Cumberland composed and published without his name, a poem in blank verse addressed to the young sovereign; and on the appointment of lord Halifax to be lord lieutenant of Ireland, he accompanied that nobleman as Ulster secretary, and his father was made one of the chaplains. William Gerard Hamilton was at this time chief secretary, but not by the choice of lord Halifax, to whom he was little known, and in the first instance not altogether acceptable, and Cumberland’s situation appears to have been unpleasant. However, towards the close of the session his lordship expressed his satisfaction in Cumberland’s services, and offered him a baronetcy, an honour which after due consideration he declined, though he says he had afterwards reason to think that it contributed to weaken his interest with lord Halifax. Why such an honour should have been offered to a youngman totally unprovided for, we know not. Even when his patron was made secretary of state, he applied, in vain, for the situation of under-secretary, and afterwards obtained only the clerkship of reports in the office of trade and plantations under the earl of Hillsborough.

Bickerstatf having brought forward with success his operas of “Love in a Village,” and “The Maid of the Mill,” Mr. Cumberland attempted a drama of that sort, under the title of “The Summer’s Tale,” which was performed for nine or ten nights, but with no great applause; the music to it was the production of Bach, Arne, Arnold, and Simpson. This drama was published in 1765, and the author afterwards cut it down to an afterpiece of two acts, and exhibited it under the title of “Amelia” with very tolerable success; and published it in 1768. His next production was the comedy of “The Brothers,” which was brought out at Covent Garden, and well received, and published in 1769.

During a visit at his father’s at Clonfert, in a little closet at the back of the palace, with no other prospect than a single turf-stack, he began to plan and compose “The West Indian.” It was his object always in his hours of study, so to place himself, as to have little or nothing to distract his attention. During his stay in Ireland, he received from the university of Dublin the honorary degree of LL.D. On iiis return to London he entered into an engagement with Garrick to bring out the “West Indian” at his theatre; and availed himself of Garrick’s suggestions in adding a new scene and other improvements. This piece (which appeared in 1771) proved successful beyond the utmost expectation of its author, who was aware that the moral was not quite unexceptionable.

During his residence in Queen Anne-street East, an event occurred which evinced in a striking manner his disinterested generosity and high sense of honour. He was visited by an old clergyman, the rev. Decimus Reynolds, son of bishop Reynolds, and first cousin to his father. This gentleman, without any previous intimacy, had bequeathed to Cumberland his estate twenty years before: he brought the will in his hand; but required that Cumberland should accompany him to a conveyancer, and direct that a positive deed of gift should be drawn up; for whfch purpose he had brought the title-deeds, and should leave them with Cumberland. Cumberland conjured Mr. Reynolds to inform him if he had any cause of displeasure with his nearer relations; stating that his natural heir was a man of most unexceptionable worth and good character. Mr. Reynolds stated that he left it to Cumberland, as being the representative of the maternal branch of his family; that Cumberland’s father hud ever been his valued friend; and that ho had constantly watched Cumberland’s character, though he had not established any personal acquaintance with him. Upon this explanation, and the evidence of Mr. Reynolds’ s having inherited no atom of his fortune from his paternal line, Cumberland consented to the drawing up of the deed, causing, however, highly to his honour, a clause of resumption to be inserted, impowering the donor to revoke his deed at any future time. This clause Mr. Reynolds was with great difficulty prevailed on to admit; prophetically observing, that it left him exposed to the solicitations of his relations, and in the debility of age, he might be pressed into a revocation of what he had decided upon as the most deliberate act of his life. After ten years of uninterrupted cordiality between them, this resumption actually took place; major Reynolds, the nephew of the old gentleman, bringing his order for the whole of the title-deeds; which were immediately delivered up by Cumberland exactly as he had received them.

About this time he became a member of a pleasant literary society, who used to dine together upon stated days at the British coffee-house; and at one of these meetings it was suggested to him to delineate the character of a North Briton, as he had already those of an Irishman and a West Indian. He adopted the suggestion, and began to frame the character of Colin Macleod, in his comedy of “The Fashionable Lover,” upon the model of a Highland servant who, with scrupulous integrity and a great deal of nationality about him, managed all the domestic affairs of sir Thomas Mills’s household, and being a great favourite of every body who resorted there, became in time, as it were, one of the company. This comedy, in point of composition, he thought superior to the West Indian; but it did not obtain equal success with that drama. When this play came out, he made serious appeals against cavillers and slanderers below his notice, which induced Garrick to call him “the man without a skin,” and this soreness to criticism became afterwards one of the most distinguishing features of his character. His fourth comedy of “The Choleric Man,” was performed with approbation; but its author was charged in the public prints with venting contemptuous and illiberal speeches against his contemporaries. This induced him to prefix to his comedy, when he published it, a “Dedication to Detraction,” the chief object of which was directed to a tract entitled “An Essay on the Theatre,” in which the writer professes to draw a comparison between laughing and sentimental comedy, and under the latter description particularly points his observations to “The Fashionable Lover.”

His next dramatic production was “Timon of Athens,” altered from Shakspeare, in which the entire part of Evanthe, and, with very few exceptions, the whole of Alcibiades, were new. The public approbation sanctioned the attempt at the first production of the play; but it has since been neglected. In compliance with the wishes of AJoodv, who had become the established performer of Irish characters, Cumberland sketched another Hibernian, on a smaller scale, in the entertainment of “The Note of Hand, or a Trip to Newmarket,” which was the last of his pieces that Garrick produced before he disposed of his property in Drury-lane. His tragedy of “The Battle of Hastings” was brought out there under the direction of Mr. Sheridan. In his own judgment it was better written than planned. It was published in 1773.

His prospects in life began now to brighten; for, on the accession of lord George Germaine to office, he was promoted to be secretary to the board of trade, which produced an increase of income that could not be otherwise than acceptable to the father of six children. His lordship took particular notice of Cumberland, and continued his kind patron and friend till death.

Mr. Cumberland afterwards resided at Tetworth in Bedfordshire, in the vicinity of the house of his honoured friend lady Frances Burgoyne, sister of lord Halifax. Here he passed his summer recesses; and in one of them wrote his opera of “Calypso,” which was brought out at Covent Garden; but did not meet with very great success. In the following season Cumberland wrote “The Widow of Delphi, or the descent of the Deities,” which has never been printed, but received frequent revisions and corrections in the ms. and its author considered it in this improved s-tate as one of his most classical productions. About this time appeared his tragi-comedy of “The Bondman,” and “The Duke of Milan,” altered neither of which has been printed.

In 1780, Cumberland was appointed on a confidential mission to the courts of Lisbon aud Madrid; a situation which, however honourable, seems to have laid the foundation of all his future distresses, and to have embittered every remaining hour of a long-protracted existence. The direct object of his embassy was to draw the court of Spain into a separate treaty of peace with this country; and but for the disturbances which took place at that period in London, it is probable that he might have proved successful in his endeavours, since his conduct gave the most perfect satisfaction to the Spanish court, andevtn procured him the particular confidence and attachment of their king. From these events, and other untoward circumstances, he was, in 1781, recalled, after having contracted a debt of near 5OOO/. in the service of his country, not one shilling of which lord North’s ministry ever thought proper to repay him, and to discharge which he was compelled to dispose of the whole of his hereditary property. If it be said that all this rests on Mr. Cumberland’s authority, it may surely be replied that no member of that ministry has attempted '. deny his account. It has indeed been asserted that he exceeded his commission, but in what respects we are not told, nor whether the losses he sustained were not too heavy a punishment for an error in judgment. He informs us that upon his journey home through France, his bills were stopped, and his credit so completely bankrupt, that he would have been put in prison at Bayonne, had not a friendly fellow-traveller advanced him 500l. which enabled him to pay his way through France and reach his home.

Upon Mr. Burke’s bill of economy, and the consequent dismission of the board of trade, Mr. Cumberland retired with a compensation fur from adequate to the emoluments of the place he was deprived of, and fixed his abode at Tunbridge Wells, having made considerable reductions in his establishment. His first publication after his return from Spain was his “Anecdotes of eminent Painters in Spain,” 1782, 2 vols. 12mo, an interesting and curious work; rendered more complete in 1787 by the publication of “A Catalogue of the king of Spain’s Paintings,” which had been drawn up purposely for Cumberland’s use while in Spain., and transmitted to him after his return to England.

Before he settled himself at Tunbridge Wells he had written his comedy of “The Walloons,” which was brer put at Covent Garden theatre, and followed by “The Mysterious Husband” in 1783, and a tragedy entitled “The Arab,” but which was acted once only for an actor’s benefit, and has never since been put to any use.

In 1783 appeared his “Letter to the bishop of Llandaflf,” respecting his proposal for equalizing the revenues of the hierarchy and dignitaries of the Church Established; and in 1785 his tragedy of “The Carmelite” was brought out; and his comedy of “The Natural Son.” The collection of essays, under the title of “The Observer,” weiv also first printed this year experimentally at Tunbridge Wells, in 2 vols. 12mo. He afterwards engaged with Charles Dilly to publish a new edition, and thereupon stopped the impression of the old. The new edition was considerably augmented, and appeared in five volumes in 1786. When this was out of print he made a fresh arrangement of the essays, and, incorporating his entire translation of “The Clouds of Aristophanes,” edited the work thus modelled in 6 vols. They have since been incorporated in the collection of “The British Essayists.” In 1785 also appeared the “Character” of his kind patron, lord Sackville, which he has farther illustrated in his “Memoirs.” About this time he published, anonymously, a pamphlet entitled “Curtius rescued from the Gulph,” in consequence, as he says, “of Div Parr’s having hit an unoffending gentleman too hard, by launching a huge fragment of Greek at his defenceless head. He made as good a fight as he could, and rummaged his indexes for quotations, which he crammed into his artillery as thick as grape-shot, and in mere sport fired them off against a rock invulnerable as the armour of Achilles.” It is indeed but a very superficial performance.

In 1789 appeared his comedy of “The Impostor;” and “Arundel, a Novel,” 2 vols. 12mo, thelatterhastilyput together in a few weeks at Brighthclmstone, and sent to the press in parcels as he wrote it. This novel, rapidly composed as it was, met with success; on which he resolved to bestow his utmost care and diligence on a second, which appeared in 1795, in 4 vols. 12mo, under the title of “Henry.” In 1792 he published his “Calvary, or the Death of Christ, a Poem, in eight books,” 4to. To this work he had applied himself with uncommon ardour; he began it in the winter, and, rising every morning some hours before day-light, soon dispatched the whole poem of eight books at the average of full fifty lines a day, of which he kept a regular account, marking each day’s work upon the ms. This poem has since been republished in a more portable size in 2 vols.

Among his productions of the more serious cast may be included his “Version of Fifty of the Psalms of David,” upon which he bestowed great attention: and his religious and argumentative tract entitled “A few plain Reasons why we should believe in Christ, and adhere to his Religion;” a copy of which he presented, with due deference, to the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London, the latter of whom honoured him with a very gracious ac^ knowledgement by letter. He wrote also as many sermons as would make a large volume, some of which have been delivered from the pulpit; and was for some years in the habit of composing an appropriate prayer of thanksgiving for the last day in the year, and of supplication for the first clay of the succeeding year. He was accustomed also to select passages from the Old Testament, and turn them into verse; of which he has given a specimen in his “Memoirs.”

In 1793, he brought out a comic opera in three acts, founded on the story of Wat Tyler; which, being objected to by the lord chamberlain, he was obliged to new-mode!, and produce under the title of “The Armourer.” He aUo brought out a comedy under the title of “The Country Attorney” at the summer theatre, when it was under the direction of the elder Mr. Colman. At the same theatre appeared in 1794 his “Box Lobby Challenge,” a comedy, and his drama of “Don Pedro.” On the opening of the new theatre at Drury Lane, his comedy of “The Jew” was represented; which he had composed with great rapidity. This was the second instance of his coming forward to raise the character of that people from the unmerited contempt and ridicule which they had uniformly before experienced. In the preceding season came out. his comedy of “The Wheel of Fortune,” which was closely followed by “First Love, a Comedy.”

In 1796 appeared at Covent Garden his “Days of Yore, a Drama.” In 1797, at Drury Lane, “The last of the Family, a Comedy.” Five other comedies were also successively produced by him. “False Impressions,” at Covent Garden “The Word for Nature;” “The Dependant;” “The Eccentric Lover;” and “The Sailor’sDaughter,” at Drury Lane.

The publications he was afterwards concerned in are, “The Exodiad,” an epic poem, written in conjunction with sir James Bland Burges. “John de Lancaster,” a novel, in 3 vols. and “Joanna of Montfaucon,” a dramatic romance. He was also the conductor of “The London Review,” a new attempt, in which the reviewers gave their names, but it did not succeed. From the time of his secession from public life, Mr. Cumberland resided at Tunbridge Wells, devoting his time solely to his literary occupations. Here he lost his wife, the happy partner of all his joys, his affectionate consoler in every sorrow. This stroke of affliction he bore with the resignation of a man of sense, convinced, as he says, that patience is no mark of insensibility, nor the parade of lamentation any evidence of the sincerity or permanency of grief.

During the alarm of invasion he headed two companies of volunteer infantry, and received the commission of major-commandant. So beloved was he by his corps, that they honoured him with a sword as a mark of their esteem; and at the conclusion of the peace, agreed to serve under him without receiving their customary pay. His last days were spent chiefly in London, where he died May 7, 1811, after a few days illness, at the house of his friend, Mr. Henry Fry, Bedford-place. The last act of his life was the publication of a poem called “Retrospection,” a kind of legacy of opinions concerning the “men and things” more fully handled in his Memoirs. In appreciating the personal character of Mr. Cumberland, the reader may be very safely directed to these “Memoirs,” where the disguise of self-esteem is too thin to hide what is attempted to be hidden. It was Mr. Cumberland’s misfortune to be bred a courtier, and never to have attained his degrees in that school. In a subordinate station, the duties of which were technical and formal, he performed them like others, but was peculiarly unfortunate in venturing to act the minister, Mr. Cumberland having associated with almost all the eminent literary characters of his day, has introduced many striking sketches and anecdotes of them in his “Memoirs.” In company his aim was to please by retailing these, and in the art of pleasing in conversation lew men have In-*, n more successful, and few would have been more praiseworthy, had he been more sincere in his compliments to those who were present, or less bitter in his sarcasms on them after they had taken their leave. By this, however, although it occasionally administered to mirth, he lost more than he gained; and his address, polite, studied, and courtier-like, soon became depreciated beyond all recovery.

As a writer, the number of his works is perhaps the most striking circumstance; but many of them, it may be remembered, were hastily written, and produced to better his income at a time when a succession of statesmen had agreed to forget that such a man ever held a public station. Whatever else he wrote, the drama was his favourite pursuit, from which he could seldom endure a long interruption; and this seems to have created in his mind a ready play of imagination which unfitted him for the serious concerns of real life and business. As a poet, he cannot rank very high; elegant versification and sentiment, however, throw a charm over some of his poetical works which has ensured them a considerable share of popularity. His “Observer,” now that he has acknowledged how much he took from Bentley’s Mss. no longer supports his character as a Greek critic. First or last, the drama was his peculiar province: it was in that he endeavoured to excel, and in that, we think, he has attained the excellence that will he most permanent.

, bart. a man of considerable talents, unhappily, in some respects, misapplied, was the son of Alexander Cuming of Coulter, who was created a baronet in 1695, and was born probably about the beginning of the last century. It appears by his Journal, which was in the possession of the late Isaac Reed, esq. that he was bred to the law of Scotland, but was induced to quit that profession in consequence of a pension of 300l. per annum being assigned him by government, either, as he intimates, for services done by his family, or expected from himself. This pension was withdrawn in 1721, at the instance, according to his account, of sir Robert Walpole, who had conceived a pique against his father, for opposing him in parliament. It is mors probable, however, that he was found too visionary a schemer to fulfil what was expected from him. In 1129 he was induced, by a dream of lady Cunaing’s, to undertake a voyage to America, for the purpose of visiting the Cherokee nations. He left England on Sept. 13, and arrived at Charlestown Dec. 5. On March 11 following, he set out for the Indians country; and on April 3, 1730, he was crowned commander, and chief ruler of the Cherokee nations in a general meeting of chiefs at Nequisee among the mountains; he returned to Charlestown April 13, with six Indian chiefs, and on June 5, arrived at Dover. On the 18th he presented the chiefs to George II. at Windsor, where he laid his crown at his majesty’s feet: the chiefs also did homage, laying four scalps at the king’s feet, to show that they were an overmatch for their enemies, and five eagles’ tails as emblems of victory. These circumstances are confirmed by the newspapers of that time, which are full of the proceedings of the Cherokees whilst, in England, and speak of them as brought over by sir Alexander Cuming. Their portraits were engraved on a single sheet. Sir Alexander says in his Journal, that whilst he was in America in 1729, he found such injudicious notions of liberty prevail, as were inconsistent with any kind of government, particularly with their dependence on the British nation. This suggested to him the idea of establishing banks in each of the provinces dependent on the British exchequer, and accountable to the British parliament, as the only means of securing the dependency of the colonies. But it was not till 1748 (as it appears) that he laid his plans before the minister (the right hon. Henry Pelham) who treated him as a visionary enthusiast, which his journal indeed most clearly indicates him to have been. He connected this scheme with the restoration of the Jews, for which he supposed the time appointed to be arrived, and that he himself was alluded to in various passages of Scripture as their deliverer. He was not, like a late enthusiast, to conduct them to the Holy Land, but proposed to take them to the Cherokee mountains: wild as his projects were, some of the most learned Jews (among whom was Isaac Netto, formerly grand rabbi of the Portuguese synagogue) seem to have given him several patient hearings upon the subject. When the minister refused tollsten to his schemes, he proposed to open a subscription himself for 500,000l. to establish provincial banks in America, and to settle 300,000 Jewish families among the Cherokee mountains. From one wild project he proceeded to another; and being already desperately involved in debt, he turned his thoughts to alchemy, and began to try experiments on the transmutation of metal. He was supported principally by the contributions of his friends: till at length, in 1766, archbishop Seeker appointed him one of the pensioners in the Charter-house, where he died at a very advanced age in August 1775, and was buried at East Bavnet, where lady Cuming had been buried in 1743. He appears to have been a man of learning., and to have possessed talents, which, if they had not been under a wrong bias, might have been beneficial to himself and useful to his country. His son, who succeeded him in his title, became deranged in his intellects, and died some years ago, in a state of indigence, in the neighbourhood of Red-lionstreet, Whitechapel. He had been a captain in the army: the title became extinct at his death.

, born Sept. 30, 1714, was the son of Mr. James Cuming, an eminent merchant in Edinburgh. Alter a suitable education in the high-school of that city, and under the particular tuition of Mr. Alexander Muir, formerly professor of philosophy at Aberdeen, he applied himself to the study of physic four years in the university of Edinburgh, and became connected with some of the most eminent students in that science. In 1735 he spent nine months at Paris, improving himself in anatomy and the French language: and he passed some time at Leyden the following year; but returned immediately before the death of his father. In 1738 he quitted Edinburgh for London: and while his friends were meditating a settlement for him at Lynne in the room of the late sir William Browne, his friend Dr, Fothergill found out a more promising situation at Dorchester; where he remained to the last, notwithstanding the most pressing invitations from Dr. Fothergill to succeed Dr. Russel in London. In the space of a few years after his establishment at Dorchester, he came to be employed in many, and in process of time, with an exception of three or four at most, in all the families of distinction within the county, and frequently in the adjacent ones. At length his chaste manners, his learning, and his probity, as they were more generally known, rendered him not only the physician, but the confidential friend of some of the best families into which he was introduced. His warm and friendly attention to the interests of the late Mr. Hutchins, author of the History of Dorset, in advancing the publication of that well written and well arranged work, cannot better be expressed than in the grateful language of its author: “One of the gentlemen to whom my acknowledgments are eminently due, permitted part of that time which is so beneficially employed to far better purposes, and is so precious to a gentleman of his extensive practice, to be diverted to the work in hand; the publication of which he patronised and promoted with great zeal and assiduity: nor did his success fall short of his zeal. Without his friendly assistance my papers might yet have remained undelivered to the press; or, if they had been committed to the public, would have wanted several advantages and embellishments with which they now appear.” The doctor bequeathed his interleaved copy of this work to Mr.Gough, his friend and coadjutor in its publication. In 1752 he received a diploma from the university of Edinburgh; and was soon after elected a fellow of the royal college of physicians there, of which he died senior fellow. He was elected in 1769 fellow of the society of antiquaries of London; and in 1781 of that of Scotland. The tenderness of his eyes was, through life, the greatest misfortune he had to struggle with; and, considering the many obstacles which the complaints in those organs have occasioned in the pursuit of knowledge, it is wonderful how he attained the degree of erudition which he was well known to possess. In his retreat from the more busy pursuits of this world, the surviving companions of his youth continued the friends and correspondents of his advanced years; and he enjoyed to the last the singular satisfaction of being visited by the most respectable persons in the county for probity, rank, and fortune. We cannot but regret that the doctor, who lias been the means of so many valuable performances being laid before the public, and some of them improved by his pen, had not himself stood forth, to give that information for which he was so well qualified, both in point of classical learning and elegant composition. He died of a dropsy, in the 7 kh year of his age, March 25, 1788.

, a very learned lawyer, and professor in the university of Leyden, was born at Flushing, in Zealand, 1586. He was sent to Leyden at the age of fourteen, where he made great progress in the Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Syriac languages, under Drusius; and, with his assistance, gained a deep knowledge in the Jewish antiquities. In the early part of his life he was in England, whither he had attended Ambrose llegemortes, his kinsman; and during his stay here, he, in one summer, accurately read over Homer, and most of the Greek poets. It appears that he was at first designed for divinity, by his maintaining theological theses under Arminius in 1605; but religious disputes running high at that time, he conceived a disgust to it, and applied himself to the belles lettres and the law. He was created LL. D. at Leyden in 161), at which time he was chosen professor of eloquence. He was afterwards made professor of politics; and in 1615 of civil law, which employment he held to his death, which happened in 1638. He was the author of several ingenious and learned works; and his little book, “Derepublica. Hebrceorum,” which is still held in high esteem, was made a text-book by the most celebrated professors. Nicolai, Goree, and Basnage have all published editions of it with notes and comments. His “Satyra Menippara in sui saeculi homines inepte erudites” was printed at Leyden in 1632, and as much admired for its wit as learning. He likewise published remarks upon Nonius’s “Dionysiaca,” and some inauguration and other speeches; with a translation of Julian’s Caesars. He was a man of great parts and learning; and we find Vossius, Casaubon, and other great men, speaking of him in the highest terms of applause, and paying the profoundest deference to his judgment. Scaliger says, that he was extremely learned, but of a melancholy humour. Burman published a volume of his “Epistolag,” which contain literary information and remarks, Leyden, 1725, 8vo.

, a lady of great genius and learning, was born in Silesia about the beginning of the seventeenth century, and became celebrated for her extensive knowledge in many branches of learning, particularly in mathematics and astronomy, upon which she wrote several ingenious treatises; one of which, under the title of “Urania Propitia,” printed in 1650, in Latin and German, she dedicated to Ferdinand III. emperor of Germany. In this work are contained astronomical tables, of great ease and accuracy, founded upon Kepler’s hypothesis. She learned languages with amazing facility; and understood Polish, German, French, Italian, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. With equal ease she acquired a knowledge of the sciences: history, physic, poetry, painting, music both vocal and instrumental, were familiar to her; and yet these were no more than her amusement. Her favourite study was the mathematics, and especially astronomy, to which she principally applied, and was not without reason ranked among the most able astronomers of her time. She married Elias de Levvin, M. D. also an astronomer; and they carried on their favourite studies for some time with equal reputation and success, until the war penetrated into Silesia, and obliged them to quit their residence at Schweinitz, for Poland, which was then at peace. Upon their journey, although furnished with the best passports, they were robbed by the soldiers; but, on their arrival in Poland, were welcomed with every kind attention. Here she composed her astronomical tables above noticed, first printed at Oels, and four years after at Franeker or Francfort. Moreri fixes her death at 1664, but others think she was living in 1669, and then a widow.

, an historian, was born in Scotland, in the time of Cromwell’s usurpation, in 1654; his father was minister at Ettrick, in the shire and presbytery of Selkirk. He was educated, according to the custom of the Scotch gentlemen of those times who. were of the presbyterian sect, in Holland, where we may suppose he imbibed his principles of government, and was much with the Scotch and English refugees at the Hague before the revolution, particularly with the earls of Argyle and Sunderland. He came over to England with the prince of Orange; and was honoured with the confidence and intimacy of many leading men among the friends of king William and the revolution. We find him employed, at different times, in the character of a travelling companion or tutor; first to the earl of Hyndford and his brother Mr. William Carmichael, solicitor-general in the reign of queen Anne for Scotland; secondly, with the lord Lome, afterwards so well known under the name of John duke of Argyle; and thirdly, with the lord viscount Lonsdale. In 1703 we find him at Hanover with the celebrated Atldison, and graciously received by the elector and princess Sophia.

Lord Lome, at the time he was under the tuition of Mr. Cunningham, was colonel of a regiment, which the father of the earl of Argyle had raised for his majesty’s service in Flanders. Mr. Cunningham’s connection with the duke of Argyle, with whom he had the honour of maintaining an intimacy as long as he lived, together with the opportunities he enjoyed of learning in his travels what may be called military geography, naturally tended to qualify him for writing intelligibly on military affairs. On this subject Achilles, it is probable, communicated information to his preceptor Chiron. When we reflect on these circumstances, we shall the less wonder that his accounts of battles and sieges, and in general of all the operations of war, should be so copious, and at the same time so conceivable and satisfactory. It is not unnatural on this occasion to call to mind, that the historian Poly bins, so justly renowned for his knowledge of both civil and military affairs, was tutor to Scipio Africanus.

Mr. Cunningham, both when he travelled with the noblemen abovementioned, and on other occasions, was employed by the English ministry in transmitting secret intelligence to them on the most important subjects. He was also on sundry occasions employed by the generals of the confederate armies to carry intelligence and to make representations to the court of Britain. In Carstares’ State papers, published by Dr. Macormick, principal of the united college of St. Andrew’s, in 1774, there are two letters from our author, dated Paris the 22d and 26th of August 1701, giving an account of his conferences with the marquis de Torcy, the French minister, relative to the Scotch trade with France. This commercial negotiation, from the tenor of Cunningham’s letters compared with his history, appears to have been only the ostensible object of his attention for he sent an exact account to king Willliam, with whom he was personally acquainted, of the military preparations throughout all France.

Mr. Cunningham’s political friends, Argyle, Sunderland, sir Robert Walpole, &c. on the accession of George I. sent him as British envoy to the republic of Venice, where he resided from 1715 to 1720. His correspondence, or at least part of it (for secretary Craggs carried away his official correspondence from the public officte, and probably, among others, some of Mr. Cunningham’s letters), with the secretaries of state is preserved, in the paper-office. His dispatches have been collected and arranged by Mr. Astle, who very obligingly communicated this information to the author of the critical and biographical memoirs prefixed to the translation of the Latin manuscript.

A question has, no doubt, been anticipated by the reader of these memorials of Mr. Cunningham, whether he was not the celebrated critic on Horace, and the author of the posthumous criticisms in an edition of Virgil published by Hamilton and Balfour of Edinburgh in 1742. On this question, which is, no doubt, not a little interesting to philologists, but not perhaps so interesting as it would have been 50 or 60 years ago, his editor Dr. Thomson has exhausted not a little reading, inquiry, and probable conjecture, and bestows perhaps more consideration on it than the importance of the question deserves. It must be owned, at the same time, that the circumstances tending to prove the identity of the critic and the historian, and those tending to prove their diversity, are so many, and the evidence for and against each so nicely balanced, that it becomes a question of infinite curiosity on this account, and of importance too as illustrating the uncertainty of both direct and circumstantial evidence. The historian Alexander Cunningham was born in Scotland in the time of Cromwell’s usurpation; was educated in Holland, where he was intimately acquainted with many of the Scotch and English refugees at the Hague, and particularly with the earls of Argyle and Sunderland: he enjoyed, in an eminent degree, the favour and familiarity of the great: he travelled with the duke of Argyle: he was distinguished by his skill in the game of chess: he was in politics a whig; and he lived to extreme old age. Now there is very strong evidence that all these circumstances belong to the life, and point to Alexander Cunningham, the editor and commentator of Horace. It would seem strange indeed, if two Alexander Cunninghams, countrymen, contemporaries, so distinguished for erudition and the familiarity and favour of men of rank and power, and the same men too, should have flourished at the same sera, in modes of life, in places of residence, in peculiarities of character, and other circumstances so nearly parallel. And yet, notwithstanding these accumulated coincidences, there are circumstances too of diversity and opposition that seem incompatible with their identity; and therefore Dr. Thomson, after all his inquiries cdncerning the identity or the diversity of the historian and the critic, on that subject remains sceptical; and from those curious points of coincidence and opposition draws the following pertinent inference: “If the writings of our author have increased the stores of history, the incidents of his life, by shewing the uncertainty of oral tradition, have illustrated its importance.”

He lived many years after his return from Venice, which he seems chiefly to have passed in a studious retirement. In 1735 he was visited in London by lord Hyndford, at the instance of his lordship’s father, to whom he had been tutor; when he appeared to be very old. It is probable that he lived about two years after; for the body of an Alexander Cunningham lies interred in the vicar chancel of St. Martin’s church, who died in the 83d year of his age, on the 15th day of May 1737; and who was probably the same person.

His History of Great Britain, from the revolution in 1688 to the accession of George I. was published in two vols. 4to, in 1787. It was written by Mr. Cunningham in Latin, but was translated into English by the rev. Dr. William Thomson. The original manuscript came into the possession of the rev, Dr. Hollingberry, archdeacon of Chichester, some of whose relations had been connected with the author. He communicated it to the late earl of Hardwicke, and to Dr. Douglas, the late bishop of Salisbury, both of whom recommended the publication. In a short preface to the work, the archdeacon says: “My first design was to have produced it in the original; but, knowing how few are sufficiently learned to understand, and how many are indisposed to read two quarto volumes in Latin, however interesting and entertaining the subject may be, I altered my purpose, and intended to have sent it into the world in a translation. A nervous fever depriving me of the power, defeated the scheme.” Accordingly, he afterwards transferred the undertaking to Dr. Thomson; and, we are told by Dr. Hollingberry that this gentleman “has expressed the sense of the author with fidelity.” The work was undoubtedly well deserving of publication. It contains the history of a very interesting period, written by a man who had a considerable degree of authentic information, and his book contains many curious particulars not to be found in other histories. His characters are often drawn with judgment and impartiality: at other times they are somewhat tinctured with prejudice. This is particularly the case with respect to general Stanhope and bishop Burnet, against whom he appears to have conceived a strong personal dislike. He sometimes also indulges himself in severe sarcasms on the clergy, and on the female sex. But he was manifestly a very attentive observer of the transactions of his own time; his works abound in just political remarks; and the facts which he relates are exhibited with great perspicuity, and often with much animation. Throughout his book he frequently intersperses some account of the literature and of the most eminent persons of the age concerning which he writes; and he has also adorned his work with many allusions to the classics and to ancient history.

The compilers of the Encyclopaedia Britanriica thus conclude their article on this subject: “Alexander Cunningham, the author of the History of Great Britain, has been supposed to be the same person with Alexander Cunningham who published an edition of Horace at the Hague, in 2 vols. 8vo. 1721, which is highly esteemed. But, from the best information we have been able to collect, they were certainly different persons; though they were both of the same name, lived at the same time, had both been travelling tutors, were both said to have been eminent for their skill at the game of chess, and both lived to a very advanced age. The editor of Horace is generally said to have died in Holland, where he taught both the civil and canon laws, and where he had collected a very large library, which was sold in that country.” That these remarks are just has been since placed beyond a doubt by a writer, under the signature of Crito, in the Scots Magazine for October 1804, who proves that the editor of Horace died at the Hague in 1730, and the historian at London in 1737.

, a poet of considerable reputation, was born in 1729 in Dublin, where his father and mother, both descendants of Scotch parents, then resided. His father was a wine cooper, and becoming enriched by a prize in the lottery, commenced wine-merchant, and failed. The little education our author received was from a Mr. Clark, who was master of the grammar-school of the city of Drogheda; and when his father’s affairs became embarrassed, he was recalled to Dublin, where he produced many of his lesser poems at a very early age. At seventeen he wrote a farce, entitled “Love in a Mist,” which was acted for several nights at Dublin in 1747. Garrick is said to have been indebted to this farce for the fable or plot of his “Lying Valet.” The success of his little drama procured him the freedom of the theatre, to which he became immoderately attached, and mistaking inclination for ability, commenced actor without one essential qualification either natural or acquired, if we except a knack at personating the mock French character, in which he is said to have been tolerable. His passion for the stage, however, predominated so strongly, that without any intimation of his intentions, he left his family and embarked for England, where he obtained a precarious and unprofitable employment in various companies of strolling comedians. Frequent want made him at length sensible of his imprudence, but pride prevented his return to his friends; and the death of his father in circumstances of distress, probably reconciled him to a way of life which he could not now exchange for a better. About the year 1761 we find him a performer at Edinburgh, where he published his “Elegy on a Pile of Ruins,” which, although obviously an imitation of Gray’s Elegy, contains many passages conceived in the true spirit of poetry, and obtained considerable reputation. During his theatrical engagement at Edinburgh, although insignificant as an actor, he was of some value to the manager, by furnishing prologues and other occasional addresses, which were much applauded.

About this time he received an invitation from certain booksellers in London, who proposed to engage him in such works of literature as might procure him a more easy and honourable employment than he had hitherto followed. He repaired accordingly to the metropolis, but was disappointed in the promised undertaking by the bankruptcy of the principal person concerned in it, and after a short stay, was glad to return to his friends in the nprth. This was the only effort he ever made to emerge from the abject situation in which youthful imprudence had originally placed him, and contented indolence possessed him so entirely, that he never made a second attempt. In a letter to a friend he describes himself in these terms: “You may remember my last expedition to London. I think I may be convinced by it, that I am not calculated for the business you mention. Though I scribble (but a little neither) to amuse myself, the moment I considered it as my duty, it would cease to be an amusement, and I should of consequence be weary on't. I am not enterprizing; and toleably happy in my present situation.”

In 1762 he published “The Contemplatist,” but with less success than his Elegy. This is indeed the worst of all his productions, and was censured with much force of ridicule by a writer in the Monthly Review. It abounds with glittering and absurd conceits, and had it been published now, might have been mistaken for a satire on the maukish, namby-pasnby stuff which the author of the Baviad and Macviad has chastised with equal justice and humour. It may here be mentioned that in 1765 he published “Fortune, an Apologue,” in which there are some poetical beauties, particularly the description of avarice, but not much consistency of plan; and in the following year collected his poems into a volume, which was honoured by a numerous list of subscribers.

For some time, he was a performer in Mr. Digges’s company at Edinburgh, and on that gentleman’s quitting Scotland, returned to Newcastle-upon-Tyne, a spot which had been his residence for many years, and which he considered as his home. Here and in the neighbouring towns he earned a scanty subsistence. Although his mode of life was not of the reputable kind, his blameless and obliging conduct procured him many friends, and in their society he passed his days without any effort to improve his situation. Yet in the verses he wrote about three weeks before he died, it appears that he was not quite so contented as his biographer has represented. A few months before that event, being incapable of any theatrical exertion, he was removed to the house of his friend, Mr. Slack of Newcastle, who with great kindness received him under his roof, and paid every attention to him which his state required. After lingering some time under a nervous disorder, during which he burnt all his papers, he died on the 18th of September, 1773, and was buried in St. John’s church-yard, Newcastle.

Although Cunningham cannot be admitted to a very high rank among poets, he may be allowed to possess a considerable share of genius. His poems have a peculiar sweetness and elegance; his sentiments are generally natural, and his language simple, and appropriate to his subject, except in some of his longer pieces, where he accumulates epithets that appear to be laboured, and are sometimes uncouth compounds, either obsolete or unauthorized. As he contemplated nature with a fond and minute attention, and had familiarized his mind to rural scenes and images, his pastorals will probably continue to be his most favoured efforts. He has informed us that Shenstone, with whose correspondence he was honoured, encouraged him to cultivate this species of poetry. His “Landscape” is a cluster of beauties which every reader must feel, but such as only a very accurate observer of nature could have grouped with equal effect. His fables are ingenious, and his lyric pieces were at one time in very high estimation, and certainly cannot suffer by a comparison with their successors on the stage and public gardens; and, upon the whole, his works have lost little of the popularity with which they were originally favoured.

, was a physician in London, who resided in Coleman-street some years of his life. About 1556 1559 he lived at Norwich, and in 1563 he was a public lecturer in surgeons’-hall, London. Bishop Bull applauded him much for his knowledge in astronomy and physic. He was certainly a man of considerable learning, and much admired for his ingenuity in the art of engraving on copper. In 1559 he published his “Cosmographical Glass, conteyning the pleasant principles of Cosmographie, Geographic, Hydrographie, or Navigation,” fol. He executed several of the cuts in this book himself. The map of Norwich, Mr. Granger thinks, is curious and fine. He wrote also a Commentary on Hippocrates, “De Acre, Aquis et Regionibus,” and a “Treatise on the French Disease.”

, a learned philologist, was born Sept. 14, 1644, at Hemmem, in the duchy of Guelderland, and educated first at home, and then at Nimeguen, where after attending a course of rhetoric, philosophy, mathematics, history, law, and theology, he found his inclination drawing him more closely to matters of taste and polite literature. With a view to further improvement in these branches, he went to Leyden, and put himself for some time under the direction of the elder Gronovius. He came afterwards to Paris, and while he was about to leave that city for Italy, he was appointed professor of history at Deventer, when he was only in his twenty-fifth year. The reputation he acquired in this office, raised him to the magistracy, and he was employed by the states of Overyssel in various important transactions. Having carried on a correspondence with some distinguished members of the French academy of inscriptions, he was chosen an honorary member. He died at Deventer, Nov. 22, 1716, in the seventy-third year of his age. His works are: 1. “Observationum Libri III.” on different Greek and Latin authors,“Utrecht, 1670, 8vo. 2.” Harpocrates, et Monumenta antiqua inedita,“Utrecht, 1676, 1687, and 1&94, 4to. 3. An additional book or volume of observations on the Greek and Latin authors, Deventer, 1678, 8vo. 4.” Apotheosis, vel consecratio Homeri,“Amst. 1683, 4to. 5.” Historia trium Gordianum,“Deventer, 1697, 12mo; and ibid. 1697, 8vo. 6.” Lettres de critique, d'histoire, de litterature, &c.“Amst. 1742, 4to. He also wrote a preface and notes to the edition of Lactantius.” de mortibus persecutorum,“Abo, 1684, and Utrecht, 1692. His correspondence with the literary men of his age was very extensive, and many of his letters have been published in various collections particularly in” Celeberrimorum virorum epistolae,“Wittemberg, 1716, 8vo, in” Schelhornii Amcenitates,“Leipsic, 1738, 8vo in Burman’s Sylloge;” in the “Sylloge nova Epistolarum,” Nuremberg, 1759, 8vo and lastly, by Betou, in his work “De Aris et Lapidibus Votivis ad Neomagum et Sanctenum effosis,” Neomag. 1783, 8vo.

, 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.

, M. D. an eminent physician of Liverpool, was born at Kirkpatrick-Flemming, in Dumfriesshire, on May 31st, 1756, where his father was the established minister, but afterwards removed to that of Middlebie. He received the rudiments of learning at the parish school of his native place, whence he was removed to the grammar-school of Dumfries. His original destination was for a commercial life, and he passed some years of his youth in Virginia, in a mercantile station. Disliking this profession, and unwilling to be a witness of the impending troubles in the American colonies, he quitted that country in 1776, and in the following year commenced a course of medical study at the university of Edinburgh, which occupied him almost without interruption for three years. A prospect of an appointment in the medical staff of the army, which would not admit of the usual delay of an Edinburgh graduation, induced him to take the degree of doctor of physic at Glasgow. He arrived, however, in London, too late for the expected place; but still determining to go abroad, he had taken his passage in a ship for Jamaica, when a severe indisposition prevented his sailing, and entirely changed his lot in life. He renounced his first intention; and, after some consideration respecting an eligible settlement, he fixed upon the commercial and rapidly-increasing town of Liverpool, which became his residence from 1781, and where he soon rose into general esteem. Indeed, it was not possible, even upon a casual acquaintance, for a judge of mankind to fail of being struck by his manly urbanity of behaviour, by the elegance and variety of his conversation, by the solid sense and sagacity of his remarks, and by the tokens of a feeling heart, which graced and dignified the qualities of his understanding. No man was ever more highly regarded by his friends; no physician ever inspired more confidence and attachment in his patients.

In 1783, Dr. Currie made a very desirable matrimonial connection with Lucy, the daughter of William Wallace, esq. an Irish merchant in Liverpool. Of this marriage, a numerous and amiable family was the fruit, by which his name promises to be worthily perpetuated. His professional employment rapidly increased; he was elected one of the physicians of the infirmary, and took his station among the distinguished characters of the place of his residence.

His first appearance from the press was on occasion of the lamented death of his intimate friend Dr. Bell, a young physician of great hopes, settled at Manchester. His elegant and interesting tribute to the memory of this person was published in 1785, in the first volume of the Transactions of the Manchester Philosophical and Literary Society, of which they were both members. He was elected a member of the London Medical Society in 1790, and communicated to it a paper “On Tetanus and Convulsive Disorders,” published in the third volume of its memoirs. In 1792 he became a fellow of the Royal Society. A very curious and instructive “Account of the remarkable effects of a shipwreck,” communicated by him to that body, was published in the Philosophical Transactions of that year. Soon after this, having with many other men of political study, viewed the war with France consequent to its great revolutionary struggle with disapprobation, with respect as well to its principles, as to its probable effect on the happiness of both countries, he wrote a pamphlet. This appeared in 1793, under the title of “A Letter Commercial and Political, addressed to the right hon. William Pitt; by Jasper Wilson, esq.;” it soon attained a second edition, and various answers attested the degree of importance attached to it in the public estimation. In the mean time, he was far from being neglectful of the duties of his profession. To those who employed him he was abundantly known as a skilful and sedulous practitioner; and the medical papers he had already published gave him reputation among his brethren. This reputation was widely extended and raised to an eminent degree by a publication which first appeared in October 1797, entitled “Medical Reports on the Effects of Water Cold and Warm, as a Remedy in Febrile Diseases; with observations on the nature of Fever, and on the effects of opium, alcohol, and inanition.” The practice of affusion of cold water in fevers, which is the leading topic in this work, was suggested to the author by Dr. Wright’s narrative, in the London Medical Journal, of his successful treatment of a fever in a homeward-bound ship from Jamaica. Dr. Carrie copied and greatly extended it, and investigated the principles by which its use should be directed and regulated. He discovered that the safety and advantage of the application of cold was proportionate to the existing augmentation of the animal heat; and he found the thermometer a very valuable instrument to direct the practitioner’s judgment in febrile cases. He may therefore be considered as the principal author of a practice which has already been attended with extraordinary success in numerous instances, and bids fair to prove one of the greatest medical improvements in modern times. The work, which contained many ingenious speculations and valuable observations, was generally read and admired. A new volume was added to it in 1804, consisting of much interesting matter on different topics, especially in confirmation of the doctrine and practice of the former volume respecting cold arYusion. The free and successful employment of this remedy in the scarlatina, was one of its most important articles. The author had the satisfaction of receiving numerous acknowledgments of the benefit derived from his instructions, both in private and in naval and military practice. He himself was so much convinced of the utility of the methods he recommended, lhat a revision of the whole work for a new edition, was one of the latest labours of his life.

Dr. Currie might now, without danger to his professional character, indulge his inclination for the ornamental parts of literature; and an occasion offered in which he had the happiness of rendering his taste and his benevolence equally conspicuous. On a visit to his native county, in 1792, he had become personally acquainted with that rustic son of genius, Robert Burns. This extraordinary, but unfortunate man, having at his death left his family in great indigence, a subscription was made in Scotland for their immediate relief, and at the same time a design was formed, of publishing an edition of his printed works and remains for their emolument. Mr. Syme, of Ryetlale, an old and intimate friend of Dr. Currie, strongly urged him to undertake the office of editor; and to this request, in which other friends of the poet’s memory concurred, he could not withhold his acquiescence, notwithstanding his multiplied engagements. In 1800 he published in 4 vols. 8vo, “The Works of Robert Burns, with an account of his Life, and a criticism on his Writings: to which are prefixed, some Observations on the Character and Condition of the Scottish Peasantry.” These volumes were a rich treat to the lovers of poetry and elegant literature; and Dr. Currie’s part in them, as a biographer and critic, was greatly admired, as well for beauty of style, as for liberality of sentiment and sagacity of remark. If any objection was made to him as an editor, on account of unnecessary extension of the materials, the kind purpose for which the publication was undertaken, pleaded his excuse with all who were capable of feeling its force. Its success fully equalled the most sanguine expectations.

Though externally of a vigorous frame of body, Dr. Currie had a pre-disposition to those complaints which usually shorten life; and in 1784 he had experienced a pulmonary attack of an alarming nature, from which he was extraordinarily recovered by the use of horse-exercise, as related by himself in his case, inserted in the second volume of Dr. Darwin’s “Zoonomia.” He was, however, seldom long free from threatenings of a return, and his health began visibly to decline in the early part of 1804. In the summer of that year he took a journey to Scotland, where, among other sources of gratification, he had that of witnessing the happy effects of his kindness on the family of Burns. His letters on this occasion were delightful displays of benevolence rejoicing in its work. He returned with some temporary amendment; but alarming symptoms soon returned, and in November he found it necessary to quit the climate and business of Liverpool. He spent the winter alternately at Clifton and Bath; and in the month of March appeared to himself in a state of convalescence, which justified his taking a house in Bath, and commencing the practice of his profession. From the manner in which his career opened, there could be no doubt that it would have proved eminently successful; but the concluding scene was hastily approaching. As a last resource, he went in August to Sidmouth, where, after much suffering, which he bore with manly fortitude and pious resignation, he expired on August 31st, 1805, in the fiftieth year of his age. His disease was ascertained to be a great enlargement and flaccidity of the heart, accompanied with remarkable wasting of the left lung, but without ulceration, tubercle, or abscess.

Few men have left the world with a more amiable and estimable character, proved in every relation of life, public and domestic. In his professional conduct he was upright, liberal, and honourable; with much sensibility for his patients, without the affectation of it; fair and candid towards his brethren of the faculty; and though usually decided in his opinion, yet entirely free from arrogance or dogmatism. His behaviour was singularly calculated to convert rivals into friends; and some of those who regarded him with the greatest esteem and affection, have been the persons who divided practice with him. His powers of mind were of the highest rank, equally fitted for action and speculation; his morals were pure, his principles exalted. His life, though much too short to satisfy the wishes of his friends and family, was long enough for signal usefulness and for lasting fame.

, an eminent botanist, was born at Alton, in Hampshire, in 1746. At the age of fourteen he was bound apprentice to his grandfather, an apothecary at Alton, and appears to have first acquired a particular taste for botany, from an acquaintance in humble life, the ostler of an adjoining inn, who had studied some of the popular Herbals. Some more systematic works falling in his way soon after, instilled into his apt and ardent mind, principles of method, and of Linnaean philosophy, which neither his original preceptor, nor the books he studied, could ever have taught. At the age of twenty, Mr. Curtis came to London, in order to finish his medical education, and to seek an establishment in the profession to which he was destined. He was associated with a Mr. Talwin of Gracechurch-street, to whose business he at length succeeded; but not without having from time to time received many reproofs and warnings, respecting the interference of his botanical pursuits with the more obviously advantageous ones of his profession. Nor were these warnings without cause. The street-walking duties of a city practitioner but ill accorded with the wild excursions of a naturalist; the apothecary was soon swallowed up in the botanist, and the shop exchanged for a garden. Mr. Curtis, therefore, became a lecturer on the principles of natural science, and a Demonstrator of practical botany. His pupils frequented his garden, studied in his library, and followed him into the fields in his herborizing excursions. His first garden was situated at Bermondsey; afterwards he occupied a more extensive one at Lambeth Marsh, which he finally exchanged for a more salubrious and commodious spot at Brompton. This last garden he continued to cultivate till his death.

Mr. Curtis was very early led to combine the study of insects and thtir metamorphoses with that of plants, and his various gardens were furnished with accommodations for this pursuit. Hence he became an author; his first publication being a pamphlet, entitled “Instructions for collecting and preserving Insects; particularly Moths and Butterflies, illustrated with a copper plate,” printed in 1771. In the following year he published a translation of the “Fundamenta Entomologist” of Linnæus, entitled “An Introduction to the Knowledge of Insects,” many valuable additions being subjoined to the original treatise. These two pamphlets have contributed more than any similar works, to diffuse a knowledge of scientific entomology in England, and to engraft on the illiterate illiberal stock of mere collectors, a race of enlightened and communicative observers of nature; who no longer hoard up unique specimens, and selfish acquisitions, but contribute their discoveries and their experience for the benefit of the agriculturist, the manufacturer, or the physician.

The celebrity which these publications procured for their author, was soon altogether eclipsed by what arose from his botanical labours, which have placed him in the very first rank of English writers in that department of science. In 1777 appeared the first number of his “Flora Londinensis,” containing six folio plates, with a page or more of letter-press, consisting of a description in Latin and English, with synonyms of each plant, and copious remarks on its history, uses, qualities, and the insects it nourishes. Each number was sold at half a crown plain, five shillings coloured; and some copie?, finished with extraordinary care, were sold at seven shillings and six-pence. The first artist employed in making the drawings for this work, was Mr. Kilburn, who used a camera obscura for the purpose; his sketches were shaded with Indian ink, before the colours were laid on. The performances of this artist have not been excelled in any similar work. When from other engagements, Mr. Kilburn was obliged to relinquish his task, Mr. Sowerby was employed, and maintained uridiminished the perfection of the figures. After him, Mr. Sydenham Edwards was engaged by Mr. Curtis, with no less credit, both in this publication and the “Botanical Magazine” hereafter mentioned. Of the plates of the “Flora Londineosis” too much cannot be said; their beauty and botanical accuracy are alike eminent, and it is only to be regretted that the manufactory of paper, as well as the typographical art, were in so degraded a state when this book first appeared. For this its author cannot be responsible, nor are these defects of any moment in the eyes of learned or scientific readers, to whom the work in question, independent of its excellent figures, ranks next to Ray’s Synopsis, in original merit and authority upon English plants. It may be added, that the works of Curtis have tended, more than any other publications of their day, to give that tone of urbanity and liberality to the science, which every subsequent writer of good character has observed. Wherever their author swerved in any degree from this candour, which was very seldom, and not perhaps without provocation, it was always to his own loss; and he was thus led into some of the very few mistakes that he has committed.

The “Flora Londinensis” was extended to six fasciculi, of seventy-two plates each, and ten years after the beginning of it, Mr. Curtis undertook a new publication, the “Botanical Magazine,” a work whose sale has been extensive beyond all former example, and which is in every respect worthy of its author. No book has more diffused a taste for unsophisticated nature and science. It rewarded its contriver with pecuniary emolument as well as with merited celebrity, and is still continued with unabated utility. It is designed to be a general repository of garden plants, whether previously figured or not in other works, but it has often had the advantage of giving entire novelties to the public.

In 1782, Mr. Curtis published a history of the browntailed moth, an insect confounded by Linnæus under his Phalitna Chrysorrhoea. The design of this pamphlet was to allay the alarm which had been excited in the country round the metropolis, by an extraordinary abundance of the caterpillars of this moth, and which was so great, that the parish officers offered rewards for collecting these caterpillars, and attended in form to see them burnt by bushels at a time. It was one of those popular alarms which every now and then arise amono-the ignorant multitude, and which vanish before the first ray of common sense. When the natural history of the insect was inquired into, and compared with that of others, no cause for any great apprehension could be discerned; and indeed the subsequent years were not more abundant in this species than usual.

Besides the above works, Mr. Curtis published “Practical Observations on the British Grasses,” in 8vo; his truly praise-worthy aim being to direct the farmer to a knowledge and discrimination of the species and their qualities. He also from time to time printed catalogues of his garden. He was induced, by the unfortunate alarm which he conceived at the publication of“English Botany,” an apparently rival work, to put forth diminished figures in 8vo, of his great Flora; but these met with no approbation nor success, and were soon discontinued. His “Lectures on Botany,”' rendered needlessly expensive by superfluous coloured plates, have appeared since his death; but for this publication he is not responsible. Two admirable entomological papers of Mr. Curtis are found in the “Transactions of the Linnean Society” of which society he was one of the original fellows. The first of these is an account of the Silpha Grisea, and Curculio Lapathi, two coleopterous insects very destructive to willows. The other paper is intended to shew that the Aphides, or lice of plants, are “the sole cause of the honey-dew,” a new theory on the subject, and perfectly just, as far as concerns the most common kind of honey-dew. This paper was digested by the president from the unfinished materials of its author, and communicated to the society after his death, which happened on the 7th of July, 1799, after he had for near a twelvemonth laboured under a disease in the chest, supposed to be of a dropsical nature; but which was rather, perhaps, an organic affection of the heart, or of the great vessels immediately connected with it. His remains were interred at Battersea church. He left behind him the character of an honest friendly man, a lively and entertaining companion, and a good master. He was ever ready to encourage and assist beginners in his favourite science, and always endeavoured to render that science as attractive as possible. It must not be forgotten that he was one of the first, who, in spite of authority, contributed to remove some reproaches to which it was justly liable, on the score of indelicacy. This last praise is justly paid to Mr. Curtis by an excellent and very eminent friend, who has given the world a history of his life and merits in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1799, whence we have derived many of the ubove particulars.

, a native of Brussels, where he was born in 1586, became a monk of the Augustine order, and rose to honours and high official situations among his order; being prefect of the schools of Brussels and Louvaine, a provincial of various convents, and counsellor and historiographer to the emperor of Germany. He had the character of a man of extensive learning and piety, the latter carried sometimes to the minuUsc of superstition, as appears by his work “De Clavis Dominicis,” of which there are three editions, 1622, 1632, and 1670: in this he gravely discusses whether our Saviour. was fixed to the cross with three nails or four? and decides in favour of the latter number. His more valuable works are: 1. “Vita; S. S. Rupert! et Virgilii,” Ingolstadt, 1622. 2. “Epistolas familiares,” ibid. 1621. 3. “Poematum libri tres,” Ant. 1629, 12mo. 4. “Amphitheatrum amorum, Christ. Fonseca auctore, Curtio interprete,” Ingolstadt, 1623, 8vo. 5. “Quadragesimale” by Fonseca, translated from the Spanish into Latin, Cologn. 6. “Vitae quinque Virginum Augustiniarum,” ibid. 1636. 7. “Elogia virorum illustrium Ord. Eremit. S. Augustini,” with engraven portraits, Antwerp, 1636, 4to. 8. “Vita S. Nicolai Tolentinatis,” with the lives of other Augustines, ibid, 1637, 16mo. He left also some unfinished manuscripts. He died in Oct. 1633.

, professor of history and rhetoric at Marpurg, was born Aug. 18, 1724, at Techentin, in the duchy of Mecklenburg, of which place his father was minister. Alter his decease, his mother married his successor, John Frederic Aepin; and it was from him that her son’s mind received its first cultivation. He was then placed in the schools at Parchim anil Schwerin, and in 1742 repaired to the university of Rostock. Having completed his academical studies, he accepted the situation of private tutor in the family of the superintendant Paul Rehfeld, of Stralsund. Here he remained till the minister of state, baron von Schwicheidt, of Hanover, became acquainted with him, and entrusted him with the education of his children. That gentleman gave Curtius many proofs of the regard he entertained for him. Among other things, during the seven years’ war, at a time when he himself was overwhelmed with business, he once charged Curtius with an important commission to the duke of Brunswick, who then commanded the allied army. He likewise gained the entire confidence of that excellent minister, the baron von Miinchhausen, who had become acquainted with him by means of Schwicheidt. He held his situation in the house of the latter till 1759, when he was appointed regular professor at the academy of Lilneburg, where he taught logic, metaphysics, history, &c. In 1767 he was appointed professor of history, rhetoric, and poetry, at Marburg, and about this time published his “Commentarii de Senatu Romano, sub iniperatoribus, &c.” In 1769, he also published a translation of Columella on agriculture, with notes.

In 1758 he was invested with the dignity of privy-counsellor; and in 1795 became principal of the faculty of philosophy. He twice held the office of pro-rector of the university, in which he gave universal satisfaction. During a period of thirty-four years, he taught, with indefatigable diligence, all the branches of history, statistics, and geography; explained the Roman antiquities, the imitative arts, natural and experimental philosophy, rural economy, &c. and gave introductory lessons on the formation of a good Latin style. At the same time, he fulfilled all his other college-duties with the most scrupulous fidelity, till the few last weeks of his active life. His health was tolerably good, excepting that he was sometimes attacked with a paralytic affection, and symptoms of the stone. In the spring of 1802, his constitution began to break; and, notwithstanding all the attention of his friend and physician, Michaelis, his health declined rapidly. In the last twelve or fourteen days of his life, his memory was considerably impaired. He had been particularly distinguished by the strength of that faculty; and has frequently been known to write down in his lectures, whole tables, containing dates of years, and other figures, merely from recollection, and without a single error. This alteration, and the anxiety he felt hecause he was prevented from attending his official duties, preyed on his mind, and weakened him more than his disorder. On the 22d of August, 1802, this venerable man expired, aged seventy-eight years and four days.

Curtius was a man of the most extensive and various attainments; and his career as an author, an academical teacher, and a man, tended only to promote the welfare of his fellow creatures. His adopted country, Hesse, was particularly benefited by his history and statistics of that province, published at Marburg in 17^3, and by numerous programmas which he drew up. By his smaller pieces, abounding in critical investigations and new views, he made many an important accession to the history of other European states, and to literature in general. His labours were long and meritorious; he could rejoice over them at the termination of his career, and could behold with pleasure many a flourishing plant of his own cultivation. All his fellow-citizens gave him the testimony that he was a learned and rigidly upright man, religious in the most exalted sense of the word, just and benevolent, open and undisguised. His calm, peaceful, and tranquil life; his indefatigable attention to his duties, without ostentation; his manly spirit, which equally disdained artifice and base submission, deserve to be held forth as patterns for imitation.

, is the name, or assumed name, of a Latin historian, who has written the actions of Alexander the Great, in ten books; the two first of which are indeed not extant, but yet are so well supplied by Freinshemius, as to be thought equal to the others. Where this author was born, and when he lived, are disputed points among the learned, and never likely to be settled. Some have fancied, from the elegant style of his history, that he must have lived in or near the Augustan age; but there are no explicit testimonies to confirm this opinion; 'and a judgment formed upon the single circumstance of style will always be found precarious. Others place him in the reign of Vespasian, and others have brought him down so low as to Trajan’s: Gibbon is inclined to place him in the time of Gordian, in the middle of the third century; and some have imagined that the name of Quintus Curtius was forged by an Italian, who composed that history, or romance as it has been called, about three hundred years ago; yet why so good a Latin writer, who might have gained the reputation of the first Latin scholar of his time, should have been willing to sacrifice his glory to that of an imaginary Quintus Curtius, is a question yet to be resolved. On the other hand it is certain that Quintus Curtius was an admired historian of the romantic ages. He is quoted in the “Policraticon” of John of Salisbury, who died in the year 1181; and Peter Blesensis, archdeacon of London, a student at Paris, about 1150, mentioning the books most common in the schools, declares that “he profited much by frequently looking into this author.” All this is decidedly against the opinion that Quintus Curtiuis a forgery of only three hundred years old.

Cardinal du Perron was so great an admirer of this historian, that he declared one page of him to be worth thirty of Tacitus. This extravagant admiration, however, may be somewhat abated by a view of what Le Clerc has written about this author, at the end of his book upon the art of of criticism; in which are manifestly shewn several great faults in him, ignorance of astronomy and geography, contradictions, erroneous descriptions, bad taste in the choice of matter, carelessness in dating the events, &c. though perhaps, as Bayle rightly observes, the greatest part of those faults might be found in most ancient historians, if one would take the pains, or had the opportunity, to criticise them severely. He has nevertheless many qualities as a writer, which will always make him admired and applauded; and notwithstanding the censures of some critics, this historian deserves to be commended for his sincerity, for he speaks the good and the bad of his hero, without the least prepossession of his merit. If any fault is to be found with his history, it is for being too highly polished.

There is a singular anecdote, relating to this historian, preserved of Alphonso king of Naples, which may be mentioned as another proof of what we have advanced above, respecting the forgery of Quintus Curtius. This prince, who lived in the thirteenth century, labouring under an indisposition at Capua, from which none of his physicians could relieve him, every one strove to bring him such things as they thought would divert him best. Antonius Panormita made choice of books, and among the rest, the history of Alexander, by Quintus Curtius. To this the prince listened very attentively, and was so extremely pleased with it, that he almost entirely recovered the very first day it was read to him. Upon which occasion he could not help rallying his physicians, and telling them, that whatever they might think of their Hippocrates and their Avicenna, Quintus Curtius was worth a thousand of them.

The first edition of this author was printed in 1470. The best editions of more modern date, are the Elzevir, 12mo, 1633 and 1653 Freinsheim’s, 1640, 2 vols. 8vo, and those of Kapp, 1640, 4to; Cellarius, 1688-91-96, 12mo, and Snakenburg, 1724, 4to. We have a very old English translation by John Brende, dated 1561; a second by Codrington, 1670; and a third more modern, by Digby, 2 vols. 12mo.

, 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.

, whose German name was Speishammer, an eminent historian, was born in 1473, at Sweinfurt, in Franconia, and became distinguished as a philosopher, historian, orator, poet, and physician, although his historical works only have survived. He was educated at Vienna, where his studies were confined to medicine and poetry, and soon became in high favour with the emperor Maximilian I. who made him his librarian, and afterwards employed him in various important negociations in Hungary, Bohemia, and Poland, and for many years admitted him to his presence as a confidential adviser, and placed him at the head of the senate of Vienna. When Cuspinian meditated his historical writings, the emperor ordered the libraries and archives to be thrown open to him. He died in 1529. His biographer, Gerbelius, describes him as a man of elegant person, address, and manners; and his works attest his learning and diligence in historical research. In this branch he wrote: 1. “De Cicsaribus et Imperatoribus Romanorum,” 1519, fol.; reprinted at Strasburgh, 1540; Basil, by Oporinus, 1561, and Francfort, 1601. 2. “Austria, sive Commentarius de rebus Austrice Marchionum, Ducum, &c.” Basil, 1553, fol. Franc fort, 1601. 3. “Commonefactio ad Leonem X. papam, ad Carolum V. imperatorem, &c. de Constantinopoli capta a Turcis, &c.” Leipsic, 1596, 4to. 4. “Commentarius in Sexti Rufi libellum de regia, consulari, imperialique dignitate, &c.” Basil, 1553, fol. with his life by Gerbelius, reprinted at Francfort, 1601, fol. 5. “De origine Turcorum,” Antwerp, 1541, 8vo. 6. “Panegyric! variorum Auctorum,” Vienna, 1513.

was born in the north of England, in the beginning of the sixth century, and educated under the Scottish monks in the famous abbey of rcolmhill, celebrated for having been the seat of learning for British and Irish monks in that age. The Scottish and Irish monks were then stimulated by the fervency of pious zeal to convert the pagan Saxons to the Christian religion, and for that purpose Cuthbert with some others settled in the island of Liridisferne, about four miles from Berwick. Egfred, king of Northumberland, invited Cuthbert to his court, where he converted and baptized many of his nobles, and acquired such reputation, that he received episcopal ordination at York, as bishop of the Northumbrian Saxons. But his love of solitude induced him to return to Lindisferne, since called Holy-island, where he founded a monastery, the remains of which are yet to be seen. There he lived to a great age, and died in the year 686, leaving behind him a great number of disciples. Whatever may be said of those zealous monkish saints who lived from the fifth to the eighth century, it is certain they were better men than their successors have represented them. They never pretended to work miracles, but the latter monks have made them perform many, even after their deaths. There can remain little doubt but Cuthbert was interred in Holy-island, where he resigned his breath; but the monks, ever fertile at invention, have told us many ridiculous stories concerning him. They say that he was first buried at Norham, in Northumberland; but, not relishing the damp situation, he appeared in person to his monks, and desired them to carry his bones to Melrose, about twenty miles farther up the Tweed. His request was complied with; but Melrose not being agreeable to him, he again appeared to his monks, and desired them to put him into a stone boat, and sail with him down the Tweed to Tilmonth, where he rested some years. The stone boat was left with a farmer, who made it a tub for pickling beef in, which enraged St. Cuthbert so much, that he came in the night-time and broke it in pieces. The monks, although almost tired with carrying the saint so often, were obliged to travel with him once more, and rested at Chester; but that place not being agreeable, they carried him to Durham, where his bones rested in peace till the time of the reformation, when the wife of Dr. Whittingham, then dean of that church, and one of the translators of the psalms ascribed to Sternhold and Hopkins, ordered them to be taken up and thrown upon a dunghill.

, a brave officer in king William’s wars, was a younger son of Richard Cutts, esq. of an ancient and distinguished family, settled about the time of Henry VI. at Matching in Essex, where they had considerable property. His father removed to Childerley in Cambridgeshire, to take possession of a good estate given him by sir John Cutts, bart. who died without issue. This, estate, after the decease of an elder brother, devolved on John; who sold it, to pay incumbrances, to equip himself as a soldier, and to enable himself to travel. After an academical education at Cambridge, he entered early into the service of the duke of Monmouth, and afterwards was aid-de-camp to the duke of Lorrain in Hungary, and signalized himself in a very extraordinary manner at the taking of Buda by the imperialists in 1686; which important place had been for nearly a century and a half in the hands of the Turks. Mr. Addison, in a Latin poem, not unworthy of the Augustan age, plainly hints at Mr. Cutts’ s distinguished bravery at that siege. He was afterwards colonel of a regiment in Holland under the States, and accompanied king William to England, who “being graciously pleased to confer a mark of his royal favour upon colonel John Cutts, for his faithful services, and zealous affection to his royal person and government, thought fit to create him a baron of the kingdom of Ireland, by the style and title of Baron Cutts of Gowran in the said kingdom, December 6, 1690.” He was appointed governor of the Isle of Wight, April 14, 1693 made a major-general and, when the assassination-project was discovered, 1695-6, was captain of the king’s guard. He was twice married first to Elizabeth, daughter of George Clark of London, merchant (relict of John Morley, of Glynd, in Sussex, and after, of John Trevor, esq. eldest brother to the first lord Trevor). This lady died in Feb. 1692. His second wife, an amiable young woman, was educated under the care of her grandmother, the lady Pickering, of Cambridgeshire. She was brought to bed of a son, September 1, 1697, and died in a few days after, aged only 18 years and as many days. Her character has been admirably delineated by bishop Atterbury, in the dedication to a sermon he preached on occasion of her death.

In 1695, and the three following parliaments, lord Cutts was regularly elected one of the representatives both for the county of Cambridge, and for the borough of Newport in the Isle of Wight; but made his election for the former. In two parliaments which followed (1702 and 1705) he represented Newport. In 1698 he was complimented by Mr. John Hopkins, as one to whom “a double crown was due,” as a hero and as a poet. In 1699, he is thus introduced in a compliment to king William on his conquests:

His wounds and his own worth can speak his fame."

He was colonel of the Coldstream, or second regiment of guards, in 1701; when Steele, who was indebted to his interest for a captain’s commission in the lord Lucas’s regiment of fusileers, inscribed to him his first work, “The Christian Hero.” On the accession of queen Anne, he was made a lieutenant-general of the forces in Holland. February 13, 1702-3, he was appointed commander in chief of the English forces on the continent, during the absence of the duke of Marlborough; commander in chief of the forces in Ireland, under the duke of Ormond, March 23, 1704-5; and afterwards one of the lords justices of that kingdom, to keep him out of the way of action, a circumstance which broke his heart. He died at Dublin, Jan. 26, 1706-7, and was buried there on the 29th, in the cathedral of Christ-church. He was a person of eminent natural parts, well cultivated by study and conversation; of a free, unreserved temper; and of undaunted bravery and resolution. As he was a servant to queen Mary when princess of Orange, and learned the trade of war under her consort, he was early devoted to them both, and a warm supporter of the revolution. He was an absolute stranger to fear; and on all occasions gave distinguishing proofs of his intrepidity, particularly at the siege of Limerick in 1691, at the memorable attack of the castle of Namur in 1695, and at the siege of Venlo in 1702. Macky says of him, in 1703: “He hath abundance of wit, but too much seized with vanity and self-conceit; he is affable, familiar, and very brave. Few considerable actions happened in this as well as the last war, in which he was not, and hath been wounded in all the actions where he served; is esteemed to be a mighty vigilant officer, and for putting the military orders in execution; he is pretty tall, lusty, wellshaped, and an agreeable companion; hath great revenues, yet so very expensive, as always to be in debt; towards fifty years old.” Swift, in a ms note on the above passage, with his usual laconic cruelty, calls lord Cutts, “The vainest old fool alive.” He wrote a poem on the death of queen Mary; and published in 1687, “Poetical Exercises, written upon several occasions, and dedicated to her Royal Highness Mary Princess of Orange; licensed March 23, 1686-7, Roger L'Estrange.” It contains, besides the dedication signed “J. Cutts,” verses to that princess; a poem on Wisdom; another to Mr. Waller on his commending it; seven more copies of verses (one of them called “La Muse Cavalier,” which had been ascribed to lord Peterborough, and as such mentioned by Mr. Walpole in the list of that nobleman’s writings), and eleven songs; the whole composing a very thin volume, which is by no means so scarce as Mr. Walpole supposes it to be. The author speaks of having more pieces by him.

, originally of Thessaly, the disciple of Demosthenes and minister of Pyrrhus, equally celebrated as a philosopher and as an orator, flourished in the 125th olympiad, about 280 B. C. Pyrrhus said of him, “that he had taken more towns by his eloquence, than he had by his arms.” This prince sent him to Rome to solicit a peace, which was nearly granted him, when Appius Claudius and Fabricius, who were not to moved by the flowers of rhetoric, influenced the senate to adopt other measures. Cyneas, being returned to the camp of Pyrrhus, described Rome to him as a temple, the senate as an assembly of kings, and the Roman people as a hydra, which recruited its vigour as often as it was defeated. Pliny cites the memory of Cyneas as a prodigy, at least in remembering persons; for the day after his arrival at Rome, he saluted all the senators and knights by their several names. He abridged the book of Ericas the tactician, on the defence of places, which Casaubon published with a Latin version, in the Paris edition of Polybius, 1609, folio, and M. de Beausobre translated it into French, with comments, 1757, 4to.

, a principal father of the Christian church, was born at Carthage in Africa, about the beginning of the third century. We know nothing more of his parents, than that they were heathens; and he himself continued such till the last twelve years of his life. He applied himself early to the study of oratory; and some of the ancients, Lactantius in particular, informs us, that he taught rhetoric at Carthage with the highest applause. Tertullian was his master; and Cyprian was so fond of reading him, that, as St. Jerome tells us, seldom a clay passed without his saying to his amanuensis, “Da magistrum,” Give me my master. Cyprian, however, far excelled Tertullian as a writer.

In the year 246 Cyprian was prevailed on to embrace Christianity, at Carthage, by Cæcilius, a priest of that church, whose name Cyprian afterwards took; and between whom there ever after subsisted so close a friendship, that Csecilius at his death committed to Cyprian the care of his family. Cyprian was also a married man himself; but as soon as he became a Christian, he resolved upon a state of continence, which was thought a high degree of piety, as being yet not become general. This we learn from his deacon Pontius, who has left us memoirs of his life, which are prefixed to his works, but are not so ample in information as might have been expected from one who knew him so well. It was now incumbent upon him to give the usual proof of the sincerity of his conversion, by writing against paganism, and in defence of Christianity. With this view he composed his piece “De gratia Dei, or, concerning the grace of God,” which he addressed to Donatus. It is a work of the same nature with the Apologetic of Tertullian, and the Octavius of Minutius Felix; and it is remarkable, that Cyprian has not only insisted upon the same arguments with those writers, but frequently transcribed their words, those of Minutius Felix especially. In the year 247, the year after his conversion, he composed another piece upon the subject, entitled “De idolorum vanitate, or, upon the vanity of idols” in which he has taken the same liberties with Tertulliau and Minutius Felix. His Oxford editor, bishop Fell, endeavours to excuse him from the charge of plagiarism upon this occasion; because, says he, having the same points to treat as all the apologists had before, namely, the truth and excellency of Christianity, and the falsehood and vanity of heathenism, he could not well avoid making use of the. same topics.

Cyprian’s behaviour, both before and after his baptism, was so highly pleasing to the bishop of Carthage, that he ordained him priest a few months after, although it was rather irregular to ordain any person in his noviciate: But Cyprian was so extraordinary a person, and thought capable of doing such singular service to the church, that it might seem allowable in his case to dispense a little with the form and discipline of it. Besides his known talents as a man of learning, he had acquired a high reputation of sanctity since his conversion; having not only separated himself from his wife, which in those days was thought an extraordinary act of piety, but also consigned over all his goods to the poor, and given himself up entirely to the things of God; and on this account, when the bishop of Carthage died the year after, that is, in the year 248, none was judged so proper to succeed him as Cyprian. Cyprian himself, as Pontius tells us, was extremely against it, and kept out of the way on purpose to avoid being chosen; but the people insisted upon it, and he was forced to comply. The quiet and repose which the Christians had enjoyed for the last forty years, had, it seems, greatly corrupted their manners; and therefore Cyprian’s first care, after his advancement to the bishopric, was to correct disorders and reform abuses. Luxury was prevalent among them; and many of their women were remarkable indecorous in the article of dress. This occasioned him to draw up his piece, “De habitu virginum, or, concerning the dress of young women;” in which, besides what he says on that particular head, he inculcates many lessons of modesty and sobriety.

In the year 249, the emperor Decius began to issue out very severe edicts against the Christians, which particularly affected those living upon the coasts of Africa; and in the beginning of the year 250, the heathens, in the circus and amphitheatre at Carthage, loudly insisted upon Cyprian’s being thrown to the lions: a common method, as is well known, of destroying the primitive Christians. Cyprian upon this withdrew from his church at Carthage, and fled into retirement, to avoid the fury of the persecution; which step, how justifiable soever in itself, gave great scandal, and seems to have been considered by the clergy of Rome, in a public letter written upon the subject of it to the clergy of Carthage, as a desertion of his post and pastoral duty. It is no wonder, therefore, to find Cyprian himself, as well as his apologist, Pontius, the writer of his life, so solicitous to excuse it; which they both endeavour to do by affirming, in the true spirit of the times, “that he was commanded to retire by a special revelation from heaven; and that his flight was not the effect of any other fear but that of offending God.” It is remarkable, that this father was a great pretender to visions. For instance, in a letter to Caecilius, he declares, “that he had received a divine admonition, to mix water with wine in the sacrament of the eucharist, in order to render it effectual.” In another to the clergy, concerning certain priests, who had restored some lapsed Christians too hastily to the communion of the church, he threatens them to execute “what he was ordered to do against them, in a vision, if they did not desist.” He makes the same threat to one Pupianus, who had spoken ill of him, and withdrawn himself from his communion. In a letter likewise to the clergy and the people, he tells them, “how he had been admonished and directed by God to ordain one Numidicus a priest.” Dodwell, in his “Dissertationes Cyprianicae,” has made a large collection of these visions of Cyprian, which he treats with more reverence than they seem to deserve.

As soon as Cyprian had withdrawn himself, he was proscribed by name, and his goods confiscated. He lay concealed, but not inactive; for he continued to write from time to time to the clergy and to the laity such letters as their unhappy situation and occasions required. He exhorted the clergy to take care of the discipline of the church, of the poor, and especially of those who suffered for the gospel; and he gave them particular directions upon each of these heads. He exhorted the people to be of good courage, to stand fast in the faith, and to persevere against all the terrors of persecution even unto death; assuring them, in the words of the apostle, that the present “afflictions, which were but for a moment, would work for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” When the persecution ceased, either in 251 or 252, Cyprian returned to Carthage, and appeared again at the head of his clergy. He had now much business upon his hands, which was occasioned in his absence, partly by the persecution, and the disorders attending it, and partly by divisions which had arisen among the Christians. The first thing that presented itself was the case of the lapsed, or those unhappy members of the church who had not been able to stand the fiery trial of persecution, but had been drawn by the terrors of it to renounce Christ, and sacrifice to idols; and for the settling of this, he immediately called a council at Carthage. The year after, he called another council, to sit upon the baptism of infants; and, in 255, a third, to debate concerning baptism received from heretics, which was there determined to be void and of no effect. All these points had produced great disputes and disturbances; and as to the last, namely, heretical baptism, it was so far from being fixed at Carthage to the satisfaction of the church, that Stephen, the bishop of Rome, and a great part of the Christian world, afterwards opposed it with the utmost violence.

These divisions and tumults among the Christians raised a second persecution against them, in 257, under the emperor Valerian. Cyprian was summoned to appear before Paternus, the proconsul of Carthage, by whom, after he had confessed himself a Christian, and refused to sacrifice to idols, he was condemned to be banished. He was sent to Curebis, a little town fifty miles from Carthage, situated by the sea, over against Sicily: and here Pontius says he had another vision, admonishing him of his death, which was to happen the year after, When he had continued in tins place, where he was treated with kindness by the natives, and frequently visited by the Christians, for eleven months, Galerius Maximus, a new proconsul, who had succeeded Aspasius, recalled him. from his exile, and ordered him publicly to appear at Carthage. Galerius, however, being retired to Utica, and Cyprian having intimation that he was to be carried 1 thither, the latter absconded, and, when soldiers were sent to apprehend him, was not to be found. Cyprian excuses this conduct in a letter, by saying, that “it was not the fear of death which made him conceal himself, but that he thought it became a bishop to die upon the spot, and in sight of that flock over which he presided.” Accordingly, when the proconsul returned to Carthage, Cyprian came forth, and presented himself to the guards, who were commissioned and ready to seize him. He was carried to the proconsul, who ordered him to be brought again on the morrow. Cyprian being introduced, the proconsul put several questions to him, which he replying to with unchangeable fortitude, the former pronounced upon him the sentence of death; to which the martyr answered, “God be praised 1” He was then led away to the place of execution, where he suffered with great firmness and constancy; after he had been bishop of Carthage ten years, and a Christian not more than twelve. He died Sept. 14, 258.

The works of this father and confessor have been often printed. The first edition of any note was that of Rigaltius, printed at Paris in 1648; afterwards in 1666, with very great additions. This edition of Rigaltius was considerably improved by Fell, bishop of Oxford; at which place it was handsomely printed in 1682, with the “Annales Cyprianici” of bishop Pearson prefixed. Fell’s edition was reprinted at Amsterdam in 1700; after which a Benedictine monk published another edition of this father at Paris in 1727. The works of Cyprian have been translated into English by Dr. Marshal in 1717; for this reason chiefly, that of all the fathers none are capable of being so usefully quoted, in supporting the doctrines and discipline of our church, as he. His letters are particularly valuable, as they not only afford more particulars of his life than Pontius has given, but are a valuable treasure of ecclesiastical history. The spirit, taste, discipline, and habits of the times, among Christians, are strongly delineated; nor have we in all the third century any account. to be compared with them. In his general style, he is the most eloquent and perspicuous of all the Latin fathers.

, of Jerusalem, was ordained a priest of that church by Maximus bishop of Jerusalem; and after Maximus’s death, which happened about the year 350, became his successor in that see, through the interest of Acacius bishop of Caesarea, and the bishops of his party. This made the orthodoxy of Cyril highly suspected, because Acacius was an Arian; aiul St. Jerome accuses Cyril, as if he was one too: but Theodoret assures us, that he was not. His connexions, however, with Acacius, were presently broken by a violent contest which arose between them about the prerogatives of their respective sees. The council of Nice had decreed to the bishop of Jerusalem the honour of precedency amongst the bishops of his province, without concerning himself at all with the right of the church of Cassarea, which was metropolitan to that of Jerusalem. This made Maximus, and after him Cyril, who were bishops of Jerusalem, to insist upon certain rights about consecrating bishops, and assembling councils, which Acacius considered as an encroachment upon the jurisdictions of his province. Hence a dispute ensued, and Acacius calling a synod, contrived to have Cyril deposed, under the pretence of a very great sin he had committed in the time of a late famine, by exposing to sale the treasures of the church, and applying the money to the support of the poor. This, however, might possibly have been passed over, as an offence at least of a pardonable nature, but for one circumstance that unluckily attended it; which was., that amongst these treasures that were sold there was a rich embroidered robe, which had been presented to the church by Constantine the Great; and this same robe was afterwards seen to have been worn by a common actress upon the stage: which, as soon as it was known, was considered as a horrible profanation of that sacred vestment.

Cyril, in the mean time, encouraged by the emperor Constantius himself, appealed from the sentence of deposition which Acacius and his council had passed upon him, to the higher tribunal of a more numerous council; but was obliged to retire to Tarsus, where he was kindly received by Sylvanus, the bishop of that place, and suffered to celebrate the holy mysteries, and to preach in his diocese. In the year 359 he appeared at the council of Seleucia, where he was treated as a lawful bishop, and had the rank of precedency given him by several bishops, though Acacius did all he could to hinder it, and deposed him a second time. Under Julian he was restored to his see of Jerusalem, and is said to have interposed to prevent the attempts that were made in that reign to rebuild the temple. Lastly, under Theodosius, we find him firmly established in his old honours and dignities, in which he continued unmolested to the time of his death, which happened in the year 386.

The remains of this father are not voluminous; but consist of eighteen catechetical discourses, and five mystagogic catecheses, and a single letter. The letter is indeed a remarkable one, as well for its being written to Constantius, as for the subject it is written upon: for it gives a wonderful account of the sign of the cross, which appeared in the heavens at Jerusalem, in the reign of this emperor, which was probably some natural phenomenon not then understood. His catecheses form a well-digested abridgment of the Christian doctrine: the first eighteen are addressed to catechumens, and the other five to the newly baptised. The style is plain and simple. The best editions of his works are those of Petavius, Paris, 1622, fol.; of Pnevotius, ibid. 1631; of Milles, Oxford, 1703; and of Touttee, Paris, 1720.

, of Alexandria, another celebrated father of the church, succeeded his uncle Theophilus in the bishopric of that place in the year 412; and as the bishops of Alexandria had long acquired great authority and power in that city, Cyril took every opportunity to confirm and increase it. He was no sooner advanced to this see, than he drove the Novatians out of the city; and, as Dupin says, stripped Theopemptus their bishop of every thing he had. In the year 415 the Jews committed some insult upon the Christians of Alexandria, which so inflamed the zeal of Cyril that he put himself at the head of his people, demolished the synagogues of the Jews, drove them all out of the city, and suffered the Christians to pillage their effects. This, however, highly displeased Orestes, the governor of the town; who began to be sensible that the bishop’s authority, if not timely suppressed, might possibly be found too strong for that of the magistrate. Upon which a kind of war broke but between Orestes and the bishop, and each had his party the inhabitants were inclined to be seditious; many tumults were raised, and some battles fought in the very streets of Alexandria. One day, when Orestes was abroad in an open chariot, he found himself instantly surrounded with about 500 monks, who had left their monasteries to revenge the quarrel of their bishop. They pursued him fiercely, wounded him with stones, and had certainly killed him, if the people had not restrained their fury till his guards came up to his relief. Ammonius, one of these monks, was afterwards seized by the order of Orestes, and, being put upon the rack, died under the operation. Cyril, however, had him immediately canonized, and took every public opportunity of commending his zeal and constancy. About the same time there was at Alexandria a heathen philosophess, named Hypatia, whose fame and character were every where so celebrated, that people came from all parts to see and to consult her. Orestes saw her often, which made the Christians imagine that it was she who inspired the governor with such an aversion to their bishop. This suspicion wrought so strongly upon some of their zealots, that on a certain day they seized upon Hypatia as she was returning home, dragged her violently through the streets, and caused the mob to tear her limb from limb. Damascius, who wrote the life of Isidore the philosopher, charges Cyril himself with being the contriver of this horrid murder.

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 famous patriarch of Alexandria, afterwards of Constantinople, was born November 12, 1572, in the island of Candia. He studied at Venice and Padua, and was pupil to the celebrated Margunius, bishop of Cythera. Cyril went afterwards into Germany, embraced the doctrine of the reformed religion, and attempted to introduce it into Greece; but the Greeks opposed it, and he wrote a confession of faith, in which he defended his principles. Having been archimandrite, he was raised to the patriarchate of Alexandria, and, some time after, elected to that of Constantinople, 1621; but, continuing firm in his connections with the protestants, he was deposed, and confined in the island of Rhodes. Some time after, however, he was restored to his dignity, at the solicitation of the English ambassador; but in 1638 he was carried from Constantinople and put to death near the Black Sea, by order of the grand signior, in the most cruel manner. He had a mind much superior to the slavish condition of his country, and laboured to promote the interests of genuine Christianity, amidst much opposition and danger. He had collected a very excellent library, rich in Greek Mss. a specimen of which, the celebrated Codex Alexandrinus, one of the most ancient and valuable manuscripts in the world, he presented to king Charles I. by his ambassador sir Thomas Roe. The fate of his other Mss. was peculiarly lamented. In order to secure them, the Dutch resident at Constantinople sent them by a ship bound for Holland, which was wrecked in sight of land, and all her cargo lost.

, a French critic and philologer, was born of protestant parents at Castres in Upper Languedoc April 6, 1651, and began to be educated in the college there; but, when by a decree of the council the direction of it was given, in 1664, to the Jesuits alone, his father sent him to the university of Puylaurens, and afterwards to that of Saumur, that he might finish his classical studies under Tannegui le Fevre, or Tanaquil Faber. This eminent scholar was so pleased with Dacier’s inclination for learning, that he kept him alone in his house, after he had dismissed the rest of the pupils; and here he conceived that affection for le Fevre’s celebrated daughter, which ended at length in marriage. On le Fevre’s death in 1672, Dacier returned to his father; and after some time went to Paris, in order to gain a settlement, and cultivate the acquaintance and friendship of the learned: in the former of these objects he did not at first succeed; but on a second visit to Paris, he procured an introduction to the duke of Montausier, governor to the dauphin, who put him on the list of the commentators for the use of the dauphin, and engaged him in the edition of Pompeius Festus, and Marcus Verrius Flaccus. This he published at Paris, 1681, in 4to; and it was again published at Amsterdam, 1699, in 4to, which edition is preferable to that of Paris, because there are added to it the entire notes of Joseph Scaliger, Fulvius Ursinus, and Anthony Augustinus, and the new fragments of Festus. His Horace, with a French translation, and notes critical and historical, came out at Paris, 1681, in 10 vols. 12mo, and has often been printed since. The best edition of this work is that of Amsterdam, 1726, consisting of the same number of volumes in the same size. Another edition was printed at Amsterdam in 8 vols. 12mo, to which were added the translation and notes of father Sanadon, published at Paris, 1728, in 2 vols. 4to, Mr. John Masson, a refugee minister in England, made several animadversions upon Dacier’s notes on Horace, in his life of that poet, printed at Leyden in 1708; which occasioned Dacier to publish new explications upon the works of Horace, with an answer to the criticisms of Mr. Masson, in which he treats Masson’s book with great contempt; and, speaking of verbal criticism, styles it “the last effort of reflection and judgment.” These were afterwards added to Sanadon’s edition of Dacier’s Horace.

The next specimen of his learning was in the edition he gave of the twelfth book of the anagogical contemplations of St. Anastasius, monk of mount Sinai, upon the creation of the world, now first published, together with notes and a Latin translation, London, 1682, 4to.

In 1683 Dacier married mademoiselle le Fevre; and in 1685 abjured with his lady the protestant religion. His marriage, which was styled “the union of Greek and Latin,” added considerably to his felicity, and procured him an able assistant in his studies and publications. In 1691 he was assisted by madame Dacier in a French translation of the moral reflections of the emperor Marcus Antoninus, with notes, in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1692 he published Aristotle’s Poetics, translated into French, with critical remarks, in 4to. This work was reprinted in Holland in 12mo; and some have considered it as Dacier’s masterpiece. In 1693 he published a French translation of the Oedipus and Electra of Sophocles, in 12mo; but not with the same success as the Poetics just mentioned. We have already noticed six publications of Dacier: the rest shall now follow in order; for the life of this learned man, like that of most others, is little more than a history of his works. He published, 7. Plutarch’s Lives, translated into French, with notes, Paris, 1694, vol. I. 8vo. This essay, which contains only five lives, is the beginning of a work, which he afterwards finished. 8. The works of Hippocrates, translated into French, with notes, and compared with the manuscripts in the king’s library, Paris, 1697, 2 vols. 12mo. The Journal des Sgavans speaks well of this version. 9. The works of Plato, translated into French, witli notes, and the life of that philosopher, with an account of the principal doctrines of his philosophy, 1699, 2 vols. 12mo. These are only some of Plato’s pieces. 10. The life of Pythagoras, his Symbols, and Golden Verses, the life of Hierocles, and his Commentary upon the Golden Verses, 1706, 2 vols. 12mo. In 1695, Dacier had succeeded Felibien in the academy of inscriptions, and Francis de Harlay, archbishop of Paris, in the French academy. In 1701 a new regulation was made in the academy of inscriptions, by which every member was obliged to undertake some useful work suitable to his genius and course of studies: and, in conformity to this order, Dacier undertook the above translation of the life of Pythagoras, &c. 11. The manual of Epictetus, with five treatises of Simplicius upon important subjects, relating to morality and religion, translated into French, with notes, 1715, 2 vols. 12mo. The authors of the “Europe Sgavante of Jan. 1718,” having criticised the specimen he had given of his translation of Plutarch’s Lives, he printed, 12. An Answer to them, and inserted it in the Journal des Sçavans of the 25th of June and the llth of July 1718. 13. Plutarch’s Lives of illustrious men, revised by the Mss. and translated into French, with notes historical and critical, and the supplement of those comparisons which are lost. To which are added, those heads which could be found, and a general index of matters contained in the work, Paris, 1721, 8 vols. 4to; Amsterdam, 1723, 9 vols. 8vo. This work was received with applause, and supposed to be well executed; yet not so, say the authors of the Bibliotheque Franchise, as to make the world at once forget the translation of Amyot, obsolete as it is. Dacier published some other things of a lesser kind, as, 14. A Speech made in the French academy, on his admission. 15. Answers, which he made, as director of the academy, to the speech of M. Cousin in 1697, and to that of M. de Boze in 1715, both inserted in the collections of the French academy. 16. A dissertation upon the origin of Satire, inserted in the second volume of the memoirs of the academy of Belles Lettres in 1717. 17. Notes upon Longinus. Boileau, in the preface to his translation of Longinus, styles these notes very learned and says, that “the author of them is not only a man of very extensive learning, and an excellent critic, but likewise a gentleman of singular politeness; which is so much the more valuable, as it seldom attends great learning.” Boileau has added them to his own notes upon Longinus; and they are printed in all the editions of his works. Dacier wrote also a commentary upon Theocritus, which he mentions in his notes upon Horace, ode xxix; and a short treatise upon religion, containing the reasons which brought him over to the church of Rome: but these two works were never printed.

He had a share too in the medallic history of Lewis XIV.; and, when it was finished, was chosen to present it to his majesty; who, being informed of the pains which Dacier had taken in it, settled upon him a pension of 2000 livres; and about the same time appointed him keeper of the books of the king’s closet in the Louvre. In 1713 he was made perpetual secretary of the French academy. In 1717 he obtained a grant in reversion of 10,000 crowns upon his place of keeper of the books of the king’s closet; and when this post was united to that of library-keeper to the king, in 1720, he was not only continued in the privileges of his place during life, but the reversion of it was granted to his wife; a favour, of which there had never been an instance before. But her death happening first, rendered this grant, so honourable to her, ineffectual. Great as Dacier’s grief was for the loss of an helpmate so like himself, it did not prevent him from seeking out another; and he had actually been married at a very advanced period of life, had he not died almost suddenly on Sept. 18, 1722, of an ulcer in the throat, which he did not think at all dangerous, since that very evening he was present at the academy. He was 7 1 years of age; short of stature, and of a long and meagre visage. He was a great promoter of virtue and learning; and if he was somewhat partial to the ancients, in the famous controversy on the comparative merits of the ancients and moderns, yet this may be pardoned in one who had so assiduously studied their works. It would be less easy to excuse his occasional boldness as a critic, and his intemperance as a disputant. In his own time, however, he enjoyed deserved reputation. He chose none but useful subjects; devoted his labours to works only of importance; and enriched the French language with those remains of wise antiquity, which are most advantageous to the morals of mankind. He could not make his countrymen classical, but he did what he could to give them a relish for the ancients. This, however, although an useful attempt in his day, has narrowed the bounds of his fame, and except in his Aristotle’s Poetics, and some parts of his Horace, modern critics seem disinclined to acknowledge his taste and critical acumen.

, the learned wife of the preceding, was born at Saumur, about the end of 1651. She was only eleven years old when her father resolved to give her a learned education; which is said to have been owing to the following circumstance, that while he was teaching one of his sons the rudiments of grammar, in the same room where mademoiselle le Fevre was employed with her needle, she, with every appearance of unconcern, now and then supplied her brother with answers to questions that puzzled him. This induced her father to give her a regular course of lessons, and educate her as a scholar, in which character she soon excelled the youths under his care, and became her father’s associate in some of his publications. We are told that when she had learned Latin enough to read Phaedrus and Terence, he began to instruct her in the Greek, which she was so much pleased with, that in a short time she was capable of reading Anacreon, Callimachus, Homer, and the Greek Tragic Poets. As she read them, she shewed so much taste of the beauties of those admirable writers, that all the fatigue of her father in his professorship was softened by the pleasure which he found in teaching her. To divert her in her more serious studies, he taught "her the Italian language, and read over with her several poets of that nation, and particularly Tasso, in the perusal of whom she very acutely remarked the difference between that poet and Virgil and Homer. She sometimes took the liberty of disputing with her father, particularly, on one occasion, respecting Vaugelas’s translation of Quintus Curtius. Her father was charmed with it, but mademoiselle le Fevre ventured to point out some negligences of style, errors in language, and passages ill translated; and he was frequently obliged to own himself of the same opinion with her. These little contests, however, gave him great satisfaction, and he was extremely surprized to find so delicate a taste, and so uncommon a penetration, in so young a person.

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

In the midst of all these various publications, so close to eacli other, she married Dacier, with whom she had been brought up in her father’s house from her earliest years. This happened, as we have already observed in our account of that gentleman, in 1683; though some have controverted not only the date, but even the marriage itself; and have surmised that she was previously married to one John Lesnier, a bookseller of her father’s, and that she ran away from him for the sake of Dacier, with whom she was never married in any regular way. But it is hardly possible to conceive, that so extraordinary a circumstance in the history of this celebrated lady must not, if it were true, have been notorious and incontested. We are therefore apt to admit father Niceron’s solution of this difficulty; vyho observes, upon this occasion, that “nothing is more common than for a person, who abandons any party, to be exposed to the calumies of those whom they have quitted,” and to suffer by them. Madame Dacier, soon after her marriage, declared to the duke of Montausier and the bishop of Meaux, who had been her friends, a design of reconciling herself to the church of Rome; but as M. Dacier was not yet convinced of the reasonableness of such a change, they thought proper to retire to Castres in 1684, in order to examine the controversy between the protestants and papists. They at last determined in favour of the latter; and, as already noticed, made their public abjuration in Sept. 1685. This, in the opinion of her catholic admirers, might probably occasion the above-mentioned rumour, so much to the disadvantage of madame Dacier, and for which there was probably very little foundation. After they had become catholics, however, the duke of Montausier and the bishop of Meaux recommended them at court; and the king settled a pension of 1500 livres upon M. Dacier, and another of 500 upon his lady. The patent was expedited in November; and, upon the advice which they received of it, they returned to Paris, where they resumed their studies; but before proceeding in our account of madame Dacier' s publications, it is necessary to do justice to the liberality of her patron the duke de Montausier. We are informed, that in 1682 this lady having dedicated a book to the king of France, she could not find any person at court, who would venture to introduce her to his majesty, in order to present it, because she was at that time a protestant. The duke of Montausier, being informed of this, offered his service to introduce her to the king, and taking her in his coach, presented her and her book to his majesty; who told him with an air of resentment, that he acted wrong in supporting persons of that lady’s religion; and that for his part he would forbid his name to be prefixed to any book written by Huguenots; for which purpose he would give orders to seize all the copies of mademoiselle le Fevre’s book. The duke answered with that freedom with which he always spoke to the king, and in which no person else would presume to follow him: “Is it thus, sir, that you favour polite literature? I declare to you frankly, a king ought not to be a bigot.” He added then, that he would thank the lady in his majesty’s name, and make her a present of an hundred pistoles; and that he would leave it to the king to pay him, or not pay him; and he did as he had said. In 1688 she published a French translation of Terence’s comedies, with notes, in 8 vols. 12mo. She is said to have risen at five o'clock in the morning, during a very sharp winter, and to have dispatched four of the comedies; but, upon looking them over some months after, to have flung them into the fire, being much dissatisfied with them, and to have begun the translation again. She brought the work then to the highest perfection; and, in the opinion of the French critics, even reached the graces and noble simplicity of the original. It was a circumstance greatly to her honour, that, having taken the liberty to change the scenes and acts, her disposition of them was afterwards confirmed by an excellent ms. in the king of France’s library. The best and most finished edition of this universally-admired performance, is that of 1717; which, however, was greatly improved afterwards, by adopting the emendations in Bentley’s edition. She had a hand in the translation of Marcus Antoninus, which her husband published in 1691, and likewise in the specimen of a translation of Plutarch’s Lives, which he published three years after; but being now intent on her translation of Homer, she left her husband to finish that of Plutarch. In 1711 appeared her Homer, translated into French, with notes, in 3 vols. 12mo and the translation is reckoned elegant and faithful. In 1714 she published the Causes of the Corruption of Taste. This treatise was written against M. de la Motte, who, in the preface to his Iliad, had declared very little esteem for that poem. Madame Dacier, shocked with the liberty he had taken with her favourite author, immediately began this defence of him, in which she did not treat La Motte with the greatest civility. In 1716 she published a defence of Homer, against the apology of father Hardouin, or, a sequel of the causes of the corruption of Taste: in which she attempts to shew, that father Hardouin, in endeavouring to apologize for Homer, has done him a greater injury than ever he received from his most declared enemies. Besides these two pieces, she had prepared a third against La Motte; but suppressed it, after M. de Valiincourt had procured a reconciliation between them. The same year also she published the Odyssey of Homer, translated from the Greek, with notes, in 3 vols. 12mo, and this, as far as we can find, was her last appearance as an author. She was in a very infirm state of health the last two years of her life; and died, after a very painful sickness, Aug. 17, 1720, being 69 years of age. She bad two daughters and a son, of whose education she took the strictest care; but the son died young: one of her daughters became a nun; and the other, who is said to have had united in her all the virtues and accomplishments of her sex, died at 18 years of age. Her mother has said high things of her, in the preface to her translation of the Iliad.

Madame Dacier was a lady of great virtue as well as learning. She was remarkable for firmness, generosity, good nature, and piety. The causes of her change of religion are not well explained, but she appears to have been at least sincere. Her modesty was so great, that she never spoke of subjects of literature; and it was with some difficulty that she could at any time be led to do it. There is an anecdote related of her, which her countrymen say sets this modesty in a very strong light, although others may think the pi oof equivocal. It is customary with the scholars in the northern parts of Europe, who visit, when they travel, the learned in other countries, to carry with them a book, in which they desire such persons to write their names, with some sentence or other. A learned German paid a visit to madame Dacier, and requested her to write her name and sentence in his book. She seeing in it the names of the greatest scholars in Europe, told him, that she should he ashamed to put her name among those of so many illustrious persons; and that such presumption would by no means become her. The gentleman insisting upon it, she was at last prevailed upon and taking her pen, wrote her name with this verse of Sophocles, Γυναιξὶν ὴ πιγὴ φέρει χόσμον, that is, “Silence is the ornament of the female sex.” When likewise she was solicited to publish a translation of some books of scripture, with remarks upon them, she always answered, that “a woman ought to read, and meditate upon the scriptures, and regulate her conduct by them, and to keep silence, agreeably to the command of St. Haul.” Among her other literary honours, the academy of Iticovrati at Padua chose her one of their body in 1684.

, a painter, was born at Stockholm in 1656, and came to London at an early age, being introduced into this country by an English merchant, but he afterwards travelled to Paris, and resided there some time. He then visited Italy, where he painted, amongst others, the portrait of queen Christina of Sweden. In 1688 he returned to England, where he acquired very considerable reputation as a portrait painter, and was no contemptible rival of sir Godfrey Kneller, with whom he lived in habits of friendship. He died in London in 1743 at the advanced age of 87 years. His portraits of Addison, queen Anne, prince George of Denmark, the duke of Marlborough, and the duke of Ormond, have been engraved.

, a minister of the church of Paris, and one of the ablest advocates the protestants ever had, was born at Chatelleraut, Jan 6, 1594; but carried soon after to Poitiers, where his father usually lived, on account of the office which he bore of receiver of the deposits there. His father designed him for business, and proposed to leave him his office; but his strong attachment to books made him prefer a literary education, and when his son had attained his eleventh year, he sent him to S. Maixent in Poitou, to learn the first rudiments of learning. He continued his studies at Poitiers, Chatelleraut, and Saumur; and, having finished his classical course in the last of those towns, he entered on logic at Poitiers, at the age of sixteen, and finished his course of philosophy at Saumur under the celebrated Mark Duncan. He began his theological studies at Saumur in 1612; which, says his son, was indisputably one of the most fortunate years in his whole life, as in October of it, he was admitted into the family of the illustrious mons. du Plessis Mornay, who did him the honour to appoint him tutor to two of his grandsons. Here, though he discharged the trust he had undertaken very well, yet it is said that he received more instruction from the grandfather than he communicated to the grandsons. Mornay was extremely pleased with him, frequently read with him, and concealed from him nothing of whatever he knew; so that some have been ready to impute the great figure Mr. Daillc afterwards made, to the assistance he received here; and it is but reasonable to suppose, that Mornay’s advice and instructions contributed not a little to it.

Daillé, having lived seven years with so excellent a master, set out on his travels with his pupils in the autumn of 1619, and went to Geneva; and from thence through Piedmont and Lombardy to Venice, where they spent the winter. During their abode in Italy, a melancholy affair happened, which perplexed him not a little. One of his pupils fell sick at Mantua; and he removed him with all speed to Padua, where those of the protestant religion have more liberty, but here he died; and the difficulty was, to avoid the observation of the inquisitors, and remove the corpse to France, to the burial-place of his ancestors. After much consideration, no more eligible plan presented itself than to send him under the disguise of a bale of merchandize goods, or a cargo of books; and in this manner the corpse was conveyed to France, under the care of two of his servants; not, however, without the necessary safe-conduct and passports, which were procured for him from the republic by the celebrated father Paul. He then continued his travels with his other pupil, visiting Switzerland, Germany, Flanders, Holland, England; and returned to France towards the end of 1621. The son relates, that he had often heard his father regret those two years of travelling, which he reckoned as lost, because he could have spent them to better purpose in his closet; and, it seems, he would have regretted them still more, if he had not enjoyed the privilege at Venice of a familiar acquaintance with father Paul, the only fruit which he said he had reaped from that journey. M. du Plessis, with whom that father corresponded by letters, had recommended to him in a very particular manner both his grandsons and their crovernor; so that M. Daille was immediately admitted into his confidence, and there passed not a day without his enjoying some hours discourse with him. The good father even conceived such an affection for M. Daille, that he used his utmost endeavours with a French physician of the protestant religion, and one of his intimate friends, to prevail with him to stay at Venice. This circumstance of Daille’s life, among many others, has been thought no inconsiderable proof, that father Paul concealed, under the habit of a monk, a temper wholly devoted to protestantism and its professors.

Daille was received minister in 1623, and first exercised his office in the family of du Plessis Mornay: but this did not last long; for that lord fell sick a little after, and died the same year, in the arms of the new pastor. Daille spent the following year in digesting some papers of his, which were afterwards published in two volumes, under the title of “Memoirs.” In 1625 he was appointed minister of the church of Sauinur; and the year after removed to that of Paris. Here he spent the rest of his life, and diffused great light over the whole hody, as well by his sermons, as by his books of controversy. In 1628 he wrote his celebrated book, “De l'usage des Peres,” or, “Of the Use of the Fathers;” but, on account of some troubles which seemed to be coming upon the protestants in France, it was not published till 1631. Bayle has pronounced this work a master-piece; but it has been attacked with great seventy by some, as tending to lessen the just respect due to the fathers, and to the views of religious opinions which they exhibit, and which are at least important in point of historical evidence. On the other hand, some eminent scholars, and orthodox churchmen in England have acknowledged its high worth and merit; and so early as 1651 an English translation of it was published by the learned Thomas Smith, B. D. fellow of Christ’s college in Cambridge. An advertisement is prefixed to it, from which we transcribe a passage or two, as illustrating the translator’s opinion and views of the work: “The translation of this tract,” says Mr. Smith, “hath been often attempted, and oftener desired by many noble personages of this and other nations: among others by sir Lucius Gary late lord viscount Falkland, who, with his dear friend Mr. Chillingworth, made very much use of it in all their writings against the Romanists. But the papers of that learned nobleman, wherein this translation was half finished, were long since involved in the common loss. Those few, which have escaped it, and the press, make a very honourable mentipn of this monsieur, whose acquaintance the said lord was wont to say, was worth a voyage to Paris. In page 202 of his Reply, he hath these words: ‘This observation of mine hath been confirmed by consideration of what hath been so temperately, learnedly, and judiciously written by M. Daille, our protestant Perron.’ I shall add but one lord’s testimony more, namely, the lord George Digby*S in his late Letters concerning Religion, in these words, p. 27, 28: 'The reasons prevalent with me, whereon and enquiring and judicious person should be obliged to rely and acquiesce, are so amply and so learnedly set down by M. Daille in his `Emploi des Peres,‘ that I think little, which is material and weighty, can he said on this subject, that his rare and piercing observation hath not anticipated.’ And for myself, I must ingenuously profess, that it was the reading of this rational book, which first convinced me that my study in the French language was not ill employed; which hath also enabled me to commend this to the world, as faithfully translated by a judicious hand.” Mr. Mettayer, who was minister of St. Quintin, published a Latin translation of this work; which translation was revised and augmented with new observations, by Daille himself, and was printed at Geneva in 1656.

In 1633 he published another work of general concern, entitled “L'Apologie de nos Eglises,” or, “An Apology for the reformed Churches;” in which he vindicates, with much learning and argument, their separation from the church of Rome, from the imputation of schism, which was usually brought against them. This work was also translated into English by Mr. Smith, in 1658; as it was into Latin the same year by Daille himself, and printed at Amsterdam in 8vo. It was much censured by the clergy of France, as soon as it was published, and some were employed to write against it. Daille“wrote two or three little pieces in defence of it, which were afterwards printed with it in the Latin edition. That Daille was a very voluminous writer, will not seem strange, when it is considered that he lived long, was very laborious, and enjoyed a good state of health. He was endued with the qualifications of a writer in a most eminent degree; and had this singular advantage, that his understanding was not impaired with age: for it is observable, that there is no less strength and fire in his two volumes” De objecto cultds religiosi," the first of which was published when he was 70 years old, than in any of his earlier works.

He assisted at the national synod, which was held at Alengon in 1637: and his authority and advice contributed much to quiet the disputes, which were then warmly agitated among the protestants concerning universal grace. He declared strenuously for universal grace; and afterwards published at Amsterdam, in 1655, a Latin work against Frederic Spanheim, the divinity professor at Leyden, entitled “An apology for the synods of Alengon and Cbarenton.” This work rekindled the war among the protestant divines; yet Daille endeavoured to clear himself. by saying, that his book had been published without his knowledge. Nevertheless, he answered the celebrated Samuel des Marets, professor of Groning-en, which produced a short, but very warm contest between them, in which Daille’s spirit of controversy has not been approved even by his friends. He died at Paris, April 15, 1670, having never experienced throughout his life any illness, except that in 1650 he was suddenly seized with a lethargic or apopletic disorder, in which he lay 10 or 11 days, apparently without a possibility of recovering. He left a high reputation behind him; and the protestants used to say in France, that “they had no better writer since Calvin than M. Daille.” In 1720, M. Engelschall, a Roman catholic clergyman at Dresden, published proposals for a complete edition of Daille’s works, for which it is probable he had no encouragement, as we have not been able to find such a publication in any catalogue; but his proposals, which are drawn up with great candour, will at least enable us to give a more correct list of Daille’s works, with the best editions. 1. “De Usu Patrum,” Geneva, 1656. 2. “Apologia ecclesiarum veformatarum,” Amst. 3. “Fides ex S. Scripturis demonstrate,” Gen. 1660. 4. “Examen Sententiae Theoph. Bracheti Milleterii super conciliatione Controversiarum religionis,” Paris, 1637. 5. “De Patrum, fide circa imagines,” Leyden, 1642. 6. “De pcenis et satisfactionibus humanis,” Amst. 1649. 7. “Pseudepigrapha Apostolica de octo libris constitutionum Apostolicarum,” Harderw. 1653. 8. “De jejuniis et quadragesima,” Daventer, 1G54. 9. “Pro duabus Synodis, Alenson et Carenton. Apologia,” Amst. 1655. 10. “De coniirmatione et extrema unctione,” Genev. 1659. II. “De confessione auriculari,” Genev. 1661. 12. “Adversus Latinorurn traditionem de cultus religiosi objecto, disputatio,” Gen. 1664. 13. “De Scriptis, quae sub Dionysii Areopagii et Ignatii nominibus circumferuntur,” Gen. 1666. 14. “De cultibus Latinorum religiosis Libri Novem,” Gen. 1671. In all those he has been thought to be very perspicuous, both with regard to the expression, and to the disposition of his subject. He was reproached by one of his adversaries with stealing several things from Dr. Davenant, in his “Exposition of the Epistle to the Colossians;” but he answered the charge.

He married in the Lower Poitou, in May 1625; and his wife died the 31st of that month, 1631, leaving him only one son, born in the house of the Dutch ambassador, Oct. 31, 1628. She had taken refuge there, because the. protestants were afraid lest the news of the taking of Rochelle might excite popular tumults. This only son, whose name was Hadrian Daille, was received a minister in 1653. He had continued his theological studies with his father for several years, when the consistory of Rochelle invited him. thither. Five years after, that is, in 1658, he was chosen a minister of Paris, and became a colleague with his father. He was alive at the revocation of the edict of Nantz, and, then retiring to Switzerland, died at Zurich in May 169O. All his Mss. among which were several works of his father’s, were carried to the public library. He wrote that abridgement of his father’s life, from which we have chiefly collected the materials of this article.

, one of the translators of the Bible, of whose family history we have no account, was educated at Westminster school, whence being removed to Cambridge, he was admitted of Trinity college May 8, 1587; chosen junior fellow there Oct. 3, 1593, and senior fellow March 16th following. In 1601 he took the degree of B. D. and was sworn Greek lecturer of that college (an annual office) Oct. 2, 1602. In July 1604 he was chosen professor of divinity in Gresham college, to which he was recommended, in the most honourable terms, not only by the vice-chancellor and several heads of houses at Cambridge, but also by some of the nobility, and even by king James I. in a letter to the Gresham committee. His majesty’s object seems to have been that Mr. Dakins should not be without a suitable provision while employed on the new translation of the Bible, undertaken by royal order, and for a part of which important work Mr. Dakins was considered as excellently qualified by his skill in the Oriental languages. The translators being divided into six classes, two of which were to meet at Westminster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge, Mr. Dakins was one of those at Westminster, and his part was the Epistles of St. Paul and the canonical Epistles. He did not, however, live to see the work completed, as he died in Feb. 1607, a few months after being chosen junior dean of Trinity college.

, M. D. an antiquary and botanist, was originally an apothecary at Braintree in Essex, until about 1730, when he became a licentiate of the college of physicians, and a fellow of the royal society, according to Pulteney, but his name does not appear in Dr. Thomson’s list. About the time above-mentioned, Dr. Dale is supposed to have settled at Bocking, where he practised as a physician until his decease June 6, 1739, in the eightieth year of his age. He was buried in the dissenters’ burying ground at Bocking. His separate publications are, 1. “Pharmacologia, seu Manuductio ad Materiam Medicam,” 1693, 8vo, republished in 1705, 1710, 8vo, and 1737,4to,a much improved edition. It was also four times printed abroad. The first edition was one of the earliest rational books on the subject, and the author attended so much to subsequent publications and improvements, as to give his last edition the importance of a new work. Scarcely in any author, says Dr. Pulteney, is there a more copious collection of synonyms, a circumstance which, independent of much other intrinsic worth, will long continue the use of the book with those who wish to pursue the history of any article through all the former writers on the subject. 2. “The Antiquities of Harwich and Dover Court,” 1730, 4to, originally written by Silas Taylor, gent, about the year 1676. That part of this work which regards natural history is so copious and accurate as to render the book a real acquisition to science. Dale was also the author of various communications to the royal society, which were published in the Philosophical Transactions.

, a learned French physician and indefatigable botanist, was born at Caen in 1513, studied medicine and botany at Montpelier, xvas admitted doctor in medicine in 1547, and died at Lyons, where he had long practised physic, in 1538. He published several elaborate translations, particularly of the fifteen books of Athenseus into Latin, in 1552, in 2 vols. fol. illustrated with notes and figures; and some of the works of Galen and Paul Egineta into French. In 1556 he published a translation of “Ccelius Aurelianus de Morbis acutis” and in 1569, “Chirurgie Franchise, avec plusieurs figures d'instrumens,” 8vo, which has been several times reprinted. He principally followed the practice of Paree, from whose work he borrowed the figures of the instruments; but he has added a translation into French of the seventh book ol' Paree, with annotations, and some curious cases occurring in his own practice. He was also the editor of an edition of Pliny with notes, published in 1537. His first work, according to Ilaller, was an 8vo edition of Iluellius’s Commentary on Dioscorides, which appeared at Lyons in 1552, enriched by Dalechamp with thirty small figures of plants, at that time but little known. But his principal performance in this branch was an universal history of plants, in Latin, with above two thousand five hundred wooden cuts, besides repetitions, published after his death in two folio volumes. The publisher, William Uouille, seems to take upon himself the chief credit of collecting and arranging the materials of this great work, though he allows that Dalechamp laid its first foundations. Haller says the latter was engaged in it for thirty years; his aim being to collect together all the botanical knowledge of his predecessors, and enrich it with his own discoveries. He employed John Bauhin, then a young man, and resident at Lyons, to assist him; but Bauhin being obliged on account of his religion to leave France for Switzerland, like many other good and great men of that and the following century, the work in question was undertaken by Des Moulins, and soon afterwards Dalechamp died. It is often quoted by the title of“Historia Lugdunensis,” and hence the merits of its original projector are overlooked, as well as the faults arising from its mode of compilation, which are in many instances so great as to render it useless. A French translation was published in 1615, and again in 1653. Besides these Dalechamp published, 1. “Caelius Aurelianus de morbis chronicis,” Lond. 1579, 8vo; and 2. An edition of the works of the two Senecas, the orator and the philosopher, with notes and various readings, Geneva, 1628, 2 vols. fol.

, an eminent engraver, who flourished about the year 1640, was a native of Holland; but under what master he learnt the art of engraving, is uncertain. It is difficult to form a proper judgment of his merit; for sometimes his prints resemble those of Cornelius Vischer; of Lucas Vosterman; of P. Pontius; of Bolswert; and other masters. A set of antique statues engraved by him, are in a bold, freestyle, as if founded upon that of Goltzius; others again seem imitations of that of Francis Poilly. In all these different manners he has succeeded; and they plainly manifest the great command he had with his graver, for he worked with that instrument only. He engraved a great variety of portraits, some of which are very valuable, and form the best as well as the largest part of his works.

, a learned Swede, who was born at Winberga, in Holland, in 1708, deservedly obtained the appellation of the father of Swedish poetry by two poems written in that language; the one entitled “The Liberty of Sweden,” published in 1743; the other the tragedy of “Brunhilda.” He successively raised himself to be preceptor to prince Gustavus, counsellor in ordinary of the chancery, knight of the northern star, and at last to the dignity of chancellor of the court. By command of the king he engaged to compile a history of his own country from the earliest period to the present time, which he accomplished in three volumes quarto; and which was afterwards translated into the German language. Sweden is indebted to him also lor a great number of epistles, satires, fables, thoughts, and some panegyrics on the members otthe royal academy of sciences, of which he was a principal ornament: all these have been collected and printed in 6 vols. There is likewise by him a translation of the president Montesquieu, on the Causes of the grandeur and declension of the Romans. Von Dalin died in August 1763, leaving a reputation for literature, which his works are thought to confirm.

, as Fuller informs us, was born at Geddington, in the county of Northampton, and bred a bible-clerk in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge: but Wood has made him a Greek scholar in Pembroke-hall. As a confirmation, however, of the former, he published “A Book of Epitaphs, made upon the death of the right worshipful sir William Buttes, knt.” in 1583, which were chiefly composed by himself and the members of Corpus. It appears that he was afterwards placed in a school in Norfolk, where, Fuller says, he gained so much money as enabled him to travel over France and Italy. Concerning Italy, we have a specimen of his accurate observations in his “Survey of the Great Duke’s State of Tuscany in the year 1596,” which was inscribed to him by the publisher, Edward Blount, in 1605, 4to; and in the same year appeared his “Method of Travel, shewed bjjj taking a view of France as it stood in 1598,” 4to. In the preface he says that he was at the last jubilee at Rome, and that “this discourse was written long since, when the now lord secretary was then lord ambassador, and intended for the private use of an hon. gent.” The second edition, published in 162y, contains the clause of Guicciardini defaced by the inquisition, consisting of sixty-one pages. After his return he became secretary to Francis earl of Rutland, then one of the privy chamber to prince Charles, and master of the Charter-house, where he introduced i:ito the school the custom of versifying on passages of the holy scripture; about which time he had also the honour of knighthood conferred upon him. He was incorporated A.M. at Oxford in 1601, and published “Aphorismes, Civil and Military; amplified with authorities, and exemplified with history out of the first quaterne of Fr. Guicciardini/' Lond. 1615, fol. in which he is said to have” shown both wit and judgment." He died in the latter end of the year 1637, upwards of seventy-six years old, and was buried in the Charter-house chapel.

According to the records of the Charter-house, he was appointed master July 9, 1624, when he was only in deacon’s orders, which was through the recommendation “of the most excellent prince of Wales.” He is described as a man “of good merit and deserte.” The governors resolved at the same time that no future master should be elected under forty years of age; or who was not in holy orders of priesthood two years before his election; and having not more than one living, and that within thirty miles of London. Sir Robert had grown so very infirm in 1636, that the governors ordered three persons as his assistants.

, a very learned Lutheran divine of the sixteenth century, of whose personal history little is known, deserves notice as thetranslator of Luther’s German Bible into the Sclavonian, which language being . spoken in Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola, the states of those countries came to a determination that this Bible should be printed for their use. They first employed John Manlius, a printer of Laybach, who was the first that printed the Sclavonic in Roman letters: but while Manlius was making his calculations of expence, &c. the archduke Charles of Austria forbad him to print it. This appears to have happened in 1580. The states, however, only changed their determination so far as to have it printed elsewhere, and sent Dalmatin for that purpose to Gratz, where he was to correct the press, after the copy had been carefully revised at Laybach by him, in conjunction with other eminent divines and Oriental scholars. But, finding that no impression of this Bible would be permitted in the Austrian dominions, the states sent, in April 1583, Dalmatin, and another divine, Adam Bohoritsch, to Wittemberg, with a recommendation to the elector of Saxony, and the work being begun in May 1583, was finished Jan. 1, 1584. They had agreed with Samuel Seelfisch, bookseller at Wittemberg, that he should print fifteen hundred copies, each to contain two hundred and eighty sheets of the largest paper, on a fine character, with wooden cuts; for which the states of Carniola were to pay after the rate of twenty florins for every bale of five hundred sheets. The expences of the impression of this Bible amounted to about eight thousand florins: towards which the states of Styria gave a thousand florins, those of Carirrthia nine hundred, and the evangelic states of Carniola six thousand one hundred. These particulars may not be unacceptable to typographical students, as it is but seldom we have access to the history of early printing. Of Dalmatin we are only told that he afterwards was put in possession of the cure of St. Khazaim, or St. Catiani, near Aurspergh, by Christopher, baron of Aurspergh, in 1585, who, when the popish party banished Dalmatin in 1598, kept him concealed in his house; and a vault under the stable before the castle used long to be shewn as the hole of the preacher."

, an eminent hydrographer, F. R. S. and F. S. A. was born July 24, 1737, at New Hailes, near Edinburgh, the seat of his fattier sir James Dalrymple, bait, of Hailes. His mother, lady Christian, daughter of the earl of Haddington, a very amiable and accomplished woman, bore sixteen children, all of whom Alexander, who was the seventh son, survived. He was educated at the school of Haddington, under Mr. David Young; but as he left school before he was fourteen years of age, and never was at the university, his scholastic endowments were very limited. At school he had the credit of being a good scholar; and, after he left school, his eldest hrother was wont to make him translate, off hand, some of the odes of Horace; so that he was, for his years, a tolerable proficient in Latin: but going abroad, entirely his own master, before he was sixteen years of age, he neglected his Latin; and, as he says, never found so much use for it as to induce him to take any pains to recover it.

Sir James Dalrymple died in 1750; and the hon. general St. Clair having married sir James’s sister, a very sensible and accomplished woman (the relict of sir John Baird, bart.), in 1752, from his intimacy with alderman Baker, then chairman of the East India company, general St. Clair got Mr. Baker’s promise to appoint his nephew, Mr. Dalrymple, a writer in the company’s service; the young man having conceived a strong desire of going to the East Indies, by reading Nieuhoff’s Voyages, and a novel of that time, called Joe Thomson. He accordingly left Scotland in the spring of 1752, with his brother sir David, who affectionately accompanied him to London. He was put to Mr. Kinross’s academy, at Forty-hill, near Enfield, for some months antecedent to his appointment in the company’s service. He tells us he was obliged to Mr. Kinross for his great kindness and attention to him, and received much good instruction for his conduct through life; by which he greatly profited: but was too short a time at that academy to learn much of what was the object of sending him there, viz. writing and merchants’ accounts; which are, at least were at that time, the only qualifications the East India company thought requisite in their servants: and the absurdity of supposing a boy of sixteen from an academy competent to keep a set of merchants’ books not being considered, some demur was made to Mr. Kinross’s certificate of this part of Mr. Dalrymple’s education not being expressed in terms sufficiently direct; however, this was not insisted on.

On the 1st of November, 1752, he was appointed a writer in the East India company’s service, and on the 8th of November, stationed on the Madras establishment. Alderman Baker disqualified early the next year; so that it was by a very accidental coritingence that Mr. Dairy m pie went to India, his family having no India connexions; more particularly as he wanted a few months of sixteen years of age, which was the age required for a writer to be: and his mother lady Christian strongly objected to his father’s son even tacitly assenting to countenance what was untrue; and she was not quite satisfied with being assured that it was with alderman Baker’s concurrence and approbation;“it being urged, that the spirit of the regulation was to prevent infants being introduced into the service as writers, and not to preclude a person for the difference of a few months in age.” This,“says our author,” is the only instance in which Alexander Dalrymple is conscious of having been accessary to cheating the company, if it can be so termed."

About the middle of December, he embarked at Gravesend on board the Suffolk Indiaman, commanded by captain William Wilson, and the vessel sailed from the Downs Dec. 25, 1752, and arrived at Madras on May 11. At first Mr. Dalrymple was put under the store-keeper, but was soon after removed to the secretary’s office, and on lord Pigot’s being appointed governor, was noticed by his lordship with great kindness, as well as by Mr. Orme, the historian, then a member of council and accountant, who continued his friendship to him during the remainder of his life. While in the secretary’s office, examining the old records, to qualify himself, by the knowledge of them, to fill the office of secretary, which he was in succession to expect, he found the commerce of the eastern islands was an object of great consideration with the company, and he was inspired with an earnest desire to recover that important object for this country.

A favourable opportunity offered for putting this into train: his old friend captain Wilson, who was appointed by the East India company commodore of all their ships and vessels, and commander of the Pitt, of 50 guns, for his good and gallant conduct, arrived in September 1758, having on board sir William (then colonel) Draper, and part of his regiment. The Pitt was destined for China. Commodore Wilson, whose sagacity and maritime knowledge was equal to his courage, had reflected during the course of his voyage from England, in what manner his passage to China could be attained at that season; and it occurred to him, that the same principle by which ships went to the Malabar coast and Persia from Madras in the south west monsoon, was applicable in a passage to China, viz. by crossing the line, and taking advantage of the contrary monsoons that prevail at the same time in north and south latitudes. Thus, as the ships from Madras stand to the south east with the south west winds, till they get into the south east trade in south latitude, and then stand westward, till they are to windward of their intended port, when they cross the line again into north latitude; so commodore Wilson reasoned, that the north-west winds would, in south latitude, carry him far enough eastward to make the north-east wind a fair wind to China. Sir William Draper countenancing his opinion, commodore Wilson, on his arrival at Madras, mentioned the subject to Mr. Dalrymple, and asked his sentiments; which entirely concurring with his own, and being confirmed by reference to Saris, &c. who had performed the most essential part of the voyage, though with a different object; commodore Wilson was thereby induced to propose it to governor Pigot, who consulted Mr. Dalrymple, and being convinced that it was practicable, commodore Wilson performed the voyage highly to the credit of our maritime reputation, and much to the advantage of the company.

Circumstances occurred in the discussion of the proposition made by commodore Wilson, which induced Mr. Dalrymple to propose, and governor Pigot to accede to, his going in the Cuddalore schooner to the eastward, on a voyage of general observation, although it had a particular destination; but as the secretaryship became vacant in 1759, lord Pigot, thinking that place a more beneficial object, endeavoured to dissuade Mr. Dalrymple from the voyage, but without success, as he remained warm in the pursuit of an object of whose national importance he had long been convinced, and considered this voyage as a new jera in his life.

As the Cuddalore went under the secret orders of the governor, it was not thought proper to apply to the council for the provision of such a cargo as was necessary in countries where there was no regular communication or commerce; and where even provisions could, probably, only be purchased by barter; a small cargo was put on board at the expence of the governor, who permitted captain Baker, the captain, to have a fourth concern. The evening before Mr. Dalrymple embarked, governor Pigot presented him with an instrument, making him a present of whatever profits might accrue from the three-fourths concern. Having never insinuated such an intention, he left no ground for mercenary imputation against Mr. Dalrymple, in undertaking the voyage, or against the governor himself for ordering it. In consequence of an offer made by the hon. Thomas Howe, commander of that ship, he first embarked in the Winchelsea, April 22, 1759, and having joined the Cuddalore, captain George Baker, in the strait of Malacca, whither that vessel had been dispatched a few days before the Winchelsea, Mr. Dalrymple quitted the Winchelsea, and embarked on the Cuddalore June 3, in the Strait of Sincapore.

It cannot be pretended to give a recital, however brief, of the course of this voyage, of which Mr. Dalrymple did not publish any connected journal, but it was in this voyage the English visited Sooloo. Mr. Dalrymple concluded a treaty with the sultan, and made a contract with the principal persons, for a cargo to be brought on the East India company’s account, which the natives engaged to receive at 100 per cent, profit, and to provide a cargo for China, which they engaged should yield an equivalent profit there. The principal person with whom this contract was negociated, was Dato Bandahara, the head and representative of the nobility; for the Sooloo government is a mixed monarchy, in which, though the principal nobility and orauky’s meet in the national council to deliberate, the authority is vested in a few officers, who are hereditary, the Sultan, Dato Bandahara, who represents the nobility, and Oranky Mallick, who represents the people; matters of government depending on the concurrence of two of the states, of which the people must be one.

The person then filling the hereditary office of Bandahara, was as conspicuous for the probity and exalted justice ok his character, as by his distinguished rank, of which, whilst Mr. Dalrymple was at Sooloo, in 1761, an occasion occurred for Bandahara to exert. There were at this time two Chinese junks in Sooloo road; in the cargo of one of them the sultan had an interest; the other belonged entirely to Chinese merchants of Amoy. The sultan, who was very avaricious, in hopes of getting money from the Chinese, or thinking, perhaps, that it would be more advantageous for the sale of the cargo in which he was concerned, laid an embargo on the other junk: Bandahara and Oranky Mailick remonstrated with the sultan on the impropriety of this behaviour to merchants, but without effect; upon which Bandahara, and Oranky Mailick, with Pangleema Milabain, a person of a military order, consonant to ancient knighthood, went on board the China junk, in which the sultan had an interest, and brought her rudder on shore, informing the sultan that they would detain the one if he obstructed the departure of the other: this well-timed interference had its due effect, and both junks proceeded without further molestation on their voyage home.

He returned to Madras from this eastern voyage, Jan. 23, 1762. The company’s administration approved of his proceedings, and in March 1762, having resolved to send on the company’s account the cargo stipulated, employed him in expediting the provision of that cargo. His expences in the voyage of almost three years, amounted to 612l. which was repaid by the governor and council of Madras, but he neither asked or received any pecuniary advantage to himself. On the 10th of May, the London packet was destined for the Sooloo voyage, and Mr. Dalrymple was appointed captain. In the passage from Madras to Sooloo, he first visited Balambangan; and on his arrival at Sooloo, found the small-pox had swept off many of the principal inhabitants, and dispersed the rest; so that very ineffectual measures had been taken towards providing the intended cargo. But although this unexpected calamity, which in the Eastern Islands is similar in its effects to the plague, was a sufficient reason for the disappointment of the cargo, yet a still more efficient cause, was the death of Bandahara, soon after Mr. Dalrymple’s departure from Sooloo, the preceding year. A few days before the death of this good man, he sent for the linguist whom Mr. Dalrymple had employed, and who had remained behind at Sooloo, asking if he thought the English would certainly come again. The linguist declaring that it was not to be doubted; Bandahara thereupon expressed his concern, saying that it would have made him very happy to have lived to have seen this contract faithfully performed on their part, and the friendship with the English established on a firm footing. The linguist observed, that they were all equally bound. Banclahara replied, that although this was true, all had not the same disposition; and perhaps none else the power of enforcing the due execution of their engagements; but that he was resigned to the divine will.

This situation of affairs at Sooloo, made new arrangements necessary, the result of which was, that one half of the cargo brought thither in the London should be delivered, to enable the Sooloos to provide goods for the expected Indiaman; but that ship not arriving, new difficulties arose; as the London was not large enough to receive the goods they had provided; and the necessity of her departure made it indispensable to deliver the remaining half of the cargo, which had been retained as an incitement to the Sooloos faithfully to pay for that portion they had received. By delivery of the remainder, every thing was necessarily left to the mercy of the Sooloos, subjected not only to their honour, but to their discretion; for if the goods they received were dissipated, they could obtain no cargo in return, having nothing to deliver to their vassals for their services, without which they were not entitled to those services. Ualrymple, however, obtained a grant of the island of Balambangan, for the East India company, of which he took possession Jan. 23, 1763, on his return towards Madras, and as it appeared necessary that the court of directors should have full information on the subject of our future intercourse in the eastern islands, he determined to proceed to England for that purpose. But as the president and council thought it proper that he should proceed again to Sooloo in the Neptune Indiaman, in the way to China, and embark thence for England, he accordingly sailed from Madras July 5, 1763. Many circumstances, however, prevented the execution of every part of this plan, and he appears to have been disappointed in his views respecting the intercourse with the eastern islands, the advantages of which he afterwards fully stated in a pamphlet entitled “A Plan for extending the commerce, &c.” published in 1771, though printed in 1769.

Soon after his arrival home in 1765, discoveries in the South Sea being a favourite object of Mr. Dalrymple’s researches, he communicated his col -m that subject to the secretary of state, lord Shelburne, late marquis of Lans^ downe, who expressed a strong desire to employ him on these discoveries. Afterwards, when the royal society proposed to send persons to observe the transit of Venus, in 1769, Mr. Dalrymple was approved of by the admiralty, as a proper person to be employed in this service, as well as to prosecute discoveries in that quarter; but from some differences of opinion, partly owing to official etiquette, respecting the employment of any person as commander of a vessel who was not a naval officer, and partly owing to Mr. Dalrymple’s objections to a divided command, this design did not take place. In that year, however, the court of directors of the East India company gave Mr. Dalrymple 5000l. for his past services, and as an equivalent to the emoluments of secretary at Madras, which he had relinquished in 1759, to proceed on the eastern voyage. As the various proceedings concerning Balambangan were published in 1769, it may be sufficient to notice in this place that the court of directors appointed Mr. Dalrymple chief of Balambangan, and commander of the Britannia; but some unhappy differences arising with the directors, he was removed from the charge of that intended settlement, and another person appointed in his stead. In 1774, however, the court of directors being dissatisfied with this person’s conduct, had it in contemplation to send a supervisor thither. On this occasion Mr. Dalrymple made an offer of his services to redeem the expedition from destruction, without any emolument except defraying his expences, on condition that a small portion of the clear profits of the establishment should be granted to him and his heirs, &c. But this offer was not accepted, and soon after the settlement of Balambangan was lost to the company.

From the time Mr. Dalrymple returned to England, in 1765, he was almost constantly engaged in collecting and arranging materials for a full exposition of the importance of the Eastern Islands and South Seas; and was encouraged by the court of directors to publish various charts, &c. It is positively affirmed that the chart of the northern part of the Bay of Bengal, published in 1772, was the occasion of saving the Hawke Indiaman from the French, in the war.

Mr. Dalrymple had taken every occasion to keep up his claim on the Madras establishment; but after lord Pigot was, in 1775, appointed governor of Fort St. George, he was advised by the then chairman and deputy chairman, to make a specific application before the arrangement of the Madras council was made, his former letters being considered as too general. Accordingly, on the 3d of March, 1775, he applied to be restored to his standing on the Madras establishment; which application the company were pleased to comply with, and he was appointed in his rank, as a member of council, and was nominated to be one of the committee of circuit. In the proceedings of the council at Madras, no man, however violent in his animosity or opposition, ever imputed to Mr. Dalrymple any want of integrity or zeal, for what he thought was for the company’s interest, and he had the satisfaction to find that the court of directors gave him distinguished marks of their approbation. On the 1st of April, 1779, when the company were pleased to accept of his services in the employment he held until his death, namely, that of hydrographer, by advice of sir George Wombwell, the then chairman, he accepted on the 8th that employment by letter, read in court on the 9th of April, on condition it should not invalidate his pretensions at Madras.

On the 27th of May 1780, the court of directors resolved that Messrs. Russell, Dalrymple, Stone, and Lathom, having come home in pursuance of the resolution of the general court, in 1777, to have their conduct inquired into, and no objection having been made in so long a time, nor appearing against their conduct, should be again employed in the company’s service. The other gentlemen were afterwards appointed to chiefships, Mr. Dalrymple continuing in his present employment, with the reservation of his Madras pretensions. When the employment of hydrographer was confirmed on the 19th of July, he expressed by letter, that he trusted, if he wished to return to Madras hereafter, that the court would appoint him, and this letter was ordered to lie on the table.

In 1784, when the India bill was brought into parliament, there was a clause precluding the company from sending persons back to India, who had been a certain time in England; Mr. Dalrymple represented the injustice this was to him, who had accepted his employment, on condition that it should not injure his pretensions at Madras; a clause was thereupon inserted, precluding that measure, unless with the concurrence of three-fourths of the directors, and three-fourths of the proprietors; he was still not satisfied, and carried on a sort of controversial correspondence with the directors, the merits of which would now be but imperfectly. understood. It having been long in contemplation to have an hydrographical office at the Admiralty, this was at length established during the administration of earl Spencer. In 1795 Mr. Dalrymple was appointed to the office of hydrographer, and received the assent of the court of directors, xinder whom he held a similar office, and who had lately given him a pension for life.

From this time little occurred in his history worthy of particular notice until the month of May 1808, when having refused to resign his place of hydrographer to the Admiralty, on the ground of superannuation, and to accept of a pension, he was dismissed from his situation; and it is said, that in the opinion of his medical attendants, his death was occasioned by vexation arising from that event. A motion was shortly afterwards made on this subject in the house of commons, when the secretary to the admiralty, after bearing the most ample testimony to the talents and services of Mr. Dalrymple, fully justified the conduct of 'that board, which had adopted a necessary measure with much reluctance. Mr. Dalrymple, indeed, had exhibited so many symptoms of decayed faculties, joined to an irritable habit, as to lessen the value of those services for which he had been so highly respected. He died June 19, 1808, at his house in High-street Mary-le-bone, and was buried in the small cemetery adjoining the church. His collection of books was very large and valuable, and particularly rich in works pertaining to geography and navigation, which were purchased by the admiralty. His valuable collection of poetry he bequeathed to his heir at law, to be kept at the family seat in Scotland, as an heir-loom; and his miscellaneous collection, containing, among others, a great number of valuable foreign books, particularly in the Spanish and Portuguese languages, was sold by auction, and produced a considerable sum.

His printed works were very numerous. The following list, exclusive of his nautical publications, was furnished by himself at the end of some memoirs of his life, which he drew up for the European magazine in 1802, and of which we have availed ourselves in the preceding account. In the following list, those marked * were never published, and those marked † were not sold.

1. “Account of Discoveries in the South Pacific Ocean before 1764,” 1767, 8vo. 2. † “Memorial to the Proprietors of East India Stock,” 1768, 8vo. 3. † “Account of what has passed between the East India Directors and Alexander Dalrymple,” as first printed, 1768, 8vo. 4. “Account of what has passed Do. Do. as published,” 8vo. 5. “Plan for extending the Commerce of this Kingdom, and of the East India Company, by an Establishment at Balambangan,” 1771. 6. * “Letter concerning the proposed Supervisors,” 20th June 1769, 8vo. 7. “Letter concerning the proposed Supervisors,” 30th June 1769, 4to. 8. Second Letter Do. 10th July 1769, 4to. 9. “Vox populi Vox Dei, lord Weymouth’s Appeal to the General Court of India Proprietors, considered, 14th August,” 1769, 4to. 10. “Historical collection of South Sea Voyages,” 1770, 2 vols. 4to; 1771, 4to. 11. † “Proposition of a benevolent Voyage to introduce Corn, &c. into New Zealand,” &c. 1771, 4to. 12. Considerations on a Pamphlet (by governor Johnstone) entitled “Thoughts onour acquisitions in the East Indies, particularly respecting Bengal,” 1772, 8vo. 13. “General View of the East India Company’s Affairs (written in January 1769), to which are added some Observations on the present State of the Company’s Affairs,” 1772, 8vo. 14. † “A paper concerning the General Government for India,” 8vo. 15. † “Rights of the East India Company.” N. B. This was printed at the company’s expence, 1773, 8vo. 16. “Letter to Dr. Hawkesworth,” 1773, 4to. 17. *“Observations on Dr. Hawkesworth’s Preface to 2d edition,” 1773, 4to. An opinion of sir David Dalrymple, that there was too much asperity in this Reply, retarded, and the death of Dr. Hawkesworth prevented, the publication. 18. † “Memorial of Doctor Juan Louis Arias (in Spanish),” 1773, 4to. 19. † “Proposition for printing, by subscription, the ms voyages and travels in the British Museum,” 1773, 4to. 20. “A full and clear proof that the Spaniards have no right to Balambangan,” 1774, 8vo. 21. “An historical relation of the several Expeditions, from Fort Marlbro' to the Islands off the West Coast of Sumatra,” 1775, 4to. 22. “Collection of Voyages, chiefly in the South Atlantic Ocean, from the original Mss. by Dr. H alley, M. Bouvet, &c. with a Preface concerning a Voyage on Discovery, proposed to be undertaken by Alexander Dalrymple at his own expence; Letters to Lord North on the subject, and Plan of a Republican Colony,” 1775, 4to. 23. † “Copies of papers relative to the Restoration of the King of Tanjour, the Imprisonment of Lord Pigot, &c. Printed by the East India Company, for the use of the Proprietors.” 1777, 4to. N. B. In this collection are many Minutes of Council, and some Letters by Alexander Dalrymple. 24. † Several other pieces on the same subject, written by Alexander Dalrymple, were printed by admiral Pigot and Alexander Dalrymple, but not sold; those particularly by Alexander Dalrymple are 4to, 1777. 25. “Notes on Lord Pigot’s Narrative.” 26. “Letter to Proprietors of East India Stock,” 8th May 1777. 27. “Account of the transactions concerning the Revolt at Madras, 30th April 1777. Appendix.” 28. “Letter to the Court of Directors, 19th June 1777. Memorial 19th June 1777.” 29. † “Account of the subversion of the Legal Government of Fort St. George, in answer to Mr. Andrew Stuart’s Letter to the Court of Directors,” 1778, 4to. 30. “Journal of the Grenville,” published in the Philosophical Transactions, 1778, 4to. 31. “Considerations on the present State of Affairs between England and America, 1778,” 8vo. 32. “Considerations on the East India Bill, 1769,” 8vo, 1778. 33. “State of the East India Company, and Sketch of an equitable Agreement,” 1780, 8vo. 34. “Account of the Loss of the Grosvenor,” 1783, 8vo. 35. “Reflections on the present State of the East India Company,” 1783, 8vo. 36. “A short account of the Gentoo Mode of collecting the Revenues on the Coast of Coromandel,” 1783, 8vo. 37. “A Retrospective View of the Ancient System of the Blast India Company, with a Plan of Regulation,” 178-4, 8vo. 38. “Postscript to Mr. Dairy mple’s account of the Gentoo Mode of collecting the Revenues on the Coast of Coromandel, being, Observations made on a perusal of it by Moodoo Kistna,” 1785, 8vo. 39. “Extracts from Juvenilia, or Poems by George Wither,” 1785, 24mo. 40. “Eair State of the Case between the East India Company and the Owners of Ships now in their service; to which are added, Considerations on Mr. Brough’s Pamphlet, concerning East India Shipping,” 1786, 8vo. 41. “A serious Admonition to the Public on the intended Thief Colony at Botany Bay.” 42. “Review of the Contest concerning Four New Regiments, graciously offered by his Majesty to be sent to India,” &c. 178S, 8vo. 43. * “Plan for promoting the Fur-trade, and securing it to this Country, by uniting the Operations of the East India and Hudson’s Bay Companies,” 1789, 4to. 44. “Memoir of a Map of the Lands around the North Pole,” 1789, 4to, 45. “An Historical Journal of the Expeditions by Sea and Land, to the North of California in 1768, 1769, and 1770, when Spanish establishments were first made at San Diego and Monterey, translated from the Spanish ms. by William Revely, esq. to which is added, Translation of Cabrera Bueno’s Description of the Coast of California, and an Extract from the ms Journal of M. Sauvague le Muet, 1714,” 1790, 4to. 46. “A Letter to a Friend on the Test Act,” 1790, 8vo. 47. “The Spanish Pretensions fairly discussed,” 1790, 8vo, 48. “The Spanish Memorial of 4th June considered,” 1790, 8vo. 49. † “Plan for the publication of a Repertory of Oriental Information,” 1790, 4to. 50. * “Memorial of Alexander Dalrymple,” 1791, 8vo. 51. “Parliamentary Reform, as it is called, improper, in the present State of this Country,” 1793, 8vo. 52. “Mr. Fox’s Letter to his worthy and independent Electors of Westminster, fully considered,” 1793, 8vo. 53. † “Observations on the Copper-coinage wanted for the Circars. Printed for the use of the East India Company,” 1794, 8vo. 54. “The Poor Man’s Friend,” 1795, 8vo. 55. “A collection of English Songs, with an Appendix of Original Pieces,” 1796, 8vo. 56. * “A Fragment on the India Trade, written in 1791,” 1797, 8vo. 57. “Thoughts of an old Man of independent mind, though dependent fortune,” 1800, 8vo. 58. “Oriental Repertory,” vol. I. 4to. April 1791 to January 1793. 59. “Oriental Repertory,” vol. II. 4to. (not completed).

, an eminent Scotch lawyer and antiquary, and brother to the preceding, was born in Edinburgh on the 28th of October 1726, and was educated at Eton school, where he was distinguished no less for his acquisitions in literature-than for the regularity of his manners. From Eton he was removed, to complete his studies at Utrecht, where he remained till 1746. In 1748 he was called to the Scotch bar, where, notwithstanding the elegant propriety of the cases which he drew, his success did not answer the expectations which had been formed of him. This was not owing either to wajjt of science or to want of industry, but to certain peculiarities, which, if not inherent in his nature, were the result of early and deep-rooted habits. He possessed on all occasions a sovereign contempt, not only for verbal antithesis, but for well-rounded periods, and every thing which had the semblance of declamation; and indeed he was wholly unfitted, by an ill-toned voice, and ungraceful elocution, for shining as an orator. It is not surprizing, therefore, that his pleadings, which were never addressed to the passions, did not rival those of some of his opponents, who, possessed of great rhetorical powers, did not, like him, employ strokes of irony too fine to be perceived by the bulk of any audience, but expressed themselves in full, clear, and harmonious periods. Even his memorials, though classically written, and often replete with valuable matter, did not on every occasion please the court; for they were always brief, and sometimes, it was said, indicated more attention to the minutiye of forms than to the merits of the cause. Yet on points which touched his own feelings, or the interests of truth and virtue, his language was animated, his arguments forcible, and his scrupulous regard to form thrown aside. He was on all occasions incapable of misleading the judge by a false statement of facts, or his clients, by holding out to them fallacious grounds of hope. The character indeed which he had obtained for knowledge and integrity in the Scotch law, soon raised him to an eminence in his profession. Accordingly, in March 1766, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of session with the wannest approbation of his countrymen; and in May 1776 he succeeded to the place of a lord commissioner of the justiciary on the resignation of lord Coalston, his wife’s father. Upon taking his seat on the bench he assumed the title of lord Hailes, in compliance with the usage established in the court of session: this is the name by which he is generally known among the learned of Europe.

As a judge of the supreme, civil, and criminal courts, he acted in the view of his country; from which he merited and obtained high confidence and approbation. But he was not only conspicuous as an able and upright judge, and a sound lawyer; he was also eminent as a profound and accurate scholar; being a thorough master of classical learning, the belles lettres, and historical antiquities particularly of his own country, to the study of which he was led by his profession. Indefatigable in the prosecution of these studies, his time was sedulously devoted tq the promotion of useful learning, piety, and virtue. Numerous are the works that have issued from his pen, ali of them distinguished by uncommon accuracy, taste, and learning. Besides some occasional papers, both serious and humorous, of his composing, that appeared in the World, and a variety, of communications, critical and biographical, in the Gentleman’s Magazine, and other publications of like nature, he allotted some part of his time to the illustration and defence of primitive Christianity.

In 1771 he composed a very learned and ingenious paper, or law-case, on the disputed peerage of Sutherland. He was one of the trustees of the lady Elizabeth, the daughter of the last earl, and being then a judge, the names of two eminent lawyers were annexed to it. In that case, he displayed the greatest accuracy of research, and the most profound knowledge of the antiquities and rules of descent, in that country; which he managed with such dexterity of argument, as clearly established the right of his pupil, and formed a precedent, at the same time, for the decision of all such questions in future. In 1773 he published a small volume, entitled “Remarks on the History of Scotland.” Tnese appeared to be the gleanings of the historical research which he was making at that time, and discovered his lordship’s turn for minute and accurate inquiry into doubtful points of history, and at the same time displayed the candour and liberality of his judgment. This publication prepared the public for the favourable reception of the Annals of Scotland, in 2 vols. 4to, the first of which appeared in 1776, and the second in 1779, and fully answered the expectations which he had raised. The difficulties attending the subject, the want of candour, and the spirit of party, had hitherto prevented the Scotch from having a genuine history of their country, in times previous to those of queen Mary. Lord Hailes carried his attention to this history, as far back as to the accession of Malcolm Canmore, in 1057, and his work contains the annals of 14 princes, from Malcolm III. to the death of David II. Aiul happy it was that the affairs of Scotland attracted the talents of so able a writer, who to the learning and skill of a lawyer, joined the industry and curiosity of an antiquary; to whom no object appears frivolous or unimportant that serves to elucidate his subject.

Lord Hailes has so well authenticated his work by references to historians of good credit, or deeds and writings of undoubted authority, and has so happily cleared it from fable, uncertainty, and conjecture, that every Scotchman, since its appearance, has been able to trace back with confidence, in genuine memoirs, the history of his country for 736 years, and may revere the memory of the respectable judge, who with indefatigable industry, and painful labour, has removed the rubbish under which the precious remains were concealed. Lord Hailes at first intended, as appears by an advertisement prefixed to his work, to carry down his annals to the accession of James I. but, to the great disappointment of the public, he stopped short at the death of David II. and a very important period of the history still remains to be filled up by an able writer. Lord Hailes’s Annals of Scotland, it is believed, stand unrivalled in the English language, for a p irity and simplicity of style, an elegance, perspicuity, and conciseness of narration, that peculiarly suited the form of his work; and is entirely void of that false ornament, and stately gait, which makes the works of some other writers appear in gigantic but fictitious majesty.

in 1786, Lord Hailes came forward with the excellent Dr. Watson, and other writers in England, to repel Mr. Gibbon’s attack on Christianity, and published a 4to volume, entitled “An Enquiry into the Secondary Causes which Mr. Gibbon has assigned for the rapid progress of Christianity,” in which there is a great display of literary acumen, and of zeal for the cause he espouses, without the rancour of theological controversy. Tins was the last work he sent from the press; except a few biographical sketches of eminent Scotsmen, designed as specimens of a “Biographia Scotica,” which he justly considered as a desideratum, and which, it is much to be regretted, the infirmities of age, increasing fast upon him, did not allow him to supply; for he was admirably qualified for the undertaking, not only by his singular diligence and candour, but from the uncommon extent and accuracy of his literary and biographical knowledge; in which, it is believed, he excelled all his contemporaries.

Lord Hailes was for some years the correspondent of Dr. Johnson, to whose inspection he submitted much of his “Annals” in manuscript. He had early formed a high opinion of the author of the Rambler, and considered him as one of the best moral writers England had produced. Johnson praised him as “a man of worth, a scholar, and a wit.” His minute accuracy, and acuteness in detecting error, were in unison with Johnson’s love of truth. “The exactness of his dates,” said he on one occasion, “raises my wonder. He seems to have the closeness of Renault, without his constraint;” and this opinion he takes a pleasure in repeating in a subsequent letter to Mr. Bosvvell “Be so kind as to return lord Hailes my most respectful thanks for his first volume his accuracy strikes me with wonder his narrative is far superior to that of Henault, as I have formerly mentioned.” “Lord Hailes’s Annals of Scotland have not that pointed form which is the taste of this age; but it is a book which will always sell it has such a stability of dates, such a certainty of facts, and such a punctuality of citation. I never before read Scotch history with certainty.”

The erudition of lord Hailes, says his friend the late lord Woodhousiee, was not of a dry and scholastic nature; he felt the beauties of the composition of the ancients; he entered with taste and discernment into the merits of the Latin poets, and that peculiar vein of delicate and ingenious thought which characterises the Greek epigrammatists; and a few specimens which he has left of his own composition in that style, evince the hand of a master. It would not, adds his lordship, be easy to produce from the works of any modern Latin poet, a more delicate, tender, and pathetic effusion, or an idylliou of greater classical purity, than the iambics he wrote “On the death of his first wife, in child-bed of twins.” Lord Hailes was a man of wit, and possessed a strong feeling of the absurd and ridiculous in human conduct and character, which gave a keen edge of irony both to his conversation and writings. To his praise, however, it must be added, that that irony, if not always untinctured with prejudice, was never prompted by malignity, and was generally exerted in the cause of virtue and good morals. How much he excelled in painting the lighter weaknesses and absurdities of mankind, may be seen from the papers of his composition in the “World” and the “Mirror.” His private character was every thing that is praise-worthy and respectable. In a word, he was an honour to the station which he filled, and to the age in which he lived. That such a man should not yet have found a biographer worthy of his merits, cannot be ascribed either to the obscurity of his character and station, or to the incapacity of his contemporaries. But lord Hailes was a man of piety of the old stamp, and a strenuous advocate for revealed religion, and therefore did not share, as he uould not have been ambitious to share, the celebrity that has been conferred on some of his countrymen of a very opposite character.

The works of lord Hailes, arranged in the order of their publication, are as follow: 1. “Sacred poems, by various authors,” Edinb. 1751, 12mo. 2. “The wisdom of Solomon, wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus.” Edinb. 1755, 12mo. 3. “Select discourses, nine in number, by John Smith, late fellow of Queen’s college, Cambridge,” Ediub. 17 06, 12mo. 4. “World,” No. 140, Sept. 4, 1755; a meditation among books. 5. World, No. 147, Thursday, Oct. 23, 1755. 6. World, No. 204, Thursday, Nov. 25, 1756. 7. “A discourse of the unnatural and vile Conspiracy attempted by John earl of Go wry, and his brother, against his majesty’s person, at St. Johnstoun, upon the 5th of Aug. 1600,” 1757, 12mo. 8. “A sermon which might have been preached in East Lothian, upon the 25th day of Oct. 1761, from Acts xxvii. 1, 2.” The barbarous people sbewed us no little kindness,“Edinb. 1761, 12mo; occasioned by the country people pillaging the wreck of two vessels, viz. the Betsy, Cunningham, and the Leith packet, Pitcairn, from London to Leith, cast away on the shore between D unbar and North Berwick. All the passengers on board the former, in number seventeen, perished; five on-board the latter, Oct. 16, 1761. An affecting discourse, which is said to have produced the restitution of some part of the pillage. 9.” Memorials and Letters relating to the history of Britain in the reign of James I. published from the originals,“Glasgow, 1762. 10.” The works of the ever-memorable Mr. John Hailes of Eton, now first collected together,“Glasgow, 1765, 3 vols. The fine-paper copies of this work are truly elegant. 11. A specimen of a book entitled: Ane compendious booke of godlie and spiritual sangs, collectit out of sundrie parts of the Scripture, with sundrie other ballates, changed out of prophaine sangs, for avoyding of sin and harlotrie, with augmentation of sundrie gucle and godlie ballates, not contained in the first edition. Printed by Andro Hart,” Edinb. 1765, 12mo. 12. “Memorials and Letters relating to the history of Britain in the reign of Charles’ I. published from the originals,” Glasgow, 1766. 13. “An Account of the Preservation of Charles II. after the battle of Worcester, drawn up by himself; to which are added, his letters to several persons,” Glasgow, 1766. 14. “The secret correspondence between sir Robert Cecil and James VI.” 1766, 12mo. 15. “A catalogue of the lords of session, from the institution of the college of justice, in 1532, with historical notes,” Edinb. 1767, 4to. 16. “The private correspondence of doctor Francis Atterbury, bishop of Rochester, and his friends, in 1725, never before published,” 1768, 4to. 17. “An examination of some of the arguments for the high antiquity of regiam majestatem; and an inquiry into the authenticity of the leges Malcolrni,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 18. “Historical Memoirs concerning the Provincial Councils of the Scottish Clergy, from the earliest accounts of the,; aera of the reformation,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 19. “Canons of the church of Scotland, drawn up in the provincial councils held at Perth, anno 1242 and 1269,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 20. “Ancient Scottish poems, published from the manuscript of George Bannatyne, 1568,” Edinb. 1770, 12mo. 21 .“The additional case of Elizabeth, claiming the title and dignity of countess of Sutherland,” 4to. 22. “Remarks on the History of Scotland,” Edinb. 1773, 12mo. 23. “Hubert! Langueti Epistolae ad Philippum Syclm-ium eqtritem Anglum, ace ura rite D. Dalrymple de Hailes eq.” Edinb. 1776, 8vo. 24. “Annals of Scotland, from the accession of Malcolm III. suriiamed Canmore, to the accession of Robert!.” Edinb. 1776. 25. “Tables of the succession of the kings of Scotland, from Malcolm 111. to Robert 1.” 26. Chronological abridgment of the volume.“The appendix contains eight dissertations. 27.” Annah of Scotland, from the accession of Robert I. surnamed Bruce, to the accession of the house of Stewart,“177:, 4to, with an appendix containing nine dissertations. 28.” Account of the Martyrs of Smyrna and Lyons, in the 2d century, with explanatory notes,“Edinb. 1776. 29,” Remains of Christian Antiquity,“Edinb. 1778, 3 vols. 30.” Octavius, a dialogue by Marcus Minucius Felix,“Edinb. 1781. 31.” Of the manner in which the persecutors died, by Lactantius,“Edinb. 17S2. 32.” Luciani Coelii Firmiani Lactantii divinarum institutionum liber quintus, sen de justitia,“1777. 33.” Disquisitions concerning the Antiquities of the Christian Church,“Glasgow, 1783. 34.” Sketch of the life of John Barclay,“1786, 4to. 35.” Sketch of the life of John Hamilton, a secular priest, who lived about 1600,“4to. 36.” Sketch of the life of sir James Ramsay, a general officer in the armies of Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden.“37.” Life of George Leslie,“4 to. 38.” Sketch of the life of Mark Alex. Boyd,“4to. 39.” The opinions of Sarah duchess dowager of Marlborough, published from her originalMSS.“1788, 12mo. 40.” The address of Q. Septini. Tertullian to Scapula Tertullus, proconsul of Africa," Edinb. 1790, 12mo. This address contains many particulars relating to the church after the 3d century. The translator has rejected all words and phrases of French origin, and writes entirely in the Anglo-Saxon dialect. In the course of the notes, many obscurities of the original, not adverted to by other commentators, are explained. Some strange inaccuracies of Mr. Gibbon are also detected, not included in the misrepresentations of his two famous chapters. He was long engaged in pursuits to examine the authenticity of the books of the New Testament. The result is said to have been, that he discovered every verse contained in it, with the exception of two or three, in the writings of the three first centuries. Indeed this seems to have been an object in all his works; for, at the end of each of his translations and editions of the primitive Christian writers, a table is given of passages quoted or mentioned by them.

, the seventh baron and first viscount Stair, was born in 1609, studied at the college of Glasgow, and passed all the regular degrees of learning in that university. On the commencement of the rebellion in the reign of Charles I. he accepted a captain’s commission from the parliament, in the earl of Glencain.'s regiment, but was soon called off to a more suitable province, that of filling a philosophy chair in the university of Glasgow. Having applied himself particularly to the study of the laws, he entered as an advocate in 1648, and became eminent for his judgment and skill, if not for his integrity. When the estates of the nation sent commissioners to Breda to invite Charles II. to Scotland, he was appointed secretary to the embassy, and acquitted himself entirely to his majesty’s satisfaction. He then resumed his practice at the bar, but could not be prevailed upon to take any oaths to the government during the usurpation. When Charles II. was restored to the throne, he conferred on Mr. Dalryrnple the honour of knighthood, appointed him a senator of the college of justice, and in 1671, lord president of the session, in which office his conduct was very unpopular; and in 1682, being dismissed from all his offices, he retired to Holland, where he became such a favourite with William prince of Orange, that when advanced to the throne of these kingdoms, his majesty restored him to his place of lord president, and raised him to the dignity of viscount Stair, lord Glenluce and Stranrawer. His lordship continued to enjoy his high legal office, and the favour of his prince, till his death, Nov. 25, 1695 4 His character as a politician has not been favourably drawn by some historians, particularly Mr. Laing, in. his lately -published “History of Scotland.” His personal character seems liable to less objection, and of his learning no doubt can be justly entertained. He wrote: 1. “The Institutions of the Law of Scotland,” second edit. fol. 1693. 2. “Decisions of the Court of Session from 1661 to 1681,'” 2 vols. fol. 3. “Philosophia nova experimentalis,” published in Holland during his exile, and much commended by Bayle in his Journal. 4. “A Vindication of the Divine Perfections, &c. by a Person of Honour,” 1695, 8vo. 5. “An Apology for his own Conduct,” 4to, the only copy of which extant is said to be in the advocates’ library at Edinburgh. Had lord Orford read much of his history, he needed not have added that “it is not known on what occasion-he published it.”

was born in 1709, at Deane, in Cumberland, where his father was then rector. He had his school education at Lowther, in Westmoreland, and thence was removed, at the age of sixteen, to Queen’seollege, in Oxford. When he had taken his first degrees, he was employed as tutor or governor to lord Beauchamp, only son of Algernon Seymour, earl of Hertford, late duke of Somerset. During his attendance on that noble youth, he employed some of his leisure hours in adapting Milton’s “Masque at Ludlow Castle” to the stage, by a judicious insertion of several songs and passages selected from other of Milton’s works, as well as of several songs and other elegant additions of his own, suited to the characters and to the manner of the original author. This was received as a very acceptable present to the public; and it still continues one of the most favourite dramatic entertainments, under the title of “Comus, a masque,” being set to music by Dr. Arne. We cannot omit mentioning to Dalton’s honour, that, during the run of this piece, he industriously sought out a grand-daughter of Milton’s, oppressed both by age and penury; and procured her a benefit from this play, the profits of which to her amounted, it is said, to upwards of 120l. Dr. Johnson wrote the Prologue spoken on this occasion. A bad state of health prevented Dr. Dalton from attending his pupil abroad, and saved him the mortification of being an eye-witness of his death, which was occasioned by the small-pox, at Bologna, in Italy. Soon after, succeeding to a fellowship in his college, he entered into orders, according to the rules of that society.

He now applied himself with diligence to the duties of his function, and was noticed as an able preacher at the university, in which character he was employed by Seeker, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, as his assistant at St. James’s. In July 1750 he took his degrees of B. and D. D. for which he went out grand compounder, and about the same time, was presented to the rectory of St. Mary at Hill by the late duke of Somerset; and upon his recommendation, promoted by the king to a prebend of Worcester, at which place be died, July 21, 1763. He married a sister of sir Francis Gosling, an alderman of London, by whom he left no issue. He had published, 1. “A volume of Sermons,” 1757 and before that, 2. “Two Epistles,” 1744, 4to, written in 1735. 3. “A descriptive Poem, addressed to two ladies, at their return from viewing the coal-mines near Whitehaven;” to which are added some thoughts on building and planting, addressed to sir James Lowther, of Lowther-hall, bart. 1755, 4to. This entertaining poem, which is reprinted in Pearch’s collection, vol. I. describes the real descent of two fair heroines into the subterraneous, and indeed submarine, regions; the mines, which are remarkable for many singularities; Savery’s fire-engine; and the remainder is employed in a survey of the improvements in Whitehaven, by the great commerce which these mines occasion, and in a very elegant display of the beauties of the adjacent country. 4. “Remarks on twelve historical designs of Raphael, and the Museum Gr^ccum & Egvptiacum” illustrated by prints from his brother Mr. Richard Dalton’s drawings.

, brother to the preceding, keeper of the pictures, medals, &c. and antiquary to his majesty, was originally apprenticed to a coach-painter in Clerkenwell, and after quitting his master, went to Rome to pursue the study of painting, where, about the year 1749, an invitation was given him by Roger Kynaston, esq. of Shrewsbury, in company with Mr. (afterwards sir John) Frederick, to accompany them to Naples. From that city they proceeded in a felucca, along the coast of Calabria, crossed over to Messina, and thence to Catania, where they met with lord Charlemont, Mr. Burton, afterwards lord Cunningham, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Murphy. They then sailed together in a ship, hired by lord Charlemont and his party, from Leghorn, with the intention of making that voyage; the felucca followed first to Syracuse, then to the isle of Malta, and afterwards separated; but Mr. Dalton, accompanying the party in the ship, made the voyage to Constantinople, several parts of Greece, and Egypt. This voyage led to his publication, which appeared in 1781, called, “Explanation of the set of prints relative to the manners, customs, &c. of the present inhabitants of Egypt, from discoveries made on the spot, 1749, etched and engraved by Richard Daiton, esq.” On his return to England, he was, by the interest of his noble patron lord Charlemont, introduced to the notice of his present majesty, then prince of Wales, who, after his accession to the throne, appointed him his librarian, an office for which it would appear he was but indifferently qualified, if Dr. Morell’s report be true. Soon after, it being determined to form a noble collection of drawings, medals, &c. Mr. Daltou was sent to Italy in 1763, to collect the various articles suited to the intention. The accomplishment of that object, however, was unfortunately attended with circumstances which gave rise to sir Robert Strange’s memorable letter of complaint to the earl of Bute, in which he says, indignantly, although not altogether unjustly, that “persecution haunted him, even beyond the Alps, in the form of Mr. Dalton.” On this subject it may here be necessary only to refer to sir Robert’s letter, and to the authorities in the note.

The object of Mr. Dalton’s tour being achieved, he returned to London, and when the royal cabinet was adjusted, his department of librarian was changed to that of keeper of the drawings and medals; and in 1778, upon the death of Mr. Knapton, his majesty appointed him surveyor of the pictures in the palaces. Upon his first appointment at court, he had apartments at St. James’s palace, where he resided until his death Feb. 7, 1791. He was elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries in 1767; and when the society of artists was incorporated by charter, he was appointed treasurer, but soon resigned the office, in consequence of the dissentions which took place in that institution. In 1764, he married Esther, daughter of Abraham Deheulle, a silk weaver in Spitalfields, by whom he had a considerable fortune. Having no issue by her, he left 1000l. to a natural son, after the death of his brother Dr. Dalton’s widow; and directed all his pictures, antiques, drawings, &c. and other personal property, to be sold for the benefit of his servants.

As an artist, Mr. Edwards is of opinion that he never acquired any great powers. In one of the early exhibitions was a drawing executed by him; the subject, an Egyptian dancing girl, which was the only specimen he ever exhibited: but he published several works at different periods of his life. The first was the collection of prints after the antique statues, a few of which he etched himself, but they cannot be considered as masterly performances. Some of these are dated 1744; the names of the others may be found in our authorities, with many, and some not very pleasing, traits of personal character.

, an English lawyer, was born somewhere in the county of Cambridge, in 1554, and bred to his profession in Lincoln’s-inn, or Gray’s-inn, and was formerly as well known for his book on the office of justice of the peace, as Burn is at present: his “Duty of Sheriffs” was also a book in good esteem. In Neal’s “History of the Puritans,” mention is made of Mr. Dalton the queen’s counsel, who, in 1590, pleaded against Mr. Udal, who was condemned for writing a libel called “A demonstration of Discipline:” this was probably our Dalton, who also in 1592 supported the episcopal power in parliament, of which he was a member, when attacked by the puritan party. There is a ms. of his in the British Museum, entitled “A Breviary or Chronology of the state of the lioinan or Western church or Empire; the decay of true religion, and the rising of papacy, from the time of our Saviour till Martin Luther.” In this he is styled Michael Dalton of Gray’s-inn, esq. It is supposed that he died before the commencement of the civil war.

, an Irishman by birth, was born in the county of Kerry in 1595, and became a Dominican, adopting the name of Dominicus a Rosario. He was at first educated in a convent of his order at Tralee, but studied principally in Flanders. The fame which he acquired for learning and piety procured him an invitation to Lisbpn, to assist in founding a convent for the Irish Dominicans, which had been projected by Philip IV. then master of Portugal. This being accomplished, he was elected the first superior. He also assisted at the foundation of a second, for the natives of Ireland, and so entirely gained the good opinion and confidence of the duke of Braganza when he ascended the throne, that in 1655, his majesty honoured him with the appointment of ambassador to Louis XIV. of France, to negociate a treaty of alliance and affinity between the two courts. At Paris he was equally valued in the character of churchman and statesman, and became highly popular by his works of piety and charity. He died at Lisbon June 30, 1662, and was interred in the chapel of his convent, with a monument and inscription; from which we learn that at the time of his death he was bishop elect of Coimbra. He had before refused the archbishopric of Goa. Among his ecclesiastical dignities, he was censor of the inquisition, visitor-general and vicargeneral of the kingdom. One book only of his is known, which is probably a very curious one, “Initium, incrementum, et exitus fainiliae Giraldinorum Desmoniae comitum. Palatinorum Kyerria in Hibernia, ac persecutionis hsereticorum descriptio, ex nonnullis fragmentis collecta'ac latinitate donata,” Lisbon, 1655, 8vo.

, M. A. F. R. S. Edin. Greek professor in the university of Edinburgh, keeper of the university library, &c. was born in 1750, in the parish of Rathos near Edinburgh, and was educated partly at the parish school, but principally at Edinburgh, where his learning and moral conduct induced the late earl of Lautierdale to appoint him tutor to his eldest son, lord Maitland, the present earl. With this young nobleman, he attended a course of the lectures of the celebrated professor Millar at Glasgow, and afterwards accompanied his lordship to Paris. On his return from the continent, Mr. Dalzcll, at the recommendation of the late earl of Landerdale, was appointed to the professorship of Greek at Edinburgh, an office which he rilled for many years with the highest reputation and advantage to the university. He has thfe credit indeed of reviving a taste for that language, which from various causes, had been disused at Edinburgh, or studied very superficially. To enable his pupils to prosecute this accomplishment with the more effect, and imbibe a taste for what was elegant in the language, he compiled and printed, at a great expence, a series of collections out of the Greek authors, including all those passages which he wished to explain in the course of his teaching. These were printed in several 8vo volumes, under the titles of “Collectanea Minora,” and “Collectanea Majora.” He added to each volume short notes in Latin, explanatory of the difficult places, and the text was printed with great accuracy. The notes, which are in elegant Latin, are admirable for brevity, perspicuity, and judgment. He at the same time composed and read to the students a series of lectures on the language and antiquities, the philosophy and history, the literature, eloquence, poetry, and fine arts of the Greeks. By these means he became eminently successful in disseminating a taste for classical literature in the university, nor was he less happy in the art of engaging the affections and fixing the attention of his pupils on the objects which he considered as the fundamentals of all genuine scholarship.

On the death of the learned professor of Oriental languages, Dr. James Robertson, he was chosen to succeed him as keeper of the university library; and likewise succeeded Dr. John Drysdale in the honourable appointment of principal clerk to the general assembly of the church of Scotland, being the first layman who had ever been elected to that office. Besides an intimacy with his learned contemporaries at home, he corresponded with Heyne and other eminent scholars abroad, and enriched the Edinburgh Royal Society Transactions with a variety of interesting communications in biography, or on subjects of erudition. He also translated and illustrated Chevalier’s description of the plain of Troy; and was editor of the sermons of Dr. Drysdale, whose daughter he married. This learned professor, whose private character was in, every respect amiable, and threw a lustre on his public services, died at Edinburgh, Dec. 3, 1806.

, or John of Damascus, a learned priest and monk of the 'eighth century, surnamed Mansur, was born at Damascus about G76. His father, who was rich, and held several considerable offices, had him instructed in the sciences by an Italian monk, named Cosmo, and he was afterwards raised to the highest posts, and became chief counsellor to the prince of the Saracens All these dignities, however, St. John Damascenus resigned, and entered himself a monk in the monastery of St. Sabas near Jerusalem, where he led a pious and exemplary life, and became famous in the church by his piety and writings. It is said, that the caliph Hiocham, having ordered his right hand to be cut off on account of a forged letter by the emperor Leo, the hand was restored to him the night following by a miracle, as he slept; which miracle was universally known, or as much so as many other miracles propagated in the credulous ages. He died about the year 760, aged eighty-four. He left an excellent treatise on the orthodox faith, and several other works published in Greek and Latin, by le Quien, 1712, 2 vols. fol. A book entitled “Liber Barlaam et Josaphat Indite regis,” is ascribed to St. John Damascenus, but without any foundation; it has no date of time or place, but was printed about 1470, and is scarce. There are several French translations of it, old, and little valued. Damascenus may be reckoned the most learned man of the eighth century, if we except our countryman Bede; and, what is less to his credit, ono of the first who mingled the Aristotelian philosophy with the Christian religion. He became among the Greeks what Thomas Aquinas was afterwards among the Latins. Except with regard to the doctrine of the Trinity, most of his notions were erroneous, and his learning and fame gave considerable support to the worshipping of images, and other superstitions of that time.

One merit of Damascenus has not been generally noticed. He is celebrated by the writers of his life, and by ecclesiastical historians, as the compiler and reformer of chants in the Greek church, in the same manner as St. Gregory in the Roman. Leo Allatius tells us they were composed by J. Damascenus, and Zarlino goes still farther, and informs us, that in the first ages of Christianity the ancient Greek notation by letters having been thrown aside, Damascenus invented new characters, which he accommodated to the Greek ecclesiastical tones; and that these characters did not, like ours, merely express single sounds, but all the intervals used in melody; as a semitone, tone, third minor, third major, &c. ascending and descending, with their different duration. This resembles, in many particulars, the notation of the ecclesiastical books of the Romkh church, before the time-table and characters in present use-were invented, or, at least, generally received.

, a celebrated heathen philosopher and writer, of the stoic school as some say, of the peripatetic according to others, was born at Damascus, and flourished about 540, when the Goths reigned in Italy. If great masters can make a great scholar or philosopher, Damascius had every advantage of this kind. Theon, we are told, was his preceptor in rhetoric; Isidorus in logic; Mavinus, the successor of Proclus in the school of Athens, in geometry and arithmetic; Zenodotus, the successor of Marinus, in philosophy ', and Ammonias in astronomy, and the doctrines of Plato. He wrote the life of his master Isidorus, and dedicated it to Theodora, a very learned and philosophic lady, who had been a pupil of Isidorus. In this Life, which was copiously written, Damascius frequently attacked the Christian religion; yet obliquely, it is said, and with some reserve and timidity: for Christianity was then too firmly established, and protected by its numbers, to endure any open attacks with impunity, especially in a work so remarkable for obscurity, fanaticism, and imposture. Of this Life, however, we have nothing remaining, but some extracts which Photius has preserved; who also acquaints us with another work of Damascius, of the philosophic or the theologic kind. This was divided into four books; 1. De admirandis operibus; 2. Admirandae narrationes de daemonibus; 3. De animarum apparitionibus post obitum admirandae narrationes. The title of the fourth has not been preserved. Damascius succeeded Theon in the rhetorical school, over which he presided nine years: and afterwards Isidorus in that of philosophy at Athens, in which situation it is supposed that he spent the latter part of his 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

, a celebrated English navigator, descended from a good family in Somersetshire, was bora in 1652; but losing his father when very young, he was sent to sea, where he soon distinguished himself particularly in the South Sea. He associated himself with capt. Cook, in order to cruize on the Spaniards; and, Aug. 23, 1683, sailed from Achamac in Virginia for the Cape de Verde islands. After touching at several of them, he steered for the Streights of Magellan; but, the wind being against them, they stood over for the Guinea coast, and in u few days anchored at the mouth of Sherborough river, where the ship’s crew were hospitably received by the inhabitants. He then proceeded to the South Seas through the Streights of Magellan; and, arriving at the isle of Juan Fernandez, took on board a Moskito Indian, who had been left in that uninhabited place above three years before. After staying fourteen days at this island, they set sail April 8, 1684, steering towards the line, off the islands of Peru and Chili; took several prizes, and proceeded to the Gallipago islands, and from thence to cape bianco, where captain Cook was interred. July 19, Mr. Edward Davis was appointed captain in the room of Cook, sailed the next day towards Rio Leja, and from thence to the gulph of Amapalla; and Sept. 20th came to an anchor in the island of Plata. Here they made a descent upon Plata, attacked the fort, and took it with little opposition. But finding that the governor and inhabitants had quitted the town, and carried off their money, goods, and provisions, they set fire to it, and afterwards sailed for Guaiquil, and attacked it, but without success.

They entered now the bay of Panama: for their design was to look into some river unfrequented by the Spaniards, in search of canoes; and therefore they endeavoured to make the river St. Jago, on account of its nearness to the island of Gallo, in which there is much gold, and safe ancborage for ships. Dampier with some others, in four canoes, ventured to row six leagues up the river; but the Indians, at their approach, got into their canoes, and paddled away against the stream much faster than they could follow. They therefore returned the next morning in order to sail for the island of Gallo; and in their way took a Spanish pacquet-boat, sent with dispatches from Panama to Lima, by which they learned that the armada, being arrived from Spain at Porto Bello, waited for the plate fleet from Lima, which made them resolve to rendezvous among the King’s or Pearl Islands, by which all the ships bound to Panama from Lima must necessarily pass. On May 28th they discovered the Spanish fleet; but night approaching, they exchanged only a few shot. The Spanish admiral, by the artifice of a false light, got the weather-gage of them the next day, and came up to them with full sail, which obliged them to make a running fight of it all round the bay of Panama, and thus their long-projected design ended unsuccessfully. They sailed now for the island of Quibo, where they found captain Harris; and as their late attempt at sea had been fruitless, they resolved to try their fortune by land, by attacking the city of Leon, on the coast of Mexico. This place they took and burnt, and proceeded to Rio Leja, which they also took. Here Dampier left captain Davis, and went on board captain Swan, in order to satisfy his curiosity by obtaining a more perfect knowledge of the northern parts of Mexico. They continued sailing to the westward till they came to Guatulco, one of the best ports in the kingdom of Mexico; and from thence to Cape Cerientes, where they waited some time in hopes of meeting with a galleon, of which they had received information. They continued cruizing off this cape till Jan. 1, when their provisions being exhausted, they steered to the valley of Valderas to procure a supply of beef. And while they were engaged in this necessary business, the Manilla ship passed by them to the eastward. After this they steered towards California, and anchored in one of the Tres Maria islands. Dampier, having been long sick of a dropsy, was here buried for about half an hour up to the neck in sand, which threw him into a profuse sweat; and being afterwards wrapped up warm, and put to bed in a tent, found great benefit from this extraordinary remedy.

Their success in this part of the world having been very indifferent, and there appearing no probability of its mending, Swan and Dampier agreed to steer their course for the East Indies. They sailed to St. John’s island, and to the Piscadores, to Bouton island, to New Holland, to Triest; and arriving at Nicobar, Dampier with others was left on shore, and treated with great civility by the inhabitants. He, however, left them, and arrived at the English factory at Achen, where he became acquainted with captain Bowry, who would have persuaded him to sail with him to Persia in quality of boatswain but he declined accepting of this proposal, on account of the ill state of his health. He afterwards engaged with captain Weldon, under whom he made several trading voyages, for upwards of fifteen months, and afterwards entered as a gunner to an English factory at Bencoolen. Upon this coast he staid till 1691, and then embarked for England, when he was obliged to make his escape by creeping through one of the port-holes, for the governor had revoked his promise of allowing him to depart; but he brought off his journal and most valuable papers. He arrived in the Downs Sept. 16; and being in want of money, sold his property in a painted Indian prince, who was carried about for a sight, and shewn for money. He appears afterwards to have been concerned in an expedition concerted by the merchants of Bristol to Uie South Sea, commanded by caplain Woodes “Rogers, which sailed in Aug. 1708, and returned Sept. 1711; a voyage attended with many singular circumstances, and a great number of curious and entertaining events. We have no further particulars of Dampier’s life or death. His” Voyage round the World" has gone through many editions, and the substance of it has been transferred to many collections of voyages. It was first published in 3 vols. 8vo, Lond. 1697.

, a French poet, was born at Jliom in Auvergne in 1671; and went to Paris, where he distinguished himself very early in the republic of letters. At the age of nineteen he was invited to Chartres, to be professor of rhetoric; which office he discharged with high repute for four years. Upon his return to Paris, he devoted his labours entirely to the service of the theatre, for which he continued to write songs, operas, and tragedies, to the end of his life. He was admitted a member of the academy of inscriptions in 1706, and of the French academy in 1712. He had a place in the king’s library, and died at Paris Feb. 21, 1748. His works were collected and printed at Paris, 1751, in 4 vols. 12mo. As a man Danchet was highly esteemed for the qualities of his mind, and the mildness of his temper; he was sincere, upright, and disinterested, and was an enemy to every species of satire and calumny, weapons too frequently used by poets and men of genius. Of this a singular instance is on record. One of his rivals having insulted him in a published satire, Danchet sent him privately an epigrammatic answer of the severest cast, which he assured him no other person had seen, and begged him to observe, that it was as easy as shameful for men of letters to embark in such kind of warfare.

, or Danckerts, is the name of a family of engravers of considerable reputation in Holland. Cornelius Danckkkts, who was born at Amsterdam in 1561, established himself at Antwerp as a print-seller; but he did not suffer this employment to engross his whole time, as he engraved many portraits, landscapes, and historical pieces, as well from his own compositions as from the designs of Berghem, Rembrandt, and others. His son, Danckert Danckerts, who was born at Antwerp about 1600, also engraved different subjects, as well from his own designs as from those of other artists; and though his pieces are not so numerous as his father’s, they surpass them in merit. Danckert combined the point and the graver with very great success, and the pieces from Berghem and Wouvermanns, which he has wrought in this manner, are much esteemed.

John Danckilkts, of the same family, a designer and engraver, about 1654 settled at Amsterdam; but being invited into England, he went to London, where he designed for the English Juvenal, the plates engraved by Hollar. This artist also engraved some plates. Hesiiy Danckerts, his brother, was also bred an engraver, but afterwards became a landscape-painter. He was born at the Hague, but at an early age travelled into Italy, from whence he came to England. Here he enjoyed the favour of Charles II. who employed him to draw views of the British sea-ports, and royal palaces. During the disturbances which preceded the abdication of James II. he quitted England for Amsterdam, where he died soon after. The landscapes painted by this artist were numerous, anil are chiefly to be found in England. Amongst them are Views of Windsor, Plymouth, Penzance, &c. He also engraved from Vandyk, Titian, Jacopo Palma, &c. Justus Danckerts, of the same family, was a designer, engraver, and print-seller, and resided in Amsterdam. The following plates bear his name: the Portrait of Casimir, king of Poland; a ditto of William III. prince of Orange; the Harbours of Amsterdam, a set of seven pieces. One other of the name remains to be noticed, Cornelius Danckerts. The circumstance of both Milizia and Heinecken dating the birth of this architect in 1.561, and saying that he was born in Amsterdam (the very time and place of the birth of Cornelius Danckerts mentioned above), leads us to suspect some chronological error, if not, indeed, that these two artists were one and the same person. Cornelius was originally a stonemason, but afterwards applied himself to architecture. He constructed in the city of Amsterdam many public and private buildings, highlycreditable to his talents on account of their beauty and convenience, and, amongst others, three of the principal churches, the exchange, and the gate which leads to Haarlem, the most beautiful of the city. He had a son named Peter, who was born at Amsterdam in 1605, and afterwards became painter to Uladislaus, king of Poland.

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

, an Italian Jesuit, was born at Cesena in the ecclesiastical state in 1554, and was the first of his order who taught philosophy at Paris. He bore several honourable offices in the society; for, besides teaching divinity at Padua, he was rector of the several colleges at Ferrara, Forli, Bologna, Parma, and Milan; visitor in the provinces of Venice, Toulouse, and Guienne; provincial in Poland, and in the Milanese. He taught philosophy in Perugia, 1596, when he was appointed by Clement VIII. to be his nuncio to the Maronites of mount Libanus. He embarked at Venice in July the same year, and returned to Rome in August the year following. The French translation which was made of his journey to Mount Libanus by father Simon, was printed at Paris in 1675, and reprinted at the Hague in 1685. Dandini’s book was printed at Cesena in 1656, under the title of “Missione apostolica al patriarcha e Maroniti del Monte Libano.” It contains the relation of his journey to the Maronites and to Jerusalem; but father Simon has left out the journey to Jerusalem in his translation, because, he says, there is nothing in it but what has been observed by travellers already. Dandini died at Forli, 1634, aged eighty. His commentary on the three books of Aristotle “de Anima” was printed at Paris, 1611, in folio; and after his death his “Ethica sacra, de virtutibus et vitiis,” was printed at Cesena, 1651, fol.

, an historical painter, was born at Florence in 1595, and was the elder brother and first instructor of Vincent Dandini, the uncle of Pietro. This master had successively studied as a disciple with Curradi, Passignano, and Christofane Allori from whom he acquired a very pleasing but fugitive manner of colouring. He was extremely correct in his drawing, and finished his pictures highly. His best altar-piece is at Ancona, and several other noble altar-pieces in the churches of Florence are of his hand one, which is in the chapel l'Annonciata, is particularly admired. He died in 165S.

, brother to the preceding, was born at Florence in 1607. After having been taught the first rudiments of his art by his brother, he studied some time at Rome under Pietro da Cortona, and copied with the greatest assiduity the master-pieces of art in the palaces and temples of that city. He was considered one of the best of Cortona’s scholars, and met with ample encouragement from the grand duke, as well as from private persons, on his return to Florence. One of his best altar-pieces, which are frequent at Florence, is the Conception of the Virgin, in the church of Ognisanti.

, an eminent painter, nephew to the preceding, was born at Florence in 1646, and received his first instruction in the art of painting from Valerio Spada, who excelled in small drawings with a pen. Whilst he was under the tuition of thrt artist he gave such evident proofs of genius, that he was then placed as a disciple with his uncle Vincent. He afterwards travelled through most of the cities of Italy, studying the works of those who were most distinguished; and resided for a long time at Venice, where he copied the paintings of Titian, Tintoretto, and Paolo Veronese. He next visited Parma and Modena, to study the works of Correggio; omitting no opportunity that might contribute to improve his hand or his judgment. When he returned to Florence, the grand duke Cosmo III. the grand duchess Victoria, and the prince Ferdinand, kept him perpetually employed, in fresco painting as well as in oil; his subjects being taken not only from sacred or fabulous history, but from his own invention and fancy, which frequently furnished him with such as were odd and singular, and especially with whimsical caricatures. He died in 1712. — This master had an extraordinary talent for imitating the style of even the most celebrated ancient painters of every school, particularly Titian, Veronese, and Tintoretto; and with a force and elegance, equal to his subjects of history, he painted portraits, landscapes, architecture, flowers, fruit, battles, animals of all kinds, and likewise sea-pieces; proving himself an universal artist, and excellent in even thing he undertook. Mr. Fuseli, however, says that the avidity of gain led him to dispatch and a general mediocrity, compensated by little more than the admirable freedom of his pencil. He exerted his powers according to the price he received for his work: they are seen to advantage in the cupolas of S. Maria Maddalena, in various frescos of the ducal palace and villas, and in the public hall of Pisa, where he represented the taking of Jerusalem. There are likewise altar-pieces which shew his merit: that of St. Francis in S. Maria Maggiore, and another of S. Piccolomini saying mass in the church a'Servi, a pleasing animated performance. He had a son, Octavio, who proved not inferior to him in any branch of his profession, and was an honour to his family and his country.

, doge of Venice, merits some notice here as one of the first historians of his country. He was born in 1310, and in 1344 became doge, being not only distinguished for military and political knowledge, but for considerable attainments in literature. By his means Venice was first enabled to extend her commerce to Egypt, which, however, had the bad effect of involving Venice and Genoa in a war, in the course of which he lost his life in 1354. As an author he is mentioned for his “Chronicle of Venice,” which comprehends the history of the republic from its foundation to the year 1342 and to him has been ascribed the compilation of the sixth book of Venetian statutes. His chronicle obtained considerable reputation for impartiality, and for the exhibition of authentic documents which the author produced to substantiate his facts. Petrarch, with whom he corresponded, Blondus, Justinian, Sabellicus, Leander, and Cuspinian, always mention this Chronicle with praise, it is inserted in Muratori’s collection, with a continuation to 1388, by Caresino.

, one of the professors of the academy of painting, &,c. was born May 22, 1700, at Aix in Provence, and was first intended for the study of the law, but dishknig it at the outset, he took lessons in painting from Vanloo and De Troy, and soon distinguished himself botli as a painter and as a writer. He succeeded more particularly in historical pictures, and undoubtedly had an affection for all the arts, was a man of considerable learning, and in society was sensible, upright, and friendly. He died at Marseilles, where he was director of the academy, April 14, 1783. Some of his writings gained him much reputation. The principal of them are, l. “De l'utilite” d‘un Cours d’Histoire pour les artistes,“1751. 2.” Principesdu Dessin,“1754, 12mo. 3.” Anecdotes sur la Mort de Bouchardon,“1764. 4.” Vie de Carle Vanloo,“1765, 12mo. 5.” Monumens de la ville de Reims,“1765, 12mo. 6.” Traite de Peinture,“1765, 2 vols. 12mo. 7.” Histoire universelle relative aux arts,“1769, 3 vols. 12mo. 8.” Costumes des anciens peuples," 1776, 4to. This curious collection was republishecl in a very enlarged form by Cochin, in 4 vols. 1786 and 1792, 4to. Dandre-Bardon wrote also some poetry, but that his countrymen seem inclined to forget.

, an eminent French protestant divine, was born at Orleans about the year 1530. Having at first an inclination for the law, he studied that science in his native city for four years under Aune du Bourg, then a teacher of high reputation, and who, after holding the office of clerk of the parliament of Paris for two years, was strangled and burnt, Dec. 20, 1559, for his adherence to the protestant faith. Affected by the constancy with which his master suffered, and of which he appears to have been an eye-witness, and referring such constancy to its proper source, Daneau embraced the principles of the deceased martyr, and the following year retired to Geneva, where he could enjoy his religion unmolested. From this time he gave over all thoughts of the law, and began the study of divinity, in which he made such progress as to be acknowledged one of the ablest divines of the protestant persuasion. At Geneva he became one of their preachers, and professor of divinity. In 15S1 he was invited to Leyden in the same character, and taught there about a year. He at length returned to France, and after residing some time atOrthcs, finally took up his abode at Castres, where he exercised the functions of the ministry until the year 1596, vvheu he died. His works are very numerous. A considerable collection of them was published by himself at Geneva in 1583, in a large folio volume, divided into three classes, didactic, exegetic, and polemic. But, besides these, Niceron and other authors give a very large catalogue of separate publications, commentaries on the Holy Scriptures; and moral, historical, and geographical treatises. One of these, “Primi mundi antiquitatum sectiones quatuor,” was published in English by Thomas Twine, under the title of “The wonderful workmanship of the World,” 1578, 4to. His “Les Sorciers” was also published here in 1564-, under the title, “A Dialogue of Witches.”

, born in 1497, at Paris, of a noble family, studied at the college of Navarre, and was the pupil of Budeus and of John Lascaris. Being appointed by Francis I. to open the Greek school at the college-royal, he was professor there for five years, and had scholars that afterwards signalized themselves. He next became preceptor and confessor to the dauphin, afterwards Francis If. He was sent to the council of Trent, where he delivered a very celebrated speech in 1546, which was afterwards published; and during the session of this council he was made bishop of Lavaur. Sponde and de Thou have handed down to us an ingenious answer of this prelate. Nicholas Pseaume, bishop of Verdun, speaking very freely one day in the council, the bishop of Orvietta looking at the French, said to them with a sarcastic smile, “Gallus cantat,” (the cock crows), “Utinam,” replied Danes, “ad istud Gallicinium Petrus resipisceret!” (I wish that Peter would repent at this cock’s crowing.) This prelate died at Paris the 23d of April, 1577, at the age of 80. He had been married. When news was brought him of the death of his only son, he retired for a moment into his closet; and, on rejoining the company, “Let us be comforted,” said he, “the poor have gained their cause,” alluding to his being wont to distribute a part of his revenues among the poor, which he now thought he might increase. With the erudition of a true scholar he had the talent of speaking well, integrity of character, and a great simplicity of manners. His custom was to write much, and almost always to conceal his name. It has been suspected by some critics that the tenth book of the history of France, by Paulus Æmilius, is his. At least it was Danes who sent it from Venice to the printer Vascosan. His “Opuscula” were collected and printed in 1731, 4to, by the care of Peter Hilary Danes, of the same family with the bishop of Lavaur, who added the life of the author. The abbe Lenglet du Fresnoi attributes to P. Danes, two Apologies for king Henry II. printed in Latin in 1542, 4to. One publication of Danes’s merits particular notice, viz. an edition of Pliny the elder, very beautiful and correct, Paris, 1532, folio. This, for whatever reason, he thought proper to publish under the name of Bellocirius, i. e. Belletiere, the name of one of his servants. The short and elegant preface, so highly praised by Rezzonicus in his “Disquisitiones Pliniani,” is to be found amongour author’s “Opuscula.” This edition is so rare on the continent that Rezzonicus was able to find only two copies of it in Spain, and not a single one in Italy; and Ernesti pronounces it as valuable as it is rare.

, a French cure at Paris, and afterwards abbe of St. Nicholas de Verdun, of which he took possession in 1674, devoted the principal part of his life to grammatical studies, and produced some works which at that time were important to the literature of his country, His first publication appeared under the title of “Radices Lingute Latinae,” 8vo, a work somewhat incorrectly printed, which was followed by his two Dictionaries, both in 4to, French and Latin, and Latin and French, in which the Latin part was considered as best executed. Although both have been supplanted by works more ample and accurate, they could not fail at that time of facilitating the study of the Latin among his countrymen. He published also, “Dictionarium antiquitatum Romanarum et Grsecarum,” for the use of the dauphin, Paris, 1698 and 1701, 4to, and published in English at London in 1700. Danet being one of the scholars appointed as editors of the Delphin classics, produced the Phsedrus, which, although it has been often printed, is reckoned inferior to the subsequent editions. He died at Paris in 1701). His contemporary Baillet has spoken with great candour of all his publications.

, a French abbe, and a man of family, was the son of Louis cle Courcillon, lord oi' Dangeau, &c. by a daughter of the celebrated Plessis-Mornay. He was born in January 1643, and educated in the protestant religion, which was that of his family, and which he professed in 1667, when envoy extraordinary in Poland but he was afterwards induced to become a Roman catholic, and entered into the church, in which he held some benefices, although none of such importance as might have been expected from his merits and family interest. In 1671 he purchased the office of reader to the king, which he sold again in 1685. In 1680 the king gave him the abbey of Fontaine-Daniel, and in 1710 that of Clermont, and he was also prior of Gournay and St. Arnoul. He devoted himself, however, principally to the belles lettres, the study of which he endeavoured to facilitate by various new modes of instruction, some of which were successful, and others rather whimsical. In the sme way, by some new expedients, he endeavoured to increase the knowledge of history, geography, heraldry, grammar, &c. and his services were so highly esteemed, that in 1682 he was admitted into the French academy, and in 1698 into that of the Ilicovrati of Padua. His own house, indeed, was a species of academy, where men of taste and learning were invited to assemble once a week for conversation. The abbe Dangeau was an accomplished scholar: besides the sciences we have mentioned, he knew Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, German, &c. Being admitted into the confidence of his sovereign, he took frequent opportunities to promote learning and learned men, and along with his brother the marquis Dangeau established a school for the education of voung men of family, the superintendance of which he took upon himself; but this did not last above ten years, the wars having obliged the king to withdraw the pecuniary assistance he had given^ a striking proof of the necessities to which Louis XIV. was sometimes driven by his ambition. He died Jan. 1, 1723, leaving the character of a man whose virtues were superior to his knowledge, extensive us the latter was. “His humanity towards the sons and daughters of misfortune was such, (says his eulogist M. d'Alembert), that, with but a moderate fortune, he was lavish of his bounty towards the poor, and added to his benefits the more uncommon benefit of Concealing them. He possessed that prudent œconomy, without which there can be no generosity; and which, never dissipating for the sake of giving continually, is always giving with propriety. His heart was formed for friendship, and for that reason he was not careless in bestowing it; but when once it was obtained, it was settled for ever. If he had any defect, it was perhaps too much indulgence for the faults and weaknesses of mankind; a defect, which by its scarceness is almost a virtue, and of which few persons have to reproach themselves, even in regard to their friends. He possessed in the highest degree that knowledge of the world and of man, which neither books nor genius ever gave the philosopher, while neglecting the commerce of his fellow creatures. Enjoying the esteem and the confidence of all the great men in the kingdom, no one had better advice to give in the most important affairs. He kept inviolably the secrets of others as well as his own. Yet his generous, delicate, and honest soul disdained dissimulation, and his prudence was too enlightened to be mistaken for artifice. Easy and affable in company, but preferring truth in all things, he never disputed except in its defence: accordingly the lively interest he shewed for truth on all such occasions gave him in the eyes of the generality an air of obstinacy, which truth is much less likely to find among mankind than a cold and criminal indifference.”

He wrote above an hundred treatises on different subjects of history, grammar, geography, &c. the greater part of which remained in manuscript, and of those which were published, many soon became very scarce, as it was his custom to print only a few copies for distribution among his friends. 1. “Quatre Dialogues,” on the immortality of the soul, the existence of God, &c. Paris, 1684, 12mo, with a vignette of Sebastian le Clerc to each dialogue, This was animadverted upon by the celebrated Jurieu in “Apologie d'un tour nouveau pour ies Quatre Dialogues, &c.” Cologne (the Hague), 1685. 2. “Cartes Geographiques, Tables Chronologiques, Tables Genealogiques, &c.” 1693, 12mo. 3. “Lettre sur Tortographe aM.de Poutchartrain,” 1693, 12mo. 4. “Reflexions sur toutes Ies parties de la Grammaire,” 1694, 12mo. ]n this and the preceding, he attempts some new modes of spelling, which have never been adopted. 5. “Nouvelle methods de Geographic historique, &c.” 1697, folio. 6. “Leg principes du Blason en quatorze planches,” Paris, 1709, folio, reprinted in 1715, 4to. 7. “Essais de Grammaire,” 1711, 8vo. 8. “Reflexions sur la Grammaire Franeoise,” 1717, 8vo, with some other treatises on the same subjects he also invented a historical game of the kinos of France, somewhat like what have lately been introduced in our schools. The best of the above treatises were reprinted by the abbe Olivet in 1754, under the title of“Opuscules sur la langue Francaise.”

, brother of the preceding, was born in 1638. The endowments of his mind and person advanced him at the court of Louis XIV. and his decided taste for literature obtained him a place in the French academy, and in that of sciences. He died at Paris in 1720, at the age of eighty-two, privy ­councillor, knight of several orders, grand-master of the royal and military order of Notre Dame dn Mont Carmel, and of St. Lazare de Jerusalem. On being invested with this last dignity, he paid greater attention than had been before shewn to the choice of the chevaliers, iincl revived the ancient pomp at their reception, which the wits endeavoured to turn into ridicule. But what was superior to all ridicule was, that by his care he procured the foundation of upwards of twenty-five commanderies, and employed the revenues of the office of grand-master, to the education of twelve young gentlemen of the best nobility of the kingdom, as has been mentioned in onr account of his brother. At the court (says Fontenelle), where there is but little faith in probity and virtue, he always preserved his reputation clear and entire. His conversation, his manners, all savoured of a politeness which was far less that of a man of fashion, than of a friendly and obliging person. His wish at all times to play the part of a grandee, might have been passed over, on account of the worthiness of his character. Madame de Montespun, who thought him not qualified exactly for that, said rather tartly, that it was impossible not to love him, and not to laugh at hi ID. His first wife was Frances Morin, sister to the marechal dEstrées, and his second the countess de Louvestein, of the palatine house. There are extant by the marquis de Dangeau, memoirs in manuscript, from whence Voltaire, Renault, and la Beaumelle, have taken many curious anecdotes; but it was not always Dangeau, says Voltaire, who made these memoirs: “It was (according to this satirist) an old stupid valet-de-chambre, who thought proper to make manuscript gazettes of all the nonsense, right or wrong, that he could pick up in the anti-chambers,” by which Voltaire would insinuate that the memoirs which bear the name of the marquis de Dangeau are to be read with caution. There is Another little work of his, also in manuscript, in which he gives the picture of Louis XIV. in a very interesting manner, such as he was among his courtiers.

, so in Moreri, but in other French biographical works placed under Arnaud, one of the troubadours of the twelfth century, was born of noble parents, in the castle of Ribeyrac, in Perigord. If we may judge of his merit by his works which have descended to us, it would be difficult to give him the preference to his brethren in that century, yet the old Italian critics assign him the first place. Dante in particular speaks of him as the best writer of tender verses in the Provencal language, and seems equally partial to the prose part of his romances; Petrarch also, who places him at the head of the Provencal poets, calls him the great master of love, and has honoured him so far as to conclude one of his own stanzas with a verse from Arnaud. It has, however, been doubted whether this verse be the production of Arnaud, and Crescinjbeni has employed a long digression in discussing the question. The best, however, of Arnaud’s productions must have been lost, for what remain by no means support the character which Dante and Petrarch have given of him. He has the credit of inventing that species of composition called the sestine, and attached great importance to rhyme. Besides his poetical talents, he had musical skill, and composed some of his own songs. Milloi speaks of having seen seventeen pieces by Arnaud, and there are eight in the imperial library at Paris, with a life of him. One of his works is entitled “Fantaumasias del Paganisme.” He is supposed to have died about 1180.

, a very ingenious and learned Frenchman, was born at Roan, Feb. 8, 1649; and in Sept. 1667, entered as a novitiate into the society of the Jesuits, He read lectures upon polite literature, upon philosophy, and theology, at several places in the early part of his life by the desire of his superiors, after which he appears to have devoted his time to his historical and controversial works. One of his earliest productions was his “Voyage to the world of Descartes,” a satirical confutation of the Cartesian philosophy, under the appearance of a romance, which was so well received, that it was soon translated into several languages into English, into Italian, &c. It has undergone several editions, which have been revised and enlarged by the author; and to that printed in 1703 there were added, by way of supplement, two or three pieces, which have a connection with the subject. They are entitled, “New difficulties proposed to the author of the Voyage,” &c. concerning the consciousness or perception of brutes: with a refutation of two defences of Descartes’s general system of the world.

But the work which will longest perpetuate the name of father Daniel, is, “The History of France,” published at Paris, 1713, in 3 vols. fol. a second edition of which he brought out at Paris, 1722, in 7 vols. 4to, revised, corrected, augmented, and enriched with several authentic medals; and a very pompous edition of it was afterwards published, with a continuation, but in the way of annals only, from the death of Henry IV. in 1610, where father Daniel stopped, to the end of Lewis XIV. He was the author of some other works; of an answer to the Provincial Letters, entitled 1. Dialogues between Cleander and Eudoxus. This book in less than two years ran through twelve editions; it was translated into Latin by father Juvenci; and afterwards into Italian, English, and Spanish, but it is a weak attack, after all, on Pascal. 2. Two letters of M. Abbot to Eudoxus, by way of remarks upon the new apology for the Provincial Letters. 3. Ten letters to father Alexander, in which he draws a parallel between the doctrine of the Thomists and the Jesuits, upon the subjects of probability and grace. 4. The system of Lewis de Leon concerning the sacrament. 5. A defence of St. Augustin against a book supposed to be written by Launoi. 6. Four letters upon the argument of the book entitled A defence of St. Augustin. 7. A theological tract, touching the efficacy of grace, in two volumes. In the second volume, he answers Serry’s book, entitled “Schola Thomistica vindicata,” a remonstrance to the lord archbishop of Rheinia, occasioned by his order published July 15, 1G97. This performance of father Daniel’s was often printed, and also translated by Juvenci into Latin. He published other smaller works, which were all collected and printed in 3 vols. 4to.

Father Daniel was superior of the Jesuits at Paris, and died there June 23, 1728. By his death, that society lost one of the greatest ornaments they ever had. His “History,” to which Voltaire and some modern French critics have objected, and his “Histoire de la Mil ice Françoise,” 2 vols. 4to, although equally liable to censure on account of its prolixity, are works which gave him a very high rank among French historians. The best edition of, his history is that of 1757, 17 vols. 4to.

, a scholar and antiquary of the sixteenth century, was an advocate at Orleans, where he mostly resided, and assessor to the abbey of St. Benoitsur-Loire, which he was frequently obliged to visit, in the discharge of his office. His taste for polite literature, and general reputation for such learning as was not very common in his time, recommended him to the esteem of the cardinal de Chatillon, a liberal Maecenas of that age. The abbey of St. Benoit having been pillaged during the war in 1562, Daniel with great difficulty saved some manuscripts, and purchased others from the soldiers, and removed them to Orleans. Among these was the Commentary of Servius on Virgil, which he published in 1600 and the “Aulularia” of Plautus, which he had printed immediately after rescuing these Mss. in 1564. He prepared also an edition of Petronius, but it was not published until 1629, after his death. This event took place at Paris, in 1603, when his friends Paul Petau, and James Bongars, purchased his library for 15OO livres, and divided the Mss. between them. Among other eminent men, Daniel was particularly intimate with Buchanan, and has been highly praised by Scioppius, Scaliger, and Turnebus.

, an English poet and historian, the son of a music-master, was born near Taunton, in Somersetshire, in 1562. In 1579 he was admitted a commoner of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, where he continued about three years, and by the help of an excellent tutor, made considerable improvement in academical studies. He left the university, however, without taking a degree, and pursued the study of history and poetry under the patronage of the earl of Pembroke’s family. This he thankfully acknowledges in his “Defence of Rhime,” which is printed in the late edition of his works, as a necessary document to illustrate the ideas of poetry entertained in his time. To the same family he was probably indebted for an university education, as no notice occurs of his father, who, if a music-master, could not well have escaped the researches of Dr. Burney. The first of his product ions, at the age of twenty-three, was a translation of Paulns Jovius’s ' Discourse of Rare Inventions, both military and amorous, called Imprese,“London, 1585, 8vo, to which he prefixed an ingenious preface. He afterwards became tutor to the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heiress to George, earl of Cumberland, a lady of very high accomplishments, spirit, and intrepidity. To her, when at the age of thirteen, he addressed a delicate admonitory epistle. She was married, first to Richard, earl of Dorset, and afterwards to the earl of Pembroke,” that memorable simpleton,“says lord Orford,” with whom Butler has so much diverted himself." The pillar which she erected in the county of Westmoreland, on the road-side between Penrith and Appleby, the spot where she took her last leave of her mother,

At the death of Spenser, Daniel, according to Anthony Wood, was appointed poet-lanreat to tiuceu Elizabeth; but Mr. Malone, whose researches lead to more decisive accuracy, considers him only as a volunteer laureat, like Jonson, Dekker, and others who furnished the court with masks and pageants. In king James’s reign he was made gentleman extraordinary, and afterwards one of the grooms of the privy-chamber to the queen consort, who took great delight in his conversation and writings. Some of la’s biographers attribute this promotion to the interest of his brother-in-law, Florio, the Italian lexicographer, but it is perhaps more probable that he owed it to the Pembroke family. Mrs. Cooper, in her Muses’ Library, observes, that in the introduction to his poem on the civil wars, he acknowledges the friendship of one of the noble family of Mountjoy; and this, adds our female critic, is the more grateful and sincere, as it was published after the death of his benefactor. He now rented a small house and garden in Old-street, in the parish of St. Luke’s, London, where he composed most of his dramatic pieces, and enjoyed the friendship of Shakspeare, Marlowe, and Chapman, as well as of many persons of rank; but he appears to have been dissatisfied with the opinions entertained of his poetical talents; and towards the end of his life retired to a farm, which he had at Beckington, near Philips-Norton, in Somersetshire, and where, after some time devoted to study and contemplation, he died, and was buried Oct. 14, 1619. He had been married to his wife Justina, several years, but left no issue.

Of Daniel’s personal history we know little, but the inferences to be drawn from his works are highly favourable. He is much praised by his contemporaries, although chiefly with a view to his genius. Edmund Bolton, in a criticism on the style of our poets before 1600, says, “The works of Samuel Daniel containe somewhat aflat, but yet withal a very pure and copious English, and words as warrantable as any man’s, and fitter perhaps for prose than measure;” and Gabriel Harvey, in his “Foure Letters and Certaine Sonnets,” cordially recommends him, with others, for his studious endeavours to enrich and polish his native tongue.